I watched an extremely fascinating documentary today on the speed of dark. The speed of dark is much faster than the speed of light. The best way I can explain it is say you're on the Earth and you cast your shadow onto the moon (before folks jump in of course this is a made up scenario) in order for your shadow, which is millions of miles away on the moon, to move in unison with you then that shadow is moving much much faster than the light which is casting it.

You're mad, mad I say!

Love to see it if you have a link?

Actually ive, this theory was first thought of when the British landed on the moon back in 1962. Unfortunately all of the papers confirming the theory were destroyed by the Americans when they returned

Joking aside, I've seen a similar documentary here. Couldn't say if it's the same one though.

It fried my brains

perhaps you are referring to this vsauce video

For years it has been believed that electric bulbs emitted light. However,
recent information from Bell Labs has proven otherwise. Electric bulbs
don't emit light; they suck dark. Thus they now call these bulbs dark
suckers. The dark sucker theory, according to a spokesman from the Labs,
proves the existence of dark, that dark has mass heavier than that of
light, and that dark is faster than light.

The basis of the dark sucker theory is that electric bulbs suck dark. Take
for example the dark suckers in the room where you are. There is less dark
right next to them than there is elsewhere. The larger the dark sucker,
the greater its capacity to suck dark. Dark suckers in a parking lot have
a much greater capacity than the ones in this room.

As with all things, dark suckers don't last forever. Once they are full of
dark, they can no longer suck. This is proven by the black spot on a full
dark sucker. A new candle has a white wick. You will notice that after the
first use, the wick turns black, representing all the dark which has been
sucked into it. If you hold a pencil next to the wick of an operating
candle, the tip will turn black because it got in the path of the dark
flowing into the candle. Unfortunately, these primitive dark suckers have
a very limited range.

There are also portable dark suckers. The bulbs in these can't handle all
of the dark by themselves, and must be aided by a dark storage unit. When
the dark storage unit is full, it must be either emptied or replaced
before the portable dark sucker can operate again.

Dark has mass. When dark goes into a dark sucker, friction from this mass
generates heat. Thus it is not wise to touch an operating dark sucker.
Candles present a special problem, as the dark must travel in the solid
wick instead of through glass. This generates a great amount of heat. Thus
it can be very dangerous to touch an operating candle.

Dark is also heavier than light. If you swim deeper and deeper, you notice
it gets darker and darker. When you reach a depth of approximately fifty
feet, you are in total darkness. This is because the heavier dark sinks to
the bottom of the lake and the ligher light floats to the top.

The immense power of dark can be utilized to a man's advantage. We can
collect the dark that has settled to the bottom of lakes and push it
through turbines, which generates electricity and helps push it to the
ocean where it may be safely stored. Prior to turbines, it was much more
difficult to get dark from rivers and lakes to the ocean. The Indians
recognized this problem and tried to solve it. When on a river in a canoe
traveling in the same direction as the flow of dark, they paddled slowly,
so as not to stop the flow of dark, but when they traveled against the
flow of dark, they paddled quickly so as to help push the dark along its
way.

Finally, we must prove that dark is faster than light. If you stand in an
illuminated room in front of a closed, dark closet, then slowly open the
door, you would see the light slowly enter the closet, but since the dark
is so fast, you would not be able to see the dark leave the closet.

This made some sense to me.. black as a shade of white..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-OCfiglZRQ

having said, it's an interesting theory and I haven't come across it before. Worth watching a couple of video's about..

Light has to travel through darkness. The dark is always already there, and just gets flooded with light. I don't care what colour the sucker is.

well said tom

I thought the basis of the dark sucker theory was that there was one born every minute.

First time realized that there has to be speed to darkness to.Well written!!!

Sounds like crap to me.
If a light is suddenly obscured (not turned off, with micro delays etc) the last photons and waves of light propagate away from the source at the speed of light, (any arguments so far?), and the following darkness can not overtake and extinguish the last energy, so therefore the darkness is limited to the speed of light, in its 'propagation'. The moon shadow thing is an illusion.

If darkness was faster and extinguished the light it was following, then where does that missing energy go ? Darkness has no mass to absorb and convert energy.

Someone is pulling someone's leg methinks.

Well, if you think about it dark is the absense of light.
A photon is something, dark is not.

But if you want to get technical, there is no dark.
Light saturates the Universe.
The night sky only appears dark because in those places light is too faint for the eye to resolve. Stars don't shine in one direction only. We can't see the light from the side of a star because the photons never contact our detectors.
Therefore, they look like pinpoints of light.

In a medium, like an atmosphere or gas cloud, light refracts (spilts apart) and we see the medium lit up.

Then, if you have ever done any film developing of negatives, you know if light enters your darkroom, your film gets exposed. Dark does not leak out but light can leak in.

Agreed Tom, [note] but the speed of dark cannot be faster than the speed of light. Even the dark between two light beams traveling 180 deg. to each other and opposite directions should not exceed light speed. Even though it doesn't add up.

[note] visible light is stopped by opaque surfaces of solids, and non-low reflective substances, but if you call gamma rays light, it does permeate everything including planet cores and suns. Apart from gamma rays, it's dark inside a chunk of metal, until it disintegrates to liberated individual molecules and atoms.

There is no dark since it isn't a substance or aether, it is just an absence of light striking a thing, and being noticed. Light can travel through dark or nothingness un-noticed, if the 'space' is free of any atoms.

". . . matter of fact it's all dark".

And inside my refrigerator . . . .

Anyone fancy a pint?

Scotch thanks.

I am currently watching a video on it.
A gin and tonic would be nice.

I'll get my coat

Okay, all dark, eh?

Consider the atom.
Each atom (as far as I know) has at least one electron.
Every virtual model of an atom I have seen shows the electron as a brilliant point of energy moving around the outside of the nucleus.
Then, in particle physics (quanta), every proton and neutron have particles of energy within them (represented in virtual models as pinpricks of light).
A photon is a baseline particle (meaning it has no known components to make it). There is no dark inside a photon.
If the Universe is made of matter and energy, it is filled (saturated) with light.

To find true dark you would need to find something at true absolute zero.
The point where all movement at all levels of scale is frozen.
While there may be parts of the Universe at scientific AZ, it is not true AZ because electromotive forces and quanta level particles are still spinning.
Thus, energy is still being released = NOT true absolute zero.
Even at tAZ it would not be dark, it would be invisible, possibly non-existent.

If I drank a pint I would probably....wait for it....
Black-Out!