Re: Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?


"Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1172266450.015220.58500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 23, 4:11 pm, "skillz...@xxxxxxxxx" <skillz...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We observe that objects moving relative to us age more slowly than
objects that are stationary with respect to us. An object observed to
be moving at c doesn't age at all. The speed affects the observed
aging, not vice-versa. The fact that aging stops for objects moving
at c insead of at an infinite speed, is just the way the universe
behaves; there is no answer as to why.

Thanks for the response. I guess I'm just curious why I don't see more
research on why this is because it seems pretty fundamental. For
example, I thought muon decay lasted much longer (i.e. it was able to
travel much further than it should) because of time dilation effects
due to them moving at close to the speed of light. If you apply the
same time dilation to light, it would seem to imply that light should
be everywhere at once and yet we don't perceive that.

The reason I ask is that I don't undestand how light and gravity
(seemingly very different things) all appear to move at the same speed
when it seems like both should really be moving at infinite speed. I
wonder if they both really operate at infinite speed, but we only
perceive them at the speed of light because of some unknown reason
(much like we perceive certain particle decays to be much longer than
we should).

Wormley and Cardinale learned their physics by reading
H.G. Wells novels. If you want to learn a theory based
on the propagation of light, then you have to learn something
about light.

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/visualizations/light/index.htm
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/D.Jefferies/antennas.html


Time-independent Maxwell equations
Time-dependent Maxwell's equations
Relativity and electromagnetism
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/lectures.html

Maxwell's equations in classic electrodynamics
(classic field theory)_
a) Maxwell equations (no movement),
b) Maxwell equations (with moved bodies)
http://www.wolfram-stanek.de/maxwell_equations.htm#maxwell_classic_extended

Ya don't choose a physician because he has seen the film
"Frankenstein" do ya? ;-)

Sue...

They are not observing the distant object anyway. That is unless they have
telepathic vision, having no space whatsoever, no time whatsoever, existing
between them and the object. They are observing light born imaging of a
distant object. Images now in a time after time. Images from a time before
time. Images dealing in a state that is no longer [the] state . . . that is
unless that state is several orders of magnitude close to the Planck
horizon, large and small, within which, or beyond which, infinity, large and
small, resides.

Light doesn't travel from any point of propagation, it expands out from
that point and within a single instant in time after expansion begins, that
point of propagation and the source of propagation have nothing whatsoever
to do with each other (are no longer one and the same thing). The point of
progation is frozen in space and time and state for all time, the source of
propagation not frozen in any of them . . . not even for a single instant in
time post-propagation.

Propagation occurres instantaneously with, or simultaneously with, causing
event. It does not occur some time before the causing event, nor does it
occur some time after the causing event, but simultaneously with the causing
event as one effect integral to the causing event. And it freezes the
causing event, as well as the specific point of propagation -- again the
space, the time, the state -- in PHOTO-still frame for all time (ergo,
forever). Freezes them forever as the dead center point from which the
expansion expands [dead straight line] out into the universe. "Dead straight
line" because the point of propagation exists nowhere else in the universe
but within the specific light-frame propagated. The source of propagation
has traveled away from that exact same point of propagation (in space, in
time, in state) all during the same time the light-frame has expanded away
from the point as its permanent center point. The source of propagation does
not take the point of propagation anywhere with it like the light-frame
[always] will. What is the core of the expansionist light-frame is now just
a stone the source will not lift (excess baggage the source will not carry).

GLB


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: new quantum mechanics?
    ... Obviously one is not observing "space" but ... propagation" i.e. aether is problematic, and it can be argued that ... But the wave properties of light prove that there is. ... be regarded as a magnitude 1.5 which is everywhere existentially ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: [RFC PATCH] file as directory
    ... pivoting - probably true, moving... ... These mounts are not propagated. ... Propagation ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Problem with Einsteins Train Thought Experiment
    ... The first sentence is accurate if you consider the emitting object to ... What I am saying is that in terms of the propagation of light, ... object is not moving directly towards the observer. ...
    (sci.physics)