If time stops at speed of light.... what does that even mean? How does light even....move?
>>17002803From the light's perspective, all the points on it's path are the same point. It doesn't move, so it needs no time to do it.
>>17002803darkness is the only evidence that anything exists.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MPHyR92MQic&ra=m
It's all about points and references.
>>17002805>>17002813
>>17002805what do you mean "it doesnt move"?
>>17002848The photon is present in its entire range space until observed
>>17002803Stop using the bullshit time definition of relativity. Light moves with c through the aether. Objects with mass move slower. But they experience a lorentz contraction of all their processes that depends on their speed in the aether. So if they close in in c the lorentz contraction is so big that everything happening on that object is nearly freezing. To define that as time is retarded but that's the foundation of relativity.
>>17002803It's worse than that. Photons (and any massless thing that carries energy) must move at c.Spacetime is a massless thing, and it carried energy, we call it zero-point energy, and it doesn't move at c.So spacetime itself violates lorentzian mechanics and relativity, and they need word salad to deflect from this glaring hole in their framework
>>17003667Yeah we should just finally call it aether again, everything else makes zero sense.
Light isn't the fastest thing in the universe. Darkness and stupidity are. Wherever light goes, both darkness and dumbness got there first.
>>17003723Darkness isnt a thing. It doesnt exist. Its just the absence of light.
>>17003736No, you just can't see it from your perspective. Stupidity is occluding your view, the foreskin of idiocy is covering your vision. You must circumcise your mind, which, once shorn of unnecessary flaps of occluding mental shortcuts, will allow you to see the bleeding wound in reality.
>>17003740>shalom
>>17003695You are so confident in aether theory, I am excited to read your published paper! Can you post it and enlighten us?
>>17003155The whole universe is just a single electron bouncing back and forth in time and pretending to be every electron in the universe until observed.Also, particles are spinning, but they’re not spinning. They just uhh, have a spin number that’s suspiciously like angular momentum but it’s not. It’s spin numberPhysics fags know none of this shit really makes sense so don’t feel bad if you don’t get it, you probably do get it on some level. it makes no sense.
>>17002803Light stands still and the universe moves around it.
>>17002803What if light and dark is the original 1D being, the sun is 99% of the observable universe, it's everything we know, space looks dark because they always go in earths shadow, space is really bright, not dark.
>>17002803It doesn't move. And considering that any massless particle is the same way, and all matter is ultimately comprised of the bounded interactions of massless particles, nothing actually moves when you get down to the fundamentals of it.From the "perspective" of c, the universe is a single point with no dimensionality. That point DOES, however, contain the record of all interactions within and between all particles in the entire history of the universe. This record is sequential but occupies no time. Its structure reflects the causal structure of the universe but occupies no space. Think of a deck of cards squashed infinitely flat—it has no thickness and neither do any of the cards within it, but the cards are still in order. Now think of that deck of cards being 3D or 4D or really any arbitrary number of dimensions depending on your physical model, and you have the universe.
>>17002803Time doesn't stop, relativity breaks down, as it takes infinite energy for a single blink rate of the Universe to progress. Matter and space break down as the data singularity is compressed into an alternate dimension.
>>17002803you're an observer moving at the speed of light. there is nothing for you to observe because, by the time information would have reached you to observe it, you are long gone.without any observable information, you cannot discern if you are moving.
>>17003949You're presupposing something with mass can move at the speed of light with finite energy, it can't. >>17002805Light definitely does move. If it doesn't move then why does it take time to travel? Because causality is what is traveling? Our only measure for that is light, so we might as well call it the speed of light.
>>17003917It doesn't need to move. The universe is a singularity, viewed from the inside. Both time and space are an illusion of perspective.
>>17003949>by the time information would have reached you to observe it, you are long gone.>without any observable information,That's only valid in one direction.
>>17003981Light and gravity. Gravity moves at "lightspeed"
>>17003987Yes thank you for saying the same thing again
>>17003838Give me 4 more weeks actually please.
It has to reach the speed of light first. Then it stops. If you want to be a quantum physicist just say shit like this to nerds doing lesser science subjects and if you say enough things, and one hits in the future, you'll be immortalised. Someone from Cern could probably answer this one though.
light is the speed of information. time doesn't "stop" so much as you move at the speed of the universe's tick ratethis analogy actually kind of explains relativistic time dilation, too. the closer you are to the universe's tick rate, the slower it gets relative to you
>>17002845idk why exactly but i read this with luke smith's onions voice
>>17004462*onions voice*
>>17003838>>17004300But would you really read it if its consistent? Or are you just baiting?
