Results 1 to 27 of 27

Thread: Why is c so important?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,282

    Why is c so important?

    It seems that in Einstein's universe, everything that is everything; time, space, matter energy, motion, all must bow before the speed of light. But why? Why is the speed of light so fundamental? It seems odd; after all, light could not exist without a universe to exist in, and yet the universe seems to be less important than light.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by parallaxicality View Post
    It seems that in Einstein's universe, everything that is everything; time, space, matter energy, motion, all must bow before the speed of light. But why? Why is the speed of light so fundamental? It seems odd; after all, light could not exist without a universe to exist in, and yet the universe seems to be less important than light.
    It might help to not think of it as "the speed of light". c is something more general, the maximum relative velocity of two objects, the maximum velocity at which energy, information, or the effect of any cause can propagate. It's not that c is the speed of light, light just travels (in a vacuum) at c.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,831
    Well said. Yeah, it is a property of the universe that light does conform to.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,779
    Quote Originally Posted by parallaxicality View Post
    It seems that in Einstein's universe, everything that is everything; time, space, matter energy, motion, all must bow before the speed of light. But why? Why is the speed of light so fundamental? It seems odd; after all, light could not exist without a universe to exist in, and yet the universe seems to be less important than light.
    If you look closely at the foundations of special relativity, you will find that it is based on just two postulates. 1) The speed of light is a fixed constant in all inertial reference frames. 2) The laws of physics are the same in all inertial reference frames.

    It turns out that in working carefully through the derivation of the Lorentz transformation, which is the heart of special relativity, one need only assume that there is some phenomena that propagates with speed "x" in all inertial reference frames. One can then derive all of special relativity and obtain the Lorentz transformation with "x" playing the role of "c". This means that "x" would be a limiting speed for the speed of massive particles and for the transmission of information. The derivation also shows that there can be only one such speed that is independent of the reference frame. It happens that, on the basis of experimental evidence, the speed of light, c, is independent of the inertial reference frame.

    It turns out that general relativity predicts the existence of gravitational waves and that they propagate at the speed of light. So, you could replace the speed of light with the speed of gravity, the only wrinkle being that special relativity specifically neglects gravitational effects. But by passing to general relativity you would have the same importance for the speed of gravity that you have for the speed of light, and they are the same.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,014
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    It might help to not think of it as "the speed of light". c is something more general, the maximum relative velocity of two objects, the maximum velocity at which energy, information, or the effect of any cause can propagate. It's not that c is the speed of light, light just travels (in a vacuum) at c.
    Wow, that's very enlightening, cjameshuff! After all these years, I finally get it! Thanks a lot.

    Hope you're right.

    I think DrRocket said you're right.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pearl Tower, Coruscant.
    Posts
    7,735
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    It might help to not think of it as "the speed of light". c is something more general, the maximum relative velocity of two objects, the maximum velocity at which energy, information, or the effect of any cause can propagate. It's not that c is the speed of light, light just travels (in a vacuum) at c.
    That would have been my answer. But being the humble brainiac that I am, I decided to let someone else provide the answer. Sweet of me, no?

    Joking

    Interesting.
    I'll tell you in the next life, when we are both cats.
    Don't let your reality checks bounce. ~Me

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    It might help to not think of it as "the speed of light". c is something more general, the maximum relative velocity of two objects, the maximum velocity at which energy, information, or the effect of any cause can propagate. It's not that c is the speed of light, light just travels (in a vacuum) at c.
    This is one of those things I love in science (or anything else - it happens to me all the time) - where something is impossible to get your head round, then someone explains it to you really simply and you think 'Oh wow, that's so obvious! How did I not figure that one out?'

    By the way, why is c described as the speed of light specifically? I always thought that electromagnetic waves all travelled at the same speed. Is it just because light is the easiest to observe?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by azimuth View Post
    [Snip!] By the way, why is c described as the speed of light specifically? I always thought that electromagnetic waves all travelled at the same speed. Is it just because light is the easiest to observe?
    A lot of us prefer "light" as a convenient short-hand for "electromagnetic radiation" or even "EM radiation" regardless of the wavelength. If we really want to be specific about the wavelength or frequency band we say "infrared" or "ultraviolet" or "X-rays", etc. When we mean the kind of light that we can see with our eyes we say "visible light".

    Also, visible light was the first form of light that we attempted to measure the velocity of.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    11,562
    Quote Originally Posted by parallaxicality View Post
    It seems that in Einstein's universe, everything that is everything; time, space, matter energy, motion, all must bow before the speed of light. But why? Why is the speed of light so fundamental? It seems odd; after all, light could not exist without a universe to exist in, and yet the universe seems to be less important than light.
    I guess you say that because of E=mc2 and the maximum speed being c? I'm not sure why that would make c more important than the universe but in the right units, c=1 and E=m without the involvement of c.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    13,886
    Besides, without C you get scurvy.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    35,269
    Quote Originally Posted by mike alexander View Post
    Besides, without C you get scurvy.
    Orange you clever!
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    11,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Swift View Post
    Orange you clever!
    Sublime

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,282
    I would never allow mere sub-limes on my ship!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    14,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Argos View Post
    Well said. Yeah, it is a property of the universe that light does conform to.
    And nothing else conforms to c. Nothing else can reach it; nothing else can surpass it.

    However, c affects everything else, so much so that there's little which isn't affected in one way or another by this constant.

    Therefore, I would say that the universe conforms to c, rather than the other way around.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,282
    dare I ask why our universe seems tied to c?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    11,562
    Knot if you value your sanity--it's all tangled up, and there are a lot of loose ends which tend to leave you adrift. At c

    Wow, that brings us back to scurvy, doesn't it? Maybe there is something to that idea of spacetime scurvature.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    14,315
    Think, for a minute, how lightening fast men's heads turn towards scurvatious women...

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,282
    surely you mean "scurvaceous"

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    14,315
    Quote Originally Posted by parallaxicality View Post
    surely you mean "scurvaceous"
    Shirley, that's what I must have meant!

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    35,269
    And stop calling parallaxicality "Shirley".
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    12,256
    Because without C, what would come after B?

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    11,562
    Quote Originally Posted by KaiYeves View Post
    Because without C, what would come after B?
    Are you saying, in order to C we have to B? G, that makes sense.

  23. #23
    Yc? Icc. Ucc2. Im2b<c&ur2. Oicur<c&im22u.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,831
    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post
    And nothing else conforms to c. Nothing else can reach it;
    How about ripples in spacetime [G waves]?

    Therefore, I would say that the universe conforms to c, rather than the other way around.
    The inflation, the expansion of the universe, are not confined to c.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,073
    So...is there a reason that light moves at that particular speed? Or is it just fundemental?

  26. #26
    If you write Maxwell's equations in a form that is invariant over the Lorentz transformations you can derive the speed of light from DrRocket's x to get that EM radiation has to propagate at the same velocity as x.
    __________________________________________________
    Reductionist and proud of it.

    Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn. Benjamin Franklin
    Chase after the truth like all hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat tails. Clarence Darrow
    A person who won't read has no advantage over one who can't read. Mark Twain

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    11,562
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket View Post
    The derivation also shows that there can be only one such speed that is independent of the reference frame. It happens that, on the basis of experimental evidence, the speed of light, c, is independent of the inertial reference frame.
    Quote Originally Posted by HenrikOlsen View Post
    If you write Maxwell's equations in a form that is invariant over the Lorentz transformations you can derive the speed of light from DrRocket's x to get that EM radiation has to propagate at the same velocity as x.
    But there are still constants that have to be experimentally determined, and if you don't assume light is EM you still have to verify that light does have that speed.

Similar Threads

  1. Important Information
    By Fezziwig in forum Fun-n-Games
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 2009-Jul-23, 10:31 AM
  2. Important Numbers
    By mroulston@yahoo.com in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 2007-Sep-06, 06:57 PM
  3. Let's speak about the most important
    By Mike2007 in forum Astronomy Cast
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2007-May-06, 04:47 PM
  4. Very Important News
    By Maksutov in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 2006-Apr-07, 03:01 AM
  5. Which mystery do you think is important
    By spaceditto in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 2003-Apr-04, 03:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •