Dissipation of light?

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Dissipation of light?

Do you read my posts? Obstructions and path alterations. The farther away the source, the more likely the source is to get obstructed or the light's path altered.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[businessman07]

Re: Dissipation of light?

does light have a weight? if it does then it is altered or curved by gravity but if it is in an enviornment such as space where there is no gravity then it will continue to go straight until like guido said "it is obstructed or obsorbed by somthing else in space." to try to answer the question simply. no LIGHT DOES NOT JUST DISSIPATE. it has to be altered.

what makes light less visible?
basically anything that gets in its way. space makes light less visible air. everything.

[Grandiagod]

Re: Dissipation of light?

Light does have weight. Light is made of photons which can be affected by gravity, thus the reason black holes are black. Their gravity sucks in all the photons.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Dissipation of light?

Light very much does NOT have weight.

Photons are massless.

Gravity does not suck in photons, it curves spacetime such that the straight line that a photon travels will spiral back in toward the hole.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[Lightknight924]

Re: Dissipation of light?

If you were to go faster than the speed of light, would you exist? If your going faster than light then your going faster than time. Then would you exist?

[Grandiagod]

Re: Dissipation of light?

If you were to go faster than the speed of light, would you exist? If your going faster than light then your going faster than time. Then would you exist?

Time has no set speed at all.

In fact there are some particles that travel faster than photons, tachyons for example.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Dissipation of light?

Source? From wiki: A tachyon is any hypothetical particle that travels at superluminal velocity. The first theoretical description of tachyons is attributed to German physicist Arnold Sommerfeld; however, the concept has recurred in a variety of other contexts, such as string theory.

You say there ARE tachyons, when they aren't actually real. String theory is bolded for emphasis because it's not actually science. Nothing can travel faster than light.

And LK, a couple of things. One, you can't go faster than the speed of light, so there's no point in even drawing a conjecture as to what might happen.

Two, time is relative. If you're going near the speed of light, your watch is going to tick away just as it always did.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[businessman07]

Re: Dissipation of light?

what was the QUESTION again?

[Porkbutts]

Re: Dissipation of light?

not to be off topic, but lol, i was just pondering something as well. A lot of TV shows portray a black hole as a dark hole in space or spinning nothing ness. But since a dark hole attracts all light since its gravity is so high, wouldn't the light not be able to reflect back? So you wouldn't be able to see a black hole at all?

I've seen pictures of black holes where theres like gases surrounding it, maybe that kind of explains it.

I also read somewhere that as one slowly approaches the horizon of the black hole, time slows down more and more. So eventually when you reach it, a viewer from a reference point would you see stuck at the point of the black hole for an eternity.

[Porkbutts]

Re: Dissipation of light?

Source? From wiki: A tachyon is any hypothetical particle that travels at superluminal velocity. The first theoretical description of tachyons is attributed to German physicist Arnold Sommerfeld; however, the concept has recurred in a variety of other contexts, such as string theory.

You say there ARE tachyons, when they aren't actually real. String theory is bolded for emphasis because it's not actually science. Nothing can travel faster than light.

And LK, a couple of things. One, you can't go faster than the speed of light, so there's no point in even drawing a conjecture as to what might happen.

Two, time is relative. If you're going near the speed of light, your watch is going to tick away just as it always did.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

oh, I believe there is a way to travel faster than life, but it's weird. It involves warping space around you to push you along.

[Reach]

Re: Dissipation of light?

Light very much does NOT have weight.

Photons are massless.

Gravity does not suck in photons, it curves spacetime such that the straight line that a photon travels will spiral back in toward the hole.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

No weight, but relativistic mass! (which i'm sure you know, but for those who don't). Which basically means it has mass because it has energy because it is moving, and they're basically different manefestations of the same thing.

Warping space to move through space faster than light does not mean you are actually moving faster than light. When warping you are changing the distance, not the speed There is absolutely no way to break the light speed barrier. However, that doesn't prevent us from getting from A to B faster than light does.

You can't really see black holes. There are special techniques for spotting them though. A big spinning cloud of gas? A galaxy? There is a supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy and all galaxies for that matter.

You wouldn't exist in view for eternity if you flew into it. I suppose in theory you wouldn't cross the event horizon, but it's not like this has been tested. Time would indeed slow and they would appear to be moving very slowly from your point of view (and this is assuming you could even observe them XD A BIG ASSUMPTION!). But remember, time only dilates extremely at ridiculously large energies/masses. Near the event horizon you're not going to 'stop'. You're going to be starting to slow down rapidly to an observer, but not stop. And then at that point you're going to f'ing DIE (and your ship annihilated). The outside observer likely would not see any of this though. But neither would you inside the ship! You will not exist long before you reach the singularity, which is where you may or may not stop completely, but you're not going to find out!

[Grandiagod]

Re: Dissipation of light?

Source? From wiki: A tachyon is any hypothetical particle that travels at superluminal velocity. The first theoretical description of tachyons is attributed to German physicist Arnold Sommerfeld; however, the concept has recurred in a variety of other contexts, such as string theory.

You say there ARE tachyons, when they aren't actually real. String theory is bolded for emphasis because it's not actually science. Nothing can travel faster than light.

And LK, a couple of things. One, you can't go faster than the speed of light, so there's no point in even drawing a conjecture as to what might happen.

Two, time is relative. If you're going near the speed of light, your watch is going to tick away just as it always did.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

Light is just a particle, the theory that light somehow sets the limit on speed is ridiculous. Einstein is cool and all, but instantanious travel has been accomplished at the subatomic level. Making transmissions faster than light. Travel no, but there are some very good working theories being put to test this year, I'll rub it in your face when they work out mkay.

[flamingspinach]

Re: Dissipation of light?

You're probably talking about quantum entanglement which is not travel.

[Grandiagod]

Re: Dissipation of light?

I said transmission, I admitted that it wasn't travel.

[flamingspinach]

Re: Dissipation of light?

Light is just a particle, the theory that light somehow sets the limit on speed is ridiculous. Einstein is cool and all, but instantanious travel has been accomplished at the subatomic level. Making transmissions faster than light. Travel no, but there are some very good working theories being put to test this year, I'll rub it in your face when they work out mkay.

good point

edit: oh wait, you contradicted yourself o_O Anyway, it's not technically "transmission" either - it's just an interdependency at this point. No ansibles yet. 8)

-fs