Re: Why is is the speed of light so slow?

As the the speed of light is so much faster than we ever experience on Earth, a ten-fold increase in the speed of light, c, would have little impact on our lives. However, high energy events in particle accelerators would be easier to achieve as the 'Universal speed limit' would be that much higher.

Relativistic effects that have been studied (including mass increase, time dilation, length contraction) would be harder to notice. One interesting effect would be on the muon lifetime: The muon is a kind of heavy electron that has a very short lifetime in the laboratory. It also exists in cosmic ray showers and it has been shown that muons created in the upper atmosphere can be detected at ground level. The time it should take for a muon to travel that distance is such that its lifetime must be increased. Now, if c is ten times larger, muons would not be able to reach the ground!

The best reason that I can give for wanting to study the Universe is the same reason the was given by the first man to climb Mt Everest when asked why he was doing it. His answer was simply "because it's there". Although stars and other galaxies are incredible distances from us, there is no reason not to study them.

Finally, I would disagree that we are 'stuck on our own planet'. Merely forty years ago, it was believed impossible to go into space at all: Ten years after that man landed on the moon. Similarly, within 20 years it is possible that man will land on Mars. Although time dilation (aging through speed) prohibits 'near light' speeds, science fiction has time and again presented hints as to how we might travel interstellar distances: Suspended Animation, for example. The point is, we just don't know what technology is going to be available to us in 50 or 100 years. I, for one, am hoping we can one day see another star as close as we see the Sun.

[Moderator's note:

Dom is correct that relativistic effects would be more difficult to notice if the speed of light was ten times larger. However, if this were the case, particle accelerator experiments, which accelerate subatomic particles to near-light speed, would also be more difficult and require much more energy to achieve.

I'd also like to note that time dilaton, which means that time runs more slowly for moving objects than stationary ones, might help interstellar travel, since a astronauts travelling on a spaceship moving at almost light speed would age very slowly. To them the trip would appear to be rather short, while tens or hundreds of years would pass for us back on Earth.

You might like to look at Jerry Acord's relativity page for a discussion of travelling to the stars at relativistic speeds, and the resources that might be required.

Jim O'Donnell, MadSci Admin]