I meant in the swimming, sorry for not clarifying. Though you could absolutely consider only looking at that event not looking very close, but that is why I said from what I've seen and not as a fact of the entire competition.
Though on the other hand you did only offer a single additional name so it doesn't really dispute it being majority no names in my mind. Even 1-2 big names per event would still be pretty much majority no names depending how you define it.
That is not analogous to this. The fact you can measure the same effect using light as using dark should immediately tell you that you aren't measuring dark at all.
The reality is all you are measuring is discreet points and calling it movement. It's not movement even in a loose sense. Calling this movement is like calling an animated character running across the screen movement. Just like that is hundreds of individual images that your brain perceives as movement, the light or shadow is thousands of points of light (or, in the reverse, absence of light) that your brain perceives as movement.
If there was a ring around the earth and you shine a laser pointer at it and rotate 360 degrees you could measure insane "speeds" of the dot moving along the ring. By the same logic his video uses you can claim to have invented teleportation and essentially infinite speed by turning the light off, moving it, and having the light or shadow be in another location when you turn it back on. Hopefully that really illustrates how much these are individual "things", not things "moving".
The photons making the light, or with the shadow, the photons being blocked, are not the same photons that were making the initial point. They are new ones in a new location.
It's mostly true. The biggest name from what I've looked into is Ben Proud. He won silver at the 2024 Paris Olympics in the 50m freestyle. But you are largely correct it is majority no names.
They still test because the whole framework relies on verified categories, but I'll admit the optics are hilarious.
No, because the space is expanding faster than light, the light can't bridge the gap and so you and the other car simply can't perceive each other at all.
And the edge of a ball of light created by a powerful spotlight could do exactly the same thing. That video is nothing but sleight of hand style tricks dressed up as the speed of dark. You can recreate every scenario using light to argue light is faster than the speed of light. What you're doing isn't movement at all, period.
Imagine earth has a ring around it the distance of the moon. You have a powerful laser pointer and rotate 360 degrees while pointing at it. The dot of light "travels" around it at insane speeds. This is what the video argues "dark" or the shadow is doing. But if you think about it for a moment you realise each "dot", whether it's the shadow or the laser pointer, is actually a unique thing, and nothing is actually "moving" at all. Shadows don't move. Ever. They aren't even something. They are just light being blocked.
Yeah that's correct. If things couldn't move apart from each other faster than the speed of light from a 3rd party observers perspective, light itself would make no sense. Either all light would actually be travelling at half the speed of light, or half the light would be frozen.
Not entirely, because if I never corrected them they would be a stranger on the internet to SOMEONE talking that way eventually.
Ultimately the ability to understand something doesn't make it correct and I get tired of the "language evolves" and "you understood it, right?" arguments because even if true we can also understand "me want job" and "John hungry" but it doesn't mean you shouldn't both attempt to speak correctly and continue to learn.
I'm learning a second language and I would prefer to be corrected and speak naturally in it as much as possible rather than the bar simply being understood.
No they can't, because they aren't moving at all. That vsauce video pisses me off so much and I've debunked it more than once over the years, but suffice to say, you could claim light moves faster than light using the same logic he uses for shadows/darkness.
I understand my 3yo as well but that doesn't mean they should continue to speak that way just because they can technically be understood.
In English you use plural for zero count. I have zero pigs. There are 0 cows.
Compare this to the browser:
The spoiler tag not working is particularly concerning.
Criticise llm all you want but it's successfully walked me through some really technical things that I had no idea how to do.