Somebody figured out the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second, right? What is the speed of dark? A radio program called Says You features 7 smart Bostonians playing games about etymology, meanings, obscure relationships and classical arts. None of them are religious, so they get whole categories wrong and struggle with anything about pop culture since 1970,making it easier to play along at home. it's been on 15 years, so they're getting desperate. Last night a round dealt with obscure measurements, and they asked what is the speed of dark. All six stumbled through the concept. The host finally read the answer: dark has no speed. It's just there. Light travels away from it. I was very tired then and not much better now, but the spiritual implications are obvious.
"Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it." - Terry Pratchett
Then maybe you would care to write them down? Dark is not a physical object, it is an interpretation humans make about patterns and statistics of light in the world (and therefore, I guess, you can also say that darkness is those particular patterns and statistics). Since dark is not a physical object, it does not need to conform to physical laws. Similarly, you can make the dot from a laser pointer travel faster than the speed of light, but that does not mean that the light itself travels that quickly. Only the interpretation that humans make to understand the dot travels faster.
Actually, if you buy what the cosmologists are saying about the Big Bang for the last few years, dark moves faster than the speed of light. It's called inflation, shortly after the big bang the Universe expanded faster than the speed of light for a period of time. If it had not, then the whole sky would be filled with light from all directions. Inflation created the dark.
What you call "darkness" is really light filled Space, but the waave lengths of the electromagnetic waves are longer and shorter than those man can see. Ligt is really just electromagnetic waves which come out of atoms when their electrons move up and down in orbits. those our eyes can see. But long before visible light appeared, long before Atoms were formed in fact, high energy waves of Photons flooded the cosmos. What I am saying is that Electromagnetic Waves have ALWAYS filled what we call "darkness, because darkness is just the absence of visible light waves.
They are "thoughts." Spiritual implications are Thoughts. The Mind, (all three parts), think in the form of immaterial, weightless, mass-less electromagnetic waves. Since they are "immaterial, weightless, mass-less electromagnetic waves," they have no "body" and the ancient writers called them "spirits."
I understand and agree with what you are saying from a scientific point of view, however light and dark are not the presence of electromagnetic waves, they are the presence or absence of visible light. Just because there are infrared or ultraviolet waves bouncing around does not mean it isn't dark. Furthermore, inflation occurred faster than the speed of light, light couldn't catch up with it. This is why the night sky isn't completely white from all the stars in the Universe shining on us. I'm not sure it means anything, but when I saw the posting it made me think that maybe there is a speed of dark, philosophically speaking. Just a thought.
Its an interesting subject here. We must remember that the whole cosmos was like a small ball, one that started growing larger and larger. Everything inside of that ball moved forward at no greater a speed than that of the first electromagnetic waves inside it. But, as the cosmos grew, the galaxies (frozen in place) moved away from one another, adding an "apparent" speed to the motion of the galaxies, as far as we could see. This "appears to be moving faster than light, but it isn't.
I hear you, but I think you might not be up to date on modern cosmological theory. Check out this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)
So in less waffly terms 'thinking implications' Is the OP marvelling that such ideas might give rise to thinking then?
I had trouble getting your meaning here. But it seems reasonable that if one accepts that Truth is Lord and the God of men is Reality, then, yes, thinking is a Holy Act. We see what the Scientific Method accomplished, as one man and another, added more and more thoughts together as they flushed out a better and better picture of Truth over the last 400 years.
I am going to read your link and double check my own sources. I know this frontier of science is still working of the phenomenon of light sources seemingly to move faster than known possible. I'll get back when I examine your reco.
I had trouble getting the meaning of the OP, when he/she referred to 'spiritual' implications. It can be quite the exercise in frustration when folk drop words like 'soul' and 'spirit/ual' into a dialogue without ever offering a definition of what these words refer to. Just as though everyone ought to instinctively know. I'd wager a goodly sum that NO ONE has any idea It doesn't seem even remotely reasonable to 'accept that truth is lord'. Probably not even if I knew what it actually meant - in the total absence of a definition
It's not rocket science... Well, ok, it is kind of hard to understand. Normally, we can define the speed of an object relative to another object as the change in the distance between them over time. However, inflation means that space itself is expanding, so in addition to the objects actually moving apart, we also have the space between them expanding, and therefore the distance increasing faster than the relative movements. There is a common example with a balloon. Imagine you make little dots on a balloon. These will be standing still with respect to the balloon's surface. If you inflate the balloon, two dots will be standing still with respect to the balloon's surface but still be moving apart. Now, let's say the dots were moving at close to the speed of light. With the extra apparent speed coming from the expansion of space (the balloon), it can appear that the dots are moving faster than the speed of light with respect to one another. This has nothing to do with any speed of dark though.
From what i read, the Universe can expand faster than the speed f light. But the Space is still rather indescribable and vague. We do not know what Space actually is, and Buckminster fuller suggests that it has complex geometric rules he began discovering himself. Not with standing this mystery, the point is that Space apparently did inflate faster than the speed of light, (which is not Space, though). Unless you have something in that article which contradict this, I rather believe that the galaxies are like raisins in a ball of dough. When the dough expands, it carries the galaxies and the light emitting particles inside further part from other stars and from us. This extra velocity given to the stars moving with Space is what accounts for the "appearance" of speed higher than C. NOTE: "In the early phase of the universe, it went through a phase called inflation, during which period, the universe expanded by a factor of more than 1050 in a time-scale of less than 10-30 seconds. So, there is some evidence that the universe DID undergo a period of expansion faster than the speed of light."
? Truth. The "stuff" science searches for is called Truth. Truth is our savior because it informs us about the reality we live in, it educates us into how to grow food and make medicines, etc. Truth also saves us socially as we learn thongs like Rev martin Luther King taught us in 1965. What is so hard about getting this idea???
YEAH,... (It is rocket science, though) I said the same thing back there: "We must remember that the whole cosmos was like a small ball, one that started growing larger and larger. Everything inside of that ball moved forward at no greater a speed than that of the first electromagnetic waves inside it. But, as the cosmos grew, the galaxies (frozen in place) moved away from one another, adding an "apparent" speed to the motion of the galaxies, as far as we could see. This "appears to be moving faster than light, but it isn't."
If I replace your the word 'truth' with 'facts', I'm on the same page. As regards 1965, I prefer to listen to the wisdom of the flower children, who people like MLK helped pave the way for.
Actually this all does have something to do with the speed of Dark. If the stars and galaxies all moved apart at sub light speeds then light would be everywhere in the night sky. However the sky is not all light, there is darkness and that's because of inflation moving faster than the speed of light, or so the theory goes. My original thought was that this means that darkness does have a speed and it is faster than the speed of light. It just a notion.
When you say Darkness, you mean Space. Space may be appearing faster than the speed of the matter inside it can emit light. But this does not mean that a "particle" can move faster than the speed of light. Space is NOT a particle. Space is related to Time and we are still trying to figure out what it is. - - - Updated - - - The Flower Children paved the way for the Sexual promiscuity that came with it, against what the Rev Martin Luther King would have preached.
Thanks for all the replies. I also posted this on Bible-Discussion.com and you might benefit from following both threads. I was pressed for time, so I couldn't elaborate. My first thought was Genesis 1:2. The earth was without form and an empty waste, and darkness was upon the face of the very great deep...3.And God said,"Let there be light." And there was light. 4. And God saw the light was good (suitable, pleasant)) and He approved it; and God separated the light from the darkness. Question for theologians: did God ever create darkness,or does darkness (in all its forms) exist without God? For those who believe in the gap theory: was there any darkness in any form before the events that led to verse 2? This linksto my perpetual question: what existed (besides God) prior to creation? Next we look at John 1: 5. And the Light shines on in the darkness, for the darkness has never overpowered it. Question for theologians: does the percentage of light and dark represent the competition between God and Devil, good and evil, or any other competition, and who appears to be winning? Several other verses come to mind, but in general Christians believe that their faith imparts new light to their mind, soul, spirit and even body, but obviously many let darkness back in. That's why the host's choice of words: light recedes from darkness struck me. As we let sin and evil thoughts into our minds, it forces God to withdraw. The darkness does not advance, but refills the space it originally occupied. I'm sure there are greater truths in this, but I can't figure them out alone.
This is how I understand Gen 1:3-5: The whole thing relates to the the Cosmic Dar Age that lasted from the Big Bang until 400 million years had past, and Atoms appeared with electrons inside them. Light could not appear until then, because the source of visible light comes from Atoms.
Does that mean you think the author of Genesis believed in the big bang but saw the necessity of attributing it to God, or that God caused the big bang then waited 40 million years to start forming the universe as we know it and explained it that way to make it most easily credible to humans,not expecting anyone to ever get a glimmer of enlightenment to guess a single detail of the real story correctly, much less convince half the world they figured it all out on their own.
