How does light travel, does this not contradict the idea that going the speed of light stops time? Because if going the speed of light stops time and light goes the speed of light shouldn't it be dark?
Asked
Active
Viewed 166 times
-1
-
1It's worth noting that time dilation is a relative effect. You don't experience any change even though others see your clocks as running slow. But that isn't a complete answer because light doesn't have a rest frame. – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Sep 26 '15 at 00:45
-
3This question shows no research effort. – Alfred Centauri Sep 26 '15 at 01:12
-
1Possible duplicates: http://physics.stackexchange.com/q/29082/2451 and links therein. – Qmechanic Sep 26 '15 at 06:53
4 Answers
1
You've mixed up which time dilates for which observer, and written yourself into a paradoxical corner: if going closer to the speed of light slows time for the object going that speed, and if time slowing down means going slower, then the conclusion is that "the faster you go, the slower you go." Which obviously doesn't make sense as you've pointed out.
However, time dilation is a relative phenomenon: say I'm on a space station and you are on a ship passing by at high speed. Because you are moving quickly relative to me, time appears dilated for you from my perspective: if I look through your porthole at the clock inside your ship, it will appear to be running slow, and the faster your ship is going, the slower your clock seems to tick. (Of course, the clock itself is moving the same speed as the ship.)
On the other hand, you could easily argue that you are sitting still in your ship and it is I in my station that are flying by at high speed, since the only way to measure speed is to compare against something else as a benchmark, and that benchmark is arbitrary. So the same principle applies in reverse as well: my clock will seem to you to tick slowly due to my high speed. Looking at your own clock, it will seem to you to be running the normal speed. And who's to argue?
Again, there's a difference between relative velocity and relative clock speed. You and I each see our own clocks ticking at full rate, but our vehicle sitting still; and the other's vehicle flying by quickly while the clock is running slowly. Traveling at light speed is impossible for massive particles, but we can get very close. If I fly past you at almost light speed, you'd think my clock was almost stopped. Likewise with light: we do not observe it aging, but we do observe it moving at light speed nonetheless.
Asher
- 4,867
- 1
- 17
- 30
0
Photons are emitted and absorbed. Between emission and absorption there is no proper time because the spacetime interval of lightlike movements is zero. Light is generated by the absorption process, not by the travel of light. So there is no reason to fear that it should be dark.
Moonraker
- 3,135
-1
Time being a measurable quantity according to the beat of cesium atomic clock, it cannot be stopped. If the light ray hitting your eye is taken as a measure of time. Then you can absolutely stop the time by travelling at the speed of light.
Vinayak
- 898
- 2
- 13
- 28
-2
If a photon carried a wristwatch, it would not tick. But us subluminals still see the photon move because for us, time has not stopped.
user66309
- 173
-
Photons (which have no rest mass) cannot carry a wristwatch. Not even hypothetically. – Qmechanic Oct 03 '15 at 20:09
-
Might I suggest you investigate the meaning of the word "hypothetical." – user66309 Oct 08 '15 at 04:09
-
A photon with a 500 nm wavelength has a frequency of 600,000,000,000,000 cps. Isn't that some kind of wrist watch? – Bill Alsept Nov 12 '15 at 15:44