# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: Why can't we see into the future?  (Read 536 times)

#### dmarkovic

• First timers
• Posts: 1
##### Why can't we see into the future?
« on: 25/02/2016 17:02:15 »
Can someone let me know if I'm wrong with any of my following assumptions?

Before you read the text below, I just want to say that I'm sorry for any grammar mistakes, my English is not my first language. I'll try to keep this short and connected :).

First part:

Light (photon) is a form of energy, right? As well as the sound (sound waves). And both of those forms of energy have their respective speed (speed of light, speed of sound).
Now, I've never heard of photons and sound being static (e.g. standing/existing in one point of space and not moving) so those forms of energy must be dynamic ones.
I've also heard (and I know there must be some law for that :) ) that energy can not be created out of nothing and can not disappear, but can only transform into another form. So why don't we all agree that mass is an energy too (E=mc^2)? Maybe (trapped) static one?
If we do agree on that then mass should have it's speed too, right? But that speed would differ depending on it's environment/surrounding (air, water, vacuum).
If that's true then all forms of energy can have their Max speeds dependant on their environment.
We, humans, have senses (sensors if you like) for almost each form of energy. Those senses were developed through evolution. We have our eyes (sight) for Light energy, we have ears (sound) for sound energy, and we also feel touch (mass energy, pressure, temperature).

Second part:
Theory of relativity says that our experience of Time is relative (dependant of the facts like: are we moving or not).
I don't agree with that. I say that we all measure Time the same way and that for each of us one second is one second, no mater in what part of known universe we are. (Please read the following paragraphs and you'll see why I think so).
Let's take a look at two objects, pretty lady sitting on a bench and a guy (let's say that guy is me) who's walking toward that lady. Now, that lady's sight is telling her that I'm closer by each second, right? Why? Because light emitted from me takes less to get to her sensors and her brain interprets that as closing by. I'm getting that same feeling, since with each step I'm closer to her and I'm human too and my sight has developed the same way as hers.
Let's say that I've stopped at 3 meters from her. Her sight does not recognize movement since light emitted from me takes same amount of time to get to her sensors t=s/v=(0.003km/(300000km/s))=0.001 microseconds. That's why she thinks I've stopped and I'm standing and not moving.
But what if I am?
Let's give my body an extraordinary power to move at the speed of light (around 300 000 km/s).
Now, the micro second ago I was standing at 3 meters from that pretty lady and in that particular micro second I've moved 300m away from her. Since, for that microsecond, I moved at the speed of light away from her, the light emitted from me was travelling with the same speed of light towards her. If we calculate how much time has passed while I was moving it's t=s/v=0.3km /(300 000 km/s) = 1 micro second. So, for that particular microsecond while I was travelling, to her I haven't moved a bit, right? The moment I've stopped at that 303 meters from her, it takes light emitted from me 1.001 microsecond to get to her optical sensors. And that's the difference her optical sensors tracked and that's the first time she notices that I've really moved.

So, what can I conclude from this?
- If we're trying to determine one object's distance from us - we can do that by calculating how much time has passed for the light emitted from that object to get to our optical sensors. (I think that something similar, with continuous measuring, is used involving quasars to determine position of far away galaxies).
- But if as a measuring results we get same constant distance that might mean two things. First: that object is not moving at all (if we also don't move), or is relatively moving at the same speed as we are, or Second: That object is moving at a speed of light away of us (if we don't move), or relatively moving away of us with the speed of light plus our speed.

Third part:
- Since it takes some time for light to reach us - it means that we don't see object in their "now" time, but in ours "now" time. For example: far away objects (Sun, other galaxies) we see as they were some seconds ago. Sun is 150 million km away from Earth and we see it as it was t=s/v=150 000 000 km/(300 000 km/s)=500seconds ago.
So further away we are from the object the further we can see into it's past. The closer we are to it, the closer we can see into it's present.
That's why we can't see into the future, only the past.
For example, if I would to come to an almost kissing distance from that pretty lady from second part I would almost see her as she's right now.

- If space is expanding at the speed of light that means that at the furthermost part of universe one could see the big bang. And if we ever get to travel at speed larger than speed of light - we could see the universe (and ourselves) in it's past. Please note (we can't interact with our past, just see it.)

#### Ethos_

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1228
• Thanked: 10 times
##### Re: Why can't we see into the future?
« Reply #1 on: 26/02/2016 01:49:47 »

First part:

Light (photon) is a form of energy, right?
No...............This is a false assumption. Light, the photon, has energy but it is not energy. The photon is a particle of matter that possesses energy of momentum even though it is considered to be massless. This energy of momentum is a product of the incredible speed that light, the photon, propagates at 186,282 mps.
Quote from: dmarkovic
Second part:
Theory of relativity says that our experience of Time is relative (dependant of the facts like: are we moving or not).
I don't agree with that.
You have the right to agree or disagree, that is your choice to make my friend. However, experiment has provided us with considerable evidence that time dilation is a fact.
Quote from: dmarkovic

Third part:
- Since it takes some time for light to reach us - it means that we don't see object in their "now" time, but in ours "now" time.
This is true but an entirely different matter than the question regarding time dilation.
Quote from: dmarkovic
- If space is expanding at the speed of light that means that at the furthermost part of universe one could see the big bang.
If from our frame of reference, the big bang is receding from us at the speed of light, then yes, we will never be able to see it. So, I'm guessing that what your suggesting is; If we were present at the big bang we would be able to see it. And that's really rather obvious my friend, if I might be so forthright.

Quote from: dmarkovic
And if we ever get to travel at speed larger than speed of light - we could see the universe (and ourselves) in it's past. Please note (we can't interact with our past, just see it.)
Traveling at speeds larger than the speed of light is out of the question so speculating  about what we would see has no bases in reality.
« Last Edit: 26/02/2016 21:55:56 by Ethos_ »

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### Re: Why can't we see into the future?
« Reply #1 on: 26/02/2016 01:49:47 »