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.

 

Einstein was wrong, the speed of light cannot be constant because it's immeasurable by his own theo

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by AnnoyingOrangeX
 


Can you please state your source?




posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Of course the speed of light isn't constant.

How do you think it get's sucked into a black hole? It has to change it's speed flying outwards and turn inwards.

But however if we could observe light in a completely closed system perhaps it would maintain a consistent speed or behavior? I hate to refer to Newton and the First Law of Motion and the principal of inertia, but it was inevitable.


It is constant.

I'm not sure what you are referring regarding the black hole. But the black hole warps space, so does all mass. Light travels in space. Maybe you could clarify what you mean by "flying outwards and turn inwards", doesn't sound like it makes much of a sense.

The speed of light appears to be fundamental for the universe. The law cannot be broken. Even space and time back down preventing this imperative to be violated.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by libertytoall
 


as an example why the theory is believed to be correct:
if the theory would fail you won't measure myons hitting the surface of the earth.

Due to cosmic radiation myons, - a more heavier version of electrons -, are created in the higher atmosphere.
the myons travel with a high percentage of the speed of light, and survive just fractions of a seconds.
The time they exist is too short to have them being detected on the surface.
The energy they release on hitting the detectors is measurable and the myons mass is known.
Also the time myons exist is known.
So under no circumstances with normal classic non-relativistic physics such myons would have enough time to reach the surface.

Now we take Einsteins relativity in place and find the following:
From earth view myons are created and travel with a good portion of speed into the detector, while the observers time ticks just like your very own wristwatch.
Since myons travel with a good portion of the speed of light, the myons time from the observers position appears to be slowed.
From the myons viewpoint the time ticks just normal, and it will fall apart in the exact time it would do if not in motion.
But it IS in motion, and from the myons viewpoint the earth comes along with a tremendous speed.
The myon would fall apart, but since the earth comes along with such a speed it would prior falling apart hit the detector.
From the myons viewpoint there is an observer on earth's surface with a wristwatch which ticks very slow, cause the observer is in rapid motion.

As you see .. the rest of the universe does not matter in this
its a thing between 2 observers ... the myon, and the detector.
Both see it coming, both just meet if you take into account that a local observer disagrees about the time of the other observer.

If GR would be wrong we won't have myons on the earth's surface. they would fall apart high above.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
We are fools to attempt to define, in logical terms, the "speed of light" or physics for that matter.. Speaking of defying the speed of light, is ignorant, when we do not know what defines the physics itself.....


Not trying to be rude..

But we are barely intelligent enough after thousands of years to barely abide by laws as a species and not kill each other over stupid human nature... Like greed, lust, etc. etc.

We can barely handle doing that, we hate the origins of those laws anyhow ya know religion the ten commandments.. etc. etc.

in 2011, we have people that are smarter then religion yet without that as a foundation our judicial system in the western world would not exist...

just saying in general, I do not want to get a keen retrospective lecture on how corruption screws all that up as well..



Einstein, was neither wrong nor right.....


edit on 24-8-2011 by Bicent76 because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-8-2011 by Bicent76 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
This is dead wrong and there is an easy test to show how.

So it wasn't einstein who originally came up with the speed of light being a constant...it is actually a by product of Maxwell's equations for electromagnetics...it was just Einstein who took the idea the next logical step and applied its implications to spacetime.

but the test to show this is true is simple.

lets assume what this guy is saying is right and there is no "true" rest frame anywhere in the universe
that isn't a crazy thing to say
So lets set up a measurement for the speed of light in that reference frame (using whatever method you like...it just needs to be accurate). Now, lets move to a different reference frame that is in a different state of acceleration (you could put the experiment on a train or a plane or just move it to somewhere where the gravity is different...like the moon) repeat this experiment and what you find is the speed you measure for light is EXACTLY the same, not just close...but exactly

so what does this mean?

It means that even if we can't ever measure lights "true" speed...because we can't escape a non-accelerating reference frame or whatever...we can still make relative measurements as to the speed of light

If it wasn't a constant then we could tell the difference by seeing the different results in the various reference frames
These experiments were carried out and continue to be carried out. In fact the speed of light being measured as a constant is one of the triumphs of GPS technology, satellite communications, and space travel to quote only a few.

You don't have to take my word for it...the next time your GPS tells you what road to turn on trust that if the clock in the satellite (which is a radiation clock running on the speed of light) was different than the clock on your phone you would end up missing your turn everytime.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
well, it just makes sense that the speed of light isn't constant....there is no such thing as a true zero point.....so, when we reference something we are referencing from a general point and calling it zero...therefore, when measuring light to use in our calculations for signal propogation and such...we use 186,000 miles/sec...you can actually use any number you want, but you have to change the constants standards that have been generally accepted in the rest of the mathematic system in order to reflect this change.....as long as you do above as you did below you can make any measurement work



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by CasiusIgnoranze
reply to post by AnnoyingOrangeX
 


Can you please state your source?


sure I can but this won´t help you much. I knew that Faraday disproves Einstein from a documentary I had watched a while ago and this page was the first that turned up in a quick google search. Unfortunately it is an austrian site in german and also not something you would call a "reliable" source.
edit on 24-8-2011 by AnnoyingOrangeX because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Check out this article, and ignore the author's opinions if you can.
Light exceeds it's own speed


In the most striking of the new experiments a pulse of light that enters a transparent chamber filled with specially prepared cesium gas is pushed to speeds of 300 times the normal speed of light. That is so fast that, under these peculiar circumstances, the main part of the pulse exits the far side of the chamber even before it enters at the near side.


It's a pretty crazy experiment.

To me it shows that light is mutable and can do all kinds of things, many we haven't even conceived of yet. We lack the technology to do the really good tests.

So yes light does not act the same all the time in all conditions and c may not always equal c when those conditions are shifted.

But if you need a number to work with for practical purposes, I don't see anything wrong with using the generalized shooting a laser at the mirror on the moon and dividing it's distance by it's time duration to get the speed value.

Of course that number doesn't always apply, and it's not even that accurate, but it's something you can work with if you need a number right now. It's a good general estimate.


Though declining to provide details of his paper because it is under review, Dr. Wang said: "Our light pulses can indeed be made to travel faster than c. This is a special property of light itself, which is different from a familiar object like a brick," since light is a wave with no mass. A brick could not travel so fast without creating truly big problems for physics, not to mention humanity as a whole.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   
I agree with the OP's points, they are very valid, and I would not like to discuss the application in this particular setting mainly due to the parrot like repetition that has spawned from just 2 pages. what do YOU think?

one thing I will note, the earth is moving, the sun is moving, you are moving, take this into account in the equations or be done with the semantics and move onto something viable, we're not at rest.

i'd also like to point out radio waves have already been accelerated past 300k /km/h, explain that one.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   
My theory is that the speed of light changes with the enviroment it is in. On earth it is at its slowest because there is much resistance in the form of dense particles to penetrate. In the solar system it is still very slow because of all the magnetic fields and quite dense particles. Inbetween Galaxys in outer space I think that the speed of light is at it's fastest maybe even almost infinate speed. I think the other Galaxies for us appear further away than they actually are and I think we may soon discover that.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   
I am not really sure what is going on in this thread. It does not matter whether you are moving or not, at whatever speed, because the velocity of light remains the same regardless. Even during acceleration, although this introduces other problems, but nothing that is unexplainable in modern physics.

Einstein 1 You 0 --- Do you think that a century of physicists have been wrong? People smarter than you could ever dream of being? Where do people come up with this stuff?



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I agree, man, trying to understand it, with a logical approach which is no disrespect to our kind, or the curious or even the op is, in my opinion the wrong approach. their are things in the reality, "universe" whatever you call this life you live in, that makes 0, no sense logically at all, and when we condemn, people for being illogical about such behavior, is where we see the ignorance at its best as a species.....

heck even $$ has defiled science...





I replied to you because I agree, that is all.....



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   
thats exactly what I mean, your just repeating what you've been taught to think.

in school (a ways back now but I remember) I asked my science teacher if there was any proof on the speed of light and his answer was its been proven, I don't need to read the litrature.

im telling you your wrong, he was wrong, and no one has had an original thought since at least the 1970's. which is why I won't discuss the reality of the situation here, its a lost cause argument.

ed: its almost as bad as dark energy and black holes and the big bang hypothesis, all unproven theorys to this day but repeat it enough and it becomes mantra
edit on 24-8-2011 by whatsinaname because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I am not really sure what is going on in this thread. It does not matter whether you are moving or not, at whatever speed, because the velocity of light remains the same regardless. Even during acceleration, although this introduces other problems, but nothing that is unexplainable in modern physics.

Einstein 1 You 0 --- Do you think that a century of physicists have been wrong? People smarter than you could ever dream of being? Where do people come up with this stuff?


Just so there is no confusion who are you reffering to when you say "you"?



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by CriticalCK
The speed of light appears to be fundamental for the universe. The law cannot be broken. Even space and time back down preventing this imperative to be violated.


This has to be the best explanation I have ever seen!
I especially like your last statement.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
light reacts to the instances that we see and it only goes to figure that it reacts to instances that we have no idea about in our reality....we can only measure up to our limit and that's it....the filters that we possess filter the rest out.....



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


these are some very interesting experiments you've found.
edit on 24-8-2011 by CriticalCK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
why grasp at straws here? theres a very simple way to disprove that time is negative, frankly the fact that you have a clock can prove that in a second, though if we're talking physics the decay of the objects around you at the atomic level should also suffice.

whats so hard about being wrong?

ed: since we're on the topic of relativity I think we can agree that time is not relativly negative
edit on 24-8-2011 by whatsinaname because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 

That old experiment was recently disproven, leaving no doubts.

Here:
news.discovery.com ...


"Professor Du's study demonstrates that a single photon, the fundamental quanta of light, also obeys the traffic law of the universe just like classical EM (electromagnetic) waves."

The possibility of time travel was raised 10 years ago when scientists discovered superluminal -- or faster-than-light -- propagation of optical pulses in some specific medium, the team said.

It was later found to be a visual effect, but researchers thought it might still be possible for a single photon to exceed light speed.

Du, however, believed Einstein was right and determined to end the debate by measuring the ultimate speed of a single photon, which had not been done before.

edit on 24-8-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
I have a coupe of questions, for those of you who seem to have a handle on the speed that light wants to travel in various mediums.

If I shot a beam of light into a vacuum, it would travel at the maximum theoretical (or absolute) speed. If the beam then entered, say, a clear glass of water, it would slow down to whatever speed light likes to travel in water.

On the other side of the glass, is a vacuum again.

My first question is, after the light emerges from the glass, at what speed will it want to travel. Will it continue along at the speed it was going while it was in the water...or will it accelerate up to its maximum speed again?

If it speeds up again, by what process can it do so? Wouldn't this go against the principle of momentum...that things will tend to continue on their way at a constant speed unless acted upon by a force of some kind?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join