[Michael Sally (OP)]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

[Janus]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

No. The speed of light is a consequence of how Space and Time are interrelated to each other. 

[Michael Sally (OP)]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

No. The speed of light is a consequence of how Space and Time are interrelated to each other.

What does that even mean ?

[geordief]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

No. The speed of light is a consequence of how Space and Time are interrelated to each other. 

Do you mean it is a consequence of how spatial measurements and time  measurements are related?

"Space" and "Time" are not physical objects, are they?

Can we say they are "metaphysical"(if that description is of any consequence)

[alancalverd]

No. It is a consequence of Maxwell's equations.

[Michael Sally (OP)]

No. It is a consequence of Maxwell's equations.

I am sorry to ask but how can an equation be the cause of a speed ?

[charles1948]

No. It is a consequence of Maxwell's equations.

But Maxwell only worked out his equations in the 19th Century.

In all previous centuries, light was going at the same speed, without his equations.
So you surely can't claim that the speed of light is a "consequence" of Maxwell's equations.
That's the wrong way round.

What you should say is that Maxwell's mathematical equations are a "consequence" of the speed of light.

But, does that in any way explain why light goes at that particular speed?

[jeffreyH]

The speed of light is a constant, a consequence of the laws of nature of our universe. To ask why it is that speed has no meaning.

It can be observed, that is, measured. Through those observations we can produce the equations necessary to model it.

Maxwell related the laws of electromagnetism to the speed of light. The models describe the laws. They don't create the laws!

[Michael Sally (OP)]

It is a consequence of the geometry of spacetime,

I am sorry I don't understand how your answer , answers my specific question .

Geometry is also a branch math and as somebody mentioned , Maxwell's equations are a consequence of the speed .

Is it possible the universe is expanding  because of an external force ?

This is my second question I was going to ask after I got my first answer .




 

[Michael Sally (OP)]

To ask why it is that speed has no meaning.

That is preposterous , the why it has the speed is the physics involved . The measure is the math involved .

Are you really going to suggest that the physics involved are not important ?

What about scientific vigor and understanding  ? 

[jeffreyH]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

No. The speed of light is a consequence of how Space and Time are interrelated to each other.

What does that even mean ?

Google time dilation and length contraction.

[Michael Sally (OP)]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

No. The speed of light is a consequence of how Space and Time are interrelated to each other.

What does that even mean ?

Google time dilation and length contraction.

Time dilation and length contraction are physical events that have equations to determine the measure .

Equations do not answer my question about the cause of  the speed of light .

If the engine of light was an external force , wouldn't that mean the speed of light was actually zero ?

[jeffreyH]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

No. The speed of light is a consequence of how Space and Time are interrelated to each other.

What does that even mean ?

Google time dilation and length contraction.

Time dilation and length contraction are physical events that have equations to determine the measure .

Equations do not answer my question about the cause of  the speed of light .

If the engine of light was an external force , wouldn't that mean the speed of light was actually zero ?

Light doesn't have an engine. It does however propagate. The speed of that propagation is c in a vacuum. Since it is a constant in vacuum there is no force being applied to it. It is affected by gravity, which is a force, and can accelerate light.

[Halc]

Geometry is also a branch math and as somebody mentioned , Maxwell's equations are a consequence of the speed

The geometry has time and space being different dimensions of the same thing (spacetime).  One second of time happens to have the same magnitude (same interval, different sign) as about 300,000 meters, so it seems awfully reasonable to say it is the geometry that defines it.

Is it possible the universe is expanding  because of an external force ?

No. A force would cause acceleration of something with proper mass. Light cannot accelerate and has no proper mass.
The expansion of the universe isn't a speed and isn't directly related to the speed of light.
Anything that expands linearly will have an expansion rate of 70 km/sec/Mpc after 13.8 billion years. It doesn't quite work perfectly for our universe which doesn't have linear expansion, but we're awfully close to the average rate right now, so it works out by chance.

 Yes, the acceleration of expansion is arguably due to to a pseudo-force of dark energy. That isn't a force proper since there is no action/reaction involved, but it does affect the total energy of a given mass-slice (a chunk of expanding universe with the mass it contains).

Are you really going to suggest that the physics involved are not important ?

jeffreyH's response was pretty appropriate. You're asking a 'why' question, which is philosophy, not physics. Science and physics seems to describe what you see and predict future measurements. The 'why' of it all is irrelevant to that. Physics just wants to predict what we'll see tomorrow, to get the spaceship to its destination without failure, etc.

Time dilation and length contraction are physical events that have equations to determine the measure .

No.  A physical event is a frame-independent point in spacetime.
Time dilation and length contraction are abstract coordinate system differences relating frame independent physical wordlines. For instance, the proper length of an object cannot physically change simply due to an abstract choice made by somebody.

Equations do not answer my question about the cause of  the speed of light .

Pretty much all questions in physics are answered by equations. Perhaps not your question, but again, it isn't really a physics question then.

If the engine of light was an external force , wouldn't that mean the speed of light was actually zero ?

No clue what an 'engine of light' is. Light (or even a rock) requires no force to continue on its way, per Newton's first law (which is admittedly more applicable to the rock than to light).

[Michael Sally (OP)]

Light doesn't have an engine. It does however propagate. The speed of that propagation is c in a vacuum. Since it is a constant in vacuum there is no force being applied to it. It is affected by gravity, which is a force, and can accelerate light.

If light does not have an engine , then the momentum must be a consequence of an external force .

You mention gravity can affect light , is it possible that gravity is the engine of light ?

[jeffreyH]

Light doesn't have an engine. It does however propagate. The speed of that propagation is c in a vacuum. Since it is a constant in vacuum there is no force being applied to it. It is affected by gravity, which is a force, and can accelerate light.

If light does not have an engine , then the momentum must be a consequence of an external force .

You mention gravity can affect light , is it possible that gravity is the engine of light ?

No and no. Light, the photon to be precise, is the force carrier of the electromagnetic field and interacts with the gravitational field. It does not require gravity to propagate.

[Michael Sally (OP)]

gravitational field. It does not require gravity to propagate.

Perhaps not but it certainly requires more than an equation to accelerate when exiting a medium .

[Michael Sally (OP)]

requires no force to continue on its way, per Newton's first law (which is admittedly more applicable to the rock than to light).

How do you explain light's acceleration when exiting a medium if there is no force involved ?

[Petrochemicals]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

I'll be honest I can't answer this without it being in new theories as at present know one knows.

There are theories about light being pre programmed and relating to space time, whether light travels through space or is merely ejected when a wave strikes an object.

[Michael Sally (OP)]

Is the speed of light a consequence of an external force  ?

I'll be honest I can't answer this without it being in new theories as at present know one knows.

There are theories about light being pre programmed and relating to space time, whether light travels through space or is merely ejected when a wave strikes an object.

Thank you for your honest answer but how can a question be a new theory ?

Shouldn't we firstly discuss the possibility of an external force and then discuss what this assumed force may be before finally trying to devise an experiment to test the assumptions ?

Then only if all the above satisfied , write a new theory ?