0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
It's preposterous to say that science has some how managed to "leave out" light travelling in space.
Chaos theory is a branch of mathematics focused on the behavior of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions. 'Chaos' is an interdisciplinary theory stating that within the apparent randomness of chaotic complex systems, there are underlying patterns,
Permeability (electromagnetism), the degree of magnetisation of a material in response to a magnetic field
t's possible that the path is chaotic- that's sometimes done deliberately.https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/9806183.pdfas far a I'm aware, it is currently in the box marked "fascinating, but useless".The chaos arises from a chaotic substrate.Why would a clear path - air, or even a vacuum- do that?
But they did, that is why I have spent years getting the answers but you don't want to listen.
science only ever considered white light which is a constant made by a mixture of constant frequencies.
We can't see randomness,
Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52But they did, that is why I have spent years getting the answers but you don't want to listen.NoThey didn't.They did quite a lot of work on it.Starting with stuff like Maxwell's equations, and going on to things like microwave radar and the fibre optic communications through which you are receiving this message.It really is preposterous to try to say they didn't .Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52science only ever considered white light which is a constant made by a mixture of constant frequencies. Clearly hogwash.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhotochemistryetcThere's a whole stack of stuff using lasers which only produce a single wavelength.Holography is, perhaps, the most widely used.Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52 We can't see randomness, Yes we can.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speckle_imagingWhy don't you spend some time finding out what we can, and do, achieve, before trying to tell us we can't.
Please provide the link to the light that is not white and permeates through space.
Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 20:27:01Please provide the link to the light that is not white and permeates through space. https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/what-monochromatic-light-how-used-468051
added- for the purpose of discussion are you happy calling the electromagnetic radiation that permeates through ''free space'' , clear light?
If it has no colour, how does it "know" to make, for example a bit of paper light up blue or green?
Since you are simply flat out wrong, I can't provide information about your hallucination.Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 21:09:33added- for the purpose of discussion are you happy calling the electromagnetic radiation that permeates through ''free space'' , clear light?It's just light; there's nothing "clear" about it.You need to get to grips with the fact that light is light.You only see it if it goes into your eye.Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/10/2017 21:24:03If it has no colour, how does it "know" to make, for example a bit of paper light up blue or green?The magnitude of feedback.Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/10/2017 21:24:03It's just light; there's nothing "clear" about it.Huh, no, it is very clear in appearance between my eyes and object, the light is invisible/clear between eye and observation. You are quite mad if you think it is not. I can see it is.
added- for the purpose of discussion are you happy calling the electromagnetic radiation that permeates through ''free space'' , clear light?It's just light; there's nothing "clear" about it.You need to get to grips with the fact that light is light.You only see it if it goes into your eye.
It's just light; there's nothing "clear" about it.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/10/2017 20:23:27Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52But they did, that is why I have spent years getting the answers but you don't want to listen.NoThey didn't.They did quite a lot of work on it.Starting with stuff like Maxwell's equations, and going on to things like microwave radar and the fibre optic communications through which you are receiving this message.It really is preposterous to try to say they didn't .Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52science only ever considered white light which is a constant made by a mixture of constant frequencies. Clearly hogwash.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhotochemistryetcThere's a whole stack of stuff using lasers which only produce a single wavelength.Holography is, perhaps, the most widely used.Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52 We can't see randomness, Yes we can.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speckle_imagingWhy don't you spend some time finding out what we can, and do, achieve, before trying to tell us we can't.I type in white light I get https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_LightPlease provide the link to the light that is not white and permeates through space. I will provide a link what I get when I type in clear lighthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Light
Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 20:27:01Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/10/2017 20:23:27Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52But they did, that is why I have spent years getting the answers but you don't want to listen.NoThey didn't.They did quite a lot of work on it.Starting with stuff like Maxwell's equations, and going on to things like microwave radar and the fibre optic communications through which you are receiving this message.It really is preposterous to try to say they didn't .Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52science only ever considered white light which is a constant made by a mixture of constant frequencies. Clearly hogwash.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhotochemistryetcThere's a whole stack of stuff using lasers which only produce a single wavelength.Holography is, perhaps, the most widely used.Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52 We can't see randomness, Yes we can.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speckle_imagingWhy don't you spend some time finding out what we can, and do, achieve, before trying to tell us we can't.I type in white light I get https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_LightPlease provide the link to the light that is not white and permeates through space. I will provide a link what I get when I type in clear lighthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_LightSo you have never seen light shining on a surface from the sun for example? Is the light on the surface clear? Of course it isnt Mr. Pigeon.
Quote from: The Spoon on 04/10/2017 22:12:49Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 20:27:01Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/10/2017 20:23:27Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52But they did, that is why I have spent years getting the answers but you don't want to listen.NoThey didn't.They did quite a lot of work on it.Starting with stuff like Maxwell's equations, and going on to things like microwave radar and the fibre optic communications through which you are receiving this message.It really is preposterous to try to say they didn't .Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52science only ever considered white light which is a constant made by a mixture of constant frequencies. Clearly hogwash.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhotochemistryetcThere's a whole stack of stuff using lasers which only produce a single wavelength.Holography is, perhaps, the most widely used.Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52 We can't see randomness, Yes we can.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speckle_imagingWhy don't you spend some time finding out what we can, and do, achieve, before trying to tell us we can't.I type in white light I get https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_LightPlease provide the link to the light that is not white and permeates through space. I will provide a link what I get when I type in clear lighthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_LightSo you have never seen light shining on a surface from the sun for example? Is the light on the surface clear? Of course it isnt Mr. Pigeon. Of course the light that glares off an object is not clear, we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''.
Quote from: Thebox on 05/10/2017 12:38:27Quote from: The Spoon on 04/10/2017 22:12:49Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 20:27:01Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/10/2017 20:23:27Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52But they did, that is why I have spent years getting the answers but you don't want to listen.NoThey didn't.They did quite a lot of work on it.Starting with stuff like Maxwell's equations, and going on to things like microwave radar and the fibre optic communications through which you are receiving this message.It really is preposterous to try to say they didn't .Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52science only ever considered white light which is a constant made by a mixture of constant frequencies. Clearly hogwash.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhotochemistryetcThere's a whole stack of stuff using lasers which only produce a single wavelength.Holography is, perhaps, the most widely used.Quote from: Thebox on 04/10/2017 15:16:52 We can't see randomness, Yes we can.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speckle_imagingWhy don't you spend some time finding out what we can, and do, achieve, before trying to tell us we can't.I type in white light I get https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_LightPlease provide the link to the light that is not white and permeates through space. I will provide a link what I get when I type in clear lighthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_LightSo you have never seen light shining on a surface from the sun for example? Is the light on the surface clear? Of course it isnt Mr. Pigeon. Of course the light that glares off an object is not clear, we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''. Oh I see. So it is the special kind of light that you have made up that we are talking about? Not the light that everybody else is referring to? Good diversion pigeon.
'we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''. 'Utter nonsense.
Quote from: The Spoon on 05/10/2017 21:08:51'we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''. 'Utter nonsense. Huh. quite clearly you have lost it. Do you not know the difference between visible light and light?
Quote from: Thebox on 05/10/2017 21:58:10Quote from: The Spoon on 05/10/2017 21:08:51'we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''. 'Utter nonsense. Huh. quite clearly you have lost it. Do you not know the difference between visible light and light?A good definition of light can be found in your favourite (and only) source of information:'Light is electromagnetic radiation within a certain portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. The word usually refers to visible light, which is visible to the human eye and is responsible for the sense of sight'We are referring to the usual definition. No doubt you are referring to your own definition which nobody else on the planet recognises as usual to ensure you get some attention and continue this farce.
Quote from: The Spoon on 06/10/2017 11:18:19Quote from: Thebox on 05/10/2017 21:58:10Quote from: The Spoon on 05/10/2017 21:08:51'we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''. 'Utter nonsense. Huh. quite clearly you have lost it. Do you not know the difference between visible light and light?A good definition of light can be found in your favourite (and only) source of information:'Light is electromagnetic radiation within a certain portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. The word usually refers to visible light, which is visible to the human eye and is responsible for the sense of sight'We are referring to the usual definition. No doubt you are referring to your own definition which nobody else on the planet recognises as usual to ensure you get some attention and continue this farce. It is quite clear to me now that you are just trolling me like Mr Chemist, so no longer will I be replying to your replies. In fact I won't be bother replying again in general. I can not beat religion , I mean science. Carry on believing your own lies about the Universe, I can't be bothered anymore wasting my very precious time of life, this is getting me nowhere so time to move on into something else.
Quote from: Thebox on 06/10/2017 11:25:36Quote from: The Spoon on 06/10/2017 11:18:19Quote from: Thebox on 05/10/2017 21:58:10Quote from: The Spoon on 05/10/2017 21:08:51'we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''. 'Utter nonsense. Huh. quite clearly you have lost it. Do you not know the difference between visible light and light?A good definition of light can be found in your favourite (and only) source of information:'Light is electromagnetic radiation within a certain portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. The word usually refers to visible light, which is visible to the human eye and is responsible for the sense of sight'We are referring to the usual definition. No doubt you are referring to your own definition which nobody else on the planet recognises as usual to ensure you get some attention and continue this farce. It is quite clear to me now that you are just trolling me like Mr Chemist, so no longer will I be replying to your replies. In fact I won't be bother replying again in general. I can not beat religion , I mean science. Carry on believing your own lies about the Universe, I can't be bothered anymore wasting my very precious time of life, this is getting me nowhere so time to move on into something else. In other words, the definition does not conform to what you think it should do, the world does not conform to what you think it should, evidence does not confirm your deluded beliefs so you accuse people who point out your mistakes of trolling. Amazing how many people you accuse of trolling really. You remind me of Donald Trump but without the intellect. ETA. This is not an airport so there is no need to announce your departure.
Quote from: The Spoon on 06/10/2017 11:29:34Quote from: Thebox on 06/10/2017 11:25:36Quote from: The Spoon on 06/10/2017 11:18:19Quote from: Thebox on 05/10/2017 21:58:10Quote from: The Spoon on 05/10/2017 21:08:51'we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''. 'Utter nonsense. Huh. quite clearly you have lost it. Do you not know the difference between visible light and light?A good definition of light can be found in your favourite (and only) source of information:'Light is electromagnetic radiation within a certain portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. The word usually refers to visible light, which is visible to the human eye and is responsible for the sense of sight'We are referring to the usual definition. No doubt you are referring to your own definition which nobody else on the planet recognises as usual to ensure you get some attention and continue this farce. It is quite clear to me now that you are just trolling me like Mr Chemist, so no longer will I be replying to your replies. In fact I won't be bother replying again in general. I can not beat religion , I mean science. Carry on believing your own lies about the Universe, I can't be bothered anymore wasting my very precious time of life, this is getting me nowhere so time to move on into something else. In other words, the definition does not conform to what you think it should do, the world does not conform to what you think it should, evidence does not confirm your deluded beliefs so you accuse people who point out your mistakes of trolling. Amazing how many people you accuse of trolling really. You remind me of Donald Trump but without the intellect. ETA. This is not an airport so there is no need to announce your departure. How about I be totally blunt with you, you are stupid. You are not a clever person, you can only do remembrance of subjective dogma, End of continue to be stupid.
Quote from: Thebox on 06/10/2017 13:49:30Quote from: The Spoon on 06/10/2017 11:29:34Quote from: Thebox on 06/10/2017 11:25:36Quote from: The Spoon on 06/10/2017 11:18:19Quote from: Thebox on 05/10/2017 21:58:10Quote from: The Spoon on 05/10/2017 21:08:51'we are not taking about the visible light of interaction. We are discussing the light that permeates through ''free space''. 'Utter nonsense. Huh. quite clearly you have lost it. Do you not know the difference between visible light and light?A good definition of light can be found in your favourite (and only) source of information:'Light is electromagnetic radiation within a certain portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. The word usually refers to visible light, which is visible to the human eye and is responsible for the sense of sight'We are referring to the usual definition. No doubt you are referring to your own definition which nobody else on the planet recognises as usual to ensure you get some attention and continue this farce. It is quite clear to me now that you are just trolling me like Mr Chemist, so no longer will I be replying to your replies. In fact I won't be bother replying again in general. I can not beat religion , I mean science. Carry on believing your own lies about the Universe, I can't be bothered anymore wasting my very precious time of life, this is getting me nowhere so time to move on into something else. In other words, the definition does not conform to what you think it should do, the world does not conform to what you think it should, evidence does not confirm your deluded beliefs so you accuse people who point out your mistakes of trolling. Amazing how many people you accuse of trolling really. You remind me of Donald Trump but without the intellect. ETA. This is not an airport so there is no need to announce your departure. How about I be totally blunt with you, you are stupid. You are not a clever person, you can only do remembrance of subjective dogma, End of continue to be stupid. Yep. Like 'the Donald'. Where facts are inconvenient to your belief, they are 'fake news'. Enjoy your delusion Pigeon.