This looks a *lot* like a reflection in the fence to me.
Imagine that piece of fence where the main "ghost" is seen is actually, for whatever reason, reflective. From the location of the camera taking the photo, imagine tracing the light back to that piece of fence. The light would reflect off the fence and into the camera from ... where?
Why would a chain-link fence be reflective? It doesn't make a lot of sense. But look at the photo. That chain-link fence section where our "ghosts" appear is not at all clear. You can't see the chain links properly, even in the magnified images. Now, who is to say that there isn't a clear sheet of hard plastic, or similar, covering the rear side of that fence panel? If there was, that could produce the reflection. But there's no way to tell for sure merely from the image.
I find it curious that the subject appears to be wearing such an uncommon outfit. A light-coloured suit with a very dark shirt?
Perhaps the apparition is inverted?
View attachment 1383
Dont be negative.(wink)Perhaps the apparition is inverted?
Perhaps the apparition is inverted?
Also, subject smaller than ladies in distance..How tall was Elvis?And no, there's no sheet of hard plastic in front of it.
Is that a politically correct thing to say?Perhaps the apparition is inverted?
I'm not JR, so I won't be forever saying the same things to you MR.And no, there's no sheet of hard plastic in front of it.
Light is a measurable phenomenon, it has an effect on the material world, which makes it material. Everything is material, nothing non-material exists.Actually he said mass and energy are the same thing. But then you knew that.
Your example simple proves that immaterial things can influence material things. Consciousness is another example. Ghosts are another.
Light is a measurable phenomenon, it has an effect on the material world, which makes it material. Everything is material, nothing non-material exists.
Everything that exists is physical and material. Otherwise no evidence would be possible of it. Light is measured in photons, which hit film or a light sensor and produce a reaction. If ghosts are immaterial, they couldn't produce a reaction.You're confusing material with physical. Material pertains only to things made of matter.
Whereas physical pertains to...?You're confusing material with physical. Material pertains only to things made of matter.
Whereas physical pertains to...?
Materialism and physicalism are views often taken to be synonymous within philosophy, and within science in particular. Some might be able to detail a difference but in most respects I would think the two are synonymous: material is that which pertains to matter; physical is that which is affected by the laws of physics. One could argue that matter is only one such thing that is affected by the laws of physics, with energy being example of another, but the two are equivalent (E=mc^2 etc).
If you wish to raise a difference, a distinction, please do and perhaps others will follow, or dispute the distinction - although probably best for the philosophy thread? I for one would use the two as synonymous, and take them to be so whenever I come across the terms.
Can you honestly say that you know and appreciate any difference in the terms when used?
Everything that exists is physical and material. Otherwise no evidence would be possible of it. Light is measured in photons, which hit film or a light sensor and produce a reaction. If ghosts are immaterial, they couldn't produce a reaction.
And in those dictionaries they will undoubtedly provide "material" as a synonym for "physical".Yes..I do make that distinction as does the dictionary. Material is made of matter, and physical is what can be measured and quantified. It's not rocket science.
No.The spectrum of the immaterial runs the full gamut from the physical immaterial like light, space, and time to the non-physical immaterial like consciousness, concepts, and mathematical laws. Ghosts occupy a position on this sliding scale, but lacking full knowledge of their nature, we can at best only speculate.
And in those dictionaries they will undoubtedly provide "material" as a synonym for "physical".
Heck, let's just pick the one that Google provides:
physical
adjective
2. relating to things perceived through the senses as opposed to the mind; tangible or concrete.
"the physical world"
synonyms: material, substantial, solid, concrete, tangible, palpable, visible, real, actual
"everything physical in the universe"
It's a wider and rather more complex matter (pun intended) than I think you give it credit for, especially when you start asserting that consciousness is non-physical and immaterial.
I think the cap says it all.The picture I get has something funny going on in the upper left corner??
View attachment 1382
Indeed. Can we all agree now that - as with the Devil who can quote the Bible for his own purposes - dictionary definitions are too broad and general to serve as a solid point in a debate?
Humpty would not be the only one using that approach.. I will whistle and you can point.When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'