Hello /sci/! I'm being curious and I'm struggling

Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 1

Anonymous
2016-01-11 05:49:16 Post No. 7775472
[Report] Image search: [Google]

File: Military_laser_experiment.jpg (1024 KB, 3008x1960) Image search: [Google]

1024 KB, 3008x1960

Anonymous 2016-01-11 05:49:16 Post No. 7775472 [Report]

Hello /sci/!

I'm being curious and I'm struggling hard to find a reliable answer on the internet, so here is my problem. What is the TOTAL margin of error in our current knowledge/measurement of the speed of light?

Wikipedia only partially answers on the following article:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre#Distance_travelled_by_light_in_a_specified_time
Several limiting factors are listed, but only a few of them are given numeric values, and I suspect there may be more limiting factors, non-listed in the article.

I'm interested in the numbers as well as in their explanations.

[spoiler]Obviously, don't express your answer in metters, as the metter is defined by the speed of light. Instead, you can use as a length unit things like the wenglenth of a laser, the Planck's length, or a simple percentage (as in "±1%").[/spoiler]

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-11 05:50:38 Post No.7775474
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-11 05:50:38 Post No.7775474 [Report]

>>7775472
Well. Spoiler fail, I guess.

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-11 11:26:31 Post No.7775862
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-11 11:26:31 Post No.7775862 [Report]

>>7775472
Noone is interested in this question?..

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-11 11:29:31 Post No.7775864
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-11 11:29:31 Post No.7775864 [Report]

>>7775862
planck length is hypothetical and doesn't exist idiot. ask a question based on reality and not pop-sci next time.

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-11 11:53:22 Post No.7775879
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-11 11:53:22 Post No.7775879 [Report]

>>7775472
the meter is defined such as 299 972 458m/s is the speed of light, there is nothing to measure.

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-11 12:14:58 Post No.7775892
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-11 12:14:58 Post No.7775892 [Report]

>>7775864
My question is NOT based on Planck length. You could totally answer without ever mentioning it.

>>7775879
Yes there is. I'm not asking about the speed of light in meters. Read the wikipedia article I linked, and you'll see that my question is a good one, as there IS an incertainty about the exact speed of light.

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-11 12:22:59 Post No.7775896
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-11 12:22:59 Post No.7775896 [Report]

>>7775892
For that matter, anything occluding the lights path, including the air is a limiting factor. But light speed as we currently accept is measured in the vaccuum of space where (supposedly) isn't blocked by anything. So I'd say the margin of error would be tiny, either way nothing we ever measure is really solid and filled with tons of tiny variables that change the results of our final data.