• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

Speed of light in a vacuum? (1 Viewer)

stag_j

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2003
Messages
95
Location
Sydney
I've been going over my notes for the space topic, and i noticed that very often, when the speed of light is given it's stated as being in a vacuum. If the speed of light is constant, why is this so?
 

PoLaRbEaR

The Bear
Joined
Apr 13, 2003
Messages
253
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
isn't it because light bounces off the atom lattices of glass, or crystal hence slowing it down, etc?
Light travels at a constant velocity so it doesnt slow down..
I guess it's because space is a vacuum so it just mentions it??
 

stag_j

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2003
Messages
95
Location
Sydney
I think I have a vague recollection of talking about this in class.
I'm sure there must be a reason for it always being stated in this way.

Underthesun - I think you might be right. While the speed of light remains the same, because it is bounced around off the atoms within the matter it will have a greater distance to travel. To an observer, i guess this would look as if it had been slowed down... Does that seem right or am I way off???
 

wogboy

Terminator
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
653
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2002
This is where everyone gets confused about the Special Theory of Relativity, the speed of light is *not* constant if you change the medium through which it propogates.

If you measure the speed of light out in space (in vacuum) it will be a bit faster than if you measure it here on Earth (in the atmosphere). Light travels the fastest in vacuum.

The speed of light is however constant regardless of the relative motion between the light source and observer. Imagine if someone was moving very fast towards you (say at a speed v), shining a torch at you. You would naturally expect that the speed of light that you would measure would be c+v. This is wrong, since you can't just add the velocities as vectors anymore (in relativistic physics). Instead of measuring c+v, you would measure c. No matter what relative velocity you move with respect to the light source, no matter which inertial frame of reference you're in, you will always measure the speed of light in vacuum to be c

This doesn't alter the fact that light travels more slowly in media other than vacuum (e.g. air, water).
 
Last edited:

yurbel

New Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
10
Light travels at a constant velocity so it doesnt slow down..
I guess it's because space is a vacuum so it just mentions it??
[/QUOTE]

Refraction involves the bending of light due to a change in its velocity.
 

PoLaRbEaR

The Bear
Joined
Apr 13, 2003
Messages
253
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
If light remains the same then it cant 'seem' to slow down...the observer would just see the light at a later time...remember that time is a variable in space-time...
 

Giant Lobster

Active Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
1,322
Location
asdads
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
nar its simple really... you cant compare things across different frames of reference. this is no exception for spd of light. For the statement of spd being constant to be true u have to be measuring spd of light from the medium in which it is traveling.

In vacuo its the fastest, @ approx 3e8m/s but it slows down in denser mediums. you cant say spd isnt constant by observing light slowing down as it changes medium. Thats like comparing two functions on different axes (stretching the analogy abit here :) )

I dunno exactly why light slows down, the conceptual explanation is surely beyond the scope of hsc physics, but i think it has somefin to do with disruption of electromagnetism of EMR by nearby particles [i.e. atoms] in a dense medium.
 

inasero

Reborn
Joined
Nov 27, 2002
Messages
2,497
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
u can travel to the past but ont the future if the theory that light is constant for all travellers is constant
 

Giant Lobster

Active Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
1,322
Location
asdads
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
actually u got it backwards. u can travel to the future, not the past :p

for past time travel to work, u need faster than the spd of light and approach the asymptote [@c=3e8m/s] from the opposite side :)

just a thought.
 

inasero

Reborn
Joined
Nov 27, 2002
Messages
2,497
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
no way man u can travel to the past...
consider the gedanken...what we pweceive as reality is what is observable right?
so if why can somwhoe catch up to the lght informatio which has long sinve relected off the original surfaces into deep space, by going faster than the speed of light then we can catch up with this light information and effectively view events as they happened in the past..agree...haha so YOU"RE the one thats wrong lol :p admit it!
 

inasero

Reborn
Joined
Nov 27, 2002
Messages
2,497
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
btw this discussion is becoming increasingly more philospohical lol
 

Mathematician

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2002
Messages
188
...

No u can travel to future but not past(according to relativity).

According to some relativity and gravity unification theory u can travel to past and u will think irrationaly(uni work, i heard this from someone)
 

underthesun

N1NJ4
Joined
Aug 10, 2002
Messages
1,781
Location
At the top of Riovanes Castle
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2010
What if what you think is real is not real? What if Einstein was not there, and all these theories of relativities are not real? What if, it's just a rule established by The Matrix to make sure no-one goes at a speed too fast inside the "matrix world" ?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top