Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

An assumption about the speed of light !I need help.

  1. Apr 7, 2008 #1
    Imagine that a man and two points m,n are collinear and the man's eye direction is in the direction of the two points i.e man-----y meters-----m-----------------------x meters--------------------------------------n
    (imagine the man as a point)
    if the man moves h distance perpendicular to the straight line in an instant such that h tends to zero.and when he moved he made an angle alpha with point m and angle gamma with point n.
    and the distance between the man and point m =y meters and the distance between point m and point n =x meters.
    if x=299999999y (such that c is the speed of light) ,and h nearly equal zero
    therefore the rate of change of angle alpha/rate of change of angle gamma=c
    (I have its proof but just try it)
    therefore new definition of the speed of light........
    c=the rate of change of angle alpha/rate of change of angle gamma

    make it an inequality such that if x>299999999y and h nearly equal zero
    therefore c<the rate of change of angle alpha/rate of change of angle gamma

    CAN ANYONE GET A RESULT FROM THAT??????!!!!!!!!!

    so i have the proof but you can easily get it also there is no facility here for drawing and explanation...

    am I right??????????
    the problem is all of that is correct due to me when only h nearly equal zero compared to other distances...
    when I assumed h greater than zero compared to the two distances i.e h=10 instead of h=10^-50..
    I got invalid and confusing results try it and tell me why is that??.............
    thanks for consideration....
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2008
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 7, 2008 #2

    Doc Al

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Since x and y are both distances, 299999999 (?) is just a dimensionless number. You could just as well set it equal to 42.

    Can't say I understand what you're getting at or why you think this has anything to do with the speed of light.
     
  4. Apr 7, 2008 #3
    if an electron moved 10^-50(assume that it moved in straight line in that distance) in time interval t m from a position where the electron and the center of the nucleus and any other point were collinear and the distance between the electron and the nucleus =10^-9 m
    and the distance between the nucleus and the other point =29.999999999cm and the electron made an angle alpha with the nucleus after it moved and made angle gamma with the other point therefore the change happened in angle alpha in the instant the electron moved 10^-50m /that happened in same conditions in angle gamma=3*10^8 which is the speed of light so that if you are there instead of the electron you just can't recognize regularly the changes happened in of the two objects if the ratio exceeded the speed of light
    (in our daily movements you recognize anything you recognize only if that ratio is less than the speed of light so that you recognize the change of your position with two objects on a straight line on the same direction from the observer if the ratio between you and the first object and the first object and the second object=1/299999999 )so that if you are standing in front of something 1 meter away and another object on the same straight line direction 3*10^8 meter away then then you can't recognize the farther object it appears as it is i.e you can't know which you or the object are moving except from an other object so what if you can't recognize the other object also!!!!!!!!! so i assume that the speed of light is just a ratio between change in those angles at the certain ratio bet distances also it may there are many unobserved phenomenas due to that ratio

    Don't strongly violate me as i am a high school newbie and i just freely think also I can't exactly get my idea.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2008
  5. Apr 7, 2008 #4

    Doc Al

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Again, I fail to see what this ratio of angles has to to with the speed of light. True, you chose distances such that their ratio happens to equal the number 3*10^8. So what?
     
  6. Apr 7, 2008 #5
    Using your small angle approximation, the ratio of the rates of change of the two angles is the same as the ratio of the two lengths, Man to m / Man to n. You have set this ratio to 2999999999:1 (y = 2999999999x + 1) so it doesn't define the speed of light. It just tells us that you already know the speed of light. The +1 I put in the equation is there because the distance (man to n) is (man to m) + (m to n). (m to n) seems to me to be about 1 metre.
     
  7. Apr 8, 2008 #6
    I am not defining the speed of light but i just tell that with that distances ration and the nearly equal zero distance you moved gives me an observation that if the ration between distances exceed 3*10^8 then the rate of change of angles will exceed 3*10^8(you observe rate of change of angle due to other angle)but if that exceed the rate of change will exceed so that it may be when you are sitting that something angle is changing very fast ass it is very near so you can't observe or something very far and changed also but you can't recognize .
    it is ratio between distances not 1 meter and 299999999 meters but it may be 1.7 angstrom and 5.1 cm .
    you can recognize your change in angles with other objects i think only if the rate of change of angle alpha/that of gamma<speed of light
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
  8. Apr 8, 2008 #7

    HallsofIvy

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    One more time, "rate of change of an angle" says nothing about the speed of light nor does it make sense to say that the rate of change of an angle is "faster than the speed of light" since the speed of light is a linear measurement.

    So far I have seen three posts by you, none of which make any sense at all. You wrote "Don't strongly violate me as i am a high school newbie and i just freely think also I can't exactly get my idea." Why should you expect to be able to write about the theory of relativity and then tell people they shouldn't criticize you because you are a highschool student? If by "thinking freely" you mean thing without knowing the facts, that's not "thinking" at all.
     
  9. Apr 8, 2008 #8
    that has no relation with relativity I think and also the ration doesn't tell the value of the speed of light but try to make your calculations when h is not nearly zero and try to make the ratio exceed 3*10^8 it didn't give me the same results.also noone has the right to stop someone from asking or thinking .
     
  10. Apr 10, 2008 #9
    My idea appeared as i got in another post that it is something like parallax but at some specified conditions ...it may be unuseful
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: An assumption about the speed of light !I need help.
Loading...