Hello Rumani Dey ,

I am not sure I understand your question. If 300,000 m/s is supposed to represent the speed of light through a vacuum, c, then it should be 300,000,000 m/s. Also, I do not understand the figure 86,400 seconds. Is that supposed to represent the time the Sun takes to rotate at its equator or something else? One complete rotation of the Sun at its equator takes about 25 days or 2,160,00 seconds. In other words, when you speak of a "path", what does that represent? Is your question some kind of a homework problem, or a problem from a book?

The title of your question: "How does sun radiate light speed , C ?" does not appear, to me, to correspond to the details given in your paragraph.

Regards,

Tom Cuff

My question is we have speed of light C = 3×100000 m / sec.

And a time 86400 secs to complete a path . That is, to reach where it started from. With this information only, what can we deduce ?

Dear Rumani Dey ,

as Thomas Cuff already stated:

the speed of light c is about 300.000km/s = 300.000.000m/sec*).

This is 1000 times larger than your value.

The time interval of 86400sec is equal to the length of a day = 24*60*60 sec.

From these numbers one is able to calculate the path length (distance), which is passed by the light in one full day (day+night time):

distance (d) = speed (c) x time(t)

d [km] =300.000 [km/s] * 86400 [s]= 25,92*109 [km]= 25,92 billion [km]

If you insist to have a 'light speed' of 300.000m/s you may calculate the distance by yourself.

*) the exact value is: 299.792.458 m/s

For this number please see for example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

Best regards

G.M.

Ok yes, i was assu.ing metres.its km. Thanks for correcting me.

Pi is not fractal analysis.

Dear Mirzakhmet Syzdykov

sorry, but I do not see any relation of 'pi' with respect to the above question or the speed of light 'c' nor to the 86400s number or the path length.

You may explain in more detail what you have meant with ' this is called as a fractal radiation or number "pi" ', perhaps supported by a reference...

Thanks in advance

and best regards

G.M.

@Mirzakhmet Syzdykov - sorry if i have misunderstood your point. Waiting for your next paper to get insights on this topic because i found nothing in google related to pi and fractal analysis. Good luck.

300000 kilometres / second you mean?

86400 second is 1 day

Light crosses product of these two numbers (in km) a day, that is 25.92 billion km. You can call it (approximately) a lightday, like notion of lightyear as distance, or conversely. lightfoot as time

As you mention sun, I say,

by the time earth completes one full rotation along its axis, light from sun crosses 25.92 billion km, that is around 5 times (avg) orbital distance between sun and pluto, or about one tenth of inner Oort cloud (Hills cloud)

How can we calculate the distance ? Its not a linear path.

A sphere carries light . It lights up an area of another sphere for 12 hrs and darkens it for another 12 hours. They say speed of light is 300000km/ sec. What distance are we calculating? Both the source and receiver are in motion? Earth is spinning and sun is moving.

Dear Rumani Dey ,

even in the case of a curved light path, such as in the vicinity of a black hole, the length d along that path is d=c*time.

12 hours dark-light cycle is not dependent on the distance of sun to earth (and vice versa) and does not dependent on the relative motion.

Only the spinning speed (angular velocity) of the earth (24h/day) is responsible for the 12 hour day night cyle (at start of spring/autumn; equinoxes).

I do not understand what you are really aiming at...

Best regards

G.M.

Okay, thank you for your answer Dr. Gerhard Martens. I wanted to understand the calculation and concept behind why we consider C to be significant. I question everything i don't understand. Because i don't accept any concept so easily . Its not my aim. I question things people accept cause its in the book. Thanks for sparing time to answer me.

Hello Rumani Dey ,

I am going to try to paraphrase your question. How does one determine the value of c, the speed of light in a vacuum, by astronomical observations, alone? My answer is as follows.

The earliest astronomical demonstration that light propagated at a finite speed was made, circa 1675, by the Danish astronomer Olaus Römer (1644-1710), see [1]. Römer measured the time for the inner moon of Jupiter to be eclipsed by Jupiter. In other words, using a telescope, he waited until the inner moon of Jupiter went behind Jupiter, at which time he started a clock. He then waited for the moon to reappear, move across the face of Jupiter, and stopped the clock when the moon was eclipsed by Jupiter, again. This time interval constituted a measurement. The trick was to make two sets of these measurements. Once when the Earth was located between the Jupiter and the Sun, and the second, approximately six months, later when the Earth had moved in its orbit around the Sun to where it was on the far side of its orbit, where the Sun was roughly between it and Jupiter. In the second measurement, the successive eclipses of Jupiter's inner moon took a longer time interval because the light had to travel an extra 2•93,000,000 miles, roughly the average diameter of the Earth's orbit around the Sun.

[1] Christian Huygens, Silvanus P. Thompson (translator); Treatise on Light; University of Chicago Press; 1912; pp. 7-10.

If I have paraphrased your question incorrectly, I apologize.

Regards,

Tom Cuff

Thank you @ Thomas Cuff for this information.

Light travels fast. What would be growth of light? A weird thing to imagine. In nature things that move, can travel fast but grow slow. Is it possible that the sun had grown with time, very slowly?

Sun is a fire ball which does not burn out. It is in motion but does not give out/transfer flames of fire 🔥 to earth. Only the light and some heat reaches earth.on earth we can't create an exact replica of sun, maybe smaller in size but it would stop burning at a point. Sun has Helium , heard somewhere but , can we create a fire which would keep burning, unaffected by gravity. Confusion..

Hello Rumani Dey ,

The sun burns because of gravity, not in spite of it. Even though gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces (in order of strength: strong nuclear, electromagnetic, weak nuclear, and gravity), it can result in a gas cloud coalescing into a protostar (gas giant) whose core is squeezed so hard that it ignites because of fusion of light elements. The diameter of the Sun depends on the balance between the outwardly pushing forces resulting from fusion and the inwardly directed force of gravity from the mass of the Sun. When we try to create fusion on Earth, the fused masses are so small that there is not enough gravity from the mass to balance the outward forces due to fusion.

Although gravity is the weakest of all the forces, it can actually overcome the stronger forces if there is enough mass present. For example, a massive enough star, when its core begins to burnout for lack of fuel, may transition to a white dwarf, neutron star, or, finally, to a blackhole.

Regards,

Tom Cuff

Thank you for this information @Tom Cuff

If the sun would not be there and we still thrive , we won't have the entity we deem as "time" or " a 24 hour day " .

https://phys.org/news/2013-04-sunlight-earth.html