Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: guest39538 on 01/04/2016 11:43:00

How can a change in a length of light affect the length of space?

This enigmatic question is obviously based on some hypothesis in your imagination.
In what ways can light change its (wave?)length?
In what ways can space change its length?

This enigmatic question is obviously based on some hypothesis in your imagination.
In what ways can light change its (wave?)length?
400700nm
In what ways can space change its length?
It can't, only point sources can expand their length between them , of space, apart?
In picture format:
0_{i}←r_{1}←0→r_{1}→0_{i}
Edited..
p.s that is a multidimensional matrice, and complies with the inverse square law.

When we are considering different frames of reference with each separate frame containing masses travelling at different velocities then the scale of the coordinate system in each one is different from all the others. This is why we need to use Lorentz transformations. Now in each moving frame the scales of distance and time relate to the speed of light in that particular frame. It gets complicated.

When we are considering different frames of reference with each separate frame containing masses travelling at different velocities then the scale of the coordinate system in each one is different from all the others. This is why we need to use Lorentz transformations. Now in each moving frame the scales of distance and time relate to the speed of light in that particular frame. It gets complicated.
Doesn't science define distance/length by the length of light and not the length of space?

You can only express the path of light in terms of displacements in distance and time. So you need the path integral if you wish to think of light as having a length.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation)

You can only express the path of light in terms of displacements in distance and time. So you need the path integral if you wish to think of light as having a length.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation)
??????????
[ Invalid Attachment ]
rē = q/4?

The metre is defined as the distance travelled by light in 1/299 792 458 of a second.
The phrase "length of light" is meaningless.

Doesn't science define distance/length by the length of light and not the length of space?
In the past (19601983), the length of the metre was defined by counting the wavelengths of light from krypton86.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre#Number_of_wavelengths_of_redorange_emission_line_of_krypton86
I would rather say that in the past, science defined distance/length by the wavelength of light.
...and that science defined the length of space by this definition.
This definition of the metre was replaced in 1983 by the speed of light, and an accurate clock.

How can a change in a length of light affect the length of space?
As with previous discussions on measuring time, you are confusing the "measurement of a quantity" with the "size of a quantity".
It is true that if you use a poor method of measurement, you will have a distorted understanding of the thing you just measured.
But, outside of the quantum realm, your measurement of something does not affect the thing you just measured  it just distorts your understanding.
That is one of the differences between psychologists and marketing people vs scientists:
 Psychologists and marketing people believe that your understanding defines reality
 Scientists believe that reality exists independently of your distorted understanding of it

Now truly I have just entered the twilight zone and think I need my eyes testing, I am sure that two people have just said that the meter is defined by light. HUH? meters exist in the dark you are clearly mistaken.

The metre is defined as the distance travelled by light in 1/299 792 458 of a second.
The phrase "length of light" is meaningless.
Scratching my head, clearly you have just defined a length.

Yards are defined by the length of the arm of King Edward V. Yards continue to exist in the absence of royalty.

Yards are defined by the length of the arm of King Edward V. Yards continue to exist in the absence of royalty.
Yards, meters, cm, mm, of space, exist and are invariant regardless what the propagating light is doing. So if the light contracts or expands it is not really affecting space and space is not affected light?
Space dimensions are independent of light dimensions?
You know my singularity is a good idea.
[ Invalid Attachment ]

Your diagrams are beautiful examples of Constructivist art, but somehow lacking in any obvious message.

Your diagrams are beautiful examples of Constructivist art, but somehow lacking in any obvious message.
I had already wrote the message in my theory of realistic, it should not be that difficult to understand when it only uses the inverse law and relative area contraction relative to motion to define an observation singularity that defines space has ndimensional.
I am 100% correct , not 99% , it is based on true facts that give us a true result.
You have to use the inverse square law in transverse form, to show this from a mirrored perspective.
Plane x_{1}, y_{1} decreases with distance travelled from an observer to a relative X_{0},y_{0} , and relative to the the observer in motion the same effect is mirrored of the starting point.
starting point 3 planes = (X_{1},y_{1})←(x_{1}, y_{1})→(X_{1},y_{1} )
end point after displacement  (X_{0},y_{0})←←←←(x_{0}, y_{0})→→→→(X_{0},y_{0} )
It is not even hard to understand
[ Invalid Attachment ]
[ Invalid Attachment ]

How can a change in a length of light affect the length of space?
Photons are particles of light. That means that the have zero size at all. The wavelength of photons refers only to the distribution of photons, not an actual length in space.