Ridiculous to think that light is the only static

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter BohrringPlank
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Static
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of light, particularly its speed, properties, and conceptual implications regarding space-time. Participants explore ideas about whether light can be considered static, how it interacts with motion, and the implications of photons in relation to mass and volume.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that light could be considered static, suggesting that we move towards it, though this idea is met with skepticism.
  • Others argue that light does not have a speed in the traditional sense, viewing speed as a property of light rather than an inherent characteristic.
  • A participant questions the mass and volume of photons, suggesting that if space-time were made of photons, it would not have volume.
  • One participant mentions that photons can be infinitely packed into a finite volume, explaining that this is due to their nature as bosons, which do not follow the exclusion principle.
  • Another participant suggests rethinking photons as waves rather than particles to better understand their behavior in finite spaces.
  • Concerns about making incorrect statements and the fear of criticism are expressed by multiple participants.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of light, with no consensus reached. Some ideas are contested, particularly regarding the properties of light and the implications of photons in relation to space-time.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their understanding and reasoning, particularly regarding the definitions of mass and volume in relation to photons and the nature of light's speed.

BohrringPlank
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
This isn't a statement or theory, i simply need help on understanding a topic. Light particles are always traveling at the same speed relative to you, even if you are moving, is it ridiculous to think that light is the only static thing in the universe and it is light that we move towards. Maybe someone could help me understand why light does this or explain why my ponderring is wrong. I haven't developped my static light idea so go easy on me with the criticism.
 
Last edited:
Science news on Phys.org
BohrringPlank said:
This isn't a statement or theory, i simply need help on understanding a topic. Light particles are always traveling at the same speed relative to you, even if you are moving, is it ridiculous to think that light is the only static thing in the universe and it is light that we move towards. Maybe someone could help me understand why light does this or explain why my ponderring is wrong. I haven't developped my static light idea so go easy on me with the criticism.

I wouldn't say that light is static, but neither it has a "speed". I think that what we call speed is more likely a property of light. It's like when you think about electric charge (or other forces as well): you could wonder "Why don't electrons exhaust their charge? Where is their source ?" Even in this case I think about forces as properties of the related particles.

Anyway it's only from the point of view of a photon that things get "weird": to it time is frozen, but it interacts anyway...
 
I was watching an internet live feed from CERN when this theoretical physicist explained that Photons could be inifnatly crammed into a box without filling it. Yet don't photons have a mass or volume like other particles?
Is space-time itself just photons, my mind is often a blur when trying to reason with myself but it would seem appropriate that the fabric of space-time is photons, maybe someone could explain why it isnt.
 
Btw, the reason i am constantly asking for answers is because of fear of making a statement that would probably be crushed by someone
 
Lets say you're moving at 0.25c and a light ray comes at you from behind. Instead of thinking that the actual wavefront its moving towards you at 0.75c think that the peaks of the wave pass you more slowly. In this effect the relative frequency decreases instead of it's velocity.
 
No one can explain why light always travels at c -- it just happens to be a feature of this universe.

And yes, you can pack an infinite number of photons into a finite volume, because photons are bosons -- there is no exclusion principle that prevents many of them from occupying the same quantum state.

- Warren
 
Btw, the reason i am constantly asking for answers is because of fear of making a statement that would probably be crushed by someone

No ones here to crush you. As long as your statements are factual that is :smile:
 
Light has no rest mass (although it does have energy so that it appears to have gravitational mass). As for volume, I'm not sure how one would define "volume" for any elementary particle, much less light.
 
Well this is why i made that point about it being the fabric of space-time, if space time were made up of such particles as photons then there would be no volume for it, hmm i am poor at explaining myself, yet its the only way in my mind i can justify that photons can be infinatly packed into a finite amount of space.
 
  • #10
You said you were thining of photons as particles. Try thinking of the photons as a collection of waves and packing them into a finite space sounds a little less absurd.
 
  • #11
Ahh, thanks, I was having trouble, that seems more feasible.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
14K