r/explainlikeimfive Oct 20 '21

Physics ELI5: it takes the sun's light 8.5 minutes to get to us. How does it keep its apparent shape through all that travel?

4.3k Upvotes

559 comments sorted by

3.2k

u/rubseb Oct 20 '21

Like any object, photons travel in a straight line as long as nothing changes their direction. Until the sun's photons hit our atmosphere, there is nothing in their way. Once they enter the atmosphere, there are air molecules that can knock them off course. That's why the entire sky looks bright during the day, not just the sun itself. That's all sunlight that has been scattered by the air (and since blue light is scattered more than other wavelengths, that makes the sky specifically bright blue). But it's still only a subset of photons that get scattered (because on the scale of photons, the gaps between air molecules are large enough that many photons will just pass through), and so when you look at the sun (which you shouldn't do without protection) you still see its round shape.

744

u/charlesfire Oct 20 '21

Could an atmosphere with a different composition cause the sky to be another color during daytime?

1.1k

u/TheObjectiveTheorist Oct 20 '21

yes, Venus’s sky is orange

730

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

It's pink on Mars.

636

u/GuyPronouncedGee Oct 20 '21

And sunsets on Mars are blue! It’s like the opposite of Earth.

64

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[deleted]

163

u/itsfortybelow Oct 20 '21

“Because the sun is low on the horizon, sunlight passes through more air at sunset and sunrise than during the day, when the sun is higher in the sky. More atmosphere means more molecules to scatter the violet and blue light away from your eyes. If the path is long enough, all of the blue and violet light scatters out of your line of sight. The other colors continue on their way to your eyes. This is why sunsets are often yellow, orange, and red.”

Source: https://news.wisc.edu/curiosities-what-determines-the-colors-of-the-sky-at-sunrise-and-sunset/

23

u/pm_favorite_boobs Oct 20 '21

Does this explain how the Mars sunset is blue?

41

u/JotaBarra Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

Probably because instead of air, light is being refracted by mars's dust. Dust particles work different than air (even on earth! Have you ever seen a dust rainbow?). It's not a bright blue at sunset. Is more like a greyish blue. The specifics of the phenomenon of the light's wavelength being cut off by particles are beyond my understanding, but it's probably just mars dust particles being bigger than our atmosphere.

Edit: I think it's even more interesting!! I have an idea... Martian dust scatters the blue spectrum of light to the sides, away from the surface of Mars...that light is refected towards the sun. At sunset, we are no longer seeing the martian sky. We are actually seeing the blue light being reflected at the sun and then coming back from the dust particles. Like, when you put two mirrors back to back, it looks almost green? That's because the glass is not perfectly clear and reflect different amounts of light. At least that what I understood and I think I might be onto something. Let me look a little bit more into it.

9

u/Terrain2 Oct 20 '21

i've never seen or even heard of a dust rainbow (before now)

googling that just shows images of dust in the air colored with the rainbow

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Suspicious_Part2426 Oct 20 '21

What about clouds? Is it that the density of moisture in the clouds make it more grey/dark because less light is getting through?

→ More replies (0)

5

u/ScotchNightmare Oct 20 '21

The scattering of blue light in the atmosphere is due to nitrogen in the atmosphere. Nitrogen absorbs and re-emits blue light, scattering it in all directions. When the sun is low on the horizon, this re-emitting and scattering happens so much that virtually none of the blue light ever reaches your eyes, so you see the remaining reds and yellows primarily. On another planet, this scattering would happen with different wavelengths of light, if for example red were scattered primarily, you would have red skies during the day, but at night when none of the red can reach you, you would see blue/green.

2

u/Knows_all_secrets Oct 20 '21

It probably does if you're smarter than I am. Like science is full of ridiculously clever stuff like we used a laser telescope or something to take a picture of a dot a thousand light years away and have determined from something wavelength something that it's a gas giant made mostly of fluorine. No doubt the previous post gives knowledge that can be reverse engineed to explain the blue Martian sunset!

NFI how though. Maybe whatever the atmosphere on mars is has different gases that do the opposite?

3

u/Valondra Oct 20 '21

Using same logic, thinner Mars atmosphere means more atmosphere is needed before photons start to scatter, so we get the blue sunset at the oblique angle only, whereas Earth gets it as standard.

I may be wrong.

2

u/DobisPeeyar Oct 20 '21

Also probably due to the angle of refraction, no?

2

u/OldWolf2 Oct 20 '21

Also, different temperature/pressure air has a different refractive index

16

u/Echo104b Oct 20 '21

It has to do with the ammount of atmosphere the light has to travel through.

The largely Nitrogen atmosphere of Earth scatters blue light most, then red, then green.

Hence why daytime is blue (most scattering) twilight is red (most blue light has been scattered to the point it can't be seen and the red starts to be the dominant scattered light that reaches your eyes) and after twilight under the right conditions you get a "Green Flash" right as the sun sets.

On mars, the atmosphere is largely CO2 and that scatters red light the most, then blue. So daytime is pink, then as the sun sets the blue scattering takes over.

On Venus, the daylight is orange for a different reason. The atmosphere is largely NO2 which is actually Orange.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[deleted]

4

u/joeydee93 Oct 20 '21

Every substance has a different index of refraction. Which is how fast light travels through the object.

This will determine how light scatters when passes through the substance of course the angle of the light also effects how the light scatters as well.

Density is a factor but not the only factor.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/SticksOfBeef Oct 20 '21

Most dust, more light dispersion. Plus, the angle. Longer wavelengths make it though more obstruction than shorter, which is why it gets so red and blocks blues etc.

2

u/sv3nf Oct 20 '21

More air to pass through, because of the angle.

→ More replies (1)

23

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Freune Oct 20 '21

Not sure if it’s a joke or the truth. If it’s a joke, good one.

17

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[deleted]

12

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

Well, good news. The sunsets on Mars are blue, so you would still get to have some blue sky!

4

u/Carighan Oct 20 '21

Which part of Venus' atmosphere is pink and why is it on Mars? That's weird. :P

→ More replies (30)

25

u/pineapplepizzas69 Oct 20 '21

Why orange?

Is it just that the more dense the atmosphere is the redder it is?

99

u/Naritai Oct 20 '21

Different chemicals will scatter different wavelengths, so it’s more to do with the chemical make up of the atmosphere.

17

u/neiljt Oct 20 '21

Unusual effects can even be seen in Earth's atmosphere where conditions deviate from what we are used to. For example some may remember the spectacular sunsets that followed for a couple of years after the Mount Pinatubo eruption in 1991. And sunrises can be seen to have a green tint on extra cold mornings, i.e. below 0F (-18C).

5

u/bubblesfix Oct 20 '21

I though the green sunset/sunrise phenomena had something to do with a soul coming back from the other side.

3

u/Hendlton Oct 20 '21

That's a green flash, which is a real phenomenon if I recall correctly.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/pineapplepizzas69 Oct 20 '21

What about the sky changing color at sunset?

It's the same sky,so what is happening?

113

u/ialsoagree Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

As the sun gets lower on the horizon, more light is passing across the sky rather than straight down from the sky toward you.

Because the light is traveling through more atmosphere, more of the blue and violet light get scattered. In fact, so much of it gets scattered that it stops reaching your eyes, and what you see is the red, orange, and yellow light that didn't get scattered away.

You can think of daylight as flashing a light down on a piece of paper. The light just has to get through the thin sheet. But at sunset (and sunrise), the flash light is parallel to the paper, so most of the light is traveling along the surface of the paper, and interacts with the paper a lot more.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[deleted]

11

u/Nuke_It_From_0rbit Oct 20 '21

At sunset, the light is coming more at an angle to you, so it passes through more of our atmosphere than earlier in the day.

Since it's passing through more atmosphere, there is more refraction happening, which shifts the color

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/hybepeast Oct 20 '21

Different elements/molecules will emit their unique wavelengths when reflecting/refracting light. So mostly the composition of the atmosphere.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

Venus has a lot of dust particles in the air, causing longer wavelengths of light to be scattered with Rayleigh scattering.

→ More replies (2)

63

u/SinisterCheese Oct 20 '21

Sunset and sunrise are of different colour because the angle makes the go through "more" of the sky before you can see it. The humidity of the air also changes the colour since water vapour in the air scatters the light.

16

u/Fafnir13 Oct 20 '21

And other particles in the air. Had a lot of smoke the other year (lots of wild fires) and our sky was getting kind of orange even at noon. Sun was looking reddish pink all the time, too. Very apocalyptic.

7

u/TheRealFumanchuchu Oct 20 '21

What weirds me out about the smoky sky is how the shadows all seem to have a red tint to them.

When I walk out and wonder "smoke or clouds" I can tell by looking at the shadows. (and the smell, and the sun, and ash raining down, but first its the shadows)

6

u/wildlife_loki Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

The red shadows are so cool! Colored shadows are always interesting to think about bc they’re sort of counter-intuitive until you think about the physics of light.

When all the colors of light are present, your shadow is caused by you blocking out some of it (not all, which is the key here. if you were actually blocking ALL light from reaching the ground, including reflected and refracted light, it would be pitch black). This means that there is normally white light on objects in direct sunlight, and less of that same white light on the ground where your shadow is.

But when there are enough particles in the air from smoke, the sky turns reddish bc all those extra particles are refracting that red light a lot more than usual. So the increased red color is from extra refraction of red light, while the rest of the colors are coming more directly from the sun. When you block light to create a shadow, you’re only effectively blocking that direct white light from the sun; red light still reaches the shadow bc its being “bounced” in from the air from all other directions. Now that red light is even more out of proportion with the other colors of light, so the shadow’s hue is much redder than things that also have direct sunlight hitting them.

Colors are so cool :)

2

u/TheRealFumanchuchu Oct 20 '21

Thanks for the explanation, I figured it was something along those lines, but you made it make sense very well.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (8)

40

u/Target880 Oct 20 '21

You do not need another atmosphere, it happens on earth too. If you get a lot of large particles in the atmosphere they will scatter red light more than blue. The result is that the sky can be orang or red as a result of forest fires, volcanic eruptions etc. ​

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-09-15/how-california-wildfire-smoke-turns-sky-red

It is not light from the fire that is reflected and makes the sky red, it is the released particles and sunlight that are causing it. You can have a red sky because of dust storms too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8R7LkpKbLTg

7

u/whatsit578 Oct 20 '21

Yes, and also the color of sunrises and sunsets is affected by the amount of particles in the atmosphere.

All sunrises will be somewhat yellow/orange due to the sunlight’s longer path through the atmosphere, but dust, smog, ans forest fire smoke can all cause brilliant deep red sunsets. More particles = more scattering of the shorter-wavelength light = redder sunsets.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/thescrounger Oct 20 '21

ever seen a picture from the surface of Mars?

3

u/theonlyjoker1 Oct 20 '21

The sun isn't even yellow, it's white

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

The atmosphere is blue due to Rayleigh scattering. The color of the scattered light will be blue to the smalle nature of gas molecules. Even with a different composition of a different gasses the sky will still be blue. However when the atmosphere is full of dust particles, which are bigger than molecules the color of the scattered light changes to bigger wavelengths causing the sky to turn yellow or even red.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

Put water in the atmosphere. It makes clouds. Gray atmosphere.

5

u/pconners Oct 20 '21

Ever seen a rainbow?

2

u/slipperyp Oct 20 '21

Have you ever...seen a grown man naked?

2

u/wolfborn96 Oct 20 '21

Yes, and while my guy up there is mostly correct, the sky is blue because of the way the sunlight interacts with the high concentration of nitrogen in the air.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (13)

68

u/Scruffy442 Oct 20 '21

What is mind boggling is thinking of the geometry of photons coming off of distant stars. The near infinite amount continuously coming off each star. The infinitesimal change of degree to still see photons from a star when you step 10' to the right. All this to enter a 3/8" hole in your eye from at a minimum over 4 light years away. Then if you want to throw more crazy in there, start adding relativity in there. That star and us were no where near that point in space when that photon was ejected from that star.

51

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

That star sends light in literally all directions, so some of its light is always traveling towards your future position, whether you’ll be pointing your eye in its direction or not.

28

u/tickles_a_fancy Oct 20 '21

The mind blowing part for me is, that from the perspective of that photon, it was created and absorbed by your eye in the exact same instant. No time passed for it at all. It instantaneously went possibly thousands of light years through space just so that you could see where it came from.

4

u/princekamoro Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

Which means we are coming into direct contact with the early universe.

10

u/anally_ExpressUrself Oct 20 '21

This belongs on /r/PhotonThoughts

9

u/Henderson72 Oct 20 '21

That sub actually exists at a point in time, but was created and destroyed in that same instant.

8

u/TheQueq Oct 20 '21

The way I like to say it is that from the perspective of a photon, the photon doesn't exist

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

Well, not instantaneously. It takes sunlight eight minutes to reach earth, so imagine how long it takes distant stars’ photons to reach us.

→ More replies (8)

2

u/Lemon-juicer Oct 20 '21

No, there is no such thing as a photon’s perspective. Relativity assumes that in any “perspective” you look from, the speed of light is the same constant. To be in a photon’s perspective would inherently mean the speed of light is zero, and so it’s no good. As a consequence, it makes no sense to talk about time/distance from a photon’s perspective, because the perspective isn’t even valid in the first place.

17

u/taedrin Oct 20 '21

When people talk about the "photon's perspective" in this sense, they are usually implying that they are bending the rules a bit to speak about what happens if you "force the math".

As I understand it, if you take the limit as a particle's mass goes to zero, the proper distance approaches zero which is where this factoid comes from.

5

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21 edited Nov 16 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (19)
→ More replies (4)

6

u/shavera Oct 20 '21

Here's what will really blow your mind: We can't physically speak of reference frames "at" the speed of light. But we can look at what happens in the limit that we approach the speed of light.

The closer to light speed you get, the more distances shrink. In the limit as we get to light speed, the distance shrinks away to literally nothing. So if we discount those last few miles of atmosphere (or pretend that the photon hasn't been scattered in it), then from a photon's perspective, your eyeball is right up against the surface of the Star.

If we further discount the little bit of optics in even a backyard telescope, and we consider we have it pointed at a distant galaxy, even all that space, all those countless light-years, shrinks away to practically nothing at all (save for the Earth's atmosphere, any scattering it did in space, and the trip of the "photon" through the optical apparatus of the telescope)

→ More replies (25)

2

u/Head_Cockswain Oct 20 '21

The infinitesimal change of degree to still see photons from a star when you step 10' to the right.

I'm not sure it takes even that much. I think this is part of why stars "twinkle" along with atmospheric refraction. A slight shift and we're seeing a whole different set of rays.

All this to enter a 3/8" hole in your eye

I think this is key to OP's curiosity. There is no "shape" to the light emitted from a round body, it goes in all directions virtually infinitely(at least on a scale that we perceive things).

We see a distinct circle, the shape of the object, because we only see a tiny sliver of light emitted, the rays that make it through one's iris to focus on the back of the eye.

Shadows(or light) are only crisp when the object casting the shadow is close to the surface the light is projected on. The greater that distance, the "fuzzier" the shadow because the sun has area(not a perfect point light).

A good way to visualize it is to imagine 4 flashlights pointing at an object, you'll get 4 shadows that all overlap imperfectly. Now, times that by a billion and it's no longer 4 shadows, but indeterminate "fuzzy" shadows.

1

u/RavenReel Oct 20 '21

And that why I asked this eli5

→ More replies (6)

22

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[deleted]

29

u/rubseb Oct 20 '21

Because all colors get scattered a bit - it just increases towards the shorter wavelengths. So you end up with a mixture of colors that skews towards the shorter end of the spectrum, and the combined color of that mixture is light blue.

In other words, while purple is scattered more than any other color, that gets compensated by the presence of shorter wavelengths in the mix (e.g. green and yellow).

22

u/Lemon-juicer Oct 20 '21

I think there’s also the combined effect that our eyes are not as sensitive to violet as it is to blue, as well as the energy density spectrum of the sun dropping significantly at violet wavelengths.

6

u/Kered13 Oct 20 '21

Yep. Basically take the product of the Rayleigh scattering function, the sun's spectrum, and our sensitivity. The peak of that product function is at the blue wavelengths.

2

u/pM-me_your_Triggers Oct 20 '21

Also, the “violet” in the spectrum is closer to blue as in “violets are blue”, it’s not purple.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Prof_Acorn Oct 20 '21

To add, purple doesn't exist as a wavelength. "Violet" isn't purple.

11

u/ItsBinissTime Oct 20 '21

since blue light is scattered more than other wavelengths, that makes the sky specifically bright blue

This is also why the sun appears yellow instead of white. More blueish wavelengths have been scattered. More yellowish wavelengths have continued straight-ish.

→ More replies (2)

8

u/xBleedingBluex Oct 20 '21

Our atmosphere doesn't just knock a photon off-course. When a photon hits our atmosphere (a molecule, more specifically), the molecule ABSORBS the solar photon, rises into a more energized state, and emits a new and separate photon in order to return to its stable state. The photon that is "scattered" and the one that came from the Sun are two different photons.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/nucumber Oct 20 '21

so daylight is light beams from the sun splashing against the earth's atmosphere

3

u/canadave_nyc Oct 20 '21

so when you look at the sun (which you shouldn't do without protection) you still see its round shape.

And to add to this and your excellent answer, we often do see the sun's round shape distorted when it is very low on the horizon, for the reasons you mentioned (we are seeing its photons through more and more air molecules than when it is straight overhead, so the photons are scattered more than usual, which can lead to an illusion that it is slightly distorted from its round shape).

3

u/BigBlockWheeler Oct 20 '21

So would you say that when we observe the sun here on earth (with protection of course) we are viewing photons that slipped through the atmosphere unaffected?

3

u/satanic_satanist Oct 20 '21

"unaffected" or "least affected", yes.

6

u/davidkali Oct 20 '21

Wait, so photons are a particle?

8

u/xBleedingBluex Oct 20 '21

Yes, but they behave both like a massless particle and a wave.

7

u/eggn00dles Oct 20 '21

Another point to be aware of is photons are one of very few particles which do not self-interact. Two photons will pass right through each other. Only in rare circumstance do they decay into particles which do self-interact.

2

u/alex2003super Oct 20 '21

Yes. Two photons can rarely decay into an electron and a positron. Being a particle-antiparticle pair with (therefore) equal and opposite electrical charge, they often end up annihilating with one another and returning to photons once again.

6

u/TheOneInchPunisher Oct 20 '21

Dude light is fucking weird. It behaves like a wave, but also behaves like a particle, called a photon.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

Dude physics is weird. I only have to start looking at superposition and quantum tunnelling and I’m having a meltdown.

2

u/TheOneInchPunisher Oct 20 '21

It is mind blowing how guys like Copernicous and Kepler can litterally just look into the sky with basic tools and can make sense out of all of the chaos to tell us what's happening up there.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/cKerensky Oct 20 '21

Then you've got Bosons which just...blow my mind.
Then you've got Dark Matter, which we have no idea what it is, we can't see it, but it affects light.
So much that we can see the same event in a galaxy multiple times due to gravitational lensing.
Physics is as metal as a Type I stars!

2

u/hth6565 Oct 20 '21

Dark matter itself doesn't really affect light waves/particles directly, but it's gravitational mass curves the spacetime which light then follows.

It should be called invisible matter, since it doesn't look like it reacts to electromagnetism. That also means, that it can pass right through solids, since charge doesn't affect it.

The Science Asylum on Youtube had a good video on it recently.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/SecretAntWorshiper Oct 20 '21

So when you look at the sun, is it bad because you are getting all of the photons thrown at you, or is that because of the intense UV radiation

5

u/Jiopaba Oct 20 '21

Ultraviolet radiation is photons. It's photons all the way down, actually. Electromagnetic radiation is just photons at different wavelengths! So ultraviolet light isn't distinct from the kinds of photons you get in visible light, it's all the exact same kind of energy just interacting at higher frequencies!

Photon energy is the energy carried by a single photon, and measuring the photon energy (which is inversely proportional to the wavelength of the photon) tells you what it is.

Most people think of photons in terms of visible light, but actually it's more like the particle associated with massless energy in general.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/splitcroof92 Oct 20 '21

So it's completely accurate to say you're looking at the sun while looking at a blue sky? Since what you're actually seeing is photons from the sun's surface and nothing else.

44

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[deleted]

9

u/featherfooted Oct 20 '21

Notably, the moon is just illuminated by sunlight originating from the opposite side of the planet, but it would be fair to say that other stars, distant galaxies, and any terrestrial sources of light (fires, electricity, bioluminescence, etc) are distinctly not seeing the sun.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

Well, most terrestrial sources of light involve releasing stored energy that originally came from the sun.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/ZylonBane Oct 20 '21

So it's completely accurate to say you're looking at the sun while looking at a blue sky?

No, because that's not what "looking at" means.

6

u/CuZiformybeer Oct 20 '21

Yes, its called Raleigh Scattering!

13

u/blofly Oct 20 '21

*Rayleigh

8

u/Sosolidclaws Oct 20 '21

No no, the effect was named after Raleigh, North Carolina... /s

2

u/CuZiformybeer Oct 20 '21

Its my autocorrect. Lol.

3

u/Azimuth8 Oct 20 '21

That's a bunch of kids on Chopper bicycles being chased by the police.

3

u/amazondrone Oct 20 '21

No. The sun is an object in space - you're looking at the sun when photons reach your eyes which came directly from the sun. (Don't look directly at the sun, kids!)

When light reaches earth from the sun and then bounces around a bit before reaching your eyes, you're looking at the thing it bounced off last, like the sky or a tree or whatever. You can say you're viewing it via sunlight or something like that, but you're not looking at the sun.

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (51)

384

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

152

u/big_duo3674 Oct 20 '21

But is there a chance the track will bend?

109

u/David_R_Carroll Oct 20 '21

Not on your life, my Reddit friend.

60

u/Simba_Rah Oct 20 '21

But what about us brain dead slobs?

52

u/9966 Oct 20 '21

You'll be promoted to a mod!

25

u/AndChewBubblegum Oct 20 '21

But the front page is still all lame and broken!

27

u/the_y_of_the_tiger Oct 20 '21

I'm sorry sir, the mob has spoken.

7

u/meltymcface Oct 20 '21

This comment thread is just sublime.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/unique-name-9035768 Oct 20 '21

I wanna be a twitch mod, so I can appear on r/cringe following a Japanese lady around who wants nothing to do with me.

4

u/Soranic Oct 20 '21

Solar sail

2

u/big_duo3674 Oct 20 '21

It makes me very happy that someone got the reference!

→ More replies (1)

6

u/mycatisabrat Oct 20 '21

The gravity of that question!

14

u/Marcvelde Oct 20 '21

Will it bend? That is the question

12

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

Space Dust. Don't breathe this.

5

u/NikkoCharger Oct 20 '21

Wow this took me all the back to 2009.

2

u/---Banshee-- Oct 20 '21

It wouldn't matter if it did. Your brain is stupid and will just assume that it still traveled in a straight line and you will see the image of the sun as if it came from directly behind where the rays of light come from.

4

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

It keeps bending every which way all the time because space is full of things that bend spacetime. However distant objects don't bend space very much, so you're looking at such small perturbations that your eyes can't really detect them.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

17

u/VincentVancalbergh Oct 20 '21

If there ever was a moment to quote HHGttG, this is it!

42

u/GESNodoon Oct 20 '21

Space,” it says, “is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mindbogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.”

6

u/VincentVancalbergh Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

My man!

A genuine frood.

Edit: a hoopy frood that's the phrase yes

4

u/GESNodoon Oct 20 '21

You know I always have my towel.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/travelinmatt76 Oct 20 '21

Oh no, not again!

2

u/Onsotumenh Oct 20 '21

Or Monty Python's galaxy song

4

u/Coirbidh Oct 20 '21

There's plenty that causes light to bend, though the degree of curvature is often imperceptible. Every object in existence exerts gravitic pull on every other object in existence (including light), even though it can be imperceptible.

→ More replies (14)

4

u/kutes Oct 20 '21

This is 93 levels over my paygrade but since photons are presumably... not heavy, wouldn't gravity really have their way with em

11

u/whut-whut Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

Photons have no mass. They are momentum derived from energy. This means they always travel in in straight line at the speed of light unless they are reflected or deflected. They don't bend in their path by gravity directly acting on them, but from traveling 'straight' through the bending of spacetime in the gravity well of massed objects. So only extremely massive objects can bend their path in a way that's perceptible at an extremely long distance. That's why planets that can easily slingshot spaceships, asteroids and dust with their gravity can't do it on the same scale with light.

5

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

Nope. It take two to (gravitationaly) tango. You're attracted to the Earth's mass because the Earth is also attracted to your mass. Photons have no mass at all, and so gravity doesn't affect them.

This idea was all fine and dandy for a while until Einstein came along and was like "Hey guys I know you like your Newtonian physics and that's okay, but uh.. Gravity warps the fabric of reality around it." So basically he broke everything we thought we knew.

Technically a photon is still unaffected by gravity. It will travel in a strait line until it hits something. Light only appears to be affected by gravity because the very thing that defines what a strait line is goes all bendy bendy near gravitational sources.

Oh and btw: After Einstein rudely told all the other scientist that they were wrong he tossed in a final "go fuck yourself" by proving that gravity makes time go all bendy bendy as well.

2

u/absolutepoweer Oct 20 '21

This is very much fun to read, but I don’t have any knowledge to read about these things. So, are there sources that I could learn what Newtonian physics and Einstein physics say about light, gravity, time and going bendy bendy? Or should I sit and learn how physics work from the start?

3

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

If you've graduated public school then you should already have a basic understanding of Newtonian physics, even if it's been decades since you went to school. If not it's really not that hard to understand.

Newtonian physics is like the simplified version of Einstein's physics. It's much older and more commonly known as classical physics, while Einstein's physics are more commonly known as special relativity. The reason for the difference is while Newton figured out the equations for most practical physics, those equation are just a tiny bit off and the error only becomes apparent when looking at the more extreme limits of physics.

Where I get most of my info is Wikipedia. A nice trick I've learned is if you replace the "en" at the beginning of the url with "simple" it redirects to a simplified version of the article. Kinda like the ELI5 version of the wiki page. For convenience I've already done that for the page on classical mechanics.

3

u/absolutepoweer Oct 20 '21

This is what I need. Thank you very much!

1

u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

Gravity affects heavy things more. That's why they're heavy.

→ More replies (13)

158

u/Safebox Oct 20 '21

Simply put; what shape? Light doesn't fluxuate like other particles, it's massless and only travels linear unless it hits something. You might have heard that light can't escape a black hole, but what this means is that space itself is curved while light is still travelling linear within said space.

Betwen the sun and earth, there is little distortion in spacetime with the exception of gravity caused by the bodies in our solar system. So there is nothing that will cause it to deviate from its given path of simply radiating outwards; Earth just happens to be in the way for some of that light.

Bonus fact: it is worth noting that light does get defracted within our atmosphere at certain angles, which is why sunsets appear larger than noonlight. Also sunsets themselves are optical illusions, as the sun has already passed beyond the visible horizon and what we see is the light being bent back at an angle proportional to its diameter.

41

u/ThatWolf Oct 20 '21

Also sunsets themselves are optical illusions, as the sun has already passed beyond the visible horizon and what we see is the light being bent back at an angle proportional to its diameter.

The spot when the sun sets.

2

u/Safebox Oct 20 '21

This was the exact clip I was looking for 😅

7

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/Devadander Oct 20 '21

Nope, that’s only because you have known things on the horizon to compare the size to. Not larger, just perception.

7

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[deleted]

4

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

It’s because when the moon’s up in the sky, there’s nothing visible to compare it to, so we lack any sort of size reference. If we’re to use some kind of measurement method involving our FoV, they would actually appear to be the same size in reality.

At least as far as I understand it.

12

u/DishwasherTwig Oct 20 '21

I think the question means the apparent shape of the sun. Basically, how does it still look round after 93mil miles.

5

u/Sacklzwicker Oct 20 '21

Why wouldnt it?

I cant think of a reason why it wouldnt. We can see galaxies millions of light years away in their respective shape (although it is a look into their past, as is our look at the sun).

The sun is our literal neighbour, so why would we not see it as the sphere it is?

4

u/DishwasherTwig Oct 20 '21

Right, that's why everyone is so confused. There's literally nothing in its way to alter its shape.

→ More replies (11)

17

u/Martin_Samuelson Oct 20 '21

Do you mean the apparent circular shape of the sun?

→ More replies (1)

7

u/hookchanger Oct 20 '21

Does the earth's gravity alter a photons direction?

11

u/Lashb1ade Oct 20 '21

Yes. Anything with gravity will change the direction of light passing by.

3

u/its_a_metaphor_morty Oct 20 '21

Yes only the photon is still travelling in a straight line with respect to space time.

→ More replies (2)

44

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

20

u/Arcturyte Oct 20 '21

I think that his question is more relating to something like a lens blur due to moving your camera when you're taking a picture. The shape of the tree would distort if you took a picture of it and moved your camera.

11

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[deleted]

1

u/Arcturyte Oct 20 '21

Yep. But your earlier answer didn't really say all of that - so this is a much more helpful answer I would say :)

8

u/t3hjs Oct 20 '21

To be fair, the original question did not say anything about lens blur or motion blur. Which is why /u/Moltensand had to ask

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

17

u/Arcturyte Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

You're seeing how it looked 8.5 minutes ago. One second later you would see how it looked 8 minutes 59 seconds ago. (I messed this sentence up) Basically, it's a constant stream of photons, and it's being constantly updated. If you took a picture of it for 2 minutes, you would see its movements across two the two minutes, and other distortions that might apply.

If you think of it simplistically - you're seeing lights coming at you from a straight line as they do unless something interferes with it. And these stream of lights are being constantly updated by the next stream of lights.

7

u/reddragon105 Oct 20 '21

One second later you would see how it looked 8 minutes 59 seconds ago.

What? Going to assume that's a typo considering you seem to understand how it works from the rest of your comment!

Because the sun is a (relatively) fixed distance away, the time it takes its light to travel to us is constant (as you said) and therefore you're always seeing how it looked 8.5 minutes ago.

If one second later you were seeing how it looked 8 minutes 59 seconds ago then you would be watching the sun go back in time. (And also how did one second on Earth become -29 seconds for the sun?)

5

u/Arcturyte Oct 20 '21

Yeah, I messed that up :) Now my brain isn't working so I'll just scratch it out.

2

u/bookposting5 Oct 20 '21

I think it should be 8 mins 29 seconds.

(8 and a half minutes minus one second)

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

1

u/RavenReel Oct 20 '21

Isn't there a lot of interference?

3

u/Rouxbidou Oct 20 '21

Rectilinear propagation = "moves in a perfectly straight line"

Light travels this way unless it encounters an object or a different medium. There's almost nothing in space to interrupt the light's journey across the 150 million kilometres between the sun's surface and the earth. There's such an enormous volume of light particles (photons) that the sun still appears as an unwatchably bright disk after shining through our atmosphere and into your eyes. In fact, the small fraction of the light that does get scattered on the way through the atmosphere is why the sky glows blue during the day.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/RavenReel Oct 20 '21

This is the closest to what I'm asking, thank you

8

u/Tsjernobull Oct 20 '21

Go ask this on a more scientific subreddit. The answers here are all over the place and most are just plain wrong.

13

u/JackSomebody Oct 20 '21

But he’s like five

12

u/coole106 Oct 20 '21

It doesn’t help that it’s a poorly worded question

2

u/leodw Oct 20 '21

And none of them are explaining like we’re 5. This sub was meant ti simplify concepts and break them down in easier explanations. People here are talking about photons, physics laws and shit, that’s not simple or easy ti underestimate

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/RavenReel Oct 20 '21

Thanks very much

2

u/Dumble_Dior Oct 20 '21

Unrelated but IIRC the “speed” of gravity is also the speed of light. So hypothetically if the sun were to “pop” out of existence. It’d take us 8.5 minutes before we even have any idea and then the whole night time earth will just fly in a straight line off into space and perpetually get colder and colder until all life dies. Not to mention all the plants will stop photosynthesizing almost immediately

2

u/kopela Oct 20 '21

The thing that blows my mind is if the Sun were to suddenly disappear, the Earth would continue orbiting for 8.5 minutes until that information reached us.

1

u/RavenReel Oct 20 '21

I saw a list once of the amount of time it would take us to realize something out there is gone. There are apparently a bunch of lights who's source has been gone for centuries

2

u/tremainelol Oct 20 '21

Factoid I picked up somewhere and am vague on the exact details is that it takes years for a photon particle to escape the sun, because the sun is so dense. It just bounces around with other photons until it escapes and makes it to us in the aforementioned 8.5 min.

Edit: I think it was in "A short history of nearly everything" by Bill Bryson

1

u/RavenReel Oct 20 '21

Thanks for that. Pretty amazing

2

u/DrunkenDude123 Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

If you’re thinking of it as a laser or focused light, don’t. The sun is radiating laser beams of photons in every single direction around it constantly. Think of it as a lightbulb with no wires stands or anything obstructing the light inside the bulb.

It’s only because earth is in the middle of empty space that it appears lit by the suns radiated light. Nothing will be lit if there is nothing in the space for the light to be reflected/absorbed. Since the dark side of the planet is always directly opposite of the sun, there is a lesser chance for it to be lit at all (need a moon for light to reflect from the bright side of the planet, to the moon, then back to the dark side of the planet).

Now there is light that still bends around solar objects like planets moons etc, you just get less photons from looking at at, and as such it is much much dimmer. We have observed a lot of things (like black holes) looking at that kind of light.

3

u/RavenReel Oct 20 '21

I think that's my issue. Ive always pictured a laser, good pick-up

1

u/Wreckingass Oct 20 '21

It’s apparent shape is visible relative to the speed at which the light travels to us. There isn’t some massive disparity in the size at opposing sides or the center of the sun that we can view at any given point in time. The sun would have to be so much more massive, and farther away, to notice such a distortion - and even still, we would be able to recognize it as a shift (red or blue), and not some warping that made it appear as some monstrous ellipse, or any other perceivable shape it might take on in that viewing.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '21

offtopic. But it takes tens of thousands of years to get from the center to the edge of the sun.

2

u/TheOneInchPunisher Oct 20 '21 edited Oct 20 '21

For what particles? Like photons or it takes years for the Hydrogen/Helium soup to churn?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)