Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ModelPerfect
Why do you need a powerful telescope? The naked eye will suffice. What do you think we're doing when we look up at the stars? We're seeing the light that was emitted from the past...we're not seeing the current state of the stars. If the star was 10 light years away, then the light emitted took, by definition, 10 years to get here. So we're seeing the star as it was 10 years ago; as far as we know, it might be implodded by now... The thing is we're used to watching the past and relating that with the present, but that's not really the case.
A powerful telescope wouldn't allow you to see further in the past, unless it was moved further away faster than the speed of light, as noted before, or aimed at a reflection of the original light (hint!). Purely from our point of view, the telescope would only allow you to see closer towards the object's present.
|
I didn't explain myself clearly. You'd need a telescope to see things clearly. I mean sure, we can look at a star and see it and what we're seeing is X number of years old. But being 2 lightyears away from earth, you wouldn't be able to see earth. You'd see the sun for sure. But let's just assume you could even see the planet, you certainly wouldn't be able to see it with any great detail. Imagine being able to look at dinosaurs. To actually see them. That's why you'd need the uber-scope. Hope that clears things up.
Blackmonsters; i just mean that it sounds like what you've done is just taken Einstein's existing theory of relativity and applied it to another situation. Pretty cleverly done too, if you ask me.