Speed of light

[Monkeylegend]

If you are travelling in a vehicle at the speed of light in the dark, what would happen if you turned your lights on.

Would it make any difference?

All in fun of course, just like to settle an "argument"

Shame about the title, I was typing at the speed of light.

[swisstoni]

It's all relative.

[Equus]

You would be instantly transported to the Science forum, where you should have posted this ste in the first place.

[MrGman]

besides there are no cars (certainly that i know of) that can go that fast so it doesn't matter.

If you did however, they'd wouldn't help you.

[Monkeylegend]

I didn't say it was in a car.

I am sure the mods will move or delete as necessary

[moustache]

The speed of light is a constant, it won't increase because the car travels faster. The light travels at 300,000,000m/s relative to the car.

(I teach physics, if you needed reassuring about whether I know what I'm talking about)

[GC8]

Through what?

Light travels at different speeds, after all...

[davepoth]

Is the vehicle on a conveyor belt?

The answer is nothing, probably. Due to the effect of time dilation, time would have effectively stopped for the person turning on the lights - it would take the entire lifespan of the universe for the lights to turn on.

[motco]

moustache said:

The speed of light is a constant, it won't increase because the car travels faster. The light travels at 300,000,000m/s relative to the car.

(I teach physics, if you needed reassuring about whether I know what I'm talking about)

Are you saying that the light will travel at 300,000,000m/s PLUS the speed of the vehicle? You said "relative to the car" which implies that the car's speed added.

[NordicCrankShaft]

motco said:

Are you saying that the light will travel at 300,000,000m/s PLUS the speed of the vehicle? You said "relative to the car" which implies that the car's speed added.

He also said the speed of light is constant and won't increase because the vehicle travels faster.

[TooMany2cvs]

Having your lights on isn't going to make much difference, because there's bugger all chance of you avoiding anything.

[moustache]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You're going to need to look at Eintein's equations regarding time dilation and specifically the Lorentz factor.

[NordicCrankShaft]

ash73 said:

Sure, it's all explained here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

And there's me looking forward to something interesting and scientific

[menguin]

Better YouTube link (and generally excellent YouTube channel):

https://youtu.be/ACUuFg9Y9dY

[Monty Python]

You cannot travel at the speed of light, so the question is hypothetical, and therefore any answer is also hypothetical.

[RobDickinson]

As you aproach the speed of light you would see less and less apart from a 'tunnel' of light ahead and behind.

Ahead would be blue shifted, behind would be red shifted.

I'm assuming if you reached the speed of light you would just see a bright dot ahead as you hit the oncoming light, and not much else.



Recently some physicist calculated a photon only lasts 3 days - this is what the photon would experience, but because they travel at the speed of light this effectively slows down time for them (well us) and they will outlast the universe

[Boring_Chris]

I thought that if you were traveling at the speed of light, then you experience no time?

So the trip would be too short to really jot down your observations.

But how 'far' does light travel? If I was in space and pointed my torch into space, would it reflect off Pluto? Or further?

[Some Gump]

If you were at the speed of light, your mass would be infinite.

Unless there were no gravitational fields whatsoever, you'd see nothing, because you'd be long dead.

[Fugazi]

A really, really 'old' internet video dating back to 1997 I believe, so it has terrible resolution which kind of adds to it's charm, but it does explain things quite nicely.

Optical effects of Special Relativity

[K12beano]

You've got confused with the Speed of Dark.....