# Naked Science Forum

## On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: AtoMick-u235 on 13/05/2019 01:13:17

Title: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 13/05/2019 01:13:17
I have been using my relativity program i made in 1997 and have some ideas. Do massless particles travel along with the actual speed of the expansion of the universe close to C, , , , Is the apparent rate of the expanding universe 44.7387 mile  per second per mega parsec, and does it work out at an actual rate of 99.999997 C

My twist on Einsteins formula shows 1) how massless particles like photons can travel at light speed
2) That the apparent expansion of the universe is speeding up because the actual speed is slowing down

here is a screen shot of my program, , , Note the actual speed of .99999997, or 186243 MPS and the apparent speed at the bottom of 45.62003 MPS

EINY-  WORKS.jpg (64.05 kB . 649x329 - viewed 1579 times)

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 13/05/2019 02:54:21
Your topic title is still not worded as a question, but at least this got moved to new theories.

I have been using my relativity program i made in 1997 and have some ideas. Do massless particles travel along with the actual speed of the expansion of the universe close to C
Massless particles do indeed travel at c through a vacuum.
The expansion rate of the universe is not a velocity.  It has different units.
Quote
, , , , Is the apparent rate of the expanding universe 44.7387 mile  per second per mega parsec, and does it work out at an actual rate of 99.999999 C
Since it has different units, it does not work out to a speed.  Do the algebra.  It isn't hard.  It works out to the reciprocal of the age of the universe, or at least what the age would be if the rate was not accelerating.
Quote
here is a screen shot of my program
The screen shot is only of the output, not of the program being run.
Quote
Note the actual speed of .99999997, or 186243 MPS
186243 miles/sec is about .9998c
If you want .99999997, you need more significant digits for one thing.
I'm not used to doing this in non-metric units.
Quote
and the apparent speed at the bottom of 64.30355 MPS
If an object is going at .9998c in some frame, then it is apparently going .9998c in that frame. It will apparently take 10002 seconds to get to a place 10000 light seconds away, two seconds slower than light.  That's 'apparently' .9998c.
Maybe you mean something else by 'apparent speed', but you've not defined it.
Quote
TIME DILATION IS 2896.309
The relativistic change factor at .99999997c is about 4082.  At .9998 it is about 50.  Not sure where the 2896 is coming from.

It is really unclear what you are asking or what you are proposing.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 13/05/2019 17:05:52
Hi Halc , , , I have checked my time dilation program results and they are correct, i may have got the light speed of 186243 miles per second a little off, but you should know that you do not have to use this in the Lorentz transformation equation, , , ,   .999 works out at 22.36649 times dilation and .8 is 1.666667, I have also checked the apparent speed value, my program works fine

i believe i am correct in my observations that there is an actual and apparent effect, and that the expansion rate of the universe has an apparent value

Mick Bartram
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 13/05/2019 18:36:59
Hi Halc , , , I have checked my time dilation program results and they are correct
Being a software person myself, there is always a possibility of another bug.
Quote
.999 works out at 22.36649 times dilation and .8 is 1.666667, my program works fine
And yet .99999997c should yield a dilation of 4082.  I suspect you are not using sufficient precision on your variables to handle a value of .99999997.  A 32 bit float is insufficient.  You need at least 64 bits to compute that one.

I have no idea what your program does.  You input a time of 50, but 50 what?  Seconds? Years?  Just 50 units?
Is it time one way, round trip, and as measured back home or as measured on the ship?  None of that was clear just by looking at the output.

OK, I suspect seconds because 9312149 is 50 times your stated light speed.  Distance and time then are I imagine measured by the non-ship frame, else that distance would not be meaningful.

Quote
i believe i am correct in my observations that there is an actual and apparent effect, and that the expansion rate of the universe has an apparent value.
I just don't know what you mean by 'apparent' speed.  I cannot comment if you're wrong or right about it if I don't know to what it refers.

From the stationary point of view, the ship goes out to a location 9312149 miles away and returns and comes back, 1 minute 40 seconds (plus a smidge in the 8th digit) elapsed for a trip of 100 light seconds.  Sounds like an apparent speed of 'damn near c', much faster than an apparent speed of 64 miles per second which would have resulted in an elapsed time of ~80 hours.
You probably mean something else by 'apparent speed', but I cannot figure out what it is.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 13/05/2019 19:06:20
Actually, the screen shot says T1 is ship time (units unspecified, but I still suspect seconds).
T2 would then be about 56.7 hours, so distance traveled by the ship in Earth frame is 38 trillion miles, much more than the 9 million the program reports.
Your formula there seems to be correct, but the program doesn't compute it.  It reports 144815 'units', but not sure what unit is here.  Seconds I think, which would have been correct if the dilation factor had been correctly computed.
If a ship moves almost 56.7 light hours in 56.7 hours, it has an apparent speed of almost c.

Distance traveled in the ship frame is zero.  The ship is stationary in its own frame for the 50 second duration of the exercise.  OK, the distance traveled by Earth in ship's frame is about 9.3 million miles.  Is that what you mean by that figure?  Earth has an apparent speed of almost c in that frame.

Your 'apparent speed' seems to be computed by dividing c by the relativistic factor, which makes no sense.  There is nothing in the example that is apparently going that speed in any meaningful frame.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 13/05/2019 19:34:34
Hi Halc, , Like I said, my program is accurate and works out the same on paper, I suggest you try it with .999 and .8

ha ha , , ,im sorry but what im saying seems so obvious to me, im more of a philosopher than a trained physicist so maybe this will help

Einstein said - If you are moving with respect to me, we shall not agree upon the rate of flow of time, your clock runs slower than mine when you move and relative to me your speed slows down, till at C you stop "ALL PROCESSES" that change with time "INCLUDING SPEED" change at a slower rate when observed in motion, one clock does not beat out time for the whole universe, a separate clock is needed for each state of motion, , , , I remembered this from a BBC OU episode on physics in 1985, , , BOOM !!

if you were a stationary observer on earth, and i got in a space ship on a round trip to the moon and back at a speed of 87% the speed of light there would be a 2x time dilation, it would take me 3 seconds, but when i returned to earth you would say ive been gone 6 seconds. FROM EARTHS VIEW APPARENTLY THE TRIP TOOK 6 SECONDS WHEN IN FACT FROM THE SHIPS VIEW IT ACTUALY TOOK 3 SECONDS, DIFFERENT TIMES and
SPEEDS - QED, the apparent time would have to be inserted into the S=D\T to give the apparent speed

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 13/05/2019 20:30:38
Hi Halc, , Like I said, my program is accurate and works out the same on paper, I suggest you try it with .999 and .8
Did you try it on paper with .99999997?
I agree, the thing works with the small figures, but you performed no limit test on your program.

Quote
if you were a stationary observer on earth, and i got in a space ship on a round trip to the moon and back at a speed of 87% the speed of light there would be a 2x time dilation, it would take me 3 seconds, but when i returned to earth you would say ive been gone 6 seconds.
2x dilation indeed. It takes light 2.6 seconds to make the round trip so a thing going at .87c would take about 3 seconds.  That's what .87c means.
3 seconds round trip as measured on earth and 1.5 seconds elapsed on the ship clock. From Earth frame, the ship is going .87c. From the ship's point of view, the ship is stationary and the moon and  the Earth move at .87c. There is no 'apparent speed' that is something else.
If I watch the ship clock from Earth, it will run at an 'apparent' rate of much slower than half pace, and it will appear to run faster than mine as I see the ship return.  But that apparent difference is due to redshift/Doppler effect, not due to dilation.  The final time will still be 3 seconds (me) and 1.5 seconds (ship).

Quote
FROM EARTHS VIEW APPARENTLY THE TRIP TOOK 6 SECONDS WHEN IN FACT FROM THE SHIPS VIEW IT ACTUALY TOOK 3 SECONDS, DIFFERENT TIMES
Putting it in caps doesn't make it right.  If it takes 6 seconds and it takes light only 2.6 seconds, it's going only about .43c.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 13/05/2019 21:41:14
Yes, spot on the apparent speed is .435 and the actual speed is .87, 2 x dilation
Your getting the idea but this is wrong "The final time will still be 3 seconds (me) and 1.5 seconds (ship)".it should be 6 and 3

I can understand that it all seems counter intuitive, but its just a basic Special Relativity concept

and Yes, the input T1 should be in seconds and the elapsed time on earth is 144815 units x 50 seconds or whatever you use for T1

I shall post you my QBASIC program TXT
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Bored chemist on 13/05/2019 21:55:00
I can understand that it all seems counter intuitive, but its just a basic Special Relativity concept
I'm backing Halc's track record on this.
Incidentally, another "counter intuitive" thing is that computers get the maths wrong.
But they do.

Do you actually know what precision you are calculating to?
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Bored chemist on 13/05/2019 21:55:34
I shall post you my QBASIC program TXT
It can't make things less clear...
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 13/05/2019 22:15:35
Hey halc, Hmmmm i did it on paper, you may be right

.99999997
.99999994
.00000006
.000244948

1 / 000244948 = 4082.499 not my 2896.309

Arghhhhhhhhhhh, , , i will have to debug it , , ,Eeeeek !!  it could be my calculator tho, im gona try .99999
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Bored chemist on 13/05/2019 22:17:45
It may not be a problem with your code.

Computers get maths wrong.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 13/05/2019 22:48:55
Hey halc, Hmmmm i did it on paper, you may be right

.99999997
.99999994
.00000006
.000244948

1 / 000244948 = 4082.499 not my 2896.309

Arghhhhhhhhhhh, , , i will have to debug it , , ,Eeeeek !!  it could be my calculator tho, im gona try .99999
I told you, it's just beyond the precision of the variable you're using to compute it.  Use 64 bit arithmetic, or don't use an example so close to light speed.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 13/05/2019 23:15:48
Yes, spot on the apparent speed is .435 and the actual speed is .87, 2 x dilation
So if I have two ships, one faster than the other, the faster one gets back to Earth after the slow one because it has a lower apparent speed?  That's what your math implies.

Quote
Your getting the idea but this is wrong "The final time will still be 3 seconds (me) and 1.5 seconds (ship)".it should be 6 and 3

I can understand that it all seems counter intuitive, but its just a basic Special Relativity concept
I'm not 'getting the idea'.  I've been doing relativity a long time.  I'm surprised you've had a relativity program for 22 years and only now are finding out it is doing this 'apparent speed' thing which is incorrect.  Speed is not a process and the ship isn't taking its speed along with it.  Speed is a relation and the relation is .87c in this latest example and not anything else.

The trip takes 3 seconds on and Earth clock and 1.5 on ship clock.  Using that math, the faster ship does the trip in less time, just like a faster ship should.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 13/05/2019 23:52:14
Hey guys, I tried it at .99999 , , , by hand I got time dilation 233.6068454 and my program gave me 233.4551, just .15 in it

Yes it may be the PC maths processor, its to late to debug my program now, ill try tmora
Ive got MS DOS QBASIC, and running Win XP on one of my laptops

And halc, in your last post I think your wrong, so apparently we will have to agree to disagree, , ,
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 14/05/2019 00:02:42
10 CLS : COLOR 2: PRINT "TIME DILATION BY MICK BARTRAM / micktbart@yahoo.co.uk"
20 COLOR 15: PRINT "AN ASTRONAUT GOES OFF IN A ROCKET AT .X THE SPEED OFF LIGHT RELATIVE TO THE     EARTH, HOW MUCH TIME HAS ELAPSED ON EARTH."
40 PRINT : PRINT " BY USING EINSTEIN'S FOLLOWING EQUATION WE CAN WORK IT OUT."
42 PRINT : PRINT "                 T1   ": PRINT "              ========="
44 PRINT "            /      V2 ": PRINT "      T2= \/ 1-  ------   OR  SP=SP*SP:SP=1-SP:SP=SQR(SP):TD=T1/SP": PRINT "                   C2"
70 PRINT : PRINT "  T1 = TIME ELAPSED ON THE ROCKET, IE.  30 YEARS."
80 PRINT "  V  = SPEED OF ROCKET, IE.  .8 C, OR 148994 MPS."
85 PRINT "  T2 = TIME ELAPSED ON EARTH. ": PRINT
90 INPUT "ENTER T1 "; T1: INPUT "ENTER V"; SP: PER = SP
95 IF SP = 1 THEN 500
100 SP = SP * SP: SP = 1 - SP: SP = SQR(SP): TD = T1 / SP
105 MPS = 186243 * PER: MPH = MPS * 60 * 60: LOCATE 18, 20: PRINT "ACTUAL SPEED ="; MPS; "MPS. OR "; MPH; " MPH"
108 DIST = MPS * T1: PRINT : PRINT "DISTANCE OF SHIP = "; DIST; "MILES"
110 FOR T = 1 TO 5000: NEXT T
120 tms = TD / T1: PRINT "TIME DILATION IS "; tms; " TIMES T1 /"; " ELAPSED TIME ON EARTH ="; TD; "UNITS"
200 APP = DIST / TD: PRINT "VIEWED FROM EARTH, THE APPARENT SPEED OF ROCKET DUE TO TIME DILATION = "; APP; "MPS"
210 INPUT "Another go (Y\N)"; go\$
220 IF go\$ = "y" THEN GOTO 10 ELSE END
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 14/05/2019 00:29:01
You said = So if I have two ships, one faster than the other, the faster one gets back to Earth after the slow one because it has a lower apparent speed?  That's what your math implies.

Yes halc this is correct, if the faster ship is going fast enough, it would loose every time , ,it obviously depends on how fast and far the slow ship is moving, and how long the round trip took for it, ,
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 14/05/2019 02:10:32
Yes halc this is correct, if the faster ship is going fast enough, it would loose every time , ,it obviously depends on how fast and far the slow ship is moving, and how long the round trip took for it, ,
This should be a clue that your understanding is wrong.  Nothing in special or general relativity has faster objects taking longer to get somewhere than slower objects.
I can falsify your assertion:
If this 'apparent speed' thing worked the way you say, neutrinos from supernovas would not appear before the light from the explosion does.  They have such a high dilation factor (gamma if you will) that they'd have an 'apparent speed' slower than I can walk by your computations.  Instead, they get here so fast they actually outrun the light which is slowed by needing to travel through space that is not a vacuum and thus has a refractive index of greater than 1.

Fast things get there before slow things.  Relativity does not say otherwise.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 14/05/2019 02:22:40
90 INPUT "ENTER T1 "; T1: INPUT "ENTER V"; SP: PER = SP
SP (and your other variables) are taking the default type of SINGLE, which is your problem with the tms computation.
You need to implicitly declare it as DOUBLE by using SP# or explicitly with DIM SP AS DOUBLE
A single precision just cannot hold 8 digits of precision, so the really high-V computations come out wrong.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 14/05/2019 17:56:04
halk, it is you who is wrong, what im saying is obvious. and it is a shame you can't grasp it

OK halc, what if I travelled near a black hole and came home, the twin paradox, , , ,it would be the same effect, my ideas explain that too

In physics, the twin paradox is a thought experiment in special relativity involving identical twins, one of whom makes a journey into space in a high-speed rocket or travels close to a black hole, then returns home to find that the twin who remained on Earth has aged more.

Look what it means, the 2 observers  see 2 different times and speeds, , , QED - BOOM !!, , , ha ha, i give up explaining to you, my post was meant to verify my ideas, so i'll wait for someone who can, , , ,

OK thanks, , ,I will try to define SP# as a double, and look at the DIM function and let you know
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 14/05/2019 18:43:58
YES YES YES, I defined DIM SP AS DOUBLE and for .99999997 got TD 4082.483 and an APP of 45.62003

Does it look familiar - the apparent rate of the expanding universe is 44.7387 mile  per second per mega parsec,
which works out at an actual rate of 99.999997 C

Yippeee, ha ha, at least you got one thing right halc, , thank you

# EINY-YES.jpg (65.98 kB . 651x330 - viewed 1355 times)

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Kryptid on 16/05/2019 06:08:59
Since when are 45 miles per second and 45 miles per second per megaparsec the same? Those are different units signifying different things.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 16/05/2019 12:50:30
OK halc, what if I travelled near a black hole and came home, the twin paradox, , , ,it would be the same effect, my ideas explain that too

In physics, the twin paradox is a thought experiment in special relativity involving identical twins, one of whom makes a journey into space in a high-speed rocket or travels close to a black hole, then returns home to find that the twin who remained on Earth has aged more.
I didn't deny that.  My clock going to the moon and back aged half as much as its twin that stayed home.

Quote
ha ha, i give up explaining to you, my post was meant to verify my ideas, so i'll wait for someone who can, , , ,
I'm sorry that you're in that funny state of 'knowing' that you're correct and thus not at all open to being corrected.  There is no such thing as 'apparent speed' in special relativity (the high-speed round trip example).  I suppose there is in general relativity (the black hole case you mention) since speeds there are not meaningfully relative to an external inertial frame. From the point of view of a distant observer, the 'fast' guy near the gravity well moves slower and slower, stopping at the event horizon, just as light does. The difference in what you're calling 'apparent' vs actual speed is related to the difference between measuring distances in Cartesian vs Schwarzschild coordinates, or just expressing distances in proper terms.
But light going to the moon and back has no 'apparent' slowdown.  It makes its way back at light speed.  You'd not be able to see your own reflection in the mirror if that apparent speed could be applied to the dilation-by-speed case.
I agree that close enough to a black hole, one would not be able to see one's self in a mirror.

You ignore my posts showing how your assertion lead to different behavior than the ones we observe (like neutrinos outrunning light).  You ignore those counterexamples.

Quote
OK thanks, , ,I will try to define SP# as a double, and look at the DIM function and let you know
Glad that worked and you didn't need to do it to other variables.
The output is still has the ship moving at near light speed in Earth frame for more than an hour and going only 186243 miles.  No special relativity exercise describes such a thing.  Please link to one if you disagree.
What moves 186243 miles is Earth in the ship frame, but if your assertion is correct, it should also have an 'apparent' 45 Mps speed and Earth would only move 45 miles during the exercise.

Since when are 45 miles per second and 45 miles per second per megaparsec the same? Those are different units signifying different things.
The expansion rate of the universe is not a velocity.  It has different units.
That was a quote from reply 1.  I also pointed this out, but have not again brought it up since the OP clearly has a misunderstanding of special relativity.  Usually it's the other way around where some SR property is mistakenly dragged into a GR case, but here the mistake is being done in the opposite direction.

So yes, the expansion rate of the universe is not a speed, since speed is expressed in different units.  Comparing then as is done in the OP is thus meaningless.  The whole argument from the OP seems to hinge on this 'apparent speed' thing, plus that meaningless comparison of two figures in different units.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 16/05/2019 13:39:53
Yippeee, ha ha, at least you got one thing right halc, , thank you
I pointed out that problem in reply 3, long before I saw the code or even knew it was written in QBASIC:
I suspect you are not using sufficient precision on your variables to handle a value of .99999997.
And yet you ignored that comment because you 'knew' your program was correct.  I'm just pointing this out to demonstrate that your certainty in things blinds you to being corrected.  Consider for a moment that this site has a few people who know their stuff (and very many who don't).  You don't know which category I'm in, so instead of taking my word for it, explain to me how neutrinos can arrive here at Earth sooner than the photons from the same event.  They go so fast that they should have an apparent speed slower than a walking pace, by your assertions.
If you can't explain that, then consider the possibility that I might be right about faster things getting there sooner than slower things.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 16/05/2019 17:08:36
Helo the incredible halc,

explain to me how neutrinos can arrive here at Earth sooner than the photons from the same event - they must have a lower rest mass than photons, , ,

They go so fast that they should have an apparent speed slower than a walking pace - Massless particles do not behave like matter, as with protons and neutrons, and are immune to the higgs field

Like photons, neutrinos are thought to have a rest mass of zero, and with keeping with my ideas I think massless particles move along in all directions with the actual expansion rate of the universe close to C

Wow, , , I put in 10 9s .9999999999 and got a TD of 70710.67 and an APP of just 2.633874 MPS, , ,, SPOOKY

Remember, , , im getting there, relative to a stationary observer, matter that moves at C appears to stop

I agree that close enough to a black hole, one would not be able to see one's self in a mirror.- I think you are wrong, the laws of physics must hold true in all reference frames, and Einstein used a mirror in a space ship analogy and asked the same question for around 10 years, he used galileo's Principle Of Relativity  to prove that all observers would see their image as normal in this moving mirror, proving C is constant and time is variable, and formulating all his work on the STR
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Janus on 16/05/2019 17:37:25
Helo the incredible halc,

explain to me how neutrinos can arrive here at Earth sooner than the photons from the same event - they must have a lower rest mass than photons, , ,

Neutrinos produced by a supernova are able to escape the core and begin their trip to Earth before the shockwave can propagate through the star to produce the light flash.  Even photons produced at the core are have to work their way through along a meandering path while the neutrinos pass through it as if it is not there.  The neutrinos arrive first, not because they traveled faster, but because they got a head start.
Quote

They go so fast that they should have an apparent speed slower than a walking pace - Massless particles do not behave like matter, as with protons and neutrons, and are immune to the higgs field

Like photons, neutrinos are thought to have a rest mass of zero,
Your information is out of date. While it was once thought that neutrinos had zero rest mass, more recent experiments have shown that this is not the case and that they do have a small rest mass.
Quote

Wow, , , I put in 10 9s .9999999999 and got a TD of 70710.67 and an APP of just 2.633874 MPS, , ,, SPOOKY

Remember, , , im getting there, relative to a stationary observer, matter that moves at C appears to stop
No. what you are doing is misinterpreting Relativity.   Time dilation only effects how we would measure the tick rate for a moving clock, not how fast we would measure it as moving relative to ourselves.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 16/05/2019 18:05:14
explain to me how neutrinos can arrive here at Earth sooner than the photons from the same event - they must have a lower rest mass than photons, , ,
Neutrinos produced by a supernova are able to escape the core and begin their trip to Earth before the shockwave can propagate through the star to produce the light flash.  Even photons produced at the core are have to work their way through along a meandering path while the neutrinos pass through it as if it is not there.  The neutrinos arrive first, not because they traveled faster, but because they got a head start.
Indeed.  They can also outrun light through a material with a refractive index a tiny bit above 1.
Even given a brief head start, the neutrinos would not get here ahead of the light if they were moving at a walking pace over hundreds of light years.  That was my point.

Quote
Massless particles do not behave like matter, as with protons and neutrons, and are immune to the higgs field
I assume you mean photons and not protons.  Janus is correct in stating that neutrinos have a small amount of proper mass.  (Janus is correct about everything, trust me)
If photons don't behave like matter in the sense of having a reduced 'apparent speed', then light would not apparently slow near a black hole as observed from a distance, but it does, just like the matter there.  You're the one that brought up behavior in a deep gravity well as observed from well outside it.

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 16/05/2019 18:54:15
Coool halc, , ,

Did you see this bit I added to my last post :-

I agree that close enough to a black hole, one would not be able to see one's self in a mirror.- I think you are wrong, the laws of physics must hold true in all reference frames, and Einstein used a mirror in a space ship analogy and asked the same question for around 10 years, he used galileo's Principle Of Relativity  to prove that all observers would see their image as normal in this moving mirror, proving C is constant and time is variable, and formulating most if not all of his work on the STR on this one idea
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 16/05/2019 20:01:40
I think you are wrong, the laws of physics must hold true in all reference frames
In all equivalent reference frames.  So one inertial frame is indistinguishable from another.

Quote
[Einstein] used galileo's Principle Of Relativity to prove
Extended the Galilean principle of relativity to include electromagnetism (meaning, constant light speed was presumed).  From that extension, all of special relativity followed.
Quote
that all observers would see their image as normal
That all inertial observers would see their image in a mirror, yes.
Quote
proving C is constant
No, it took a constant c as a premise.  SR was derived from that.  The constant speed of light does not follow from SR.  Other way around.

Quote
and formulating most if not all of his work on the STR on this one idea
Yes. One further idea (the equivalence principle) drove most of general relativity (GR).

Quote
I agree that close enough to a black hole, one would not be able to see one's self in a mirror.-
Because the frame there is not inertial, yes. The laws of physics are different in an accelerating frame than they are in an inertial one. Similarly, one would not be able to see one's reflection if at the rear of a ship accelerating at sufficiently high G.  Occupants at the front and rear of an accelerating ship might be able to see each other, but would appear to move at different apparent speeds.  All this is GR, not SR.
I think you got your 'apparent speed' idea from a description of such accelerating frames, but such frames don't apply to the examples you've been giving such as a fast trip to the moon and back.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 16/05/2019 21:36:05
Galileo's Principle of Relativity = All steady motion is relative, and cannot be detected, without reference to an ouside point ,

if my image disappeard in the mirror, i would'nt have to look outside my ship to know im moving at C, which would violate glalileo's principle

ha ha , ,thats why you dont hear the sonic boom when on board concorde

You see, I do know a bit about STR, and its not just guess work, , , ,lol
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Kryptid on 16/05/2019 21:53:53
if my image disappeard in the mirror, i would'nt have to look outside my ship to know im moving at C, which would violate glalileo's principle

Well, you can't move at c. At any constant speed below c, you'd be able to see your image in the mirror without distortion anyway, since the speed of light always looks unchanged in your own reference frame.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 17/05/2019 01:08:33
if my image disappeard in the mirror, i would'nt have to look outside my ship to know im moving at C, which would violate glalileo's principle
It would not have violated Galilean relativity, but it would definitely violate special relativity.
Quote
Galileo's Principle of Relativity = All steady motion is relative, and cannot be detected, without reference to an ouside point
The principle did not apply to electromagnetism until Einstein extended it to include that.  Newton may have pondered something going faster than light once they discovered it to be a finite speed, but he might have still had you seeing yourself in a mirror in a box that takes the aether along with it, much like that which allows one to talk to the person seated in front of you on the Concorde.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 17/05/2019 17:54:04
No. what you are doing is misinterpreting Relativity.   Time dilation only effects how we would measure the tick rate for a moving clock, not how fast we would measure it as moving relative to ourselves.

if you were a stationary observer on earth, and i got in a space ship on a round trip to the moon and back at a speed of 87% the speed of light there would be a 2x time dilation, it would take me 3 seconds, but when i returned to earth you would say ive been gone 6

hmmmmm Hi janus, i dont get it, maybe im just dumb, , ,, If there are two different times, you can insert them into S=D\T to give two different speeds

ha ha, , , apparently, we are chatting in 2 different forums, , ,SPOOKY

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 17/05/2019 18:50:08
If photons don't behave like matter in the sense of having a reduced 'apparent speed', then light would not apparently slow near a black hole as observed from a distance, but it does, just like the matter there.  You're the one that brought up behavior in a deep gravity well as observed from well outside it.

Hi halc, , ,I don't know, maybe photons behave more like matter in extreme  gravity
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 17/05/2019 20:21:35
If there are two different times, you can insert them into S=D\T to give two different speeds
There is only one speed.  The other speed is zero.  The ship moves only in Earth frame, not in the ship's frame.

Hi halc, , ,I don't know
If you don't know, why are you so closed to learning something new?

I just started a new thread, and did that precisely because I don't know the answer.  I'm trying to learn.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 18/05/2019 00:55:46
I just started a new thread, and did that precisely because I don't know the answer.  I'm trying to learn.

Me too , ,.Cooooooor, , , that janus is a tough cookie to crack, , ,go up 5 posts

https://thescienceforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2777&p=36560#p36560

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 18/05/2019 01:35:00
Me too , ,.Cooooooor, , , that janus is a tough cookie to crack, , ,go up 5 posts
It appears that you are the cookie that won't crack. Please pay close attention to iNow's post #9.  It is more on target than the others.

Janus also quoted the same 3 seconds/1.5 seconds on the two clocks for the round trip moon exercise.
Quote
Ok janus, I get it, , , ha ha,  your saying my program is wrong, and in doing so, that Einstein is wrong
The numerous spelling, punctuation, and other mistakes suggests your education level is limited.  Consider the possibility that others might know relativity theory better.

Your program does not compute what Einstein says. That's what we've been saying.
I spotted 3 bugs in your program (that have been there for 22 years) right away, before you even posted the code.

If we're wrong, tell us what empirical consequence will occur given what we claim.  I've done that for your assertion, showing how neutrinos go so fast that they should take ages to get anywhere, and yet they don't.  You've not done that for what we assert.  Don't quote your incorrect understanding of Einstein.  Quote some empirical fact that supports your view.

Janus claim that there is an 'apparent speed' that is half of its actual speed at super high recession speeds, and I support that interpretation of 'apparent speed'. Using that interpretation, incoming objects have an apparent speed much higher than light speed.  I can see a fast ship leave a star a light year away and get here in a few seconds, with an apparent speed of a million x light.  But that's not it's speed relative to us, its just a few seconds duration between us witnessing the departure (that took place a year ago) and witnessing the arrival.
My interpretation of 'apparent speed' is more like how you're using it: Actual time it takes for the object to go a certain distance like to the moon and back, which at .877c is about 3 seconds, not 6.

If this 'apparent speed' thing was actually how it worked, there would be a well published figure for the optimal speed that balances actual with dilation and gets you there the fastest.  It wouldn't be hard to compute, but notice there is no mention of this on any web site.  That is further evidence that you need to adjust your understanding of SR.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 18/05/2019 02:24:50
Not another one saying my program is wrong, and in doing so, saying Einstein is wrong

you have my program, if you know it all, see if you can correct it and impress me, but I don't think you can

halc said - My interpretation of 'apparent speed' is more like how you're using it: Actual time it takes for the object to go a certain distance like to the moon and back, which at .877c is about 3 seconds, not 6.

one minute you say 1.5, now you say 3, make your mind up, , , I said it would be 3
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 18/05/2019 03:57:23
one minute you say 1.5, now you say 3, make your mind up, , , I said it would be 3
3 as measured at Earth, 1.5 seconds as measured by the 'ship'.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 18/05/2019 16:32:20
for a time dilation factor of 2, it is closer to 86.6%
Yes.  My mistake.

Quote
Janus said = As measured by the Earth, the Earth-Moon distance is 384,000 km, and at ~87%, this takes ~ 1.5 sec per leg or ~3 sec per round trip.

look what janus is saying, As measured by the Earth, If it took 3 seconds there would be no time\speed dilation for the earth observer. so he is talking nonsense - QED
The clock on Earth that measures that 3 seconds is stationary in that Earth frame, so it should not be dilated in that frame.  That makes Janus (and Einstein) exactly correct.

Total trip distance in Earth frame is 768800 km, and at .866c (259620 km/s), it would take 2.96 (very close to 3) seconds.  That's what .866c means.  It doesn't mean actually 129810 km/s.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Bored chemist on 18/05/2019 16:39:06
I'm backing Halc's track record on this.
Incidentally, another "counter intuitive" thing is that computers get the maths wrong.
But they do.

Do you actually know what precision you are calculating to?
Yippeee, ha ha, at least you got one thing right halc

Looks like I backed the right runner.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 18/05/2019 21:27:41
OK, I get it

Einstein said - If you are moving with respect to me, we shall not agree upon the rate of flow of time, your clock runs slower than mine when you move and all processes that change with time change at a slower rate when observed in motion, one clock does not beat out time for the whole universe, a separate clock is needed for each state of motion, , , ,

I assumed, the speed of an object is in motion, relative to a stationary observer its clock is running slower,  the observer would  have to put the longer Time into S=D\T and get a slower speed, , , a simple mistake
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Janus on 18/05/2019 22:53:23
OK, I get it

Einstein said - If you are moving with respect to me, we shall not agree upon the rate of flow of time, your clock runs slower than mine when you move and all processes that change with time change at a slower rate when observed in motion, one clock does not beat out time for the whole universe, a separate clock is needed for each state of motion, , , ,

I assumed the speed of an object is in motion, and its a process that changes with time, as in S=D\T, so must have a slower rate when observed in motion, , , a simple mistake
It depends on what S is.   For example.  Observer A is watching B, which is traveling at 0.866 c relative to A. If B were to throw a ball a in a direction perpendicular  to the relative line of motion between A and B, at a speed of 0.25c as measured by B, then A would measure the ball as moving at 0.125c( 1/2 of 0.25c) with respect to B.
However, if B threw the ball in the same direction as its motion relative to A, then A would measure the ball as having a speed of 0.91738c relative to himself and 0.0514c relative to B.  And if he threw it in the opposite direction, A would measure the ball as moving at 0.7862c relative to himself and 0.07978c with respect to B.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 18/05/2019 23:50:04
ha ha, good to see you again, I didn't get a chance to explain myself properly, ive used this for years, and ive changed it a little bit

I assumed, an object is in motion at .866 relative to a stationary observer, if the clock is running slower,  they would  have to put the longer Time into S=D\T and get a slower speed of .43, , , is it a simple mistake

ha ha , , give me chance get my head around the A B idea, im glad there aint a C, , , , A would measure the ball as having a speed of 0.91738c - sounds interesting
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 19/05/2019 17:36:26
if B threw the ball in the same direction as its motion relative to A, then A would measure the ball as having a speed of 0.91738c relative to himself and 0.0514c relative to B.  And if he threw it in the opposite direction, A would measure the ball as moving at 0.7862c relative to himself and 0.07978c with respect to B.

Simple

you got your figure of 0.0514 wrong

0.05138 +.866 = .91738
.866 - .07978 = .78622
.866 - .78622 = .07978

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 19/05/2019 19:18:18
you got your figure of 0.0514 wrong
It was correct.  You are doing the math the classical way, which has been demonstrated to be wrong.
You don't appear to have even the rudiments of understanding of the theory, and yet seem completely closed minded to being corrected, so there are plenty of sites showing velocity addition under relativity, such as this one:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/velocity.html

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 19/05/2019 20:28:03
You don't appear to have even the rudiments of understanding of the theory

so I got it wrong and made a mistake. i now understand, to a stationary observer moving clocks run slow, but the moving clocks speed does not slow down, , happy now

OK, If you know so much, tell me why  you don't hear the sonic boom when on board concorde, as it passes through 760 mph, using TSR

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 19/05/2019 20:50:47
you got your figure of 0.0514 wrong

Ok halc if you know the answer, do the maths and show me why 0.05138 is wrong, , , ,at least I had a go and I forgot 1 relativistic value, I noticed you didn't attempt to break it down
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 20/05/2019 02:32:08
so I got it wrong and made a mistake. i now understand, to a stationary observer moving clocks run slow, but the moving clocks speed does not slow down, , happy now
That seems to be a self contradictory statement.

Put in hopefully better terms: Time is dilated in a frame in which it is moving.

Quote
OK, If you know so much, tell me why  you don't hear the sonic boom when on board concorde, as it passes through 760 mph, using TSR
Pretty irrelevant to the topic at hand, but sound moves away from its source, so those on board an aircraft do not hear the shock wave of the passage of the aircraft.  Most of what is heard from the inside is not outside sound at all, but mostly the vibration of the craft itself disturbing the cabin air.  There is no sonic boom to that.

Quote
do the maths and show me why 0.05138 is wrong, , , ,at least I had a go and I forgot 1 relativistic value, I noticed you didn't attempt to break it down
.05138 is not wrong.  It is the same as the .0514 figure, except not rounded as much.  Sorry, I thought you were saying the figure was actually wrong, not just 'not accurate to the precision the in which the sum was expressed', which you're right about.

The maths was being done at 3 significant figures, so adding a 4th doesn't make the answer more accurate.  Yes, the .91738 figure is probably one more digit than the precision suggests.

You say 'maths' and yet you write your program to compute miles?  Where are you from?  That's a rare cultural combination.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 20/05/2019 18:11:30
sound moves away from its source, so those on board an aircraft do not hear the shock wave of the passage of the aircraft.  Most of what is heard from the inside is not outside sound at all, but mostly the vibration of the craft itself disturbing the cabin air.  There is no sonic boom to that.

Hey halc. I mentioned something like this earlier, but this makes it clearer

Galileo's Principle of Relativity = All steady motion is relative, and cannot be detected, without reference to an outside point ,

Einstein had this thought experiment for around 10 years from the age of 14, and found the answer here , , , Einstein is in a space ship and he is holding a mirror at arms length, when his speed hits the speed of light, will his image in the mirror disappear, if his image disappeared in the mirror, he wouldn't have to look outside his ship to know he's moving at speed C, which would violate glalileo's principle - ha ha, ,and yes we know you cant move at the speed C

that's why  you don't hear the sonic boom when on board concorde, as it passes through 760 mph - this is what I thought up as an example
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 20/05/2019 19:14:03
Einstein had this thought experiment for around 10 years from the age of 14, and found the answer here , , , Einstein is in a space ship and he is holding a mirror at arms length, when his speed hits the speed of light, will his image in the mirror disappear, if his image disappeared in the mirror, he wouldn't have to look outside his ship to know he's moving at speed C, which would violate glalileo's principle - ha ha, ,and yes we know you cant move at the speed C

that's why  you don't hear the sonic boom when on board concorde, as it passes through 760 mph
Hearing the sonic boom is the equivalent of looking out of the window.
The equivalent statement should be:
Galileo had this thought experiment where he's in an aircraft and he is talking to his companion at arms length.
When his speed hits the speed of sound, will he no longer be able to converse with his companion?
If this ability ceased, he wouldn't have to look outside his aircraft to know he's moving at speed of sound, which would violate Galileo's principle - ha ha, ,and yes we know you cant move at the speed sound.

It just doesn't follow.  There's nothing in Galileo's principle that forbids moving a supersonic or superluminal speeds.  One can speak on the Concorde because the Concorde takes the sound medium along with it.  Galileo would likewise suspect that your image is always seen in the mirror because light probably moves at a speed determined by the object that emitted it.  We now know that isn't true, but there was no evidence for it back then.
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 21/05/2019 22:33:25
Ive had enough of puzzling about relativity for a week , , ,ha ha

im going back to making music

Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Colin2B on 21/05/2019 22:50:59
im going back to making music
As long as you get the timing right  ;D
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: AtoMick-u235 on 23/05/2019 20:17:04
From the info from janus, I have corrected my program

[ Invalid Attachment ]
Title: Re: Expansion of the Universe - Actual and Apparent and why photons travel at light
Post by: Halc on 23/05/2019 23:51:13
From the info from janus, I have corrected my program
The dilation factor is correct.  Speed of light constant is still off, but that's not important.
Time elapsed in Earth frame while the ship moves is indeed 21 million seconds.  Note that this is very different than the time that elapses on Earth in Ship's frame during the trip.  Your output doesn't specify the frame in which the value is computed.  It's important.
Distance ship moves in Earth frame is 2 million seconds * light speed which is 3.9 trillion miles, a lot more than the 5.6 million miles you output.
Distance the ship moves in ship frame is by definition zero, so not sure what you're trying to compute there, since for it to be nonzero would be to say the ship isn't where it is.