According to Einsteins Theory of Relativity, the maximum speed in the universe is light velocity. But let's imagine a space ship - if it was possible - running at this limit speed in one direction in deep space, and other, at the same speed and time, running to the right opposite side. Aren't they going over that speed limit, in relative velocity to each other?
Now you can also imagine a very very far way galaxy, that is moving in deep space and withdrawing very fast from our Milk Way Galaxy. If the relative velocity of each other are over the light speed we will never be able to find and see that far way galaxy.
Comments
Dear Ari,
Tks for write for me about my ideas.
With all respect, I should remember you that your mathematic formula express just a hipotesis like my first philosophic formulation; considering that booth of us can only talk about that kind of light velocity measunring as an hipotetic idea. You have use the formula and mathemathics. And I, only philosophy. Its still impossible to say who is right.
Also, with your permission, let me tell a litle more in the philosophic language: "Modern cosmology is on the borderland between science and philosophy, close to philosophy because it asks fundamental questions about the Universe, close to science since it looks for answers in the form of empirical understanding by observation and rational explanation. Thus, theories about cosmology operate with a tension between a philosophical urge for simplicity and a wish to include all the Universe's features versus the shire complexitied of it all."
That's why I'm inclined to think that there is a very big and invisible universe out there. Like a man that can only remember the facts of your own time life, from the earth we may just see what is in the universe of its own life time. Remember that universe is estimate to exist dates backs about 13,5 billion years, and the earth only about 5 billion years. May be either some part of the universe that we are still going to see just in the future, because its light did not get us yet.
I also bet that the idea of this invisible universe, that I wrote above, has something or some relation with the idea of the dark energy and dark matter. Thats not impossible. Please if you can, write me back about this.
Best Regads,
Felipe
Felipe Pugliesi Jr. | 02/20/09 | 19:09 PM
booth of us can only talk about that kind of light velocity measunring as an hipotetic idea. You have use the formula and mathemathics. And I, only philosophy. Its still impossible to say who is right.
WHAT??? You making up things is certainly not the same as the prediction/derivation from Maxwell's equations that has also been measured as a constant.
By your philosophical 'it is impossible to say who is right' statement you are saying GPS systems, lasers and lots of other things don't work. Maybe in a Husserlian 'I am the only thing apodictically evident and all else is relative' world, light is not a constant but in the real universe, it is.
Hank Campbell | 02/20/09 | 19:22 PM
Yes. I think its perfectly possible that light absolute speed happens to be a constant for a body it self - if it was possible to say -, and can be, at same time, in a relativity measuring or, in another words, in comparison with another hipotethic body, higher than 300.000 m/s. Its phisicaly possible, according to the relativity teory. Remember that Maxwell's work dates back to the 19th century, thus before Einstein teory of relativity.
Felipe Pugliesi Jr. | 02/20/09 | 23:36 PM
Its phisicaly possible, according to the relativity teory. Remember that Maxwell's work dates back to the 19th century, thus before Einstein teory of relativity.
If you're telling me Maxwell's equations were superseded by anything Einstein said I will personally write you a check for the $250 billion semiconductor industry. You have no idea what you are talking about.
You are using the word 'relative' incorrectly. The good news is, none of the less tolerant physics writers have seen this silliness or they would have pulled it. I am trying to be patient. It's okay to ask questions, like "why can't we go faster than light?" if you have genuine interest in learning, but you are instead attempting to portray yourself as some sort of expert and arguing without even knowing what words mean.
If you actually want to learn and not think you are engaging in a battle of semantics you are certain to lose, you need to understand the relativistic formula for addition of velocities. Try this:
How You Add Velocities in Special Relativity
You claim to be a journalist. You need to do some journalistic research before you come into a science community and telling other people they don't 'get' physics but that you somehow do by getting cute with semantics.
Hank Campbell | 02/21/09 | 00:40 AM
Think about that:
Imagine two guys with one laser each. They are about to point the lasers, at the same time, at two places, one in the right opposite side of another. To a observer located in a third position, in earth, the light of the two lasers will get to the objetcs at the same time. And from his point of view, the one laser light in comparioson with the other, have been in a speed higher than 300.000 m/s. The proof of it is that each light have get at the same time to their pointed object, at the right opposite side from each other. So this hipothesis does not contradics the Maxwells ideias and mathematics derivations. But show that is possible to consider other approuch to this questions thinking within the concepts of relativity.
Felipe Pugliesi Jr. | 02/20/09 | 23:58 PM
Something which is simultaneous in one reference frame will not be in another.
Ari (not verified) | 02/21/09 | 09:55 AM
of course I will listening to everything booth of you are writing. In the last exemple I wrote, if I well understand, you are saying that there is a difference in the "time" of each laser light reach the same point at the right opposity side - same distance - depending of the observer point of view, right? please, if you can, may you show me, in your words, the differecences between this tree points of view: a guy in the left objct, a guy in the rigth object - each one reached by the laser light at the same time from the third guy in an equidistant point of view from the two others. I'm very intersted to learn about all that hipotesys. Thanks once more to talk to me.
regards,
Felipe
Felipe Pugliesi Jr. | 02/21/09 | 14:37 PM
Felipe Pugliesi Jr. | 02/22/09 | 16:32 PM
we do that here on earth because it is a good approximation at speeds well below 'c'. without getting into specifics about observers and directions we can say that if one spaceship is traveling at v1, and another at v2, their relative velocity is
v = (v1+v2)/(1+v1*v2/c^2)
if you plug in the numbers you can see that v is never greater than c. in fact it only reaches c if v1 and v2 are both themselves c.
this also applies to the retreating galaxy. regardless of the relative velocity between the two galaxies, if one releases a photon of light towards the other, it will always reach the second galaxy.