"The Speed Of Light" Is Wrong! Ft. Sean Carroll | Think Inc. 

Space Time Limit (STL) is a more encompassing term than C (speed of light) that I use in my own works, as it relates to a more fundamental relationship from which the velocity measure of light is derived: Velocity = distance / time the limit of that ratio is the limit of spacetime itself, more fundamental.

I think his answer to "why is the speed of light xxx m/s" missed the point. Its not about units of measurement. I could express it as furlongs per fortnight, but the speed would be the same. I think the root of the question is really why is the speed of causality what it is? why could it not be faster. Or slower. Or variable. What is the underlying fundamental thing about nature that makes this constant? And while we are at it ... I tend to think of the concept of "speed" as being an emergent concept and the concepts of distance and time as each being more fundamental. Is this wrong? Is speed fundamental and time and distance emergent concepts?

The people saying Sean didn't answer the question are entirely missing that he shows (as Einstein showed) that its a poorly asked question, that doesn't have one finite answer. Speed is an approximation which is relative to other objects.

Question: If gravity acts on light such that it removes energy from the photon or wave energy as E=h(nu) and therefore the wavelength increases as light passes by mass, Can red shift be caused by photons (light) passing enormous amounts of mass in the universe? When light passes through glass or clear water, can we measure the loss of energy (wavelength increase) from the emerging light after it has passed through a transparent mass?

What is the length of a photon? If a photon leaves the sun and travels 93,000,000 miles to earth and hits a detector in a telescope is the length of that photon 93,000,000 miles? Or is it the distance between the electron shells of the atom that emitted it - i. e. picometers? Also, radio waves can have wave lengths of many meters so does that mean that a photon of a radio wave can be kilometers long? Thank you.

Forget units, why is the speed of light what it is, ie why is it not faster or slower than what it is?

Why is the speed of causality not faster or slower than it is?

What is the effect of our motion in space (earth/solar system/galaxies...) on the time we experience, that is are we experiencing any time dilation and how would it be relative to completely stationary point of reference

But how the twin back to his brother's present? He should be back to his brothers past because of lesser time lapses for travelling. So all points of this Universe with its contents are always at it's present irrespective of different time flow rate. Please reply Mr Sean Carroll.

So, we are traveling at the speed of light, and everything else is traveling slower, and that is why we can see/detect it? Interesting concept... It reminds me of the Twilight Zone movie where the guy breaks his time stopping watch.

Thank you for your work. I'm so happy to have found your channel.

As you push the back of the cue to strike the cue ball, the cue tip moves at a later point in time. 🙂

Today, it is common for people to jump to conclusions, faster than the speed of light.

the speed of light is one Planck length (local) per Planck rotation. c should be remembered this way or as a specific number of Planck lengths per unit local time.

We are pron to various beliefs. Like "Energy is ability to the work" , E=mc sq. , and so on. What will be if m=E/c ????. Photon is not particle it is a wave. Why we believe that atoms are made of particles, what if these "particles" are standing waves. Why all physic is based on "simplified" Maxwell equation system, that is reduced from 4 dimensional field model to 2 sets of linked 3 dimensional fields???? .

My question is this. If a photon travels at the speed of light, and time dilation occurs as you approach the speed of light to the point time stands still at the speed of light relatively speaking. Wouldnt photons (particle or wave) stop from our point of view, and the world would go dark? It is a serious question I have wrestling with.

I think : Mechanics( quantum) of light : The light is the limit(the border,of things,the edge of the matter) Over the limit are no more things,( there is no matter anymore ) If you want to pass( break, to outrun ) the limit, you should use : not matter anymore, ( not particles anymore) (Light speed ) It can't be reached with mechanical movement( mechanical particles movement). Mechanical movement( motion) is for things under the light's limit,( things with mass, volume etc... For matter,)light is the "wall"( limit) between matter and " No matter " . Don't waste time to break( to outrun) the light's limit with particles ( like neutrino, tachyon etc..) In this state( situation) you don't have to do with particles , because you want to go over( beyond ) the light ( over the particles) therefore is wasting of time . Another parallel thought : The possible outcome : C= constant means : The light doesn't move,( doesn't travel ) The photons doesn't move, therefore ( speed of) light is constant, because they don't move , is just as to turn the page, light just display it( unveils it) , but doesn't move ( doesn't travel) The book 91:3 This is a new point of view So you should make another math system, another physical system ( over{ beyond} the matter) , should find new sources . If you will approach to the limit( to the border), the limit doesn't have sense anymore, if you pass the limit, the things will change, the system doesn't work anymore, a new system will be applied( will be working) , for example : if you want to become smaller and smaller and smaller , until you become a string, that is the edge, there is nothing beyond it, if you want to go beyond it, you should leave the entire system, and take a new( different) system . It is like to travel with a car, you can travel with the car until in front of you there is the sea, now you should leave the car and take a new vehicle ( a ship) , because the car doesn't work beyond the edge ( beyond the limit ,the land ), there is different environment beyond the land, the car doesn't work there, same is your system, you want to go there but your system doesn't work there, need a new system, new variables, "new tools "... 🦩

At "akademie olympia 2.0" unconventional, innovative and, above all, correct predictions were made in April 2022 under "Aktuelles" about the partly ancient galaxies in James Webb's first images. It`s a new theory behind. According to this, the universe is much older than assumed. There is also a video on this platform, in wich he shows a new interpretation of "c".

So, I was not satisfied with Sean’s answer to why the speed of light ….why does light travel at 3M km/s….for example, why not 3.1M or why not 2.9M …..WHY AT 3M km/s??

Okay, lets just use natural units for everything. A meter is 10^-9, so 3cm would be .03 x 10^-9 - we could call them nanos, so .03 nanos, making nano-nano our small scale of 10^-18. That is, 1 nm would be 1 nano-nano in natural units. I like this because it introduces some much needed humility into our (ultimately quite puny) human endeavors.

"photons dont have a rich innerlife" i'm cracking up ^6^

How did light come before causality when light couldn't have existed before the big bang/beginning of the universe?

from the viewpoint of an observer on the extremities of our universe we are travelling at the speed of light, and getting faster...

If the light waves from the sun were 8 minutes and 20 seconds in a past dimension of Einstein's space-time then people on Earth are just imagining the infrared warmth of the sun coming up on the horizon. The communications delay between Earth and Mars is approximately 20 minutes. We're either viewing the light from Mars in the future, Einstein's past dimensions of space-time or in real time, which do you think is more logical? Einstein's relativity is wrong light has no limitation of speed; it cannot be slowed down because it isn't moving. From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in both directions. Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. According to Einstein's relativity-time dilation's, photos taken of the Earth from the Discovery Space station traveled from the past to the future violating the laws of physics, conservation of energy and common sense. According to Einstein's projectile light particle proton light has a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second moving through spacetime, but if light has a (constant speed) then moving clocks cannot run slow through spacetime! :-) The speed of light according to Einstein's relativity is 186,000 miles per second, but according to physics if two mechanical watches were synchronized on earth and one traveled across the universe and back, there would be no difference in time between the mechanical watches proving the speed of light is instantaneous as the only way a mechanical watch will run slow is if you tighten the main spring. Big Bang, Einstein's relativity-time dilation and nearly all of science debunked. Using optical clocks, lasers and GPS to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing. If the speed of light is constant then past and future dimensions of spacetime and an expanding universe would not be possible, obviously destroying the twins paradox as each twin cannot move faster or slower than the other. A mirror is a wave reflector that flips images from left to right, but according to Einstein the images you see are the result of projectile light particle photons being transported into past and future dimensions of space-time. Explain how particle light photons can re-converge their molecular structures in mirrors and how this is done without violating the law of conservation of energy. From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in all directions (forwards and backwards through Einstein's space-time) while violating the law of conservation of energy. Explain how Einstein's projectile light particle proton can travel all directions having a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second. Einstein would have made a great used car salesman :-). Light waves can stretch, bend-curve and occupy a state of superposition, whereas the hypothetical Einstein projectile light particle (photon), a particle that has never been observed cannot. Unlike a TV or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of frames that create the appearance of a moving image. There are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just video recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. Neither time, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch Time, energy, and matter like a rubber band into space-time dimensions. Einstein's projectile light particle proton has a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second moving through spacetime and because so wavelengths of light cannot stretch through spacetime! Red-shifts are simply the result of decelerating electrons, as moving electrons of charged electromagnetic waves-light travel through the plasma of the universe each lump (or "quanta") of energy in the electromagnetic waves are charged then discharged to the next lump, eventually the energy dissipates causing the delay in radio communications giving the appearance of time dilation - longer wavelengths in red shift. Will the James Webb Telescope view the birth of the first galaxies? Nope, the universe goes on to infinity. Neither time, the atom, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. The James Webb Space Telescope is not a time machine, you can’t travel back in time to view the beginning of the universe with telescopes that were made in the future :-). Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. If science uses Einstein's wrongly theorized speed of light like an odometer to calculate past dimensions of distance and time, then using that same method to calculate forward dimensions of distance and time would mean the Big Bang was created and expanded in the future before time existed. Unlike a television or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of still image frames that hypothetical Einstein projectile light particles photons create to give us the appearance of a moving image :-). The speed of electromagnetic wave is 186,282 miles per second vs Einstein's projectile light particle proton at 186,000 miles per second. Is this a coincidence or did Einstein plagiarize yet another phenomenon to fit the math of relativity? Electromagnetic waves in space can neither slow down or speed up, this is consistent with the law of conservation of energy. If light slowed down, its energy would decrease, thereby violating the law of conservation of energy so the speed of light is instantaneous and cannot travel slower than it does. If Einstein's projectile light (particle photon) had mass it's light could not travel across the universe, high speed particles traveling at 186,000 miles per second would break the Hubble and James Webb telescope mirrors, debunking the speed of light, Big Bang, Einstein's relativity and any science that uses relativity in their theories. Everyone knows cell phone electromagnetic radio waves travel both ways, yet Einstein's disciples believe time energy, mass and light can only travel one way back in time. If you simply run the Big Bang theory in reverse you reveal the insanity of Einstein's relativity and Big Bang theory. If the expansion of the Big Bang were true, time, energy, mass and light would be in the future from the vantage point of an expanding singularity-Big Bang and planet Earth would now reside in a past dimension of Einstein's time dilation (moving clocks run slow) space-time 13.8 billion years ago :-). From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in both directions (forwards and backwards through Einstein's space-time) while violating the law of conservation of energy. Explain how Einstein's projectile light particle proton can travel in both directions having a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second :-) It's truly amazing how the science and politics of the left are able to keep people denying reality, there are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space, yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. Pretending not to notice the gross contradictions-pseudoscience in Relativity is typical of Einstein's disciples, devaluing the source of any information that's in contradiction with their beliefs-theories. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. If the light from the universe travels to past dimensions of time then it's light is also traveling into future dimensions of time (instantaneously). “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” a state of superposition where time and gravity run inwardly, outwardly, in all directions in the same time frame, similar to the electromagnetic field having no beginning and no end. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End" Revelation 22:13. Disciples, remember thy 1st commandment, thou shalt not question thy lawgiver of relativity for blasphemers are the devil's pawn. Let thee not dwell in dissension of our Lord Albert, shun them, drive them back to their jungle lair amen. Albert Einstein, an autistic violinist patent clerk that had access to more papers than Suzanne Somers litter box yet creates theories with more bugs than Terminix- Magnetron

‘Gravitons’ - hens’ teeth?! Gravity always used to be an effect not a thing! When did that change. If gravity is considered as a unit effect then it is not governed by the physical law applying to radiative/propagative particles. Tie a piece of string to a stiff on/off switch to a laser secured to the moon and pull from ‘off’ to ‘on’ from an earth related structure and you will see what you have caused some quarter of a second later than you are ‘allowed to’! (The gravitational effect is tensive and all the molecules in the string are lined up and performing ‘unit-gravity’ - or so I imagine!)

He didn’t get the question about why the speed of light is c !

Why don't you start a podcast with this videos . This r just awsm. I have a question what is the one way ßpeed of light??

"Things" relate at and by lightspeed. Lightspeed is PRIOR to space-time. Lightspeed isn't mph; it's the SOURCE of m&h, of space-time. Etymology of relate, of relativity, is "carry back". Lightspeed is the cosmic glue; it IS relativity. There is no simultaneity among things (stars, quarks, events). To stop time is to negate space. A solitary Planck of time does not express existence.

i love sean carroll

I hate to say it, but Sean Carroll is becoming yet another "tow the standard speil" talking head "physicist". He used to have some interesting non-standard ideas. Now, it's all just standard the standard BS.

At 6:30 Sean Carroll says "When you compare it somehow to what is observed by someone who is moving in a different way through the universe, they can have experienced a different amount of time." I understand how it is possible for an observer in a specific frame of reference to compare the measured speed of two EVENTS (e.g., clock ticks) in different frames, but I don't understand how it is possible for me, an observer in a frame, to compare WHAT I OBSERVE with what you, in another frame OBSERVE. To do this, it would be necessary to treat observations as themselves being physical things, and to be able to compare two observations in two different frames from the point of view yet a third observer - where? in what frame? - or from "outside" the whole scenario, as if you could judge from a "God's-eye" point of view. But this is explicitly disallowed by the concept of relativity; there is no privileged point of view, and no absolute, universal standard.

The speed of light can be measured as 1, when α =1/137.

Is photon traveling is like water drop in flowing river stream pickups the speed of stream. Seed of paper boat dropped in the stream will flow at speed of stream.

Think if there weren't time and space, It wouldn't be nothing.

person: what determines the speed of light? physicist: starts to explain why does speed of light appear so big in numerical value. Please answer that. you are just beating around the bush. We want answer.

"We can't measure light" ahem @

You cannot explain the speed of light using made up things like Gravitons, they haven't been found to exist in reality or even in theory. Some however may still want to force them into existence none the less, and thats with the use of bad maths and the breaking of general relativity.

I Need My Ganja To Slow Things Down 🙇

sean carroll comes off as the most punchable/patronizing guy. the tone he uses when talking about faraday and maxwell you would think he came up with the equations on his own one afternoon. and "it was only MUCH later that WE figured out speed of causality" -- good job figuring out speed of causality, sean. you and einstein figured it out together, right? and then he doesn't actually answer the next question. someone asks 'why is the speed of light x' his answer: "oh, well [idiot], it's not that. speed of light is 1... and the question is really, why do we use meters/second" -- continues to delve into that explanation, which has nothing to do with the original question. no sean, why x is what it is IS IS IS the question. the universal speed limit being a definite number is HUGELY important. HUGE implications. WHY would there be a speed limit IS the question. it goes back to finding out what the hell system are we all existing in. it would be like a microbe getting one step closer to understanding the nature of the petri dish. so, no, sean. just go into what maxwell found with permitivity/permeability and it coming out to speed of light. then maybe talk about the implications of that.

If entangled particles are really communicating instantly, then... why do scientists keep saying nothing can happen faster than C?

I feel like whenever "the super smart science guy" is talking about abstract quantum stuff hes just got a formula like drive till you hit a half tank than a quarter than an eighth and it goes on forever and its unlimited gas.

There isn't speed of light because nothing moves, fotons don't move! Energy is transferred from foton to foton! When you switch on your light, do you feel any rush of anything?

'photons are particles' LOL .. I guessed he missed the part where we found out about wave/particle duality XD

The speed of gravitons? Total nonsense!

If speed of light = speed of photons , then what is the probability that every star have photons speed different to each other because they have different energy.?

Here's a new word: Slower

BAHAHA

The velocity of light (causality) is the same and equal for all observers, it is independent of the observer's perspective or 'position', it therefore conforms to a principle of objective democracy. The laws of physics conform to a principle of objective democracy. Scale invariance is the same and equal for all observers -- objective democracy.

The human thought process is faster than The speed of Light. .

He's wrong about that and I can prove it it's actually the opposite you get less Mass to close the lightspeed

This is completely idiotic, light has no speed. The speed of causality or the speed of energy transfer is instantaneous. It isn’t infinite, it simply is or is not. If I roll a pool ball against another pool ball the other ball will accept the energy from the cue ball instantaneously. Causality and light I agree move at the same speed, that speed is instantly.

How is it possible they always pretend to understand what they talking about, at the same time knowing about not having quite correct physics.