Ask Me Help Desk

Ask Me Help Desk (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forum.php)
-   Astronomy (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=38)
-   -   This is my theory. (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=308560)

  • Jan 25, 2009, 06:01 PM
    survivorboi
    This is my theory.
    First thing, I assume that light is time. This theory is based on that.

    If light was time, then it is impossible to go faster then light. The reason is, if light was time, then if we go faster then the speed of light, then that means time stops. And if time stops, we are not going anywhere!

    Remember, this theory I have is based on the fact that light=time.
  • Jan 25, 2009, 06:11 PM
    sarnian
    It may be your personal theory, but on what indications do you base such a thesis ?
  • Jan 25, 2009, 06:20 PM
    retsoksirhc

    Einstein had a theory involving spacetime. It's the theory of special relativity. Along the same line of thinking, if you're hypothetically moving at an incredibly fast pace, lets say near the speed of light, you can look at a clock you have with you. Looking at your clock, time passes normally.

    Now lets say someone else moves in the other direction as you, with the same clock. Lets also say that, hypothetically, when you pass each other, both your clocks read 12:00. You get farther and farther away from him, while still looking at his clock. The light from where he is takes increasingly longer to get to you, as you drift further away. Therefore, his clock appears to be running slower than yours.

    While not really time travel, this is called Time Dilation. It's pretty interesting. I REALLY don't know too much about it other than the main principle behind it, but I always thought it was pretty cool.

    Compliments of my high school Physics teacher :)
  • Jan 25, 2009, 06:24 PM
    nike 1
    Light is some sort of moving photons.

    Define time.
  • Jan 25, 2009, 06:26 PM
    retsoksirhc

    I define time as a constant from which duration and sequence can be defined, as valid from a single frame of reference in any given space.
  • Jan 25, 2009, 06:29 PM
    survivorboi
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sarnian View Post
    It may be your personal theory, but on what indications do you base such a thesis ?


    I'm new to theory and stuff, so what do you mean by indications?
  • Jan 25, 2009, 06:32 PM
    nike 1
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by retsoksirhc View Post
    I define time as a constant from which duration and sequence can be defined, as valid from a single frame of reference in any given space.

    Then time is a man made measurement of duration, by the way, good definition. So how is light and time equal other than the speed of light is measured in time?
  • Jan 25, 2009, 06:40 PM
    retsoksirhc

    Im not saying they're equal, but they are definitely related. That's what the theory of relativity is all about.

    I don't quite agree with "Time is a man made measurement" because even if we didn't measure, I'm fairly certain time would pass at a steady interval. The passage of time itself isn't man made, but just our units of measurement, which are based off our position and traversal through space. But that's not how I say they're related.

    I was taught that time and space are related by 1 constant: the speed of light. I never really understood that until I learned about time dialation. If you think of observing something far across space, you're observing not the thing itself, but the light that travels to you, from it. Now think of that light in frame, one after another after another. If you move through space away from what you're observing, the closer you get to moving at the speed of light, the slower time will have passed for what you're observing, from your frame of reference. If you could travel the speed of light, you would observe time stopping entirely for what you're looking at, because you would be traveling with a single moment of light that was captured. That's why time is relative to space... because time isn't simply just 'there'... it has to be observed.
  • Jan 26, 2009, 06:18 AM
    Capuchin

    light = time is certainly not a fact.

    And this isn't a theory, it's a hypothesis.

    Space and time are interwoven. The universe is carved out of space-time. They're not easily separated. They're manifestations of the same thing.
  • Jan 26, 2009, 05:00 PM
    sarnian
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by survivorboi View Post
    I'm new to theory and stuff, so what do you mean by indications?

    Idea --> Claim --> (hypo)Thesis --> Theory
    What you posted in your question was an idea. If you provide some explanation to your reasoning and conclusion that idea could develop into a thesis. And with scientific research support a thesis can develop into a theory.

    In normal life what we call a theory is in science called a thesis.
    In science a scientific theory is a supported thesis, near or equal to reality.

    With indications I meant : on what is your suggestion based? Is it just an idea you had?
    Or do you have any reasoning to your suggested "light is time"?
    So what do you think is light?
    And what do you think is time?
    What "makes" light into time into light?
  • Feb 4, 2009, 05:38 AM
    Stratmando

    The best definition of Time that I always believed is, a unit of measure used to measure the movement of space?

  • All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:46 AM.