dad wrote:
Kenisaw wrote:
Time doesn't affect light, because AT the speed of light there is no time. Relativity. I already explained this to you. I even asked you to look it up yourself and not take my word for it. Light also doesn't experience distance.
Light does move. It moves so far so fast!
From your perspective it appears that way. The theory of relativity is the explanation you seek.
We see time and distance for light because, relative to the light, we are experiencing such dimensions. At the speed of light photons experience neither. So it doesn't matter if time exists or doesn't exist, because time doesn't affect light in the first place. NOTHING does. So the speed of light can't change because nothing affects it.
You have no idea what affects it in the far universe or not!
Of course we do, because the entire universe is governed by the same rules. I know you can not or do not want to accept that, but it's the facts of the matter. You can't have universal conservation laws if the universe has different rules in different places. You can't have universal conservation laws in the universe had different rules in the past. You can't line up the radioactive decay of every single radioactive isotope in the universe if universal laws weren't consistent throughout. You can verify all this yourself. Do the math if you want.
Your constant repeating of the same unsupported claim that contradicts the facts isn't going to make it more true at some point.
The issue is not what happens here in a lab. If light moves so far in so much time, then time is the factor that matters. How much time light took to move depends on what time is like where the light moves!
There is no time at the speed of light. The theory of relativity explains why. I would suggest becoming educated on the topic if you would like to understand why your assumptions are not valid.
The support is because we can see the light from stars, so we can see their motion relative to other stars.
Only as seen FROM HERE! IN TIME!
Exactly. We can experience time, and we can see photons. And because the entire universe operates the same way, we can gather all sorts of knowledge about all manner of things.
Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation shows that objects are attracted to each other in a relationship that is relative to their distance. We've measured the interactions between objects in our own solar system. The values of the forces in play were used on the rest of our galaxy.
Distances are not known to any star. So you do not know what you are seeing.
Baseless claim. You have presented nothing that invalidates any of the math that is used to calculate those distances. You have presented nothing that invalidates any of the laws of the universe. If you are right, it should be easy to find a hole in the work performed over tens of millions of man hours for the last couple hundred years that tells us the distances to stars. All the creationist pseudo science proponents at AIG or creation.com can 't seem to do it, but I bet you can...
There also may be more than just the physical out there!
Great. Prove it.
After all science invented dark stuff that is invisible to explain what we see.
There are things that affect the structure of galaxies and the universe itself that we don't have enough knowledge about to discern what they are. Those things exist, they aren't invented. Science loudly and proudly proclaims that we don't know what is causing those forces and why they are causing them. We are currently investigating so we can figure it out. That's how the process works.
Your process is to throw your hands up in the air, credit some unproven being with a great PR campaign (it never sends the tornado, but it always saves the trailer trash), and stop thinking about it. Fortunately not everyone in humanity is the same way, or else we'd still be cutting up meat with sharp rocks...
In our solar system we know there are physical planets and a physical earth. We also know the distances here because we know time exists here a certain way. You cannot claim distances in the far universe based on time existing the same and sizes, and orbits etc etc.
Yes, we can. It's already been explained to you ad naseum why. Your erroneous conclusions to the contrary don't invalidate mountains of verified math and science.
Those values properly predicted the movement of objects outside our solar system. Those values have been used to analyze the movement of planets around other stars, and they also accurately predict the interactions between those star and their planets.
Show an example. Yes things orbit in space. How big they are and how far we do not know. So what prediction shows distance or size, or that time exists there???
No idea what your level of scientific education is, so here are a couple of links to start with. You've already mentioned one (parallax) which is just simple geometry.
https://physics.weber.edu/schroeder/ua/StarMotion.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... on.html#c1 (click on the various circles)
The interactions between galaxies also follow the same force values that work in our solar system.
No. You just assumed distances and sizes and all sorts of things. Yours is a circular religion.
Since we know the entire universe uses the same laws, and it's backed by math and science and validated countless times, there is nothing assumed. This, of course, has already been explained to you.
Sorry if reality doesn't agree with your dogma. Reality doesn't care if you like it or not.
In short, the entire universe acts just like things in our local area, and things in our local area happen over time with specific values for various laws.
No it does not, except it seems that way to you as an observer in the fishbowl. You assign reason for what we see based on a belief set, son in your head it seems to all fit.
Your baseless opinion has been refuted. Perhaps it is time to come up with something new?
That's not what the comment was about. It was about you stating "all speeds of anything involve time", and pointing out that your statement isn't true because photons don't experience time.
Where...on earth? The issue is not what touchy feely things photons supposedly experience! If a photon travels a certain distance then the photon takes time to do so! If time is changed then the same photon cannot take the same time to travel that distance! Elementary.
Elementary to someone who doesn't understand relativity. Nonsense to someone that does.
One of your basic problems is that you think the universe should follow what you think is common sense. Problem is, the universe doesn't.
Yes it does. Science just doesn't have any.[/quote]
Says the guy that wrote that on a computer over an internet that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the scientific understanding of chemistry, physics, and quantum mechanics, the same fields of study that have proven the laws of the universe and allowed us to understand how it all works. Delicious irony.
You think that since we see light going from one place to another, and there are measurable intervals we call time that pass between one event and another, that means everything must experience that interval we call time. But not everything does. You can verify this yourself too, you need not believe anything I tell you. You can actually do the experiments and calculate the math and verify that this is all true. I'm confident you will do neither however...
If you are talking about light moving at something other than light speed then you need to be specific. You know...so many miles per second etc...
Ha.
Light always moves at the speed of light, daddy-o. I guess you haven't done the experiments are calculated the math yet. I'm stunned.
