Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #606118 > unrolled thread

Re: What is the speed of light????

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: What is the speed of light???? Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-04-05 15:02 +1000
    Re: What is the speed of light???? whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-05 15:30 -0500
      Re: What is the speed of light???? "gehan.am...@gmail.com" <gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com> - 2023-04-05 18:32 -0700
        Re: What is the speed of light???? whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-05 22:52 -0500
          Re: What is the speed of light???? "gehan.am...@gmail.com" <gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com> - 2023-04-05 22:05 -0700
            Re: What is the speed of light???? whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-06 10:20 -0500
              Re: What is the speed of light???? Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-06 08:27 -0700

#606118 — Re: What is the speed of light????

On 30-Jan-23 6:57 am, The Starmaker wrote:
> I know you're not suppose to ask this question...
> worse yet, you're not even suppose to answer it..

That seems a strange claim.

It's exactly 299,792,458 metres per second.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#606190

On 4/5/2023 12:02 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 30-Jan-23 6:57 am, The Starmaker wrote:
>> I know you're not suppose to ask this question...
>> worse yet, you're not even suppose to answer it..
> 
> That seems a strange claim.
> 
> It's exactly 299,792,458 metres per second.
> 
> Sylvia.

We pick some star approximately 20 light years from earth. We
then predict its location for some time in the future based on
hitting that star based the speed of light you have defined for
us. If we dispatch a three second beam of light at the future
location of that star will our beam of light actually hit it?

This question is based on our knowledge of the path traveled by
our light beam appears to be a straight line while in reality
our beam of light will travel a somewhat longer geodesic path
that we cannot define.

Hint: there's more than one problem involved.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606209

On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 1:30:06 AM UTC+5, whodat wrote:
> On 4/5/2023 12:02 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: 
> > On 30-Jan-23 6:57 am, The Starmaker wrote: 
> >> I know you're not suppose to ask this question... 
> >> worse yet, you're not even suppose to answer it.. 
> > 
> > That seems a strange claim. 
> > 
> > It's exactly 299,792,458 metres per second. 
> > 
> > Sylvia.
> We pick some star approximately 20 light years from earth. We 
> then predict its location for some time in the future based on 
> hitting that star based the speed of light you have defined for 
> us. If we dispatch a three second beam of light at the future 
> location of that star will our beam of light actually hit it? 
> 
> This question is based on our knowledge of the path traveled by 
> our light beam appears to be a straight line while in reality 
> our beam of light will travel a somewhat longer geodesic path 
> that we cannot define. 
> 
> Hint: there's more than one problem involved.

Why can't it be defined?

This does not bode well for interstellar travel. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606224

On 4/5/2023 8:32 PM, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 1:30:06 AM UTC+5, whodat wrote:
>> On 4/5/2023 12:02 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>> On 30-Jan-23 6:57 am, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>> I know you're not suppose to ask this question...
>>>> worse yet, you're not even suppose to answer it..
>>>
>>> That seems a strange claim.
>>>
>>> It's exactly 299,792,458 metres per second.
>>>
>>> Sylvia.
>> We pick some star approximately 20 light years from earth. We
>> then predict its location for some time in the future based on
>> hitting that star based the speed of light you have defined for
>> us. If we dispatch a three second beam of light at the future
>> location of that star will our beam of light actually hit it?
>>
>> This question is based on our knowledge of the path traveled by
>> our light beam appears to be a straight line while in reality
>> our beam of light will travel a somewhat longer geodesic path
>> that we cannot define.
>>
>> Hint: there's more than one problem involved.
> 
> Why can't it be defined?

Please tell us how to define the geodesic that light will
travel to a star some 20 light years present.

> This does not bode well for interstellar travel.

Howso? Are you suggesting that space vehicles cannot travel in
straight lines?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606226

On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 8:52:06 AM UTC+5, whodat wrote:
> On 4/5/2023 8:32 PM, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: 
> > On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 1:30:06 AM UTC+5, whodat wrote: 
> >> On 4/5/2023 12:02 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: 
> >>> On 30-Jan-23 6:57 am, The Starmaker wrote: 
> >>>> I know you're not suppose to ask this question... 
> >>>> worse yet, you're not even suppose to answer it.. 
> >>> 
> >>> That seems a strange claim. 
> >>> 
> >>> It's exactly 299,792,458 metres per second. 
> >>> 
> >>> Sylvia. 
> >> We pick some star approximately 20 light years from earth. We 
> >> then predict its location for some time in the future based on 
> >> hitting that star based the speed of light you have defined for 
> >> us. If we dispatch a three second beam of light at the future 
> >> location of that star will our beam of light actually hit it? 
> >> 
> >> This question is based on our knowledge of the path traveled by 
> >> our light beam appears to be a straight line while in reality 
> >> our beam of light will travel a somewhat longer geodesic path 
> >> that we cannot define. 
> >> 
> >> Hint: there's more than one problem involved. 
> > 
> > Why can't it be defined?
> Please tell us how to define the geodesic that light will 
> travel to a star some 20 light years present.
> > This does not bode well for interstellar travel.
> Howso? Are you suggesting that space vehicles cannot travel in 
> straight lines?

Question:
Please tell us how to define the geodesic that light will
travel to a star some 20 light years present.

Answer: 
To define the geodesic that light will travel to a star 20 light-years away, we need to first understand what a geodesic is. In general relativity, a geodesic is the shortest path between two points in spacetime. It is the path that an object with no forces acting on it would naturally follow through curved space-time.

In the case of light, which is massless, it travels in a straight line in space-time, but the path appears to be curved due to the curvature of space-time caused by the presence of massive objects such as stars and planets.

To define the geodesic that light will travel to a star 20 light-years away, we need to know the gravitational field of the star and the initial conditions of the light. Assuming that the star is stationary and spherically symmetric, we can use the Schwarzschild metric to calculate the path of the light.

The Schwarzschild metric describes the curvature of space-time around a stationary, spherically symmetric object like a star. Using this metric, we can calculate the trajectory of the light as it travels from its source to the star 20 light-years away.

Assuming that the light starts from rest at some point in space, the geodesic it follows can be found by solving the geodesic equation, which describes the path of an object moving through curved space-time.

The exact path of the geodesic depends on the mass and distance of the star, as well as the initial conditions of the light. However, in general, the geodesic will be a curved path that bends towards the star due to the gravitational attraction between the light and the star.

In summary, to define the geodesic that light will travel to a star 20 light-years away, we need to know the gravitational field of the star, the initial conditions of the light, and solve the geodesic equation using the Schwarzschild metric.




Regenerate response

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606257

On 4/6/2023 12:05 AM, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 8:52:06 AM UTC+5, whodat wrote:
>> On 4/5/2023 8:32 PM, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 1:30:06 AM UTC+5, whodat wrote:
>>>> On 4/5/2023 12:02 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>>> On 30-Jan-23 6:57 am, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>> I know you're not suppose to ask this question...
>>>>>> worse yet, you're not even suppose to answer it..
>>>>>
>>>>> That seems a strange claim.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's exactly 299,792,458 metres per second.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>> We pick some star approximately 20 light years from earth. We
>>>> then predict its location for some time in the future based on
>>>> hitting that star based the speed of light you have defined for
>>>> us. If we dispatch a three second beam of light at the future
>>>> location of that star will our beam of light actually hit it?
>>>>
>>>> This question is based on our knowledge of the path traveled by
>>>> our light beam appears to be a straight line while in reality
>>>> our beam of light will travel a somewhat longer geodesic path
>>>> that we cannot define.
>>>>
>>>> Hint: there's more than one problem involved.
>>>
>>> Why can't it be defined?
>> Please tell us how to define the geodesic that light will
>> travel to a star some 20 light years present.
>>> This does not bode well for interstellar travel.
>> Howso? Are you suggesting that space vehicles cannot travel in
>> straight lines?
> 
> Question:
> Please tell us how to define the geodesic that light will
> travel to a star some 20 light years present.
> 
> Answer:
> To define the geodesic that light will travel to a star 20 light-years away, we need to first understand what a geodesic is. In general relativity, a geodesic is the shortest path between two points in spacetime. It is the path that an object with no forces acting on it would naturally follow through curved space-time.

<https://m.cas.oslo.no/getfile.php/137560-1458045883/6_CAS-publikasjoner/Seminar_booklets/PDF/0809Raynaud.pdf>

General relativity is a model, perhaps modeling some reality, perhaps
not. The significant questions revolve around what is the relationship
between model you mention and the realities posed by my question.

"John Bell, a physicist from Northern Ireland, made an important
breakthrough in 1964, devising a theoretical test to show that the
hidden variables Einstein had in mind don't exist."

<https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-win-physics-nobel-prize-for-proving-einstein-wrong>

I realize that this is a mix and match, but when the castle walls
begin to crumble, a total collapse is almost always imminent. In
1920 Einstein recanted abandoning an aether. In 2020 Bell and others
contribution. Still, even today, we cannot define what space
and/or space/time is. We merely poke around some aspects of its
most obvious behavior. That's where my questions fall as well.

<snip balance of the post>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606260

On Thursday, 6 April 2023 at 17:20:38 UTC+2, whodat wrote:
> On 4/6/2023 12:05 AM, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: 
> > On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 8:52:06 AM UTC+5, whodat wrote: 
> >> On 4/5/2023 8:32 PM, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: 
> >>> On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 1:30:06 AM UTC+5, whodat wrote: 
> >>>> On 4/5/2023 12:02 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: 
> >>>>> On 30-Jan-23 6:57 am, The Starmaker wrote: 
> >>>>>> I know you're not suppose to ask this question... 
> >>>>>> worse yet, you're not even suppose to answer it.. 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> That seems a strange claim. 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> It's exactly 299,792,458 metres per second. 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Sylvia. 
> >>>> We pick some star approximately 20 light years from earth. We 
> >>>> then predict its location for some time in the future based on 
> >>>> hitting that star based the speed of light you have defined for 
> >>>> us. If we dispatch a three second beam of light at the future 
> >>>> location of that star will our beam of light actually hit it? 
> >>>> 
> >>>> This question is based on our knowledge of the path traveled by 
> >>>> our light beam appears to be a straight line while in reality 
> >>>> our beam of light will travel a somewhat longer geodesic path 
> >>>> that we cannot define. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Hint: there's more than one problem involved. 
> >>> 
> >>> Why can't it be defined? 
> >> Please tell us how to define the geodesic that light will 
> >> travel to a star some 20 light years present. 
> >>> This does not bode well for interstellar travel. 
> >> Howso? Are you suggesting that space vehicles cannot travel in 
> >> straight lines? 
> > 
> > Question: 
> > Please tell us how to define the geodesic that light will 
> > travel to a star some 20 light years present. 
> > 
> > Answer: 
> > To define the geodesic that light will travel to a star 20 light-years away, we need to first understand what a geodesic is. In general relativity, a geodesic is the shortest path between two points in spacetime. It is the path that an object with no forces acting on it would naturally follow through curved space-time.
> <https://m.cas.oslo.no/getfile.php/137560-1458045883/6_CAS-publikasjoner/Seminar_booklets/PDF/0809Raynaud.pdf> 
> 
> General relativity is a model, perhaps modeling some reality, perhaps 
> not. 

For sure not, it's only modelling some delusions of
some brainwashed religious maniac.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web