Twice the speed of light.

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Beaconator, Jul 18, 2021.

  1. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,209
    Is the fastest one particle of light can move from another.

    until the circumference of the the speed of light has been reached. Then light deals with quantum mechanics in such a way to slow both particles down to the speed of light between each other.

    these outside forces keep not only paradox from happening but time staying impartial.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,326
    Light radiates in all directions.

    Speed has no circumference.

    Light doesn't deal with quantum mechanics or anything else.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,209
    The observer effect creates a circumference. Or maybe I’m just feeling my Cheerios after silencing ddyddyr
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,935
  8. Ssssssss Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    216
    If you mean this in any inertial frame of reference then yeah because light pulses can be doing \(c\) in opposite directions and the distance between them grows at \(2c\) but if you mean something travelling at the speed of light measures another thing moving at the speed of light to be doing up to \(2c\) then no because no inertial rest frame can be defined for light.
    Do you understand that you're supposed to read textbooks not tear the pages out and use them to roll joints?
     
    exchemist likes this.
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,103
    Yes. This was explained by Ssssssss, above.

    A speed cannot have a circumference, so this is meaningless.

    This claim is completely unsupported and probably false. Beaconator: you must try to provide a supporting argument, or appropriate references, if you are going to make controversial claims like this.

    No "outside forces" have been specified so far and no paradox has been outlined. The word "impartial" appears to be meaningless in this context.

    In summary, it seems that there is not much to discuss here. Are you done, Beaconator?
     
  10. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,209
    Twice the velocity of light then.

    they have a camera that can record light moving through a bottle of milk, so you can’t possibly tell me two particles of light traveling in opposite directions wouldn’t reach twice the speed of light till terminal velocity slowed them down due to quantum entanglement
     
  11. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,638
    There doesn't seem to be much point in telling you anything, period.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,825
    And yet, here we are telling you that.

    The weasel word in the above sentence is "reach". When you define what "reach" means, you will discover why the whole statement is false.


    Word salad.

    Reminds me of Gil Grissom on CSI, who once said "Well, terminal velocity is 9.8 metres per second, so ... this dead guy was pushed."
     
    exchemist likes this.
  13. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,209
    Nothing of heuristic validity can persuade me. I am beyond it.

    we could build a telescope that could see the light from 90 degrees of its objective and follow that light through our own planetary system. If we wanted to.

    or we could skip over that and do anything…
     
  14. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,209
    I’ve heard it all from volcanoes to bosons.
     
  15. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,318
    Circumference of the speed of light...

    Got any dressing to go on that word salad?
     
    exchemist likes this.
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,103
    Beaconator: you must try to provide a supporting argument, or appropriate references, if you are going to make controversial claims.

    Please support your claim or retract it and apologise to your readers. Thank you.
     
  17. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,209
    I retract this thread
     
  18. dart_ship Registered Member

    Messages:
    51
    can nothing move faster than the speed of light (warp one is fastest speed)?
     
  19. Ssssssss Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    216
    Zero mass objects move at the speed of light and objects with a non zero mass always move slower than the speed of light and nothing moves faster.
     
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,825
    Theoretical particles called tachyons can.

    That is fiction.
     
  21. dart_ship Registered Member

    Messages:
    51
    excellent statement Ssssssss.
     
  22. dart_ship Registered Member

    Messages:
    51
    ...then so are tachyons.
     
  23. dart_ship Registered Member

    Messages:
    51
    Ssssssss is an explosion zero mass?
     

Share This Page