So light obviously travels at the speed of light, wouldn't that mean light travels as far as it possibly can instantaneously?
Relative to the light that is true. All time stops for light so from its perspective it takes zero time to do any real distance. Of course the other way of viewing it is that from the perspective of light all distance shrinks to zero so no matter what the speed you must reach the end of the universe instantly.
No. Because light has a speed, it takes time to travel any given distance. If the distance is short, then the time is short and the inverse is true.
Light travels at 186,000 miles per second, or about 671 million miles per hour. Technicaly it doesn't travel as far as it possibly can instantaneously because there's a limit set by the its own speed so it coudnt travel 250.000 miles in a second.
So light obviously travels at the speed of light, wouldn't that mean light travels as far as it possibly can instantaneously? No. Time does not apply to quantum objects, like photons. Additionally, the formulas for massive bodies (Lorentz transforms) cannot be applied to light. Light can never see light leaving at c. So there is no way to answer this question definitely one way or the other. Light responds proportionately to the space through which it passes, which is not possible if travel is instantaneous. Also photons do not age, but assemblies of photons (aka light) does age.
In the light's own reference frame the travel time is zero. That's how the formulas work out anyway, but that's not really a legitimate reference frame for special relativity. It's inappropriate to use that formula. In your reference frame as an observer, it takes the expected amount of time, i.e. d/c. Your clock is not shifted by observing something moving, only by moving yourself.
