Would We See the Same Light After Traveling Back to Earth Faster Than Light?

In summary, the article explores the implications of traveling faster than light and its effect on perceiving light upon returning to Earth. It discusses the theoretical framework of relativity, suggesting that if one were to travel faster than light, they might experience time dilation and altered perceptions of light. The conclusion raises questions about the nature of light and time, ultimately emphasizing the complexities and paradoxes that arise from such hypothetical scenarios in physics.
  • #1
markterry
1
0
TL;DR Summary
Not Sure
Just joined because I have been unable to find an explanation: please avoid comments about FTL speed since they don't pertain to the question. The question:

A planet is 30 light years away, so when viewing it from earth we are seeing it from "30" years previous. Now, we travel 30 years at light speed and should basically arrive when that light (reflection) left. The question is: if we traveled back to earth at double the speed of light would we not see the same light as it was before we left earth? Where is the time dilation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Skeptical
Likes PeroK and berkeman
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
markterry said:
please avoid comments about FTL speed since they don't pertain to the question.
Yes, they do, since it is pointless to ask what the laws of physics say about a thought experiment that violates the laws of physics.

markterry said:
A planet is 30 light years away, so when viewing it from earth we are seeing it from "30" years previous.
If we assume that the planet is at rest relative to the Earth, and we choose the common rest frame of the Earth and the planet, yes.

markterry said:
Now, we travel 30 years at light speed and should basically arrive when that light (reflection) left.
No, we don't. To arrive when the light left the planet that we saw on Earth before we left, we would have to travel backwards in time. If we travel at light speed (or, to avoid complications, at a speed very, very close to light speed, so the difference in travel time in the common rest frame of Earth and planet is negligible), we will arrive at the planet 30 years after we leave Earth, in the common rest frame of Earth and planet.

markterry said:
The question is: if we traveled back to earth at double the speed of light
We would be violating the laws of physics. But if we traveled back to Earth at a speed very, very close to the speed of light, as above, we would arrive back at Earth 60 years Earth time after we left.

markterry said:
would we not see the same light as it was before we left earth?
Certainly not. See above.

markterry said:
Where is the time dilation?
So far you haven't talked about anything that is even relevant to time dilation. Time dilation comes into play when you ask how much time has elapsed on our clock, the clock that travels with us as we go to the planet and back. The answer to that question is that we can make that time as short as we like by making the speed we travel closer and closer to the speed of light (again, in the common rest frame of Earth and planet). So when we get back to Earth, while 60 years will have elapsed on Earth clocks, only a very short time will have elapsed on our clocks. That is time dilation. (Actually a more precise term would be "differential aging".)
 
  • Like
Likes Renato Iraldi, Vanadium 50, Doc Al and 2 others
  • #3
markterry said:
please avoid comments about FTL … we traveled back to earth at double the speed of light
That makes it impossible to answer. You ask us not to make comments about something and then the question explicitly states that thing. So we cannot talk about the topic of the question in the answer.

You will need to make a choice. Either you can remove the unmentionable topic from your question or you can remove the prohibition against mentioning it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50

FAQ: Would We See the Same Light After Traveling Back to Earth Faster Than Light?

Is it theoretically possible to travel faster than the speed of light?

According to our current understanding of physics, particularly Einstein's theory of relativity, it is not possible for any object with mass to travel faster than the speed of light. The energy required to accelerate an object to the speed of light increases exponentially, becoming infinite at the speed of light.

What would happen to light we emitted if we traveled faster than light?

If we somehow managed to travel faster than light, we would theoretically surpass the light waves we emitted, leading to complex paradoxes and violations of causality. In essence, we would be moving into our own past and could potentially see light we emitted after we started our journey.

How would traveling faster than light affect our perception of time?

Traveling faster than light would result in time dilation effects that reverse the normal order of cause and effect. This means we could potentially arrive at a destination before we left, creating significant paradoxes and inconsistencies with our current understanding of time and causality.

Would we see the same light if we returned to Earth faster than light?

In theory, if we traveled faster than light and returned to Earth, we would encounter light waves we had previously emitted, but in reverse order. This would create a confusing and paradoxical scenario where events could appear to happen out of sequence.

Are there any theoretical models that allow faster-than-light travel?

Some theoretical models, such as those involving wormholes or the Alcubierre warp drive, suggest mechanisms for faster-than-light travel. However, these models require exotic matter and energy conditions not currently feasible or understood within the framework of known physics.

Similar threads

Replies
65
Views
7K
Replies
27
Views
3K
Replies
98
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top