Dear IMYY4U2,

Traveling at the speed of light with respect to what? Einstein’s theory of relativity requires that time, space and mass be defined with respect to the observer’s frame of reference. Thus, if you are driving your car at the speed of light, it must be with respect to some point on the road. You, however, are at rest (at least, not moving) with respect to your car. Thus, if you turned on the lights they would shine ahead at the speed of light, measured from your position in the car, whether the car was in the garage or moving away from the garage at the speed of light.

Of course, the theory of relativity does have its problems. Let’s call your car a space ship, and have two identical space ships move away from a central point, say, the moon, in opposite directions at nine tenths the speed of light. One would suspect that the velocity of one space ship with respect to the other would be 1.8 times the speed of light. WRONG!

According to the theory of relativity, no signal can be propagated at a speed faster than the speed of light. As objects near the speed of light, the energy applied to accelerate the rate of motion is converted into the mass of the object, according to the famous equation E = m times C squared, where C is the velocity of light. So, if from the frame of reference of space ship A, we measure the velocity of space ship B, we will find that it is receding from us at a speed less than the speed of light. However, if we could measure its mass, we would find it to be heavier than our space ship, A. Also, it would be shorter (distance is contracted in the direction of motion), and the clocks on space ship B would be running slower than those on space ship A. (Time slows down as we approach the speed of light.) In the limit, as the speed of light is reached, that space ship, B, would be infinitely heavy, completely flat in the direction of motion, and the clocks would all have stopped!

Now, if you can swallow all that, think about the occupants of space ship B. They are measuring your space ship, and find that your space ship, A, is receding from them at near the speed of light, and that space ship A is heavier, shorter and in it the clocks are running slower than in their space ship, B.

Now each of those conditions is true only in relation to the frame of reference of the observer. And they are contradictory in reference to each other. It’s obvious that the theory of relativity does not describe the properties of nature, but is only a practical mathematical procedure for predicting observed phenomena.

The theory of relativity in many applications is more accurate than Newton’s laws of mechanics. However, as sure as the setting sun, the theory of relativity will be will be relegated to the dustbin of history in the same manner that has seen the demise of all the theories that have preceded it.

The Bible was compiled between the years of approx. 1400 and 400 BC, and the Book of Mormon between the years of 600 BC and 400 AD. Yet those books are as true today as the day they were written, whereas any scientific text book that you can find that is 50 years old is of no value because the concepts found therein have been proven incorrect or inadequate by subsequent scientific advance.

It reminds me of the story of the entomologist that trained an ant to obey a voice command. When the entomologist would say "Jump’, the ant would jump. So the entomologist picked off the two front legs of the ant and said, "Jump" and the ant still jumped. Then the entomologist picked off the middle two legs of the ant and said, "Jump" and again the ant jumped. Finally, he picked off the remaining two legs of the ant and said, "Jump" and the ant didn’t jump. So in his final report on the project he concluded that when you remove all six legs from an ant it becomes deaf!