Archived Is a 'Light-Boom' Possible at the Speed of Light?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the hypothetical concept of a "light-boom," similar to a sonic boom, generated by a spaceship traveling at the speed of light with a flashlight attached. It explores the idea of using this effect as a weapon against extraterrestrial life, speculating on the potential damage caused by concentrated light over time. However, the consensus is that this is not possible due to the principles of relativity, specifically that the speed of light remains constant for all observers, negating the possibility of light buildup. Time dilation is also mentioned as a factor that complicates this scenario. The concept of Cherenkov radiation is briefly referenced as a potentially comparable phenomenon, but it does not equate to a "light-boom."
matthewfullhart
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
ok, so I'm sitting in class one day, and my physics teacher is talking about light... and since we had just finished up a section on sound, I was wondering whether there is such an effect as a "light-boom"

that is to say, if we were to have a spaceship that could go exactly at the speed of light, and we attached a flashlight to the front of the ship, could we not cause the buildup of light rays much the same as we can with sound and airplanes? if so, couldn't we make a gigantic weapon with this? let's say that there's life on a planet near alpha centauri, and we go to war with them... couldn't we just send out a ship with a big flashlight on the front, cause the buildup of light particles over the span of 4.3 years, and then decelerate just before hitting the planet? 4.3 years of light would definitely do some amount of damage to their planet, even if it's just blinding everyone on the surface...

I asked my teacher this, and he said something to the effect of "no, because of time dialation." I realize his point, but that makes me wonder how the red shift works, if this doesn't...

sorry if I confused anyone, and if anyone knows why this can/can't occur, could you please do so? it's been bugging me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
matthewfullhart said:
ok, so I'm sitting in class one day, and my physics teacher is talking about light... and since we had just finished up a section on sound, I was wondering whether there is such an effect as a "light-boom"

that is to say, if we were to have a spaceship that could go exactly at the speed of light, and we attached a flashlight to the front of the ship, could we not cause the buildup of light rays much the same as we can with sound and airplanes? if so, couldn't we make a gigantic weapon with this? let's say that there's life on a planet near alpha centauri, and we go to war with them... couldn't we just send out a ship with a big flashlight on the front, cause the buildup of light particles over the span of 4.3 years, and then decelerate just before hitting the planet? 4.3 years of light would definitely do some amount of damage to their planet, even if it's just blinding everyone on the surface...

I asked my teacher this, and he said something to the effect of "no, because of time dialation." I realize his point, but that makes me wonder how the red shift works, if this doesn't...

sorry if I confused anyone, and if anyone knows why this can/can't occur, could you please do so? it's been bugging me.

The teacher is correct, this cannot happen. The speed of light is the same for all observers, so there is no possibility of a 'light-boom'.

This concept is explained here: http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_weird_logic.htm

It also mentions time dilation, since that is how both observers measure the speed to be the same.
 
What about cerenkov radiation? Isn't that somewhat comparable to a "light boom" ?
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Would We See the Same Light After Traveling Back to Earth Faster Than Light?
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Standing light waves if the one-way speed of light were not constant?
Replies
36
Views
2K
I Speed of information in a medium
Replies
38
Views
4K
B Why is it impossible to go faster than the speed of light?
Replies
21
Views
3K
B Let me ask a thing about the Speed of Light
Replies
6
Views
1K
Spaceship voyage at close to light speeds
Replies
11
Views
2K
I For a relativistic spaceship, what is the most recent news the ship gets from Earth?
Replies
6
Views
1K
I Is the concept of a one-way speed of light meaningful and measurable?
Replies
25
Views
4K
Intensity of Stars and the Inverse Square Law Problem
Replies
10
Views
3K
I One-Way Speed of Light: Is it Possible?
2
Replies
53
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top