5 ms·
Oh man, I don't want to get into an argument on HN. But you didn't really read the previous comment with a generous eye. The poster never mentioned "faster than
by codefreakxff 6y ago
Oh man, I don't want to get into an argument on HN. But you didn't really read the previous comment with a generous eye. The poster never mentioned "faster than light" travel at all. In fact, they specifically called out AT or NEAR light speed, and then gave wormhole travel as an example of "not traveling via speed".
- marcinzm 6y agogremlinsinc literally said "they could be traveling many times that" in respect to "AT or NEAR light speed." As in they could be traveling many time faster than light. He didn't use the exact phrase "faster than light" but his meaning is pretty clear.
- gremlinsinc 6y agoTransportation technically is faster than the speed of light, because if travelling at the speed of light you get to point B in 5 years, and by using a warp drive/worm hole device you get their in 3 days, you've traveled faster than light, doesn't matter if you cheated using physics, you still got their in a fraction of the time. Sure you're 'speed limit' didn't exceed the speed of light, but the distance/normal travel time DID exceed the speed of light, so it's just semantics.