Speed Of Light

Originally posted by PVS
nonsense. even assuming that we both live to our full life expectancies, and that i choose to be buried, you will also be long dead by the time i have decomposed

Nah, I am immortal.

Also you start to rot the second you are dead....

Originally posted by Alliance
The speed of light is constant. Gravity can bend it, but it does not change speed.

There are however, hypotheses that the speed of light may be relative or fluctuate. João Magueijo is one such proponent of Variable Speed of Light (VSL) theory, which proposes that the speed of light was faster in the early universe.

the speed of light is relative isnt it...for example if you are travelling at the speed of light and you shine a light ahead of you...it still travels away from you at the speed of light...in essence it would be going twice the speed of light even though it would going at the same rate

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, I am immortal.

Also you start to rot the second you are dead....

and what if i choose mummification? then i will be intact long after every last molecule of you is expelled from the anuses of worms

Originally posted by PVS
and what if i choose mummification? then i will be intact long after every last molecule of you is expelled from the anuses of worms

Stop using your superiour knowledge, which you were only able to gather because you are old, to argue agaisnt me.

Originally posted by jaden101
the speed of light is relative isnt it...for example if you are travelling at the speed of light and you shine a light ahead of you...it still travels away from you at the speed of light...in essence it would be going twice the speed of light even though it would going at the same rate

That's the thign though, it would not be going twice the speed of light.

Originally posted by jaden101
the speed of light is relative isnt it...for example if you are travelling at the speed of light and you shine a light ahead of you...it still travels away from you at the speed of light...in essence it would be going twice the speed of light even though it would going at the same rate

I don't think so. I'm just confused though. I'll go back to biology. 😉

Originally posted by Alliance
I don't think so. I'm just confused though. I'll go back to biology. 😉

actually i'm worng...i just looked it up...while the light would take just over half the time to reach a point X from a ship travelling just under the speed of light compared with that of a light shined from a stationary object....it is the time that is relative and not the speed of light

because the time measurement changes...when you do the calculation for each light source...the speed of light ends up the same

Originally posted by jaden101
actually i'm worng...i just looked it up...while the light would take just over half the time to reach a point X from a ship travelling just under the speed of light compared with that of a light shined from a stationary object....it is the time that is relative and not the speed of light

because the time measurement changes...when you do the calculation for each light source...the speed of light ends up the same

Originally posted by jaden101
actually i'm worng...i just looked it up...while the light would take just over half the time to reach a point X from a ship travelling just under the speed of light compared with that of a light shined from a stationary object....it is the time that is relative and not the speed of light

because the time measurement changes...when you do the calculation for each light source...the speed of light ends up the same

Cool. ✅ I thought the answer was more along these lines.

I remeber that from this show that I watched years ago and the example of thowing a ball on a plane and a flashlight.

Well, i just knew that current Theory states that light is not relative...meaning...no mater what, you always measure it as "c."

I though it was C-ya 😛

no. its a little "c"

c 😛

c

a curly c not a kicking k

no kidding, right?

Apparently so