Can Lights Be Heard at Light Speed? The Surprising Discovery in Galactic Traffic

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of whether sound can be heard and light can be seen when traveling at or near the speed of light, particularly in a hypothetical scenario involving faster-than-light travel. Participants explore the implications of special relativity and the nature of sound and light as they relate to motion in space.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a scenario where they travel at light speed and questions whether sound can be heard while light can be seen, suggesting a difference in how sound and light propagate.
  • Another participant contrasts sound, which requires a medium, with light, which is described as a concept related to forces, indicating a fundamental difference in their nature.
  • A participant provides a mathematical expression for relativistic velocity addition, attempting to explain how light emitted from a spaceship traveling at light speed would still propagate at the speed of light.
  • Another participant challenges the premise by stating that no massive object can travel at the speed of light, questioning the validity of the initial scenario.
  • There is a debate about the Earth's velocity in relation to other celestial bodies, with some participants asserting that the Earth cannot travel at 0.8c relative to any massive object, while others argue that it can be moving at that speed relative to certain stars.
  • One participant mentions Hubble's law and the expansion of the universe, suggesting that distant galaxies appear to be moving away from us at speeds greater than light due to the expansion of space, which may relate to the earlier discussion about relative speeds.
  • Another participant expresses confusion over the implications of the laws of relativity and the conditions under which different velocities are measured.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of sound and light, the implications of special relativity, and the velocities of celestial bodies. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on several points, particularly regarding the Earth's speed and the hypothetical scenario of traveling at light speed.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about the nature of sound and light, as well as the application of special relativity in hypothetical scenarios. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of relativistic principles and the conditions under which they apply.

Clausius2
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
1,433
Reaction score
7
Some day I was driving my spaceship that can go as faster as light velocity. (in year 2175 all of us believe Einstein was wrong). Suddenly, a dumb driver appeared in the galactic highway with a old fashioned spacecraft , and when I reach him I stood behind him wanting to express my angry. To my surprise, I sounded a lot of times the horn, but nobody of the cars in front of me heard no sound. Then, I thought in the Mach cone and this sorts of things and using those unpractical tools of the physics, I invoked the special relativity postulated and switched on the frontal lights like flickering. Hey, I discovered that going at light speed my lights worked! (After all Einstein was not so wrong). :wink:

To point this in another way more serious, sound interaction seems to be a perturbation over some type of steady mesh (not participating of the spacecraft movement). But light rays seems to be a little bit different, isn't it?. Although I think they might be similar. The question that anyone of such stupid drivers can hear me if I sound my horn if I'm going supersonically, but can see me if I switch on the lights, seems to be a little bit puzzling!.

Anything to say about?
 
Science news on Phys.org
But light rays seems to be a little bit different, isn't it?

To say the least. Sound is composed of varying pressure in a medium, whereas Light is a concept we use to describe the way some forces occur. Since it involves causation, your headlight questions become fundamental questions about how our universe works. Those types of thought problems are constantly considered in relativistic mechanics.
 
for that question, you can use Special Relativity and calculations. If you look at velocity addition at speeds close to the speed of light, you will see your result. If I am not mistaken, relativistic velovity addition is:
u' = v + u / (1 + vu/c^2)
if you sub in your speeds (speed of spaceship = 1c)
(speed of emitted light = 1c)
u' = 1c + 1c / (1 + (1c)(1c)/c^2)
u' = 2c / (1 + (1c^2)/c^2)
u' = 2c / (1 + 1)
u' = 2c / 2
u' = 1c
which means the light emitted by your headlights will propagate ahead of you at the speed of light. It is hard to picture this but that's special relativity.
 
for that question, you can use Special Relativity and calculations.
No you can't, since:

(in year 2175 all of us believe Einstein was wrong).

If you are traveling at c, and is massive, no current law can tell you what is going on, because the current laws say rather bluntly: No massive object can travel at c!
 
FZ+ said:
...the current laws say rather bluntly: No massive object can travel at c!

Does that mean the mass Earth is not moving at .8c in comparison to some stars? Or how about in comparison to light reflected away from earth?
 
What law is that? I have never read that or heard anything like that.
 
299,792,458 m/s - Speed of light (.8 = 239,833.966 km/s) Speed of light info

149,600,000 km - Earth's orbit away from sun. Orbit info

Therefore circumference of orbit = (pi(d)) 3.14*299,200,000 = ~939,488,000

therefore if the Earth were traveling at 8/10 the speed of light the Earth would revolve around the sun once every 3917 seconds or ~every 65 minutes... so no the Earth is NOT traveling at 8/10 the speed of light.
 
Last edited:
The Earth is certainly not traveling with respect to the sun at 8/10 c. Did anyone say it was?

Relativity tells us (as FZ+ said) that no massive object can travel at speed c with respect to any inertial frame, and thus with respect to any other massive object.

Of course, I have no idea as to Clausius2's original point, as he has things moving at (or greater than?) light speed and sound traveling in space.
 
omin said:
Does that mean the mass Earth is not moving at .8c in comparison to some stars?

some stars includes our own, so i used that as a provable refernece, or am I just not understanding what he meant? And if c is the S.o.L. Why would it change from what you were measuring it with respect to? wheter you judged it from our sun, orhter stars, Mars, or even comets?
 
  • #10
299,792,458 m/s - Speed of light (.8 = 239,833.966 km/s)

149,600,000 km - Earth's orbit away from sun.

Therefore circumference of orbit = (pi(d)) 3.14*299,200,000 = ~939,488,000

just for fun. the speed of the Earth in m/s (in reference to the orbit around our sun)..

there are 31,536,000 seconds in a year (using a 365 day year)(and not including the 1/4 of a day each year) if the orbit of the Earth is app. 939,488,000 KM and the Earth makes that trip in exactly 1 year, the Earth travels at ~ 29.790 KM/s or 29,790 m/s which is app. 99/1000000 the speed of light or, .000099369

And yes this accounts for the elliptical shape of the Earths orbit.. not circular.. but remember that's using the other assumptions
 
Last edited:
  • #11
omin said:
Does that mean the mass Earth is not moving at .8c in comparison to some stars? Or how about in comparison to light reflected away from earth?

.8 c?, certainly. c?, never!
 
  • #12
LURCH said:
.8 c?, certainly. c?, never!
totally lost me on that response?
 
  • #13
In response to the question whether Earth is moving at .8c relative to "some stars", I am saying that it certainly is. It is a near certainty that there is some stars somewhere in universe traveling at that velocity relative to earth.

However, FZ+ did not say that the laws of relativity prohibit Earth from traveling at .8c, but only that it cannot travel at c.
 
  • #14
Hubbles law tells us that distant galaxies are traveling away from us at very high velocities; velocities proportional to their distance from us.

There is an observable edge to the Universe - past which galaxies appear to be traveling away from us at greater than the speed of light, so their light never reaches us. Of course, they aren't really traveling at greater than c, just the expansion of space means that distant 'stationary' galaxies are all traveling further apart as the space between them expands - as do dots on a balloon as you inflate the balloon.

Is this what Omin is referring to perhaps when he talks about stars traveling at very high speeds?

Just a thought... :smile:
 
  • #15
Clausius2 said:
Some day I was driving my spaceship that can go as faster as light velocity. (in year 2175 all of us believe Einstein was wrong).

Well, make something up then - because standard theory won't cover it.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Achieving the speed of light at the end of a whip
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
Graduate Is light speed limit an artifact of the math of measurement
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Undergrad Do Lights Move at the Same Speed?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Graduate Can Negative Mass at near Speed of Light go Back in Time?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Undergrad Conventionality of the One-Way Speed of Light
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Undergrad Einstein on his discovery of the speed of light
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
Graduate Speed of light in unusual materials
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
Undergrad Has anyone measured the speed of light in one direction?
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
7K
High School Why is it impossible to go faster than the speed of light?
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Undergrad The Einstein Clock aka Light Clock
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K