Speed of light yes or no? [closed]

First off I am not a physics student: I am more of a science enthusiast.

My question pertains to time and the speed of light: According to Einstein, no mass can travel at the speed of light. Now, is that based on time or is time excluded from the equation?

According to the warping the space-time continuum, someone standing outside the warp would see it as traveling at the speed of light or faster, and could say the photon in a beam of light is not in its own space-time shift. Whereas it is traveling at a normal speed. and we see it as at the speed of light. In the same way as an ant sees us moving very slowly and wee see the ant moving fast. Size, distance, gravity, and time itself are all relative, are they not?

closed as unclear what you're asking by Prahar, Kyle Kanos, Rob Jeffries, John Rennie, JamalSApr 6 '15 at 10:35

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

• My friend, I hate that you have so many dislikes so I will be nice and won't do it. Special Relativity is what you really need to research, in particular time dilation and length contraction. The equations are really easy. – Damon Blevins Apr 4 '15 at 7:09
• Plus, it's unclear what you're asking and the title is not very descriptive. – Damon Blevins Apr 4 '15 at 7:09
• time is not really 'included' in any 'equation'. That's kind of implied by one of the fundamental postulates of classical mechanics. Also assume you're saying, we "see objects moving faster than they see themselves'', that is unclear and incorrect intuitively as well. It's the other way round. Intuitively, a photon won't observe its motion really. Pure, untamed intuition is usually wrong or plain nonsensical past a certain level. If you really want to understand nature, use a much more mathematical and rigorous way of thinking. – lucky-guess Sep 2 '16 at 18:06

Have a read through my answer to What is so special about speed of light in vacuum?.

From popular science articles and TV programmes it's easy to get the impression that the speed of light is, well, just some speed. However it's intimately related to the geometry of the universe, and as such is one of the most fundamental properties of our universe.

In general relativity the speed that light is observed to move (I'm being very precise about the terminology here) is not always the constant $c$. See for example the discussion in Speed of light in a gravitational field?. However, a local measurement of the speed of light will always return the value $c$.

I'm not sure I'll get everything right, but I can give some of these questions a try. I think, in general, it's better to stick with one specific question. You asked several.

and, while mass can't travel at the speed of light, light or no-mass particles can't travel slower than the speed of light, though light does slow down through a medium, but that's something else.

First off I am not a physics student. I am more of a science enthusiast. The question pertains to time and the speed of light. According to Einstein no mass can travel at the speed of light. Now is that based on time or is time excluded from the equation?

Time can't be excluded cause you can't calculate speed without time. without time, speed is meaningless.

E=MC^2 doesn't include Time, but that's not all there is to special relativity, though it's the most famous equation.

With the understanding of warping the space time continuum, someone standing outside the warp/shift would see it as traveling at the speed of light or faster.

Warp ships don't exist and they might not be possible so this is a hard question to answer. A more scientific term is the Alcubierre drive which is a theoretical method where faster than light (FTL) travel might be possible, by warping space. So, if you saw such a ship fly past, it would appear to travel faster than light, but you could see light coming of the ship (though very briefly) and the light wouldn't be blue or red shifted like you'd expect with regular travel - (er, probably, I'm not an expert in Alcubierre physics).

Similarly in an Alcubierre drive ship, you'd experience normal time, while if you were in a close to the speed of light ship, you'd experience time slowing and the universe would appear to get flatter. But lets keep in mind that neither might be possible and certainly, both are enormously difficult.

that said. Who's to say the photon in a beam of light is not in its own space time shift. Where to it, it is traveling at a normal speed. But we see it as the speed of light. As an ant sees us moving very slowly... We see the moving fast. Size, distance, gravity, and time itself are all factors, are they not?

I'm sure, from light's point of view, assuming there is such a thing, traveling at the speed of light would seem normal and traveling slower than that, impossible.

I'm not sure what you mean by distance, gravity and time are factors. Traveling at the speed of light, distance becomes squashed into nothing and time doesn't make much sense. Gravity is experienced as curves in space, which might not be what gravity actually is, but that's how it behaves.

Not sure that helps.