11 Feb '08 07:34>
Hey Everyone.
I'm new to the site (introduced by some friends for a chess tourney were having) and I saw a lot of people posting "hypothetical"questions. I have no formal schooling but I have two questions I always wanted to hear an attempted answer to.
1. Your travelling at the speed of light towards Earth with a telescope fixed on a populated location. Even though time is relative, would the images in the telescope appear to be moving faster?
2. Since an object that is moving faster experiences less time, is it possible to assume that Jupiter is younger then Earth (assuming both were created at the same time) because of how much faster it spins? And if thats the case, how can we accurately estimate the age of the universe if at the instant of the big bang when the singularity expanded close to the speed of light, virtually no relative time would have passed for all matter?
Interested in hearing your answers...
I'm new to the site (introduced by some friends for a chess tourney were having) and I saw a lot of people posting "hypothetical"questions. I have no formal schooling but I have two questions I always wanted to hear an attempted answer to.
1. Your travelling at the speed of light towards Earth with a telescope fixed on a populated location. Even though time is relative, would the images in the telescope appear to be moving faster?
2. Since an object that is moving faster experiences less time, is it possible to assume that Jupiter is younger then Earth (assuming both were created at the same time) because of how much faster it spins? And if thats the case, how can we accurately estimate the age of the universe if at the instant of the big bang when the singularity expanded close to the speed of light, virtually no relative time would have passed for all matter?
Interested in hearing your answers...