Question about light speed and distance

[Ebiru2387]

Hi all,

I have been very interested in astronomy for many years, but just recently have i been reading more books, watching documentaries, reading articles and the like.  However one thing i cannot find is an answer i have regarding my following question.

So 1 light year is explained as ~ 5.9 trillion miles away. And every time i watch a documentary they say that if something is 5 light years away, then you are, "seeing 5 years into the past".  When a statement like this is made, are they implying you are seeing 5 light years in the past,  or 5 "earth years"?  If it is the latter, then how is this?  

Sorry if this question seems basic as compared to others, but among all the things that involve astronomy, light speed is one topic that puzzles me more than the rest.  Just have a hard time wrapping my brain around such an awesome concept.

[Dejarma]

2 hours ago, Ebiru2387 said:

Hi all,

I have been very interested in astronomy for many years, but just recently have i been reading more books, watching documentaries, reading articles and the like.  However one thing i cannot find is an answer i have regarding my following question.

So 1 light year is explained as ~ 5.9 trillion miles away. And every time i watch a documentary they say that if something is 5 light years away, then you are, "seeing 5 years into the past".  When a statement like this is made, are they implying you are seeing 5 light years in the past,  or 5 "earth years"?  If it is the latter, then how is this?  

Sorry if this question seems basic as compared to others, but among all the things that involve astronomy, light speed is one topic that puzzles me more than the rest.  Just have a hard time wrapping my brain around such an awesome concept.

when someone says a light year; do you actually know what that means? 

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

2 hours ago, Ebiru2387 said:

Hi all,

I have been very interested in astronomy for many years, but just recently have i been reading more books, watching documentaries, reading articles and the like.  However one thing i cannot find is an answer i have regarding my following question.

So 1 light year is explained as ~ 5.9 trillion miles away. And every time i watch a documentary they say that if something is 5 light years away, then you are, "seeing 5 years into the past".  When a statement like this is made, are they implying you are seeing 5 light years in the past,  or 5 "earth years"?  If it is the latter, then how is this?  

Sorry if this question seems basic as compared to others, but among all the things that involve astronomy, light speed is one topic that puzzles me more than the rest.  Just have a hard time wrapping my brain around such an awesome concept.

A light year is a measure of distance, not time, but since light takes 5  Earth years to travel 5 light years, you are in fact seeing light that is 5 years old.

Lets say the Sun stopped shinning, we wouldn't know about it until 8 minutes after it happened, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes from Earth (150.000.000 million km. In the civilised world we use kilometers, not miles )

[OntarioSquatch]

5 years is roughly how long it takes for light to get here from 5 light years away. Interestingly, if one is under a lot of gravity like if they were close to a black hole, it would take a lot less than 5 years for light to reach them from out in space

[Likely Guy]

1 hour ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

A light year is a measure of distance, not time, but since light takes 5  Earth years to travel 5 light years, you are in fact seeing light that is 5 years old.

Lets say the Sun stopped shinning, we wouldn't know about it until 8 minutes after it happened, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes from Earth (150.000.000 million km. In the civilised world we use kilometers, not miles )

Heathen.

 

[MissJatti]

In the early mornings you might get to see a huge ball (the sun) on the horizon, (obviously not has huge has you might think now)  but you will not be able to see its light until 8 minutes later, 

[godnodog]

Everything you see regardless of distance is seeing the past, what you see is the reflection of light, when you see a person and what that person is wearing or doing what you really see is light reflected by that person body, clothes and objects. 

So when scientists say they discovered a planet, for example, 150 light years away it means that the event of the planet passing in front of the star that allowed us to see it happened 150 years ago, and it took 150 years for the light of that event to reach our satellites to capture it.

 

Looking in to space is literally looking into the past, there is no pun intended.

Edited September 10, 2017 by godnodog

[RAyMO]

8 minutes ago, godnodog said:

Everything you see regardless of distance is seeing the past

Never thought of it like that before - nice.

[RAyMO]

Damned kilometers - soon as I cross the border here I have to start diving by 8 and mulitplying by 5 and looking at the wee tiny numbers on the speedometer on the car. But that said you're probably right.

Edited September 10, 2017 by RAyMO

[acute]

All light from Space takes time to reach the Earth. The further away an object is, the longer the light has taken to reach us, so the older the picture of it we are seeing.

We see the sun as it looked 8 minutes ago (a distance of 8 Light Minutes) because that's how long it has taken the light to reach us.  If a visible galaxy is a billion Light Years away, it has taken a billion years for the image to reach us, so we are seeing it as it was (and in the position it was) a billion years ago.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

3 hours ago, RAyMO said:

Damned kilometers - soon as I cross the border here I have to start diving by 8 and mulitplying by 5 and looking at the wee tiny numbers on the speedometer on the car. But that said you're probably right.

It was just a joke. I've been known to do that from time to time. 

[ArcherSage]

Light isn't a thing that travels, it is like a shadow. What is the speed of dark? Light is a wave propagating through ether much like sound waves propagating through air/water/land mediums. Light is not something that exists by itself like a house, or a tree. Even in the dark the tree and house still remain detectable by other senses (touch, taste etc). Light does not exist in this way. Where does the light go when you turn your light bulb off? You really think photons are being created when you excite the gas in the bulb? Its a field, this is clear when you look at a streetlight at night where the ground below is illuminated but the area further away is not. It is not photons losing energy the further from the source, it is the area of the field. Particle theory in time will be replaced by wave theory and the particle wave duality nonsense can finally end.

[Rlyeh]

21 minutes ago, ArcherSage said:

Light isn't a thing that travels

Why can we measure it's speed?

 

Quote

What is the speed of dark?

That's a nonsense question, does dark have a point of origin? Light does.

 

Quote

Light is a wave propagating through ether much like sound waves propagating through air/water/land mediums. Light is not something that exists by itself like a house, or a tree. Even in the dark the tree and house still remain detectable by other senses (touch, taste etc). Light does not exist in this way. Where does the light go when you turn your light bulb off? You really think photons are being created when you excite the gas in the bulb? Its a field, this is clear when you look at a streetlight at night where the ground below is illuminated but the area further away is not. It is not photons losing energy the further from the source, it is the area of the field. Particle theory in time will be replaced by wave theory and the particle wave duality nonsense can finally end.

^ And here is the rest of the unsupported nonsense. 

By what you've said photons should cease to exist the moment the emitter is switched off.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Rlyeh

[Derek Willis]

3 hours ago, ArcherSage said:

Light isn't a thing that travels, it is like a shadow. What is the speed of dark? Light is a wave propagating through ether much like sound waves propagating through air/water/land mediums. Light is not something that exists by itself like a house, or a tree. Even in the dark the tree and house still remain detectable by other senses (touch, taste etc). Light does not exist in this way. Where does the light go when you turn your light bulb off? You really think photons are being created when you excite the gas in the bulb? Its a field, this is clear when you look at a streetlight at night where the ground below is illuminated but the area further away is not. It is not photons losing energy the further from the source, it is the area of the field. Particle theory in time will be replaced by wave theory and the particle wave duality nonsense can finally end.

You might of missed this, but a few years ago - in fact 130 years ago - a couple of guys called Michelson and Morley did an experiment that demonstrated light doesn't propagate through the ether. In fact, there is no such thing as the ether.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

4 hours ago, ArcherSage said:

Light isn't a thing that travels, it is like a shadow. What is the speed of dark? Light is a wave propagating through ether much like sound waves propagating through air/water/land mediums. Light is not something that exists by itself like a house, or a tree. Even in the dark the tree and house still remain detectable by other senses (touch, taste etc). Light does not exist in this way. Where does the light go when you turn your light bulb off? You really think photons are being created when you excite the gas in the bulb? Its a field, this is clear when you look at a streetlight at night where the ground below is illuminated but the area further away is not. It is not photons losing energy the further from the source, it is the area of the field. Particle theory in time will be replaced by wave theory and the particle wave duality nonsense can finally end.

Sure lets just discard one of the most successfull theories of all time. Its not like its the basis of modern technology, like the computer you used to write your post............. oh wait it is. 

[ArcherSage]

On 11/21/2017 at 1:37 PM, Rlyeh said:

Why can we measure it's speed?

 

That's a nonsense question, does dark have a point of origin? Light does.

 

^ And here is the rest of the unsupported nonsense. 

By what you've said photons should cease to exist the moment the emitter is switched off.

Photons have never been proven.

Particles are not necessary for any matter to exist.

Particles that carry light waves is complete nonsense.

Electrons/protons and the like (let alone gluons/gravitons) have never been proven.

Atomistic thinking is a cancer to science.

[ArcherSage]

On 11/21/2017 at 6:12 PM, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

Sure lets just discard one of the most successfull theories of all time. Its not like its the basis of modern technology, like the computer you used to write your post............. oh wait it is. 

Ah I see. I guess my computer creates photon particles and that hits my eye cones and then I see, now it makes sense...light is a wave not a particle, ALL matter is a wave. ALL energy is a wave, energy is always transferred as a wave. Wave theory is 100% correct as is admitted by modern physicists, the problem is they also say that particle theory is right. So they invented this thing called "particle-wave duality" to try and keep their particles in the equation. No modern scientist will dispute the fact that matter and light can be proven to be a wave, they just claim it is ALSO a particle somehow. It is not both, light has only been proven to be a wave..the double slit experiment proved this. The double slit makes much more sense when you realize its a wave the entire time. They cannot actually take a particle or photon, and shoot it. They can do no such thing. They have never even observed a particle. These particle accelerators are assumed to be colliding particles because they start with the premise that the light rays they are using are made of particles. They should be called wave colliders. 

 

Oh and btw, dark energy/dark matter is the atomistic version of ether theory. Modern science KNOWS that space is not a vacuum of nothingness, that there must be some sort of energy that permeates all of the universe...aka ether

Edited November 23, 2017 by ArcherSage

[Rlyeh]

1 hour ago, ArcherSage said:

Photons have never been proven.

Particles are not necessary for any matter to exist.

Particles that carry light waves is complete nonsense.

Electrons/protons and the like (let alone gluons/gravitons) have never been proven.

Atomistic thinking is a cancer to science.

That's why they've been detected. You don't like science because it doesn't support your bull****. Your ignorance isn't helping anyone.

Edited November 23, 2017 by Rlyeh

[Rlyeh]

1 hour ago, ArcherSage said:

Ah I see. I guess my computer creates photon particles and that hits my eye cones and then I see, now it makes sense...light is a wave not a particle, ALL matter is a wave. ALL energy is a wave, energy is always transferred as a wave. Wave theory is 100% correct as is admitted by modern physicists, the problem is they also say that particle theory is right. So they invented this thing called "particle-wave duality" to try and keep their particles in the equation. No modern scientist will dispute the fact that matter and light can be proven to be a wave, they just claim it is ALSO a particle somehow. It is not both, light has only been proven to be a wave..the double slit experiment proved this. The double slit makes much more sense when you realize its a wave the entire time. They cannot actually take a particle or photon, and shoot it. They can do no such thing. They have never even observed a particle. These particle accelerators are assumed to be colliding particles because they start with the premise that the light rays they are using are made of particles. They should be called wave colliders. 

So molecules don't exist either?

Not only has light been proven to be made up of photons they can fire single photons.

http://www.sps.ch/en/articles/progresses/wave-particle-duality-of-light-for-the-classroom-13/

 

1 hour ago, ArcherSage said:

Oh and btw, dark energy/dark matter is the atomistic version of ether theory. Modern science KNOWS that space is not a vacuum of nothingness, that there must be some sort of energy that permeates all of the universe...aka ether

If you even understood them you'd know they have nothing to do with aether.

You sound like a creationist attacking what you don't understand.

[ArcherSage]

Those aren't photons, they are wave packets

[ArcherSage]

This is what is happening in the double slit

 

 

Not this

It appears to be made of individual particles in the images because the barrier breaks the wave into packets

Edited November 23, 2017 by ArcherSage

[Rlyeh]

This is what is happening in the double slit

[SHaYap]

Ooooh Science Project ...

~

 

[00.03:19]
 

Quote

 

~

How to Build the World's Simplest Particle Detector - Scientific ...

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/.../how-to-build-the-worlds-simplest-particle-dete...

Oct 15, 2012 - Even if you don't have a source, you can use the cloud chamber to see cosmic rays--energetic particles from outer space. The plastic cup is the ...

 

~

Cloud Chamber Particle Detector: 12 Steps (with Pictures) - Instructables

www.instructables.com/id/Cloud-Chamber-Particle-Detector/

Jul 19, 2016 - In this instructable, you will learn to build your own cloud chamber! This design utilizes peltier thermocoolers, a power supply, and CPU cooler ...

 

~

How to make your own cloud chamber | CERN

https://home.cern/students-educators/updates/.../how-make-your-own-cloud-chamber

Jan 21, 2015 - ... explains how to make a cloud chamber (Video: Sarah Charley/US-LHC) ... several experiments at CERN have used cloud chambers to detect particles. ... to plan and build, you can make your own cosmic-ray detector in the ...

~

 

 

[ArcherSage]

That is not a particle detector. It simply detects radiation, it is essentially a radiation detector. If you BELIEVE in particles, then you assume radiation must come from particles, but you are not actually witnessing particles in action. Radiation is a form of energy, science has yet to define what energy is or what its made of. All we know is that it is required for anything to exist. All things essentially consume energy (all things"eat" so to speak). 

 

In physics, radiation is the emission or transmission of energy in the form of waves or particles (the duality remember) through space or through a material medium. There is the assumption that this comes from particles, but it comes from waves. Oscillating waves carry the energy in the form of radiation, the same pattern of a DNA strand.

[Tatetopa]

On 9/9/2017 at 9:09 PM, Likely Guy said:

On 9/9/2017 at 7:08 PM, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

A light year is a measure of distance, not time, but since light takes 5  Earth years to travel 5 light years, you are in fact seeing light that is 5 years old.

Lets say the Sun stopped shinning, we wouldn't know about it until 8 minutes after it happened, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes from Earth (150.000.000 million km. In the civilised world we use kilometers, not miles )

Heathen.

We barbarians still count on our fingers and measure with our feet.  And if that doesn't work, we might attempt to pound some sense into you.  After all, we find slugs carry a lot more weight than kilograms. For you civilized people, a slug is better than 2 stones.  I think I'll quart now. See you liter.