No. Without refraction at a boundary between media with different refractive indices,
lenses wouldn't work. The only way we would have of forming real images would be
with curved mirrors.
A lack of light from the sun would cause an immediate cooling effect. For example, a nuclear winter occurs when the cloud of debris blocks the sun.
My take on it would be that Light would travel faster through water. Alcohol tends to be slightly more viscous. Remember that all things would have to be equal, temperature, pressure of air, the amount of air in the liquid, angle of light, etc. And (I'm guessing here) the difference would minimal. ========================================= Humm..... not sure that the reasoning above is correct. The speed of light in a vacuum is constant (c) and the fastest light can travel. When light passes through matter it slows and to know how much you really need to know the index of refraction and temperature of the substance it is passing through. The index of refraction of water is about 1.33, so the speed of light in water is (c/1.33). The index of refraction of Ethanol is 1.36 so the speed of light in Ethanol is (c/1.36). This light moves slower in Ethanol than water if both are at the same temperature.
Yes, it is possible for sub-atomic particles to travel faster than the speed of light (186,000 miles/second). A total of 15,000 neutrino beams were fired from Geneva, Switzerland --> Gran Sasso, Italy and were found to arrive about 60 nanoseconds faster than light would have. "It is a tiny difference," one scientist was quoted as saying, "But conceptually it's incredibly important." For more information on breaking the speed-of-light barrier, please see the article attached below.
To answer this question you must take into account the effects of relativity. All stars of orions belt are 1500 light years away, ie 1.42 x 1019 m. According to Newtonian physics it would take 1.42 x 1019 \ c = 4.7 x 1010s = 1500 years, where c is the speed of light. Now this is not true according to Einsteinian physics. according to Einsteinian physics as an object gains velocity its mass increases exponentially towards infinity as velocity approaches c. It is therefore impossible to travel at the speed of light as you would require more and more energy to accerate at a constant rate to c. In fact you would require infinite amounts of energy to reach c. You would also have infinite mass and this would do who knows what to the universe or space-time-continuum. in short this was probably a trick question, it is impossible. Maybe the question needs to be asked again but with a different speed, say 0.95c.
Things that would cause a stream to move faster would be how large the stream is, how much material is in the stream and how much of a slope the stream is at. Things blocking the stream would also cause it to move slower.
IF the refractive indexes of the two materials are not the same number, and IF the light is not traveling perpendicular to the boundary between them, then the direction of the light will change at the boundary. This happens because of the slight difference in the speed of light in the two materials. The process is called "refraction" of light. Without it, eyes and other lenses would not work.
It could
head lights would be the least of ur worries if u had a car that could travel at the speed of light cause u wouldn't have a car cause it would turn to energy. -foxtrot3092- !!!END OF STORY!!!
No, gamma rays travel at the speed of light, which is the fastest speed in the universe. Comic rays, on the other hand, are high-energy particles that can approach the speed of light but are not faster than gamma rays.
probably not... at least not with our current technology traveling at the speed of light could also cause problems, everyone would be creating sonic booms....
No - you would be stopped BEFORE you reach the speed of light, by your increasing mass (among other things). As your speed approaches the speed of light, your mass would approach infinity, and it would require an infinite energy to actually achieve the speed of light.Note that the "speed of light" is not really about light. It is a speed limit of our Universe; some have described it as the "speed of causality".
Traveling on a beam of light is not possible for objects with mass, as light moves at the fastest speed in the universe and cannot be caught up to. Traveling at the speed of light would also cause time dilation effects, where time would appear to stand still for the traveler.
Light would bend the least in a material with a low refractive index, such as air or a vacuum. This is because the speed of light is fastest in these materials, causing minimal deviation as it passes through.
Yes it could.
yesthe speed of light in a vacuum is different than the speed of light in our atmosphere or another planets atmospherethe speed of sound is also different in the air than when it goes through a solid or liquidAddional answerThe first answer above not quite correct. The speed of light is the same regardless of what it passes through. It's 186,282 miles per second, but there is a small change due to the refractive index of different materials. But this difference is much less than the difference of the speed of sound in different materialsIf we go even further, it's the same to all observers (as Einstein would say). That means that even if you were travelling at close to the speed of light, it would appear to be travelling past or towards you at the speed of light. Now we're into relativity!
Light rays will pass from one transparent material to another without bending if the two materials have the same refractive index (i.e., the same speed of light in the material). This is known as optical transparency, which occurs when there is no abrupt change in the speed of light as it transitions between the two materials.
Most common cause would be a faulty wheel speed sensor or damaged wires.