Re: Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?
- From: "Paul Cardinale" <pcardinale@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 24 Feb 2007 18:11:47 -0800
skillzero@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
No. It implies no such thing. Re-read what I wrote.
Paul Cardinale
.
- References:
- Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?
- From: skillzero@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?
- From: Paul Cardinale
- Re: Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?
- From: skillzero@xxxxxxxxx
- Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?
- Prev by Date: Re: Help please
- Next by Date: Re: Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?
- Next by thread: Re: Why doesn't light travel at infinite speed?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
