Another light speed one. Hypothetically…

[wildwood]

I am still trying to get my head around this speed of light thingy.

One spaceship can travel at the SoL and goes to the Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy (25000 light years away). Counting onboard time, would it get there in 12500 L.Y. as it meets the light?

[vascop]

Dave the dog
That is not correct. Relativity is a well established theory and it's not necessary to travel at the speed of light to prove it. Do some research and you will see.

[sammmo]

So if The theory of relativity is under challenge by modern day physics ..And someone actually said its wrong.. who's to say everything else that we think of as actually being Fact is actually wrong? therefore just because one man has a theory it does'nt make it a FACT ..

[naomi24]

vascop, I don't need to read your post again. I repeat I am quite aware of the two definitions of the word 'theory'.

//To try and argue that relativity is just an idea is just as ridiculous ....//

Nobody is saying that, simply that it is unproven - which it is.

[vascop]

It is NOT under challenge at all.

[vascop]

Naomi
It is NOT unproven. You are mistaken.

[sammmo]

sammmos law......".A theory is a theory until its proven to be fact "

[sammmo]

sammmos law 2.... "An Idea is the begining of a theory"

[naomi24]

vascop, no, you are claiming proof where none exists - and if you think no one is challenging it, I suggest you do some research.

Got to go out now. Bye all.

[Davethedog]

Sammo you are completly right no theory is fact, but many theorys become fact and many theorys don't become fact and are discarded.

Flat earth, the sun revolves arounfd the earth, blood letting cures all etc.

That is science.

The theory of relativity isn't discredited it is questioned. The theory is far greater than E=MC2 the part that is under challenge is string theory and it has something to do with the way that the rings of Saturn twist.

This isn't new it beagan when Voyager(?) or Explorer(?) went through the rings years ago.

[vascop]

Sammo
As I tried to explain above, the word "Theory" in the case of the Theory of Relativity does NOT mean an idea which might be true, but an explanation of observable phenomena, just like other scientific facts.

[Davethedog]

Sammo yep i'm right you are on a wind up

[Davethedog]

Vascop - Read this an established theory is not an an established fact. It isn't proven and it cannot be proven until we can actualy establish the boundaries of the theory.

http://www.allaboutsc...ory-of-relativity.htm

[vascop]

Dave the dog
That's a creationist/intelligent design website trying to pretend it's a science website. They've got a religious agenda. Don't be fooled by anything you read on that site - it's certainly not science.

[sammmo]

No i'm not on a wind up.. It is a fascinating subject and I wish I knew more about It.. as it is I only ever really thought about it after reading this post yesterday.. Our universe is beautiful and everything around us is beautiful .. Science is something that should be questioned is'nt it? the same as religion..

[vascop]

Of course you can question anything you like, but you need to know what you are talking about, otherwise those who do know what they are talking about about will treat your questions with contempt and tell you to go and do a few courses and come back and see them then.

[vascop]

Sammo
How can you say everything in the universe is beautiful, everything around us is beautiful?
How about children born with serious deformities? effects of earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanic eruptions on human populations?
Are they beautiful? That's not what I understand by beauty.

[Davethedog]

I must of hit the wrong site and didn't look sorry

[mibn2cweus]

The “Special ‘Theory’ of Relativity” is actually stronger than Newton’s Laws of Motion in explaining phenomena that are only evident as one approaches the speed of light . . . light years stronger. Yet, all in all, SR is not so much a refutation of Newton’s Laws but simply adds context which only further supports them.

Time dilation has always been shown to be consistent and has up until now never required an major modifications let alone been refuted. In fact, much of the recent explosion in modern technology exists only by virtue of our understanding of SR in general and time dilation in particular.

Nevertheless, Special Relativity is not without its rivals. Just to keep things interesting, you can actually age faster by thwarting the bonds of Earth’s gravity . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDvmN_Pw96A

[mibn2cweus]

Jake, There appears to be a strong and deep correlation between the rate at which time passes and the speed of light when it is not interacting with something else. Time as well as a host of other factors appear to be inextricably linked to c so until otherwise established I see no problem with the admitted presumption that time comes to a halt at c. We call 'c' a constant for good reason.

[mibn2cweus]

Oh, by the way. While admittedly only a 'shade tree scientist', I look forward no less to nothing more than to be PROVEN wrong . . .