Progression of time as local phenomenon

Well, whether “darkness” has speed I think depends on the reality of dark matter. If there really is dark matter, like 98% of the universe as some day, then there is a speed of dark, kind of. And because dark is just the absence of energy it’s as fast as light.

Btw, what’s that experiment when they slowed down light? Can’t remember and too lazy to google it. IBM did it I think.

Gravitation itself doesn’t have a speed, since it appears to fill the universe, but gravitational waves have speed, even though they are not yet directly proven, right? Only indirectly, but what was really seen then I wouldn’t bet the farm on.
When is LISA bound to take off?

Let the speed of darkness be ‘d’

c=d :p

Subject: Speed of Darkness post id: 1942

If the speed of light is known, what is the speed of darkness? The two opposing schools of thought that have developed are:

1. Darkness does not move, it is always present, and light is layed on top of it. (As an analogy, consider a table as being darkness, a tablecloth as being light: when you pull the tablecloth off, the table itself (darkness) doesn’t move).

2. Darkness moves at the same speed as light, and it meets the laws of motion in that Darkness is the equal and opposite reaction for the action of the movement of light.

Personally I can appreciate both arguements, but firmly consider 1. to be the closest to the “truth”. Any light you could shed would be appreciated (sorry about the pun, I couldn’t help myself).

There’s really no such thing as the “speed of dark”, light is actually something, and the speed of light is the speed of that something. Dark is the lack of light.

The speed of light can be given as c=1/sqrt(e*u) where e and u are the permitivity and permeability of a vacuum(I forget which is which)and thats similar to the equation.

time

The Lorenz transformation

It is just a simultaneous equation.

The invariance of the velocity of light is an experimental result. It means
that when you measure the velocity of light some how the result is
independent of the velocity of the source, like a star or a lamp on a moving
bench.

If you can work out the time an aeroplane takes for a return journey west to
east with a constant east wind then you are well on the way to calculating
the Lorenz transform.

Suppose the aircraft does v knots through the air and the wind is u knots
over land then going from west to east d nautical miles the velocity is v-u
and it takes d/(v-u) hours to get there going back it takes d/(v+u) hours.
so the average is (d(1/v+u)+d(1/v-u))/2 =
d((v-u)+(v+u))/v+u)(v-u)/2
= d(v)/v^2-u^2)=d/v(1-(u/v)^2)

With the Lorenz transform c is constant so if the velocity of the source is
v then to make the velocity c in both frames the distance the light travels
must be contracted to make the time d/v once again. So the rest distance is
d, if d* is the contracted distance then d*/c=d/c+v and the same for the
source with a velocity -v so d*/c=d/c-v so (d*/c)^2=d^2/(c+v)(c-v) so,
d*=d(sqr((c^2/(c^2-v^2)))=d/(sqr(1-(v/c)^2).

This contraction is not real it is an effect like perspective because we use
light to measure the distance, it has no physical meaning.

Quite simple really, it is an example of a geometric mean and is called a
metric as in differential geometry where you look at a hill, going over the
hill is further than along the ground and if you are unaware of the slope
the longer distance would be the only way you could know of the hump.
Relativity is like that, we cannot see the real path of the light it is
distorted by the space distortion caused by the movement of the source or
observer.

There is no contraction really and no upper limit on velocity. If you work
out the momentum it Mv/(sqr(1-(v/c)^2) but when you separate it for
integration you go M (v/(sqr(1-(v/c)^2) the mass does not increase only the
number v/(sqr(1-(v/c)^2) and this is the real velocity V.

Much more fun you can get velocities higher than light with a rocket or
accelerators where the phase velocity of the travelling wave (as in a
rhombadron) is higher than light. Remember group velocityXphase velocity is
c for light in a waveguide and the same is true of matter waves so a
stationary electrons phase wave occupies the whole universe and the energy
quanta of a free electron is influenced by the size of the universe and all
the matter in it.

is this somewhere close?

A man stands at the doorway of his bedroom, attired in boxer shorts and a sleeveless undershirt. One hundred times in a row, he turns off the light switch and dashes for the bed. How many times does he see himself land under the covers? Zero. There isn’t any light there. Obviously dark got there quicker than light. Ergo:
Let ” d” equal the speed of dark
d = SQRT( e/m ) + 1
1 what? Hey, I provided the equation. You do the dimensional analysis.

Nope….not drunk.

Dont forget that as you’ve mentioned the speed of light….what about its opposite….? http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=9908&highlight=speed+dark

errrrrr…. a bit of a warning here, this one gets heavily into physic’s after a few replies !

The ultimate quantum of “time” is the “Planck Time”, about 10^(-44) sec.