Is that "no mass" (whatsoever, period)... no rest mass... or no relativistic mass? [i've never measured either of those... which one(s) have you recorded? ]
Anyway, we're getting into wave/particle duality now (as well as mass/energy equivalence), and so, okay... perhaps 'matter' wasn't the most perfect word [which is why i generally favor the less technical term "stuff".] But thank goodness we got you back on a science track here.
So that still leaves my original question completely unanswered however (except for the Star Trek sci-fi "warp 9" response by ...JER. Good one!).
Language getting in the way?
Known speed of light was a math product. A bit less than 300,000kps Faster than the speed of light challenges relativity. Imagination is at work: http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw43.html
Stuff can travel at the maximum speed of light [if> stuff doesn't get in its way
Hard science will not answer the question that some want it to. They cannot use science to justify their faith.
But thank goodness we got you back on a science track here.
I recognized that the objective to the question asked, was to make a connection between hard science and faith. Some thought using mysticism was an answer; others use the soft sciences to make their point. I did not notice that Tacit had not applied soft science in any of his analysis. His Linguistics tried to explain how the issues was being confused. Using the science of Cultural Anthropology he demonstrated how and why the connection couldn't be made. Others also made the same distinctions, examples of how Giants in the field of both disciplines were trying to find a Consilience to move the argument forward were posted, all within the bounds of science. The only time that the argument left the realm of science is when mysticism was introduced and attempts were made to validate it.
]
