light is time

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Borg255, Mar 29, 2001.

  1. Borg255 Registered Member

    Messages:
    14
    I am reading this book about time storms, and in the back with the science explanition it says basicly that time is light well read:
    If a spaceship was headding to earth and another from earth at 12:01 at a speed almost that of light and the moon exploded at 12:01 and the ship coming to earth saw the explosion at 12:02 and the other ship saw it at 1:05 which time did the explosion happen?

    It says at all times but this is impossiable it only happens at one tmie it doens matter how long it take sfor you to see it if ti has happend then it has allreayd happend. Any thoughts/explinations?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Time/02112 Senior Member Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    298
    Time Polarization - Significance and Weaponization

    Try these links, you might find some answers there.

    Time Polarization - Significance and Weaponization
    http://www.cheniere.org/misc/time.htm

    Time Technical proposals for time control research program. (Modern theories about nature of Space and Time.)
    There are many known theories and no needs to comment all of them. I submitted here some data that is correlating with my own understanding. This data let me develop practical ideas and offer some time rate control experiments.
    http://members.fortunecity.com/frolov/time.htm


    A Partial List of Successful Documented Over-Unity and Negative Resistor Devices and Processes
    Excerpt from the Tom Beardon wesite
    http://www.cheniere.org/misc/oulist.htm
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Crisp Gone 4ever Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,339
    The special theory of relativity summarized in 10 lines.

    Hi Borg255,

    I hope you won't mind me settling for a more "classical" explanation using the special theory of relativity.

    The answer you read is correct. If one spaceship says the explosion occured at 1:05, then they are right. If the other spaceship reports the explosion at 2:02, they are also right. As a matter of fact, if you would be on a planet 4 lighthours away, you would say that the explosion occured at 16:01. You are also right.

    Imagine we have two observers that are 1km apart, standing still, with perfectly synchronized timers and they see something happening. Before you can witness an event, the light that "displays" the event must reach your eyes. Since light travels at a finite speed (300.000 km/s) it takes a a short time before this happens. This has one important consequence: events happen at different times for different observers (simply because the light has to travel further, and needs this tiny bit more time to reach the second observer). On your clock you would see that this event occured at 12h01 and 0,000000 seconds. The other observer, 1km. further away from the event, would say it happened at 12h01 and 0,000003 seconds. In this scenario you are both right, since you both saw it happen at the time you recorded (note: in the classical way of thinking, seeing = truth ; this is no longer true in quantummechanics, but that's another ballgame).

    The theory of special relativity explains how you can resolve the apparent paradox of something happening at two different times: if you want to describe an event, you do not only have to specify the location the event happened, but also the time it happened for an observer standing at the same location as the event.. As you could see in the previous example, the times did not match because the observers were standing at different positions. Therefor it is important to know the time something happens at the location it is actually happening.

    Once you know the time something happens at the location it is happening, it is easy to calculate what time (non-moving) observers at different positions will see the event: the light travels at 300.000 km/s, so if you are 900.000 km away, you will see the event 3 seconds later than an observer standing at the location of the event (hence the name of the theory: the occuring of events is relative, dependant of the observer and not absolute).

    Things get a bit more complicated if you also take account for moving observers (like the spaceships in your example). I won't go into much detail here, but if you are going pretty fast (half the speed of light for example), the time you measure an event changes aswel (because the light has to catch up with you for example).

    If we apply all this to your example, you would get this:
    • For an observer standing on the moon - and what an unfortunate position he took - the moon explodes at 12:01.
    • The spaceship moving to the earth sees the explosion at 12:02. The light that displays the moon (and our unfortunate observer) exploding needs some time to reach the spaceship.
    • The other spaceship, moving away from earth at a high speed, sees the explosion at 1:05 because the light has to catch up with that spaceship.

    You cannot say that anybody is right or wrong (it's all relative). Hence the explosion could happen at any time you want it to happen (if you just get further and further away, the explosion will happen later and later on your synchronized watches). What you can say for certain is that the explosion happened at 12:01 on the moon (specifiying both the time and the location, or as it is commonly refered to in theories of relativity: the point (t,x) in spacetime).

    So to summarize: there is an important connection between the time you think something happens and the speed of light. Saying that "light = time" is perhaps a bit too drastic.

    I hope this more or less clarifies some things; if you really want to go into more detail, I highly recommend reading a book on special relativity (eg. Taylor and Wheeler, "Spacetime physics". It doesn't use a lot of formulas and is quite intuitive. If you want to go into the serious math stuff behind all this, you'd better check the "advanced" literature).

    Bye!

    Crisp
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. discord5 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    88
    modern astronomers

    Perhaps you should remind all of the astronomers of this relativity thing as they are the ones saying that we are witnessing events that occurred millions of years ago when we look at the stars.
    where i run into problems is with viewing the beginning of the universe as they claim , cause that just messes up all sorts things.
     
  8. geneva Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    motion is time

    time is a measurement of movement at a consistent interval t=m m=t mis t time is also a man made construct to orientate intervals of all forms of movement at a standardized rate. This is even proven through the famous Einstein equation in fact he discovered a way to break the barriers of what we call time but never released it I have documents I have just finished writing that explains how it is possible through high frequency vibration to accelerate particles to do this I will post them later
     
  9. roscogre Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    43
    one time?

    An event doesn't happen at only one time,time is different for each observer.
    The speed of light is the only constant in the universe,therefore time and space must be relative to the speed and position of the observer.
    Read Relativity by Einstein for further explanation.Very interesting.
     
  10. roscogre Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    43
    I believe it is incorrect to say that the light has to "catch up" to the spaceship.
    Time on the spaceship actually slows down with speed of travel moving away relative to the light source.
    Light landing on a moving spaceship,or coming from a moving source,always travels the same speed.
    What happens is the color is shifted in frequency for the observer.
    This is what is called red shift in astronomy and the degree of red shift tells astronomers the speed of heavenly bodies as they move away from the observer.
    Light sources moving toward the observer would be shifted towards the blue end of the spectrum.
    An analogy to sound would be a train approaching sounds higher pitched than a train retreating.
     
  11. roscogre Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    43
    that is,the speed of light is always the same for all observers.
    This is why time and space have to bend to allow for this constant.
    Time slows down and space actually shortens in the direction of travel as perceived by an observer at the origin.
     
  12. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    We need one universal time zone and this nonsense will go away. An event occurs at a specific time, and all agree on what time it occurred, regardless of how far away they were and how much additional time it took the light to reach them. Everyone in the universe needs to be on the same sheet of music!
     
  13. M00se1989 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    508
    wouldn't that mean that even as you approach the speed of light you are bending space and time?

    the faster you move the less time passes by as space is bent more, but light is still moving at the same constant rate from your perspective, but your moving infinitly faster from the intial observer. therefore even as you approach the speed of light, light speed from your perspective is still constant??

    that means time travel is not only possible but ocurring as we speak.

    A traveler could technically fly around the galaxy and appear back not quite at the same time but only as long as it takes for the motion of your craft to stop and start from the inital observers perspective of their constant speed of light.
     
  14. roscogre Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    43
    I agree with one global time zone,but in reality universal time is not possible.
    The rate of time varies with speed of travel relative to the observer.
     
  15. roscogre Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    43
    YES.
    Except that to accelerate matter to the speed of light takes infinite force which is not possible.
    If you could reach the speed of light time would stop and your length in the direction of travel would be zero.
    This slowing down of time has been confirmed by spacecraft orbiting the earth,but is very small as the speed of the craft is only a small fraction of the speed of light.
     
  16. roscogre Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    43
    and it is only travel backwards in time.
     
  17. M00se1989 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    508
    idk about impossible... we still have a very limited view of electromagnetism and the interplay between particles. I would like to say lightning is the key but it comes down to the boy who cried wolf scenario and even then it only explains the reaction not the cause to the effect which connects the magnetic core to the atmosphere. Or the difference in density that could possibly allow the reaction to take place and the lightning to fork as it chooses different paths of least resistance. Ion buildup caused by the electrical reaction of water vapor re-condensing in the face of nitrogen then grounding itself in the repetition of the nitrogen cycle....

    positive to negative positive to negative as the magnetic field that repels certain harmful rays back into the cosmos builds up ions from the other side.

    Its like we are in some sort of plasma ball in Brookstone except we can't really run our fingers over the glass to direct any part of the immense power that stems from the outside in instead of the inside out. unless we get struck by lightning but then of course it would be directing us.
     
  18. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    You can travel faster than the speed of light.
     
  19. John Connellan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,636
    How exactly?
     
  20. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,289
    I agree with this. It raises the question that if time cannot be measured without light, and at one time the sun's light was yet not focused on earth will the sun reached a light emitting phase - when did time start on earth?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. John Connellan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,636
    You don't need the suns light to measure time

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Time existed long before the sun or earth existed.

    Also, the suns light was always focused on earth.
     
  22. M00se1989 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    508
    time is a man made idea that humans use to express the flow of all things natural. Seeing as life is only natural on our planet and we are a statistical abnormality I would say that anything material or immaterial (existing only as an abstract) can contain time or be time as long as it follows a pattern. Time also pushes back on objects leading to more disorder in the long run.
     
  23. Acitnoids Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    704
    12:01 according to who? The Earth? I'm going to assume that you meant the Earth and ignore that there is more than one time-zone.
    12:02 according to who? The Earth?
    Once again, according to who? The Earth?
    According to whose clock?
    .
    This example is extremely vague. IMHO there is a better way to present it. Instead of ambiguously stating that the Moon exploded at 12:01 you should declare that that observation happened at time zero. The question now becomes; how long does it take that light to reach each observer? According to your post, it took one minute for the incoming ship, an hour and four minutes for the outgoing ship and less than one minute according to the Earth (relative to the Earth observer). From this information the Earth observer can deduce each ships average distance from the Earth. However, if you were to ask someone on the incoming ship how long it took for that same light to reach each ovserver then they would come up with a different answer depending on their relative velocity to the event. If the Earth observer had that information (the time it took that same light to reach each observer relative to those individual observers) then he/she could deduce those ships velocity relative to event. Timekeeping is a man made apparition (12:01, 12:02 and 1:05) but a second will always be a second no matter the observers frame of reference. As long as each observer can agee on a common reference point then they can all agree on the amount of time any particular event takes place according to that common reference point relative to each observer.
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2010

Share This Page