theory of light

[Gorghandi]

I believe that the faster light moves the darker it is, that the space filled with darkness, in space is super fast moving light particles. with addition of other effects. a shadow for example, the slower moving light gets blocked by the solid mass, leaving only the fastest light particles to penetrate the object and form a darker impact, past it.  a black hole for example, light collects at the event horizon condensing almost halting, time actually seems to stop as it collects kinetic energy, till it gets enough to break past the barrier and super speeds up till it is no longer light but darkness. and I also believe that upon big bang, all universe space was fill with its light and reflected/bounced back over and over again, instantaneously creating Jetstream like channels that light and other particles got trapped in producing matter controlled by electromagnetic forces(we call this gravity still). and that if light is a reflection of distance and overlap of itself, that this supports we are the technically living in the past, which can support for how prophets can see the future cause its already happened, and they resignate at a frequency that lets them enter other lightsteams , it also could help explain why in physics particles are only random and land where they do if you notice. and only land because they already decided to before they actually decide to.

[Aves]

The speed of light in a vacuum is c, or approximately 3.00×10⁸m/s. The speed of light through matter, such as an atmosphere or fluid, is less than c. So you are correct that light travels faster through space, which is generally dark, than through other mediums.

As for the black hole, light that enters the event horizon does not escape it; it doesn't stop moving at the event horizon.

[kaempfer13]

brightness is all about the number of Photons that are observed (reach the observer) per timeperiod. The speed of light is constant for each medium, unless extreme gravitational forces are in effect in which case each photon is affected according to its distance to the center(s) of the masses that pull them. As no medium is really perfectly permeable, light that has to travel through a medium will be lowered in intensity/partially absorbed (in addition to traveling slower) compared to light of equal intensity that passes right by the medium. Also in a hyphotetical situation where you flash light of lower speeds (not like such a thing existed) it would take the Photons longer to reach the eye (observer). In that hypothetical situation if you also reduced the number of Photons in an area to match that of faster light (this is not actually a thing) it would appear dimmer, as fewer photons per timeperiod would actually reach the eye, which might be how you got that misconception. If the same light source emitted light at two different speeds (however that should work) but with equal intensity, both lights would appear equally bright with one of them being unnoticeably delayed compared to the faster if you watch from afar (far away enough or hypothetical difference in speed being higher would even make the delay noticeable).
Hope this resolved more than it caused confusion.

[Gorghandi]

I should clarify, that when I am talking about light, in my theory, I am not technically speaking about observable light necessarily, but light as an elemental particle. comprised of its own ethereal mass, speed, and energy. I forgot that most folk only understand light as a response stimulated by their senses.

[Aves]

We are using light as a term for electromagnetic radiation, quantized as photons. This includes things not observable by our senses such as radio waves or gamma rays. If not electromagnetic radiation, then what are you referring to as light?

[OldTrees]

1)By light are you referring to photons?
2)How would you test this theory? How do you predict the speed of a photon prior to collision would affect the effect it has in its collision?
3)How do you account for quasars?