Neil deGrasse Tyson - The Inexplicable Universe
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-08-2014, 08:44 PM
RE: Neil deGrasse Tyson - The Inexplicable Universe
You saying "if you were sitting on a photon" is the same as me saying "in relation to itself". OBVIOUSLY, we are talking about exactly the same thing, so I have no clue why you would think I wouldn't understand what you mean... We are after all TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING Big Grin

Lol, we even both said "with respect to the photon itself." (you) and "in relation to itself" (me).



"If you were sitting on a photon, both time and distance would be zero."

That is what you said earlier, and I pointed out that elapsing time is indeed zero, but not the distance a photon travels, which is OBVIOUS. So if you travel a distance in no time, then your speed is "undefined", as you said, but more correctly "infinite" as I have said. But in the end, you could say we AGAIN mean the same thing.

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Youkay's post
13-08-2014, 05:45 AM
RE: Neil deGrasse Tyson - The Inexplicable Universe
Another thing that I found very insightful was that first people tried to reason out the nature of the universe by logical deduction alone. Only much later this crude way of thinking was gradually absolved by the scientific method we have today.

In short, the clash between atheists and theists is that one group has adopted the modern way of thinking, whereas the other adopted the ancient more than 2000 year old way of thinking Big Grin

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Youkay's post
13-08-2014, 06:08 AM
RE: Neil deGrasse Tyson - The Inexplicable Universe
(12-08-2014 08:44 PM)Youkay Wrote:  That is what you said earlier, and I pointed out that elapsing time is indeed zero, but not the distance a photon travels, which is OBVIOUS.

It's only obvious that the distance isn't zero from an observer NOT sitting on the photon. SR says your ruler would undergo contraction as you would speed up. In the limit that your speed approaches the speed of light, the length you would measure tends to zero. At exactly the speed of light, which would be your speed if you are sitting on a photon, the distance you would measure would be zero.



Quote:So if you travel a distance in no time, then your speed is "undefined", as you said, but more correctly "infinite" as I have said. But in the end, you could say we AGAIN mean the same thing.

Wrong, they're not the same. Technically, an "infinite" means there are no successor as in 1,2,3... While zero/zero is "undefined".

My blog
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes zaybu's post
13-08-2014, 06:21 AM
RE: Neil deGrasse Tyson - The Inexplicable Universe
Ah, so according to SR both time and distance become 0 the closer you get to the speed of light? Well, if so, I must have done the mistake of measuring the distance as an outside observer and measuring the time from the photon's perspective?

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Youkay's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: