Target Distance and Light Travel: The Impact on Spatial Position

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cfrogue
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of light as it travels towards a target located at a distance d, particularly considering the motion of the Earth and the target. Participants explore the implications of relative motion, the frame of reference, and the constancy of the speed of light in different contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether a target remains at the same spatial position as light travels towards it, particularly when considering the Earth's motion.
  • Others argue that the target's motion is dependent on its frame of reference, stating that if the target is stationary relative to the Earth's surface, it shares the same motion as the Earth.
  • A few participants suggest that the question may imply a misunderstanding of how the speed of light relates to the motion of the observer and the target.
  • Some contributions highlight that the speed of light is constant in all inertial frames and does not depend on the motion of the light source.
  • There are discussions about whether the target will move away from the light beam due to the Earth's orbital motion, with varying interpretations of how this affects the time it takes for light to reach the target.
  • One participant notes that the speed of the target relative to the light source is zero if both are fixed to the Earth, despite the target's motion relative to an external reference point.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between the motion of the target, the speed of light, and the frame of reference. There is no consensus on the implications of these factors, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include assumptions about the frame of reference, the relevance of the Earth's motion, and the ambiguity surrounding the term "motion" as it pertains to acceleration versus constant velocity.

  • #61
cfrogue said:

*I* (Ie, the laws of physics) claim that it doesn't exist and experiments prove it.

How do you prove something does not exist?

May I see the proof?
Yes, please do. Stop asking and look at what has been provided for you. It isn't like I'm going to type a 10,000 word essay on Relativity into the forum.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
cfrogue said:
Well, you line up the target, the Earth is moving with a rotation and then in its orbit around the sun.

Then the milky way moves.

How do you know where the target will be when the light reaches it?

Are you assuming the target is at absolute rest?
No, I'm a skilled shot and understand the concept of pulling lead on a moving target.
 
  • #63
russ_watters said:
Yes, please do. Stop asking and look at what has been provided for you. It isn't like I'm going to type a 10,000 word essay on Relativity into the forum.

No, I know what a math proof is and you have not provided it.
 
  • #64
...better yet, since your belief is that if a universal reference frame existed it would be undetectable (ie, have no bearing on our observations/experiments), ask yourself why this conversation even matters. In terms of the way the laws of physics work, there is no difference between "undetectable" and "doesn't exist". So why bother even arguing about it?
 
  • #65
russ_watters said:
No, I'm a skilled shot and understand the concept of pulling lead on a moving target.

LOL, good one.
 
  • #66
cfrogue said:
No, I know what a math proof is and you have not provided it.
Math proof of what? I don't think even you know what you are asking!
 
  • #67
cfrogue said:
LOL, good one.
That wasn't a joke. Perhaps this is a game to you, but it isn't to us.
 
  • #68
We're done here. It has come down to you simply wanting to believe something for which you accept there is no evidence, which is just plain irrational. I'm not sure it is possible for us to help you get past that, but if you really want to, you're going to have to put some effort into it. As I said before, there is a sticky on the top of the forum about the experimental basis of Relativity. In it, there is a link to a list of experiments. Read the link and come back with specific questions about specific things you don't understand. But we're not going to keep playing this game of yours.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Why does laser beam hit the same target when fired?
  • · Replies 90 ·
4
Replies
90
Views
4K
Undergrad One way speed of light
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
618
High School Traveling through space at zero km/s
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
Undergrad Does Light Travel the Shortest Path in Curved Space-Time Around a Neutron Star?
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
5K
Undergrad Effects of time dilation for near-speed-of-light travel
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
12K
High School Does Force Travel Faster Than Light?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Undergrad Understanding Spacetime simultaneity in twin paradox scenarios
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
Undergrad Is the concept of a one-way speed of light meaningful and measurable?
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
Undergrad Does light escape the Universe?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Conflict Between Time Dilation and Red/Blue Shift?
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K