The light is in our eyes...

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

  1. Nacho Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    123
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



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

    Messages:
    17,509
    So can we agree that mainstream scientific thought is that the visual universe is essentially a mental construction based on data entering our eyes. That the perception of "out there" is an illusion premised on that data and constructed subjectively from that data by our brain?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    I don't know is that what mainstream science thinks ?
     
  8. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,201
    That's how.
     
  9. Nacho Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    123
    I wouldn't agree it is an illusion unless your (my) senses are in collusion with each other. Look at an object, and then go feel that object. Does what you see of the object conform to what you felt of it?
     
  10. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    well... hopefully if you hang around long enough you might find out...
     
  11. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,201
    It's not that a pinhole camera is better. It's that a pin hole is a small aperture, which results in great depth of field and the focal length is wide which also makes it easy to get infinite dept of field.

    Use a standard camera with a wide angle lens and a small aperture and you will get essentially infinite dept of field as well.
     
  12. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    I tend to agree but this is unimportant.What does mainstream conventional science have to say?
    Based on what has been found to date science is pretty clear that our visual universe is incredibly subjective and that all 8 billion or so individuals have an inexplicable shared and consistent subjective world view.
     
  13. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    but would agree that the lens is not entirely essential to the taking of still imagery? Yet is for any moving imagery ( as in animated)

    Refraction through a lens is not needed to invert the image?
     
  14. Nacho Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    123
    Are you sure you're wanting answers? You tend to ignore them or gloss over them. Also, you say things like the above, but have not left any kind of links to back it up.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  15. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,201
    Why are we speaking of "mainstream scientific thought". Do you have an issue with this info?

    Of course we don't see if we don't have eyes. The tree is still out there but without eyes you don't see it.

    Are you just learning that we "see" via our eyes and brain?
     
  16. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    what does science have to say about it?
     
  17. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,201
    Your "arguments" tend to wander all over the place don't they? A pinhole functions as a lens. This is a "point" without a distinction.
     
  18. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    From what I have come to understand there is no clear explanation other than to come to the conclusion that:
    There are no links that can be used to explain how it is that the visual universe appears to be out side our eyes.
    Therefore accordingly:
    One can conclude that the visual universe ( out there) is a subjective mental construct.
     
  19. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    evolution?
     
  20. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    true but there is no refraction involved...
    You fail to see the need for precision in your assessments...

    A lens offers refraction
    A pin hole doesn't.

    therefore the lens and focus issue is superfluous to the issue at hand.
     
  21. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    Hmmm....what of consistancy ? Of billions of people ?
     
  22. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,201
    Sight is a mental construct. What else would it be? That has no bearing on the existence of what is out there however. The tree is there whether you see it or not.
     
  23. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,509
    true but this is ancillary to the question. The reality or not of the actual tree is not in question.
    Sight is a mental construct according to currently held light theory ...note emphasis on the word "theory".
     

Share This Page