you can't go faster than the speed of light

duh. fucking retard.

Hit a big brain with a rock

>Wouldn't their relative speed be higher than the speed of light?

That's the great mystery of it... actually it's not.

In every reference frame, light moves at 299,999 mph

>brainlet doesn't get space time
Time for the object from your Perspektive will slow down so that you still move under lightspeed towards eachother

youtube.com/watch?v=BLuI118nhzc

what happens when you have two flashlights and point them at each other?

299,999,999m/s

so from the reference frame of a photon, another photon is approaching it, both going at the speed of light, in a vacuum, toward a dead-on collision.
How fast is the photon either photon is approaching? 2x the speed of light? Less? Why?
Show your work :)

Cumskins are so fucking retarded, especially those of slaveic orientation.

What slows it? How?

>universe is 13 billion years old
>there are galaxies 90 billion light years away
>space expands faster than speed of light
Who falls for this bullshit?

Attached: 1584147344690.jpg (638x558, 63.57K)

Duh, it’s called lightspeed x2 idiot

YEEAAAHHHH!!!
youtube.com/watch?v=TLvT5IybVk8

It would be, but it would be difficult to see what is going on because the light would still be travelling at c with respect to the medium. So you would probably pass the other person before you actually saw yourself pass them, like how a hypersonic plane passes you before you hear it.

neutrinos

Relative to an observer in the middle, yes. But if you are one of the objects, the other will appear to be approaching you at sub-light speeds. That's how it works.

No. That's the whole point of relativity - time-space continuum begins to distort because nothing is faster than light. It's the result.

>2x the speed of light? Less? Why?
No. If i am riding on photon A approaching photon B, I will see that it is moving towards me at the speed of light.

This is where time dilation comes from. Speed is calculated by distance/time. Space and time apparently rearrange themselves to make it true that light always moves at the speed of light no matter what.

Here brainlets this video explains it

youtube.com/watch?v=hm8kYLwR_PQ&list=PLjYsRyunM7zdYRArHKyj16dQOWB-eVFrS&index=3

>Space and time apparently rearrange themselves to make it true that light always moves at the speed of light no matter what.
And this ultimately results from the fact that any measurement of space or time you come up with will ultimately depend on the motion of photons in your frame.

we live in a simulation and the computer running it does little tricks like this to preserve CPU power and so no one can violate the set rules

Timeflow is just processes that can slow down in cold or high gravity. And having a lot of potential kinetic energy seems to do it too.

All you fucking brainlets that believe time dilation is a physically real phenomenon are retarded. The lorentz transformation is just a representation of the physical limitations of observing things near the speed of light with light as your observational medium. Einstein's idea that it actually means time slows down is retarded and untestable.

Take your meds schizo

The thing is that you cannot define time without reference to photons...

So your concept of time is wrong if you think it's not "really" dilating.

Time is canstant and can never be manipulated, thats why time travel is impossible. The only thing that can be manipulated is your perception of time, which can give you the impression that it can.

The maximum travel speed of information is 299792458 m / s. You can now try to solve this conumdrum yourself, or you go over to gen.lib and download yourself a book on relativity theory and work through the the first 2 or 3 chapters while on corona holiday.

Attached: 1567202007738.gif (350x350, 2.7M)

You are mostly right but the speed of processes can be increased and decreased.

>All you fucking brainlets that believe time dilation is a physically real phenomenon are retarded.
It is real and measurable. Satellites adjust their clocks to counter this.

But how far are the photons from one another? It takes 8~ minutes for sunlight to reach the surface yet the planet is still flat for them.

Yes you can. Time is best defined as a measurement of motion in a system. You can easily use other media to measure that motion.

Imagine a plane traveling faster than the speed of sound. Is the plane where you hear it, or somewhere else? Now imagine a plane travelling faster than light. Is the plane where you see it, or somewhere else?

Photons instantly reach their destination from their point of view.

Much like how your computer CPU can be overclocked, which again is just a perception.

>you cannot define time without reference to photons...
I reference time to Mississippi all the time.

Space does not locally but over large distances it does.

Their relative speed is still less than light speed

>Closing speeds

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light

Space dilation is not space travel

Isn’t speed based on a fixed point? If you move the point during travel then it’s no longer the same definition.

>thats why time travel is impossible
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that literally everything in the universe is in a constant flow through space and to go from A+ to A- you'd somehow need to figure out the exact position of literally everything down to the smallest possibly conceivable unit to accurately navigate you way.

By the time I finish this post the planet has moved through space almost 150.000 kilometers.

Attached: 0.png (560x407, 80.01K)

>untestable

Except for all the tests they have done REPEATEDLY

physlink.com/Education/Askexperts/ae433.cfm

if I have a mirror light is fucked, I just post that up and block light and I win the race even if I walk four paces

>Is the plane where you see it, or somewhere else?
No no no. This is NOT what time dilation is about. This has nothing to do with how long it takes the photons to reach your eyeballs.

The relativistic effects DON'T depend on how far you are away from the airplane, they only depend on how fast you are moving relative to it. This is not a doppler effect. The same time dilation will occur whether the plane is moving towards you or away from you.

Your analogy is not correct.

it would travel away from you at the speed of light, (not joking)

First of all, no they don't, but lots of pop science articles claim they do. Go read or watch stuff from Ron Hatch, one of the men responsible for the modern gps system. He says they don't and that points to a problem with SR.

Second, it is impossible to measure the one way speed of light, by definition, without discovering a medium of transmission faster than the speed of light to take measurements with. If you don't get that sit and think about it for a while until you understand.

Kike physics at this point just says light exists at all points between its source and destination simultaneously because fuck literally all logic and understanding, only math patchwork frankentheories matter.

To put it more clearly, over a decade ago “cutting edge science” completely abandoned causality and the scientific method.

It is impossible for a solid object to move at the speed of light

No

>But how far are the photons from one another? It takes 8~ minutes for sunlight to reach the surface yet the planet is still flat for them.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. It doesn't matter how far the photons are away from eachother.

Nothing's stable. There's no literal stable measurement point. How do you lock a reference point in time-space?

Attached: d56.gif (280x302, 3.63M)

bu-bu-but the guy in the white lab coat says its true

the expansion of space is moving faster than light, this is why in the far flung future light from other galaxies will not reach us.

Basically this Space is not only geometrically flat, but flat from photon perspective as well. So how do you measure accurately? Do you take 2 photons and simply space them far enough for the math to work?

Attached: 1549066367141.png (512x422, 230.54K)

If you can manipulate your brain to fire off neurons at the speed of light, you can literally almost stop the flow of time. And that is the gateway to finding eternal life.

Sad!

Having positive inertia mass to be more accurate. Technically even 'massless' particles have some energy-mass correspondence through E=pc ( generally E^2=(pc)^2 + ((mv^2)/2)^2 )

Yes as your speed increases, so does your mass. Thus the closer to the speed of light you reach more energy it takes to go faster but your mass increases simultaneously therefore a physical object cannot reach the speed of light.

for them no, times at relativistic speed slow down, so for the observers in the colliding spaceship the closing distance with the other ship would always been under the speed of light

You are a big gay retard incapable of thought.
Do you have any proof of time dialation?
>yes
What makes you think those physical forces have zero affect on a given measurement apparatus and exclusively affect an abstraction of thought?

Measurement apparati exist in the physical world and are affected by it. Abstractions do not.

Please justify your belief that abstractions Are affected by physics while physics are not.

But if you OC, the transistors are physically switching faster, so it's not perception

>light exists at all points between its source and destination simultaneously
Isn't this the argument between particles and waves? Things get fucky when you go quantum.

Attached: download.png (225x225, 7.64K)

two cars in a 25mph head on collision does not equal a 50mph head on collision

>.99999999999999999999
that's not even 1%, fucking burger-tier education

Y tho?

>you can't go faster than the speed of light
I cannot, but it is probably possible. No one knows for sure, because no one tried it.

Attached: 1562939.jpg (400x400, 26.2K)

It's true it should only be half energy of a 50 mph collision but he is interested in the relativistic sum of velocities not energy

Atomic clocks would exhibit the same exact effect if light was a wave in a medium. They are electromagnetic devices that would experience a slowdown. The math is literally the same, but you interpret it either as time as a physical dimension changing, or as a physical device experiencing interference in its mechanism. It's literally a nothingburger.

You say my analogy is incorrect because you assume that Einstein's interpretation of Michelson Morley is correct. If he was wrong, which he almost certainly was, and Maxwell and just about everyone else was right, then my analogy is correct.

>Inb4 null result, inb4 Einstein never heard of Michelson morley, inb4 muh gps

>it is impossible to measure the one way speed of light, by definition, without discovering a medium of transmission faster than the speed of light to take measurements with

I suddenly feel less alone on this universe.
The only known speed limit of the universe is measurement,

Attached: FBC64F21-9499-4A2C-BB94-9584A8687344.jpg (640x480, 72.42K)

We should build intergalactic cannons that can launch these bots into space instead of building shuttles and bothering with fuel.

>Things get fucky when you go quantum.
That is because it is all fake and gay.

if u do the calculation you will find that they are both short of the speed of light

Depends on what we consider time to actually be and how it really works.
Time could be a meme and the flow of space could work through some other means we don't know about, thus making "time"-travel possible. Maybe time only works as we know it as long as there a conciousness nearby to perceive it, for example. That'd mean go far enough and fast enough and you can freely travel through different points in space-time.

Maybe time only works around gravitational bodies. Escape the solar system and you can do it.
Maybe it's trans-dimentional metaphorically. Maybe it's trans-dimentional literally. Who knows.

Attached: 1548918886283s.jpg (250x247, 8.48K)

Quantum superposition is faster than the speed of light.

90 billion light years. Is a measure of distance
13 billion years is a measure of time

Everything is supposedly moving from the centre of the universe
If something is the other side of the universe that's 13*2 (as it's in all directions) that's 26 million light years away
Then to travel the 26 million light years we have to account for the speed at which the universe is expanding on both sides
So for light speed travel
Here to point b would be 26 billion + the new distance it's moved in that time (26 billion+ 13billion) meaning 39 billion + the original distance 26 billion making the greatest point away via light speed travel 65 billion

yes but still IF I HAVE A MIRROR light loses, its headed the opposite way and will never catch up, I win! I am faster then light!

No, the tools used to make the measurements work regardless of our perception. You cannot dismiss all the tests done to demonstrate time dilation plus all the mathematics that prove it as a fact just because you do not understand how it works. Your massive argument from ignorance is obvious.

And it'd still wouldn't be enough to find your dick, phoneposter.

Attached: 1520784335.gif (250x194, 47.4K)

>Thread's full of physicists discussing some old jew fairytales.

Cringe

>Basically this
>So how do you measure accurately?
How do you measure what?

Obviously nobody has measured anything from a photon's reference frame.... we can't make a device that moves a the speed of light. I'm just explaining what the theory says (and I think it's backed up by sound logic).

The math is totally independent of their positions, so it works no matter where they are.
Are you proposing an experiment? Are you asking me to propose an experiment?
What should the experiment demonstrate exactly?

>What makes you think those physical forces have zero affect on a given measurement apparatus and exclusively affect an abstraction of thought?
Their effect on the measurement apparatus is what's being measured. In this case the measurement apparatus is a clock. I'm open to alternative explanations, but it's pretty powerful that this theory follows from first principles and accurately predicts lots of things we try to measure.

You're suggesting their are other physical effects that we're not accounting for....What kind of effects are you proposing? I'm open to the idea. But the specifics of the idea need to be stated before we can test it.

oops typo guess the joke's on me eh

Attached: 1496489455527.jpg (619x453, 27.99K)

Light would have to reach you first before it could 'bounce' off of your mirror user.

Think about what you say before you say it.

>You say my analogy is incorrect because you assume that Einstein's interpretation of Michelson Morley is correct. If he was wrong, which he almost certainly was, and Maxwell and just about everyone else was right, then my analogy is correct.
Your analogy is incorrect because it does not have the same testable properties that "Einsteins interpretation" has. According to your idea, time dilation would depend on distance away from the object.... No experiment backs that up.

No you fucking retard I understand what special relativity proposes. I'm telling you it's fucking wrong. How does a cesium clock slowing down on an airplane prove special relativity if the competing theories also predict the exact same slowdown?

>Their effect on the measurement apparatus is what's being measured. In this case the measurement apparatus is a clock. I'm open to alternative explanations, but it's pretty powerful that this theory follows from first princi
So what is more likely (or more evidenced):
>physical variables such as speed and gravity alter the way our physical measurement apparatuses work
Or
>speed and gravity alter the way a human abstraction that is only defineable and not actually mesuareable works

B I G T H I N K

Attached: 1FAC3240-CC9D-4BAD-B480-B8148AED82AE.png (645x773, 48.65K)

So basically it's all academic theorizing that just fits neatly into preconceived math?
That leaves open the possibility: we've looked for something hard enough we eventually came up with our own conclusion. The puzzle pieces fall together but that might be because we designed the puzzle all along?

Bear with my retardo I'm a bro scientist.

Attached: 1549401145054.jpg (78x87, 3.06K)

Quantum physics proves the theory of relativity to be incorrect.

What's the big deal about lightspeed? Why's it impossible to go faster? It's not like you'd go back in time, time should still work independently of it.
I mean, you can go faster than the speed of sound, isn't it the same concept?