Why is the speed of light considered a constant in physics?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of the speed of light, exploring why it is considered a constant in physics. Participants delve into theoretical explanations, analogies involving massless particles, and the implications of special relativity, while addressing various aspects of light's propagation and its relationship with spacetime.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the speed of light is constant because photons are massless, questioning whether all massless particles travel at this speed.
  • Others mention gluons and hypothesized gravitons as additional examples of massless particles, prompting inquiries about their speeds.
  • A participant proposes that if a massless particle were not traveling at the speed of light, it would imply a frame of reference where the particle is at rest, leading to contradictions regarding its existence.
  • Another viewpoint emphasizes the lack of a preferred frame of reference, suggesting that the constancy of light speed is a symmetry inherent in physics, as derived from Maxwell's equations.
  • Some participants express confusion about how the speed of light can be the same for all observers, with references to experimental measurements supporting this claim.
  • There are discussions about the implications of length contraction and time dilation as factors that preserve the constancy of light speed across different frames of reference.
  • One participant argues that the constancy of light speed is a postulate of relativity, which may not be fully explained by the theory itself, but is accepted as a fundamental aspect of spacetime.
  • Concerns are raised about the analogy involving the Higgs field and its implications for understanding light speed, with some participants challenging the validity of this analogy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the explanations for the constancy of light speed. While some accept it as a fundamental postulate of physics, others raise questions and propose alternative interpretations, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of reconciling classical mechanics with special relativity, noting that traditional Newtonian assumptions may lead to confusion in understanding the nature of light speed. There are also references to the mathematical structure of Minkowski spacetime, which some argue underpins the constancy of light speed.

Avichal
Messages
294
Reaction score
0
Speed of light is constant because photon is massless. If this is wrong please correct me.
So is it that any massless particle will move at speed of light? Do we know any such particles?

There is this analogy that explains how particles get mass. Basically the higgs field gather around heavy particles and not around lighter particles. So when a photon moves there is no resistance from the higgs field and hence it moves fastest.
But considering this analogy if another particle moves towards a photon with velocity u, speed of light will increase.
What is wrong with this analogy?

Is there any explanation why speed of light remains constant or is it just another fact, another one of those things that we have to accept?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Gluons are also massless. Gravitons are hypothesized to be massless also.
 
A massless particle always travels at speed of light. This can be proved but i can't :(.
I see it this way: if you have a massless particle not traveling at the speed of light, there exists a frame of reference in which the particle is at rest, but because the rest mass is zero, it's energy would be zero and it does not exist. This is not a good reasoning but it should give you a good feeling about it.
 
The reason that the speed of light is constant is this: there is no preferred frame of reference. For all non accelerating observers physics is the same. This is a very beautifull and actually intuitive symmetry. If you know maxwell's equations of electromagnetism, you should conclude with the above symmetry that the speed of light is constant and the same for all observers.
 
So do gluons move at speed of light?
I don't understand how you can conclude that speed of light is same for all observers.
 
Avichal said:
So do gluons move at speed of light?
I don't understand how you can conclude that speed of light is same for all observers.

No one knows why the propagation speed of light in space is constant, or why it has the specific value of c. It would seem to depend on the structure of space, since permittivity (electric constant) and permeabliity, measured and defined values for properties of space(vacuum) determine c. Space cannot be 'nothing' if it has properties, can exhibit quantum fluctuations of virtual particles, and be deformed by the presence of large masses.

The perceived speed of light is constant because of length contraction and time dilation. These are complementary effects resulting from motion induced phenomena, that preserves a constant relation of space/time.
 
Is there any explanation why speed of light remains constant or is it just another fact, another one of those things that we have to accept?
It's another fact you have to accept. In fact, it goes deeper than physics. It's an axiom of geometry. This has nothing to do with massless particles. In a mathematical structure called Minkowski space or spacetime, there is a velocity which is constant for all observers. If you look at it geometrically, velocity is an angle between a world line of an observed particle and a world line of an observer. In Minkowski spacetime, there exists a special angle that is always constant for all world lines. In other words, there exist such straight line that is always at the same angle to all other lines sharing a point with it. With some imagination, you can assign a value 45 degrees to that angle. This may sound odd, but this is the axiom. A mathematical statement, which has nothing to do with physics yet.

Now for some reason the universe we live in has the Minkowski geometry. This is a physical falsifiable statement, an observational fact that has been tested and the tests turned out positive. There is a limit velocity in our universe, just like in Minkowski spacetime.

Now there is a certain kind of particles called photons, that travel at that speed. If they travel at that speed to one of the observers, then they have that speed relative to any observer. Photons are what light is made of, so we call it the speed of light, but that's a bit misleading. The limit velocity has nothing to do with light. It's a coincidence that light happens to travel at that speed.

Now some other laws of dynamics (which you have to believe as they are) state that if something travels at the speed of light, then it has zero rest mass.
 
Avichal said:
Is there any explanation why speed of light remains constant or is it just another fact, another one of those things that we have to accept?

From our Relativity FAQ (at the top of this forum):

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=534862
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Avichal said:
Speed of light is constant because photon is massless. If this is wrong please correct me.
So is it that any massless particle will move at speed of light? Do we know any such particles?

There is this analogy that explains how particles get mass. Basically the higgs field gather around heavy particles and not around lighter particles. So when a photon moves there is no resistance from the higgs field and hence it moves fastest.
But considering this analogy if another particle moves towards a photon with velocity u, speed of light will increase.
What is wrong with this analogy?

Is there any explanation why speed of light remains constant or is it just another fact, another one of those things that we have to accept?
At first you seem to refer to the second postulate: relativity theory simply postulates that light speed is a constant, as a law of physics. One explanation (the oldest) is that it is a property of space. More commonly it is held to be a property of spacetime.

But at the end you make a system transformation: you "jumped" to a different reference frame. There you used assumptions of classical relativity (Newtonian, also called "Galilean") that have been discarded with special relativity (SR). SR applies the first postulate to the speed of light: all laws are invariant with frame transformations (second postulate). Frame transformations have nothing to do with Higgs fields. But as you correctly remark, those two conditions (postulates) are contradictory according to classical mechanics. If you abandon classical mechanics then they are, as Einstein put it, "only apparently irreconcilable". - http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
The oldest explanation is that length contraction and time dilation assure invariance. A more popular explanation is that it is a property of spacetime. But again, being a postulate it is not explained by SR.

Part of the confusion may be caused by some textbooks that don't clearly distinguish between a velocity difference and a system transformation. For more, see older threads on similar topics, at the bottom of this page.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
harrylin said:
At first you seem to refer to the second postulate: relativity theory simply postulates that light speed is a constant, as a law of physics. [..]

But at the end you make a system transformation: you "jumped" to a different reference frame. There you used assumptions of classical relativity (Newtonian, also called "Galilean") that have been discarded with special relativity (SR). SR applies the first postulate to the speed of light: all laws are invariant with frame transformations (second postulate). [..].
Oops I had rearranged a phrase and forgot to delete "(second postulate)" - that may be confusing.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
60
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 120 ·
5
Replies
120
Views
9K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K