A square looks at light squared

In summary: I'm saying that there is a maximum speed limit in the universe, c, and that quantity is used in a variety of important ways in SR and other theories. It was my understanding that light itself simply happens to move at this velocity. Is that...wrong?
  • #1
tbco
1
0
Third thread same topic.
Non physicist asks question-why speed of light squared?
Answers
Its the derivitive that makes the equation work.
The speed of light is some kind of ultimate measuring device.
You are too stupid to understand.

I think the questioners are incorrectly phrasing what they actually want to know
We see the realtionship between Mass and Energy almost intuitively. What we don't see is
why light has anthing to do with it at all.( and don't answer-it doesnt,its the SPEED of light because saying light and the speed of light are not connected makes no sense) Some say it doesn't matter because the equation is so cool and valuable-who cares? Well, could it be that the next entire level of understanding of Physics could pivot on figuring out why these realtionships exist?
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #2
tbco said:
Third thread same topic.
Non physicist asks question-why speed of light squared?
Answers
Its the derivitive that makes the equation work.
The speed of light is some kind of ultimate measuring device.
You are too stupid to understand.

I think the questioners are incorrectly phrasing what they actually want to know
We see the realtionship between Mass and Energy almost intuitively. What we don't see is
why light has anthing to do with it at all.( and don't answer-it doesnt,its the SPEED of light because saying light and the speed of light are not connected makes no sense) Some say it doesn't matter because the equation is so cool and valuable-who cares? Well, could it be that the next entire level of understanding of Physics could pivot on figuring out why these realtionships exist?

This is utterly puzzling.

Please look at this FAQ entry:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=511175

You'll notice that the FULL relativistic equation has another term to it! In fact, for light itself, its energy is only the other term, ie. E= pc.

So where's the "square" there? How come people are not "obsessing" over the fact that there is no square of the speed of light here?

Sometime, I just don't understand where and how people form their ideas.

Zz.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
ZapperZ said:
Sometime, I just don't understand where and how people form their ideas.

Zz.

+1 on that
 
  • #4
tbco said:
Non physicist asks question-why speed of light squared?
What else could it possibly be? It has to have units of speed^2. It has to be composed entirely of universal constants. That makes it c^2.
 
  • #5
tbco said:
Third thread same topic.
Non physicist asks question-why speed of light squared?

It's just the way the math works out. You might as well ask why the Lorentz transformation is set up as it is. Both are the result of how the rules of the universe interact with each other. Nothing more, nothing less.

What we don't see is why light has anthing to do with it at all.( and don't answer-it doesnt,its the SPEED of light because saying light and the speed of light are not connected makes no sense)

I'm sorry to say, but light has nothing to do with it. Light happens to travel at the maximum possible velocity in the universe. That's it. The fact that there is a maximum speed limit, along with other ways physics works, results in mass and energy being related by c2.
 
  • #6
Drakkith said:
It's just the way the math works out. You might as well ask why the Lorentz transformation is set up as it is. Both are the result of how the rules of the universe interact with each other. Nothing more, nothing less.



I'm sorry to say, but light has nothing to do with it. Light happens to travel at the maximum possible velocity in the universe. That's it. The fact that there is a maximum speed limit, along with other ways physics works, results in mass and energy being related by c2.

OR everything - depending on how you look at it?
 
  • #7
sophiecentaur said:
OR everything - depending on how you look at it?

You must be looking at it differently than I am.
 
  • #8
Drakkith said:
You must be looking at it differently than I am.

I was looking at it from the point of SR. There is a strong link between velocity and mass and it involves the speed of light and light is an EM wave. You seem to be arguing against a very obvious association between those quantities. Or am I reading you wrong?
 
  • #9
sophiecentaur said:
I was looking at it from the point of SR. There is a strong link between velocity and mass and it involves the speed of light and light is an EM wave. You seem to be arguing against a very obvious association between those quantities. Or am I reading you wrong?

I'm saying that there is a maximum speed limit in the universe, c, and that quantity is used in a variety of important ways in SR and other theories. It was my understanding that light itself simply happens to move at this velocity. Is that clearer?
 
  • #10
sophiecentaur said:
I was looking at it from the point of SR. There is a strong link between velocity and mass and it involves the speed of light and light is an EM wave. You seem to be arguing against a very obvious association between those quantities. Or am I reading you wrong?

I think Drakkith's point, which I agree with, is that there is a universal speed limit that exists REGARDLESS of whether photons happen to be massless. The fact that they ARE massless means that they travel at that speed limit. We use the speed of light in the models really as a stand-in for the universal speed limit.

Uh ... I think I just said the same thing Drakkith just said.
 
  • #11
I don't feel particularly happy with using photons along with a theory like SR. That always leads to circular arguments about impossible characteristics for photons. SR, being non quantum, is more to do with fields and the rate at which 'disturbances' propagate. No surprise that this involves a speed limit of c. (No surprise, once Albert introduced the idea at least). The fact that 'light' is and was used in the arguments which lead to SR is a mere chance, based on our visible wavelength range. If we worked at LF radio frequencies, SR would still have been the conclusion but it is less likely that we would be as obsessed with trying to include photons in all our discussions.
Saying that light just happens to behave that way seems to lose the intimate connection between all the quantities. To my mind it is not just peripheral. The maths just yields the answers that the input physical ideas force it to.
 
  • #12
The OP hasn't been back.
 
  • #13
Vanadium 50 said:
The OP hasn't been back.

Yep. It's like dads with their son's radio controlled car. They take over. I'm sure the OP never expected the overkill response.
 

1. What is "A square looks at light squared" about?

"A square looks at light squared" is a scientific concept that explores how light behaves when it interacts with a square-shaped object. It delves into the principles of reflection, refraction, and diffraction to understand how light is affected by the shape and size of an object.

2. How is light squared different from regular light?

Light squared refers to the concept of light interacting with a square-shaped object. Regular light, on the other hand, is not limited to a specific shape and can interact with various objects in different ways. Light squared is a specific scenario that helps us understand the behavior of light in a controlled environment.

3. What is the significance of studying light squared?

Studying light squared allows us to gain a deeper understanding of the fundamental principles of light and its behavior. It also has practical applications in various fields such as optics, physics, and engineering. By studying light squared, we can develop new technologies and improve existing ones.

4. How does a square affect light?

A square can affect light in several ways, depending on its size and orientation. It can reflect, refract, or diffract light, which can change the direction, intensity, or wavelength of the light. A square can also create interference patterns when light passes through it, which can provide insights into the properties of light.

5. Can we observe light squared in real life?

Yes, we can observe light squared in real life. For example, when light passes through a window with a square-shaped frame, we can see the effects of diffraction and reflection. We can also see light squared in action through various optical devices such as prisms, lenses, and mirrors, which use the principles of light squared to manipulate and control light.

Similar threads

Why the speed of light squared?
    • Optics
Replies
6
Views
3K
I How different is a calcite crystal from a polarizer?
    • Optics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Explaining Squaring Numbers & Light to a 5-Year-Old
    • Optics
Replies
10
Views
6K
B Does light ever go from the eye to the image?
    • Optics
Replies
17
Views
1K
Does speed of light depend on the wavelength or frequency of it?
    • Optics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Why does the speed of light change in different media?
    • Optics
Replies
4
Views
2K
Speed of Light in Various Mediums
    • Optics
Replies
2
Views
1K
B Can the "creation" of space in the Universe affect the speed of light?
    • Cosmology
Replies
6
Views
459
On Rayleigh Scattering and UV Light Absorption
    • Optics
Replies
4
Views
7K
What makes a light source "brighter"?
    • Optics
Replies
7
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top