I think Carl Sagen said it best:

"Doppler Effect, we dont need no stinking Doppler Effect.

OK im pleading the 5th on this one.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :D

OK, I'm a little shakey on this but, disregarding the effects on you of traveling at or near light speed, in theory, the light from your lights would leave you at 186,000 miles/sec same as if you were stationary. You see, the speed of light is a universal constant. It's time that is the veriable in this equation. :confused: :confused: :confused:

I'm not sure of the answer, but you may want to ask Steven Wright if he ever found out. :D

Remember, they used to think we would die if we went over 100 mph
:D :D :D

who's holding?.. because you guys are ate up :D

Puder, DUDE,,, you should spend less time listening to O&A and more time in remedial writing. Do you look at what you write ?? :confused: :confused: :confused:

[ 01-29-2002: Message edited by: diligaf ]

IF A TREE FALLS IN THE WOODS ,DOES IT MAKE A NOISE. :D
MIKE

Laster is right...Einstein taught us that time is relative not the speed of light..distant stars that hubble looks at have been dead and gone for billions of years,yet the light for them keeps traveling through space..this is a way we can roughly estimate the age of the universe..14-20 billion years old..Those ancient stars that are gone now are the very stars that produced the atoms that make up our very own bodies...We are children of the stars...thank you ;)

would it really matter anyway, since matter becomes infinite mass at the speed of light?

:)