Yahoo Answers is shutting down on 4 May 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

if I were traveling at 90% of the speed of light ...?

and a bright object were traveling towards me almost head-on at the same speed, would I be able to see it?

After we passed and were moving away from each other, would I be able to see it recede or would it just seem to disappear?

5 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Favourite answer

    I don't think it's a matter of whether you would see it or not, get the hell out of its way!

    Source(s): Common sense
  • 8 years ago

    Yes. IF the object was directly ahead. You would still see photons moving past at c. Those ahead would be strongly Blue-shifted and those from behind would be strongly Red-shifted.

    Steve is correct.

    Lola is not. Photons from objects off the path cannot get to you.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity

    Look at the diagram with the 2 cones. Any object outside the cones cannot be seen. The faster you go the narrower the cones get. At 90%c the cones would be very narrow. True objects a LITTLE off your path would be visible (inside the cone), but that is a nit-pick.

  • Steve
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    Old Pilot got it right, but the blue shift and red shift would be so extreme at warp 0.90 that the frequencies would be above & below the visible light frequencies, and you would see nothing looking ahead or behind unless the object was radiating in frequencies that when shifted, would fall in the visible light range.

    Source(s): Herr Doppler
  • 8 years ago

    Human eye is not sufficiently fast to be able to track objects moving at 90% of c.

    The speed of that object would still be bellow the speed of light, though.

  • Lola F
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    No, OldPilot did NOT get it exactly right, because there was no need for the proviso "IF it were directly ahead." Doppler issues aside, the oncoming object would be visible regardless of its trajectory.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.