It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

photon relation to time

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Well I was thinking, and this is random but...

Photons travel at c, durr right.. okay now F=ma ya ya ya right

*I will explain this as clearly as i can

It is well know in science that Photons are not affected by gravitational pull..."Due to the nonmass nature of the photon", and researchers are loing hard for the higgs boson, which would tie alot of things together nicely.

But if say the nature of the photon excludes it from the affects of gravity, and gravity time is correlated together, then perhaps the photon is outside the time effect and therefor it travels at c.




Now things get a little weird so i want to give this thread some breathing time and make sure of what im saying.




posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
How does gravatational lensing work if photons are uneffected by light? Isnt light visibly bending around the sun durning a solar ecplise what proved alot of einstines work?



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by KingAtlas
 


I'm sorry but photons ARE affected by gravity. Light can bend around massive oblects such as suns and even bend completely around to run in an endless circle as is the case with black holes.

Good thinking though, keep it up!



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by KingAtlas
 


I would like to point out also that energy is "unaffected" by time itself as time is a measurement of the changing of the form of energy itself.

If the photon is not energy itself and it can be broken down, then it is definitely "affected by time".

But the real reason I wanted to reply is because I love your signature quote. Sabin is the man.

"BUM RUSH!" (Oh, how many Bracchiosaur have fallen...)



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
einstien is saying that a gravitaional field extends around a large mass Bending space time itself creating a warped field around the area such as a star. But einstein didnt exacly explain this just predicted it with mathmatics. *i think, i have to re look at some things.

but if the entire space time feild were warped the natural path that would be followed by the phonton would be of least resistance.

like sitting on a trampoline roll a marble around the edges it will curve. Now the photon itself isnt being affected by the gravitational pull of the mass but the space around the sn is warped so as the straight line becomes curved, but in a way the photon is still travelling in the same direction not getting pulled into the mass(gravitional pull thereof) itself, as it should if it had its own mass.


but what i am trying to get at is that if the photon travels outside time then the speed at which it travels might not be that fast but an illusion caused by the non pullof time. weird huh, i said it would get weird.

anyways still thinking of a good way to explain some stuff.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:47 PM
link   
But energy is not affected by time as a mesuring stick, but if time is a field or a wave or an energy itself then things get hairy. Time can be thought of in many different ways. Look at string theory way of seeing time as a nother dimention, not just a means to measure. Or it could just be a measuring stick ... I love it



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by KingAtlas
 


Most things in our perceptions which are limited to our very narrow five basic human senses are simply illusions! Imagine if we could translate ALL waves into a visual image with our brains! Holy crap!

...

"BUM RUSH!"



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by KingAtlas
 


Yeah, that theory is fun and all, but the reality is that any theory that disregards a simple and irrefutable law is really funny. Energy is neither created nor destroyed, but it changes form. Therefore, energy is beyond time and by the changing of its form do we derive time.

Any theory that wishes to claim that time is a wave or a force of some sort ,all of itself, must first demonstrate the ability of energy to be created or destroyed.

"Mmmm... that was a delicious morsel!"



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Well I prefer AURA BURST, just because it reminds me of kamehameha haha I love Sending A kamehameha right at kefka it brings me pleasure.

But back to the matter at hand. matter haha. so funny.

Maybe like this

Take a flip book example, you draw a guy, on page one right, then on page two he moves a little ect. makes a nice movie of some dude hurling. now make a hole down the same book and look down it, if you change your (the observers) perspective of it it changes its depth. like pull your head back then move over it at same distance from it, then over it, then past it. You see down the hole(as you pass over it) and the depth of the hole change due to perspective.

If the observer is time, then the energy that is there is changing due to the observer (time).
Its like a standing wave, its like its moving but its not, only the perspective of the observer is changing because each motion like in the book with the hurling guy.

I will try to be clearer hahahaha



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 01:08 AM
link   
Okay i have to sleep on this and work some stuff out, i will continue this line of though, even if its just to exercise my brain a little.

But i will leave saying, photons are interesting. I think that photons are not pulled into the black hole due to gravity, but due to the bending of space time created by the black hole.

A black hole with massive gravity would bend spacetime creating a vortex field inwards towards the center and if the photon is following thepath of least resistance and is travelling on spacetime then it would follow the natural path down the black hole.



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 01:11 AM
link   
reply to post by KingAtlas
 



IF time is a force in and of itself, it must be the force of anti-matter.

If it is the force of anti-matter, then what is the concept we refer to in regards to anti-matter and what is its constant?



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 01:15 AM
link   
I forget who said this and might have the data a bit skewed but here it goes. As some have said time is relative to the observer. So in viewing a planet that is 14 000 light years from Earth's perspective would take 14 000 years to get there. However, if you use the vehicle as the observer point it would take less than 50 years to go there and back based on time past as viewed by the observer. Although 1000's of years would have passed on Earth upon their return.

With maths calcs for example they found that if you travelled 99% the speed of light(SOL) it would take 14 000 years to get there. If you travelled 99.9% SOL it would take 1400 years and so on and so on. The closer you get to the true value of the SOL the less time it takes.

But distance and time is relative to the observer. Light exists as both a wave and particle at the same time. I believe that somethings or maybe all probably exist in multiple dimensions simultaneously and are relative to the observer(ie. what dimension you observe them from).

I would bet theres stuff all around us as we speak that we simply don't have the ability to detect physically.

[edit on 21-9-2009 by DEEZNUTZ]



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by DEEZNUTZ
 


The odds of you winning that bet are about the same as the odds of a chilly day in the arctic.



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 


Well I like the Multi-verse theory and the concept that consciousness has a measurable value(we haven't figured that out yet) thus meaning that based on us the observer in this dimension our conscious decisions here have a measurable value that affects the outcome in another universe. These universes exist but are not defined until we make a decision here that affects that universe as viewed by us here as the observer.

Now an observer from another universe, our universe would only exist as potential to them based on their decisions.

Did that make any sense?

Some physicists believe that particles can exist in multiple dimensions at once. Some believe the "2 slits experiment"(GOOGLE) is proof that particles and waves can come from different dimensions.



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 

Photons are are not affected by gravity. Gravity is not a force, it is the "bending" of spacetime caused by mass. When light moves through the accelerated frame of reference created by mass (the curved spacetime) its path appears, from an outside frame of reference, to bend. From inside that frame of reference it follows a straight path. Yup, it's relative.

But photons exist in spacetime. They are "outside" of neither time or space.

[edit on 9/21/2009 by Phage]



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by KingAtlas
... then perhaps the photon is outside the time effect and therefor it travels at c.


If you apply the time dilation formula to a photon in vacuum, meaning c than if I understand this correctly light itself "feels" no passing of time whatsoever.



So as v approaches c, v^2/c^2 approaches one and time dilation approaches infinity. From this, it can be concluded that photon once emitted do not experience any passing of time and therefor space. From their point of view, they've teleported instantly.

I could be completely wrong... as always


Kind regards, M.

[edit on 21-9-2009 by Manawydan]



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Manawydan
 


IF this is true, then photons either sleep all the time or have no conscious awareness.

Anything without a conscious awareness would simply observe no time. Anything that sleeps for a long period of time would experience almost no time.

It should be pointed out that when discussing observers/observations, to observe requires a conscious awareness.



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
well i think you are thinking of observing differently haha, I am thinking of the observer as just a perception of a perspective.

Well I had a real thought in here somewhere. But now it has slipped my mind and become blurred with other thoughts, i wanted t think about it but work was rought today.

Ill keep thinking see if i can remember.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join