B Would We See the Same Light After Traveling Back to Earth Faster Than Light?

markterry
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Not Sure
Just joined because I have been unable to find an explanation: please avoid comments about FTL speed since they don't pertain to the question. The question:

A planet is 30 light years away, so when viewing it from earth we are seeing it from "30" years previous. Now, we travel 30 years at light speed and should basically arrive when that light (reflection) left. The question is: if we traveled back to earth at double the speed of light would we not see the same light as it was before we left earth? Where is the time dilation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Skeptical
Likes PeroK and berkeman
Physics news on Phys.org
markterry said:
please avoid comments about FTL speed since they don't pertain to the question.
Yes, they do, since it is pointless to ask what the laws of physics say about a thought experiment that violates the laws of physics.

markterry said:
A planet is 30 light years away, so when viewing it from earth we are seeing it from "30" years previous.
If we assume that the planet is at rest relative to the Earth, and we choose the common rest frame of the Earth and the planet, yes.

markterry said:
Now, we travel 30 years at light speed and should basically arrive when that light (reflection) left.
No, we don't. To arrive when the light left the planet that we saw on Earth before we left, we would have to travel backwards in time. If we travel at light speed (or, to avoid complications, at a speed very, very close to light speed, so the difference in travel time in the common rest frame of Earth and planet is negligible), we will arrive at the planet 30 years after we leave Earth, in the common rest frame of Earth and planet.

markterry said:
The question is: if we traveled back to earth at double the speed of light
We would be violating the laws of physics. But if we traveled back to Earth at a speed very, very close to the speed of light, as above, we would arrive back at Earth 60 years Earth time after we left.

markterry said:
would we not see the same light as it was before we left earth?
Certainly not. See above.

markterry said:
Where is the time dilation?
So far you haven't talked about anything that is even relevant to time dilation. Time dilation comes into play when you ask how much time has elapsed on our clock, the clock that travels with us as we go to the planet and back. The answer to that question is that we can make that time as short as we like by making the speed we travel closer and closer to the speed of light (again, in the common rest frame of Earth and planet). So when we get back to Earth, while 60 years will have elapsed on Earth clocks, only a very short time will have elapsed on our clocks. That is time dilation. (Actually a more precise term would be "differential aging".)
 
  • Like
Likes Renato Iraldi, Vanadium 50, Doc Al and 2 others
markterry said:
please avoid comments about FTL … we traveled back to earth at double the speed of light
That makes it impossible to answer. You ask us not to make comments about something and then the question explicitly states that thing. So we cannot talk about the topic of the question in the answer.

You will need to make a choice. Either you can remove the unmentionable topic from your question or you can remove the prohibition against mentioning it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes L Drago and Vanadium 50
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
27
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
98
Views
7K
Replies
10
Views
6K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Back
Top