---
title: "Discussion on \"Why the Internet Can Never Be Faster Than Light (And How I Proved It With Two Cloud Servers)\" | Hashnode"
description: "Discussion on \"Why the Internet Can Never Be Faster Than Light (And How I Proved It With Two Cloud Servers)\". There's a number that sounds boring but is actually kind of amazing: 56 milliseconds. That's roughly the fastest a piece of data could travel from New York to London and back, even with perfect intern"
url: "https://hashnode.com/posts/why-the-internet-can-never-be-faster-than-light-and-how-i-proved-it-with-two-cloud-servers/6a9ae22c5bc14f367133ab52"
---

[Feed](https://hashnode.com/feed) /

Discussion

# [Why the Internet Can Never Be Faster Than Light (And How I Proved It With Two Cloud Servers)](https://rabindranath-tiwari.com.np/why-the-internet-can-never-be-faster-than-light-and-how-i-proved-it-with-two-cloud-servers?utm_source=hashnode&utm_medium=feed)

There's a number that sounds boring but is actually kind of amazing: 56 milliseconds. That's roughly the fastest a piece of data could travel from New York to London and back, even with perfect intern

Sep 4 · 6 min read · rabindranath-tiwari.com.np  
Read the article

## Written by

[Rohan Tiwari](https://hashnode.com/@tyranny)

@tyranny · Nepal

  
[View profile](https://hashnode.com/@tyranny)

Beyond Code

## Responses 3

Markdown supported · ⌘↵ to post

[Julian Neagu](https://hashnode.com/@julianneagulab)

[Sep 7](https://hashnode.com/posts/why-the-internet-can-never-be-faster-than-light-and-how-i-proved-it-with-two-cloud-servers/6a9ae22c5bc14f367133ab52/comment/6a9ea330f5304c56c324ab0d)

i like that you tested the math with actual cloud servers 76ms vs the theoretical floor makes the gap very real

[Habib Shah](https://hashnode.com/@sawasshas)

[Sep 5](https://hashnode.com/posts/why-the-internet-can-never-be-faster-than-light-and-how-i-proved-it-with-two-cloud-servers/6a9ae22c5bc14f367133ab52/comment/6a9c1b0c4e00af6070ddb916)

The derivation is clean. The conclusion is a little stronger than the maths supports though, and the gap is the interesting part. [hashnode.com/posts/why-the-internet-can-never-be-…](https://hashnode.com/posts/why-the-internet-can-never-be-faster-than-light-and-how-i-proved-it-with-two-cloud-servers/6a9ae22c5bc14f367133ab52) Two different things are bundled into your 56 ms. The speed of light is a law. The refractive index of 1.5 is an engineering choice, and it is actively being removed: hollow-core fiber guides light through air rather than glass, so its index sits near 1.0, worth roughly a third off transit time. It is already deployed on latency-sensitive financial routes. So that half of the number is not physics, it is the current generation of glass.

[gyapa ganda](https://hashnode.com/@lattice)

[Sep 4](https://hashnode.com/posts/why-the-internet-can-never-be-faster-than-light-and-how-i-proved-it-with-two-cloud-servers/6a9ae22c5bc14f367133ab52/comment/6a9b46f4a874566f0de43f5c)

The derivation is clean. The conclusion is a little stronger than the maths supports though, and the gap is the interesting part.

Two different things are bundled into your 56 ms. The speed of light is a law. The refractive index of 1.5 is an engineering choice, and it is actively being removed: hollow-core fiber guides light through air rather than glass, so its index sits near 1.0, worth roughly a third off transit time. It is already deployed on latency-sensitive financial routes. So that half of the number is not physics, it is the current generation of glass.

The other half cuts the opposite way. 56 ms assumes a great-circle path and no cable follows one. Transatlantic routes bend around seabed terrain and landing sites, so the real floor sits meaningfully above your figure before any switching or queuing is counted.

The version I would defend: about 37 ms is the floor set by c, 56 ms is the floor for glass on a path nobody can build, and a real connection lands above both. Only the first is a law, and separating them makes the physics claim stronger rather than weaker.