It is always dark, Light is an illusion and not a thing!

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by theorist-constant12345, Nov 2, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    From the video I provided, of the laser experiment, the visual experimental observation within a certainty shows the defining of dark, and energy. We can clearly observe both states at the same time, we are not blind in the dark. We simply have no energy to see.
    You can clearly see that the energized area is visual and you can clearly observe, that the laser beam vanishes into the dark once un-propagated and in its weaker state of zero net charge, and maximum velocity.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    "Dark" and "energy" are not two states. "Dark" is the absence of visible light.
    We are blind if we cannot see any light. This is true whether or not that lack of seeing light is caused by darkness, or our eyes being covered, or our eyes malfunctioning.
    That is quite literally correct. We do not have enough energy, in the form of photons, entering our eyes to be able to see.
    The reason you cannot see the laser is that the air is cleaner than the water. If the water was perfectly clean and the air was dusty, you would see the beam in the air but not the water. Thus your hypothesis fails.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    OK so you do not know what permittivity and permeability is.

    You do not know what work is.

    You do not know how a prism works.

    You apparently do not know english either.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Holy crap, you are so confused. We see the laser beam because some of the beam is scattered in water so some photons hit our eyes from the laser.

    It is a lucky thing you are not capable of understanding how incredibly ignorant you sound - you would be so embarrased.
     
    paddoboy likes this.
  8. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    Soon I will find the correct wording.
    Dark is an incorporeal impenetrable gloom to sight that is impalpable , that is filled by impalpable Em radiation, that our eyes use to couple to our brains, any matter within the line of sight, by change, in the constant of impalpable spacial volume , making the impenetrable gloom, penetrable for sight, by a temporal energy transition.
     
  9. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    Nice sermon!
     
  10. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Well this sure ain't it
    It seems that you are trying to say something about a scenario like this.

    If there were no other stars but the sun and you were in space near the sun but not looking at it you would see only blackness even though there were untold billions of photons right in front of your face.

    Is it something like this you are trying to say?
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
  11. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    Sort of yes, except with the exception, of that we do not have enough dimension to stop the Em Radiation flooding around us.
     
  12. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Unfortunately that makes absolutely no sense at all.
     
  13. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    In simple terms, we are not wide enough to completely block the light and some can bend around us.

    I will just answer this thread with a simple question,

    If light has to reflect off matter into our eyes, so that we can see that matter,
    Why is it that in experiment, a laser has no reflective ray trace in a smoke filled room?. Experiment shows no reflective beam. Experiment shows us that we are seeing a change in a constant, an energy constant sent through a no, or low energy constant, that is greater than the constant.
     
  14. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    That also makes no sense.

    It does! When the laser hits smoke some of the photons are reflected off of the smoke particles and that is what you see.

    It most certainly does. We use lasers at my work and you clearly see the beams when they pass through smoke or dust.
    Uneducated gibberish.
     
  15. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    I own a laser, I can clearly see in a smoke filled room there is only an incident ray, and there is no reflective ray.
    If you use a mirror, or a total reflective surface, then yes the beam will have a reflective , redirected beam. I observe no evidence of a reflective beam through smoke off a wall for example from a laser.
     
  16. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    I will add this description from Wiki.

    ''Night vision is the ability to see in low light conditions. Whether by biological or technological means, night vision is made possible by a combination of two approaches: sufficient spectral range, and sufficient intensity range. Humans have poor night vision compared to many animals, in part because the human eye lacks a tapetum lucidum''.

    Consider the effect of sufficient spectral range, and sufficient intensity, being created in the day time, to make up for the lacking in a tapetum lucidum.

    At night there is an insufficient magnitude of both intensity and frequency, in the day time, and approaching daytime, or approaching nigh time, twilight is the increasing or decreasing in the magnitudes, comparing to the glooming translucently.

    I believe I have offered several observable axioms. Bio logical comparison, lasers etc.


    Consider , Humans have poor night vision compared to many animals, so the logical axiom is that we need a greater sufficient amount of magnitudes to see in the dark, having effectively night vision by temporal means.
     
  17. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    Bump - Have I won this argument?
     
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Nope. People just gave up on you. You don't even understand reflection.
     
  19. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    I do not understand reflection , hmmm, let me see,

    a reflective surface , a none reflective surface, Photons have to reflect of matter , Photons have to be remotely sensed by our eyes, reflecting of the matter into our eyes.
    Really, very strange how my laser has no reflective ray heading towards my eyes, any Photons from the incident laser beam, that may or may not disperse into the atmosphere, will have little to no intensity for our sight use.
    We are not blind in the dark, there is just no energy to see by or to detect. Dark is a constant , and by interactions of energy in the constant is how we see.
     
  20. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    No, you do not. From an earlier post:

    "I own a laser, I can clearly see in a smoke filled room there is only an incident ray, and there is no reflective ray."

    You do not understand that you are seeing light reflected from the smoke particles in the beam.
     
  21. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    You are incorrect, if the incident ray through the smoke was fragmenting and particles were dispersing through the smoke from the linearity of the beam, then you would see the fragmentation in the smoke, which you do not, you do not also understand that if there were a small amount of fragmentation it would be to weak to see.
    There is no evidence by experimental observation that suggests a beam fragments through the smoke into your eyes, you see the incident ray has a singular linearity in the dark, so stop trying to lie, and defend a complete lie that has no experimental observation to concur the lie.
    Light reflects off reflective surfaces, and does not reflect off none reflective surfaces , colour is propagation, or man made frequency manipulation of the constant in a constant.
    Your spectrum is nothing more than energy difference.
     
  22. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543

    You have a lot to learn... and you have a huge ego to manage.
    Just as there is no such thing as a perfect reflector, so to is there no such thing as a perfect absorber other than BH's.
    Colour of any object, simply in the first instance, depends on the nature of the EMS that falls upon it, and secondly, the reflective property of that object. Certainly not the posturing bullshit you have suggested.
    Still, I imagine that is why this is in pseudoscience.
     
  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    You do indeed see reflection in the smoke. You do indeed see attenuation due to the reflection of the beam in the smoke.
    A laser shining directly into your eye is an incident ray from the laser. If you see the beam from the side, then it is due to reflected light. That's the definition.
    Correct. Smoke particles have reflective surfaces. That's why you can see smoke, both in normal light and in lasers.
    No, color is color and propagation is propagation. They are different.
    Close to correct! Different photons at different places on the spectrum (i.e. different colors, or different frequencies) do indeed have different energies. A spectrum is made up of photons of different energies, based on their wavelength.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page