Speed of Light and Energy...?

[hackenslash]

well it doesn't feel like middle-world thinking to me, since I'm talking about it on the atomic and sub-atomic scale, incorporating gravitational fields etc... but if I'm truly waaaaay off the mark, i'll just shut up and give colubridae the satisfaction of seeing me give up. as for the book, it's next on my list.

Of course it doesn't feel like middle-world thinking. It makes perfect sense to you from your middle-world point of view. Until you step outside the box, you can't see that you were in the box.

Oh, and if you're going to talk about the atomic and sub-atomic scale, incorporating gravitational fields, you have more work ahead of you than that, because on the atomic and subatomic scales, you're into quantum territory. There are several things that are going to be a problem for you here. The first is that the best minds of the 20th and 21st century have still not found any way to bring gravity into a quantum framework. The second, and some might say that this is a bigger problem, is that if you can't get your head around relativity, you haven't got a prayer of understanding quantum mechanics. If you think that relativity is counter-intuitive, wait until you come across particles that can be in two places at once, or indeed everywhere at once, let alone a particle that can travel in two directions at the same time (you may be interested in my sci-writing entry this month, if I ever get it finished, because the latter is what it deals with), the impossibility of nothing, the impossibility of a zero field of any description, the impossibility of being at rest (which contradicts relativity, by the way, since relativity tells us that every observer has equal claim to being at rest), observer effect collapsing the wavefunction, particles tunneling through walls, the exclusion of energy frequencies that cannot complete their wave-cycle, virtual particles, and possibly cosmic instantiation from nothing.

Seriously, quantum mechanics fucks up some really brilliant minds. That's why they say just shut up and calculate. Nobody can even give you a good reason why quantum mechanics works, it just does.

[Nautilidae]

well it doesn't feel like middle-world thinking to me, since I'm talking about it on the atomic and sub-atomic scale, incorporating gravitational fields etc... but if I'm truly waaaaay off the mark, i'll just shut up and give colubridae the satisfaction of seeing me give up. as for the book, it's next on my list.

The reason time is considered a spatial dimensions is because it naturally follows from special relativity. Minkowski noticed that special relativity can be described in a coordinate system involving time as a dimension. This is called the Minkowski metric. It naturally arises from the equations of special relativity. In other words: just like the x, y, and z dimensions on a coordinate system, one can incorporate time as an additional dimension. Just as how something can move through space, Minkowski showed that objects can move through time in a similar manner. This Minkowski metric is actually what inspired Einstein to create general relativity; by using a curved Minkowski space, one can construct a consistent theory of gravity.

Ask as many questions as you wish, dj357; don't give colubridae the satisfaction

[colubridae]

well it doesn't feel like middle-world thinking to me, since I'm talking about it on the atomic and sub-atomic scale, incorporating gravitational fields etc... but if I'm truly waaaaay off the mark, i'll just shut up and give colubridae the satisfaction of seeing me give up. as for the book, it's next on my list.

I feel deeply hurt that you should think I would get any satisfaction from you giving up. It would be my delight to see you continue.

I have done nothing but encourage you.
I have recommended tutored study of this subject, that hardly counts as wanting you to give up.

Clearly if you think this, then an apology from me would be needed.
I certainly do not think that you are deliberately ignoring what has been explained to you in extremely simply terms. And you must not feel inadequate if you cannot follow the reasoning. Clearly this is not your fault.
I am only a humble B.Sc. so trying to explain this subject may take me out of my depth.

I certainly do not think that you are a scammer deliberately obfuscating to gain some sort of strange pleasure. And I don’t want to appear to be someone who is baiting such a scammer for some equally strange pleasure.

Anyway to the business at hand I would like to ask you three questions.

1 You are standing on railway tracks. A train is approaching you at 100km/sec.
Imagine the train is completely transparent. You see a man on the train throwing a ball at you. For people on the train with him, they see him throw the ball at 100km/sec.
How fast do you see the ball moving towards you?
Please don’t think this as trivial. It is important to establish baseline understanding.


2 You are standing on the tracks and a different train approaches you at 2/3 the speed of light (approx 200,000km/sec)
A man on the train switches a torch on
How fast do you see the light from the torch coming towards you.?


3 You are standing on the tracks and a different train approaches you at 2/3 the speed of light (approx 200,000km/sec)
A man on the train throws a ball at you and passengers with him see the ball move at 2/3 the speed of light.
How fast do you see the ball coming towards you.?

These are important questions.



Ps Somewhere you suggested that I thought you were a f**cking moron. This is an adult forum and from what I can see people here will not be offended by adult language. Do not be afraid to use such language. If you think you are a fucking moron, do not be afraid to say ‘I am a fucking moron’ I for one would applaud you if you did.

[dj357]

colubridae: apologies if I miscontrued your comments. they appeared sarcastic to me, and clearly I was wrong. as for the questions, my brain is too frazzled by this over the last few days so I'm going to come back to them some other time, but thanks for them. as for the moron bit, that was simply an assertion on my part to reassert that I consider myself intelligent enough to figure this stuff out. and the f**king bit is just me using that word while calm. I know we're all adults and we can handle it, but it doesn't mean I need to be intentionally rude, so i try not to be

nautilidae: I understand (basically) Minkowski spacetime and I understand that it follows from relativity and I understand that it shows object can move through time as they do through other dimensions, but I still don't believe that is actually possible. I understand it, but I don't get it. as for giving up, it's more like postponing more detailed study of the issue until i've done a hell of a lot more background research and I understand the math behind it. it seems the math is the only way I have to actually prove one way or the other if I'm just conceptualising things wrong or not and I don't have anywhere near enough understanding of the maths to do so any time soon, so any further objections I could make to the issue would simply be on principle and that's much of a basis for an argument.

hackenslash: well that's what i'm gonna do. I'm gonna shut up and go calculate. once I understand the maths better.

[newolder]

colubridae: apologies if I miscontrued your comments. they appeared sarcastic to me, and clearly I was wrong. as for the questions, my brain is too frazzled by this over the last few days so I'm going to come back to them some other time, but thanks for them. as for the moron bit, that was simply an assertion on my part to reassert that I consider myself intelligent enough to figure this stuff out. and the f**king bit is just me using that word while calm. I know we're all adults and we can handle it, but it doesn't mean I need to be intentionally rude, so i try not to be

nautilidae: I understand (basically) Minkowski spacetime and I understand that it follows from relativity and I understand that it shows object can move through time as they do through other dimensions, but I still don't believe that is actually possible. I understand it, but I don't get it. as for giving up, it's more like postponing more detailed study of the issue until i've done a hell of a lot more background research and I understand the math behind it. it seems the math is the only way I have to actually prove one way or the other if I'm just conceptualising things wrong or not and I don't have anywhere near enough understanding of the maths to do so any time soon, so any further objections I could make to the issue would simply be on principle and that's much of a basis for an argument.

hackenslash: well that's what i'm gonna do. I'm gonna shut up and go calculate. once I understand the maths better.

Hi dj357,

You seem to be asking frequently-asked type questions. Try – like Einstein, - What happens when I travel at the speed of light with respect to my stationary, Earth-bound twin?

When you 'get' the correct answer, you'll have realised a co-moving frame of reference in your own brain-matter.

After that, imagine two space-ships attached, line astern by a tether-rope-string. Now, each accelerates away from you constantly. Does the string break?

When you have the correct answer here*, it's probably time to introduce quantum ideas...

* e.g. http://skfiz.wdfiles.com/local--files/m ... _ships.pdf

[colubridae]

colubridae: apologies if I miscontrued your comments. they appeared sarcastic to me, and clearly I was wrong. as for the questions, my brain is too frazzled by this over the last few days so I'm going to come back to them some other time, but thanks for them. as for the moron bit, that was simply an assertion on my part to reassert that I consider myself intelligent enough to figure this stuff out. and the f**king bit is just me using that word while calm. I know we're all adults and we can handle it, but it doesn't mean I need to be intentionally rude, so i try not to be

Just for now can you answer the first question. It would really put your understanding 'on the map' so to speak.

[dj357]

colubridae: apologies if I miscontrued your comments. they appeared sarcastic to me, and clearly I was wrong. as for the questions, my brain is too frazzled by this over the last few days so I'm going to come back to them some other time, but thanks for them. as for the moron bit, that was simply an assertion on my part to reassert that I consider myself intelligent enough to figure this stuff out. and the f**king bit is just me using that word while calm. I know we're all adults and we can handle it, but it doesn't mean I need to be intentionally rude, so i try not to be

Just for now can you answer the first question. It would really put your understanding 'on the map' so to speak.

i should see it travelling towards me at 200km/sec

as an aside, the ball actually is travelling at 200km/sec since the train was already travelling at 100km/sec as was the ball (which was 'at rest' inside the train) until an additional 100km/sec was imparted to it by the man throwing the ball bringing it's total speed to 200km/sec.

[colubridae]

colubridae: apologies if I miscontrued your comments. they appeared sarcastic to me, and clearly I was wrong. as for the questions, my brain is too frazzled by this over the last few days so I'm going to come back to them some other time, but thanks for them. as for the moron bit, that was simply an assertion on my part to reassert that I consider myself intelligent enough to figure this stuff out. and the f**king bit is just me using that word while calm. I know we're all adults and we can handle it, but it doesn't mean I need to be intentionally rude, so i try not to be

Just for now can you answer the first question. It would really put your understanding 'on the map' so to speak.

i should see it travelling towards me at 200km/sec

as an aside, the ball actually is travelling at 200km/sec since the train was already travelling at 100km/sec as was the ball (which was 'at rest' inside the train) until an additional 100km/sec was imparted to it by the man throwing the ball bringing it's total speed to 200km/sec.

This is a perfect newtonian answer. Newtonian physics works because the speeds (even 100km/sec) are so slow that relativistic effects are so small as to be unmeasurable.

This is also called classical physics as opposed to relativistic physics. You could call it absolute kinematics. Every observer see the ball at an 'absolute' speed.

Now can you try the second question. Exact answer not neccessary.

[dj357]

I should see the light from the torch coming at me at c

[colubridae]

I should see the light from the torch coming at me at c

Brilliant. well done.

Now do you understand just how alien that it is?
Nothing we see or do in the 'newtonian' world which is what we experience behaves in this way.
This is why it is said to be counter-intuitive.

[dj357]

I should see the light from the torch coming at me at c

Brilliant. well done.

Now do you understand just how alien that it is?
Nothing we see or do in the 'newtonian' world which is what we experience behaves in this way.
This is why it is said to be counter-intuitive.

yeah i do understand how alien it is it and counter-intuitive to most people, but it's intuitive for me once you understand that the speed of light is a constant. it's obvious in that situation. but the thing is light doesn't behave the same way as matter does i.e. the speed of the train doesn't change the speed of light. however the speed of the train in which the ball sits does change the inherent speed of the ball.

if you start out a light-minute away from me, flash a light once quickly and then travel towards me faster than the speed of light, i'll actually see you appear to start right in front of me and travel away from me (backwards) at the speed of light, ending with you flashing a light once. because at each stage where light is reflected off you (which is the only way I can actually observe you) you are travelling faster than it.

[dj357]

stupid duplicate post...

[colubridae]

I should see the light from the torch coming at me at c

Brilliant. well done.

Now do you understand just how alien that it is?
Nothing we see or do in the 'newtonian' world which is what we experience behaves in this way.
This is why it is said to be counter-intuitive.

yeah i do understand how alien it is it and counter-intuitive to most people, but it's intuitive for me once you understand that the speed of light is a constant. it's obvious in that situation. but the thing is light doesn't behave the same way as matter does i.e. the speed of the train doesn't change the speed of light. however the speed of the train in which the ball sits does change the inherent speed of the ball.

if you start out a light-minute away from me, flash a light once quickly and then travel towards me faster than the speed of light, i'll actually see you appear to start right in front of me and travel away from me (backwards) at the speed of light, ending with you flashing a light once. because at each stage where light is reflected off you (which is the only way I can actually observe you) you are travelling faster than it.

Dude one thing at a time! don't confuse yourself by running away with other stuff at this point....

Do you understand that the way light behaves is utterly alien? Beyond annything that you know so far? Beyond anything that you experience in everyday life?

Do you understand why light behaves in this way?

[dj357]

Dude one thing at a time! don't confuse yourself by running away with other stuff at this point....

Do you understand that the way light behaves is utterly alien? Beyond annything that you know so far? Beyond anything that you experience in everyday life?

Do you understand why light behaves in this way?

photons (commonly known as light) are considered to be massless packets of electro-magnetic radiation that exhibit particle-wave duality. i understand photons are the poster child for quantum mechanics. i understand they behave differently than we would normally see things in everyday, but I understand light and these concepts.

[colubridae]

photons (commonly known as light) are considered to be massless packets of electro-magnetic radiation that exhibit particle-wave duality. i understand photons are the poster child for quantum mechanics. i understand they behave differently than we would normally see things in everyday, but I understand light and these concepts.

Dude that wasn't the question I asked. Let me lead you through this, otherwise you will just make yourself look like a fucking idiot and you don't want that do you?

Once again it is very important:-

Do you know why light travels at a constant speed in all frames of reference?

(there is one correct answer)

(i Have to go on a lesson shortly so I won't be back till later today - be patient)