Our God is a particle???. XD http://www.catholic.org/technology/story.php?id=50261 The current laws of physics says that light travels approximately 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum. That's been a handy fact that has allowed scientists to calculate the distances to faraway objects and to conduct other research with great accuracy. However, that measurement assumes that space is a vacuum. It isn't. Space is filled with tiny subatomic particles which although extremely diffuse, can theoretically slow down light just a tiny bit. How tiny? About 50 attoseconds per square meter of crossed vacuum. An attosecond is a one quintillionth (10^-18) of a second. An attosecond is to a second what a real second of time is to 31.71 billion years. So that's not a lot of egg on the face of physics. Still, over very great distances light from distant objects could be slowed just slightly. That slowing isn't enough to impact any currently accepted theories regarding physics, but it still suggests that even the most reliable of yardsticks may be variable after all. Very minor changes to currently accepted understandings may be required, but since the changes are so slight they might not be significant, and therefore unworthy of much modification. The greatest change might be to textbooks, which will need to add a caveat that the speed of light is constant, only in a true vacuum-which space isn't. The findings must still survive peer review before that happens.
[QUOTE="LauraPortinari"]Our God is a particle???. XD http://www.catholic.org/technology/story.php?id=50261 The current laws of physics says that light travels approximately 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum. That's been a handy fact that has allowed scientists to calculate the distances to faraway objects and to conduct other research with great accuracy. However, that measurement assumes that space is a vacuum. It isn't. Space is filled with tiny subatomic particles which although extremely diffuse, can theoretically slow down light just a tiny bit. How tiny? About 50 attoseconds per square meter of crossed vacuum. An attosecond is a one quintillionth (10^-18) of a second. An attosecond is to a second what a real second of time is to 31.71 billion years. So that's not a lot of egg on the face of physics. Still, over very great distances light from distant objects could be slowed just slightly. That slowing isn't enough to impact any currently accepted theories regarding physics, but it still suggests that even the most reliable of yardsticks may be variable after all. Very minor changes to currently accepted understandings may be required, but since the changes are so slight they might not be significant, and therefore unworthy of much modification. The greatest change might be to textbooks, which will need to add a caveat that the speed of light is constant, only in a true vacuum-which space isn't. The findings must still survive peer review before that happens. Ah, the most useless facts are also the most important.
[QUOTE="LauraPortinari"]Our God is a particle???. XD http://www.catholic.org/technology/story.php?id=50261 The current laws of physics says that light travels approximately 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum. That's been a handy fact that has allowed scientists to calculate the distances to faraway objects and to conduct other research with great accuracy. However, that measurement assumes that space is a vacuum. It isn't. Space is filled with tiny subatomic particles which although extremely diffuse, can theoretically slow down light just a tiny bit. How tiny? About 50 attoseconds per square meter of crossed vacuum. An attosecond is a one quintillionth (10^-18) of a second. An attosecond is to a second what a real second of time is to 31.71 billion years. So that's not a lot of egg on the face of physics. Still, over very great distances light from distant objects could be slowed just slightly. That slowing isn't enough to impact any currently accepted theories regarding physics, but it still suggests that even the most reliable of yardsticks may be variable after all. Very minor changes to currently accepted understandings may be required, but since the changes are so slight they might not be significant, and therefore unworthy of much modification. The greatest change might be to textbooks, which will need to add a caveat that the speed of light is constant, only in a true vacuum-which space isn't. The findings must still survive peer review before that happens. But I don't quite understand. How could scientists overlook something as obvious as "space isn't a vacuumn."
The greatest change might be to textbooks, which will need to add a caveat that the speed of light is constant, only in a true vacuum-which space isn't. The findings must still survive peer review before that happens. LauraPortinari
It's NOT slowing down the speed of light, it's slowing down the APPARENT speed.
Lets take a glass window for example. You can see through it, so that means light passes unimpeded through it, right?
Not so. What is actually happening is that the photons are being absorbed by the atoms in the glass, and then re-emitted. This is the only reason that lenses work as they do. If light passed right through it, a convex lens would give you the same distortion as a flat glass: none. Eyeglasses wouldn't work, prisms wouldn't work, fiber optic wouldn't work...
Ya know, I think this young lady (might be a G.I.R.L.) is nothing more than a spammer. She starts threads, hasn't made any replies in said threads except once, yet has a sig that advertises a pay for mentoring type system and uses that same company as her blog/profile banner. Something fishy if ya ask me.
I know that we already knew light isn't a constant and can be slowed by a medium. Isn't that how refraction works? hmm...LauraPortinari
Yeah but what this is talking about is that science didn't think there was anything in space to effect the travel of light. So the speed they have been using doesn't take into account these newly found particles.Â
[QUOTE="LauraPortinari"] The greatest change might be to textbooks, which will need to add a caveat that the speed of light is constant, only in a true vacuum-which space isn't. The findings must still survive peer review before that happens. MannyDelgado
Silly. This is already a very well-known fact
Popular science reporting remains as sh*t as ever
This. we should note that even in the equation E=MC^2 C is "The speed to light in a vacuum" Scientists have been aware that light moves at different speeds in different mediums for quite some time..
[QUOTE="DirigiblePlums"][QUOTE="LauraPortinari"]Our God is a particle???. XD http://www.catholic.org/technology/story.php?id=50261 The current laws of physics says that light travels approximately 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum. That's been a handy fact that has allowed scientists to calculate the distances to faraway objects and to conduct other research with great accuracy. However, that measurement assumes that space is a vacuum. It isn't. Space is filled with tiny subatomic particles which although extremely diffuse, can theoretically slow down light just a tiny bit. How tiny? About 50 attoseconds per square meter of crossed vacuum. An attosecond is a one quintillionth (10^-18) of a second. An attosecond is to a second what a real second of time is to 31.71 billion years. So that's not a lot of egg on the face of physics. Still, over very great distances light from distant objects could be slowed just slightly. That slowing isn't enough to impact any currently accepted theories regarding physics, but it still suggests that even the most reliable of yardsticks may be variable after all. Very minor changes to currently accepted understandings may be required, but since the changes are so slight they might not be significant, and therefore unworthy of much modification. The greatest change might be to textbooks, which will need to add a caveat that the speed of light is constant, only in a true vacuum-which space isn't. The findings must still survive peer review before that happens. But I don't quite understand. How could scientists overlook something as obvious as "space isn't a vacuumn." perfect vacuum, no, but a vacuum for all practical purposes...
[QUOTE="LauraPortinari"]I know that we already knew light isn't a constant and can be slowed by a medium. Isn't that how refraction works? hmm...Yusuke420
Yeah but what this is talking about is that science didn't think there was anything in space to effect the travel of light. So the speed they have been using doesn't take into account these newly found particles. That's not a new discovery, either
I think we all have come to a mutal agreement that the catholics are seriously behind in their facts. They just want God to exist so bad they will say anything. Religion is on its way out from all these newly found discoveries in which makes sense rather than all those stories our civilization was founded on.Â
Light moves at different speeds through different substances.
Â
Where have you been the last 100 years?
toast_burner
No it doesn't
Here's a quick video that explains it nicely
He's referring (giving him the benefit of the doubt) to the average speed, which varies by substance, whilst you're referring to the instantaneous speed
edit: By 'average speed' I mean the magnitude of the average velocity, rather than the average of the magnitude of the velocity
I'm pretty sure advanced physics takes these things into consideration. It's general physics that makes the assumption for the sake of ease of calculation and teaching. I took some university astronomy classes and they very clearly said that space is not a vacuum... it's merely the ideal state to calculate distance. Black holes also ruin standard physics of light.
Light doesn't change speeds, it just takes longer to travel through some substances
Nibroc420
Â
Herp Derp.
Cars dont change speed, the distance between the car and it's destination simply changes.
What has that got to do with what I said? A car driving at 50MPH would take longer to drive a 100 mile journey than a 50 mile journey. That doesn't mean it's driving at a slower speed.Â
That's the fun part of it.. It's so fascinating and complex.. I wish we knew so much more. Even the smartest scientists deal with things that are way over their heads. The beauty of science is that it is a perpetual gold mine. And so we keep digging.
Log in to comment