Light Speed vs Vision: Is Optic Velocity Greater Than 300000km/s?

  • Thread starter Thread starter A_I_
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Optic Velocity
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the speed of light, which is approximately 300,000 km/s, and the perception of distant stars. It clarifies that when observing stars, we see light that was emitted long ago, meaning we view them as they were in the past, not instantaneously. The idea that vision could be faster than light is debunked; vision relies on light entering the eye and being processed by the brain. The analogy of a thrown ball illustrates that we do not "see" light until it impacts our retina. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding light propagation and perception.
A_I_
Messages
137
Reaction score
0
there's a question which is confusing me a little bit;
it is known and verified that the speed of light is about 300000km/s
well, as we look through the stars
which are very distant from us in thousands light-years
we notice that we can view them spontaneously.
thus, it doesn't take much time even though the distant is largly very great.

does this imply that our vision's velocity is greater than the speed of light,
or is it just an explanation for a light propagation like diffraction and diffusion, etc...?

Regards,
Joe
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
A_I_ said:
there's a question which is confusing me a little bit;
it is known and verified that the speed of light is about 300000km/s
well, as we look through the stars
which are very distant from us in thousands light-years
we notice that we can view them spontaneously.

Actually, we view them as they were in the past. We see a star that's ten light years away as it was ten years ago.
 
A_I_ said:
there's a question which is confusing me a little bit;
it is known and verified that the speed of light is about 300000km/s
well, as we look through the stars
which are very distant from us in thousands light-years
we notice that we can view them spontaneously.
thus, it doesn't take much time even though the distant is largly very great.

does this imply that our vision's velocity is greater than the speed of light,
or is it just an explanation for a light propagation like diffraction and diffusion, etc...?

Regards,
Joe

Seems you have misconceptions on how light works. When you look at the stars you are seeing light that was emitted long ago. You can not "see" something until the light from that object enters your eye and is processed by your brain. If today a star 100 light years away blew up, or disappeared for some reason, we would not see it happen for 100 years.

The statement about your "visions velocity" is incorrect. Your vision is triggered by light entering your eye from some source. Imagine a ball being thrown in your direction. Your eyes are closed so you don't see it. The ball next hits you in the chest and you "feel" it. The same thing happens with light. The light is coming at you just like the ball but you never really "see" it, but instead your eye "feels" the impacts of photons hitting the retnia and the brain creates an image from the information.
 
thanks for clarifying the subject for me,
i was hesistating and i knew there was a mistake in my thoughts.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top