<p>A deeper answer is "yes and no". In the frame of reference of the light itself the journey from Proxima to here is instantaneous. In our frame of reference it takes four years - this is all bound up in relativity and the nature of spacetime.</p>

<p>But in the everyday sense we are indeed looking back in time at light from the stars.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-18T13:20:46.763Z
"In the frame of reference of the light itself the journey from Proxima to here is instantaneous." Could you expand on that with some explanation please?
vascowhite
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-18T17:36:28.260Z
In general realtivity space and time are part of a single "spacetime" and if an object travels through spacetime at the speed of light then it does not experience time. This http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_line might help, though like a lot of Wikipedia articles on science it doesn't take many prisoners when it comes to introducing a subject.
adrianmcmenamin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-24T16:27:51.120Z
It gets weird (in a hum drum normal general relativity kind of way) when you think about the photon's perspective.  The photon is emitted by the star and received by your eye instantaneously.  In a real sense, that photon could not have been emitted unless "the universe knew" (or "structured such...") that your eye would be there to look at it at precisely that moment you looked at it.  Every photon must have both a beginning and an end "already in place".  So a  universe with only a single star could not emit photons because there would be nothing to receive them.
CoolHandLouis
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-18T12:25:01.743Z
2014-01-18T12:25:01.743Z
adrianmcmenamin
<p>Actually, the light hitting us from Proxima Centauri is not necessarily 4.243 years old.  Perhaps some of the photons arriving here were created in the photosphere of Proxima.  But some of them will have been created in the center of the star, and these photons may take many years to arrive at the photosphere, where they are then "emitted".  </p>

<p>For our sun, it is written (in Wikipedia's article about <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#Core">our Sun</a>): </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"The gamma rays (high-energy photons) released in fusion reactions are
  absorbed in only a few millimeters of solar plasma and then re-emitted
  again in a random direction and at slightly lower energy. Therefore it
  takes a long time for radiation to reach the Sun's surface.
  <strong>Estimates of the photon travel time range between 10,000 and 170,000 years.</strong>"</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Similarly, many of the photons arriving from Proxima may be many tens of thousands of years old.  Their travel time from Proxima's photosphere is only a small part of their journey to Earth.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-07-09T18:50:57.913Z
Incorrect. The photons arriving at the Earth are emitted (by definition) from the photosphere. The photons emitted in the core are hard X-rays with mean free paths of a mm.
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-22T01:52:33.450Z
I think this is useful and interesting to mention (+1), but this kind of 'random walk' idealization strikes me as more than a little strange and misleading. It's hard to make much sense of the claim that any photon near the photosphere is actually the "same" photon produces near the core in some distant past, since photon number is drastically non-conserved during the absorption/emission process. On the flip-side, since photons are identical in a way stronger than any classical objects could be, the distinction of "same photons" vs "different photons" isn't very meaningful in the first place.
Stan Liou
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-22T17:02:54.617Z
Yes, @StanLiou, this is a quirk, but as you say, at least a bit interesting.  As to "same" vs "different" photons, well, there are a lot of mysteries in the universe, and this is one of them.
Cyberherbalist
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-24T16:13:08.390Z
One could also talk about photons of light that traveled thousands of years from another star before hitting Proxima Centauri and subsequently emitted toward our planet.  But I don't think any such meanderings of photons before emission towards earth has anything to do with the OP.
CoolHandLouis
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-25T14:56:05.573Z
No I really don't agree. Those photons that are absorbed and re-emitted are not really the same photons. They have different energies and a different (random) direction. You might say that the energy that is emitted from the star's core takes 100,000 years to get to the photosphere, but not the photons.
Dieudonné
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-22T01:07:27.410Z
2014-01-22T01:07:27.410Z
Cyberherbalist
<p>All light we see is from the past. The light from a light bulb at 3 meter distance arrives 10 ns after it left the bulb in your eye. For short distances this delay is negligible (10 ns is 10 billionths of a second), but at astronomical scale it becomes significant. Light from the Sun takes 8 minutes and 20 seconds to reach the Earth, so when we see the Sun it's the Sun like it was 8 minutes ago. If the Sun would suddenly die we wouldn't notice for 8 minutes.</p>

<p>The same goes for other stars in our Galaxy. The light from a star at 4 light years takes 4 years to reach us; it's the definition of a light year.</p>

<p>One could make the following comparison: suppose there's a town at 100 <em>car years</em> from where you live. That means it takes a car 100 years to reach you. When a car from that town reaches you today it left in 1914. It won't be a 2010 sedan, but a Ford T. As the car arrives you're looking 100 years in the past.</p>

<p>This looking into history is very convenient for cosmologists. You want to know what galaxies looked like 13.5 billion years ago, when the Universe was still young? Well, look for light that's been underway for that time. It left the galaxy under study 13.5 billion years ago and shows you what that galaxy looked like at the time. It doesn't tell you anything about the current state of it. It may have collided with another galaxy or absorbed by a black hole. There's no way of knowing other than waiting another 13.5 billion years, until the light emitted now will reach us.</p>

<p>Another interesting thing to observe from that far past is the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB). It's the radiation from the Big Bang, which has been underway for 13.8 billion years. Of course today the Big Bang is history, but thanks to the "limited" light speed this history is continuously underway to us.</p>

<hr>

<p><strong>edit</strong><br>
Enter relativity. So we say the light from Proxima Centauri has been underway for 4.2 years, but only <em>from our point of view</em>. As objects go nearer the speed of light their time slows down, and ultimately when you would reach light speed time would stop completely. Now photons travel at the speed of light, so for them time is at a standstill. <em>From the photon's point of view</em> it travels the whole distance from Proxima Centauri to Earth <strong>instantaneously</strong>: it arrives at Earth at the same time it leaves Proxima Centauri! (You can't do this with objects which have mass.)</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-02-17T15:26:07.100Z
2014-02-24T18:16:14.557Z
2014-02-24T18:16:14.557Z
stevenvh
<p>There's a little bit too much sophistry in some of the answers to this question. While it is true a photon doesn't experience time, the OP was asking about light emitted from Proxima Centuri as observed from Earth. Since PC is 4 light-years away, the light took 4 years to reach us - since neither we nor the Centuri system are traveling, relative to each other, at relativistic speeds (near light-speed; somewhere, depending on context, between ~5% of c and 20% of c is where we start talking about the speeds being relativistic). Some of the light was absorbed (by dust, or ions) between there and here and was probably re-emitted as infrared light, but most of it (the visible part) traveled the whole way uninterrupted, so yes it did begin its journey 4 years ago. But note that Proxima isn't visible to the naked eye, so its not a very robust example.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-25T06:37:45.383Z
Ironic that this answer starts with a complaint about sophistry, and ends with sophistry ;)
GreenAsJade
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-07-09T17:51:06.183Z
2016-07-09T17:51:06.183Z
Li Zhi
<p>Traveling at light speed has implications for both space and time. In addition to no experience of time, photons perceive no space in the direction of their travel. Thus their "instantaneous" space travel covers zero distance. In other words, each photon perceives your eyeball to be attached to the photosphere of Alpha Centauri, thus allowing for a very short travel time...</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-11-23T20:24:24.757Z
So... in the frame of reference of the photon, it went nowhere, instantaneously. Yet you are talking about photons and "their travel" - but apparently there was no traveling and can NEVER BE any traveling. What does it mean to 'exist' for exactly 0 time? It sounds like you're saying in the frame of reference of photons, photons don't exist.
Spike0xff
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-07-07T08:52:52.963Z
2016-07-07T08:52:52.963Z
yaron
<p>Yes, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light" rel="nofollow noreferrer">speed of light</a> in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum" rel="nofollow noreferrer">vacuum</a> (or <em>c</em>) is 299,792,458 m/s and one <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-year" rel="nofollow noreferrer">light-year</a> is the distance the light travels in one <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_year_%28astronomy%29" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Julian year</a> (365.25 days), which comes out to 9.46073 × 10<sup>15</sup> meters. The exact value is 9,460,730,472,580,800 meters.</p>
<p>Since <em>c</em> is the maximum speed at which all energy, matter, and information in the Universe can travel, it is the universal physical constant on which the light-year (<em>ly</em>) as one of the astronomical units of length is based.</p>
<p>That means that <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light" rel="nofollow noreferrer">visible light</a> as an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation" rel="nofollow noreferrer">electromagnetic radiation</a> cannot travel faster than <em>c</em> and in one Julian year it can traverse a maximum distance of</p>
<blockquote>
<p><code>d = t * c</code></p>
</blockquote>
<p><em><code>d</code></em> is distance in meters</p>
<p><em><code>t</code></em> time in seconds</p>
<p><em><code>c</code></em> the speed of light in vacuum in meters per second</p>
<p>If we calculate this distance for a 4.243 <em>ly</em> distant object, that comes out as <em><code>4.243 * 365.25 * 86,400 s * 299,792,458 m * sˉ¹</code></em> or exactly 40,141,879,395,160,334.4 meters (roughly 40 <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trillion" rel="nofollow noreferrer">trillion</a> kilometers or 25 trillion miles).</p>
<p>That is the distance the light traveled since it was last reflected of (or in our case emitted from, since Proxima Centauri is a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_dwarf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">red dwarf</a> star) the surface of a celestial object to be 4.243 Julian years later visible at our observation point, in this case our planet Earth from where the distance to Proxima Centauri you quoted was measured.</p>
<p>The more powerful the telescope, the further into the past we can see because the light is much older! This goes the same regardless of the distance of the object you're observing, but astronomy is particularly neat in this regard and we can observe objects that are so distant that we see them from the time when they were still forming.</p>
<p>For further reading on other units used to measure far away objects you might be interested in reading <a href="https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/94/what-is-a-parsec-and-how-is-it-measured">this question on the parsec.</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-07-10T00:23:11.163Z
So when we look at the night sky we are looking at the past. Let's say one of the stars we see in the sky went supernova and and is not there no more and let's say this supernova was 'small' and could've of been seen only if you were literally next to the star. Let's say this star is about 4ly away. So in 4 years we will not see the star anymore right?
NuWin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-25T20:55:38.397Z
@NuWin No such thing as a supernova that small. In four years you would see the supernova (after the light has already been traveling for four years from the perspective of an observer on Earth) which would gradually fade until it's no longer visible to the naked eye. Also, everyone would die.
Aurast
CC BY-SA 4.0
2013-10-15T05:49:38.000Z
2022-07-15T00:46:03.763Z
2022-07-15T00:46:03.763Z
TildalWave
<p>Our nearest star <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri">Proxima Centauri</a> is 4.243 light years away from Earth.</p>

<p>Does that mean we are seeing light that is 4.243 years old everyday?  </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-10-15T09:28:22.513Z
4000 lightyears would mostly be still in our galaxy, which is roughly 100.000 lightyears across, and 3000-6000 lightyears thick. Most galaxies are at least millions of lightyears away.
Arne
<star><distances><light><speed>
Is the light we see from stars extremely old?
PrivateUser
# Is the light we see from stars extremely old?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-10-15)

Our nearest star [Proxima Centauri](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri) is 4.243 light years away from Earth.

Does that mean we are seeing light that is 4.243 years old everyday?

**Tags:** star, distances, light, speed

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: 4000 lightyears would mostly be still in our galaxy, which is roughly 100.000 lightyears across, and 3000-6000 lightyears thick. Most galaxies are at least millions of lightyears away.  

---

## 6 answers

### Answer by username_14 on 2013-10-15. Score: 23 | Accepted answer

Yes, the [speed of light](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light) in [vacuum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum) (or *c*) is 299,792,458 m/s and one [light-year](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-year) is the distance the light travels in one [Julian year](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_year_%28astronomy%29) (365.25 days), which comes out to 9.46073 × 1015 meters. The exact value is 9,460,730,472,580,800 meters.

Since *c* is the maximum speed at which all energy, matter, and information in the Universe can travel, it is the universal physical constant on which the light-year (*ly*) as one of the astronomical units of length is based.

That means that [visible light](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light) as an [electromagnetic radiation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation) cannot travel faster than *c* and in one Julian year it can traverse a maximum distance of

> `d = t * c`

*`d`* is distance in meters

*`t`* time in seconds

*`c`* the speed of light in vacuum in meters per second

If we calculate this distance for a 4.243 *ly* distant object, that comes out as *`4.243 * 365.25 * 86,400 s * 299,792,458 m * sˉ¹`* or exactly 40,141,879,395,160,334.4 meters (roughly 40 [trillion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trillion) kilometers or 25 trillion miles).

That is the distance the light traveled since it was last reflected of (or in our case emitted from, since Proxima Centauri is a [red dwarf](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_dwarf) star) the surface of a celestial object to be 4.243 Julian years later visible at our observation point, in this case our planet Earth from where the distance to Proxima Centauri you quoted was measured.

The more powerful the telescope, the further into the past we can see because the light is much older! This goes the same regardless of the distance of the object you're observing, but astronomy is particularly neat in this regard and we can observe objects that are so distant that we see them from the time when they were still forming.

For further reading on other units used to measure far away objects you might be interested in reading [this question on the parsec.](https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/94/what-is-a-parsec-and-how-is-it-measured)

> **Comments:**
> **username_15**: So when we look at the night sky we are looking at the past. Let's say one of the stars we see in the sky went supernova and and is not there no more and let's say this supernova was 'small' and could've of been seen only if you were literally next to the star. Let's say this star is about 4ly away. So in 4 years we will not see the star anymore right?  
> **username_16**: @username_15 No such thing as a supernova that small. In four years you would see the supernova (after the light has already been traveling for four years from the perspective of an observer on Earth) which would gradually fade until it's no longer visible to the naked eye. Also, everyone would die.  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2014-01-18. Score: 13

A deeper answer is "yes and no". In the frame of reference of the light itself the journey from Proxima to here is instantaneous. In our frame of reference it takes four years - this is all bound up in relativity and the nature of spacetime.

But in the everyday sense we are indeed looking back in time at light from the stars.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: "In the frame of reference of the light itself the journey from Proxima to here is instantaneous." Could you expand on that with some explanation please?  
> **username_2**: In general realtivity space and time are part of a single "spacetime" and if an object travels through spacetime at the speed of light then it does not experience time. This http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_line might help, though like a lot of Wikipedia articles on science it doesn't take many prisoners when it comes to introducing a subject.  
> **username_4**: It gets weird (in a hum drum normal general relativity kind of way) when you think about the photon's perspective.  The photon is emitted by the star and received by your eye instantaneously.  In a real sense, that photon could not have been emitted unless "the universe knew" (or "structured such...") that your eye would be there to look at it at precisely that moment you looked at it.  Every photon must have both a beginning and an end "already in place".  So a  universe with only a single star could not emit photons because there would be nothing to receive them.  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2014-01-22. Score: 7

Actually, the light hitting us from Proxima Centauri is not necessarily 4.243 years old. Perhaps some of the photons arriving here were created in the photosphere of Proxima. But some of them will have been created in the center of the star, and these photons may take many years to arrive at the photosphere, where they are then "emitted".

For our sun, it is written (in Wikipedia's article about [our Sun](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#Core)):

> "The gamma rays (high-energy photons) released in fusion reactions are
> absorbed in only a few millimeters of solar plasma and then re-emitted
> again in a random direction and at slightly lower energy. Therefore it
> takes a long time for radiation to reach the Sun's surface.
> **Estimates of the photon travel time range between 10,000 and 170,000 years.**"

Similarly, many of the photons arriving from Proxima may be many tens of thousands of years old. Their travel time from Proxima's photosphere is only a small part of their journey to Earth.

> **Comments:**
> **username_7**: I think this is useful and interesting to mention (+1), but this kind of 'random walk' idealization strikes me as more than a little strange and misleading. It's hard to make much sense of the claim that any photon near the photosphere is actually the "same" photon produces near the core in some distant past, since photon number is drastically non-conserved during the absorption/emission process. On the flip-side, since photons are identical in a way stronger than any classical objects could be, the distinction of "same photons" vs "different photons" isn't very meaningful in the first place.  
> **username_5**: Yes, @username_7, this is a quirk, but as you say, at least a bit interesting.  As to "same" vs "different" photons, well, there are a lot of mysteries in the universe, and this is one of them.  
> **username_4**: One could also talk about photons of light that traveled thousands of years from another star before hitting Proxima Centauri and subsequently emitted toward our planet.  But I don't think any such meanderings of photons before emission towards earth has anything to do with the OP.  
> **username_8**: No I really don't agree. Those photons that are absorbed and re-emitted are not really the same photons. They have different energies and a different (random) direction. You might say that the energy that is emitted from the star's core takes 100,000 years to get to the photosphere, but not the photons.  
> **username_6**: Incorrect. The photons arriving at the Earth are emitted (by definition) from the photosphere. The photons emitted in the core are hard X-rays with mean free paths of a mm.  

---

### Answer by username_9 on 2014-02-17. Score: 5

All light we see is from the past. The light from a light bulb at 3 meter distance arrives 10 ns after it left the bulb in your eye. For short distances this delay is negligible (10 ns is 10 billionths of a second), but at astronomical scale it becomes significant. Light from the Sun takes 8 minutes and 20 seconds to reach the Earth, so when we see the Sun it's the Sun like it was 8 minutes ago. If the Sun would suddenly die we wouldn't notice for 8 minutes.

The same goes for other stars in our Galaxy. The light from a star at 4 light years takes 4 years to reach us; it's the definition of a light year.

One could make the following comparison: suppose there's a town at 100 *car years* from where you live. That means it takes a car 100 years to reach you. When a car from that town reaches you today it left in 1914. It won't be a 2010 sedan, but a Ford T. As the car arrives you're looking 100 years in the past.

This looking into history is very convenient for cosmologists. You want to know what galaxies looked like 13.5 billion years ago, when the Universe was still young? Well, look for light that's been underway for that time. It left the galaxy under study 13.5 billion years ago and shows you what that galaxy looked like at the time. It doesn't tell you anything about the current state of it. It may have collided with another galaxy or absorbed by a black hole. There's no way of knowing other than waiting another 13.5 billion years, until the light emitted now will reach us.

Another interesting thing to observe from that far past is the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB). It's the radiation from the Big Bang, which has been underway for 13.8 billion years. Of course today the Big Bang is history, but thanks to the "limited" light speed this history is continuously underway to us.

---

**edit**  
Enter relativity. So we say the light from Proxima Centauri has been underway for 4.2 years, but only *from our point of view*. As objects go nearer the speed of light their time slows down, and ultimately when you would reach light speed time would stop completely. Now photons travel at the speed of light, so for them time is at a standstill. *From the photon's point of view* it travels the whole distance from Proxima Centauri to Earth **instantaneously**: it arrives at Earth at the same time it leaves Proxima Centauri! (You can't do this with objects which have mass.)


---

### Answer by username_10 on 2016-07-09. Score: 3

There's a little bit too much sophistry in some of the answers to this question. While it is true a photon doesn't experience time, the OP was asking about light emitted from Proxima Centuri as observed from Earth. Since PC is 4 light-years away, the light took 4 years to reach us - since neither we nor the Centuri system are traveling, relative to each other, at relativistic speeds (near light-speed; somewhere, depending on context, between ~5% of c and 20% of c is where we start talking about the speeds being relativistic). Some of the light was absorbed (by dust, or ions) between there and here and was probably re-emitted as infrared light, but most of it (the visible part) traveled the whole way uninterrupted, so yes it did begin its journey 4 years ago. But note that Proxima isn't visible to the naked eye, so its not a very robust example.

> **Comments:**
> **username_11**: Ironic that this answer starts with a complaint about sophistry, and ends with sophistry ;)  

---

### Answer by username_12 on 2016-07-07. Score: 0

Traveling at light speed has implications for both space and time. In addition to no experience of time, photons perceive no space in the direction of their travel. Thus their "instantaneous" space travel covers zero distance. In other words, each photon perceives your eyeball to be attached to the photosphere of Alpha Centauri, thus allowing for a very short travel time...

> **Comments:**
> **username_13**: So... in the frame of reference of the photon, it went nowhere, instantaneously. Yet you are talking about photons and "their travel" - but apparently there was no traveling and can NEVER BE any traveling. What does it mean to 'exist' for exactly 0 time? It sounds like you're saying in the frame of reference of photons, photons don't exist.  

---

