Common Sense vs The Theory of Relativity

[ImmortalFlame]

For instance let's say you have a photon traveling one light year, and you have another photon traveling two light years. How can they not experience time, when a fundamental law of physics is that light travels at a constant speed? (Speed = distance/time)

Because of time dilation. The closer something is to the speed of light, the slower time is and the shorter the distances between all points along its path become.

What is it like to be a photon traveling at light speed?

From a photon's viewpoint, the Universe is timeless and dimensionless. Life at light speed is unlike anything we can imagine.

bigthink.com

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The photon is travelling at the speed of light so to the photon time has stopped*. For someone observing the photon, it appears to pass time between point A and point B

* The closer to the C (speed of light) the more t (time) decreases up to the point of C t = 0

There in lies the problem. If it's a constant based on Speed = distance/time , then time can't change.

If photon A and photon B are in a race and emitted at exactly the same source and time. Photon A has to race to a destination 2 light years away, and photon B races to a destination 4 light years away. If they experience no time or distance, which one wins the race?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

In what way specifically does general relativity conflict with quantum physics?

I'm not exactly sure, I just know that Einstein himself disagreed with it, and kept trying to prove it wrong because it conflicted with his theory in some way.

 

[Sumadji]

There in lies the problem. If it's a constant based on Speed = distance/time , then time can't change.

If photon A and photon B are in a race and emitted at exactly the same source and time. Photon A has to race to a destination 2 light years away, and photon B races to a destination 4 light years away. If they experience no time or distance, which one wins the race?

Light travels at a set speed in a vacuum. A light photon takes 8 minutes to reach Earth from the sun. The photon takes 2 years to travel a distance of 2 light years, and 4 years to travel 4 light years, in a vacuum. I don't understand the problem?

I get that relativity is counter intuitive and not easy to get a handle on. The photon doesn't know it's a photon. It just is light, it doesn't experience time or sense of motion. The observer senses time and motion, not the light ray.

Something along thise lines, lol

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Because of time dilation. The closer something is to the speed of light, the slower time is and the shorter the distances between all points along its path become.

What is it like to be a photon traveling at light speed?

From a photon's viewpoint, the Universe is timeless and dimensionless. Life at light speed is unlike anything we can imagine.

bigthink.com

That brings up the problem associated with the twins paradox. Because either twin could be the one to claim to be at rest in their reference frame. So in one reference frame one twin is claiming to be at rest meaning the other twin is supposedly moving and aging slower, while in the other reference frame the opposite twin would be at rest, and the first twin is the one moving and aging slower. It can't be both ways. Something is wrong.

HOW can you say the speed of light is a constant and based on the equation Speed = distance/time, and then try to tell me that the distance and time can change?

This is a good example of what I think shows that something is wrong with the theory.

 

[ChristineM]

There in lies the problem. If it's a constant based on Speed = distance/time , then time can't change.

If photon A and photon B are in a race and emitted at exactly the same source and time. Photon A has to race to a destination 2 light years away, and photon B races to a destination 4 light years away. If they experience no time or distance, which one wins the race?

Therein lies the problem, you are not understanding time. If at speed C time is zero then it's a draw.

However to an observer photon A reaches its destination before photon B

Relativity remember.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Light travels at a set speed in a vacuum. A light photon takes 8 minutes to reach Earth from the sun. The photon takes 2 years to travel a distance of 2 light years, and 4 years to travel 4 light years, in a vacuum. I don't understand the problem?

I get that relativity is counter intuitive and not easy to get a handle on. The photon doesn't know it's a photon. It just is light, it doesn't experience time or sense of motion. The observer senses time and motion, not the light ray.

Something along thise lines, lol

How can the photon taking two extra years to reach its destination not be experiencing time or distance? It has to be experiencing time or it wouldn't take 2 more years.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes I have looked into quantum mechanics. It is very interesting. But lately I have been reading "Relativity Visualized" by Lewis Carroll Epstein. It's just that I think there are flaws in the thinking behind the theory to begin with. Like the moving clock slowing for instance. Who is to say which perspective is the one moving? Both individuals can claim to be the one at rest, with the other moving. So which clock actually slows? You always get two different answers and only one at most can really be correct.

I know, Relativity is weird. When there are two travelers each looking at the clock of the other both of them see the other person's clock moving more slowly. When you have two people at same place and one accelerates away from that place and then accelerates again to turn around and go back and the other remains there The person that changed velocity will have experienced less time. That is where the idea of person taking a trip at close to the speed of light and coming back to see his grandchildren older than him came from.

And this has been confirmed with clocks on planes. Compared to a clock on the ground. I could find an article on it if you would like. Plus GPS not only relied on special relativity. But also general relativity to work. If you ever used GPS and it worked for you then you confirmed each theory.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Therein lies the problem, you are not understanding time. If at speed C time is zero then it's a draw.

However to an observer photon A reaches its destination before photon B

Relativity remember.

If it takes 2 more years for photon B to reach its destination, then the time it experienced can't be zero. That is impossible.


That was why I started this thread. To try to show why I think there has to be something wrong with the Relativity theory.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How can the photon taking two extra years to reach its destination not be experiencing time or distance? It has to be experiencing time or it wouldn't take 2 more years.

The photon itself does not experience time. Photons are not sentient. They are just little bits of light. For photons there is no time. There is not even any distance. You are trying for the impossible. One cannot be empathic towards light.

 

[Sumadji]

How can the photon taking two extra years to reach its destination not be experiencing time or distance? It has to be experiencing time or it wouldn't take 2 more years.

The photon experiences nothing at all. The observer collapses the wave function. Something along those lines.

I'm not the expert. I like to follow this stuff from my armchair, mostly you tube stuff nowadays.

Interesting thread. Thanks. I'll just read from now on

 

[Subduction Zone]

If it takes 2 more years for photon B to reach its destination, then the time it experienced can't be zero. That is impossible.

That is our time. We are not moving at the speed of light. Photons are. Photons cannot experience either time or distance.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Therein lies the problem, you are not understanding time. If at speed C time is zero then it's a draw.

However to an observer photon A reaches its destination before photon B

Relativity remember.

For what you are saying about time being zero at speed C to be true. Light would have to reach its destination instantly.

 

[PureX]

P1 and P2 are emitted into space at the same time.

P1 travels X distance in 1 hour.

P2 travels Y distance in 2 hours.

But distance Y is not distance Xx2.

"This makes no sense!" one cries.

Because one does not realize that the space they are traveling through is expanding. And P1 and P2 can only travel through that space at the max speed that the space is expanding. But as they both do so, that distance is increasing as the space is expanding. So the distance P2 travels is greater that twice the distance that P1 traveled. Even though the amount of time P2 traveled is exactly twice the amount of time P1 traveled.

This is not illogical, or really even "nonsensical". We just have to be able to envision ALL the variables. A lot of people forget that space itself is warped and bent by gravity, and is also constantly expanding. So as P1 and P2 travel through it, they do not take the simple logical linear path that we envision. Because they are traveling through that undulating and ever-expanding space.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because of time dilation. The closer something is to the speed of light, the slower time is and the shorter the distances between all points along its path become.

What is it like to be a photon traveling at light speed?

From a photon's viewpoint, the Universe is timeless and dimensionless. Life at light speed is unlike anything we can imagine.

bigthink.com

Thanks, I was trying to explain how photons cannot experience time and I almost said that they only experience distance and then remembered time contraction. The question is will the OP click on the link?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

That brings up the problem associated with the twins paradox. Because either twin could be the one to claim to be at rest in their reference frame. So in one reference frame one twin is claiming to be at rest meaning the other twin is supposedly moving and aging slower, while in the other reference frame the opposite twin would be at rest, and the first twin is the one moving and aging slower. It can't be both ways.

Yes, it can. That's the error you need to get over. It CAN be both ways. That's the whole point and exactly what relativity explains.

HOW can you say the speed of light is a constant and based on the equation Speed = distance/time, and then try to tell me that the distance and time can change?

Because both are true. Where's the issue?

@PureX gives a good explanation above.

This is a good example of what I think shows that something is wrong with the theory.

There is nothing wrong with the theory. The problem is your comprehension of it. I suggest you learn more about it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That brings up the problem associated with the twins paradox. Because either twin could be the one to claim to be at rest in their reference frame. So in one reference frame one twin is claiming to be at rest meaning the other twin is supposedly moving and aging slower, while in the other reference frame the opposite twin would be at rest, and the first twin is the one moving and aging slower. It can't be both ways. Something is wrong.

HOW can you say the speed of light is a constant and based on the equation Speed = distance/time, and then try to tell me that the distance and time can change?

This is a good example of what I think shows that something is wrong with the theory.

That is not true. One experiences acceleration to another speed. In physics that is called "shifting ones inertial frame of reference" . Then he stops and turns around and accelerates back. That is another changing of his frame of reference. The one that remains undergoes no such change. The two know which one took a trip and which one did not.

 

[Sumadji]

For what you are saying about time being zero at speed C to be true. Light would have to reach its destination instantly.

Light thinks it does. Light thinks it is everywhere all the time. The photon does. Light in the fast lane, like the Eagles song. The observer is always moving at below light speed. Oops. I was going up zip-it and just read

 

[ChristineM]

If it takes 2 more years for photon B to reach its destination, then the time it experienced can't be zero. That is impossible.

Only to the observer, not to the photons.

That was why I started this thread. To try to show why I think there has to be something wrong with the Relativity theory.

It shows you are not understanding reletivity.

 

[ChristineM]

For what you are saying about time being zero at speed C to be true. Light would have to reach its destination instantly.

Yes, for light it does, but not for the observer external to the light.