Parallel Universes and Physical Constants

Yes electromagnetics can be perceived as light, especially when you look at wave formations like X-rays and microwaves as they cause electromagnetic disturbances.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"Yes electromagnetics can be perceived as light, especially when you look at wave formations like X-rays and microwaves as they cause electromagnetic disturbances."

Electromagnetic waves IS light by definition, and it always travels at light speed, duh.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Itchy,
Thats a bit of 'tude I suspect. Light speed is only a constant to that set point on a spectrum, Your talking of the speed of electromagnetics in comparison to say the light in your room. Both travel at different speeds, although both a form of light.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"light in your room"

I thought the light of a bulb sends out Em waves of all frequencies (it's a white colour)

 

Clarification. They are ALL electromagnetic waves and they ALL travel at light speed. The only difference is in the frequencies (energy).

 

Q,

Don't you get tired of explaining trivial facts to teenagers who think they know everything?

There are too many people here who don't realise their level of education and who should be a little more humble when presenting their ideas and be able to accept certain facts.

If I have an idea I say "I think that..", I don't say "This is how it is.."..

Getting tired of this forum.

Take care all.

 

itchy

i noticed you didn't post YOUR age

But then your old so YOU know everything

 

Q, Pi and Pictures

I think Q is wkd - and one of the few people who writes things others can understand. Unlike a lot of people who make everything too complex in a futile attempt to look smarter than they are.

So Thanx-Q for not being egotistical and explaining things for those of us with lesser intelligence (and spelling).

Going back a bit - i don't think Pi can be changed coz its mathematically defined and if it were different it would be called something else wouldn't it??
Love Ink x

PS. How do you put those little pictures by your name - i've been trying for ages and cant do it!!

 

Thats easy

Read the anoucement section

Oh and as for my spelling, Ive ecused it in enough threads and explaned the reason why i can't spell

and it has nothing to do with itellegence by the way

 

This is where you and I look at the universe a little different. Where you see a constant speed, your not truly looking at the speed but a Distance (namely that metre per seconds)

Now this is all well and good but it doesn't actually take the very frequency into account, thats what I look at.

If you check the attached inage you will see a very small, but crudly drawn diagram, with an A frequency and B frequency of waves that "simulate" real wave forms in the sense of measurement.

In whole they both travel the same distance (I haven't written the measurement down), but they both have a different number of Helixes. My Measurements are from Helix to Helix in comparison.

This is noted when you look at frequency modulation and realise it can be used to adjust the true length that is travelled (by this line that people draw as a wave) since light and sound is 3 dimensional and wavvers)

If looked at this way, it's more understandible for time dialations and spacial folds. Especially when oberving the universe as in space, afterall different frequencies occur in different parts of the universe, although some occur from the same source.

Edit:

Actually here is an addition. If your travelling along in a car with your headlights on (That are supposedly travelling a constant speed) the light is traveling at "Lightspeed" as you mention, but isn't it also travelling with the speed of the car as an addition.

So the frequecy of the light stays the same in this instance, but travels faster.

 

If your travelling along in a car with your headlights on (That are supposedly travelling a constant speed) the light is traveling at "Lightspeed" as you mention, but isn't it also travelling with the speed of the car as an addition.

No. The speed of light will remain constant regardless of what speed the car may be traveling. A stationary observer will measure this constant speed the same as the observer in the car. The car might be traveling near the speed of light but the light propagating from the headlights will remain constant to all and any observers.

So the frequecy of the light stays the same in this instance, but travels faster.

The frequency (or energy) of the light will change. A stationary observer standing in front of the oncoming car will see a frequency shift to the blue spectrum (blueshift) and a stationary observer standing behind the car that is moving away will see a frequency shift to the red spectrum (redshift).

The speed of light however will not change.

 

The mor I learn about the laws of science, the more it seems like things are the way they are because that's the only way they could be.

 

I will still disagree with you Q,

For instance, if light can SLOW DOWN, it must mean it can SPEED UP. At least to your observation. In reality it could be moving the same rate, but then universe looks a bit.... "Hey Mr Soft..."

As for another small example, Place an infra red buld in a torch at night and shine it, the light only carries such a distance and then it can no longer been seen. If you were to use a normal bulb, it creates light throughout he frequencies, some of which carry further.

If the energy that was used to propell the infrared was applied to a higher scale frequency, it would propell faster across a given distance and for further, since the infrared would disperse sooner (running out of energy and momentum)

 

Light travels at C divided by the material it is passing through. This does not change due to the motion of the light's emitter. If a car travelling at twice C puts on its headlights, it will simply outpace its light. The light can still only travel a certain speed. This is not to say the car itself can not go faster than C; I will leave that to the arguments about FTL theory and such. But the fact remains that electromagnetic signals travel at a given speed in any given material.

 

Stryder

I will still disagree with you Q

This place wouldn't be much fun if we all agreed.

For instance, if light can SLOW DOWN, it must mean it can SPEED UP.

But light doesn't slow down or speed up. When it propagates from its source it does not speed up to its constant. Light is instantaneously moving at its constant. This concept is a little hard to wrap your head around because we are so used to objects accelerating to certain speeds. Light however is not an object, it has no mass.

At least to your observation.

It remains constant to all observers.

 

Adam,
Atleast that still doesn't disprove that their is changes in speed because of the materials. I will still suggest that light does travel faster, as that is why I suffer light blindness during nighttimes, because the light is at an intensity from two cars moving past each other with the full beam on.

 

I will still suggest that light does travel faster, as that is why I suffer light blindness during nighttimes, because the light is at an intensity from two cars moving past each other with the full beam on.

That has nothing to do with the speed of light. Adding more light does not increase its speed.

 

I wasn't suggesting more light, as the light still outputs the same as what it did at a standstill. I was suggesting that the light can cause an EM that pushes it faster, making it a higher frequency that what was being emitted. (especially in the relationship of two cars)

 

I was suggesting that the light can cause an EM that pushes it faster, making it a higher frequency that what was being emitted. (especially in the relationship of two cars)

Can you expand on this? How would it "push it faster?"

 

Because it's source is accelerating in my direction.