How much speed does a "Near the speed of light" claim have?

[Jhonatan]

If a character has only one declaration of going at a speed close to the speed of light, would he fall into the base category of Relativistic + [50% of the speed of light]?
One could guess or assume that having the word "near the speed of light" means 90%, 99% of the speed of light, but these are very ambiguous assumptions.
Just as you can see feats where a planet is destroyed from any point in space where there is no data on its size, the Planetary scale must be taken as a basis.

So, with that being said:

• THERE ARE NO MORE STATEMENTS
• THERE IS ONLY 1 STATEMENT FROM THE AUTHOR
• "NEAR THE SPEED OF LIGHT" ONLY HAS

•| Is it okay to clarify, for lack of further data, that these words would only qualify to say that the character has 50% of the speed of light? PS: It would be good if there was a question and answer section about these statements and how they can be made on a base percentage. Invoke the Administrators

@Firestorm808 @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Qawsedf234 @Elizhaa @Agnaa

 

[KLOL506]

I usually consider it to be around 90-95% the speed of light. Other people might be a bit more conservative and say 75%.

 

[Fallen_Angelicx]

Although there's no exact value, this sounds anywhere from Relativistic to Relativistic+ although i think Relativistic+ seems like the better option for "near". Near implies it's almost at a certain value

 

[Random-Helper323]

One possible issue is that the speed of light is such a high speed, so far divorced from most people's perception of speed, that someone might consider something near light speed for even being relativistic. The source of the statement is of course important to factor.

 

[Jhonatan]

One possible issue is that the speed of light is such a high speed, so far divorced from most people's perception of speed, that someone might consider something near light speed for even being relativistic. The source of the statement is of course important to factor.

That is why I put the only data we have and it would be the Author's own statement, considering that there is no more data within the series that contradicts what the author said, I proposed that only the basis of the Relativist+ category be taken for this, that is , 50% of the speed of light.

 

[Jhonatan]

Although there's no exact value, this sounds anywhere from Relativistic to Relativistic+ although i think Relativistic+ seems like the better option for "near". Near implies it's almost at a certain value

That is why I proposed that such statements in those circumstances where only the author's statement is available should be taken as the basis of the Relativistic+ category, 50% of the speed of Light.

 

[Fallen_Angelicx]

50% of the speed of Light

Pretty sure "half the speed of light" is very explicit as opposed to "close to the speed of light". The statement definitely should yield higher and we should make a set speed for statements such as this on our wiki

 

[KLOL506]

Pretty sure "half the speed of light" is very explicit as opposed to "close to the speed of light". The statement is definitely should yield higher and we should make a set speed for statements such as this on our wiki

This.

 

[KLOL506]

But either way, I suppose the correct answer would be in the Relativistic+ range, for me it'd be anywhere from 75% to 95% SoL.

 

[Fallen_Angelicx]

75% to 95% SoL

I do agree with 95%. Close just implies x speed is almost at the value of the SOL.

 

[Jhonatan]

Pretty sure "half the speed of light" is very explicit as opposed to "close to the speed of light". The statement definitely should yield higher and we should make a set speed for statements such as this on our wiki

The point is not to assume an exact value by "ESTIMATE" but by standard values in the absence of "more statements" Statements of "Near the speed of light" will never be a category of Light, but the "CATEGORY" closest to this speed is the RELATIVIST+ category.

Now, this category starts from 50% of the speed of light to 99% of the same speed.

Assessing an intermediate number between both figures would only be a subjective estimate by anyone and even more so if there is no more data than a simple statement from the author (this is spoken ONLY in this circumstance, it would not apply to situations with more data) That said and in the absence of more information (under the circumstance that I propose) the base value of the Relativistic+ category should be used, 50% the speed of light. I want to clarify that within the division of speed categories, where you enter from the field of 1% of the speed of light to luminosity (100%) there are several categories and the most generous estimate for the author's claim that I provide would be only be Relativistic+, so the estimate of the phrase is already taken from the beginning and due to lack of data, only the basis of the category to which a phrase belongs should be taken without further support, to avoid exaggerations and personal estimates.

This is the most objective solution I see for such words without further evidence supporting an estimate higher than the standard/base of Relativist+ (50% speed of light).

@Firestorm808 @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Qawsedf234 @Elizhaa @Agnaa

 

[Fallen_Angelicx]

Now, this category starts from 50% of the speed of light to 99% of the same speed.

It is better to give a estimate. Just "50% to 99%" is going to mess up the versus thread battles. Which is why a estimate is needed as we have done for other feats the reference for common feats which have estimates for feats that happen in various ways. Tnis keeps balance on this site, esimates are more logical and beneficial than just giving a character a whole speed range. As such we need esyimates for feats like this on our tier system. Like i said 50% the speed of light doesn't count for "close to light speed", its obvious since its a borderline between two speed tiers and nothing " close" is about that. Close entails something is almost at a cergain value

 

[CNBA3]

I would say between 90-99% as it is considered “near lightspeed”

 

[Jhonatan]

It is better to give a estimate. Just "50% to 99%" is going to mess up the versus thread battles. Which is why a estimate is needed as we have done for other feats the reference for common feats which have estimates for feats that happen in various ways. Tnis keeps balance on this site, esimates are more logical and beneficial than just giving a character a whole speed range. As such we need esyimates for feats like this on our tier system. Like i said 50% the speed of light doesn't count for "close to light speed", its obvious since its a borderline between two speed tiers and nothing " close" is about that. Close entails something is almost at a cergain value

An 'estimate' lacks any objective (impartial, neutral) criterion, which is highly valued and prioritized in our wiki, so we rely on data and not estimations/conjectures.

Now, I provided an explanation of the range of percentages for the relativistic+ category, which is 50% up to 99% of the speed of light to detail the unique situation presented (a single author's statement, nothing more or less), something that does not affect the 'OTHER FEATS' of other characters you mention, as those examples have more data that allow for a very accurate conclusion. So I ask you to separate it from the topic because what I propose does not affect those characters, on the contrary, it helps us classify the speed of characters in the same situation as the one I present.

I want to emphasize that I am not talking about a feat but about a situation in which only the author's statement is available to refer to the speed of their character (this is the hypothetical situation).

It seems that you have ignored all this text that I sent before, so I will put it here again:

"I want to clarify that within the speed category division, ranging from 1% of the speed of light to luminosity (100%), there are several categories, and the most generous estimate for the author's statement I provide would only be Relativistic+, so I AM ALREADY TAKING THE ESTIMATION OF THE PHRASE FROM THE BEGINNING, and due to lack of data, only the base of the category to which a phrase belongs should be considered, to avoid exaggerations and personal estimations."

As you can see, such an ESTIMATION provided by the author's statement is already introduced from the beginning, so the "CLOSE" you mention is also considered after this process, then the rules of our level system come into play, since there is no data that exposes higher levels than the standard base of relativistic+, the most neutral and OBJECTIVE thing is to take the standard base value of said category, which is 50% of the speed of light.

I want to make it clear that I am not trying to classify half of the full percentage of light speed, I just adhere to the bases of our level system. If relativistic+ had a standard base of 75% of the speed of light, I would propose the same as I am doing now, so at no time am I discrediting the author's statement presented in this hypothetical situation.

That said, @KLOL506 if you can tag an administrator to consider taking this situation and placing it in the questions and answers section.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think this is case by case.

 

[KLOL506]

I think this is case by case.

Yeah no, not this time. "Near light speed" objectively cannot have it be anything lower than at least 75% SoL.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Yeah no, not this time. "Near light speed" objectively cannot have it be anything lower than at least 75% SoL.

On paper yes, but keep in mind that "Near Light Speed" has also been used as a hyperbole before.

 

[KLOL506]

On paper yes, but keep in mind that "Near Light Speed" has also been used as a hyperbole before.

Hyperboles are hyperboles, like how outliers are outliers, this thread has to do with legitimate "near light speed" statements.

 

[XxZetsuxX]

I would go with 90-99% personally

It feels more accurate

 

[CloverDragon03]

Definitely 75% bare minimum, though personally I'd go 90-95% SoL

 

[XxZetsuxX]

I don't think 75% would be considered near

But i am open to explanations though XD

 

[CloverDragon03]

Also the OP is now spontaneously proposing this change to be made?

Like, this is still a Q&A thread, not a revision...

 

[XxZetsuxX]

Also the OP is now spontaneously proposing this change to be made?

He is asking what the majority of the staff thinks what can be considered "near" light speed i guess

So people can have more or less an idea when a character with statements like these scale to

 

[CloverDragon03]

That said and in the absence of more information (under the circumstance that I propose) the base value of the Relativistic+ category should be used, 50% the speed of light

This is the most objective solution I see

No, he's pretty much answering his own question and trying to get this accepted

 

[Chariot190]

I'd say context is important, it's technically relative after all.

But most of the time when it's said, it's just trying to say "yeah uh, it's ALMOST lightspeed but not quite", aka, it's obviously gonna be on the higher end, like ya wouldn't say "oh he's almost as fast as Usain Bolt", and have him be half his speed, it'd evidently be closer to the value than it is away from it.
75% is good, but I'd even say over 90%+ if the context is pushing for it to be truly just about light speed, just use common sense, and all that.

 

[XxZetsuxX]

No, he's pretty much answering his own question and trying to get this accepted

Ah XD

I'd say context is important, it's technically relative after all.

But most of the time when it's said, it's just trying to say "yeah uh, it's ALMOST lightspeed but not quite", aka, it's obviously gonna be on the higher end, like ya wouldn't say "oh he's almost as fast as Usain Bolt", and have him be half his speed, it'd evidently be closer to the value than it is away from it.
75% is good, but I'd even say over 90%+ if the context is pushing for it to be truly just about light speed, just use common sense, and all that.

Well if the 75% is consensus i guess i agree with this

So, If i got this right, It's like this;

"He's almost light speed" pushes to the high end

"He's almost light speed but not there yet" pushes to the lower end yes?

Is there something like a mid end like 85% or something?

 

[Chariot190]

"He's almost light speed" pushes to the high end

"He's almost light speed but not there yet" pushes to the lower end yes?

That doesn't change anything, neither are there yet, it's why they're almost light speed.

Is there something like a mid end like 85% or something?

Not really possible, they're just almost light speed, we really can't get an exact value, if we could, we wouldn't be having this talk.

 

[XxZetsuxX]

That doesn't change anything, neither are there yet, it's why they're almost light speed.

Not really possible, they're just almost light speed, we really can't get an exact value, if we could, we wouldn't be having this talk.

Alright

 

[Planck69]

"Almost the level of X" doesn't mean half of X, it means nearing that level. So, 75 - 99% is a good enough estimate. If anything 75% is a low-end imo.

 

[LordTracer]

To be somewhat fair, I can somewhat get the logic of 50%. Since being “near” the level of something would imply that it’s closer rather than farther, >50% would be the absolute minimum.

But it seems that 75% is what’s agreed upon.

 

[Jhonatan]

@DarkDragonMedeus @KLOL506 @XxZetsuxX @CloverDragon03 @Chariot190 @Planck69 @LordTracer

- First, thank you for taking the time to talk about the topic.

- Second, I want to clarify that I NEVER literally proposed that the phrase "near the speed of light" be given a percentage of 50%, I proposed such a conclusion for reasons that I mentioned and that I never arrived at such a value for simple reasons. .

- To explain myself better I will be more specific with the topic in question:

1* Our level system in the speed section has 5 categories ranging from 1% to 100% of the speed of light:

SUBRELATIVIST = 1%
SUBRELATIVIST+
RELATIVISTIC
RELATIVIST+
LIGHT SPEED = 100%

2* Now let's review the phrase expressed by the author:

"CLOSE TO THE SPEED OF LIGHT"


3* As we can see we have 5 sections of the percentage of the speed of light and the intermediate/HALF point falls in the RELATIVIST category and the phrase "close to the speed of light" objectively allows us to go as close to 100% rating = speed of light

-As you should already know, the category closest to the speed of light is RELATIVIST+.

-FULLY RESPECTING the word declared by the author

4* Such a category has a range in our level system that goes from 50% to 99% of the speed of light, as I had already mentioned, there is no more data than what the author said and how the consideration of his statement. IT HAS ALREADY BEEN TAKEN, we are left to stick to what is commonly done in the absence of data and that is to take a NEUTRAL point which is the standard of said classification, which is well known as only 50% of the speed of light. , in this way under the terms that I present, the most sensible and objective classification is relativistic +/50% and AGAIN to make it clear that what the author said was already taken into consideration.

-Now I want to get to a more important topic and that is why most people have this discomfort regarding my conclusion on the topic.

4* The classification 50% of the speed of light, the majority of common sense considers that this classification is erroneous because in percentages terms it is half the speed of light, discrepant with what was declared by the author, but as I already said explained, such consideration is already being taken and in the absence of evidence, only the base standard of the category to which it is classified can be taken. NOW, as several have already mentioned, a classification of 75% of the speed of light would be the most optimal. and standard for these situations, HOWEVER, such classification in these cases does not have a neutral or objective point, it is only a generous estimate and a classification of 99% or 90% is one that exaggerates and overestimates the only one. . data that is kept in mind, that is why the proposal that I offer now is to set the base standard of RELATIVISTA+, a category that tries to show the closest thing to the speed of light at 100%, having only 50% as a basis for such category. very weak and generates these differences that were generated in their exchanges of words, that is why I propose setting the standard base of RELATIVISTA+ at a minimum of 75% of the speed of light, in this way it would be respected that the category is as close to the speed of light at 100% and we would have to face statements of “CLOSE TO THE SPEED OF LIGHT”, whose phrase is very common in fiction.

PS: As I had already mentioned, my intention was never to classify such author statements as 50%, but rather to emphasize that if said percentage were higher or, failing that, lower, I would still respect the bases of taking a standard of the RELATIVIST+ classification.

So what did you think of the proposal to change the base from relativistic+ to 75% of the speed of light?

 

[CloverDragon03]

I don’t think this really supports changing baseline Relativistic+ to 75% SoL. Not to mention, it’d require a good amount of work for no real payoff

 

[Jhonatan]

I don’t think this really supports changing baseline Relativistic+ to 75% SoL. Not to mention, it’d require a good amount of work for no real payoff

An important reason has been seen in this thread and I know the discrepancy that exists only because the baseline of relativistic+ is 50% of the light, I understand that consideration and I know that similar problems/statements will come, that is why I propose the new baseline (75%) for relativist+, although such a thing cannot be done, I will understand it, but if that is the case there is no reason to oppose 50% of the light for the author's declaration under the circumstances presented and the evaluations that I gave it, What do you think?

 

[Jhonatan]

@DarkDragonMedeus @KLOL506 @XxZetsuxX @CloverDragon03 @ Chariot190 @Planck69 @LordTracer

- Primero, gracias por tomarte el tiempo de hablar sobre el tema.

- Segundo, quiero aclarar que NUNCA propuse literalmente que a la frase "cerca de la velocidad de la luz" se le diera un porcentaje del 50%, propuse tal conclusión por razones que mencioné y que nunca llegué a tal valor para razones simples. .

- Para explicarme mejor seré más específico con el tema en cuestión:

1* Nuestro sistema de niveles en la sección de velocidad tiene 5 categorías que van del 1% al 100% de la velocidad de la luz:

SUBRELATIVISTA = 1%
SUBRELATIVISTA+
RELATIVISTA
RELATIVISTA+
VELOCIDAD DE LA LUZ = 100%

2* Ahora repasemos la frase expresada por el autor:

"CERCA DE LA VELOCIDAD DE LA LUZ"


3* Como podemos ver tenemos 5 secciones del porcentaje de la velocidad de la luz y el punto intermedio/MEDIO cae en la categoría RELATIVISTA y la frase "cerca de la velocidad de la luz" objetivamente nos permite acercarnos al 100%. calificación = velocidad de la luz

-Como ya debes saber, la categoría más cercana a la velocidad de la luz es RELATIVISTA+.

-RESPETANDO PLENAMENTE la palabra declarada por el autor

4* Tal categoría tiene un rango en nuestro sistema de niveles que va del 50% al 99% de la velocidad de la luz, como ya lo había mencionado, no hay más datos que lo que dijo el autor y cómo se considera su afirmación. YA SE HA TOMADO, nos queda ceñirnos a lo que comúnmente se hace ante la falta de datos y es tomar un punto NEUTRO que es el estándar de dicha clasificación, que es bien conocido como solo el 50% de la velocidad de la luz. . , de esta manera bajo los términos que presento, la clasificación más sensata y objetiva es relativista +/50% y OTRA VEZ para dejar claro que lo que dijo el autor ya fue tomado en consideración.

-Ahora quiero llegar a un tema más importante y por eso la mayoría de la gente tiene este malestar respecto a mi conclusión sobre el tema.

4* La clasificación 50% de la velocidad de la luz, la mayoría de sentido común considera que esta clasificación es errónea porque en términos porcentuales es la mitad de la velocidad de la luz, discrepante con lo declarado por el autor, pero como ya dije expliqué , ya se está tomando dicha consideración y a falta de pruebas sólo se puede tomar la norma base de la categoría a la que se clasifica. AHORA, como ya varios han mencionado, una clasificación del 75% de la velocidad de la luz sería lo más óptimo. y estándar para estas situaciones, SIN EMBARGO, tal clasificación en estos casos no tiene un punto neutral u objetivo, es sólo una estimación generosa y una clasificación del 99% o 90% es aquella que exagera y sobreestima la única. . dato que se tiene presente, por eso la propuesta que ofrezco ahora es fijar el estándar base de RELATIVISTA+, una categoría que intenta mostrar lo más parecido a la velocidad de la luz al 100%, teniendo solo como base el 50%. para tal categoría. muy débil y genera estas diferencias que se generaron en sus intercambios de palabras, por eso propongo fijar la base estándar de RELATIVISTA+ en un mínimo del 75% de la velocidad de la luz, de esta manera se respetaría que la categoría sea lo más cerca de la velocidad de la luz al 100% y tendríamos que enfrentarnos a afirmaciones de “CERCA DE LA VELOCIDAD DE LA LUZ”, cuya frase es muy común en la ficción.

PD: Como ya lo había mencionado, mi intención nunca fue catalogar tales declaraciones de autor como 50%, sino más bien enfatizar que si dicho porcentaje fuera mayor o en su defecto menor, igualmente respetaría las bases de tomar un estándar del Clasificación RELATIVISTA+.

Entonces, ¿qué te pareció la propuesta de cambiar la base de relativista+ al 75% de la velocidad de la luz?

@DarkDragonMedeus @KLOL506 @XxZetsuxX @CloverDragon03 @Chariot190 @Planck69 @LordTracer

 

[KLOL506]

I don't speak Spanish, but I think I understand the intent. I agree with Clover on this, that it would yield no benefit at all to change our Relativistic+ border from 50% to 75% and would lead to unnecessary workloads which would further hamper our productivity on this site and waste our precious time.

 

[KLOL506]

Anyway I think this question has been sufficiently answered (With a decent majority of staff, myself included, preferring 90-99% SoL for "near light speed" statements). Thread should be closed.

 

[Jhonatan]

Anyway I think this question has been sufficiently answered (With a decent majority of staff, myself included, preferring 90-99% SoL for "near light speed" statements). Thread should be closed.

but all that was based on estimates for that baseline, it was not an objective consensus but a simple one for a single statement without much weight.

If we have the destruction of a planet and from perspective it seems big, isn't the "STANDARD" assumed due to lack of more conclusive data?
I mean only the planetary base, in addition, the estimate of close to the speed of light had already been appreciated, there was no reason to assume those words just within relativistic + when the same category already symbolizes such estimate of "close"

 

[Jhonatan]

I don't speak Spanish, but I think I understand the intent. I agree with Clover on this, that it would yield no benefit at all to change our Relativistic+ border from 50% to 75% and would lead to unnecessary workloads which would further hamper our productivity on this site and waste our precious time.

Sorry, I'm new and from my perspective as a newbie it's just editing a couple of numbers but from your words it seems like it's more complex than that.