if your doing the speed of light in a car what happens if you turn the lights on, do they still shine out the front or does the light not make it out

Dr Karl triple j 11am Thursday

I'll give it a go on the way home from work today and let you know mate.

Look up theory of relativity. You'll find answers there.

Select to expand quote

tryharder said..
if your doing the speed of light in a car what happens if you turn the lights on, do they still shine out the front or does the light not make it out

You will just have to tryharder because we covered this subject some months ago. A Holden Torano couldn't make the speed of light but a Ford GTHO V8 just got over the speed of light. When the lights were switched on they lit up the road ahead as the whole thing is moving at the speed of light. But I'm just guessing as I've never tried it yet.

What kind of car do you have? If it's a prius, just use the hi beams...

Guessing it doesn't matter since most roads don't have 'speed of light' compatibile turns. If you're headed to space, fill up first, charge up, and take some extra fuel.....

Don't panic

Select to expand quote

tryharder said..
if your doing the speed of light in a car what happens if you turn the lights on, do they still shine out the front or does the light not make it out

Your car can't travel at the speed of light, unless it has zero mass. Which I would have thought is unlikely

Select to expand quote

azymuth said..

tryharder said..
if your doing the speed of light in a car what happens if you turn the lights on, do they still shine out the front or does the light not make it out

Your car can't travel at the speed of light, unless it has zero mass. Which I would have thought is unlikely

Yes, that bit was covered too in previous post. Aliens use a machine called a mass spectrometer removal system which restores the mass from the fabric of space when they arrive at their destination.This enables them to cover the vast distances that they travel. I believe they are after Zircon encrusted tweezers from Montana which are unavailable in their own galaxy.
It's like dejavu, or did I just say that.

I just tried it in my Holden Original XX7 Sandman HZ 308 4Spd Panel Van, built at Acacia Ridge.

Unfortunately, your daughter got pregnant and then it was daylight and I never got a good measurement.

But, I think if I was doing the speed of light at a constant speed, and then turned on the high beams, my high beams would be doing the speed of light relative to my position.

I propose a theory, that it is all relative to the observer. I would call it the theory of relations.

Its the Matrix dudes

You need good wipers. At c speed, you will circumnavigate globe 7.5x in one second.
So make sure you wipe everything from your windshield if you want to see what is in front of you.
Cyclists, small cars, trees all this stuff may stick and smear on your windscreen.

This has already been answered in www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/General-Discussion/Chat/Top-Joke-2?page=73


"Car no do that. Car no fly. Car no go space."

Of course not, as the bulb is emitting photons that exit in all directions at the speed of light.
As they have a particle nature, those photons trying to move "forward" from the bulb at the speed of light go nowhere.

Those going out the side transcribe a parabolic path, much like a tennis ball thrown out the window on the freeway (it gets progressively slower in both X and Y axes)

Those exiting the rear of the bulb want to do 2x C - being their own exit speed plus the speed the bulb is already travelling at. .........which they simply can't. They then hope to change from photons to something else - and only tachyons are able to travel faster then C, so they identify as tachyons now.
Logman loves them and they are in a float parade. Anyone who does not love the photons who identify as tachyons is labelled a bigoted xenophobic creationist who probably votes Coalition and hates the Greens.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
Of course not, as the bulb is emitting photons that exit in all directions at the speed of light.
As they have a particle nature, those photons trying to move "forward" from the bulb at the speed of light go nowhere.

Those going out the side transcribe a parabolic path, much like a tennis ball thrown out the window on the freeway (it gets progressively slower in both X and Y axes)

Those exiting the rear of the bulb want to do 2x C - being their own exit speed plus the speed the bulb is already travelling at. .........which they simply can't. They then hope to change from photons to something else - and only tachyons are able to travel faster then C, so they identify as tachyons now.
Logman loves them and they are in a float parade. Anyone who does not love the photons who identify as tachyons is labelled a bigoted xenophobic creationist who probably votes Coalition and hates the Greens.

Thank you Sheldon

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
Of course not, as the bulb is emitting photons that exit in all directions at the speed of light.
As they have a particle nature, those photons trying to move "forward" from the bulb at the speed of light go nowhere.

Those going out the side transcribe a parabolic path, much like a tennis ball thrown out the window on the freeway (it gets progressively slower in both X and Y axes)

Those exiting the rear of the bulb want to do 2x C - being their own exit speed plus the speed the bulb is already travelling at. .........which they simply can't. They then hope to change from photons to something else - and only tachyons are able to travel faster then C, so they identify as tachyons now.
Logman loves them and they are in a float parade. Anyone who does not love the photons who identify as tachyons is labelled a bigoted xenophobic creationist who probably votes Coalition and hates the Greens.

Can't work out if this is serious or not?

Select to expand quote

Subsonic said..
Look up theory of relativity. You'll find answers there.

I'm not sure that applies here, if I threw a ball forwards out of the window then it must go faster than the speed of light as relative to me who's doing the speed of light it moving away but not sure light is being pushed away from a bulb or not

^^^you could not throw it, as it gets heavier exponentially as you accelerate it.



Please, don't discriminate against particles that are clearly photons but want to identify as tachyons.
#justiceforalltheoreticalparticles

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
Of course not, as the bulb is emitting photons that exit in all directions at the speed of light.
As they have a particle nature, those photons trying to move "forward" from the bulb at the speed of light go nowhere.

So does that mean that you could measure how fast you were going, by observing how quickly the light goes 'forwards'?

Of course not. There's no aether. You need to read a bit more about what Einstein wrote.

Light doesn't actually move, the appearance of movement, that which we call a photon, is in fact simply a measurement of the displacement of energy.

So, for your car to travel at the maximum velocity at which energy can be observed to be displaced it would have to have zero mass and would be what we call a photon.

I.e. You couldn't switch on the light because you would be light

Select to expand quote

nebbian said..

Mark _australia said..
Of course not, as the bulb is emitting photons that exit in all directions at the speed of light.
As they have a particle nature, those photons trying to move "forward" from the bulb at the speed of light go nowhere.

So does that mean that you could measure how fast you were going, by observing how quickly the light goes 'forwards'?

Of course not. There's no aether. You need to read a bit more about what Einstein wrote.

Let's take water as an example. There is a big wave traveling on the sea.Say traveling 100 km /h .But water isn't traveling at all.If something is floating on the water, then will rise upon the wave then down but will not follow wave at 100km/h.Our float remains stationery.Light is considered wave also.
aeon.co/essays/why-is-the-speed-of-light-the-speed-of-light

If you're travelling at the speed of light, headlights are useless, and wipers are useless, you can't see anything anyway, it's just a indistinguishable fog of blur,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, until you hit something, then nothing matters anymore anyway. Next.

**** you guys can be entertaining..

Depends on if its a flat or ball earth - if its round you'll be able to see your own tail lights

Select to expand quote

tryharder said..

Subsonic said..
Look up theory of relativity. You'll find answers there.

I'm not sure that applies here, if I threw a ball forwards out of the window then it must go faster than the speed of light as relative to me who's doing the speed of light it moving away but not sure light is being pushed away from a bulb or not

Yes Relativity does apply. All human experience is in the realm of Newtonian mechanics. We don't get to see the geometric changes that occur as you approach light speed. What you are proposing makes sense in a Newtonian world but not at speeds approaching light speed.

Firstly, things with mass can't get to light speed anyway because it requires infinite energy. Secondly, if you were at light speed, time for you would freeze so all otherwise instantaneous experiences would be stretched out over eternity (time dilation). Thirdly, light (in a vacuum) always travels at the same speed measured from any direction in any inertial frame. Bizarre but true.

It's easy to identify with those who say WTF, this can't be right, but it's been tested over and over again and survives unmodified.

Select to expand quote

NotWal said..

tryharder said..

Subsonic said..
Look up theory of relativity. You'll find answers there.

I'm not sure that applies here, if I threw a ball forwards out of the window then it must go faster than the speed of light as relative to me who's doing the speed of light it moving away but not sure light is being pushed away from a bulb or not

Yes Relativity does apply. All human experience is in the realm of Newtonian mechanics. We don't get to see the geometric changes that occur as you approach light speed. What you are proposing makes sense in a Newtonian world but not at speeds approaching light speed.

Firstly, things with mass can't get to light speed anyway because it requires infinite energy. Secondly, if you were at light speed, time for you would freeze so all otherwise instantaneous experiences would be stretched out over eternity (time dilation). Thirdly, light (in a vacuum) always travels at the same speed measured from any direction in any inertial frame. Bizarre but true.

It's easy to identify with those who say WTF, this can't be right, but it's been tested over and over again and survives unmodified.

Just goes to show what we observe isn't what there is.

Select to expand quote

tryharder said..

Subsonic said..
Look up theory of relativity. You'll find answers there.

I'm not sure that applies here, if I threw a ball forwards out of the window then it must go faster than the speed of light as relative to me who's doing the speed of light it moving away but not sure light is being pushed away from a bulb or not

It quite literally has to do with the theory of relativity , look it up.

youve got marsbars onto it anyway. Im sure he'll be back soon with a definitive answer for you.

Select to expand quote

nebbian said.. So does that mean that you could measure how fast you were going, by observing how quickly the light goes 'forwards'?
Of course not. There's no aether. You need to read a bit more about what Einstein wrote.

I think you need to know I made all that crap up.




Notwal- how do we test the part where nothing with mass can reach light speed? Proven its impossible I mean...?
Time dilation was easy of course

How effective is it to fart up a storm?

Select to expand quote

Marsbars said..
I'll give it a go on the way home from work today and let you know mate.

Sorry mate could not do it dont know what happened got to 88MPH and went back to 1955 had to get a crazy doctor to help me out apparently something wrong with my flux capacitor.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..

nebbian said.. So does that mean that you could measure how fast you were going, by observing how quickly the light goes 'forwards'?
Of course not. There's no aether. You need to read a bit more about what Einstein wrote.

I think you need to know I made all that crap up.




Notwal- how do we test the part where nothing with mass can reach light speed? Proven its impossible I mean...?
Time dilation was easy of course

Good question. I assume the geometric relationship is tested from observations thus confirming the math and the boundary condition is inferred. That's good enough unless something weird happens at the boundaries. But there's nothing to imply such a thing so ya go with wot ya know.

Select to expand quote

Marsbars said..

Marsbars said..
I'll give it a go on the way home from work today and let you know mate.

Sorry mate could not do it dont know what happened got to 88MPH and went back to 1955 had to get a crazy doctor to help me out apparently something wrong with my flux capacitor.

Bummer