Jump to content

possibly a stupid question.


cameron marical

Recommended Posts

ok, this may sound like a stupid question, but i dont know. say you efficently stopped time by going at the speed of light. well, would we still age? my first guess is no, no time, of course no age. but im not sure when i really think about it. having no time on a referance frame sounds like that referance frame shouldnt age, but would it be affected by things like other timeless referance frames? also, that brings up the question, what would it be like with no time? just like now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relative to outside observers (people watching you), you would not age. However, within your own frame of reference, you would age... all would seem normal.

 

Then again, really anything could happen since you'd have to suspend the laws of physics to get any object with mass to go that fast. Once you suspend the laws of physics, you're talking about fiction so it can be anything you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can get as close as you like to the speed of light, and time in your frame of reference will come to as close as you like to a standstill. You won't notice any different though. And of course the mechanism to get near the speed of light would be insanely large and expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an object (of mass) approaches the speed of light, it's mass approaches infinity. Think about that. How to propell an infanantly massive object at the speed of light. Wow, talk about power to weight ratio!

 

I agree it's a realitivity question. Time is the same to each person in their own element. The "traveling" person will say the "stationary" person aged faster than normal and the "stationary" person will say the "traveling" person aged slower than normal? Who is right? They both are.

 

You can't say that traveling at the speed of light will make time stop for that person without considering that it will infinatively speed up the "stationary" people's time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Time is the same to each person in their own element. The "traveling" person will say the "stationary" person aged faster than normal and the "stationary" person will say the "traveling" person aged slower than normal? Who is right? They both are...

 

But one twin is older then the other when they reunite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

This reminds me of another question... say you're going at the speed of light- how long does it take to get to the sun? 8 minutes? So you would age 8 minutes? Or would it take 0 minutes?

 

But if it would take 8 minutes, why is light necesarily the fastest thing in the universe? What if something could do it in 7 minutes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me of another question... say you're going at the speed of light- how long does it take to get to the sun? 8 minutes? So you would age 8 minutes? Or would it take 0 minutes?

 

But if it would take 8 minutes, why is light necesarily the fastest thing in the universe? What if something could do it in 7 minutes?

 

You can't go the speed of light but at relativistic speeds the distance from the Earth to the Sun would be covered in seconds, not minutes. You would also age only seconds. This would be because of time dilatation and length contraction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.