If you were to blast off and provided a constant video feed as you distance yourself from Earth, what happens to the video feed as you get further away?

When you start from Earth, your stream has no lag. By the time you got as far as Moon orbit, you have 1.3 seconds lag. How can the video be broken/slo-mo when it was broadcast in real-time? The 20th day of video is broadcast 10 days after the 10th, and it would arrive at Earth 10 days after the 10th day as well.

Even if you could travel at the speed of light, retain your form/senses/whatever, and keep transmitting, the data from 1 second ago is 186,282 miles behind you. But that 1-second old data will still be received 1 second after the present data on Earth.

So basically:
the broadcast is in real-time
the viewers see the broadcast in the same real-time scale (because transmission at the speed of light is way faster than your measly pre-warp spacecraft)
BUT
both things happening in the same timescale would mean instantaneous transmission across space, no matter the distance.


2nd question:
If you were traveling at the speed of light away from the earth, would you be able to transmit electromagnetic signals back to earth? Would they just "sit" motionless in space? I guess the question could also be "does the sound of a sonic boom transmit directly backwards from the direction of travel?" Wake from a boat doesn't, and I'd say light/sound wake doesn't either.

Seems like my 2nd question would answer my 1st

[Edited on February 2, 2011 at 9:58 PM. Reason : ]

2/2/2011 9:48:54 PM

here we go again

2/2/2011 9:50:08 PM

too much weed

2/2/2011 9:50:12 PM

What about the treadmill?

2/2/2011 9:57:55 PM

^ ha

gg

2/2/2011 9:58:23 PM

goddamn that's retarded.

nothing "happens" to the data feed. But when you're sufficiently far away, by the time your transmission of "i'm at space mile marker eleventy billion" reaches earth, you're actually at space mile marker eleventy billion + the distance you traveled while the data traveled to earth.

how is that hard to comprehend? it's like hearing something, a large firework for example, from far away. by the time you hear the sound, the explosion had already occurred.

[Edited on February 2, 2011 at 10:01 PM. Reason : ,]

2/2/2011 9:59:50 PM

treadmill = /thread imo

2/2/2011 9:59:59 PM

the spaceship does not land

2/2/2011 10:00:24 PM

^or that

2/2/2011 10:02:19 PM

Is it tethered?

2/2/2011 10:02:37 PM

a large firework starts from far away

the data feed starts from where you are and moves away, giving real-time video along the way. your firework analogy is as if the ship was already a distance away then started transmitting

Quote :

"nothing "happens" to the data feed"

oh?

[Edited on February 2, 2011 at 10:04 PM. Reason : ]

2/2/2011 10:03:28 PM

what?

no.

cue head exploding .gif

2/2/2011 10:05:05 PM

dude, there is no "slo-mo" of the data we receive. it keeps coming to earth. it's just that eventually, what we see, isn't YOUR "real-time"

if you don't understand i'm sorry. but at the risk of possibly being trolled, i'm going to recuse myself from this thread.

2/2/2011 10:08:56 PM

I'm high as shitI'm dumb as shitI'm smart as shitOMGWTFSPACE

2/2/2011 10:14:42 PM

^All of the above.

2/2/2011 10:15:58 PM

When I was smoking heavily I wrote a story about how our TV feeds from like the 60's and 70s, are currently reaching a planet 40-50s light years away. As the beings learn to make sense of the signals they are learning about our way of life as seen through famous sit-coms, ie Brady Bunch. haha image a planet interpreting The Brady Bunch as some sort of fact of life, way things are, reality and adapting its teachings into their lifestyle.

2/2/2011 10:23:55 PM

So you smoked heavily then watched Galaxy Quest?

2/2/2011 10:25:13 PM

So you smoked heavily and then watched Galaxy Quest?

2/2/2011 10:27:43 PM

haha I knew that sounded familiar. You're right, my stoned mind committed plagiarism, I'm glad I never ran that by anybody IRL.

2/2/2011 10:28:05 PM

no troll

there would have to be breaks in the stream (causing a kind of slow-mo, I suppose) for the two "real-times" to deviate.

for nothing to happen to the video AND the timescale deviation to occur, the spaceship at 10 light-minutes away would be 10 mins in the future (with 10 mins of video floating between them and earth).

let's say the video is shooting a clock matched to one on Earth. you're saying the video would stay synchronized to the Earth clock, yet the ship clock would actually be 10 mins ahead when they're 10 light-mins from Earth.

[Edited on February 2, 2011 at 10:36 PM. Reason : jwb9984]

2/2/2011 10:34:38 PM

I don't know about Galaxy Quest, so I guess Futurama stole it from them too? Fry knocked out the feed to "Single Female Lawyer" in 2000, the aliens were watching it 1000 light years away.. maybe not the same, but related

2/2/2011 10:38:28 PM

I never watched Futurama. But sounds pretty close to galaxy quest

2/2/2011 10:40:16 PM

Doppler affect.

vvvvvvvvvVVVVVVVVRRROOoooooooommmmm

2/2/2011 10:40:55 PM

So what you are saying is that we know nothing about relativistic travel?

You are right. However, please stop your incoherent babbling.

2/2/2011 10:42:18 PM

^Ah there's a name for it. I'll read the whole wiki later. the first few paragraphs explain what happens but not why it happens. I haven't checked out any links yet. How about the 2nd question?


Doppler Effect:

Quote :

"The waves "bunch together", so the time between arrival of successive wavefronts is reduced, giving them a higher frequency. For an observer in back (right) of the car, each wave takes a slightly longer time to reach him than the previous wave. The waves "stretch apart", so the time between the arrival of successive wavefronts is increased slightly, giving them a lower frequency"

Does the stretch get further apart as the object gets further away? If not, then the waves are still arriving at a constant pace (though stretched).

[Edited on February 2, 2011 at 10:55 PM. Reason : not incoherent]

2/2/2011 10:54:17 PM

i believe the correct answer is the plane will take off.

2/2/2011 11:03:58 PM

To answer your first question: your instinct is right. A continuous video feed from the space craft would slow over time as each "frame" took just a little longer to reach earth. I.e. the doppler effect, same principle applies to red- and blue-shift for star light

To answer your second queston: yes, assuming the craft achieved the impossible and fired a signal backward while traveling forward at the speed of light, the signal would propagate at exactly the speed of light toward earth. The speed of light is a universal constant, whereas mass, spacial dimension, and even time are not and are subject to relativistic dilation effects that are a direct result of the difference in velocity between two observers. To an object moving at the speed of light, all events are simultaneous and instantaneous.

I recommend googling "speed of light thought experiment" and just start reading



[Edited on February 2, 2011 at 11:34 PM. Reason : damnyouautocorrect]

2/2/2011 11:30:16 PM

you people /thread on any science-related question thread any time treadmill is mentioned

there is no ultimate thread ender

2/2/2011 11:33:01 PM

Quote :

"too much weed"

i, too, am unable to understand frame of reference when i'm stoned as fuck

2/2/2011 11:34:09 PM

A: no one can hear you scream

2/3/2011 8:27:04 AM

I blasted off in your mom last night and provided a constant video feed.

2/3/2011 8:37:18 AM

Space Weed Questions

2/3/2011 8:39:54 AM

this used to be a major problem in the early space days, but modern dsp techniques have taken care of that. john nash developed something called the fast fourier transform that could re-compress all those stretched out waves. this is why remote feeds on tv don't sound karl from slingblade even though they're routed through a satellite 25,000 miles away

2/3/2011 9:22:32 AM

Red Shift

2/3/2011 9:27:42 AM

you cannot travel at the speed of light, so your other question is not valid. If you were travelling close to the speed of light, the video feed (which is a type of radiation which also travels at the speed of light) will still travel at the speed of light, but it will be super red-shifted (doppler effect).

2/3/2011 9:29:41 AM

Quote :

"I don't know about Galaxy Quest, so I guess Futurama stole it from them too? Fry knocked out the feed to "Single Female Lawyer" in 2000, the aliens were watching it 1000 light years away.. maybe not the same, but related"

Those Aliens (from Omicron Persei 8) knew it was a TV show, they just really enjoyed it and were pissed that they missed the last episode.

2/3/2011 10:37:30 AM

Quote :

"this is why remote feeds on tv don't sound karl from slingblade even though they're routed through a satellite 25,000 miles away "

TV feeds are generally sent through satellites in geostationary orbits, and shouldn't be affected by this.

2/3/2011 11:07:28 AM

Quote :

"The speed of light is a universal constant, whereas mass, spacial dimension, and even time are not and are subject to relativistic dilation effects that are a direct result of the difference in velocity between two observers"

so light does not act like an 80mph fastball thrown out the back of a car traveling 70mph ending up as a 10mph slow ball? weird

from the tiny bit of reading last night (turning on headlights at/near light speed), someone wrote that the light would appear to travel at light speed to the traveler, but the light and car would appear to be going the same speed to an outside observer.

2/3/2011 6:04:34 PM

hence the "universal constant"

2/3/2011 6:06:02 PM

^^yep you got it...I recommend reading Gary Zukov's book "The Dancing Wu Li Masters," it's a book for the educated layman that explains the fundamental complexities of quantum physics in the flavor of eastern mythology...it's really an enlightening and extremely enjoyable quick read

I have that book to thank for my current intellectual direction in life, actually. It blew my mind when I read it as an adolescent

2/3/2011 6:20:11 PM

Quote :

"TV feeds are generally sent through satellites in geostationary orbits, and shouldn't be affected by this."

you do know that a geostationary orbit is about 22,000 miles above the equator, right?

2/3/2011 9:58:09 PM

^Yep. What's your point? The satellites aren't moving any closer or further from us - so as I understand it, there wouldn't be any wave compression (or decompression) to deal with.

2/3/2011 11:38:06 PM

Quote :

"^Yep. What's your point? The satellites aren't moving any closer or further from us - so as I understand it, there wouldn't be any wave compression (or decompression) to deal with. "

You're assuming the satellite just hovers overhead...?

2/3/2011 11:50:59 PM

Perpendicular movement wrt the ground station would not produce a doppler shift anyway

but that would depend on the orbit, i'm not sure direct tv satellites are in geosynchronous orbit, but they probably are

[Edited on February 3, 2011 at 11:58 PM. Reason : ]

2/3/2011 11:51:26 PM

Quote :

"You're assuming the satellite just hovers overhead...?"

From the viewpoint of an observer on the ground, yes.

Quote :

"Perpendicular movement wrt the ground station would not produce a doppler shift anyway"

Exactly.

Quote :

"but that would depend on the orbit, i'm not sure direct tv satellites are in geosynchronous orbit, but they probably are"

Satellites in geostationary orbit are generally 22,236 miles above Earth moving through space at ~6880mph, but because stationary WRT a receiver on Earth, there is no Doppler shift. Geosynchronous orbit is different, and signals received by satellites in geosynchronous orbit do exhibit a Doppler shift.

2/4/2011 1:20:43 AM

^ok... maybe you do know what's going on ... from what you posted it looked like you meant that the signals were not going a far distance, and that is what I posted about.

wolface: geostationary satellites do in fact appear to be stationary as observed from the earth.

[Edited on February 4, 2011 at 8:49 AM. Reason : ]

2/4/2011 8:49:22 AM

Lots of misinformation ITT...

If anyone doesn't know about this stuff, and is trying to learn about it here, good luck.

paerabol and BIGcementpon seem to be on top of things though

2/4/2011 10:35:25 AM

i didnt read this thread

but if Praxis had not exploded, there would be no peace with the Klingons

and...

the answer is 42

2/4/2011 10:39:11 AM

2/4/2011 4:54:44 PM

I'd say the space between arrival times in data packets will increase as distance increases.

So the first data packet you will see have an arrival time of n(0) which will take "n" seconds = 0.
The second packet n(1) will be seen in n(0) + ([distance(m+1) - distance(m)]/ (speed of light))
The third    packet n(2) will be seen in n(1) + ([distance(m+2) - distance(m+1)]/ (speed of light))
The fourth  packet n(3) will be seen in n(2) + ([distance(m+3) - distance(m+2)]/ (speed of light))

2/4/2011 10:49:04 PM