Cyclopsicle said:what if two objects are moving towards each other at more than half c, in reference to a body at rest, wouldn't the objects be traveling more than the speed of light in reference to each other?
HallsofIvy said:... if you observe two objects moving directly toward you ...
Most of the answers were probably given quite recently on this forum, for example here:Cyclopsicle said:I'm confused on how it would be impossible to be faster then light, is it your acceleration? or is it how fast you are going in comparison to some other frame of reference (I do see that phrase being thrown around here)? Because if 2 objects are moving towards each other at more than half the speed of light, doesn't it mean that in respect to each other it is moving faster then c?
Actually, in order not to worry about angles, I was thinking of the situation in which "you" are standing directly between two objects, each moving toward "you" with speed, relative to "you", of .6c.phinds said:Halls clearly meant towards EACH OTHER
Yes, according to FICTION like Red Dwarf that is exactly what happens. Different fiction authors may do it differently.EBENEZR said:If, for whatever reason, you traveled faster than the speed of light relative to another individual, would you not merely experience situations before the other individual has had a chance to catch up? Much like that early episode of Red Dwarf, you wouldn't be traveling back in time, but in fact in front of other people's time?
Time: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=643834EBENEZR said:[..] For that matter, does the fact light is limited to a certain velocity, time travels at a particular velocity also? Time is not in fact instantaneous, rather time travels at ~299x10^6m/s?
The problem is that you are effectively saying "If relativity we not true, what would relativity say about this situation?" If relativity is not true (if you CAN travel faster than light), then relativity wouldn't say anything about! You have to fall back to Newtonian physics which says that it is possible to travel faster than light but nothing can travel back in time.EBENEZR said:If, for whatever reason, you traveled faster than the speed of light relative to another individual
, would you not merely experience situations before the other individual has had a chance to catch up? Much like that early episode of Red Dwarf, you wouldn't be traveling back in time, but in fact in front of other people's time?
For that matter, does the fact light is limited to a certain velocity, time travels at a particular velocity also? Time is not in fact instantaneous, rather time travels at ~299x10^6m/s?
The concept of "nothing" being faster than light is actually a scientific misconception. In reality, the speed of light is considered to be the universal speed limit and cannot be exceeded by any object or phenomenon, including "nothing".
The speed of light is approximately 299,792,458 meters per second in a vacuum. It is measured using various methods, such as timing the travel of light pulses or observing the behavior of particles at high energies.
The speed of light plays a crucial role in many fundamental theories and principles in physics. It is a constant that is used to define the relationship between space and time, and it is a key component in understanding the behavior of particles and energy.
As of current scientific understanding, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. While there are some theories and experiments that suggest the existence of particles or phenomena that can travel faster than light, none have been proven to be true.
The speed of light is a fundamental factor in the way we perceive the universe. Due to its finite speed, we are only able to observe objects and events that are within a certain distance from us, as anything further would require a longer time for light to reach us. This limitation affects our understanding of the universe and shapes our theories and models of how it works.