Speed of Light: Has It Always Been Constant?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jamie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the question of whether the speed of light has always been constant, particularly in the context of the inflationary model of the universe. Participants explore various hypotheses regarding the potential variability of the speed of light over time and its implications for cosmology and fundamental physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the speed of light may have changed during the early universe, potentially accelerating during inflation and possibly slowing down now.
  • Others argue that evidence suggests the speed of light has not varied significantly over time, citing observational consequences related to fundamental constants.
  • A participant expresses a hypothesis that if the speed of light had changed, it could imply a smaller size of the universe than currently calculated, which might address issues related to mass/energy discrepancies.
  • One contribution emphasizes that while the speed of light is constant in space-time, it does not necessarily mean it has been constant through space over time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views remain regarding the constancy of the speed of light and its implications for cosmological models.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on observational evidence, the complexity of the concepts discussed, and the unresolved nature of the implications of varying speed of light on cosmological models.

jamie
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
I have to ask this question on this forum because i was shot down in flames when i bought the subject up in a physics discussion at uni.
has the speed of light always been c?
did it rapidly accelerate in line with the inflationary model of the universe or start instantaneously at c, and could it be possible that it is slowing down at the same rate the expanding universe is slowing down.
I am going to throw the ball in the court of you clever ladies and gents because, I will confess, It may help me with a particular topic assighed to me by my tutor.
many thanks
jamie
 
Science news on Phys.org
Its an interesting question and evidence is thin, but suggests it hasn't changed much (if at all). Remember, with telescopes we can see back in time and a different speed of light would cause very different looking galaxies, stars, etc.
 
Thanks for your prompt reply Russ.
This idea really came to me when i read the problem regarding the lack of mass/energy in the universe. now my idea( i won't call it a theory) goes on to sugest that if the speed of light had accelerated and is deaccelerating now then the size of the universe would be smaller than we have calculated. now this would help to solve partly the above mentioned problem.
Now believe me i am not trying to flaw relativity but i am wondering whether, just as quantum mechanics and relativity are very good tools for predicting most of physics except singularities, they fail at the begin of time.
do you think i should follow this line of thought or you my limited talents be better employed elsewhere.
any guidance would be greatly appreciated
many thanks again
jamie
 
jamie said:
I have to ask this question on this forum because i was shot down in flames when i bought the subject up in a physics discussion at uni.
has the speed of light always been c?

The speed of light is constant in space-time. It is reasonable to consider the possibility that as the universe increases through time that motion through space slows. While the speed of light in space-time is constant, as the theory goes, there is no requirement that the speed of light through space has been constant.
 
There is a lot of evidence to suggest that c has not varied significantly over time, at least not since a very long time ago. There would be a number of observational consquences, notably the nuclear fine structure constant, which have not been demonstrated. While a bit technical this paper gives a good overview

http://horology.jpl.nasa.gov/papers/alpha95.pdf

For a dissenting opinion, try

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/constants_nature_changing.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
7K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K