See, that's one way of thinking about it, because that's how light works. Light particles (photons) are separate particles (and waves because quantum mechanics and electrodynamics), but darkness is not. Your description also fits, but darkness being nothing - one easily deformable pile of nothing - means that it can be regarded more like a liquid.
Even slow moving objects through a normal liquid has a tiny gap behind it because the liquid takes a finite time to catch up to it because it has a finite speed, and it takes a finite time for the pressure wave in front of the object to spread out meaning that it takes time for the liquid to notice that it has moved.
Darkness does not take time to catch up to light, implying that it travels at infinite speeds to accommodate the shape it has around the light.

It's an interesting thought I'll give ya that.

At some point I heard that "Nothing that carries information moves faster than light" as opposed to "nothing travels faster than light".

Take a point in space, and launch two photons from it in opposite directions. The distance between the two photons increases at twice the speed of light, but the distance doesn't carry information because it's an abstract concept and is a relationship between two objects that do carry information. To find the distance, you need to observe each photon.

I'll have to admit that all I know about light is that it's series of particles moving at a certain speed, but I still don't understand how it's also "waves".

But as I've said, darkness is the idea of absence of light, and apparently can travel at speed higher than the speed of light like you said according to the aforementioned definition.

That is, darkness is still an abstract concept, so I'd guess you can't really observe it directly. I just don't feel like agreeing on it's comparison to a liquid (or a gas) in terms of behavior.

I see.
The manner in which I understood that something can travel faster than light is that light's wavefunction can be described as a wave packet - that is a wave-like package of waves.
In this sense, the package can move at speed c at tops, but the individual waves that it contains can move much faster, but must always be confined to the package.
I think you're right though.

Diffraction = wave phenomenon.

Whut?

You know how when you shine light through a thin grid onto a wall and several dots appear there? That's because there's a thing called an electric field and a thing called a magnetic field, and light is a sine wave of a magnetic field plus a sine wave of an electric field, meaning that when it goes through a grid, it will create constructive interference at some points on the wall.
That's wave-like behaviour and really fuck'n awesome!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction

I think you're right.
Since darkness can be described as a function of "if there's a photon, then it's 0, if not it is 1" as a consequence of not being an actual thing, it is analogous to the dot on the moon.
Thus the phrase "nothing moves faster than light" becomes technically true.

See, that's one way of thinking about it, because that's how light works. Light particles (photons) are separate particles (and waves because quantum mechanics and electrodynamics), but darkness is not. Your description also fits, but darkness being nothing - one easily deformable pile of nothing - means that it can be regarded more like a liquid.
Even slow moving objects through a normal liquid has a tiny gap behind it because the liquid takes a finite time to catch up to it because it has a finite speed, and it takes a finite time for the pressure wave in front of the object to spread out meaning that it takes time for the liquid to notice that it has moved.
Darkness does not take time to catch up to light, implying that it travels at infinite speeds to accommodate the shape it has around the light.

It's an interesting thought I'll give ya that.

At some point I heard that "Nothing that carries information moves faster than light" as opposed to "nothing travels faster than light".

Take a point in space, and launch two photons from it in opposite directions. The distance between the two photons increases at twice the speed of light, but the distance doesn't carry information because it's an abstract concept and is a relationship between two objects that do carry information. To find the distance, you need to observe each photon.

I'll have to admit that all I know about light is that it's series of particles moving at a certain speed, but I still don't understand how it's also "waves".

But as I've said, darkness is the idea of absence of light, and apparently can travel at speed higher than the speed of light like you said according to the aforementioned definition.

That is, darkness is still an abstract concept, so I'd guess you can't really observe it directly. I just don't feel like agreeing on it's comparison to a liquid (or a gas) in terms of behavior.

I see.
The manner in which I understood that something can travel faster than light is that light's wavefunction can be described as a wave packet - that is a wave-like package of waves.
In this sense, the package can move at speed c at tops, but the individual waves that it contains can move much faster, but must always be confined to the package.
I think you're right though.

Diffraction = wave phenomenon.

Whut?

You know how when you shine light through a thin grid onto a wall and several dots appear there? That's because there's a thing called an electric field and a thing called a magnetic field, and light is a sine wave of a magnetic field plus a sine wave of an electric field, meaning that when it goes through a grid, it will create constructive interference at some points on the wall.
That's wave-like behaviour and really fuck'n awesome!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction