why does light travel so fast?
That's a better question. No one knows the answer, but one possibility is that the computational speed of the universe is limited (Wolfram), or even more simply, the universe may evolve in discrete finite time intervals.but why is it not instantanous because it is not actually matter so it does not have to overcome friction to move.
No matter how fast we live, the speed of light is allways the same. And you, the observer, will allways move with zero speed relative to youself, so it allways would seem that the light moves at the speed of light and you are at rest.Because we live so slow.
why does light travel so fast?
Because we live so slow.
I think it is about physics not philosophy and the solution is of the type of The_Duck's.This question is about philosophy, not physics.
but why is it not instantanous because it is not actually matter so it does not have to overcome friction to move.
Asking that "why light travels at c instead of another speed or instantaneously" is a philosophical question and nothing to do with physics. It is a universal constant. Like pi for example..I think it is about physics not philosophy and the solution is of the type of The_Duck's.
I have given a very crude version of what would be a physical argument. When you say the speed of light is so many m/s like any other physical measurement it is a comparison. You can make it into a comparison with e.g. the size of atomic structures and the times of atomic events. As light is more fundamental than the atom the most meaningful comparison is the other way round. It is asking why atoms have the size and frequencies they do, more exactly try an explain why the size is such that light can get back and forth between two adjacent atoms in the time it takes for x flips of a Cs nucleus or something like that, thousands of things like that. Physical questions.Asking that "why light travels at c instead of another speed or instantaneously" is a philosophical question and nothing to do with physics. It is a universal constant. Like pi for example...
Not sure what your point is here but yes that is mathematical, once we define pi as twice the circumference of the unit circle. The mathematics answers of is the answer to any 'why' question.Like pi for example..
If that's not philosophical, then I can ask you; why pi is 3,14... and not something else? Then is this mathematical?
Puzzling and contradictory IMHO.Pi is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter. It is 3,14... Asking "why it is 3,14... and not something else" is not a mathematical question. It is a philosophical question. There is no single living thing that can answer why pi is 3,14...
And this is the same case. Pi is a mathematical constant, c is a physical constant. Therefore, asking why speed of light is c is not physical question but philosophical.
Physics and mathematics (in fact any positive science) do not ask "why" questions.
I don't think it is contradictory and I don't think the mathematical proof is the answer to the why. "Why" has more deep meaning. Of course we know pi is 3,14... and not something else. But why it is? Can you answer? All you can say is that "Because for any circle circumference over diameter gives 3,14..". Then "Why for any circle circumference over diameter gives 3,14...?". You can ask these but you cannot find an answer. That's why there is a thing called philosophy :)Puzzling and contradictory IMHO.
It was mathematically proved that pi when defined as you have is that decimal. So it was a mathematical question answered. The mathematical proof is the answer to the why. In ordinary parlance - maybe you can argue deeply that you cannot give a logical sense to the word 'why' that applies here.
I don't think math and physics have completely different status. Physics derived from mathematics. Physics can be considered as applied math. (I think)Your 'therefore' is completely unwarranted since math and physics are of completely different status and nature - it is not like statements about physics carrying over to chemistry.
No, I never use "philosophical" as pointless or unworthy. I know the boundaries of philosophy and science, so I am not saying that "Do not discuss why does travel so fast! It is pointless." , I am saying "Quantum Physics forum is not the right place to discuss this kind of why questions". Because it is philosophy.At first your use of the word 'philosophical' suggested to me you were one of those scientists who used 'philosophical' as equivalent to 'pointless, unworthy of an adult's attention'. But when I saw 'positive science' I thought you might come from a very definite philosophical position. Unless you just copied the expression. In any case just one position.
Every constant in science has a meaning. But "why it has that meaning" is something else.Would you say the Boltzmann constant is just what it is, asking why it has that value is a philosophical question?
Yes, from "the human perspective" it is fast; 299,792,458 meters per second. But remember that meters and seconds are related to humans, living on the planet Earth.why does light travel so fast?
There is no friction in outer space, whether you are a spaceship or a light beam. If the speed of light was instantaneous, there would not be any time = crazy mess... where everything happens at once...but why is it not instantanous because it is not actually matter so it does not have to overcome friction to move.
Would you say the Boltzmann constant is just what it is, asking why it has that value is a philosophical question?
Well the Boltzmann constant comes in a bit everywhere at least in bulk matter theory. So it can have the appearance of a fundamental constant. But if you analyse it it is nothing but a property of water, its solid/liquid/gas states. If you can predict the energy of its melting and boiling you have it. So a property of atoms in the end. I suggest the speed of light is a property of atoms in the same kind of way.Every constant in science has a meaning. But "why it has that meaning" is something else.
No he went much further, and said "oh yeah, it just does, because of gravity". And we're still at that point now + a few unexplained constants. :PThe problem here is that some people are solving this by just saying " it just does" but imagine if Newton wondered "why did this apple fall?" and then just said " oh yeah, it just does" we have to to a crack at the question.
No, the problem is that we don't actually know WHY light travels so fast, only that it DOES. We can explain how light works to the best of our knowledge, but thats it. It's like the little kid that continually asks why when you explain something too them. Eventually, you HAVE to say "It just does" or "Thats just the way it works". Either because its far to complicated to explain, or because we just don't know.The problem here is that some people are solving this by just saying " it just does" but imagine if Newton wondered "why did this apple fall?" and then just said " oh yeah, it just does" we have to to a crack at the question.