Register to reply

Stars and Time

by imageek
Tags: stars, time
Share this thread:
imageek
#1
May17-13, 03:30 AM
P: 4
From my understanding the image we see of a star isn't a reflection of how that star is now. The image we are seeing of those stars is millions, or billions of years old because it's taken that long for the light from the star to reach us. Is this correct?

But, lets say we could travel to one of these stars, one that still exists. If we could travel there in an hour, and looked back at the earth through a powerful telescope what would we see? Would we see the past on earth?

Would it be true that further we travel back from the earth, the more of the past we would see because it's taking longer and longer for the present light from earth to reach that point in space where we would theoretically be looking from?
Phys.Org News Partner Astronomy news on Phys.org
What lit up the universe?
Eta Carinae: Our Neighboring Superstars
Best view yet of merging galaxies in distant universe
HallsofIvy
#2
May17-13, 04:04 AM
Math
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 39,533
Yes, all of those things are true. Of course, you could only do that, look into the earth's past, if you could travel faster than the light which is theoretically impossible.
Chronos
#3
May17-13, 04:07 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Chronos's Avatar
P: 9,442
There is a causal barrier that prevents us from seeing distant objects as they 'currently' appear due to the finite speed of light. If you could somehow magically travel to alpha centauri in one hour, you would see earth as it was about 4 years ago. Needless to say, that would invoke a variety of paradoxes.

imageek
#4
May17-13, 05:42 AM
P: 4
Stars and Time

Very interesting. Thank you for the replies.
tiny-tim
#5
May17-13, 06:40 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
tiny-tim's Avatar
P: 26,148
hi imageek! welcome to pf!

if there was a mirror near a star that was a million light years away,

there would be no problem whatever seeing the earth as it was two million years ago!

(well, apart from all the obvious problems, of course)
imageek
#6
May17-13, 06:54 AM
P: 4
... getting the mirror that far lol!

Has there been any attempt to put a mirror into space for this purpose? Or anything similar?
tiny-tim
#7
May17-13, 07:03 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
tiny-tim's Avatar
P: 26,148
well, i suppose the dinosaurs may have done it!
but we won't know unless you go out and start looking for it!
quick!

EDIT: ooh, wait a mo …

you may need to look in the infra-red …

assuming the dinosaurs didn't provide any means of slowing the mirror down, it could still be moving at nearly light-speed, and the reflection will therefore be highly red-shifted
imageek
#8
May17-13, 08:20 AM
P: 4
Quote Quote by tiny-tim View Post
well, i suppose the dinosaurs may have done it!
but we won't know unless you go out and start looking for it!
quick!

EDIT: ooh, wait a mo …

you may need to look in the infra-red …

assuming the dinosaurs didn't provide any means of slowing the mirror down, it could still be moving at nearly light-speed, and the reflection will therefore be highly red-shifted
I love your answers tiny-tim :p I just realised how stupid my last question was.
solar71
#9
Jul14-13, 03:09 AM
P: 30
So if we put a huge mirror on mars we could look at it and see ourselves 16 minutes in the past?
Oh my god I want to do that and start betting on horse races. Lol. Oh wait. Hahaha.
tiny-tim
#10
Jul14-13, 03:16 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
tiny-tim's Avatar
P: 26,148
Quote Quote by solar71 View Post
Lol. Oh wait. Hahaha.
he he

solar71, you'll make more money if you're running the betting-shop!
solar71
#11
Jul14-13, 12:52 PM
P: 30
Lol so true so true.

But still wouldn't it be cool to see ourselves in the past?
To observe ones self in the past would be very enlightening.
Not the mention the perspective gained.
Gerinski
#12
Jul16-13, 08:53 AM
P: 128
And if you travel away from the Earth, you would see the Earth in 'slow-motion', the faster you go the slower it would appear, until when you reach the speed of light it would appear forever frozen. Only if you could travel faster than light would the Earth start to appear to 'go backwards' towards the past.
Now, that would be looking to your back towards the Earth. Looking in front of you, in the direction of your motion it would be the opposite, things would appear sped-up in fast-forward motion, the faster you go the faster the would appear to happen. Now, when you reached the speed of light, how would you see the objects in front of you? infinitely sped-up?
collinsmark
#13
Jul24-13, 09:48 PM
HW Helper
PF Gold
collinsmark's Avatar
P: 1,953
Quote Quote by imageek View Post

Has there been any attempt to put a mirror into space for this purpose? Or anything similar?
As a matter of fact there has! And a successful attempt at that.

During the Apollo space program reflectors were set on the moon as part of the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment. But one can only "see" about 2 ½ seconds into the Earth's past. And one can only see very bright and directed sources like pulsed lasers from Earth. [Edit: and you'll need a really big Earth based telescope too, to "see" the reflection.] But hey, it's better than nothin'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_L...ing_experiment

The main purpose of the reflectors and experiment was to measure the distance between the moon and Earth with great precision.

But when you think about it, it's really the same thing being discussed here.
ALICE: Ready the laser, Bob.
BOB: Roger that, Alice.
ALICE: Three, two, one, fire!

[2 ½ seconds later.]

BOB: Hey Alice, look; somebody from Earth fired a laser at the moon two and a half seconds ago.
ALICE: Huh. Imagine that.
Quote Quote by solar71 View Post
So if we put a huge mirror on mars we could look at it and see ourselves 16 minutes in the past?
It would vary from around 8 minutes to around 40 minutes depending on Earth's and Mars' orbital positions.
Jano L.
#14
Jul25-13, 03:27 AM
PF Gold
P: 1,165
From my understanding the image we see of a star isn't a reflection of how that star is now. The image we are seeing of those stars is millions, or billions of years old because it's taken that long for the light from the star to reach us. Is this correct?
Yes, this is how we think of large distances and "now". What we see now not how things are now, but how they were in the past.

But, lets say we could travel to one of these stars, one that still exists. If we could travel there in an hour, and looked back at the earth through a powerful telescope what would we see? Would we see the past on earth?
Depends on whose hour it is. If it is hour of Earth's time, it is impossible to accelerate so fast according to special theory of relativity. But if we could transport by other means and the rest of the special theory is correct, looking back on Earth we would see past events.

If it one hour of traveler's time, it is theoretically possible according to special theory. The traveler will have to move close to speed of light. When he arrives at his destination and looks back at Earth, he will see how it was short time of the Earth time after he left, so nothing spectacular.
Gerinski
#15
Jul26-13, 07:58 AM
P: 128
Quote Quote by Gerinski View Post
And if you travel away from the Earth, you would see the Earth in 'slow-motion', the faster you go the slower it would appear, until when you reach the speed of light it would appear forever frozen. Only if you could travel faster than light would the Earth start to appear to 'go backwards' towards the past.
Now, that would be looking to your back towards the Earth. Looking in front of you, in the direction of your motion it would be the opposite, things would appear sped-up in fast-forward motion, the faster you go the faster they would appear to happen. Now, when you reached the speed of light, how would you see the objects in front of you? infinitely sped-up?(and if so what would 'infinitely sped-up' might mean in practice?
Could anyone reply to this one? TX
glappkaeft
#16
Jul26-13, 10:35 AM
P: 82
You can't reach the speed of light.
Gerinski
#17
Jul26-13, 10:43 AM
P: 128
I know that, but if it seems sensible to assume how would things look in the hypothetical case of travelling at the speed of light when looking to your back (I believe that they would appear frozen in time), why shouldn't be able to do the same exercise for looking at the direction of motion?
glappkaeft
#18
Jul26-13, 11:18 AM
P: 82
Since the situation is outside the scope of valid physics you get nonsence answers in both the forward and backward looking case.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Binary stars, time taken to collide Advanced Physics Homework 7
I have a problem where two stars are at a certain time r0 apart from Introductory Physics Homework 7
Do the positions of stars determine our position in time,or does our General Physics 8
Twins stars born at different time Astronomy & Astrophysics 1
Fusion of stars-time Astronomy & Astrophysics 1