It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# A Question on Time Slowing Down at the Speed of Light

page: 2
4
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 08:24 PM

Originally posted by Sly1one

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by Sly1one
reply to post by tooo many pills

Well I'm glad you found what we all said helpful to expand your understanding of at least time. There are few things that can truly drive a man insane if he delves deep enough into them, one is the concept of time and the other is the concept of infinity.

If you think deeply enough about the concept of infinity within the universe you will find yourself going back and forth and back and forth between "Ah ha! This is how it works" moments and "Wait no, that's not right" moments...part of me believes infinity is just too abstract for the human mind to contemplate and make sense of.

Good luck with your journey into physics!

The infinite is easy. Its a constant and is always stationary. It never moves or changes.

Finite expands until it becomes infinite. The expansion of finite is also the reason why time travel is impossible.

Infinity can get pretty complicated when you contemplate that within the space between your fingers an infinite number of measurements and space exists...THAT is very difficult to wrap your . around because it implies that distance in space is also an illusion....

Not really.

The space between my fingers is made up of finite energy. Different gasses that expand. Its called the finite dimension.

My finger's, my existence and the dimension you and i live in, is smack in the middle of the infinite dimension.

The distance from you and me and to the infinite is far, very far. The infinite is at the edge where the finite energy expansion becomes infinite again.

You and I have to go through quite a proses before we get close to the infinite. Grow old, die, rot and the whole works.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 10:06 PM

If a photon is everywhere at once that means it is infinite?

No.

All quantities in nature are finite.

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 10:49 PM

Originally posted by Astyanax

If a photon is everywhere at once that means it is infinite?

No.

All quantities in nature are finite.

Here is the question that everyone needs to ask regarding the arguments on whether or not the universe is finite, or infinite:

Is the line that makes up a circle infinite? or is it finite? If it is finite? where does the line that makes up a circle begin and where does it end?
edit on 22-12-2010 by Sly1one because: deleted part of sentence I didn't completely agree with

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 02:40 AM

The line that makes a circle is finite, of course. It has a length you can measure. You can begin measuring at any point along the circumference and still obtain the same value. Therefore any point thereon may be both the start and the end of the circle.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 05:52 AM

Originally posted by Astyanax

If a photon is everywhere at once that means it is infinite?

No.

All quantities in nature are finite.

I agree.

But i dont get how a Photon can be everywhere at once?

If light is emitted energy from a source, as waves or ripples in the fabric of space. That means they have a beginning and a source.

The light from the sun is not everywhere at once. The light waves emitted onto the fabric of space use a specific time to reach earth?

The fabric that makes up the space that surround us is finite. Its a finite volume of matter. It is not even constant. So the waves that make up the emitted light probably dont even travel at a constant speed through the finite fabric of space.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 06:46 AM

i dont get how a Photon can be everywhere at once?

You have to see it from the point of view of the photon.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 07:29 AM

Originally posted by Astyanax

i dont get how a Photon can be everywhere at once?

You have to see it from the point of view of the photon.

I can imagine a wave of light. It is rippled onto the fabric of space from a source constantly, as long as the source produces the wave.

But that does not make it everywhere at once. It makes it have a specific location in space and time depending on how far the wave has traveled since the source produced the wave of light. And what distractions in the fabric of space it meats on its journey.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 07:42 AM

Photons travel at the speed of light. At the speed of light, time disappears.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Astyanax

Photons travel at the speed of light. At the speed of light, time disappears.

Time only disappear when it becomes infinite. If a photon travels at the speed of light. It has time.

Light has to become infinite to loose time. It must loose its motion in the fabric of space first.

The infinite is the only dimension that has no time no motion. Everything else has time/motion.

Light photons are emitted from a finite energy source onto a finite fabric of energy. The emitted light photon is a finite energy source. Without the energy source that produce the light you have no light photons.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 12:51 PM

Originally posted by Astyanax

The line that makes a circle is finite, of course. It has a length you can measure. You can begin measuring at any point along the circumference and still obtain the same value. Therefore any point thereon may be both the start and the end of the circle.

Then I ask is infinity an "illusion"? Are all things finite and just simply "wrap around themselves" creating the illusion of a never-ending line or space, such as the circle above?

The more you contemplate the simple questions the more you have to delve into theoretical areas such as string-theory, quantum mechanics, special relativity, etc...

can you not break each "segment" of distance into smaller and smaller segments of distance infinitely? Are we not acknowledging the microcosmic portions of existence? How "small" can things get, before we know they could get no smaller? Where is the foundation of the universe?

Because we do not know for certain the answers to these questions we ultimately have no choice but to theorize from what we do know. from my perspective "infinity" is a building "pattern" that is consistently apparent in the construction of the universe so I lean towards "all things infinite"....where as others chose to lean the other way.

Until those questions above can be answered neither is wrong and neither is right.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:55 PM

Oh, I see. You want an argument. I thought you were seeking knowledge.

Well, you won't get one. What I have posted is what actually happens according to the Special Theory of Relativity as I understand it. It only applies to photons in vacuo, but it applies nonetheless. Accept it or not, as you will; I couldn't care less.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 11:25 PM

Then I ask is infinity an "illusion"?

What was it I posted earlier? 'There are no infinite quantities in nature.'

Are all things finite and just simply "wrap around themselves" creating the illusion of a never-ending line or space, such as the circle above?

As I have shown you, a circle is a figure with finite and quantifiable properties. It is not infinite.

can you not break each "segment" of distance into smaller and smaller segments of distance infinitely?

No.

How "small" can things get, before we know they could get no smaller?

In theory, 1.616252×10^−35 metres. In fact, probably a whole lot bigger than that.

Are we not acknowledging the microcosmic portions of existence?

What is a 'microcosmic portion'? A menu option at Milliways?

Where is the foundation of the universe?

What has this got to do with the question of whether infinite quantities exist?

Because we do not know for certain the answers to these questions we ultimately have no choice but to theorize from what we do know.

I think you have accidentally used the wrong pronoun. Shouldn't your sentence read 'Because I do not know for certain... I have no choice but to theorize...'?

from my perspective "infinity" is a building "pattern" that is consistently apparent in the construction of the universe so I lean towards "all things infinite"....

Careful when you lean towards that infinitely deep well, or you may have an infinitely long fall.

...where as others chose to lean the other way.

Well, it takes all sorts, doesn't it?

Until those questions above can be answered neither is wrong and neither is right.

Ah, the old God of the Gaps argument. Surprising how many people find it so useful...

edit on 24/12/10 by Astyanax because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 07:18 AM

Ooh ooh pick me pick me!

According to S.R., you are entirely correct. Since time comes to a grinding halt at light speed and photons travel at light speed, from the photon's point of view, it doesn't take 8 min to travel from the Sun to Earth, it takes an infinite amount of time. The same time it takes to reach any other given point in the universe so it must be everywhere at once since it can never reach anywhere in a finite amount of time.

posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 07:38 AM

Also, since I have noticed that you seem to be much learned, what happens at the event horizon of a black hole? Say a wandering hydrogen atom strays near a black hole. Gravitational attraction will result in the H atom accelerating toward the black hole, and, according to S.R., it will gain mass as it accelerates. This increase in mass will result in both a "resistance" to accelleration as it gets heavier and therefore more difficult to accelerate and an "assistance" as it's increase in mass results in more gravitational attraction. As it nears the event horizon, it will become almost infinitely massive but will reach a stalemate as the more massive it becomes, the harder it is to accelerate but the more acceleration due to gravity it will experience. The acelleration to near light speed will also result in time (according to the H atom) to pretty much stop. This entire turn of events seems to contradict itself.

I fully doubt I'm like the first to notice this and stuff.
edit on 24-12-2010 by OZtracized because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 07:59 AM
Light does what it does when it travels.The " How long" thing is irrelevant to the photon because it travels at its own pace. We the observer interact with light and that includes time because time is of mind. To stop the time warp one would have to become that (light) which moves us into ourselves which is time. So on its own merit, light just travels. We either benefit from it or get ripped to shreds. Light is much bigger a force than we who are mere dust. "Like sands through the hour glass, so are the days of our lives".

posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 11:04 AM
Using a photon for reference, think about this, does the Photons time slow down or everything around it just speed up?

Hey look up time dilation, there is also lots of interesting clips on youtube about it. It may help get ur . around it

Also in regard to the time difference my thought is this: 4.2 years is 4.2 years either way. Only because it all comes to reference and how we measure. 4.2 LY is the same either way, whether you are the traveler or the observer. The difference comes in aging or half life etc. I have a question for u, if time for the particle traveling at light speed is slow, then it is aging very slow, are photons ageless? the same beam of light that left a star or galaxy 15 billions years ago is still bouncing through space. Although the particle is so old relative to us, it may actually be younger than us. If that makes sense.

posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 03:32 AM
Just wanted to add to my above post, i was mobile when i posted it and was kinda hard to add more detail. Here's a couple of clips that might help:

In regard to the above he uses the train paradox as an example. Now this guy is abviously smarter than me, but to me it would make more sense that when the train contracts from the observers point of view, then from the trains point of view everything else would actually expand, but yeah thats my lil theory on it - i dont have anything to back it up and is most likely wrong but it makes more sense and gets around the paradox!!

I mean he is using the same example for the train travelling at 99% c as the observers at normal motion or speed. The trains velocity causes contraction but physically only the train the actually moving that fast, the space / matter around it is not, it only appears that way from the train and may only be an optical illusion.

Also think about this, if i were to travel to the Sun from Earth at 2x lightspeed ( if ever possible ) could i then i look back at Earth with a telescope and see myself leaving?

Also i then somehow destroy the Sun and return at same speed there will still be lapse in time, so when i return to Eartyh for another 4 Minutes approx the Sun looks fine, have i changed the future relative to Earth. As by the time i return, from Earths point of view the Sun is still ok.

Also if Time Dilation is possible then Reverse time dilation must also be possible, any object or action has an equal and or opposite reaction, so then why not reverse time dilation? I have posed this before but never get much of a response....

What if it was possible to exceed lightspeed, now if time stops when traveling at lightspeed, what may happen if you exceed this barrier, would time maybe begin to reverse?

I have thought about this for a long time now, ironically i was watching a re-run of startrek the orginal serious on tv and they had this same issue, to cut it short they imploded thier warp drive, in turn making the enterprise so fast and much faster than light that they went back in time 3 days.

Now obviously Star-trek is fiction but it makes me think. I will post a crude graph of the theory i put together.

It shows the Earth, then an obkect that leaves Earth at lightspeed, and return to Earth. this part is mostly correct due to time dilation. What i have added on is what may happen ( theory only ) if lightspeed is exceeded.
edit on 25-12-2010 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-12-2010 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)

Heres a couple more clips for good measure - also judging by the direction this thread is .ing it may be worth starting a new thread on the issue but hmm we will have to wait and see....

edit on 25-12-2010 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 05:11 AM

Well i guess the question you need to ask yourself is, Photons - are they travelling so fast that they are indeed infinite. I mean just look at what we can see. We look out and see the light from stars and galaxies that is billions of years old, with no known end in sight.

So are the particles aging? I tend to think not but that is my opinion only....

posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 05:13 AM

A Circle is infinite.... kinda
but yeah not starting an argument i do what point your were getting to.

However as per my last reply perhaps photons are, the evidence is all around us in brillilant colour!

Also wanted to add to the thread, the Voyager spacecraft os now traveling at 20,000x the speed of a bullet, i wonder what the onboard clock is compared to Earth time??? Perhaps that helps in it lasting so long compared to relative Earth time.
edit on 25-12-2010 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 07:14 AM

Originally posted by Havick007

Well i guess the question you need to ask yourself is, Photons - are they travelling so fast that they are indeed infinite. I mean just look at what we can see. We look out and see the light from stars and galaxies that is billions of years old, with no known end in sight.

So are the particles aging? I tend to think not but that is my opinion only....

The first thing i ask my self is: What is a true constant? A true constant that does not change.

-Is the infinite stationary or does it expand/move. Does it do anything?

I think of the infinite as a infinite dimension. A infinite volume of space. A infinite volume of pace can not move. It can't expand. And it wont compress. Because It takes up all space/volume possible.

To me the infinite is Thee constant. Therefore everything else " matter and energies" becomes a relative to the infinite. Because matter and energies have changes. The infinite does not change.

Light can not be a constant if the infinite already is the constant.

When it comes to light. Light is the source we know that has the fastest expansion time. In my opinion all other finite matter and energies become relative to the expansion of light. What this means is that we compare expansion of other matter and energies to the expansion speed of light.

We can only observe and measure speed within the finite dimension of matter and energies. Therefor our theory of relativity cant include the infinite dimension. Because we can not observe the infinite.

Someone mentioned that all matter is infinite. Well that is a lie.

If you take matter and divide it. Zoom in to divide it, zoom in to divide it. People think we can go on with this action for ever. But that is not true.
At a point the mass you are dividing will disintegrate, vanish because of the surrounding pressure effecting the mass your dividing. People tend to forget that matter consists of compressed energies. And that all matter exists within a finite atmosphere of pressure.

When it comes to time dilation. you can actually check your equations with geometry. To see if they are true or not.

new topics

top topics

4