I have to agree with Speed o'light. Why? because if you look at the Chaos theorum you would see that Praetor's Frational Law of Dendrum and stuff that doesn't make sense followed by quantum physics crap followed by something that some smart guy said followed by and that's why I agree with speed o'light.
#7
Posted by: Guest on February 6th, 2006
light cannot travel faster that light coz that is its terminal speed
#6
Posted by: Guest on February 6th, 2006
The lights would be going their speed on top of your speed, that's twice the speed of light, and would seem normal to you. The interesting thing is if you're travelling the speed of light and shine a light behind you they would cancel each other out, so the light would be stationary. Then what?
#5
Posted by: Guest on February 6th, 2006
or vice versa both are called the same
#4
Posted by: Guest on February 6th, 2006
7 - cause your american
8 - because the english launauge doesnt make sense
#3
Posted by: Guest on February 6th, 2006
the lights would also be travelling at the speed of light so it would shine like a normal light, neither the light or source will overtake eachother so they will be going the same speed
#2
Posted by: Guest on February 6th, 2006
1. No
2. every tried frying concrete?
3. The cat would land on its feet
4. Nothing
5. it shows what part of the package to open, fool
6. All atms are standard
7.Coz
8. Describe is not represent
9. Good point
10. Ever tried keeping a piece of almost solid lead off the ground for long?
#1
Posted by: Guest on February 6th, 2006
WOW
Showing 1-8 of 8 comments, newest comments at the top