At the speed of light? Really?
We are very used to saying "at the speed of light"... we say it, read it and hear it every now and then. But, what i fail to understand is, why not at the speed of darkness? If what we want to hint by saying "at the speed of light" is "very fast"; wouldn't darkness be a better analogy? Coz we can observe that darkness spreads much faster than the light and also, it is a state by default. Any source of light would need some time to fill up an enclosed room with light. However, no time lag would be required to fill up that room with darkness and it would come naturally as well...
And for someone more inclined towards the real meanings, the speed with which darkness and light fill up our life should be satisfactorily sufficient to declare the winner i guess...
What say?
And for someone more inclined towards the real meanings, the speed with which darkness and light fill up our life should be satisfactorily sufficient to declare the winner i guess...
What say?
posted by vaibhaV at 7:00 PM
2 Comments:
Well, I guess because people usually want to associate things with brightness, and not darkness. Darkness essentially symbolizes negation.. And, though darkness is much more obvious, we don't really feel it coming over us - it's lightning and it's brilliance which we usually see, and like to associate ourselves with it..
what say?
Doesn't being obvious make darkness a better candidate? Anyway, if i get you right, the point is that of "liking" what we are associating ourselves with. Now, the perception of what we are getting associated with(darkness in this case) as (as negative in this case) itself is again defined by society in general...Why? No one knows...
Just wondering if such things should be driven by what is obvious or wat is more "liked by all"? Anyway, thx for stopping by and putting a comment.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home