JesseM
Science Advisor
- 8,519
- 17
Again, speed cannot be less than zero by the definition of speed itself, so what you're saying doesn't make sense. Speed is always measured in the context of some coordinate system--for example, if we're using a coordinate system where an object is at position x=5 meters at time t=1 second, and then at position x=15 meters at time t=2 seconds, we'd say its speed was 10 meters/second in that coordinate system. If you want to, you can define a coordinate system where a given light wave is at rest, meaning its coordinate position doesn't change over time (though the equations of relativity are only supposed to work in a special class of coordinate systems called 'inertial reference frames', and this wouldn't be one of them so you'd have to write the laws of physics differently in such a coordinate system, and normal rules of relativity like 'nothing moves faster than light' wouldn't apply), but in this coordinate system objects which aren't moving at the speed of light would be moving faster than the light wave, not slower.WillBlake said:The reason I bring up the speed of zero is because it is a "resting speed" simply by definition. If the speed of light was considered the "resting speed", then there would be reason to imagine a speed less than zero.