0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
... distance is a unmeasured length,
We don't directly observe individual photons, we observe light as a whole.
Quote from: Thebox on 16/02/2016 14:16:30... distance is a unmeasured length, So if someone asked you the distance between Stoke and Liverpool you would reply "unmeasured"?Quote from: Thebox on 16/02/2016 14:16:30 We don't directly observe individual photons, we observe light as a whole.As Ethos and Evan said the eye detects individual photons, the brain ignores unless a group arrives together to reduce noise. So as long as a few are arriving in a short time, we do in fact observe individual photons.
So if someone asked you the distance between Stoke and Liverpool you would reply "unmeasured"?
Quote from: Colin2B on 16/02/2016 14:55:18So if someone asked you the distance between Stoke and Liverpool you would reply "unmeasured"?He wants us to answer his questions but he refuses to answer ours. Truth is Colin, it may be too difficult for him..................DENSE
I answered it I would reply, you mean measured length don't you. approx 56 mile
Quote from: Thebox on 16/02/2016 07:13:05 One does see distance, distance is an axiom and provable to be there, regardless of sight I can experience the distance of space, by moving.Nope.....We only judge distance or measure it. Go out on a dark night and look up at the stars. Now, tell me which one's are closer to you and which ones are more distant?Quote from: Thebox (if photons really exist to begin with So now you're questioning the existence of the photon?
One does see distance, distance is an axiom and provable to be there, regardless of sight I can experience the distance of space, by moving.
(if photons really exist to begin with
I would reply, you mean measured length don't you.
Truth is Colin, it may be too difficult for him..................DENSE
Quote from: Thebox on 16/02/2016 15:05:13 I would reply, you mean measured length don't you. And I would reply "No, check a dictionary"Quote from: Ethos_ on 16/02/2016 15:04:29 Truth is Colin, it may be too difficult for him..................DENSEIt would appear so
Maybe stars are the same size, and distance gives the sense of a difference.
Quote from: Thebox on 16/02/2016 15:18:33Maybe stars are the same size, and distance gives the sense of a difference.Incredible..................Now Mr. Box, you're showing us your abject ignorance. I'm wasting my time with you sir.
Quote from: Ethos_ on 16/02/2016 15:29:19Quote from: Thebox on 16/02/2016 15:18:33Maybe stars are the same size, and distance gives the sense of a difference.Incredible..................Now Mr. Box, you're showing us your abject ignorance. I'm wasting my time with you sir.You asked me a question, I can only guess at a way to know, that is not ignorant that is me thinking of an answer to give you.
Quote from: Thebox on 16/02/2016 15:31:55Quote from: Ethos_ on 16/02/2016 15:29:19Quote from: Thebox on 16/02/2016 15:18:33Maybe stars are the same size, and distance gives the sense of a difference.Incredible..................Now Mr. Box, you're showing us your abject ignorance. I'm wasting my time with you sir.You asked me a question, I can only guess at a way to know, that is not ignorant that is me thinking of an answer to give you. Mr. Box, we have a star in our own solar system, it's referred to as the Sun. From this evidence alone, we know that stars come in different sizes. This is evidence that your answer was hasty and lacked credibility, thus the use of the term "ignorant". Ignorance does not mean stupid, ignorance is a word that defines lack of knowledge or the impetuous use of the knowledge one presently possesses. Listen my friend, we all recognize that you're not stupid. Your mind is searching for answers and that is admirable. However, until you are willing to learn from others, your hunger for scientific knowledge will suffer greatly. We offer our answers and you continually seek to either ignore them or brush them off as insufficient and or flawed. None of us are perfect but IMHO, the answers you'll receive here are worthy of consideration and you insult us with your cavalier attitude. I have just about had it with your obstinate positions Mr. Box. If you continue to gloss over and minimize the worthiness of my answers, I will eventually acquaint you with my ignore list. If you continue to be disenchanted with the answers you receive from us, you might consider just not asking in the first place. Enough said......................
If there is a brick wall between yourself and the object, you can't see it. Ergo something must be travelling in a straight line between you in order for you to see it. Remarkably, this simple hypothesis has led to the entire science and industry of optics, from microscopes and spectacles to the Hubble telescope and observations of gravitational lensing. I rather think it has legs, and yours doesn't.
in your diagram at the beginning of the discussion, in the first diagram do I see the object in silhouette?
hi Mr box I will have one go at explaining how it works. Energy is emitted from an atom via a photon in discrete packages like bullets from a machine gun. The time interval between each bullet determines the frequency and the resultant wavelength of the waveform that follows. Light, the bit your eye can detect forms a small part of the whole range of possible wavelengths, the whole being called the electro-magnetic spectrum(EMS). Your eye absorbs this energy and converts into an electrical impulse that that your brain then sorts into the picture you see. If you look directly at the sun(suitably subdued) you will able to see its shape and all of the contrasting surface features which will be caused by differences in the energy levels emitted. If you put your backside to the sun you will feel it warming up. This is just photons delivering energy at a different wavelength and your backside is acting as a different detector. Any object emitting energy on the EMS will emit photons, some will be light sources. When a photon hits any object unless it is either a perfect black body or a perfect mirror, two things will occur some energy will be absorbed( it may be re-emitted) and some will be reflected in the form of another photon, so your eye sees the object in exactly the same way as if you look directly at something. You cannot see a photon, you can only detect its existence when its energy triggers a response. Daylight is trillions of photons hitting dust and other particle which reflect into your eye. All of this is well proven basic science and indisputable. Now if you had asked why a photon is a massless particle and a wave? or how can a massless particle have angular momentum? Then I am sure the eminent physicists on this forum would have been happy to explain the current theory and be prepared to listen to and comment on any reasonable hypothesis, although they would be unlikely to agree, but to question science that intuition, logic, and 400 years of experimental evidence has established will cause them to tilt. I am far from convinced that current physics has all the answers, and I am tending towards the view that some things may be wrong, but you have to respect the experimental evidence. Only then will people treat your ideas seriously.
you can observe clear light a length away between objects, vision is direct and faster than light.