>tfw disproved Einstein yet again
If you were traveling at the speed of light, from your perspective you are still, and everyone thing else around you is moving backward... at the speed of light.
Einstein says all reference frames are equally valid. And that means things with mass are traveling at light speed.
BOOM GOES THE DYNAMITE
Other urls found in this thread:
hermes.ffn.ub.es
twitter.com
wrong
from the perspective of a reference frame that is moving at the speed of light every point in the universe is collocated and things observed from that reference frame appear not to be moving forward in time.
>Reference frame
>Moving at the speed of light
Neither of you understand relativity, fuck off.
>jumping through mental hoops this badly to defend some dead guy like a sort of religion
I thought science was supposed to accept new evidence and not stick to archaic traditions?
>two objects are moving away from each other at the speed of light
>mfw one object is moving at twice the speed of light compared to the reference point of the other object
what is spatial dilation for 500 Alex?
nothing violates the speed of light, space and time literally warp to make it impossible.
well if you were a photon, or in this thought experiment, perceiving the universe from the perspective of a photon then everything said there was true
>accept new evidence
what new evidence? everything ever tested has confirmed general relativity.
Photons don't have a rest frame.
feel free to articulate a coherent position any time
Photons don't have a rest frame, it's implicit in one of the principles of relativity, if c is the same in all frames there photons can't have a frame, else there would be a frame where the speed of a photon is 0. It should be pretty obvious, if you aren't a brainlet. If you're still having trouble with understanding that, try boosting into a frame that's moving at c.
>doesn't understand the point of a thought experiment.
of course "things" cant move at the speed of light.
>Doesn't understand the point
Well it's been nice user, but you're clearly a brainlet. How can you ask physical questions about something that is unphysical and come to any reasonable conclusion?
>Pro tip: you can't
>doesn't realize the entire framework of relativity was conceived of with exactly the though experiment he is shitting on.
Except it wasn't dumbass. It was based on a paradox Einstein noticed in Maxwell's equations. Holy shit, go read On The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, here I'll even give you a link
hermes.ffn.ub.es
Read less pop-sci you uneducated faggot.
>I have a switch-activated light one light-year away
>I build a really long stick that is one light-year in length
>if I want to turn on the light, I just move the stick a millimeter, flipping the switch in seconds
>mfw I've broken causality because the light wont get there for another 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 50 seconds.
>dumbass... ...uneducated faggot.
so you have a severe inferiority complex that you're trying to make up for by being an asshole in the internet. Cool.
read the collected essays that Einstein authored on the subject of relativity and get back to me.
It's okay faggot, I've read the original paper and several (non pop-sci) books on the subject. I don't need a dumb restatement of the fact that the speed of light is the same in all frames.
Everyone here is so smart!
Props to everyone in this thread
Go Veeky Forums! :)
If you're going to post shitty troll thread and act out for attention don't also cry when you get btfo
>implying I'm not a random dude who saw this shit thread on the first page and shitposted as a meta comment on Veeky Forumss simultaneous superiority/inferiority complexes whilst all being brainlets
Nice try brainlet
>All reference frames are equally valid.
Tycho Brahe's cosmological system confirmed. Cool.
This guy gets it. All these other brainlettas using popsci logic, right?
LIGHT DOES NOT HAVE A FRAME OF REFERENCE. Jesus, read a fucking book you cavemen.
>Objects with mass can travel at c if we suppose objects with mass can travel at c.