That's a really bad explanation IMO. The author provides some weird formula which you have to use when u and v are "near the spead of light", w/o actually expla

That's a really bad explanation IMO. The author provides some weird formula which you have to use when u and v are "near the spead of light", w/o actually explaining how near the speed of light you have to be to use (u + v) / (1 + uv) instead of u + v or even explaining why do you have to use another formula at all. She basically says "wow, look at all this, what a nonsense! but I promise it's true". Meanwhile the problem is really really simple. No, Einstein hasn't "taught us nothing travels faster than the speed of light". Instead, he taught us that neutonian velocity-addition formula is imprecise, instead of u + v it's always (u + v)/(1 + uv/c^2). It just doesn't usually matter, since "wrong" u + v formula works good enough for our everyday needs, because "c" is so huge compared to our usual "u" and "v" (so uv/c^2 is usually close to zero). And that's it, that's why velocity-addition of 0.99c and 0.99c gives us 0.9999c. Not all that "sometimes 1 + 1 equals 1" nonsense.