this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
46 points (94.2% liked)

Explain Like I'm Five

16718 readers
2 users here now

Simplifying Complexity, One Answer at a Time!

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This never made any sense to me whatsoever.

I've see all the physicists (Michio Kaku, Stephen Hawking, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, etc.) explain this principle but it doesn't make sense. They say that if you were to go to the moon and back at a certain speed near the speed of light, you might return to Earth a thousand years into the future like what happened in Planet of the Apes. But if you were going at the speed of light, you would arrive at the time light takes to arrive there. Why the dip? What is being missed?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 38 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (9 children)

The light takes the same amount of time to get there from an external point of view. It's more like time slows down for you the faster you go, which from an external perspective would look like you moving and acting slower than normal. So in the time it would take light to travel 1 light year, it always takes one year. However, you would be slowed down so much that it would appear to you that much less time had passed, maybe only a few days. If you travel at the speed of light you slow down so much that no time passes for you at all at that speed. So you instantly arrive, from your point of view. However, from the point of view of an external observer, it still took one year.

Essentially, it slows down the amount of time you experience, but the amount of time that actually passes externally doesn't change. If you go to the moon, it will take only 1 second at light speed, so you wouldn't really notice whether it felt instant or to take a second. However, if you go somewhere further like Proxima Centauri, which is 4 light years away, you will arrive back on Earth at least 8 years later (there and back). If you go at light speed, it would appear to be instant, suddenly you're at Proxima Centauri 4 years later, suddenly you're back at Earth 8 years later. If you go just below light speed, you'll see the world outside go past like it's being fast forwarded, and when you return, 8 years will have been compressed into something that seems much shorter to you.

It doesn't help that media often portrays this incorrectly. Take the movie Lightyear, for example. Sure, it's a sci fi movie for kids so it doesn't have to be scientifically accurate, but the way they portray it is completely nonsensical. They show Buzz Lightyear trying to reach light speed in his space ship. Each time he flies around the sun, he goes faster, but more time has passed on the planet he left by the time he gets back. In reality, the faster you go, the less time it takes you to get somewhere (from some external reference of time). It's just your experience of time that changes.

Interstellar is at least a little bit closer (ignoring the whole time travel part)

load more comments (8 replies)