The light is in our eyes...

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Quantum Quack, May 21, 2017.

  1. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,622
    This is how we can process a lot of photons simulataneously.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoreceptor_cell
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    been doing a little research in to latency of visual processing...
    what seems like a good article :
    Simon Thorpe, Denis Fize and Catherine Marlot Published: Nature 6/June/1996
    https://www.researchgate.net/profil...-of-Processing-in-the-Human-Visual-System.pdf

    also:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_N1
    and
    http://www.brainfacts.org/sensing-t.../articles/2012/vision-processing-information/


    All links refer to processing information but do not specify the primary reconstruction of our visual field but more about reaction time** to visual stimulus.( which can be to the order of 0.15 seconds according to the first article mentioned above.) That is to say there appears to be no insight offered in to the initial conditions that "backgrounds" the processing they speak of.

    There is no information that I could find in any of the articles regarding the reconstruction of vacant space which fills a massive amount ( if not the majority) of our 3 dimensional visual field. Dealing almost exclusively with the reactions to light only.

    It appears obvious that for the illusion to provide an external 3 dimensional field of view the ability to process vacant space or spacial data is essential.

    ** reacting to what has already been recreated as a sensory illusion that is ultimately implied as necessary, by conventional light theories.
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2017
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,200
    Why do you keep talking about an article taking about "photons but not light waves" as though this has anything to do with whatever distinction you are trying to draw?

    Why do you keep looking at "conventional light theories" when you know that you are never going to accept any convention theory of any kind as that is the antithesis of why you are here?

    By the way, we see photons. They are associated with waves as well but when we measure we are measuring photons (not that this distinction has anything to do with your vacant space interest).

    Of course you aren't going to find that kind of nonsense terminology in any actual scientific article.
     
  8. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    do we? what do they look like?
     
  9. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,622
    Right, for that you need wave-receptors instead of photo-receptors, but they are all sold out.....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please, don't even think this has anything to do with the double slit experiment and wave interference patterns.
     
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,622
    Seattle,
    I want to follow up on my post # 388
    Am I too far out in left field here?
    I was just trying to identify the Doppler effect (drop the SR part) and I may have found confirmation of that aspect.
    http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node106.html

    Is that better?
     
  11. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,622
    Read it and be astounded by the knowlegde of the properties and functions of the eye, *the most important sensory organ", allowing for a visually cognition and experience (the patterns expressed) in and by a physical object or function..
    As Carlin said; "I worship the sun. I can see the sun, duhh. And that kinda helps along the credibility." And it treats me just fine.[/quote]
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2017
  12. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,645
    Perfect. Well done. Problem solved. Thread closed.
     
    Seattle likes this.
  13. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    just have to keep looking I guess... any ideas DaveC?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: May 30, 2017
  14. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    still waiting on Seattle to tell us all what a photon looks like...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,645
    Well, that's the "unscientific method".

    Get an idea in your head, then take years to sift through a bunch of data, throwing out any evidence that doesn't match your idea, and seizing upon misunderstandings that seem to support your idea.




    I think what's most troubling is that you haven't availed yourself of the facts of mainstream optical science before going off and inventing your own ideas. So, when you ask 'why this and why that', your questions are poorly formed. That's one of the reasons why so many people are having trouble understanding you.

    And for that reason, your own ideas can't be in contrast with science; they can't be outside the box, because you haven't checked to see where the box is.

    As Pauli once put it to a student, who had his own malformed ideas, your ideas are "not even wrong".


    Learn what science is telling you, before going and making up your own ideas.
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2017
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,723
    Light.
     
  17. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    QQ,

    You have had a nice thread so far. Now it is at the verge of degeneration. DaveC12345 is not worth engaging. He will find fault with you not with your argument.
     
  18. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,822
    Seems like this would be a good time to finally stop feeding this troll. I suppose it is barely possible that he may not be a troll; he may just be, uh, challenged.
     
  19. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,297
    Oh God this is so true.
     
    DaveC426913 likes this.
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,645
    I think this says it all:
     
  21. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,297
    Calls to mind Spike Milligan's : "Who turned on the dark?"
     
  22. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,200
    Wasn't there a guy a few years ago on here with a theory of dark?
     
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,622
    Well, if we can have a space race, why not an empty space race?....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page