What seems to be a simple question..

[Muse]

I've searched the forum incase such a question has been asked before, but I've come up empty.

 

It seems like such a simple and obvious problem that science must have surely found an answer long ago, but I can't find that answer anywhere.

 

 

Ok, in simple terms..

 

Relativity states that as objects move, they relatively experience a slowing of time. Upon reaching the speed of light, time relatively stops.

 

Therefore, photons, going at the speed of light, don't experience time. A proof of this is that photons don't age. (sorry, no ref. for this)

 

As far as I know, the above two statements are true and accepted.

 

Here's my issue: c is usually rounded off to 300,000 km/s. If light doesn't experience time, but freely travels through our 3 tangible dimensions, then shouldn't it be able to get from point A to point B in 0 second (litterally).

 

If light doesn't experience time, then the equation v = d / t is plagued by the fact that t = 0

 

If t = 0 then light travels at the speed of infinity.

 

But it's clearly been shown that the speed of light is finite (Ole Rømer, Hippolyte Fizeau, Albert A. Michelson) Therefore, light must experience time, no matter how relatively short that time is (to us), it cannot be 0.

 

In other words, that light takes time to travel from point A to B indicates that it must experience time, and not experience the total "halting" of time as suggested by relativety.

 

Note: I'm not talking about something with mass, but light itself.

 

I'm not arguing for or against anything, I'm just confused and clearly missing something important.

[losfomot]

I will attempt an answer before the smart people get here...

 

In the photons frame of reference, time is dilated infinitely, AND length is contracted infinitely so that the photon experiences it's entire travel in an instant.

 

However, in any other frame of reference (ie a frame of reference that is not travelling at c), the photon is travelling at about 300,000km/s.

 

So, from your frame of reference, light takes about 8 minutes to get from the sun to your eyeball.

 

In the photons frame of reference, the trip from the sun to your eyeball is virtually instantaneous.

 

I'm not sure, but I think some will argue about being able to talk about the photon's frame of reference.

 

So:

 

Here's my issue: c[/b'] is usually rounded off to 300,000 km/s. If light doesn't experience time, but freely travels through our 3 tangible dimensions, then shouldn't it be able to get from point A to point B in 0 second (litterally).

 

Yes, that's right. But only from the photon's frame of reference.

 

If light doesn't experience time' date=' then the equation v = d / t is plagued by the fact that t = 0

 

If t = 0 then light travels at the speed of infinity.[/quote']

 

Wrong. If the photon were to try and use that equation, here is what it would find:

 

Velocity = distance / time

 

What is the distance? Zero (space is infinitely contracted)

How long does it take to get there? Zero (time is infinitely dilated)

 

So it ends up with V = zero/zero which I believe is undefined.

 

 

I am already cringing from the anticipated reactions to my answer.

[danny8522003]

Im not one of the smart people, but what your saying makes sense.

[eon_rider]

I'll second that.

 

Im not one of the smart people either, but what your saying does appear to make sense.

[ydoaPs]

I've searched the forum incase such a question has been asked before' date=' but I've come up empty.

 

It seems like such a simple and obvious problem that science must have surely found an answer long ago, but I can't find that answer anywhere.

 

 

Ok, in simple terms..

 

Relativity states that as objects move, they [i']relatively[/i] experience a slowing of time. Upon reaching the speed of light, time relatively stops.

 

Therefore, photons, going at the speed of light, don't experience time. A proof of this is that photons don't age. (sorry, no ref. for this)

 

As far as I know, the above two statements are true and accepted.

 

Here's my issue: c is usually rounded off to 300,000 km/s. If light doesn't experience time, but freely travels through our 3 tangible dimensions, then shouldn't it be able to get from point A to point B in 0 second (litterally).

 

If light doesn't experience time, then the equation v = d / t is plagued by the fact that t = 0

 

If t = 0 then light travels at the speed of infinity.

 

But it's clearly been shown that the speed of light is finite (Ole Rømer, Hippolyte Fizeau, Albert A. Michelson) Therefore, light must experience time, no matter how relatively short that time is (to us), it cannot be 0.

 

In other words, that light takes time to travel from point A to B indicates that it must experience time, and not experience the total "halting" of time as suggested by relativety.

 

Note: I'm not talking about something with mass, but light itself.

 

I'm not arguing for or against anything, I'm just confused and clearly missing something important.

 

couple of things:

the photon doesn't experience time slowing for it. to the photon, we wouldn't experience time

 

we see the photon's time slow down.

 

you forgot about length contraction.