be in giant circular room with radius 1 light year

> be in giant circular room with radius 1 light year
> point a laser pointer directly at the wall
> quickly spin the laser pointer 360 degrees
> the end of the laser beam moves at 6.28 times the speed of light


Problem physicists?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=IsEDigUHsOQ
pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/Special_relativity_adding/index.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

physics btfo, we need new theories
electric universe ftw

>not knowing the difference between velocity and angular velocity
why are there so many fucking retards on this board

This. Bits of light do not travel at speed.

Light is a longitudinal circuit with a rate of induction.

Do the experiment, that's not how it will go. Light's rate of induction into the aether is 3.00 * 10^8 m/s.

This guy's got it, Newton knew what was up

But user, the problem with OP's argument is that he naively used the relationship between linear and angular velocity. That isn't the problem at all.

It seems like you're the retard... B-but... user... what if YOU are the real troll in this thread?

My god.

laser beam don't have end. it shoots light waves at constant frequency

Can't even troll properly.
>quickly spin the laser pointer 360 degrees
> the end of the laser beam moves at 6.28 times the speed of light
means it takes you a year to turn completely around.
Hope your brain(let) works faster than your body.

>>the end of the laser beam moves
The end of the beam is not a physical thing that moves, it is multiple things striking the wall from your position.

This is a well known optical illusion
youtube.com/watch?v=IsEDigUHsOQ

retard.

>optical illusion
>linking sixty symbols
haha fucking brainlet get off my board

Holy shit finally someone else who understand this. Light doesn't travel, it's a perturbation of electricity and magnetism.

This makes me think of something that genuinely confuses me.

>Point a laser pointer, send light away from you
>turn 180 degrees, point it again and send light in the opposite direction.
From your frame of reference both beams are headed away from you at c (and you are headed away from it at c) but from either beams frame of reference, the other beam is going away from it at 2c.
I know I'm missing something, 2c isnt possible.
Someone care to fill me in why this isnt the case? Is it just relativity fuckery?

>it's a perturbation of electricity and magnetism
then how come we can measure individual photons?

From each beams perspective the other is going at c not twice c.

Thats where the relative part comes in, eachh beam is at c relative to eachother.

is time stopped from a photon's point of reference?

...

>expecting 10-year-old 9GAG memes to bait /sc-
Nevermind. Still works.

No. This is the same thing if you aim a laser at the moon and move it. There is no information being transferred so it doesn't break physics

XD OMG I LUV TRULL FISICS XDDS

It would take a year for the laser to reach the wall....

Relativity fails but physicists will never admit it

from the light beams perspective, it is stationary and the other beam moves away at c

But wouldn't that also mean that from the beam's perspective, you're also moving away at c? And it seems like that would violate the laws of physics since massive objects can't move at c. Furthermore, it would completely remove what seems like a meaningful distinction
between your motion and the first beam's motion - both would appear to be c, whereas from your perspective the *difference* between your motion and the beam's motion would be c.

Does special relativity even allow for reference frames moving at c relative to each other?

Hi guys, in my first year of university i remember this kind of problem was mentioned. The key thing is that even though it looks like an object is moving on the wall at a rate faster than lightspeed, it's seperate photons hitting the wall next to each other which makes it look like an object is moving. It is the sum of discrete photons hitting the wall which looks like it is one object moving, but it isn't one object moving. Once you strip away the layers, to think this is kind of thought experiment demonstrates superluminal travel would be the same as thinking if I flash a light and then Bruce in Australia flashes a light the light has somehow jumped from me to Bruce in the time between flashes.

>...which looks like it is one object moving, but it isn't one object moving.
THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF UNIVERSITY EDUCATION(INDOCTRINATION)

Google says that the frame of reference where either beam is at rest is invalid due to not being an inertial frame

Thanks, I guess that answers my question in

0/10

Velocities don't add in the "common sense" way in relativity.
>pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/Special_relativity_adding/index.html
By "common sense", I mean what we're used to in everyday life. If the velocities involved are small compared with lightspeed, you get the "ordinary" (Galilean) result.
At the other extreme, if one of the moving objects is a photon ALL observers, regardless of their own motions, will agree that the photon has a relative velocity of c.

The only requirement to be an inertial reference frame is constant, unaccelerated, motion.
Every photon moves in an IRF. Nothing with rest-mass can share that frame -- though you can come arbitrarily close.

this is correct. Each photon moves at the speed of light. Also, after you turn the laser on it will be two years before you see the spot on the wall.

To get 6.28 times the speed of light for the laser dot on the wall, you'd have to complete your 360 degree spin in 1 year because the radius is 1 light year.

I would not consider spinning at less than 1 degree per day to be very quick.. Surely you could do better

No, from the photon's reference frame, no time as passed between when it left the laser pointer and when it struck the wall.

>>quickly spin the laser pointer 360 degrees and walk away