gamefreek_01 Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 Almost every thread im interested in or any topic of astrophysics is somehow associated with the speed of light and such, time, and all this einstein stuff. The speed of light is just a speed if it changes it wont effect anything except the force that particle of light, it wont change dimension it wont later time. i cannot understand why people with such great minds can use this pitiful thoery as there basis to all thinknig. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 The speed of light is just a speed if it changes it wont effect anything except the force that particle of light, it wont change dimension it wont later time. Is there a particular reason in starting a new thread for this instead of discussing it in the thread already started for this topic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamefreek_01 Posted March 20, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 i did not know that there was another thread but i am very angry at everyone for believe in the most implausble theorys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paultrr Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 One of the reasons about the interest in weither C is constant or not is that certain physical properties could well be effected by a change in C, especially if other constants like the fine structure constant or planck energy are involved. Also, part of those three roads tends to make predictions that imply C should change at least at certain scales. So what's actually being sought is a better understanding of those natural processes that brought about this universe in the first place, irrespective of the actual changes themselves. One equation that would tend to vary if C is not a constant is E=MC^2. The velocity of light in the equation if it is a variable would then signal that energy itself has varied over time and possible from place to place. Also, if perhaps you where to join those threads you might discover there is some minor evidence in its favor. One time period even by theory it did alter in was that of inflation(False Vacuum does not have the stress energy tensor of our vacuum at present). The arguement and debate going on today concerns the time after inflation. Also, a short check of published articles out there on the subject and cosmic observational reports would show you that this is something being debated by mainline researchers, not just fanatics as one might think. I think people like Lee Smolin, Hawking, and many others are considered sane mainline researchers in the field of physics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 i did not know that there was another thread but i am very angry at everyone for believe in the most implausble theorys. Please read through the topics before starting new ones. It helps everyone to share their opinions with each other if they have less of the same to wade through. BTW, Welcome to Hypography. There is a FAQ here that will help you get started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paultrr Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 See: arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0208122 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/02/010212075309.htm citebase.eprints.org/cgi-bin/citations?id=oai:arXiv.org:hep-th/0208122 stacks.iop.org/1475-7516/2003/i=07/a=004 physics.nad.ru/cgi-bin/forum.pl?forum=eng&mes=1102 stacks.iop.org/0264-9381/16/2741 http://www.ebicom.net/~rsf1/uhecrs.htm New Scientist Breaking News - Speed of light may have changed recently 19 March 2005. JOB OF THE WEEK. The World's No.1 Science & Technology News Service. Speed of light may have changed recently. 19:00 30 June 2004 ... of an invariable speed of light comes from measurements of ... a variable alpha. For example, if it had been lower in the past, meaning a higher speed of light, it ...http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6092 That's the reason all the debate is going on and these are just a few out there. Its discussed in the IOP, in the AIP, etc which are all mainline groups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Bang Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 One of the reasons for being hung-up on C is that it is a function of time, and time is a variable commodity all over the universe. As light approaches the center of a Black Hole, time approaches zero. What happens to the speed of light X / t->0? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WebFeet Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 One of the reasons for being hung-up on C is that it is a function of time, and time is a variable commodity all over the universe. As light approaches the center of a Black Hole, time approaches zero. What happens to the speed of light X / t->0?If C is not a constant, but the variable commodity all over the Universe, then Time could be seen as a function of C.Instead of C being a consequence of SpaceTime, Time becomes a consequence of C in Space. For time to be zero, the speed of light would also have to be zero. No matter which direction light travels in it always moves forward in that direction, then time would also always move forward. This would mean that time travel in any direction other than forward would not be possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 For time to be zero, the speed of light would also have to be zero.Not True! In QED the action of the propagation of a photon can be written independentof Time! :eek: :friday: Maddog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 I'm not sure that's a conclusive argument at all maddog, just as much as I disagree with:The speed of light is just a speed if it changes it wont effect anything except the force that particle of light...Although we trditionally call it "the speed of light", it isn't just the speed of light. It isn't even just the speed of propagation of the electromagnetic field, although electromagnetism is what historically brought up the point. It is a fundamental aspect of space-time geometry. Lorentz covariance is quite well verified for phenomena of all types. In WebFeet's thread I posed a couple of questions, it might be helpful to meditate upon them here as well: What does it mean, to measure "the speed of light"? What does it mean, to say that c is 3*10^8 m/s? What would it mean, to say that c had changed? I suggest thinking very carefully about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Bang Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 Every event is a function of time. If time is zero how can any event occur, and if time is zero according to yhe equation for velocity C would be infinite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WebFeet Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 Every event is a function of time. If time is zero how can any event occur, and if time is zero according to yhe equation for velocity C would be infinite.True. If the speed of light is zero, then every event takes an infinite amount of time. Time is effectively stopped. This is not the same thing as zero.When Time is zero, an inifinte number of events can oocur without measuring any duration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paultrr Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 Not True! In QED the action of the propagation of a photon can be written independentof Time! :) :friday: Maddog Good point. At some levels in quantum theory the zero point itself or points smaller than the planck scale have the wavefunction spread out to infinity. Not dissimular to a frame where all points are the same and zero time exists. Again, if anything transpired at smaller scales than the planck scale the implication would be that all is independent of time. That was actually some of the background out of which the double special relativity theory arose. I also agree that C if it has changed has lots of implications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted March 23, 2005 Report Share Posted March 23, 2005 I'm really not sure what something like: "for time to be zero" could mean. It really doesn't make sense to me, Unless what you mean is about certain time intervals being zero. As for the speed of light being zero, this would imply that all but one curve throuh each point of space-time would be spacelike, the remaining one would be null as well as timelike. It would locally be the time axis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WebFeet Posted March 23, 2005 Report Share Posted March 23, 2005 I'm really not sure what something like: "for time to be zero" could mean. It really doesn't make sense to me, Unless what you mean is about certain time intervals being zero.The velocity of light depends on the refractive index of the medium it is travelling through. The index of a vacuum is 1. Using PV (Polarized Vacuum), this value is determined by the charge density of the vacuum. Changes in density can be equated to changes in the curvature of spacetime.What if the region of space was deviod of charge. This would mean that the refractive index was effectively zero, resulting in the speed of light being infinite. Speed = Distance/Time. If the velocity were infinite this would mean that Time would be zero. In GR, time dilation is proportional to mass, and since a photon is massless, it does not suffer from time dilation. Does this mean that Light/Photon/Energy is outside of the realms of time? If the speed of light were variable, then wouldn't it make more sense that Time is defined by the Speed of Light. Under GR, this would not be the case. But in PV, which produces the same results as GR, it could be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 The velocity of light depends on the refractive index of the medium it is travelling through. The index of a vacuum is 1. Using PV (Polarized Vacuum), this value is determined by the charge density of the vacuum. Changes in density can be equated to changes in the curvature of spacetime.What if the region of space was deviod of charge. This would mean that the refractive index was effectively zero, resulting in the speed of light being infinite.I read up on PV to follow you. If you have even one particle (charged of course) in this universe of yours,then your charge density of the vacuum would be greater than 0 and then c would be less than infinite. Maddog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paultrr Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 Exactly. Also the reason I suspect when it came to the dual frame hyperspace model that even in that case C is not infinite either, perhaps faster than here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.