Velocity of light and it's frame of reference.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the speed of light (c) and its frame of reference, exploring implications of special relativity, particularly regarding how light behaves in different frames of motion and the relativity of simultaneity. Participants examine the conditions under which light travels and the effects of relative motion on observations of light's speed and position.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the frame of reference for the speed of light, suggesting that light emitted from a moving source might reach different distances at different times, potentially indicating a universal frame of reference.
  • Another participant asserts that the speed of light is constant across all frames, as stated in special relativity, and that both a stationary observer and a moving observer would measure light traveling at c.
  • A participant challenges the idea of light reaching the same point for both observers, asking how light can end up in the same location if it travels at c for both, given their relative motion.
  • Responses highlight that time dilation and length contraction occur differently for each observer, which allows light to behave consistently across frames.
  • Some participants reference the need for Lorentz transformations and Einstein's thought experiments to understand the relativity of simultaneity and how light signals can be reconciled in different frames.
  • One participant elaborates on the counterintuitive aspects of relativity, including the failure of classical velocity addition and the relativity of time and distance, emphasizing the fundamental nature of the speed of light.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the implications of the speed of light and its constancy across different frames. While some accept the principles of special relativity, others raise questions about the interpretations and consequences of these principles, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various concepts such as time dilation, length contraction, and the Lorentz transformations, but the discussion does not resolve the complexities or assumptions underlying these concepts. The implications of simultaneity and the behavior of light in different frames are also noted as areas of ongoing exploration.

MedianPlebeian
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
If light has a maximum speed of c, what frame of reference is that speed determined from?

For example, if you were to turn on a light bulb moving at a constant rate and measured when the light in every direction got to one light year away from it's source, wouldn't some of it reach that distance more quickly than the light moving in the opposite direction and wouldn't it be appropriately redshifted? If so, couldn't you use that data to determine a universal frame of reference?

It's an obvious question so I'm sure I'm wrong about something. I'd be obliged if someone could explain it to me. :biggrin:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The speed c is the same no matter what frame you use. This is assumption #1 in special relativity. If I'm sitting here with a light bulb, and you run past me very fast, and I turn the light bulb on, we both measure the light from this light bulb to be traveling at c.
 
Matterwave said:
The speed c is the same no matter what frame you use. This is assumption #1 in special relativity. If I'm sitting here with a light bulb, and you run past me very fast, and I turn the light bulb on, we both measure the light from this light bulb to be traveling at c.

Okay, but if that's the case, how does light end up in the same place for both of us? If I'm running past you and light is still traveling away from both of us at c, shouldn't it end up in different places?
 
The time is flowing differently for you and the length for you is contracted. This causes the light to move exactly as needed.
 
haael said:
The time is flowing differently for you and the length for you is contracted. This causes the light to move exactly as needed.

Okay, but what about the light that's moving in the other direction? If time is moving more slowly for me, doesn't that mean that the light moving in the opposite direction also has less time to move and ends up at a different point in space than for the "stationary" observer?
 
MedianPlebeian said:
Okay, but what about the light that's moving in the other direction? If time is moving more slowly for me, doesn't that mean that the light moving in the opposite direction also has less time to move and ends up at a different point in space than for the "stationary" observer?

At some point you'll have to try drawing a space-time diagram or playing with the formulas that relate one observers notion of position in space and time to another's; these are called the "lorentz transforms" and google will find many references.

But before you do that, you should google for "einstein simultaneity train" to find Einstein's classic thought experiment on the relativity of simultaneity; that explains how light signals traveling in opposite directions can be reconciled.
 
Nugatory said:
At some point you'll have to try drawing a space-time diagram or playing with the formulas that relate one observers notion of position in space and time to another's; these are called the "lorentz transforms" and google will find many references.

But before you do that, you should google for "einstein simultaneity train" to find Einstein's classic thought experiment on the relativity of simultaneity; that explains how light signals traveling in opposite directions can be reconciled.

Will do. Cheers!
 
MedianPlebeian said:
Okay, but what about the light that's moving in the other direction? If time is moving more slowly for me, doesn't that mean that the light moving in the opposite direction also has less time to move and ends up at a different point in space than for the "stationary" observer?
As Nugatory mentioned, you are now running into the third counterintuitive feature of relativity theory, that simultaneity is relative. Einstein's train thought experiment addresses this seemingly paradoxical aspect of relativity.The first counterintuitive feature is that the speed of light is the same to all observers. Suppose I'm sitting on the hood of a moving car, idly tossing rocks forward. You're watching this while standing still on the ground. If the car is going 30 mph and I'm throwing those rocks at 30 mph relative to me, you will see those rocks as moving at 60 mph because 30 mph + 30 mph = 60 mph. If I shine a flashlight instead of throwing rocks, you would expect those photons to be coming at you at c+30 mph. That's not how it works. This is what makes the constant speed of light so counterintuitive.

One consequence of relativity theory is that our naive velocity addition rules aren't right. This applies not only to beams of photons but to everything. Going back to the tossing pebbles situation, the velocity of those rocks is not quite 60 mph. It is however so close to 60 mph that the error is immeasurably small.

The second counterintuitive feature is that time and distance are relative. Again, this doesn't make a bit of sense from the perspective of our everyday world. It's the passage of time and the distance between objects that are the same to all observers in our everyday world. You have to surrender your grip on those everyday concepts to understand relativity theory.

As already mentioned, the third counterintuitive feature is relativity of simultaneity. The constancy of c, the velocity addition rules, the Lorentz transformations that describe how space and time are related, and the simultaneity of relativity go hand in hand. The constancy of c dictates that all of those other features must follow.

The two way (round trip) constancy of the speed of light is a physically observed fact. Some physicists from Einstein's time were working on how to explain this fundamental fact away. Einstein's brilliance was in taking this observed fact as being fundamental rather than explaining it away.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Energy and reference frames
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
6K
Undergrad Time dilation and the human body
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
High School How to measure time in reference frame with clock?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Undergrad What if one is in 1905 and debating foundational fundamentals?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
High School A difficulty with the equivalence of all inertial reference frames
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
High School Perception of Velocity in Special Relativity
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
Undergrad Is an accelerating frame the same as an inertial frame at a point?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
High School Confusion over relative velocities and reference frames
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School Einstein thought experiment confusion: “light clock in a moving frame”
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Galilean relativity in terms of homogeneity
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K