4 ms·

That isn't the speed of light.

• Handprint4469 3y ago
  This is the most terrifying exchange I've read on HN in a while
  • Boogie_Man 3y ago
    The smack to the head sent him into a parallel dimension with a different speed of light and he's just now finding out.
• posix_compliant 3y ago
  Probably meant to type km/s
  • SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
    Just the wrong number, at least for light in a vacuum. 299,792,458 m/s is the correct value.
• MobileVet 3y ago
  Harsh. Considering that most of us remember it as 3x10^8 m/s I was willing to roll with it. Apparently he is a little off. 299,792,458 m/s according to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light
  • tialaramex 3y ago
    Right, and that's a definition. Modern SI works by defining constants, so then when scientists figure out a way to measure more exactly they're actually refining our understanding of the SI units, the numbers (such as the speed of light in metres per second) never change any more, so that's convenient.
• bhaney 3y ago
  It is in a material with a refractive index of 1.001122387 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
• rimunroe 3y ago
  To anyone reading this now and thinking, “299,792,458 m/s is the speed of light!”: stairlane’s comment originally gave 299,456,352 m/s as the speed of light. Unfortunately they’ve since edited it to the correct value, thus ruining a very good exchange