Forums > Social Chat > speed of light
Login/Join to ParticipateSILVER Member
The super duper uber looper
119 posts
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
The super duper uber looper
119 posts
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted:
There is such thing as the speed of light right? but is the such thing as speed of dark and how fast is it compared to light?
There is such thing as the speed of light right? but is the such thing as speed of dark and how fast is it compared to light?
Don't make someone your priority if they only make you an option.
SILVER Member
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
Posted:
2 answers... and I may choose 2 of them!
"is there such thing as speed of dark" - Ive heard of Son of Dork
2 answers... and I may choose 2 of them!
"is there such thing as speed of dark" - Ive heard of Son of Dork
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Is this supposed to be serious or not...I'm not sure. Being that there is no speed of dark considering that darkness is simply the absense of light.
Is this supposed to be serious or not...I'm not sure. Being that there is no speed of dark considering that darkness is simply the absense of light.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
newbie
23 posts
Location: Hitchin, Herts
23 posts
Location: Hitchin, Herts
Posted:
I suppose you could argue that the light forces the darkness to move, which would make it the same speed as light ... but I wouldn't want to be the one trying to argue that perspective.
I suppose you could argue that the light forces the darkness to move, which would make it the same speed as light ... but I wouldn't want to be the one trying to argue that perspective.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I'm not physicist, but I'm pretty sure there is no "force" involved in the transition from light to dark. It's simply an absense and is therefore instantaneous.
I'm not physicist, but I'm pretty sure there is no "force" involved in the transition from light to dark. It's simply an absense and is therefore instantaneous.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
newbie
23 posts
Location: Hitchin, Herts
23 posts
Location: Hitchin, Herts
Posted:
It's been a long time since I read anything on physics too, but I agree. I think the last person I heard using that line was confusing darkness with dark matter (which does have a speed, though I can't for the life of me remember what it is).
It's been a long time since I read anything on physics too, but I agree. I think the last person I heard using that line was confusing darkness with dark matter (which does have a speed, though I can't for the life of me remember what it is).
SILVER Member
addict
567 posts
Location: USA
addict
567 posts
Location: USA
Posted:
Well, technically, the speed of light is just the speed of dark. If you think about it, the dark has to move the equal amount of speed as the light moves to overcome it. Same goes visa versa. I would get in more depth, but I'm too tired at the moment.
Those are my thoughts though.
Well, technically, the speed of light is just the speed of dark. If you think about it, the dark has to move the equal amount of speed as the light moves to overcome it. Same goes visa versa. I would get in more depth, but I'm too tired at the moment.
Those are my thoughts though.
"I don't know what you are talking about"
"Cardinal!!! Poke her... with the SOFT CUSIONS!!!!"
"Its not working my lord!"
"Have you got all of the stuffing on one end?!"
GOLD Member
Lv15 Ranger
1,489 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Lv15 Ranger
1,489 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
I read something somewhere about how light bulbs are 'dark absorbers' - they suck the dark out of a room, thus allowing it to be brighter. That's why it's dark when you cover it up - you're stopping the dark from getting in. And when they're full of darkness, they have to be replaced.
I read something somewhere about how light bulbs are 'dark absorbers' - they suck the dark out of a room, thus allowing it to be brighter. That's why it's dark when you cover it up - you're stopping the dark from getting in. And when they're full of darkness, they have to be replaced.
Kupo!
GOLD Member
Do you do the poiz?
530 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Do you do the poiz?
530 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posted:
Hahah I remember once brainstorming something similar to that years ago, expanded the theory to torches as well lol. From memory my theory got stuck on candles
Written by: jarle
I read something somewhere about how light bulbs are 'dark absorbers' - they suck the dark out of a room, thus allowing it to be brighter. That's why it's dark when you cover it up - you're stopping the dark from getting in. And when they're full of darkness, they have to be replaced.
Hahah I remember once brainstorming something similar to that years ago, expanded the theory to torches as well lol. From memory my theory got stuck on candles
"In the end there is only fire and a waterfall"
BRONZE Member
Sitting down facing forward . . .
2,387 posts
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Sitting down facing forward . . .
2,387 posts
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posted:
Terry Pratchett expands on the theory very well (The Science of Discworld).
Rave's started to touch on it but Dark is faster. Light takes a measurable time to get from A to B but the instant the light source is removed the dark is there, therefore speed of dark is faster than speed of light.
"As yet unmeasured, but believed to be faster than light owing to its ability to move so quickly out of lights way."
Terry Pratchett expands on the theory very well (The Science of Discworld).
Rave's started to touch on it but Dark is faster. Light takes a measurable time to get from A to B but the instant the light source is removed the dark is there, therefore speed of dark is faster than speed of light.
"As yet unmeasured, but believed to be faster than light owing to its ability to move so quickly out of lights way."
Written by: Doc Lightning talking about Marmite in Kichi's Intro thread
I have several large jars of the stuff. I actually like it... a little. And don't tell anyone I admitted to it. 
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Well certainly the speed of light and the speed of darkness is the same. Thus because the entire room (in which you just switched off the light) ain't completely dark in the same instant.
If you measure on the surface of objects, there is still "light" arriving at the time, the bulb is already finished. Darkness pours in, at the same speed as light does (by the time you flick the switch once more). As the speed of light is beyond our receptive abilities, we usually do not perceive this phenomenon. One of the best comparisons is that of rain: By the time it starts raining at the location you are present (rain destination), the rain might have already stopped at it's origin (cloud). But personally you are perceiving that it IS raining right now.... (even though this moment is already history)
Light and Dark do depend on each other, there cannot be one without the other. No shadow without light as no light without a shadow. Without light/ dark we would not be able to make a difference, we would not distinct between one or the other. It is like Yin and Yang. But there are realms in which they are isolated, like in a black hole or within a star. In the former there is no light and in the latter there is no shadow.
However IMO the universe contains as much light as it contains darkness. Even though it appears as if the stars are less than the space around it, this doesn't matter. We (on earth or any other destination) are simply looking in one direction (i.e. "into" the sun). We can see the sun when looking at it - but even if there are clouds blocking our view, it's still there, shining (no, not the movie) - thus meaning that the particles and waves on which light travels are invisible, unless they are directly aimed at or reflected by an object back to us.
Whether or not the quality of darkness and light are the same is only a matter of perspective. When sitting in a completely isolated room with no light present, it might be depressing - but a single ray of light is able to illuminate (the soul). The reason that we are conditioned to light lies in the history and the conditioning by our ancestors. We greatly depend on light for navigation, but when looking at blind people, we notice that light is not the one and only foundation. Over all it simply doesn't matter whether there is (no) light. The only thing that matters is: How do you feel about it?
The entire question becomes more twisted, if one ponders about the spiritual values and qualities associated with the term "light" and "darkness". So far it has been potentially dangerous to associate "light" with "good" and "dark" with "bad" - as clearly seen in the exploitation and abuse of the "dark continent" and it's inhabitants...
Just if we're able to detach from the conditioning that derived from our ancestry, we will be able to see the true light - the one that is originating from inside of us, without any (polished) lamps or electricity companies (i.e. religions) who charge and keep us hostage for utilizing it.
I'm getting offtopic...
To close the loop: Light and dark usually depend on each other, yet they can exist in certain environments without one another - but when travelling they do this generally at the same speed.
Well certainly the speed of light and the speed of darkness is the same. Thus because the entire room (in which you just switched off the light) ain't completely dark in the same instant.
If you measure on the surface of objects, there is still "light" arriving at the time, the bulb is already finished. Darkness pours in, at the same speed as light does (by the time you flick the switch once more). As the speed of light is beyond our receptive abilities, we usually do not perceive this phenomenon. One of the best comparisons is that of rain: By the time it starts raining at the location you are present (rain destination), the rain might have already stopped at it's origin (cloud). But personally you are perceiving that it IS raining right now.... (even though this moment is already history)
Light and Dark do depend on each other, there cannot be one without the other. No shadow without light as no light without a shadow. Without light/ dark we would not be able to make a difference, we would not distinct between one or the other. It is like Yin and Yang. But there are realms in which they are isolated, like in a black hole or within a star. In the former there is no light and in the latter there is no shadow.
However IMO the universe contains as much light as it contains darkness. Even though it appears as if the stars are less than the space around it, this doesn't matter. We (on earth or any other destination) are simply looking in one direction (i.e. "into" the sun). We can see the sun when looking at it - but even if there are clouds blocking our view, it's still there, shining (no, not the movie) - thus meaning that the particles and waves on which light travels are invisible, unless they are directly aimed at or reflected by an object back to us.
Whether or not the quality of darkness and light are the same is only a matter of perspective. When sitting in a completely isolated room with no light present, it might be depressing - but a single ray of light is able to illuminate (the soul). The reason that we are conditioned to light lies in the history and the conditioning by our ancestors. We greatly depend on light for navigation, but when looking at blind people, we notice that light is not the one and only foundation. Over all it simply doesn't matter whether there is (no) light. The only thing that matters is: How do you feel about it?
The entire question becomes more twisted, if one ponders about the spiritual values and qualities associated with the term "light" and "darkness". So far it has been potentially dangerous to associate "light" with "good" and "dark" with "bad" - as clearly seen in the exploitation and abuse of the "dark continent" and it's inhabitants...
Just if we're able to detach from the conditioning that derived from our ancestry, we will be able to see the true light - the one that is originating from inside of us, without any (polished) lamps or electricity companies (i.e. religions) who charge and keep us hostage for utilizing it.
I'm getting offtopic...
To close the loop: Light and dark usually depend on each other, yet they can exist in certain environments without one another - but when travelling they do this generally at the same speed.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
SILVER Member
water based
5,125 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
water based
5,125 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
Posted:
i guess it depends on what you are refering to as the speed of darkness.. if you mean how long it takes for it to become dark after a light source is removed, then it is exectly equal to the speed of light. on the other hand, if you are refering to it on a much more localised and microscopic level (for this, lets assume a photon on impact 'disapears') the the speed of darkness would be equal to the time it takes for it to go from light to no-light; thus, the time it takes for a photon to be 'destroyed'
also tom... something interesting i *think* i learnt recently.. there is light within a black hole, we just cant observe it (thats assuming im getting the right jist of the book im reading)
i guess it depends on what you are refering to as the speed of darkness.. if you mean how long it takes for it to become dark after a light source is removed, then it is exectly equal to the speed of light. on the other hand, if you are refering to it on a much more localised and microscopic level (for this, lets assume a photon on impact 'disapears') the the speed of darkness would be equal to the time it takes for it to go from light to no-light; thus, the time it takes for a photon to be 'destroyed'
also tom... something interesting i *think* i learnt recently.. there is light within a black hole, we just cant observe it (thats assuming im getting the right jist of the book im reading)
"you know there are no trophys for doing silly things in real life yeah pete?" said ant "you wont get a 'listened to ride of the valkyries all the way to vietnam' trophy"
*proud owner of the very cute fire_spinning_angel, birgit and neon shaolin*
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
... link/ quote your source
but certainly there is light at the end of the tunnel...
in one of my ponderings upon black holes is came to me that they are just "the other end" of stars (in another dimension)... might not make too much sens(ej)
... link/ quote your source
but certainly there is light at the end of the tunnel...
in one of my ponderings upon black holes is came to me that they are just "the other end" of stars (in another dimension)... might not make too much sens(ej) the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
Sitting down facing forward . . .
2,387 posts
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Sitting down facing forward . . .
2,387 posts
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posted:
you can't observe it from the outside of the black hole because the light photons have mass and are pulled in (or rather prevented from leaving) by the gravitational field.
So there's an interesting question - light has mass but does dark???
Or, is dark simply "the absence of". Tom, I'd have said there was more dark than light in the universe or perhaps to be more precise there is more instances/"volume" of dark than light, but I'd agree that light has a greater effect on a person than dark. (Dark can have a very powerful effect on people too though).
But maybe that's a little off the topic of the speed...
you can't observe it from the outside of the black hole because the light photons have mass and are pulled in (or rather prevented from leaving) by the gravitational field.
So there's an interesting question - light has mass but does dark???
Or, is dark simply "the absence of". Tom, I'd have said there was more dark than light in the universe or perhaps to be more precise there is more instances/"volume" of dark than light, but I'd agree that light has a greater effect on a person than dark. (Dark can have a very powerful effect on people too though).
But maybe that's a little off the topic of the speed...
Written by: Doc Lightning talking about Marmite in Kichi's Intro thread
I have several large jars of the stuff. I actually like it... a little. And don't tell anyone I admitted to it.
SILVER Member
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
Posted:
And this was moved to chat..why?
There are posts that are more then 5 lines long.
Thus.. its a discussion!
And this was moved to chat..why?
There are posts that are more then 5 lines long.
Thus.. its a discussion!
SILVER Member
water based
5,125 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
water based
5,125 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
Posted:
'a star that was sufficiently massive and compact would have such a strong gravitational field that light could not escape: any light emitted from the surface of the star would be dragged back by the star's gravtiational attraction before it could get very far' - steven hawking - a brief history of time 10th aniversary edition
'a star that was sufficiently massive and compact would have such a strong gravitational field that light could not escape: any light emitted from the surface of the star would be dragged back by the star's gravtiational attraction before it could get very far' - steven hawking - a brief history of time 10th aniversary edition
"you know there are no trophys for doing silly things in real life yeah pete?" said ant "you wont get a 'listened to ride of the valkyries all the way to vietnam' trophy"
*proud owner of the very cute fire_spinning_angel, birgit and neon shaolin*
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Well the thing is that in the universe there is no (complete) darkness. The only reason why space in between stars appears dark (or black) is that there is nothing that can reflect the particles back to us, or that the reflected light is so weak that we cannot perceive it with our (poor) eyes.
In short: the universe is full of light!
Look here:
Non-Https Image Link
This is a (closer) picture of the Orion nebula, taken by Hubble. So as we're looking to Orion with our (natural) eyes, we only see a couple of stars 2-D. There is no nebula - there are not even colours in the sky.
However, we perceive a picture - put into our minds for milleniae - a man with a belt. It's a conditioning. Because if we'd be looking at the Orion from the side, we'd see this:
Non-Https Image Link
The light is travelling from all places/ stars (that resemble Orion) at the same rate/ same speed. The stars themselves might not be in existence anymore (right now) but still we do receive their light. This I am saying as to explain my example what happens in a room after the bulb got switched off. Only if observed on the greatest scale one understands what happens on the smallest.
The question whether or not dark travels or merely absorbs (suck) light IMHO is an extension to the one question that keeps mankind busy since the dawn of time: What will prevail? Good (light) or evil (dark)?
Therefore we try to give them attributes, like "stronger" or "faster"...
But hey, I'm hijacking here
and I really have no great idea about physics or metaphysics *returns to sad lurking mode and humms Satchmo's: it's a wonderful world"
Just check my vote on both: yes and no...
PS: Thanks Pete, Hawkins is a great guy. Always amazing.
[edited] please add some daftness and sprinkle some mad giggles here and there...
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1183724927)
Well the thing is that in the universe there is no (complete) darkness. The only reason why space in between stars appears dark (or black) is that there is nothing that can reflect the particles back to us, or that the reflected light is so weak that we cannot perceive it with our (poor) eyes.
In short: the universe is full of light!
Look here:
Non-Https Image Link
This is a (closer) picture of the Orion nebula, taken by Hubble. So as we're looking to Orion with our (natural) eyes, we only see a couple of stars 2-D. There is no nebula - there are not even colours in the sky.
However, we perceive a picture - put into our minds for milleniae - a man with a belt. It's a conditioning. Because if we'd be looking at the Orion from the side, we'd see this:
Non-Https Image Link
The light is travelling from all places/ stars (that resemble Orion) at the same rate/ same speed. The stars themselves might not be in existence anymore (right now) but still we do receive their light. This I am saying as to explain my example what happens in a room after the bulb got switched off. Only if observed on the greatest scale one understands what happens on the smallest.
The question whether or not dark travels or merely absorbs (suck) light IMHO is an extension to the one question that keeps mankind busy since the dawn of time: What will prevail? Good (light) or evil (dark)?
Therefore we try to give them attributes, like "stronger" or "faster"...
But hey, I'm hijacking here
and I really have no great idea about physics or metaphysics *returns to sad lurking mode and humms Satchmo's: it's a wonderful world"Just check my vote on both: yes and no...
PS: Thanks Pete, Hawkins is a great guy. Always amazing.
[edited] please add some daftness and sprinkle some mad giggles here and there...
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1183724927)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
Lv15 Ranger
1,489 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Lv15 Ranger
1,489 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Gah, all this talk of Physics asstounds and confuses me. If we were talking philosophically I might be able to contribute more, but I dont think that's what this thread is about, so I'll shut up and pretend I know whats going on.
Gah, all this talk of Physics asstounds and confuses me. If we were talking philosophically I might be able to contribute more, but I dont think that's what this thread is about, so I'll shut up and pretend I know whats going on.
Kupo!
SILVER Member
water based
5,125 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
water based
5,125 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
Posted:
hmm, you may have lost me there, but definetlyi agree with you, on the whole 'light existance/non-existance' thing, depending on the position of the observer.. it is indeniable after all
hmm, you may have lost me there, but definetlyi agree with you, on the whole 'light existance/non-existance' thing, depending on the position of the observer.. it is indeniable after all
"you know there are no trophys for doing silly things in real life yeah pete?" said ant "you wont get a 'listened to ride of the valkyries all the way to vietnam' trophy"
*proud owner of the very cute fire_spinning_angel, birgit and neon shaolin*
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
I have never taken any physics or anythong of the like before BUT....
I disagree, If you are floating in space at any given point i would imagine you would be able to see yourself. with the exception of floating while in the shadow of a plant. I am picturing that the planets/moons shadows are the only darkness outthere.
on a side note, id say the speed of The Darkness was about 3-6 months before losing popularity.
Written by: georgemc
Tom, I'd have said there was more dark than light in the universe or perhaps to be more precise there is more instances/"volume" of dark than light, but I'd agree that light has a greater effect on a person than dark. (Dark can have a very powerful effect on people too though).
I have never taken any physics or anythong of the like before BUT....
I disagree, If you are floating in space at any given point i would imagine you would be able to see yourself. with the exception of floating while in the shadow of a plant. I am picturing that the planets/moons shadows are the only darkness outthere.
on a side note, id say the speed of The Darkness was about 3-6 months before losing popularity.
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
SILVER Member
water based
5,125 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
water based
5,125 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
Posted:
there are too many variables and different points of view on this topic for me, so im just gona step back and watch
there are too many variables and different points of view on this topic for me, so im just gona step back and watch
"you know there are no trophys for doing silly things in real life yeah pete?" said ant "you wont get a 'listened to ride of the valkyries all the way to vietnam' trophy"
*proud owner of the very cute fire_spinning_angel, birgit and neon shaolin*
GOLD Member
Lv15 Ranger
1,489 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Lv15 Ranger
1,489 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Was it Red Dwarf, Hitchikers Guide or some other sci-fi book which had ships that ran on bad news - the only thing faster than light?
Was it Red Dwarf, Hitchikers Guide or some other sci-fi book which had ships that ran on bad news - the only thing faster than light?
Kupo!
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I think it was Hitchhikers
And a wikkid concept!!
I think it was Hitchhikers
And a wikkid concept!!
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
newbie
22 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
newbie
22 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
Posted:
darkness doesn't exist so it can't have a speed.
Shadows are just the name we give to areas that have less light than somewhere else, it is not something that can exist in and of itself, therefore it can't have a speed.
If you sat in your room for an hour and nothing moved, how fast did if travel?
darkness doesn't exist so it can't have a speed.
Shadows are just the name we give to areas that have less light than somewhere else, it is not something that can exist in and of itself, therefore it can't have a speed.
If you sat in your room for an hour and nothing moved, how fast did if travel?
'The prerequisite of originality is the art of forgetting, at the proper moment, what we know.' 32
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Same speed travelling... how could it be faster, if bad news is the only thing faster than light?
And same amount, because the universe works that way and is full of particle wavelengths that are just travelling in a different direction (so we can't see them).
Darkness is only the stuff around the light, filling the void.
phew, 5 line post, classified "chat" Aye, sirs
Same speed travelling... how could it be faster, if bad news is the only thing faster than light?
And same amount, because the universe works that way and is full of particle wavelengths that are just travelling in a different direction (so we can't see them).
Darkness is only the stuff around the light, filling the void.
phew, 5 line post, classified "chat" Aye, sirs
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
Rock is dead, long live paper and scissors
197 posts
Location: The sea, United Kingdom
Rock is dead, long live paper and scissors
197 posts
Location: The sea, United Kingdom
Posted:
Darkess always happens before the light. Not really out of being faster but usually cus darkness sets off nice and early in the morning so its allready had a cup of tea by the time light gets there.
On the whole balance thing eventually light will be evrywhere, but at the moment darkness probbably fills most of the universe beyond the stars.
Poje, if you were billions of billions of light years into space far beyond where any light has yet reached from the stars and you looked around, you would see nothing. Not unless you yourself emit some sort f low level light source. It would be like being in a totaly dark room. (something very few people have experienced)
Darkess always happens before the light. Not really out of being faster but usually cus darkness sets off nice and early in the morning so its allready had a cup of tea by the time light gets there.
On the whole balance thing eventually light will be evrywhere, but at the moment darkness probbably fills most of the universe beyond the stars.
Poje, if you were billions of billions of light years into space far beyond where any light has yet reached from the stars and you looked around, you would see nothing. Not unless you yourself emit some sort f low level light source. It would be like being in a totaly dark room. (something very few people have experienced)
Eagles may soar but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines.
Telepath wanted, you know where to apply.
BRONZE Member
Sitting down facing forward . . .
2,387 posts
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Sitting down facing forward . . .
2,387 posts
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posted:
Genesis - "in the beginning was the void, and the void was without form or light"...
Dark is the void - the absence of light, but Tom is right that we may perceive an area of dark that actually has light particles passing through it if the light particles are travelling anywhere other than in a straight line to our point of view.
As for speed, there's always tachyons. From memory, they are one of the bits in a light particle and yet they are said to be faster than light. There are theories that say if you can seperate one Tachyon from it's partner tachyon and transport them trillions of miles/light years apart the tachyons are still in instant communication with each other somehow. Now that has got to be fast.
Genesis - "in the beginning was the void, and the void was without form or light"...
Dark is the void - the absence of light, but Tom is right that we may perceive an area of dark that actually has light particles passing through it if the light particles are travelling anywhere other than in a straight line to our point of view.
As for speed, there's always tachyons. From memory, they are one of the bits in a light particle and yet they are said to be faster than light. There are theories that say if you can seperate one Tachyon from it's partner tachyon and transport them trillions of miles/light years apart the tachyons are still in instant communication with each other somehow. Now that has got to be fast.
Written by: Doc Lightning talking about Marmite in Kichi's Intro thread
I have several large jars of the stuff. I actually like it... a little. And don't tell anyone I admitted to it.
BRONZE Member
Checking who's online, watching you!
1,972 posts
Location: somewhere, England (UK)
Checking who's online, watching you!
1,972 posts
Location: somewhere, England (UK)
Posted:
line 1: off topic but...how fast is something that is just sitting in your room?
line 2: well to be pedantic:
line 3: The earth's circumference (at the equator) is 25,000 miles and it rotates in 24 hours.so if you were to hang above the surface of the Earth at the equator without moving, you would see 25,000 miles pass by in 24 hours, at a speed of 25000/24 or just over 1000 miles per hour.
line 4: Earth is also moving around the Sun at about 67,000 miles per hour.
line 5: (not entirely my own words)
line 1: off topic but...how fast is something that is just sitting in your room?
line 2: well to be pedantic:
line 3: The earth's circumference (at the equator) is 25,000 miles and it rotates in 24 hours.so if you were to hang above the surface of the Earth at the equator without moving, you would see 25,000 miles pass by in 24 hours, at a speed of 25000/24 or just over 1000 miles per hour.
line 4: Earth is also moving around the Sun at about 67,000 miles per hour.
line 5: (not entirely my own words)
you just lost the game!!!!!! !!!!!
knowledge is power, power corupts, study hard, become evil.
BRONZE Member
newbie
22 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
newbie
22 posts
Location: melbourne, Australia
Posted:
*giggles* well if you want to be pedantic if you where to hang around not moving then by then end of the day the earth would be about 1.6 million miles away from the earth so while you would technically see 25000 miles of the earth pass by you might need a pretty good telescope to notice. :P
Written by: fake teeth and glue
line 1: off topic but...how fast is something that is just sitting in your room?
line 2: well to be pedantic:
line 3: The earth's circumference (at the equator) is 25,000 miles and it rotates in 24 hours.so if you were to hang above the surface of the Earth at the equator without moving, you would see 25,000 miles pass by in 24 hours, at a speed of 25000/24 or just over 1000 miles per hour.
line 4: Earth is also moving around the Sun at about 67,000 miles per hour.
*giggles* well if you want to be pedantic if you where to hang around not moving then by then end of the day the earth would be about 1.6 million miles away from the earth so while you would technically see 25000 miles of the earth pass by you might need a pretty good telescope to notice. :P
'The prerequisite of originality is the art of forgetting, at the proper moment, what we know.' 32
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
however fast teh earth is hurdleing thru space i suppose...
Written by: dirkjently
If you sat in your room for an hour and nothing moved, how fast did if travel?
however fast teh earth is hurdleing thru space i suppose...
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
... me is pinned to the wall
... me is pinned to the wall
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com