How fast is the speed of dark?

Pickers · 8 May 2006 at 12:09

Hamzter said:
Lol, absolutely not! Well, maybe the bit about the bird exploding.....

Theoretically it's quite possible, you can exceed the speed of light since it's not actually a physical object, it's just our interpretation of it. There's loads of situations where the similar things occur, if you set a series of explosives to go off on a timer that are ever so slightly different, then spread them out in a line over a few hundred miles, you could get it so that the explosions progress faster than the speed of light. No laws are being broken though, since there's no information travelling faster than the speed of light.

Erm thats not exceeding the speed of light though, thats compensating for the delay beforehand... creating a coincidence if you will.
edit: And the argument is flawed, as information of the explosions occuring, and informing you is subject to the speed of light also.

Hamzter · 8 May 2006 at 12:22

I agree that it's not technically travelling faster than the speed of light, it just appears to be. While information coming from each explosion is limited to the speed of light, there's no information passing from one explosive to the next telling it to explode, it's just an illusion that it's happening faster than the speed of light.

Pickers · 8 May 2006 at 12:25

Hamzter said:
I agree that it's not technically travelling faster than the speed of light, it just appears to be. While information coming from each explosion is limited to the speed of light, there's no information passing from one explosive to the next telling it to explode, it's just an illusion that it's happening faster than the speed of light.

exactly... But its really not that clever as simultaneous events occur all the time. For example, my footsteps this morning cooincided with someones from over the other side of world - it doesnt mean that the speed of light has been exceeded

JimmyEatWorms · 8 May 2006 at 12:38

If you have a light bulb in a sealed box with a mirrored interior, will the light still be there if you switch the bulb off?

Zefan · 8 May 2006 at 12:40

JimmyEatWorms said:
If you have a light bulb in a sealed box with a mirrored interior, will the light still be there if you switch the bulb off?

No it'd transfer into heat very quickly. I've thought about this far too much for far too long and this is the conclusion I've reached each time.

JimmyEatWorms · 8 May 2006 at 12:43

Zefan said:
No it'd transfer into heat very quickly. I've thought about this far too much for far too long and this is the conclusion I've reached each time.

Dammit...I thought i'd come up with an idea to help solve the energy crisis. An infinitely lit room

Zefan · 8 May 2006 at 12:46

JimmyEatWorms said:
Dammit...I thought i'd come up with an idea to help solve the energy crisis. An infinitely lit room

Annoying isn't it. That was my great plan, to sit in a little box for a while and go "OMG I'm everywhere!!!" - seeing as the light would be bouncing continually off of me so I'd see all parts of myself from every angle. Actually it'd probably just be white. Actually I dunno. Actually it wouldn't be anything as it doesn't work >_< Gay.

Pickers · 8 May 2006 at 12:47

Zefan said:
Annoying isn't it. That was my great plan, to sit in a little box for a while and go "OMG I'm everywhere!!!" - seeing as the light would be bouncing continually off of me so I'd see all parts of myself from every angle. Actually it'd probably just be white. Actually I dunno. Actually it wouldn't be anything as it doesn't work >_< Gay.

You would act as a sponge and absorb all the light that didnt convert to heat, or escape elsewhere

. Heh heh heh

Lithium · 8 May 2006 at 12:47

The speed of dark is actually measured as a negative time-frame.

Its not possible for us to gauge with any real certainty because we are unable to observe it.

Arcade Fire · 8 May 2006 at 12:48

Lithium said:
The speed of dark is actually measured as a negative time-frame.

Its not possible for us to gauge with any real certainty because we are unable to observe it.

What the hell are you talking about?

Zefan · 8 May 2006 at 12:50

The speed of dark is quite clearly non existent as it is simply the lack of light. If anything it is equal to the speed of light, no more and no less. Seriously, close the thread - either that or somebody explain properly how it's either faster or slower than the speed of light.

Psyk · 8 May 2006 at 13:05

Zefan said:
No it'd transfer into heat very quickly. I've thought about this far too much for far too long and this is the conclusion I've reached each time.

What if the mirrors were perfectly reflective? Of course that's not possible in practice, but hypothetically speaking what would happen?

I'm thinking that if every single beam of light was reflected back then they would keep bouncing back and forth and it would stay lit forever. Not that you'd be able to look of course since you would just absorb all the light.

Visage · 8 May 2006 at 13:11

Psyk said:
What if the mirrors were perfectly reflective? Of course that's not possible in practice, but hypothetically speaking what would happen?

I'm thinking that if every single beam of light was reflected back then they would keep bouncing back and forth and it would stay lit forever. Not that you'd be able to look of course since you would just absorb all the light.

My QM is a bit rusty, but there would be a small, but non-zero possibility of the light escaping at some point. So no, it would not be possible to trap it forever.

The possibility would be realted to the lights wavelength as well - its to do with the localisation of position and the uncertainty principle - how can one be certain that the photon is within the box....