It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The speed of Darkness

page: 9
3
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by hidatsa

You and nobody else until we fully understand and can prove whether dark matter does or does not exist can say if it has anything to do with the speed at which darkness travels.


Oh, I see, we're talking about the speed of dark matter. It's 30 MPH in a built-up area. This was proved in experiments done at Area 52.3, where I once worked as dog-handler for the security division (X-Sec A/12 - check it, it has its own website).The speed of dark is the same as the speed of light, only it's going away from you, according to Dr Sargoin, the Reticulan elf.


Although funny... you did nothing to disprove my point! Dark Matter, if it does exist, and I believe it does... must have a speed at which it can travel! If there is no light and we are to believe that darkness can travel through dark matter, than that speed at which dark matter either moves or allows movement for darkness would directly relate to the speed at which darkness travels! Just like right now the speed of light is the factor! If you think about it, it will make sense!




posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by sparda4355
Although funny... you did nothing to disprove my point! Dark Matter, if it does exist, and I believe it does... must have a speed at which it can travel!


Why would 'dark matter' have to have a speed? If it is in fact 'matter' then it's not a wave, right?

Why do you guys keep bringing up 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' anyway? It has nothing to do with this thread. I'm wearing a 'dark shirt', maybe that has a speed we can discus...


[edit on 12/2/2008 by ANOK]



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Dark matter is an astronomical thing. That is, astronomy, cosmology. It's used to explain the fact that they mathematically see what could be the effects of matter out there, but don't see it visibly. So they invented "dark matter," the idea that there can be matter that doesn't show up for whatever reason (like light reflectivity).

It has NOTHING to do with light or it's speed.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by newday
 


Well if we can 'BELIEVE' in god, why can't we 'BELIEVE' in a speed of darkness?

We 'BELIEVE' that god exists and helps us in many ways. Why can't we 'BELIEVE' that there is a speed of darkness and try to figure it out?

[edit on 15-2-2008 by Nyte Angel]



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Nyte Angel
 


You can believe anything you want, but no matter how hard you believe it won't make it true. If you get into the habit of believing things that are not true I'm afraid you might run into some problems in life...


Believing in fantasies gets us nowhere.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by sparda4355
Although funny... you did nothing to disprove my point!


That's ok, I was only going for funny. I've already done the serious analytical answer a few pages further back. Didn't feel like repeating myself. Repetition of self was an unfelt emotion. I disdained my repeat-handling abilities.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nyte Angel
reply to post by newday
 

We 'BELIEVE' that god exists and helps us in many ways. Why can't we 'BELIEVE' that there is a speed of darkness and try to figure it out?


Do "we" try to figure God out? I thought we just took it on trust. Keeps us from wasting our time on unprovable, immeasurable concepts. And there the similarity, for me at least, ends.

It is hard for someone without a similar belief system to understand why someone else believes in a darkness that can possess any significant active characteristics at all. The manifest power of the God or gods described in every conceivable religion is, as it were, manifest. "I pray to God for help, I get help, there must be a God. QED." Have there been religions that worshipped darkness? The powers of darkness, yes, just as the Christian God is "the way the truth and the light" and the Judaic God is a jealous God, the God of Vengeance.

These belief structures are understandable socially, psychologically and anthropologically and "we " may believe in them all we want. That doesn't necessarily mean they have a rate of passage, or speed. What would then be the "speed of jealousy" or the "spped of vengeance"? Or would it depend on how long it took you to find out something was wrong?

So the speed of an abstract concept depends on our human rate of response. Hence, I suspect, the speed of darkness depends on how swiftly you can operate a light switch.

Second Argument:

Not every blank page will ever have anything interesting written on it. Not every vacant lot will have a building constructed on it. Not everything we don't see can be quantified. Dark is an adjective as well as a noun. The adjective refers to a quality of, for example, matter (like ANOK's shirt). The noun describes a state or condition that arises, for example, once the sun sets. When something is taken away, a void is left behind. At what speed does a void move?

Silly question.

Void is another noun describing an utter absence of something. A word created to describe something that doesn't and won't move, though its perimeters, its boundaries might vary according to what's enclosing it. The word "void" might be considered, therefore, a linguistic artefact to illustrate an immobile, unpopulated region of existence.

Just like the word "dark".

The word exists to describe something that has no speed. If it moves, then this is the wrong word to use to describe it. There is no "speed of darkness" because the word "darkness" was created to explain a condition which is devoid of all speeding tendencies. It is meaningless to ask the speed of something when the word used to describe it means, essentially, static and immobile void.

Words are important. If we use them wrongly, we will always be misunderstood. Use them poetically and perhaps you want to be misunderstood
. I consider "the speed of darkness" a poetic term, and a pretty one at that. (I am personally responsible for concocting the term "the Cosmic Floor", though it's certain that the universe has no base. No bother. It's poetic. Allegoric, perhaps. Spoken aloud with the right accent, it has additional meanings and resonances.) I'm all for poetry in small doses. But never should one be distracted by attempting to prove with science a poetical premise.

If I have chosen my words poorly, you won't believe me.

If I've chosen them well, you should be due an "Ahhh, I get it" moment any second now.

But either way, please, believe me - as if I were someone more articulate and more convincing - in purely, earth-bound, cosmos-based, scientific terms, dark has no speed. The reasons for this have already been stated.


[edit on 15/2/08 by hidatsa]



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by hidatsa
Do "we" try to figure God out?


Vengeance is sometimes used as a descriptor of speed by itself. And justice is swift. Very nice poetic attributes...

But I had God figgered out long ago. Just close your eyes and there God is.

You have earned my star, but more importantly my respect.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 10:09 PM
link   
It all boils down to what you define darkness as.

In terms of radiation visible to the human eye, darkness implies lack of radiation in a very tiny band of radiation frequency compared to the entire spectrum of possible radiation.

In absolute terms, darkness is an absence of radiation at any frequency and indicates that matter in that absolute darkness has no molecular activity producing radiation of any kind and this is the condition of absolute zero (0 kelvin) which probably doesn't exist in the universe.

Darkness is the screen on which light is displayed and the screen doesn't move, only the light moves to give the illusion of motion to the darkness in the background.



posted on Feb, 16 2008 @ 07:24 AM
link   
It all boils down to the fact that darkness for us, is based on on of our senses, seeing, not being triggered. It would be the same as saying you can't understand the concept of not touching anything, not smelling anything, not hearing anything or not tasting anything.

Light is the triggering of photon-receptors (Rhodopsin) in the eye-cones, nothing more, nothing else. Darkness is the lack of active nerve synapses. We percieve it as black; ie. no light. So there is no such thing as darkness.



posted on Feb, 18 2008 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Matyas
 


Thanks, Matyas, I appreciate it.



posted on Feb, 18 2008 @ 09:45 AM
link   
I have written that darkness does not have a speed for it is just the lack of radiation, but I now take that back since the universe is expanding just below the speed of light then darkness is that speed.



posted on Feb, 18 2008 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


And just what do you mean, X, that you imply what the universe is expanding into?

Would that not be not just presumptuous, but preposterous as well, considering there is no S/T for the universe to expand "into"? Therefore no darkness? Or is it "Outer Darkness?"

You can't imagine nothing, mere mortal.

"Out here in the perimeter there are no stars
Out here we is stoned Immaculate"

yeah


edit: know to imply

edit: "Isn't that not just" to "Would that not be not just", would you concur?

edit to add: The universe is in the process of self creation, darkness is an observed attribute of S/T absent radiation. Your safer to stick with the former and do not enter there, the latter, for there be dragons. 'Tis easier to have an epiphany than to understand the Dragon...


[edit on 2/18/2008 by Matyas]



posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
And just what do you mean, X, that you imply what the universe is expanding into?


I am suggesting that the nothingness of our universe is expanding in the nothingness of non-universe at just be low the the speed of light, so darkness is moving...



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 



But wouldn't that mean that the speed of darkness is the speed of light once all the light has sped out of an area you get dark?



[edit on 22-2-2008 by WraothAscendant]



posted on Feb, 25 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Do you have any kind of proof revealing the expansion of our universe?

I am not asking for the scientists who find new galaxies and such, I'm asking about the actual universe expanding.

If you come up withe proof to back up your theory, I'll 100% believe it.



posted on Feb, 25 2008 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nyte Angel
Do you have any kind of proof revealing the expansion of our universe?


Do you have any kind of proof revealing the Earth to be round?


I am not asking for the scientists who find new galaxies and such, I'm asking about the actual universe expanding.


I am not asking for the astronauts and such who fly in space, I'm asking about the actual roundness of the Earth.


If you come up withe proof to back up your theory, I'll 100% believe it.


If you come up with the proof to back your belief in the theory the Earth is round, I'll 100% believe it.



posted on Feb, 25 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
Do you have any kind of proof revealing the Earth to be round?


1) Every picture of the Earth taken from space shows it to be round.

2) During a lunar eclipse, Earth's shadow is always curved.

3) There is a horizon.

4) The force of gravity is roughly equal at all places on Earth.

5) Ships "sink" lower as the sail away towards the horizon.

6) Time zones.



Originally posted by Nyte Angel
Do you have any kind of proof revealing the expansion of our universe?

Red shifting - the Doppler effect.

[edit on 25-2-2008 by Johnmike]



posted on Feb, 25 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Nyte Angel
 


There is no such thing. Darkness=absence of light, Silence=absence of sound, Cold=absence of heat, etc....



posted on Feb, 25 2008 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


Actually I was looking for something more to the tune of this.

Then I wanted NA to work out a proof for the expansion of the universe. He(?) should never take somebody else's word for it. That is what science is about.

Don't you think?

Edit to add additional site

Then we will do the Doppler effect and Hubble's law.


[edit on 2/25/2008 by Matyas]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join