The so-called speed of light has been broken! I'm sure you've heard about the experiments that have proved this at CERN recently,please take down your obsolete video mate! E=MC2, bull fucking shit!!!!!!!!!!!
i think that you would be going faster and faster approching the speed of light and once you get there, going in someone elses veiw, you would be slowing down, in your veiw you would be going faster and faster, but when you decelerate you would appear to jump in time to your new location
as soon as you broke the speed of light you would be not visibly where your at but phyically. and you would be able to see yourself in the past. faster you go, the farther you get and the old the light becomes. therefore the farther in the past you would be seeing. time would visibly be going back in the past but you would actually be going ahead in time and only watching whats happening in the past not physically living it..
So I ask this question: If you can go back in time so you are traveling the same speed backward as the time go foreward everything would seem to stop. If you are on the road you would easely go between cars. So drivers would see you moving very fast. That is because you are traveling with speed of light.
But if this would be real time traveling you wouldnt fly off the road on a curve because of speed. So speed of light and time traveling are two different terms.
According to Zeno's Paradoxes, you have to travel to every discreet point before you arrive at your destination; you aren't *teleporting* past the red light! If you go FASTER than the speed of light in any direction, you see events playing out in Fast Forward! Now, if you are at the source of the light, and looking behind you, you WILL see events transpire in reverse. Does that mean you're Time Traveling? I posit; No.
If you would be able to travel faster than the speed of light you would more or less get vaporized by other molecules that you will bump or encounter. Other theories suggest that time would stop according to Lorenze's Equation. But for me.. i don't know.
@stonekid156 The reason why you cannot travel at the speed of light is because no mass can, Photons (Light particles) can because they have no mass. It would take infinite energy to make a mass travel at c which is'nt possible. It is also impossible to achieve speeds greater than light because that is the speed in which the universe is expanding. Even if you were to achieve c, the speed of light will allways be the same distance of 300,000km infront of you moving that distance every second.
@pizzabox24 pretty much. if you were at the speed of light you would of moved infinitley far is a short amount of time, the rest of the universe would look still.
@pizzabox24 It is impossible to travel backward in "time", regardless of c. What is "time"? Is "time" a calendar? Does June 2011 feel twice as different from June 2009 as June 2008 did? Or is "time" just a method Man invented to measure fairly equal discreet changes between events? What makes you think this "Past" is a physical place? When you were "in the past", did it not feel exactly like "Now"? What makes you think that any moment other than "Now" exists? Time is not linear, it is a point.
@NANOFORGE You are proposing massive edits to the entire universe, when you cannot even un-shatter a single coffee cup. Un-crash the World Trade Center. Un-break my heart. Convince every human that the year is 2007. You will then have traveled backwards in time. Minus everyone who died. And all those socks and keys and money we lost.
@Ayelis The laws of physics say time travel is impossible, what I'm saying is maybe in the future those laws may be rewritten. I never like to say something is'nt possible but as far as modern physics laws go, somethings are.
Oh i think i got it. So is it that if we look towards the lights(both of them) moving away from us rather than towards us? Then it would make sense this way and i think i didn't see that red arrow pointing from the ball towards the 'going away' colours.
wtf? I don't get this. Plz someone explain. First how they hell would you be able to see the black colour first than the red when travelling faster than the speed of light? Second, which way are you travelling? towards the ball or away from it? In anyway wouldn't you still see the red colour first? because it is more closer to you than the black colour!!????
hypothetically. assuming light and time as a zero point. + being slower than the speed of light and - being faster than the speed of light. Would going faster than the speed of light mean that you start to gain an infinite amount of mass because you start to hit the photons (light) instead of the photons hitting you. In turn would this cause Einsteins equation E=MC2 to be reversed or turn into a negative route number? or just collapse? would you be traveling into the realm of antimatter?
and also to travle faster then the speed of light you would go into the futer becuase time is relative faster you go slower the time goes so lets jsut say this this isent exacly right im just using numbers to express what im saying so say your travling at the speed of light comapred to people on earth at the normal rate 1 year at the speed of light would be 1000 years on earth these year calculations arnt true but im using them as a example so therefore u wont go back in time
therefor we can go even 30 miles per hour while the space bends past it making us travle up to 100 times the speed of light without any difrence to us except getting there faster =) but then again the mass we would need to bend the light would be almsot as much as a black hole there for we would be sucked into goign infenaty and burn up and torn apart if we could find some way to withstand the gravity of a black hole and to move one we could do it
going faster then the speed of light is impossible as you get to the speed of light once u acuely hit it all energy go to go forward would convert into mass so instead of goign faster you would jsut be going the same speed but jsut start gettign heavier and heavier-----but i found something out the only thiing faster then the speed of light is time and space itself so oooo what if its possible to bend space into a big dip in the front and then creat a big wave in the back of the ship
E=mc^2 dumbass, in order to exceed the speed of light you would have to either create mass or energy (matter in essence). Which, by the laws of physics is impossible! Good try though
NO NO NO!.. If u travelled faster than light u would not go back in time. Like DarrikBaker said, u will only see events in reverse because u are moving faster than light which means u are catching up to the photons and YOU are SMACKING them w/ your retina instead of them smacking you (like usual). Its the same if u were to fire 10 rounds w/ an uzi, and u run twice as fast as the bullets, u will catch up to the bullets and see them BACK-to-FRONT in a straight line, instead of Front-to-back.
as you travel close to the speed of light, time slows down. when you travel at the speed of light, time stops. the only plausible conjecture i can make is that when you travel faster than the speed of light time reverses. so in a sense, you would be seeing the universe in reverse. but that's only IF you could travel faster than light.
sure - given light speed and sound speed are nowhere near the same... same principle really. loud enough sound and if you travel faster than it - you can here it again. just need to magnify it :P
We don't know why black holes exist in our universe... Though we know partially how they work and understand some physics behind them, the question "Why" is a more than important factor when trying to understand anything in the universe. Think about the phrase "who, what, when, where, and why". Why is the deepest of all of them.
lets say you reached the speed of light. well if that were somehow possible you mass would then become infinite according to e=mc^2. well that infinite mass would produce some major (if not infinite) gravitition. this gravitation created by you would alter any light you were near. including those red light waves and the ?black? light waves
I think it´s a very interesting question. From what I´ve understood time (theoreticaly) stands still at the speed of light.
I don´t think the answer would be that you would see the ball changing colour in reverce, rather you would see nothing because the light from the ball has no way of catching up with you.
what would happen to time when exceeding the speed of light? would one fall out of time all together or would it go backwards? Hypotheticaly, that is....
Scientists have an illution of control, although they discover many things that amaze us today, they are childs play in the few of the whole universe and the One who created it. Seriously, what do we know about alternate realities and the like, to say they are meer science fiction? Might I add that often times science fiction is actually cutting edge technology a few years from now. Look at us, we try so hard to replicate things that seem so simple in nature. Well we've got credit for curiosity.
@ElijahJohnSanders, illusion of control ? Its true that scientists do discover more and more and have not as yet discovered the origins of everything, but to say its an illusion is hypocritical, because as you said " they are childs play in the whole universe and the One who created it." do you have proof of its existence? and things only seem simple because you choose not to investigate properties nature and its facets
@jamesmcmurray750 I said an illusion of control, not just an illusion, in that it seems, that we think we know EVERYTHING and the answer to EVERYTHING when we don't. I do investigate them in fact, thank you. I realize it is vast and complex and wonderful! But there is so much more, and we try so hard to replicate the basics, and yet we think we know everything. Yes I realize we don't liturally think we know everything (although some do, lol). Proof of the universe? or it's Creator? You don't? 00
if you traveled faster than the speed of light, you would have MORE than infinite mass which doesn't make sense. Einsteins equation E=mc/√(1-(v²/c²)) or E=γmc² shows that it would be impossible because if v>c, then you'd have a negative root.
the same goes for time, you'd have infinite time dilation (everything else relative to you would move MORE than infinitely slow (whatever that means) by t'=γt or t'=t/√(1-(v²/c²)) in the exact same way, it can't happen because you'd have a negative root.
in theory the faster you travel the slower time will be so lets say you have something on your person thatl lets u move that fast even standong still everything around you would be frozen in time as you are moving so fast everything will slow down
Here is the problem. this is extremely simplified but you should get it.
time dialation is based on time as we perceive it divided by (one minus square root of the objects speed "V" squared divided by the speed of light "C" squared).
but when you actually hit C this happens V/C is the same is C/C and thus equals 1 and 1-1 equals zero so you are left with a fraction that looks like this 1/0 which is impossible mathematically
My mom used to feed me the same question, I finally told her other than the whole "dreaming the future" argument (which I don't think is what you're suggesting) That the speed of thought is roughly the speed of electricity. After all, that's how our body's nerve endings work anyways. I'd guess probably the time it takes the thought to travel from your right frontal lobe, to your left frontal lobe of your cerebrum.
(where you created the thought, to where you were able to perceive it)
In fact, you wouldn't "catch up" with either light. because the velocity of light is neither added nor subtracted to the velocity of either the source or the observer (however counter-intuitive that may sound).
If you're on a train on one track going 50mph compared to an observer on the ground and I'm on an adjoining track going in the opposite direction going 50mph, I'm going 100mph compared to you.
(cont'd) A third observer traveling at 50mph going in the same direction as you on a third track doesn't seem to be moving at all - compared to you.
Let's make it spaceships, each travelling at 50% the speed of light, and each projecting a beam of light out in front of them -- and measuring the velocity of one another's light beams.
A funny thing happens. Everybody on every spaceship, along with all the ground observers say the same thing.
(cont'd) Every beam of light, no matter the direction or from which ship it is being projected, is travelling at the same velocity -- 186,282 mps.
The velocities neither add nor subtract but always seem to be the same for every observer. What they will disagree about is the *relative time* of the various spaceships.
Observers will disagree about clocks, mass, and velocity -- but they will always agree about the speed of light.
you would see nothing as you go in between light. as you catch up to the red light you would see rainbow like colors because its not red until the light reflects and absorbs off of things (you dont see the red laser beam but you see the dot at the end right?). one thing i believe is faster then light is...the mind. you can measure the speed of light but can you measure the speed of my thoughts? if my mind is infinite then thats something so fast so vast that it can not be measured.
i beleive that our president should gather the worlds greatest scientist and see what they can come up with right now we think that it is impossible to reach light speed but if the president were to gather the worlds greatest scientist then maybe we could find a solution for not creating a black hole when you travel at light speed
backwards then you would only see an absence of light (black) because the light wouldnt be traveling fast enough to catch up to your eyeballs and stimulate the light detecting cells in you eyes.
ok, so your original lightbulb thingy would APPEAR to travel in reverse time, but if there was another lightbulb at the other end of the room then as you were traveling it would appear that time was speeding up for that lightbulb. and for any other random lightbulb it would appear to speed up untill you got to the point in your path that would pass closest to the lightbulb and then it would appear to stop and go backwards in time. also if you were traveling faster than light and you looked
faster than light travel would create a black hole as it would create a time singularity that would according to quantum theory condense into a mass singularity. I over simplified here but if you are curious about this theory check out "Faster Than Light Superluminal Loopholes In Physics" by Nick Herbert, Ph.D.
humm... i have heard of this before... hes saying that you could look into the past, not necessarily travel into the past and effect it. example: we measure space distance in "light years" which is how far light travles in a year... well some things they say are like 250 million light years away... so technically, what were seeing when we look at it, happened 250 million years ago.. it just took that long for the light to get here for us to see it.
If you can exceed the speed of light, then you are suggesting time will travel backward. If this is true, then paradoxes must exist and also parallel universes. The idea of parallel universes is very controversial and commonly thought of as science fiction. I propose that the faster you travel, the faster time progresses, but nothing can exceed the speed of light, but then why can a black hole force something faster than the speed of light???
@DarrikBaker A black hole doesn't have infinite mass. Infinite mass would equal infinite gravitational force. A black hole has slightly less mass than the star it was created from. It does, however, have infinite density because all that mass is focused on a point with zero volume and the gravitational force would be extraordinary close to the centre.
@eah2119 black holes are actually paradoxial... but the idea is that the can only reach the gravitational eqivalent of the speed of light and every atom they attract after that is instantly changed to energy...
also light wouldn't be sucked into but rather bent a warped light the obit of a planet which would allow it to eventually be pulled in while not breaking the speed limit
@eah2119 It has actually been proven that moving objects have their time slow down. particles that usually decay quickly standing fairly still, decay way slower while accelerated near the speed of light. If what you propose is true, then the particle should have decayed way faster. Stuff is not supposed to make much sense around a black hole, and anything traveling faster than the speed of light next to a black hole means it's already doomed anyway.
@danielodors Sorry. I meant the faster you travel the slower YOUR time is relative everything else, so then everything around you would have faster time travel, and that is why I said "the faster time progresses" as in the time on Earth.
@eah2119 NO WHAT U SAID ISNT TRUE.....I JUST HAD A BRAIN FART OF EPIC PROPORTIONS.....IF U GO 5X FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT AWAY FROM EARTH FOR A YEAR...AND U LOOKED BACK WITH A SUPER TELESCOPE .... YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE 4 YEARS INTO THE PAST.... WHEREVER U LOOK IT WOULD BE 4 YEARS IN THE PAST.... U COULD LOOK AT WHAT U DID 4 YEARS AGO...BUT EARTH WOULD STILL BE IN THE PRESENT... AWESOME... I LOVE OUR UNIVERSE!!
@MagicSeasoning lol a brain fart of epic proportions. You're right, but what if you're traveling 5 times the speed of light orbiting the Earth for a year?
assuming first of all that you can see the earth in that sort of detail after traveling at hyperspeed for a year, also assuming that at the speed of light, time does in fact slow, and at exceeding the speed of light time travels backwards only for the individual traveling at that speed, also, assuming that time is linear and it follows a set path that can be traveled back upon in a linear fashion, then yes you are correct magic seasoning
@saska123321 If nothing can escape a black hole then why do they spew matter? Gravity doesn't affect things without a mass (i.e. photon-waves) and there is no such things as black holes. They are just (flawed) imaginary creations of Newtonian scientist that haven't yet realized the power of plasma and electromagnetic forces. Electromagnetism is x1000000 as powerful as gravity, proven fact.
@saska123321 They don't, they're just assuming that they would show up but they still haven't, Black holes don't even follow the laws of physics let alone exist. There is no black holes in the center of our galaxy (its actually a giant plasmoid just like our sun) or any where in our universe.
@saska123321 That gives me an idea. If the gravitational force near/inside a black hole is so large then as you approached it space would be stretched out. Everything would expand as you got closer therefore it wouldn't seem much like a black hole at all. A hole in space itself? No. There can not be holes in space. It only seems like a hole from a distance. As you approached you would sucked in to this enormous curve of space time and, lo and behold, it's a whole new universe!
@eah2119 black holes don't "force" something faster than the speed of light... its just that the gravitational pull is stronger than every other force... and it doesn't have infinite force, it has infinite density.
@eah2119 Time doesn't "travel backwards" just because you see events backwards. Is time ACTUALLY traveling backwards when you rewind a VHS tape? Vision has nothing to do with actual time. Events still take place in a certain order, and Thermodynamic Law will never be broken.
As particle moving at superlight speed it could only see it self and nothing else. Inside warp drive u see mass spacetime displacements occur as conduits. Example stars no longer appear as dots they appear as lighted streaks trailing off into space to point of origin inside expanding universe, a way kool site to see.
If you think of space/time in a truly linear fashion. When you break the speed of light, you would observe the universe moving backwards, however you would still be traveling forward in time, and time would pass same for you, as for everyone else. So if you left earth and travelled faster then the speed of light with some super powerful optics, you could see earths past, but when you returned to earth if still watching earth time would seem to go twice as fast. (assuming linear universe)
@ctoon6 My hypothesis depends soley on time being linear... which it isn't or appears not to be people tell me its curved but i'd really like to see a spaceship approach the speed of light before i'll be fully convinced. Was just doing a thought experiment on if it was linear. Then relativity wouldn't matter.
I've always hear the speed of sound, the speed of light, faster than the speed of sound, faster than the speed of light. BUT has ANYONE ever even considered the speed of SIGHT @ 20/20 vision??? When I look at the stars or planets in space ( I know that's old light) but just how fast was my eyes able to travel and focus on that light? And at exactly what distance did I come into contact with that light?
i actually like this video, its gotten me thinking on the big theories again, but please dont bring strings theory in here, thats just a massive headache that only stephen hawkings can explain.
It's good that you're thinking of these things even if most people find it "impossible." Maybe through wormholes or some unconventional method it's possible. But, your view seems somewhat accurate that you see black first; however, you would not see red. The two light waves would interfere and you would see black, then a mix of black and red (whatever color that is) and then black again. In actuality, you would probably see the mix first as the black light catches up with the red light.
However if an object was moving faster than the speed of light, wouldn't it just become invisible? since we can't see anything until it reaches our eyes, and the item is already gone before they do?
We are all living in the same time. -nothing ahead of us, nothing behind. so if you go at the speed of light, you are basically just moving before anything BEHIND you reaches you. However what u see in front of you still remains. Just at a different speed. Its like you wer driving. faster than cars behind you, but the cars in front, you can still see. So, my theory is that if you travel at the speed of light, you will see in front of u. just altared in time. as if the speed of light wass changed
To accelerate any object with mass to the speed of light would require infinite energy. But as einstein proved, the faster you go, the bigger you get (which is really frackin weird but true). as you got to the speed of light you would get infinitely more massive. this would create a black hole and you wouldnt see anything. because you'd be dead. or all you would see is white since all the light would get sucked into your black hole. and then you'd be dead.
your actually kind of right. except we could never go the speed of light because as an object with mass approaches the speed of light, the objects mass approaches infinite, requiring an infinite amount of force to keep it moving. but if you did some how, theoretically, time would stop at the speed of light, and if you kept going past the speed of light, you would go back in time. all theoretical though of course
You're theory of seeing the black light first is coming from you running out from the light source. Which contradicts your first theory of viewing the light from outside its source.
Sorry, but you are incorrect. You would see nothing in reverse. This my friend, is common sense.
Well, you could not exceed the sped of light #1. And #2, if you did, you would not see the light at all. #3, as you approach the speed of light, light still travels away from you at the speed of light. #4, if the red light was emitted first, you would still see it first.
i'm conflicted when i comment on something like this because i don't want to discourage people from thinking, but at the same time, there is something wrong with what you're thinking. however, i'm afraid that a complete explanation may be beyond your current technical grasp, for if it were not, i don't think you would have posted this video. CONTINUED IN NEXT POST...
so, as a word of encouragement, keep on thinking! but find some good information sources on the web where you can learn about space, time, and the mathematics behind it. do not go to weird sites. stick with colleges and trusted information sources. although not always 100% right, wikipedia is pretty darned good, especially if you starting out. good luck!!
impossible. can't exceed the speed of light. Can't reach it. If you could REACH the speed of light (only possible if you have no mass), then you would not experience time passing. You would instantly arrive at your destination... so 2x speed of light... if it were possible, can only be considered hypothetically (the equation for time dilation would yield an irrational number--time/root negative)
It can continuously accelerate, and from its frame of reference it will arrive that much quicker, but as time dilates, for the moving object, an external observer would see less and less increase in speed. The change gradually becomes a shift in the rate of passage of time. We'll discuss this further in community.
So if u were moving faster than the speed of light in front of a galaxy,meaning the way that the galaxy is moving towards, you will see the past? And if u were moving faster than the speed of light behind the galaxy, or like the opposite direction the galaxy is moving, you will be able to see the future?
i have been thinking about this myself... if you were to get shot out into space faster than the speed of light for lets say 10 years and used a very powerful telescope (yes, i know there are no telescopes this powerful) to look back at earth, u could see the 9/11 attacks on the world trade centers.
@Cervelo000 Using this idea, and the telescope you mentioned, couldn't you go far enough into space to see if dinosaurs are actually real(if you were to somehow live forever)?
the notion that you would travel back in time is false as you would have to take the light that emited from our plant (reflection) and use that some how to interact with the past.
basically if we can travel faster then the speed of light then at this point its only possible to observe the past (but that in itself is f'ed lol)
but hwo knows maybe after that there will be away of atleast communicating with the past, i hope not
yup basically our understanding of things would make that true
cuz in reality when we look at the stars we are acualty seeing the light they emited millions-billions of years ago, who knows if some have disappeared since then?
Actually if you could move faster then the speed of light you would still see the red light first because its you moving faster not the light. retard... on top of that no matter can move as fast as light because the faster an object goes the more mass it has, and the more mass at high speeds the more momentum is required, momentum requires energy, therefore the amount of energy needed would exponentially increase to infinity. and you cant have infinite energy except rom the big bang.
Actually, space can expand faster than the speed of light. Other than light, no particle or wave is able to travel faster. Although, if you can create an immense amount of gravity at any one point, you could literally bend and pull space towards you. This would enable you to travel long distances, faster than light, without actually moving faster than light. Wish we'd invest more tax dollars in science instead of war and we'd be gold.
agreed, its kinda like a car sitting still and the earth moving under it but the car remains in place....you travel at the speed of the earth rotation! same concept here. just hold your position and let the universe expand through you as you remain, the tricky part would be catching back up with the earth as you could move at the speed of the expansion but would need to go faster in ordr to cath up....anything is possible! :D
Well i don't think you can see black light since black is from the absence of photons. I think it is possible to break the speed of light since scientists assume that in the beginning of the big bang that within the first trillionth of a second particles were moving much more faster than the speed of light.
you would not see things in reverse it would just like being at a track meet if one runner leaves the start line sooner (red light) but the second runner (black light) is faster than is faster than the first then the second runner just hits the finish line sooner.
I don't think human mind can perceive more than 3rd dimension of environment. Hell, we hardly understand the 4th... I'd think if you were to stand inside a spaceship that travels at FTL, I would imagine everything would change instantaneously into the future from our perspective using our limited senses.
Nothing very particular will happen if you traveled faster than the speed of light. It's like asking "What happens when you go over the limit of 60Km an hour, on the street?" For that respect, you wouldn't be able to catch the red light after the latter kind of light, and by extension, you wouldn't be able to see the world in reverse either.
Maybe you should imagine what life would be like if light did not travel that fast. I think we would be blind to moving objects. The same way any space ship travling @ the speed of light would be blind to anything in it's way.
this video dosent make any sense from ure diagram, if u were observing the ball from elsewhere then u would see the red light, then the black light. But since ure diagram showed the person leaving the ball then they'd see red, black, red. (red when they 1st on it, then black as it changes black, then red again when they catch up with the red light that first left the ball)
say you were on earth and you set off a red light at the speed of light and you took off at twice the speed of light towards somewhere 1 lightyear off in space, you reach that, then turn around go back to Earth, you arrive there what feels to you 1 year later to you, but your a year in the past cause the red light is still 1 lightyear away?
But first I would like to raise a point. Since in your video you did not specify whether you were traveling towards the ball or away from the ball. If you were traveling towards the ball at close to the speed of light everything would blueshift towards the Gamma Ray portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, whereas if you were traveling away they would redshift into the Radio waves. Assuming that this trend continues beyond the speed of light. Both colors should diverge
sorry, both colors should converge into some electromagnetic radiation at an extreme degree perhaps beyond what we are used to depending on whether you were traveling towards or away from the ball. Now lets assume the ball doesn't redshift or blueshift, you would notice that the Red light still reaches you sooner than the black light if you were traveling at the speed of light. Only if the black light somehow traveled faster than the red light would you see the black light sooner than the red.
I agree with 1965 ace. Breaking the speed of light theoretically could enable time travel, but only to the past. I do dig your theory, kid. Keep them coming.
Let's say there is a mirror 100 light years away and you are looking back at yourself. You would observe the light that left your position 200 years ago say a particular event. The image was frozen for 200 years because time stops at the speed of light. That's why everything we see is to some degree in the past. If you could follow the light path instantaneously you would arrive at the event.
..at speed of light which means ball is flat like a pizza 2 dimensional ...upper speed of light the contraction is negative and the time for the bowl is also negative ..so the ball disappear in the past through the 4th dimension the black light from it will never reach you...
..than you see just red and later black light ! you would see it reverse every thing in your movie ...but if a bowl with mass break the lightspeed barrier (theoretically) ! you woun't see the black light at all because your bowl would behaves very strange...because 0 mph redlight shine in your direction than the colored ball speed up to faster than speed of light...before changing color to black...ball travel in to the past upper than speed of light..length contraction not only 100%
you are right ! with the video..theoretically. first of all you would see nothing but you would feel only the ball in ya face ^^ u know what i mean...than you would see the black light and than the red light beacause you passed the red light circle and turn 2 black out of the red light circle and produce a black light circle ..but that works only if the colored ball fly faster than speed of light in YOUR direction..if you are behind or beside the colored balll which goes AWAY from you ,...
are you thinking that if you moved faster than light you would be moving into older light (over taking light) and seeing things how they were and getting that rewind effect?
unfortunately, if you moved away from the light source at faster than the speed of light, you would never see the red or black light. the light would never reach your eye. so your theory is not plausible sorry. and you only need the flux capacitor to go in reverse through time
no this is not true as proven by the modified equation from einstein it proved that when moving at speeds as fast as light time is manipulated in process.. so if a person was traveling half the speed of light and another person shined a light the direction you were traveling you would see the same light as when you stood completle still as the light passed by and hit your eyes..
yes, you would "see" events happen in reverse, but once you introduce a second inertial frame that allows faster than light travel, you will have an irreconcilable paradox on your hands.
when u travel at 186000 miles / second, time n light r standing still
now if u increase ur speed to 186001 miles / second, relative to u time is travellin at -1 miles / second n da same goes fr light......N u have time travelled to the past 1 second !, as u increase ur speed to 286000 miles/second, u have gone 1000 seconds into the past
This has been flagged as spam show
▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
THIS IS A REALLY POPULAR COMMENT！
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
kylenjm 1 month ago
The so-called speed of light has been broken! I'm sure you've heard about the experiments that have proved this at CERN recently,please take down your obsolete video mate! E=MC2, bull fucking shit!!!!!!!!!!!
jumz82 1 month ago
@jumz82 you do know it hasn't been proven yet right?
How about you take down your obsolete message?
plz? thx
sniped101 1 week ago
i think that you would be going faster and faster approching the speed of light and once you get there, going in someone elses veiw, you would be slowing down, in your veiw you would be going faster and faster, but when you decelerate you would appear to jump in time to your new location
Jomasterhns 2 months ago
as soon as you broke the speed of light you would be not visibly where your at but phyically. and you would be able to see yourself in the past. faster you go, the farther you get and the old the light becomes. therefore the farther in the past you would be seeing. time would visibly be going back in the past but you would actually be going ahead in time and only watching whats happening in the past not physically living it..
dootchltdltd 5 months ago in playlist The Universe--Light Speed
So I ask this question: If you can go back in time so you are traveling the same speed backward as the time go foreward everything would seem to stop. If you are on the road you would easely go between cars. So drivers would see you moving very fast. That is because you are traveling with speed of light.
brixie11 7 months ago
But if this would be real time traveling you wouldnt fly off the road on a curve because of speed. So speed of light and time traveling are two different terms.
brixie11 7 months ago
I dont thinkany1 jnows anythimg about it cuz no1s ever done -
TheSCstudios 7 months ago
Idklets ask han solo
TheSCstudios 7 months ago
According to Zeno's Paradoxes, you have to travel to every discreet point before you arrive at your destination; you aren't *teleporting* past the red light! If you go FASTER than the speed of light in any direction, you see events playing out in Fast Forward! Now, if you are at the source of the light, and looking behind you, you WILL see events transpire in reverse. Does that mean you're Time Traveling? I posit; No.
Ayelis 8 months ago in playlist The Universe--Light Speed
If you would be able to travel faster than the speed of light you would more or less get vaporized by other molecules that you will bump or encounter. Other theories suggest that time would stop according to Lorenze's Equation. But for me.. i don't know.
stonekid156 11 months ago
@stonekid156 The reason why you cannot travel at the speed of light is because no mass can, Photons (Light particles) can because they have no mass. It would take infinite energy to make a mass travel at c which is'nt possible. It is also impossible to achieve speeds greater than light because that is the speed in which the universe is expanding. Even if you were to achieve c, the speed of light will allways be the same distance of 300,000km infront of you moving that distance every second.
NANOFORGE 11 months ago
@NANOFORGE so if you were to travel at the speed of light, you would think that time has stopped?
pizzabox24 10 months ago
@pizzabox24 pretty much. if you were at the speed of light you would of moved infinitley far is a short amount of time, the rest of the universe would look still.
NANOFORGE 10 months ago
@NANOFORGE Ha, so time travel may not be possible, but at least time freezing still is :D
pizzabox24 10 months ago
@pizzabox24 well if we can go further in time which we are doing every second there is no reason we cannot go back in time.
NANOFORGE 10 months ago
@NANOFORGE wowwow but u said that we cannot travel faster than c, therefore it is impossible to travel backward in time...?
pizzabox24 10 months ago
@pizzabox24 It is impossible to travel backward in "time", regardless of c. What is "time"? Is "time" a calendar? Does June 2011 feel twice as different from June 2009 as June 2008 did? Or is "time" just a method Man invented to measure fairly equal discreet changes between events? What makes you think this "Past" is a physical place? When you were "in the past", did it not feel exactly like "Now"? What makes you think that any moment other than "Now" exists? Time is not linear, it is a point.
Ayelis 8 months ago
@Ayelis D8
drodriguez62 6 months ago
@NANOFORGE You are proposing massive edits to the entire universe, when you cannot even un-shatter a single coffee cup. Un-crash the World Trade Center. Un-break my heart. Convince every human that the year is 2007. You will then have traveled backwards in time. Minus everyone who died. And all those socks and keys and money we lost.
Ayelis 8 months ago
@Ayelis The laws of physics say time travel is impossible, what I'm saying is maybe in the future those laws may be rewritten. I never like to say something is'nt possible but as far as modern physics laws go, somethings are.
NANOFORGE 8 months ago
Oh i think i got it. So is it that if we look towards the lights(both of them) moving away from us rather than towards us? Then it would make sense this way and i think i didn't see that red arrow pointing from the ball towards the 'going away' colours.
someonestartwith786 1 year ago
wtf? I don't get this. Plz someone explain. First how they hell would you be able to see the black colour first than the red when travelling faster than the speed of light? Second, which way are you travelling? towards the ball or away from it? In anyway wouldn't you still see the red colour first? because it is more closer to you than the black colour!!????
someonestartwith786 1 year ago
Wtf is up with these huge words.
almightyJ620 1 year ago
hypothetically. assuming light and time as a zero point. + being slower than the speed of light and - being faster than the speed of light. Would going faster than the speed of light mean that you start to gain an infinite amount of mass because you start to hit the photons (light) instead of the photons hitting you. In turn would this cause Einsteins equation E=MC2 to be reversed or turn into a negative route number? or just collapse? would you be traveling into the realm of antimatter?
jamesmcmurray750 1 year ago
LMAO Its funny how a little kid made yall think im pretty sure if one of ur little relatives said sum bout his u would ignore and sumtines u dont
chambersdude 1 year ago
I'm building a couple of black hole engines that you strap on your back, they suck time and space in the front and release the energy out the back.
fourayes 1 year ago
and also to travle faster then the speed of light you would go into the futer becuase time is relative faster you go slower the time goes so lets jsut say this this isent exacly right im just using numbers to express what im saying so say your travling at the speed of light comapred to people on earth at the normal rate 1 year at the speed of light would be 1000 years on earth these year calculations arnt true but im using them as a example so therefore u wont go back in time
saska123321 1 year ago
but we are not even close to that technological advancement yet and it may be even impossible to do it so im not sure =p
saska123321 1 year ago
therefor we can go even 30 miles per hour while the space bends past it making us travle up to 100 times the speed of light without any difrence to us except getting there faster =) but then again the mass we would need to bend the light would be almsot as much as a black hole there for we would be sucked into goign infenaty and burn up and torn apart if we could find some way to withstand the gravity of a black hole and to move one we could do it
saska123321 1 year ago
going faster then the speed of light is impossible as you get to the speed of light once u acuely hit it all energy go to go forward would convert into mass so instead of goign faster you would jsut be going the same speed but jsut start gettign heavier and heavier-----but i found something out the only thiing faster then the speed of light is time and space itself so oooo what if its possible to bend space into a big dip in the front and then creat a big wave in the back of the ship
saska123321 1 year ago
E=mc^2 dumbass, in order to exceed the speed of light you would have to either create mass or energy (matter in essence). Which, by the laws of physics is impossible! Good try though
MrPrangerBanger 1 year ago
NO NO NO!.. If u travelled faster than light u would not go back in time. Like DarrikBaker said, u will only see events in reverse because u are moving faster than light which means u are catching up to the photons and YOU are SMACKING them w/ your retina instead of them smacking you (like usual). Its the same if u were to fire 10 rounds w/ an uzi, and u run twice as fast as the bullets, u will catch up to the bullets and see them BACK-to-FRONT in a straight line, instead of Front-to-back.
cultivator23 1 year ago
as you travel close to the speed of light, time slows down. when you travel at the speed of light, time stops. the only plausible conjecture i can make is that when you travel faster than the speed of light time reverses. so in a sense, you would be seeing the universe in reverse. but that's only IF you could travel faster than light.
bobbytmathew 1 year ago
Wait ,you can't see anything, there is no light get in to your eyes,cauz you are faster than light.
guitarkiller1981 1 year ago
You are right in logic,but you can't broke the speed of light.
guitarkiller1981 1 year ago
sure - given light speed and sound speed are nowhere near the same... same principle really. loud enough sound and if you travel faster than it - you can here it again. just need to magnify it :P
greenpogo 1 year ago
I personnaly have no idea what I would see if I would go faster than the speed of light or even at the same speed. I'm just taking a guess here :
I would see everything...
gearsiborg 1 year ago
Interesting. Keep watching!
Wildcard120 1 year ago
We don't know why black holes exist in our universe... Though we know partially how they work and understand some physics behind them, the question "Why" is a more than important factor when trying to understand anything in the universe. Think about the phrase "who, what, when, where, and why". Why is the deepest of all of them.
jscullysmail 1 year ago
lets say you reached the speed of light. well if that were somehow possible you mass would then become infinite according to e=mc^2. well that infinite mass would produce some major (if not infinite) gravitition. this gravitation created by you would alter any light you were near. including those red light waves and the ?black? light waves
black light?
TheIdontknow86 1 year ago
I think it´s a very interesting question. From what I´ve understood time (theoreticaly) stands still at the speed of light.
I don´t think the answer would be that you would see the ball changing colour in reverce, rather you would see nothing because the light from the ball has no way of catching up with you.
what would happen to time when exceeding the speed of light? would one fall out of time all together or would it go backwards? Hypotheticaly, that is....
lindarajalin1 1 year ago
Scientists have an illution of control, although they discover many things that amaze us today, they are childs play in the few of the whole universe and the One who created it. Seriously, what do we know about alternate realities and the like, to say they are meer science fiction? Might I add that often times science fiction is actually cutting edge technology a few years from now. Look at us, we try so hard to replicate things that seem so simple in nature. Well we've got credit for curiosity.
ElijahJohnSanders 1 year ago
@ElijahJohnSanders, illusion of control ? Its true that scientists do discover more and more and have not as yet discovered the origins of everything, but to say its an illusion is hypocritical, because as you said " they are childs play in the whole universe and the One who created it." do you have proof of its existence? and things only seem simple because you choose not to investigate properties nature and its facets
jamesmcmurray750 1 year ago
@jamesmcmurray750 I said an illusion of control, not just an illusion, in that it seems, that we think we know EVERYTHING and the answer to EVERYTHING when we don't. I do investigate them in fact, thank you. I realize it is vast and complex and wonderful! But there is so much more, and we try so hard to replicate the basics, and yet we think we know everything. Yes I realize we don't liturally think we know everything (although some do, lol). Proof of the universe? or it's Creator? You don't? 00
ElijahJohnSanders 1 year ago
if you traveled faster than the speed of light, you would have MORE than infinite mass which doesn't make sense. Einsteins equation E=mc/√(1-(v²/c²)) or E=γmc² shows that it would be impossible because if v>c, then you'd have a negative root.
the same goes for time, you'd have infinite time dilation (everything else relative to you would move MORE than infinitely slow (whatever that means) by t'=γt or t'=t/√(1-(v²/c²)) in the exact same way, it can't happen because you'd have a negative root.
Richy15251 1 year ago
in theory the faster you travel the slower time will be so lets say you have something on your person thatl lets u move that fast even standong still everything around you would be frozen in time as you are moving so fast everything will slow down
kyosuke2008 1 year ago
If light is travelling faster then i could see what is going to happen in the future. But i would still be in the same time pattern.
I dont know what i am talking about but there are so many outcomes that make sense.
Arika486 1 year ago
Comment removed
Arika486 1 year ago
Here is the problem. this is extremely simplified but you should get it.
time dialation is based on time as we perceive it divided by (one minus square root of the objects speed "V" squared divided by the speed of light "C" squared).
but when you actually hit C this happens V/C is the same is C/C and thus equals 1 and 1-1 equals zero so you are left with a fraction that looks like this 1/0 which is impossible mathematically
gtq838 1 year ago
@azn3kn444
My mom used to feed me the same question, I finally told her other than the whole "dreaming the future" argument (which I don't think is what you're suggesting) That the speed of thought is roughly the speed of electricity. After all, that's how our body's nerve endings work anyways. I'd guess probably the time it takes the thought to travel from your right frontal lobe, to your left frontal lobe of your cerebrum.
(where you created the thought, to where you were able to perceive it)
ohgodihatenames 1 year ago
Comment removed
ohgodihatenames 1 year ago
In fact, you wouldn't "catch up" with either light. because the velocity of light is neither added nor subtracted to the velocity of either the source or the observer (however counter-intuitive that may sound).
If you're on a train on one track going 50mph compared to an observer on the ground and I'm on an adjoining track going in the opposite direction going 50mph, I'm going 100mph compared to you.
prodprod 1 year ago
(cont'd) A third observer traveling at 50mph going in the same direction as you on a third track doesn't seem to be moving at all - compared to you.
Let's make it spaceships, each travelling at 50% the speed of light, and each projecting a beam of light out in front of them -- and measuring the velocity of one another's light beams.
A funny thing happens. Everybody on every spaceship, along with all the ground observers say the same thing.
prodprod 1 year ago
(cont'd) Every beam of light, no matter the direction or from which ship it is being projected, is travelling at the same velocity -- 186,282 mps.
The velocities neither add nor subtract but always seem to be the same for every observer. What they will disagree about is the *relative time* of the various spaceships.
Observers will disagree about clocks, mass, and velocity -- but they will always agree about the speed of light.
prodprod 1 year ago
you would see nothing as you go in between light. as you catch up to the red light you would see rainbow like colors because its not red until the light reflects and absorbs off of things (you dont see the red laser beam but you see the dot at the end right?). one thing i believe is faster then light is...the mind. you can measure the speed of light but can you measure the speed of my thoughts? if my mind is infinite then thats something so fast so vast that it can not be measured.
aznk3n444 1 year ago
You would have to be traveling in the opposite direction of the ball, and time stops at the speed of light, idk what happens if you go faster...
edonis321 1 year ago
if u did brake teh speed of light u'd be able to see nothing!!!!! or even go back in time!
scottlocks 1 year ago
i beleive that our president should gather the worlds greatest scientist and see what they can come up with right now we think that it is impossible to reach light speed but if the president were to gather the worlds greatest scientist then maybe we could find a solution for not creating a black hole when you travel at light speed
213125342 1 year ago
you would not see any light at all because you are traveling faster than it
213125342 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you would not see it at all if you traveled faster than light i think
213125342 1 year ago
srry, my below, 2 part comment is in reverse order, read the bottom one first.
theeichris 1 year ago
backwards then you would only see an absence of light (black) because the light wouldnt be traveling fast enough to catch up to your eyeballs and stimulate the light detecting cells in you eyes.
theeichris 1 year ago
ok, so your original lightbulb thingy would APPEAR to travel in reverse time, but if there was another lightbulb at the other end of the room then as you were traveling it would appear that time was speeding up for that lightbulb. and for any other random lightbulb it would appear to speed up untill you got to the point in your path that would pass closest to the lightbulb and then it would appear to stop and go backwards in time. also if you were traveling faster than light and you looked
theeichris 1 year ago
i am 12 yrs old, and you physiccaly cannot break the speed of light. time woll literally slow itself down to prevent you from doing so.
pillowsarecool2 1 year ago
faster than light travel would create a black hole as it would create a time singularity that would according to quantum theory condense into a mass singularity. I over simplified here but if you are curious about this theory check out "Faster Than Light Superluminal Loopholes In Physics" by Nick Herbert, Ph.D.
dsdougharty 1 year ago
humm... i have heard of this before... hes saying that you could look into the past, not necessarily travel into the past and effect it. example: we measure space distance in "light years" which is how far light travles in a year... well some things they say are like 250 million light years away... so technically, what were seeing when we look at it, happened 250 million years ago.. it just took that long for the light to get here for us to see it.
Synic08 1 year ago
If you can exceed the speed of light, then you are suggesting time will travel backward. If this is true, then paradoxes must exist and also parallel universes. The idea of parallel universes is very controversial and commonly thought of as science fiction. I propose that the faster you travel, the faster time progresses, but nothing can exceed the speed of light, but then why can a black hole force something faster than the speed of light???
eah2119 1 year ago
@eah2119 probably the gravitational attraction of a black hole is so great because of its infinite mass
DarrikBaker 1 year ago 2
@DarrikBaker A black hole does not have infinite mass.
firewallx 1 year ago
@DarrikBaker A black hole doesn't have infinite mass. Infinite mass would equal infinite gravitational force. A black hole has slightly less mass than the star it was created from. It does, however, have infinite density because all that mass is focused on a point with zero volume and the gravitational force would be extraordinary close to the centre.
HackersRUs 5 months ago
@eah2119 black holes are actually paradoxial... but the idea is that the can only reach the gravitational eqivalent of the speed of light and every atom they attract after that is instantly changed to energy...
also light wouldn't be sucked into but rather bent a warped light the obit of a planet which would allow it to eventually be pulled in while not breaking the speed limit
gtq838 1 year ago
@eah2119 It has actually been proven that moving objects have their time slow down. particles that usually decay quickly standing fairly still, decay way slower while accelerated near the speed of light. If what you propose is true, then the particle should have decayed way faster. Stuff is not supposed to make much sense around a black hole, and anything traveling faster than the speed of light next to a black hole means it's already doomed anyway.
danielodors 1 year ago
@danielodors Sorry. I meant the faster you travel the slower YOUR time is relative everything else, so then everything around you would have faster time travel, and that is why I said "the faster time progresses" as in the time on Earth.
eah2119 1 year ago
@eah2119 actually physicists have theorized the opposite, that time will actually slow down when nearing the speed of light. I love physics!
MrWoodson87 1 year ago
@eah2119 NO WHAT U SAID ISNT TRUE.....I JUST HAD A BRAIN FART OF EPIC PROPORTIONS.....IF U GO 5X FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT AWAY FROM EARTH FOR A YEAR...AND U LOOKED BACK WITH A SUPER TELESCOPE .... YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE 4 YEARS INTO THE PAST.... WHEREVER U LOOK IT WOULD BE 4 YEARS IN THE PAST.... U COULD LOOK AT WHAT U DID 4 YEARS AGO...BUT EARTH WOULD STILL BE IN THE PRESENT... AWESOME... I LOVE OUR UNIVERSE!!
MagicSeasoning 1 year ago
@MagicSeasoning lol a brain fart of epic proportions. You're right, but what if you're traveling 5 times the speed of light orbiting the Earth for a year?
eah2119 1 year ago
@MagicSeasoning
assuming first of all that you can see the earth in that sort of detail after traveling at hyperspeed for a year, also assuming that at the speed of light, time does in fact slow, and at exceeding the speed of light time travels backwards only for the individual traveling at that speed, also, assuming that time is linear and it follows a set path that can be traveled back upon in a linear fashion, then yes you are correct magic seasoning
ldehart17 1 year ago
@eah2119 its becuase a blackhole is so mnassive in its mass it
bends space makeing it go faster then the speed of light the black hole on the
inside is at a speed of infenaty becuase it makes a hole in space itself
saska123321 1 year ago
@saska123321 If nothing can escape a black hole then why do they spew matter? Gravity doesn't affect things without a mass (i.e. photon-waves) and there is no such things as black holes. They are just (flawed) imaginary creations of Newtonian scientist that haven't yet realized the power of plasma and electromagnetic forces. Electromagnetism is x1000000 as powerful as gravity, proven fact.
CanadianStoner1001 1 year ago
@CanadianStoner1001 did u say nothing can escape it cusi jsut went through my comments and i didnt say that anywere so yea =p
saska123321 1 year ago
@saska123321 That wasn't my point though, im trying to tell you that black holes don't actually exist. =p
CanadianStoner1001 1 year ago
@CanadianStoner1001 then why do they always have mini black holes in the collider over there in europe when there smashing atoms
saska123321 1 year ago
@saska123321 They don't, they're just assuming that they would show up but they still haven't, Black holes don't even follow the laws of physics let alone exist. There is no black holes in the center of our galaxy (its actually a giant plasmoid just like our sun) or any where in our universe.
CanadianStoner1001 1 year ago
@saska123321 That gives me an idea. If the gravitational force near/inside a black hole is so large then as you approached it space would be stretched out. Everything would expand as you got closer therefore it wouldn't seem much like a black hole at all. A hole in space itself? No. There can not be holes in space. It only seems like a hole from a distance. As you approached you would sucked in to this enormous curve of space time and, lo and behold, it's a whole new universe!
eah2119 1 year ago
@eah2119 This could be the answer to time travel! Who knows the wonders of the universe could result in!
SHad0wnight9 1 year ago
@eah2119 black holes don't "force" something faster than the speed of light... its just that the gravitational pull is stronger than every other force... and it doesn't have infinite force, it has infinite density.
guitfan33 1 year ago
@eah2119 Time doesn't "travel backwards" just because you see events backwards. Is time ACTUALLY traveling backwards when you rewind a VHS tape? Vision has nothing to do with actual time. Events still take place in a certain order, and Thermodynamic Law will never be broken.
Ayelis 8 months ago in playlist The Universe--Light Speed
@eah2119
See but they just broke it now. Wut?!
TheOvechking8 5 months ago
As particle moving at superlight speed it could only see it self and nothing else. Inside warp drive u see mass spacetime displacements occur as conduits. Example stars no longer appear as dots they appear as lighted streaks trailing off into space to point of origin inside expanding universe, a way kool site to see.
HGSpaceTime 1 year ago
If you think of space/time in a truly linear fashion. When you break the speed of light, you would observe the universe moving backwards, however you would still be traveling forward in time, and time would pass same for you, as for everyone else. So if you left earth and travelled faster then the speed of light with some super powerful optics, you could see earths past, but when you returned to earth if still watching earth time would seem to go twice as fast. (assuming linear universe)
GhostInTheShell29 1 year ago
@GhostInTheShell29 time moves slower the faster you move, so you would age slower and everyone on earth would be dead
ctoon6 1 year ago
@ctoon6 My hypothesis depends soley on time being linear... which it isn't or appears not to be people tell me its curved but i'd really like to see a spaceship approach the speed of light before i'll be fully convinced. Was just doing a thought experiment on if it was linear. Then relativity wouldn't matter.
GhostInTheShell29 1 year ago
I've always hear the speed of sound, the speed of light, faster than the speed of sound, faster than the speed of light. BUT has ANYONE ever even considered the speed of SIGHT @ 20/20 vision??? When I look at the stars or planets in space ( I know that's old light) but just how fast was my eyes able to travel and focus on that light? And at exactly what distance did I come into contact with that light?
Truemoderate 1 year ago
i actually like this video, its gotten me thinking on the big theories again, but please dont bring strings theory in here, thats just a massive headache that only stephen hawkings can explain.
ICETEEBAG 1 year ago
ya no shit you tard whats the point could you have possibley come up with a lamer example
joko10127 1 year ago
It's good that you're thinking of these things even if most people find it "impossible." Maybe through wormholes or some unconventional method it's possible. But, your view seems somewhat accurate that you see black first; however, you would not see red. The two light waves would interfere and you would see black, then a mix of black and red (whatever color that is) and then black again. In actuality, you would probably see the mix first as the black light catches up with the red light.
thesands49 1 year ago
Google: Tachyon Theory. Wikipedia has a thought provoking blurb about the effects of FTL travel.
TexasSixShooter 1 year ago
However if an object was moving faster than the speed of light, wouldn't it just become invisible? since we can't see anything until it reaches our eyes, and the item is already gone before they do?
flobble123 1 year ago
We are all living in the same time. -nothing ahead of us, nothing behind. so if you go at the speed of light, you are basically just moving before anything BEHIND you reaches you. However what u see in front of you still remains. Just at a different speed. Its like you wer driving. faster than cars behind you, but the cars in front, you can still see. So, my theory is that if you travel at the speed of light, you will see in front of u. just altared in time. as if the speed of light wass changed
flobble123 1 year ago
Theoretically speaking, I think that it would be as if the world stood still
GoLuMgrrElmo 1 year ago
You wouldn't see anything at all.
To accelerate any object with mass to the speed of light would require infinite energy. But as einstein proved, the faster you go, the bigger you get (which is really frackin weird but true). as you got to the speed of light you would get infinitely more massive. this would create a black hole and you wouldnt see anything. because you'd be dead. or all you would see is white since all the light would get sucked into your black hole. and then you'd be dead.
boytoy042188 1 year ago
@boytoy042188 what if we used a shrink ray ,lol.
ruthomom 1 year ago
You would outrun the color change, in fact, if you were outrunning the photons then you would never see the color change until you slowed down.
xxporkxsodaxx 1 year ago
your actually kind of right. except we could never go the speed of light because as an object with mass approaches the speed of light, the objects mass approaches infinite, requiring an infinite amount of force to keep it moving. but if you did some how, theoretically, time would stop at the speed of light, and if you kept going past the speed of light, you would go back in time. all theoretical though of course
sk8emerica035 1 year ago
You're theory of seeing the black light first is coming from you running out from the light source. Which contradicts your first theory of viewing the light from outside its source.
Sorry, but you are incorrect. You would see nothing in reverse. This my friend, is common sense.
xXxDarkxGodxXx 1 year ago
Well, you could not exceed the sped of light #1. And #2, if you did, you would not see the light at all. #3, as you approach the speed of light, light still travels away from you at the speed of light. #4, if the red light was emitted first, you would still see it first.
ShowtimeSPL 1 year ago
The LSD I took last week proves that the Lights turn blue tomorrow
unitedstatesdale 1 year ago
i'm conflicted when i comment on something like this because i don't want to discourage people from thinking, but at the same time, there is something wrong with what you're thinking. however, i'm afraid that a complete explanation may be beyond your current technical grasp, for if it were not, i don't think you would have posted this video. CONTINUED IN NEXT POST...
pruel 1 year ago
so, as a word of encouragement, keep on thinking! but find some good information sources on the web where you can learn about space, time, and the mathematics behind it. do not go to weird sites. stick with colleges and trusted information sources. although not always 100% right, wikipedia is pretty darned good, especially if you starting out. good luck!!
pruel 1 year ago
Comment removed
pruel 1 year ago
impossible. can't exceed the speed of light. Can't reach it. If you could REACH the speed of light (only possible if you have no mass), then you would not experience time passing. You would instantly arrive at your destination... so 2x speed of light... if it were possible, can only be considered hypothetically (the equation for time dilation would yield an irrational number--time/root negative)
mega160 1 year ago
@mega160
He said it was theoretic... Just say your opinion, not lecture him. Just say yes or no.
KingErrek 1 year ago
quote phiciys teacher
It can continuously accelerate, and from its frame of reference it will arrive that much quicker, but as time dilates, for the moving object, an external observer would see less and less increase in speed. The change gradually becomes a shift in the rate of passage of time. We'll discuss this further in community.
mega160 1 year ago
What a load of old pish!
wattenmike 2 years ago
you didnt think of that. Albert Einstein did
zirfygodd 2 years ago
@pwnedunoob890 LIGHTING1000/1 SECOND think about...no
patti628 2 years ago
So if u were moving faster than the speed of light in front of a galaxy,meaning the way that the galaxy is moving towards, you will see the past? And if u were moving faster than the speed of light behind the galaxy, or like the opposite direction the galaxy is moving, you will be able to see the future?
enerchin 2 years ago
Correction: Nothing with mass can travel faster than light in a vacuum. SoulOfMasterDragon explained it correctly.
np316579 2 years ago
i have been thinking about this myself... if you were to get shot out into space faster than the speed of light for lets say 10 years and used a very powerful telescope (yes, i know there are no telescopes this powerful) to look back at earth, u could see the 9/11 attacks on the world trade centers.
Cervelo000 2 years ago
@Cervelo000 this would be true
castout85 2 years ago
Comment removed
strategicmunchkin 2 years ago
@Cervelo000 Using this idea, and the telescope you mentioned, couldn't you go far enough into space to see if dinosaurs are actually real(if you were to somehow live forever)?
strategicmunchkin 2 years ago
yup bascially.
as a side note (not directed to you strate)
the notion that you would travel back in time is false as you would have to take the light that emited from our plant (reflection) and use that some how to interact with the past.
basically if we can travel faster then the speed of light then at this point its only possible to observe the past (but that in itself is f'ed lol)
but hwo knows maybe after that there will be away of atleast communicating with the past, i hope not
cmbsmith24 2 years ago
yup basically our understanding of things would make that true
cuz in reality when we look at the stars we are acualty seeing the light they emited millions-billions of years ago, who knows if some have disappeared since then?
cmbsmith24 2 years ago
Actually if you could move faster then the speed of light you would still see the red light first because its you moving faster not the light. retard... on top of that no matter can move as fast as light because the faster an object goes the more mass it has, and the more mass at high speeds the more momentum is required, momentum requires energy, therefore the amount of energy needed would exponentially increase to infinity. and you cant have infinite energy except rom the big bang.
SoulOfMasterDragon 2 years ago
Actually, space can expand faster than the speed of light. Other than light, no particle or wave is able to travel faster. Although, if you can create an immense amount of gravity at any one point, you could literally bend and pull space towards you. This would enable you to travel long distances, faster than light, without actually moving faster than light. Wish we'd invest more tax dollars in science instead of war and we'd be gold.
Myk664 2 years ago 2
@SoulOfMasterDragon Finally someone with an appreciable knowledge of physics that knows what they're talking about.
Forlo12345 2 years ago
agreed, its kinda like a car sitting still and the earth moving under it but the car remains in place....you travel at the speed of the earth rotation! same concept here. just hold your position and let the universe expand through you as you remain, the tricky part would be catching back up with the earth as you could move at the speed of the expansion but would need to go faster in ordr to cath up....anything is possible! :D
cmbsmith24 2 years ago
Theoretically as soon as you hit speed of light, your shit would fly out your rear end
jogrannymonkey 2 years ago
Well i don't think you can see black light since black is from the absence of photons. I think it is possible to break the speed of light since scientists assume that in the beginning of the big bang that within the first trillionth of a second particles were moving much more faster than the speed of light.
derekrhode 2 years ago
Nothing can travel at or beyond the speed of light. It is physically impossible.
np316579 2 years ago
@np316579- Wrong. Sound waves can travel faster than the speed of light.
theslugger15 2 years ago
Correction/ Sound waves are capable of traveling faster than 300,000 m/s A.K.A. the traditional speed of light.
theslugger15 2 years ago
Comment removed
Cervelo000 2 years ago
ok I think I get what he's trying to say, I'm just a kid myself, and this acctually makes sence.
ImayStalkU 2 years ago
this isnt even theoretical..
malakai23 2 years ago
you would not see things in reverse it would just like being at a track meet if one runner leaves the start line sooner (red light) but the second runner (black light) is faster than is faster than the first then the second runner just hits the finish line sooner.
turneralx11 2 years ago
I dont get the positioning nor the relative points of view, therefore anything i say will be flawed.....please elaborate on your idea :D
fix520 2 years ago
I don't think human mind can perceive more than 3rd dimension of environment. Hell, we hardly understand the 4th... I'd think if you were to stand inside a spaceship that travels at FTL, I would imagine everything would change instantaneously into the future from our perspective using our limited senses.
gocaitygo 2 years ago
Nothing very particular will happen if you traveled faster than the speed of light. It's like asking "What happens when you go over the limit of 60Km an hour, on the street?" For that respect, you wouldn't be able to catch the red light after the latter kind of light, and by extension, you wouldn't be able to see the world in reverse either.
Whiteoverblue 2 years ago
Maybe you should imagine what life would be like if light did not travel that fast. I think we would be blind to moving objects. The same way any space ship travling @ the speed of light would be blind to anything in it's way.
MicrosoftsourceCode 2 years ago
this video dosent make any sense from ure diagram, if u were observing the ball from elsewhere then u would see the red light, then the black light. But since ure diagram showed the person leaving the ball then they'd see red, black, red. (red when they 1st on it, then black as it changes black, then red again when they catch up with the red light that first left the ball)
UKRemixed 2 years ago
(The light is directly aimed at the observer)
Say you turn on a red light source that travels at the "speed of light".
After a certain time has passed:
You press a button and light switches to yellow but this hypothetical yellow light travels "faster than red light".
Depending on the observer's distance to the source I am thinking he would see the yellow light earlier.
If that's true:
From the receiver's (observer) Point of View. The Yellow light travel to in time to the past?
NartSaga 2 years ago
would you really travel to the past
say you were on earth and you set off a red light at the speed of light and you took off at twice the speed of light towards somewhere 1 lightyear off in space, you reach that, then turn around go back to Earth, you arrive there what feels to you 1 year later to you, but your a year in the past cause the red light is still 1 lightyear away?
gingerkid417 2 years ago 2
Interesting thought...
But first I would like to raise a point. Since in your video you did not specify whether you were traveling towards the ball or away from the ball. If you were traveling towards the ball at close to the speed of light everything would blueshift towards the Gamma Ray portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, whereas if you were traveling away they would redshift into the Radio waves. Assuming that this trend continues beyond the speed of light. Both colors should diverge
se7enfive1 2 years ago
sorry, both colors should converge into some electromagnetic radiation at an extreme degree perhaps beyond what we are used to depending on whether you were traveling towards or away from the ball. Now lets assume the ball doesn't redshift or blueshift, you would notice that the Red light still reaches you sooner than the black light if you were traveling at the speed of light. Only if the black light somehow traveled faster than the red light would you see the black light sooner than the red.
se7enfive1 2 years ago
I think your brains would turn to shit from the speed, and therefore you would be dead before you even hit, like mach 10.
nocturnalicon12 2 years ago
I agree with 1965 ace. Breaking the speed of light theoretically could enable time travel, but only to the past. I do dig your theory, kid. Keep them coming.
Master0Shake 2 years ago
the author is obviously a retarded faggot.
ha ha ha ha ha... hmm eh. jk
ObscurelyUnkown 2 years ago
lololol black light.
JamesHazBeHaiTyme 2 years ago
Let's say there is a mirror 100 light years away and you are looking back at yourself. You would observe the light that left your position 200 years ago say a particular event. The image was frozen for 200 years because time stops at the speed of light. That's why everything we see is to some degree in the past. If you could follow the light path instantaneously you would arrive at the event.
1965ace 2 years ago
..at speed of light which means ball is flat like a pizza 2 dimensional ...upper speed of light the contraction is negative and the time for the bowl is also negative ..so the ball disappear in the past through the 4th dimension the black light from it will never reach you...
Raumzeit100 2 years ago
..than you see just red and later black light ! you would see it reverse every thing in your movie ...but if a bowl with mass break the lightspeed barrier (theoretically) ! you woun't see the black light at all because your bowl would behaves very strange...because 0 mph redlight shine in your direction than the colored ball speed up to faster than speed of light...before changing color to black...ball travel in to the past upper than speed of light..length contraction not only 100%
Raumzeit100 2 years ago
you are right ! with the video..theoretically. first of all you would see nothing but you would feel only the ball in ya face ^^ u know what i mean...than you would see the black light and than the red light beacause you passed the red light circle and turn 2 black out of the red light circle and produce a black light circle ..but that works only if the colored ball fly faster than speed of light in YOUR direction..if you are behind or beside the colored balll which goes AWAY from you ,...
Raumzeit100 2 years ago
Well before anything there's no dark light...
wkswilliam 2 years ago
are you thinking that if you moved faster than light you would be moving into older light (over taking light) and seeing things how they were and getting that rewind effect?
rtonb 2 years ago
unfortunately, if you moved away from the light source at faster than the speed of light, you would never see the red or black light. the light would never reach your eye. so your theory is not plausible sorry. and you only need the flux capacitor to go in reverse through time
Taxi502 2 years ago
I think this is like asking what you would say if you died and lived to tell about it.
philnoll 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
attn: all writers world-wide
I want to know when is Dan Brown going to work
with Jeff Fisher and Jane Bowell since the Davinci Code is true.
The site is called JesusChristLovesForeverAmen blogspot
Toni Maples
Alberta Canada
tonimaples hotmail
I got an email from a man named Richard Saskle.
ToniMaples 2 years ago
hes the white hippy llookin guy
xXsquishy420Xx 2 years ago
if anyone hasnt seen doc valentines videos i suggest u check it out its a lil longer then58 seconds
xXsquishy420Xx 2 years ago
no this is not true as proven by the modified equation from einstein it proved that when moving at speeds as fast as light time is manipulated in process.. so if a person was traveling half the speed of light and another person shined a light the direction you were traveling you would see the same light as when you stood completle still as the light passed by and hit your eyes..
Xboxexperts 2 years ago
but tortoises are faster than slugs arent they?
omanrocks123 2 years ago
yes, you would "see" events happen in reverse, but once you introduce a second inertial frame that allows faster than light travel, you will have an irreconcilable paradox on your hands.
quidproquo2004 2 years ago
SEE COMMENT BELOW FIRST !!
when u travel at 186000 miles / second, time n light r standing still
now if u increase ur speed to 186001 miles / second, relative to u time is travellin at -1 miles / second n da same goes fr light......N u have time travelled to the past 1 second !, as u increase ur speed to 286000 miles/second, u have gone 1000 seconds into the past
danial657 2 years ago