🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <56sc4a$o...@phaedrus.kralizec.net.au>,
rrudek@zeta.org.au.NoJunkMail (Richard RUDEK) wrote:

> Ripper <rip...@flash.net> wrote:
> 
> >> :>You people need to be a little more creative. You don't need headlights
> >> :>at the speed of light. All you have to do is put a big reflector at the
> >> :>rear end of the car. As bright as your car will be glowing at that
> >> :>speed, it will illuminate its own way. Duh!
> >> :>
> >> :>-Raffi
> 
> >Quick question. How's it gonna light its own way when the car is
> >traveling at the same speed as the light being used to illuminate the
> >way? You would not see any light at all if you were traveling at light
> >speed because the light would never catch up to you if it were behind
> >you, and you would never catch up to it if it was ahead of you. So
> 

This is a lot like asking "Which way is north?" when standing on the north
pole.  It's not that there is no answer or that the answer is hidden
amongst the verbiage.  The question doesn't make any sense.  Just as there
are rules built into the concept of "north" that prohibit one from making
any sense out of this quandry, there are rules built into "the speed of
light".  One can NOT travel at the speed of light.  So...

STATEMENT:
If one could attain the velocity c, then [statement here] would be true.

TRANSLAION:
P --> Q

Remeber that if P is false, then the statement is true NO MATTER WHAT you
put into [statement here].  P is, in fact, false.  So teh conditional above
is meaningless.

An example:
- If one could attain the velocity c, then one's headlights would
illuminate objects normally.
- If one could attain the velocity c, then one's headlights would NOT
illuminate objects normally.

Both of these are valid statements and both are evaluated to "true"
(because the anticedents of both are false).  So the statements tell us
nothing about the condition of one's headlights.

So any statement you make about your headlights which are traveling at the
speed of light is meaningless because it is true regardless of what you say
of them.

sorry...