- #1
mikelus
- 90
- 0
in theory only
I was wondering if their was a speed for light? I always thought of light as something that would change and
bend the rules. How ever if there's a black hole in our center of our universe Pulling the light in at a constant speed then
yes light would have a constant speed. I would think that light would travel as fast as it was turned on, meaning once
the star erupted into a star than that is the speed of the star in (their time, in ours) because we would witness it as fast
as the star erupted in our time since it traveled in their time to ours. This meaning that we are know more close than the next galaxy to the "center" of the universe. Since our time is no greater than the next galaxies. It's all the same. we witness the star erupting at the same rate it is burning or burning out. Say if we wanted to travel to the star and we took
off in our ship, by the time we got there the star could be burned out and we could have witnessed it on the way. say if
we traveled at the speed of light we could be there that much faster and would have seen it burn out that much faster.
But is it true to say it was burned out before or after the trip to the next galaxy? Is it fare to know that it was burned out
on such and such a date of our time according to our caculations. because what if the star wasn't burning out until we
went back in time to discover it, and we discovered it had actually had not been born yet. Say if we instead went into the future to see if it hadn't burned out yet. It's all these different perspectives that makes life so upredictable.
I was wondering if their was a speed for light? I always thought of light as something that would change and
bend the rules. How ever if there's a black hole in our center of our universe Pulling the light in at a constant speed then
yes light would have a constant speed. I would think that light would travel as fast as it was turned on, meaning once
the star erupted into a star than that is the speed of the star in (their time, in ours) because we would witness it as fast
as the star erupted in our time since it traveled in their time to ours. This meaning that we are know more close than the next galaxy to the "center" of the universe. Since our time is no greater than the next galaxies. It's all the same. we witness the star erupting at the same rate it is burning or burning out. Say if we wanted to travel to the star and we took
off in our ship, by the time we got there the star could be burned out and we could have witnessed it on the way. say if
we traveled at the speed of light we could be there that much faster and would have seen it burn out that much faster.
But is it true to say it was burned out before or after the trip to the next galaxy? Is it fare to know that it was burned out
on such and such a date of our time according to our caculations. because what if the star wasn't burning out until we
went back in time to discover it, and we discovered it had actually had not been born yet. Say if we instead went into the future to see if it hadn't burned out yet. It's all these different perspectives that makes life so upredictable.
Last edited:
