Since light particles travel at the speed of light, we know it's possible for something to travel at that speed. However, since all things are relative, and if time does stop at the speed of light, then we can not measure the velocity in conventional terms. Consider from the perspective of the light particle, how long does it take to travel a "light year"? If time stops at the speed of light, then how can we rationalize the definition of a "light year"? There is no time from the perspective of the light particle. So, why would not it be transported instantaneously?
Asked
Active
Viewed 81 times
1
-
2You should read http://physics.stackexchange.com/q/16018/ , because your question is predicated on a falsehood. – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Feb 19 '16 at 03:18
-
3"since all things are relative" - this isn't true. For example, proper time is not relative, proper acceleration is not relative, chronological order is not relative, etc. That is to say, there are in reality, physical invariants. – Alfred Centauri Feb 19 '16 at 03:21
-
All reality is perceived and is therefore relative to the perception in and of itself. – Feb 19 '16 at 04:19
-
Proper time interval between two events on a world line is the change in proper time and therefore is relative to each event within the world line. Proper acceleration would be similarly relative. We're getting hamstrung in minutiae. If the photon in a vacuum doesn't experience passage of time. Then, the photon is transported instantaneously irrespective of reality outside the frame. We're barely scratching the surface here. There's so much more that you have yet to realize. You must believe there is a way, because there is. – Feb 24 '16 at 04:21