quote:

---

Originally posted by Ian
The technology exists to make long lenses, they're just very expensive and difficult to make because of the very small manufacturing tolerances required.

The problem is that the image generated from such a lens would be so dark no current image sensor would be sensitive enough to amplify what little light came in without introducing masses of noise.

You also need to hold it fairly still of course.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RussSxi

quote:

---

Originally posted by Skinz
i sometimes think, what if we could travel faster than light, i mean if we could catch up with light that left the earth 2000 years ago, if we could focus on the light we would in affect be seeing the source of that light, be it a house or a city, 2000 years ago, and in effect be travelling back in time

---

your confusing time with light.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Skinz

quote:

---

Originally posted by RussSxi

quote:

---

Originally posted by Skinz
i sometimes think, what if we could travel faster than light, i mean if we could catch up with light that left the earth 2000 years ago, if we could focus on the light we would in affect be seeing the source of that light, be it a house or a city, 2000 years ago, and in effect be travelling back in time

---

your confusing time with light.

---

no im not, light is a snapshot of time

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CorsAsh
Sometimes we have some very good intelligent threads on CS. I'm proud.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CorsAsh
Sometimes we have some very good intelligent threads on CS. I'm proud.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard_syko
But, what happens when you have lights on a plane?

There moving faster than light!

If you reall want to know, look on amazon for a book called relativity.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0486607690/qid=1119562121/sr=8-6/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i6_xgl/202-2929400-2421437

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by langey

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard_syko
But, what happens when you have lights on a plane?

There moving faster than light!

If you reall want to know, look on amazon for a book called relativity.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0486607690/qid=1119562121/sr=8-6/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i6_xgl/202-2929400-2421437

---

a plane does not go faster than light.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard_syko
Apart form the fact proper telescopes dont use lenses.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard_syko

quote:

---

Originally posted by langey

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard_syko
But, what happens when you have lights on a plane?

There moving faster than light!

---

a plane does not go faster than light.

---

And

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard_syko

quote:

---

Originally posted by langey

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard_syko
But, what happens when you have lights on a plane?

There moving faster than light!

If you reall want to know, look on amazon for a book called relativity.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0486607690/qid=1119562121/sr=8-6/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i6_xgl/202-2929400-2421437

---

a plane does not go faster than light.

---

And

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RussSxi
no it wouldnt, its like falling off a building and flashing a torch, you cant speed up light by throwing it think of it as not a constant light, but millions of little lights joined up, if you were to shunt a plane travelling 759mph, and you rammed it with another going 800, that would break the sound barier cos its a constant thing. so fucking hard to explain im confusing myself

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by langey

quote:

---

Originally posted by RussSxi
no it wouldnt, its like falling off a building and flashing a torch, you cant speed up light by throwing it think of it as not a constant light, but millions of little lights joined up, if you were to shunt a plane travelling 759mph, and you rammed it with another going 800, that would break the sound barier cos its a constant thing. so fucking hard to explain im confusing myself

---

you mean like light is a beam, or abit like running water, as in its moving, so it cant go faster because once its left the source of the light, it travels at the spped of light and nothing can catch it, so it cant be sped up?

it made sence in my head, but dont seem to have made sence in words

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard_syko

quote:

---

Originally posted by langey

quote:

---

Originally posted by RussSxi
no it wouldnt, its like falling off a building and flashing a torch, you cant speed up light by throwing it think of it as not a constant light, but millions of little lights joined up, if you were to shunt a plane travelling 759mph, and you rammed it with another going 800, that would break the sound barier cos its a constant thing. so fucking hard to explain im confusing myself

---

you mean like light is a beam, or abit like running water, as in its moving, so it cant go faster because once its left the source of the light, it travels at the spped of light and nothing can catch it, so it cant be sped up?

it made sence in my head, but dont seem to have made sence in words

---

No

Nobody knows what light is. Is it a wave (like sound) or is it a particle (the photo).

There is evidence of both.

But You would not be throwing the light.

The light source is already moving!

Light cant cant go faster than the speed of light!

In fact light cant travel at the speed of light, it travels up to it.

Using E=mc^2 and making a graph, light speed is the theoretical speed.

[Edited on 23-06-2005 by richard_syko]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CorsAsh

quote:

---

Originally posted by Skinz
i sometimes think, what if we could travel faster than light, i mean if we could catch up with light that left the earth 2000 years ago, if we could focus on the light we would in affect be seeing the source of that light, be it a house or a city, 2000 years ago, and in effect be travelling back in time

---

It happens already when you look out into space, you're in fact seeing things as they were thousands or more years ago. It's one reason why searching for ET life through radio etc is flawed. If you look at it this way - if a race of beings was following the same evolutionary path as us, they would have to have originated a long time ago, in order to develop technology that we could pick up now with our current detectors. In other words, they'd have to be where we are now, but thousands of years ago, in order for the radio waves etc to reach our antennae.

So, we are in fact looking into the past just by gazing into space. Theory goes that if you could make a lens powerful enough, you could capture light from ages ago and therefore view the past. Trouble is making such a lens.

---