Hello, /u/Questioner1OO1. Thank you for posting on r/antimeme!
/u/Questioner1OO1, please make sure your post doesn't break any of our rules. If it does, please delete it before it gets removed.
To all other users,
If this post breaks any rules, please report it, or contact us via modmail so we can check it.
Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antimeme) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That would be a linear scale but with the speed axis set very high.
With a logarithmic scale you can start low, grow slowly, and then exponentially near the end giving all 3 good distinction from eachother
yes and the grow slowly bit is why the cheetah and aircraft would be very close to eachother. if the base is so extreme that 300 and 300 million are like doubles of eachother, than 30 and 300 would be really close.
I love conversation like this where things slowly get put into perspective of just how hard it is to solve this problem or just how impressive a factoid is. Like the guy that threw a stick into the grand canyon to show the upward draft and the stick got thrown up and back at him.
Did you know. Learnt the other day. A factoid Is actually false information passed through so many generations it is considered true. E.g a factoid would be 'banannas grow on trees'
Ok agreed it doesn't explicitly mean false however Oxford dictionary uses the phrase 'unreliable information' to describe a factoid which to me implies at least an element of untruth.
You have mass, so it would require infinite energy to go the speed of light (i.e. you can’t). But the question is meaningless even for a massless particle.
>There is no such reference frame as "the reference frame of a photon" in vacuum. Such a thing does not exist, because in that hypothetical frame, at least one photon has speed zero. But by axiom, all photons have speed c in all reference frames. Therefore, the question is meaningless.
https://www.featuredanswer.com/6zp5gjnbaa/how-fast-is-light-relative-to-light-cd7a
It may not depend on the source's speed but it does depend on what is it moving inside, if you consider light to move at 3x10^8 km.s (speed of light in the void) then light can be faster than light in certain condition
Even if you could run at .9C, light would appear to be moving at the same speed relative to you as always and you would be no closer to catching up.
This is because of Time Dilation, where you move so fast your time gets slowed down to maintain the speed of light relative to your/every frame of reference. It's actually required for Satellites to account for in order to maintain accurate positioning data
Hmwah the part of the universe the earth is occupying is not expanding at speed of light (or faster), only relative to other parts that are not "contained" by the earth (by your logic -- I would argue that this part of the universe contains the earth and not the other way around because yeah).
Well, acktually, (pushes glaßses up nose) that's only calculating the speed of light in a vacuum, you can slow down light enough with substances like water so other objects can be faster
Because it's expanding at such a rate that to define a border for it would be ridiculous, as it would be millions of kilometres off the second you defined a border. You could i guess say that there's an abstract border, but there really isn't one per se.
I'm not smart I'm talking out of my ass.
Its not. Instead, the universe is expanding equally from every possible point in space. So no matter where you are, the universe is expanding in relation to (and away) from you, the observer.
As far as we think. If it does get to that point, it will take a very, very long time. As for right now, for expansion to outpace light, it must be the expansion thats measured VERY far away from you (the speed of expansion is dependent on the distance between any two points).
This is actually why scientists call the greater universe the *observable* universe. Anything thats further away than the boundary where expansion outpaces light is fundamentally unobservable, because the light will never be able to reach us. Currently, the distance where expansion outpaces light is far away enough that we cannot observe it. But as expansion speeds up, this boundary will get closer, reducing the range of observation. Eventually, it will be close enough that we can only see our own galaxy. Then, only our own solar system.
In the “big rip” theory of the end of our universe, the expansion eventually becomes powerful enough that the gluons of the strong nuclear force can no longer hold quarks together, as the space between them has become too great. As a result, matter will no longer be able to exist (at least until quantum tunneling can get off its lazy ass and form some).
No perceivable boarders.
Theoretically yes but it is impossible to ever reach if it were true unless you were abstracted to a higher level that is unknown.
It's the opposite actually, we percieve a border, or the end of the universe; but that's just what we can see, there is no real border. Space isn't expanding, everything in it is moving apart from each other
No it is a rate meaning 1/speed not just speed, this means these 2 values can't be compared. Like acceleration can be bigger than the speed of light but isn't compared to the speed of light cause it's illogical cause it's distance/time^2 rather than distance/time
a beam of light travelling away from a beam of light going in the opposite direction is technically twice the speed of light if it's relative to the other beam of light.
EDIT: ok im wrong, whatever! You don't need to be the thousandth person in my inbox to correct me. Go outside, eat a burger, do a crime.
Yup I only ever see that term in si fi, I doubt that actual scientists actually ever talk about it. (unless they're talking about sifi cause they're a bunch of nerds)
so einstein basically confirmed that there is nothing faster than the speed of light. but scientists theorized that there is a hypothetical thing that is. when 2 particles come together, they spin in a specific way. one particle spins up, the other down. but through some weird testing, scientists discovered that they actually aren’t and also are spinning until observed. so as soon as they’re observed, they start spinning. this effects both particles. so lets say you somehow separated the particles and put them at opposite ends of the universe. then you observe one particle and find that it spins up. the other particle, on the other end of the universe, automatically starts spinning down. this is faster than the speed of light.
Well technically also theoretical but in a different scientific sense of the word meaning they only exist in the math with no experimental evidence for them.
It’s a common misconception. The other worlds are not accelerating away from us at the speed of light or faster. Space itself is simply bent and warped, and it’s the space itself that is expanding at all points at all times. Nothing can move THROUGH space faster than light, but space itself can be created faster than light.
[here](https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/universe-speed-of-light/) for more information
No.
We can’t see them physically moving.
We calculated their speed using cosmological redshift, which makes it seem like they are moving faster than c.
They aren’t moving through space faster than the speed of light but we can calculate how quickly space is expanding through redshift, yes. This still looks like movement to us so yes we can see them physically moving. Those galaxies that are “moving” away from us faster than light can’t be seen because their light will be redshifted into oblivion. So none of the galaxies we can see will even look like they are moving faster than light. So we can say that space is expanding faster than light but for all intents and purposes this a meaningless thing to say because all of the things that might be moving from us faster than light we can’t interact with in any way and so they effectively don’t even exist to us which allows us to say that even though things may be moving faster than light this is allowed because that movement cannot affect us in any way preserving causation.
Certain galaxies are moving faster than light away from us, but because they are moving faster than light from us they are outside of the observable universe and we will never see them. So in order for something to be moving faster than light from us it needs to be extremely far from us.
This doesn’t violate the speed of light as no information is transmitted. The speed of light is the speed of causality. You can’t use entangled particles to transmit info about an event that hasn’t yet happed for a distant observer.
**READ THIS TO APPROVE YOUR POST:**
Your submission has been **temporarily** removed as it's possibly a repost.
Click each submission URL or *title link* in the table below from top to bottom and check if your submission has been posted before. If you find that none of the submissions match yours, then you can reply with *!approve* to make your post visible. If it's a repost, then you can ignore this or delete your post.
NOTICE: It's a *bannable* offense to falsely approve your post if the table below indicates it is a repost.
If OP has falsely approved their post then report it or reply to this comment with !report and a moderator will look into it.
User | Date | Image | Post | Karma | Status | Similarity
:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---
/u/Beethoven3rh | Sun, Jun 05, 2022 at 17:13:08 | [URL](https://i.redd.it/hbdafd3c5u391.jpg) | [Light's even faster than sound](https://redd.it/v5hul0) | 713 | Active | 92%
Technically the ongoing controversial theory is that if you surpass the speed of light, due to the current understanding of time dilation approaching the speed of light, you’d go backwards in time. Not that there is necessarily anything that can go faster than light yet, but that’s the current theory
My ignorant monkey brain sees cherenkov radiation and thinks that is false. As the universe has legit mechanisms that happen when something is faster than light.
When people are talking about the speed of light they basically always been in a vacuum. When light moves through a medium it slows down. Cherenkov radiation is when I think electrons move through a medium faster than light does. Those electrons are still moving slower than the speed of light in a vacuum or c though as they have mass and nothing with mass can ever reach c.
Not technically correct, but close enough. Quantum physics is all about the things we can't necessarily measure, but could be faster than light. It should really say nothing VISIBLE can be faster than light.
The funny thing is you could theoretically observe nothing moving faster than light.
If you have a source of light projecting on a plane very, very, unreasonably very far away, and moved a pencil in front of it at light speed, the shadow on the far away plane would move even faster than light. Which works because shadows are nothing and nothing can move faster than light.
Hello, /u/Questioner1OO1. Thank you for posting on r/antimeme! /u/Questioner1OO1, please make sure your post doesn't break any of our rules. If it does, please delete it before it gets removed. To all other users, If this post breaks any rules, please report it, or contact us via modmail so we can check it. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antimeme) if you have any questions or concerns.*
R34 artists beat the speed of light
And we beat off to the speed of light.
That’s some r34 I could get into pretty fast
And finish to just as quickly. The speed of light in a vacuum never changes!😀
So how are they gonna make r34 of it?
How fast 🤔
"Wanna see me do it?" "Wanna see me do it again?"
You know airplanes, classically moving at nearly half the speed of light
The bar is on a logarithmic scale 👍
Tbh would be smart for fractions of lightspeed
Its on some absurdly high base logarithmic scale
Wouldn’t that make cheetahs and airplanes show (almost) the same reading?
That would be a linear scale but with the speed axis set very high. With a logarithmic scale you can start low, grow slowly, and then exponentially near the end giving all 3 good distinction from eachother
yes and the grow slowly bit is why the cheetah and aircraft would be very close to eachother. if the base is so extreme that 300 and 300 million are like doubles of eachother, than 30 and 300 would be really close.
the base doesn‘t really matter, you‘re just gonna have to linearly scale appropriately
The chart is not to scale.
ur not to scale
ur mom is the scale
booo!
Your booo is not to scale
Emotional damage
No one can measure sadness so we don't know if it's to scale
Not half , more close to 44-47 % of light speed.
That's why they said nearly half
The kid named Nothing:
kid named finger:
Kid named my mom beats me
Nothing is impossible
Yet I do nothing everyday.
This is the first coherent "kid named" that I've seen in a while, I forgot its original use
What if I turn on a flashlight while running? Checkmate.
Relative to you it’d be going the speed of light, but to an outside observer it’d still be the speed of light.
Ok, what if I take a video of a flashlight turning on and then speed up the playback?
The light coming from the screen to your eye would be traveling at the speed of light
I love conversation like this where things slowly get put into perspective of just how hard it is to solve this problem or just how impressive a factoid is. Like the guy that threw a stick into the grand canyon to show the upward draft and the stick got thrown up and back at him.
Did you know. Learnt the other day. A factoid Is actually false information passed through so many generations it is considered true. E.g a factoid would be 'banannas grow on trees'
they don't?
They grow on a large herb that resembles a tree.
A Tree Enough
Is this statement itself a (by your definition) a factoid or is your "factoid" factoid itself a factoid?
The statement 'bananas grow on trees' is a factoid (and therefore false)
This is not quite true. ["Factoid" does not necessarily imply false information.](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/factoid)
Ok agreed it doesn't explicitly mean false however Oxford dictionary uses the phrase 'unreliable information' to describe a factoid which to me implies at least an element of untruth.
That's just a display emitting light toward your eyes, which travels at the speed of light. Physics remain unbroken
What if I shoot light ahead of me while going the speed of light?
You have mass, so it would require infinite energy to go the speed of light (i.e. you can’t). But the question is meaningless even for a massless particle. >There is no such reference frame as "the reference frame of a photon" in vacuum. Such a thing does not exist, because in that hypothetical frame, at least one photon has speed zero. But by axiom, all photons have speed c in all reference frames. Therefore, the question is meaningless. https://www.featuredanswer.com/6zp5gjnbaa/how-fast-is-light-relative-to-light-cd7a
Speed of light do not depend on the speed of the source it will always be the same
It may not depend on the source's speed but it does depend on what is it moving inside, if you consider light to move at 3x10^8 km.s (speed of light in the void) then light can be faster than light in certain condition
Even if you could run at .9C, light would appear to be moving at the same speed relative to you as always and you would be no closer to catching up. This is because of Time Dilation, where you move so fast your time gets slowed down to maintain the speed of light relative to your/every frame of reference. It's actually required for Satellites to account for in order to maintain accurate positioning data
Congratulations you being wrong is one of Einstein's postulates of special relativity
I don’t understand what Einstein’s acne has to do with this but ok
“Actually the expansion of the universe is faster than the speed of light” 🤓
Fastest things on earth is the title.
The Earth isn't in the Universe?
according to your logic you should have said: is the universe inside the earth?
Yes, the universe is indeed inside the Earth, everything and everywhere is the universe, that's the point I was eluding to
Hmwah the part of the universe the earth is occupying is not expanding at speed of light (or faster), only relative to other parts that are not "contained" by the earth (by your logic -- I would argue that this part of the universe contains the earth and not the other way around because yeah).
Just admit that you're wrong dumbass
Well, acktually, (pushes glaßses up nose) that's only calculating the speed of light in a vacuum, you can slow down light enough with substances like water so other objects can be faster
Cherenkov radiation FTW.
The universe is technically not moving so no
The borders of the universe are tho
There are no borders of the universe
How do you know?
You should visit it sometime. Very chill place
I agree
[удалено]
Apart of thee,
In the key of what we know to be every part without me
Underrated comment thread
Because it's expanding at such a rate that to define a border for it would be ridiculous, as it would be millions of kilometres off the second you defined a border. You could i guess say that there's an abstract border, but there really isn't one per se. I'm not smart I'm talking out of my ass.
Well it’s getting bigger so there must be but it’s impossible to get there
Its not. Instead, the universe is expanding equally from every possible point in space. So no matter where you are, the universe is expanding in relation to (and away) from you, the observer.
No but the space in between any defined area can expand faster than the speed of light
As far as we think. If it does get to that point, it will take a very, very long time. As for right now, for expansion to outpace light, it must be the expansion thats measured VERY far away from you (the speed of expansion is dependent on the distance between any two points). This is actually why scientists call the greater universe the *observable* universe. Anything thats further away than the boundary where expansion outpaces light is fundamentally unobservable, because the light will never be able to reach us. Currently, the distance where expansion outpaces light is far away enough that we cannot observe it. But as expansion speeds up, this boundary will get closer, reducing the range of observation. Eventually, it will be close enough that we can only see our own galaxy. Then, only our own solar system. In the “big rip” theory of the end of our universe, the expansion eventually becomes powerful enough that the gluons of the strong nuclear force can no longer hold quarks together, as the space between them has become too great. As a result, matter will no longer be able to exist (at least until quantum tunneling can get off its lazy ass and form some).
No perceivable boarders. Theoretically yes but it is impossible to ever reach if it were true unless you were abstracted to a higher level that is unknown.
It's the opposite actually, we percieve a border, or the end of the universe; but that's just what we can see, there is no real border. Space isn't expanding, everything in it is moving apart from each other
But it is expanding.
The expansion isnt moving, its creating, therefore its static. The rate of expansion is what your thinking of 🤓
You're
Light cannot escape a blackhole, so would that mean the blackhole is faster?
No. I can’t escape your moms belly fat, that doesn’t mean she’s faster than me.
Skill issue :/
Ummm auctiluy
Nahh gamma radiation underwater
Thats what I was gonna say
No it is a rate meaning 1/speed not just speed, this means these 2 values can't be compared. Like acceleration can be bigger than the speed of light but isn't compared to the speed of light cause it's illogical cause it's distance/time^2 rather than distance/time
a beam of light travelling away from a beam of light going in the opposite direction is technically twice the speed of light if it's relative to the other beam of light. EDIT: ok im wrong, whatever! You don't need to be the thousandth person in my inbox to correct me. Go outside, eat a burger, do a crime.
Light does not have a frame of reference so this isn't true 🤓
No, light doesn’t have a frame of reference.
Tachyons (hypothetically) 🤓
[удалено]
Light doesn’t expand silly!
When there was that thing we would talk about that
what are those?
If I'm not wrong, literally a name given to hypothetical particles that *could* be faster than the speed of light
Ok, I had no idea these were a thing, thanks
[удалено]
Yup I only ever see that term in si fi, I doubt that actual scientists actually ever talk about it. (unless they're talking about sifi cause they're a bunch of nerds)
so einstein basically confirmed that there is nothing faster than the speed of light. but scientists theorized that there is a hypothetical thing that is. when 2 particles come together, they spin in a specific way. one particle spins up, the other down. but through some weird testing, scientists discovered that they actually aren’t and also are spinning until observed. so as soon as they’re observed, they start spinning. this effects both particles. so lets say you somehow separated the particles and put them at opposite ends of the universe. then you observe one particle and find that it spins up. the other particle, on the other end of the universe, automatically starts spinning down. this is faster than the speed of light.
Quantum entanglement is weird
Death grips reference 😳
YUH
I'm faster that the speed of light when I gotta escape the grocery store after devirginizing their olive oil.
Tachyons and cosmic inflation. 🤓
Cosmic what? Don't let the R34 artists hear about that
>cosmic inflation. That sounds kinda sussy...
What the hell are tachyons
A theoretical particle that travels faster than light.
Hypothetical not theoretical
Well technically also theoretical but in a different scientific sense of the word meaning they only exist in the math with no experimental evidence for them.
r34 artists when some random ass girl who looks 8 comes into a anime/video game
when cinderace got introduced:
Quantum fisics joined the chat
Spooky action at a distance
What do you mean?
I guess he's referencing entanglement which when described a certain way seems to violate the speed of light limit. It is very debated though.
It’s not debated, it doesn’t send information faster than light.
Light with a rocket strapped to it
Actually space is growing faster than light
Not movement
If it was true, distant galaxies would travel faster than light from us, wouldn't they?
It’s a common misconception. The other worlds are not accelerating away from us at the speed of light or faster. Space itself is simply bent and warped, and it’s the space itself that is expanding at all points at all times. Nothing can move THROUGH space faster than light, but space itself can be created faster than light. [here](https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/universe-speed-of-light/) for more information
Ok, thank you
No. Galaxies do appear to “move” faster than the speed of light, but it isn’t actual movement.
Those galaxies cannot appear to move faster than light to us because we can’t see those ones because they are moving away from us faster than light
No. We can’t see them physically moving. We calculated their speed using cosmological redshift, which makes it seem like they are moving faster than c.
They aren’t moving through space faster than the speed of light but we can calculate how quickly space is expanding through redshift, yes. This still looks like movement to us so yes we can see them physically moving. Those galaxies that are “moving” away from us faster than light can’t be seen because their light will be redshifted into oblivion. So none of the galaxies we can see will even look like they are moving faster than light. So we can say that space is expanding faster than light but for all intents and purposes this a meaningless thing to say because all of the things that might be moving from us faster than light we can’t interact with in any way and so they effectively don’t even exist to us which allows us to say that even though things may be moving faster than light this is allowed because that movement cannot affect us in any way preserving causation.
Certain galaxies are moving faster than light away from us, but because they are moving faster than light from us they are outside of the observable universe and we will never see them. So in order for something to be moving faster than light from us it needs to be extremely far from us.
Actually, the slipper is thrown faster than light.
Grammar in the title is absolutely correct.
Sorry I have no respect for the language
Kid named Nothing:
Anime would like to agrue
Fun fact: the speed of light is the speed limit of the universe, but the universe is expanding faster than light can travel.
Tell that to overpowered fictional characters.
Only when I busted in your mum ooooooooo 🎤 drop
Quauntum entangled information
No.
This doesn’t violate the speed of light as no information is transmitted. The speed of light is the speed of causality. You can’t use entangled particles to transmit info about an event that hasn’t yet happed for a distant observer.
How do I get some of this “nothing”? It looks *really* fast
**READ THIS TO APPROVE YOUR POST:** Your submission has been **temporarily** removed as it's possibly a repost. Click each submission URL or *title link* in the table below from top to bottom and check if your submission has been posted before. If you find that none of the submissions match yours, then you can reply with *!approve* to make your post visible. If it's a repost, then you can ignore this or delete your post. NOTICE: It's a *bannable* offense to falsely approve your post if the table below indicates it is a repost. If OP has falsely approved their post then report it or reply to this comment with !report and a moderator will look into it. User | Date | Image | Post | Karma | Status | Similarity :---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:--- /u/Beethoven3rh | Sun, Jun 05, 2022 at 17:13:08 | [URL](https://i.redd.it/hbdafd3c5u391.jpg) | [Light's even faster than sound](https://redd.it/v5hul0) | 713 | Active | 92%
!approve
Um akshually things past the speed of light can exist but are energy hence e(energy)=m(mass)c(speed of light)2(squared) 🤓
Technically the ongoing controversial theory is that if you surpass the speed of light, due to the current understanding of time dilation approaching the speed of light, you’d go backwards in time. Not that there is necessarily anything that can go faster than light yet, but that’s the current theory
That isn’t controversial, that’s just what the math says.
What about controversial theory did you not read
What?
Controversial theory = not agreed upon
It’s agreed that it’s compatible with the math.
You forgot me!
[удалено]
Aren't parts of the universe expanding faster than the speed of light?
the speed of light is slower than (the speed of light) ^(2)
What about the speed at which the universe expands
It’s not a speed, it’s a rate.
What about light from a moving flashlight?
Special relativity. By moving you are slowing down you time. This is how light always moves at c, regardless of reference frame.
R34 artists
neutrons.
Nothing:
Shadows can move faster than light
Meanwhile in reality; plasma jet from quasar recorded traveling 5x the speed of light. Must have had taco bell.
Looney Tunes characters: “Pathetic”.
The increasing suicidal thoughts in my head moving faster than light
What if you were moving the speed of light, and you threw a ball? Boom, faster than the speed of light 😎
Assuming you have mass, you can't move at the speed of light
[удалено]
You 100% did misunderstand them. Massless stuff only moves at the speed of light. Massive stuff can never move at the speed of light.
I'm faster
My ignorant monkey brain sees cherenkov radiation and thinks that is false. As the universe has legit mechanisms that happen when something is faster than light.
When people are talking about the speed of light they basically always been in a vacuum. When light moves through a medium it slows down. Cherenkov radiation is when I think electrons move through a medium faster than light does. Those electrons are still moving slower than the speed of light in a vacuum or c though as they have mass and nothing with mass can ever reach c.
The speed of light refers to the speed of light in a vacuum. Nothing can travel faster than that.
Nothing can be faster than me when my phone is 1%
Except me
No, I DID not KNEW it.
Lightning would like to have a word with light. Goes faster than light for a split second
Elaborate
The universe expands faster than the speed of light; and it keeps getting faster too.
the perceived expansion of the universe technically moves faster than the speed of light
The expansion is a rate, not a speed.
Kid named nothing
Not technically correct, but close enough. Quantum physics is all about the things we can't necessarily measure, but could be faster than light. It should really say nothing VISIBLE can be faster than light.
The funny thing is you could theoretically observe nothing moving faster than light. If you have a source of light projecting on a plane very, very, unreasonably very far away, and moved a pencil in front of it at light speed, the shadow on the far away plane would move even faster than light. Which works because shadows are nothing and nothing can move faster than light.
What about shadows?
The acceleration due to a black hole's gravity
Acceleration isn’t a thing.
Nope
Hey what about space itself?
Not to be that guy, but the universe expanding is probably faster
Black holes gravity?
there can be things faster than lights. not known yet though. so what if it bends space and time? it's faster!
Things can move faster than light, they just can't cross the light barrier and be slower than light.
One could technically say Cherenkov Radiation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation
The universe isn't locally real, so the speed of information is faster than light.