It travels the same speed from your perspective.

because the jew said so

>>16990661
yeah I get that but WHY

>>16990659
Time slows down the faster you move.

If a photon travels for a light year, how much time did if experience within that light year

File: it be.jpg (197.9 KB)

>>16990665
It's fundamental, there is no why.

What do you think would happen if you somehow moved faster than photons?
What would you see? Explain the logic in this first.

>>16990666
again I understand that, but why does time slow down with higher velocity? why and how are speed and time linked at all

mathematically I get how distance and time contract to preserve the speed of light in all reference frames, but I dont get why or how this happens at all. Its just completely fucking bizarre and there's got to be some deeper logical mechanism for why the universe is like this besides "these equations match our experiments"

>>16990659
>And dont respond with relativity equations, I know that already
then you should have a deep understanding of maxwell's equations, at which point the answer to your question is trivial. reminder that einstein's mass-energy equivalence paper was mostly just working with maxwell's equations.

>>16990672
>why
there's that stupid question again

why anything nigga

>>16990672
>why does time slow down with higher velocit
At high speed you travel through more space, the more space you travel through, the more time you travel through the less time you experience locally.

Its that running in the rain thought experiment, if you run in the rain do you get wetter than if you walked in the rain for the same amount of time?

>why does a photon travel the same speed no matter how fast youre moving relative to it?
they just do, ok?

>>16990659
If you are too stupid to understand the equations and what they mean then you just have to accept that "they just do that" will be as far as you go. Reality is not obliged to explain it's processes to you for it to be true.

>>16990701
>If you are too stupid to understand the equations
Can you claim to be smart if you can't express what you supposedly understand?
You weren't obliged to post in this thread so your presence is that of one who is an arsehole who's come to shit on people

>>16990709
Yes, I can express it to myself and others. I can't express it to you which I'm not obliged to do.
Reality doesn't stop being true if you can find a retard that can't understand it nor do smart people suddenly turn stupid if you find someone dumb enough to not understand what they are talking about. The fact that you resort to "well if you can't explain it to ME (the worst retard alive) that means you don't know what you are talking about!!!" already tells me everything I need to know about your intellect.

>>16990659
that's antisemitic

>>16990728
>>16990701
>t. dunning kruger retard
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."

>>16990700
only good response itt

>>16990728
>I can express it to myself and others.
>I can't express it to you
Pick one shit for brains

>>16990751
>>16990685 and >>16990667 say the same thing though

>>16990672
>again I understand that, but why does time slow down with higher velocity? why and how are speed and time linked at all
your speed is constant, you only change direction, traveling through either space or time.
Source: I made it up.

Do you understand that a boost is just a rotation but along a hyperbola rather than a circle? Everything falls out if you plug imaginary numbers into the usual equations for rotation.

>>16990679
OP got real quiet from this one, lol

>>16990659
It is the speed of causality (how fast things interact). Or how some anons say "refresh rate of reallity". Thats why no matter where you are in reallity, the refresh rate is the same.

Why does reality have such nature? No one knows. Thats metaphysics, until we actually somehow go beyond it empiricaly.

If you are more of a philosophy prone anon, best way to see it is as somethinf like Kants apriori structure of mind.

>>16990659
>why does a photon travel the same speed no matter how fast youre moving relative to it?
it doesnt

>>16990672
You could literally ask this same questiom about absolutely everything, you don't because you have the intutuion for them in your evolved monke brain. So the question is rather why don't you have intuition for relativistic mechanics. Well, because the monkeys on the tree didn't jump from branch to branch with 99% the speed of light.
/thread

so basically no one has a real answer at all but some insecure dimwits who also dont have an answer like to look down on people who have curiosity beyond crunching numbers like an NPC. Got it

>>16991175
You got ethered here.
>>16990679

>>16991245
sure I did, retard. it's a bullshit non answer.
>move some terms around in maxwells equations and you get a prediction for the velocity of light that stays the same under lorentz transformations
and WHY does the universe obey lorentz symmetry and not galilean? But yes "shut up and calculate" NPC logic is all you need, ok.

>>16991263
>and WHY does the universe obey lorentz symmetry and not galilean?
Noether's theorem retard.

>>16991263
>muh "shut up and calculate" NPC logic
>seething
Realists and agnostics are in shambles. copenhagenGODS can't stop winning

>>16991333
>cope 'n hang

>>16991263
>WHY does the universe obey lorentz symmetry
Something to do with the position of the observer always being in 3rd person

>>16990659
>why does a photon travel the same speed no matter how fast youre moving relative to it?
It doesn't. Relativity is a bunch of Jewish pilpul, and you won't begin to understand physics until you understand its all trash.

File: fields of knowledge.png (44.8 KB)

>>16991263
1. relativity is a trivial maxim of motion. to deny it is to be a schizophrenic retard
(nota bene: i am not speaking of special relativity nor of galilean relativity; no, elaboration is unnecessary at this stage)
2. classical relativity (galilean) contradicts electrodynamics (maxwell's equations) and vice versa. this is the fault of galilean symmetry
2b. a luminiferous ether could fix this discrepancy. all evidence for its existence comes up null.
3. special relativity respects the maxim of relativity while permitting electrodynamics to be true (occam's razor)
(nota bene: this is the least amount of excess assumptions necessary in absence of a luminiferous ether)

look. this is all literally week one of a dedicated course in special relativity. which you claim you understand, yet obviously do not. that's why the other post eviscerated your argument and exposed you as a pseud (not that such post was even necessary). since you seem to be illiterate and incapable of abstract, chained logic, i'll distill it even further for you:

0. why? it just werks.

unsatisfactory? that means you don't understand the basic principles of the scientific method. you will never be a scientist, a physicist, nor an intelligent individual capable of having these discussions. learn the basics if you want to talk about the advanced topics.

you see this chart in pic rel? it's different ways to analyze reality. you, however, fall into none of the circles. nor in the ring of bullshit. you're in schizo delulu land and should go to ///x///.

>>16991412
>occam's razor
Anyone who uses this argument can safely be disregarded as a fool who doesn't know what he is talking about. Its shorthand for, "I have no proof of what I'm saying, but you should believe me because my theory is more beautiful or something, lol".

>>16991485
i accept your concession.

>>16990679
This. It all flows from Maxwell's equations. And anyone with a supposed interest in physics should be able to master Maxwell's equations before running their mouth on the internet, assuming they're not a degenerate larping faggot that is!

>>16990659
If you're asking for the cause of light's behavior, then you would have to consult theories of fundamental physics to obtain such a description. For me, the most easily understood of these models explains light as being a mechanical propagation through a supersolid. When disturbed, the lattice of a supersolid behaves as a superfluid, transmitting that disturbance without the perturbation losing its energy. Light in this theory is analogous to the propagation of sound waves, with the speed of propagation depending on the material properties of the lattice it travels through.

>>16990659
it's merely a rounding error

Has anybody ever asked the photons what they actually experience? It seems kind of presumptuous to assume they genuinely atemporally experience nothing. What if each photon is an isolated observer, screaming the whole time instead?

>>16993288
i asked a photon. then it disappeared and a new one appeared. it answered as though it were the original photon. it said it sees everything. in photons i trust.

>>16993291
Did you listen really carefully for the tiny screaming? It needs better instruments than your ears, I wager.

if a photon screams in the double slit experiment, does it make a sound?

>>16993353
those are phonons.

File: Mesopotamia_male_worshiper_2750-2600_B.C.jpg (60.2 KB)

depends how you look at it ig, if you move your hand in a direction opposite to the direction of the photon as it passes by, then relative to your hand it would be moving 'faster than light', but its not. its just relative. easier to grasp if you can visualise doppler cooling in motion.

it can 'hit you faster' cause you moved to it faster, but the photon itself isnt moving faster, the observer is, so faster than light travel would effectively be synonymous with time travel, because you would intercept 'the past' photons before they could escape your observation. dont invent time travel though, its not worth it kek.

time doesnt slow down, the amount of things interacting with 'high velocity object' increases, meaning it interacts more, so to the object, time has slowed down, yet to outside observers moving at a lower velocity, the object has sped up. full throttle a motorbike through the mountains at night, youll get it.

File: nhcf.jpg (94.9 KB)

>>16990659
It doesnt make sense, since its bullshit. Einstein claimed that even tho we measure only the two way spped of light. Light moves with c relative to the aether. If we move relative to the aether the one way speed of light gets anisotropic. SInce you know the math you know the lorentz transformation makes the two way speed of light constant.
This
>muh different reality for everyone watching differently
is just some jewish fantasy to destroy common sense in science.

>>16990685
The absolute state of jew physics.

File: 54hw.jpg (75.8 KB)

>>16991412
>2b. a luminiferous ether could fix this discrepancy. all evidence for its existence comes up null.
Wrong. CMB dipol is a more then zero evidence that we are in motion to an absolute reference frame. Why else would it be almost perfect, but with a dipol from relative speed of 370 km/s? Simplest conclusion is in the reference frame its extremely homogenous, and in motion we see the doppler effect.
>3. special relativity respects the maxim of relativity while permitting electrodynamics to be true (occam's razor)
Funny to use occams racor when your theory redefines simultanity so that it is not an equivalence relation. Clearly the more complicated and retarded theory.

>>16990659
>speed
Rate of induction*. I heard it described that way from Ken Wheeler and it really helped me understand its properties better, even if other parts he uses dont align with mine (or measurements, he got into it with someone that worked on satellites and clock timing and he didnt "win" it.)

>>16990672
>these equations match our experiments"
That is literally all there is to it, its jew science. Light is not constant relative to the observer, but pretending it is satisfies some jewish equations so "scientists" treat it as their religion. Einstein was wrong.

>>16990665
It knows where you are and runs faster from you if you move towards it.

>>16990659
For the same reason a car is still moving at a 100mph even if you match its speed

>>16994846
Fuck off, Nathan. Call your mom.

>>16994954
then speed of light would be 0 relative to you but it isnt

>>16995065
The idea of "speed" becomes irrelevant at such scales, space will compress in front of you to the point where it will become dimensionally completely flat rendering any measurement of speed completely useless

File: hred.jpg (32.1 KB)

>>16995074
>space will compress
Space doesnt compress, its the basis for everything we can measure and see. "space" as defined by einstein bends ok, but he literally defined space with the speed of light. Topkek classical circular reasoning. Read Kant to get educated about space.
>>16995065
Yes thats why its bullshit
>>16995019
????
Why do i never get serious replies? Im very seriosuly defending lorentzian aether and you einstein fangirls just pretent my arguments dont exist.
>>16994918
Careful, yes its jew science but you have to argue more precisely or you make the jew science look less unhinged. The two way speed of light is proven to be c. But that the one way speed of light is always c, no matter how fast you move, in fact for the standing and the moving next to the standing at the same time, is classical jewish fantasy and not serious science.

File: cis girls laughing.png (153.4 KB)

>>16995228
>seriosuly defending lorentzian aether

the photon does not experience time it has no perception of time, no time passes
therefore no distance travelled
and also therefore it doesnt care if you are moving hell it doesnt even know if you are moving, to it nothing is moving everything is static if its at the speed of light

>>16990659
>why does a photon travel the same speed no matter how fast youre moving relative to it
It doesn't travel at all. You observe a wave red or blueshift as of the speed difference. Your photon is a detector event and must have the speed of your's.

>>16995257
Clearly it has better arguments, see >>16994846
Special relativity is a knock off anyway. So i assume the absence of arguments is a concession?

>>16995309
Why do you still post here, Nathan? You got schooled years ago.

>>16995257
cmb proves aether is real

>>16995346
Lol, not even close. You know nothing about the CMB.

The aether is complete nonsense, okay? Light waves don't need a medium.
Btw here are your 17 quantum fields which are the media of all particles including light.
lol

Non science guy here, i assume this guy screeching about “jew science” is some retard that thinks he’s gained profound hidden knowledge through the explanations of some schizo on some other board, right? Embarrassing what lengths some people will go through to assume they are special.

>>16995369
That and Youtube University. No need to listen to "experts" ((((experts)))) when you can listen to some random grifter on YouTube.

>>16995359
Physicists rejected the luminiferous ether BEFORE the advent of quantum electrodynamics (which, mind you, is only a different model of how electrodynamics works -- the underlying mechanism (propagation in a vacuum) remains the same). fields are NOT a medium. you do realize fields, such as electric and magnetic fields existed before quantum mechanics, right? besides the fields are not media through which particles propagate -- the fields ARE the particles.

you need to first understand classical physics, then classical electrodynamics before first studying quantum mechanics. and this is all before you dive into quantum field theory. not to mention the math prereqs you need. there's a reason quantum field theory is taught at the graduate level of physics, requiring at least an undergraduate degree in physics to understand. you can start with david morin for classical physics, then use griffiths for intro electromagnetism (followed by jackson for classical electrodynamics), then go to sakurai for quantum mechanics before finally ending at michele maggiore for quantum field theory. then you can come back here and apologize for your ignorance and misinformation.

>>16995228
>Space doesnt compress
It does relative to your pov, that's what relativity is about, numbnuts.

File: r3f2.jpg (366.7 KB)

>>16995369
I tell you what. There is no experiment in the world which can differentiate between lorentzian aether and special relativity. Its just that relativity made complete bullshit definitions and therefore did lead to a new philosophy, we call that jewish. Its way more substance then you think, thats why Einstein fangirls react aggressively at the mention of lorentz aether.
>>16995310
Im not that guy and i usually post on /biz/ so i dont know who he is.
>>16995359
Kek
>>16995380
>Physicists rejected the luminiferous ether BEFORE the advent of quantum electrodynami
Kek so wrong. Even ives and stilwell in 1938 believed in the lorentz aether and saw their famous experiment as confirmation of the lorentz aether, as they literally wrote at the start of their paper.
https://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/HerbertIves1938a.pdf
Today its seen as experiment that validates relativity but thats only an interpretation
>>16995562
"space" defined by einstein does, because he literally redefined space with the speed of light postulate. But thats not a real definition. Space as a real object defined by kant is absolute.