The speed of light is constant right? What if everything in

>>7745151
well if i remember correctly the relative speed of light is always the speed of light.

if you think about that, the only thing u can change about light is its frequency.

if you move toward a source of light the frequency increases (blueshift), and away then the frequency decreases (redshift).
The relative speed of the light is still the speed of light. But thats just off my memory dunno if correct

>>7745157
oh, i'm interpreting "the speed of light is constant" wrong, it's relativistic speed of light is constant.

>>7745151
>What if everything in the universe is traveling the speed of light all the time?

take out the 'what if' and you have your answer

oh ok. glad i helped :)

File: VisibleLightSpectrum.jpg (156KB, 1340x631px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1340x631px

>>7745157
HOL UP

Are you saying that because you are moving against the direction of the light wave and thus increasing your personal encounter of the frequency that the light will change the color it depicts to you?

That's some seriously subjective bullshit.

That implies that all electromagnetic radiation is SIMULTANEOUSLY every form it can take all at once and what makes it different is the speed at which you encountered it

EUREKA I've done, what I just said must be true, don't steal it.

BUT that also implies that RADIOACTIVITY is REALLY just light that YOU are encountering at a relativistic speed that is TOO SLOW and makes light have more effect and prehaps if you slowed down enough LIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO HAVE MASS

What is WE are all light slowed down to a very very slow vibration?

>>7745165
Don't steal my ideas you bastards this is going to be my doctoral thesis.

>>7745165
HOL UP

WRONG

YOU ARE ENCOUNTERING THE LIGHT TOO FAST and that gives it "radioactive" properties.

IT's ALL about speed!

IF you moved fast enough LIGHT WOULD BECOME SOLID because the vibration would be so high that it would NEVER be absorbed by anything!

>>7745176
IN THIS WAY you could make HOLOGRAMS that COULD effect other matter PHYSICALLY!

>>7745179
or I should say, effect matter mechanically.

fu fu fu i'm smart

>>7745165
ok wtf did u just say. honestly make no sense to me. are u making a joke or something?
also im this guy :>>7745157

>>7745183
The speed of light is constant right?

That means all light everywhere is moving at the same velocity.

The frequency of the wave changes in you are moving towards it or away form it, which means that if all light is moving at a constant speed, that if you were moving away form light at the speed of light, the wave length of the light would be increasingly long, even to the point where at times it appeared flat.

If you were moving toward the light at the speed of light the wave length would be ultra high frequency.

I am proposing that all light, because the relativistic speed is constant, is not of any differing frequency but it is YOUR relvistic speed at which you encounter light that determines the frequency of the light and the form it takes.

For instance, if were hurtling toward a light source at a faster and faster speed then the light would change for red to blue and eventually become gamma radiation to us because we are moving against it's frequency so fast, and if we turned around and headed the other direction the gamma radiation would revert back to the visible color spectrum

>>7745151
With respect to some reference frames it obviously is. That's why "no reference frame is preferred" is an important SR postulate that you shouldn't skimp over.

>>7745163
My prof was once talking abou mass-energy equivalence and how it's often misunderstood etc. At some point he said the energy associated with rest mass, E = mc2, was just the kinetic energy from us traveling through time at the speed of light.

Honestly I've always wondered if he was serious or not.

>>7745186
oh i just realised a flaw in my explanation,
u need to accelerate in order for the frequency of light to change.

also the amplitude will not change. only the frequency.

lets say at constant velocity what you see when looking at an object is green. if u accelerate toward it it will shift blue. accelerate away then redshift.
You will need to accelerate a fuck ton to get it to move out of visual spectrum

its based on acceleration, not velocity.
sorry for bad explanation

File: d8235f7b0c3840ed822f0177fa11efd15e431c198d5849eee0aa0e55c1e186f5.jpg (84KB, 625x625px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 625x625px

>>7745186
what if when an atom is expelling light it's really the quarks of the electron coming undone and there energy being released as a hyper extension under the pressures of gravity all around it

like the strings of string theory getting stretched out because the nuclear forces can't protect it form gravity anymore?

>>7745194
that's very interesting, but my point is still valid, if you accelerated to a new velocity the light would stay it's color

the only reason it changes back to it's normal color on earth is because you decelerate back to your original speed do to the speed of the earth

if you accelerated in s space ship the light shift should stay permanent, i don't see how it couldn't because if it shifted back down that would mean the light is aware of your acceleration and is compensating it's frequency for your movement.

>>7745193
he's wrong if he was serious. because what he says doesn't explain the atom bomb

>>7745186
>>7745194

You didn't fuck up just there, friendo :^)
The speed of light is NOT a constant.
The speed of light in a VACUUM is constant.
Light travels at different speeds in different mediums, hence refractive indexes of different materials (air, water, glass, etc.).

As for for your statements about the frequency (and hence colour) changing, Doppler Effect, bro. Traveling at different velocities will change the colour of the light. Acceleration is merely the change of velocity, so if you're accelerating, you're just moving through lots of different velocities and hence the light will change colours in accordance to the magnitude of your acceleration.

At least I think. High school physics taught me that much in 2 months. Can any physicists confirm?

>>7745201
wouldn't that mean if you were moving at light fast enough it would become solid because it's frequency would be so high it couldn't penetrate any material on the molecular level?

How fast are we moving through the universe really?

>>7745199
if you accelerate at a constant rate you will observe a constant fixed color which has shifted either redshift or blueshift from the original observation at 0 accel.

now if you were increasing in acceleration or decreasing in acceleration you will experience changing color.

lets say at 0 accel you would something as green

you then accelerating at A m/s^2 toward the object. you see that object as blue.

you then start to change acceleration to 0. (keep in mind you velocity is still increasing in the process.)
you will experience a change in color going from blue to green.

lets say now u want to change accel to be going away at Am/s^2
it will now change from green to red

>>7745201
oh ya thats right. i am doing all my explanations in a vacuum

>>7745209
I think you are wrong about that, and your velocity wouldn't change if you stopped accelerating. my reference frame is in a vacuum though not earth.

>>7745214
no your velicity will increase during the time where u change from accel of A to 0. once accel is 0 velicuty is constant

>>7745215
that's what I meant by "stopped accelerating" as in no change in velocity at all, weather slowing or speeding.

>>7745204
No. Nothing would happen except a shift in colour until it was beyond the visible portion of the electro-magnetic spectrum. You are moving, not the light source. It's still emitting electro-magnetic waves at the same frequency and speed (and energy) regardless of how fast you're moving.

>>7745220
right which means eventually the visible spectrum would turn into gamma radiation.

I'm just saying is there a light frequency so high that it can't penetrate anything on the molecular level.

>>7745219
ok here let me explain again

when you observe an object at 0 acceleration it will appear a certain color

when you start accelerating away from it it will red shift and toward it then blue shift

in order for something to appear to change colors with time you need to change accelerations(jerk)
increase accleration away from the object will change the color more and more longer wave lengths, increasing acceleration toward an object will make it more and more shorter wave lengths

instantaneously changeing accel from 0 to something away from an object will make an object look a certain color then instananeously a redshifted version

>>7745209
>increasing in acceleration or decreasing in acceleration
Bruh.

>>7745222
It would be observed as gamma waves but that doesn't make it gamma waves. The light wave still has the energy of whatever colour it actually is.

>there a light frequency so high that it can't penetrate anything on the molecular level
I have no idea what you mean by that. Wouldn't a higher freq (and hence higher energy) result in more penetrative power?

>>7745223
right.

so that means that all light is actually the same and weather its radiation or visible spectrum all depends on how fast YOU are going when you encounter the light

and because the speed of light is constant that means if you accelerated to the speed of light you would be going so fast everything would be gamma radiation to you

>>7745223
>increase accleration
You keep saying this yet I don't think it's what you mean.

File: wut.png (6KB, 720x353px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 720x353px

>>7745222
well a case like that would be very rare.
but i think that has some serious implications

if you are acclerating away so fast that it is shifted toward to the point of radio then can someone on the otherside see the object?

>>7745232
>all depends on how fast YOU are going when you encounter the light
Well not just YOU. If the light was moving towards/away from you, it'd change colour as well.

File: Prism.png (3KB, 576x341px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 576x341px

>>7745229
>The light wave still has the energy of whatever colour it actually is.

No, see that doesn't make any sense because the speed of light is constant and there for it's acceleration is constant and there fore its force and amplitude.

I'm saying light is ALL the colors and gamma waves ALL AT ONCE and it's just YOUR speed that deterimnes weather its the color red or gamma radiation to you

ALL a prisim does is take a light wave and make the colors move through it at different speeds so it emerges separated.

>>7745234
>alot
They would see the object as it is, assuming the blue person isn't moving, nor is the light, and that the red person isn't physically blocking the light from the view of the blue person.

>>7745234
I think if you slowed down enough everything would be radio waves to you and you couldn't see anything.

But that makes no sense because there are different light frequencies all around us yet we are all traveling at a pretty much constant rate.

actually wait, I think that just means that we are further away form the "true" source of the light depending on what wave length it is for us.

>>7745239
i dont think u understand. the speed of the object doesnt matter because all that matters is relative accleration, not veloctiy.

the blue observer should have 0 acceration relative to the object.

the red observer should have BIG accleration relative to the object.

lets say the red observer is directly between the object and the blue observer.

because the light is at radio wave frequency for the red observer then does that mean it passes through the red observer and keep going on to the blue observer who will see the light as visable light instead of a radio wave.

>>7745247
any velocity is a form of acceleration when compared to a reference point. i think

>>7745237
Your understanding of the underlying idea of what light is is flawed. My HS physics teacher taught me one thing, and it's the only thing I ever needed to be top of the class. If your understanding of the basic ideas is wrong, everything you ever try to do will be wrong.

A few things to remember when thinking about light:
>It's a wave.
>All waves (light, sound, even water waves) act the same.

Light does have a constant acceleration, except that acceleration is 0. It does not accelerate/decelerate in the sense that cars and sprinters do. When light shifts from one medium to another with varying refractive indexes, its speed changes instantaneously. When a particle emits light in a vacuum, it does not accelerate to the speed of light. It just IS at the speed of light. There's no acceleration, hence light does not exert a force.

Amplitude does not change unless you're changing the speed of the object emitting the light or the light's frequency. Neither are changing in this case, so yes, you are right, the amplitude is constant, but your reasoning for that was incorrect and amplitude has nothing to due with the energy in light waves anyway.

>>7745247
wait change the accell to vel. sorry

>>7745255
Then your argument makes no sense. I said "assuming the blue person isn't moving, nor is the light"

ok im so scrambled but ill explain this picture again.

lets say the object in the picture has 0 velocity
lets say the red observer has a huge velocuty to the right, so big that the light the red observer is looking at is shifted to the point that it is a radio wave.

the blue observer is moving 0 vel. relative to the object and therefore moving at 0 vel.

the red observer is directly in between the object and the blue observer

because to the red observer it is a radio wave does it go through the red observer.

if so does that mean the blue observer can see the object even with the red observer in the way

File: Untitled.jpg (40KB, 966x161px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 966x161px

>>7745247
And velocity has EVERYTHING to do with change in frequencies. Pic related. It's the equation describing the observed frequency of a wave based on the frequency emitted and velocities of the observer/source

>>7745262
sorry look at this post :>>7745260
i went full retard cuz i got all scrambled
and look at picture from this post:>>7745234

>>7745260
No, it does not go through the red observer. Observing the light as a radio wave does not make it a radio wave. The blue person cannot see the light, but only because the red person is PHYSICALLY BLOCKING THE LIGHT - it has nothing to do with the speed of the red person.

>>7745266
ok.