[Alan McDougall]

Thebox please don't take my remarks as an encouragement. They are not.

Lol, I don't need encouragement. 

What do you mean by positive and negative event?  Sorry I did not really understand your other post.

added- I understood it now , and yes exactly that, that is why I suggested in ''jester'' the Darkton  has the positive event.

You should find your sense of humor the post of mine you did not understand was a joke, almost as difficult as comprehending you convoluted circular "science"??

[guest39538]

Thebox please don't take my remarks as an encouragement. They are not.

Lol, I don't need encouragement. 

What do you mean by positive and negative event?  Sorry I did not really understand your other post.

added- I understood it now , and yes exactly that, that is why I suggested in ''jester'' the Darkton  has the positive event.

You should find your sense of humor the post of mine you did not understand was a joke, almost as difficult as comprehending you convoluted circular "science"??

Sorry I missed the joke, yes I am difficult to understand I suppose.

[Ethos_]

Thebox please don't take my remarks as an encouragement. They are not.

Lol, I don't need encouragement. 

What do you mean by positive and negative event?  Sorry I did not really understand your other post.

added- I understood it now , and yes exactly that, that is why I suggested in ''jester'' the Darkton  has the positive event.

You should find your sense of humor the post of mine you did not understand was a joke, almost as difficult as comprehending you convoluted circular "science"??

Sorry I missed the joke, yes I am difficult to understand I suppose.

No, you are very easy to understand Mr. Box. We deal in facts and you invent issues to confuse what should be very simple for the educated mind to understand. It is quite apparent that it is you who is confused and not us.

[guest39538]

Thebox please don't take my remarks as an encouragement. They are not.

Lol, I don't need encouragement. 

What do you mean by positive and negative event?  Sorry I did not really understand your other post.

added- I understood it now , and yes exactly that, that is why I suggested in ''jester'' the Darkton  has the positive event.

You should find your sense of humor the post of mine you did not understand was a joke, almost as difficult as comprehending you convoluted circular "science"??

Sorry I missed the joke, yes I am difficult to understand I suppose.

No, you are very easy to understand Mr. Box. We deal in facts and you invent issues to confuse what should be very simple for the educated mind to understand. It is quite apparent that it is you who is confused and not us.

How do you know it is not I who is not confused and the world is confused?

[Ethos_]

How do you know it is not I who is not confused and the world is confused?

It becomes apparent by using the same scientific method that any good scientist uses...................it's called observation of evidence.

And the evidence is: Your confused posts and replies.

Are we to believe that you, contrary to the whole "world" of scientific endeavor, alone have the answers? That only you know the facts and the rest of us have got it all  wrong? These views clearly reflect your inability to sort out good information from the bad. This behavior is also not emotionally healthy and forces me to ask a serious question:

Can anyone with such a selfish esteem for their own point of view ever discuss profitably with anyone else?

And if not, they are destined to never learn anything except what grows within their own imaginations thus limiting and stunting their growth in knowledge.

"No man is an island"

We need each other Mr. Box!

[guest39538]

How do you know it is not I who is not confused and the world is confused?

It becomes apparent by using the same scientific method that any good scientist uses...................it's called observation of evidence.

And the evidence is: Your confused posts and replies.

Are we to believe that you alone, contrary to the whole "world" of scientific endeavor, have the answers? That only you know the facts and the rest of us have got it all  wrong? These views clearly reflect your inability to sort out good information from the bad. This behavior is also not emotionally healthy and forces me to ask a serious question:

Can anyone with such a selfish esteem for their own point of view ever discuss profitably with anyone else?

And if not, they are destined to never learn anything except what grows within their own imaginations thus limiting and stunting their growth in knowledge.

"No man is an island"

We need each other Mr. Box!

Agreed one man can not alone be sure of his own reality, but one man can be sure by evidence that the very darkness and lack of Photons entering your eyes from these very words is a different reality than you understand.

[Ethos_]

 but one man can be sure by evidence that the very darkness and lack of Photons entering your eyes

Light has energy Mr. Box, and darkness is a word that describes the absence of energy. It takes energy to "enter" anything and darkness has none. We only recognize darkness when light is absent, darkness as a moving or energized entity does not exist. It is only a word to describe the absence of light. Why you continually try to add energy or force to nothingness, is beyond a reasonable individual's common sense.

[guest39538]

 but one man can be sure by evidence that the very darkness and lack of Photons entering your eyes

Light has energy Mr. Box, and darkness is a word that describes the absence of energy. It takes energy to "enter" anything and darkness has none. We only recognize darkness when light is absent, darkness as a moving or energized entity does not exist. It is only a word to describe the absence of light. Why you continually try to add energy or force to nothingness, is beyond a reasonable individual's common sense.

Darkness does not move, but darkness exists, your perception of the very screen you are reading this on , the surface area is illuminated leaving the silhouette of darkness to reveal words.  However these words are clearly on the screen and in their exact geometrical position, the pixels that are not illuminated have XY co-ordinates, I would like to know how anybody can argue that these words are not in their exact geometrical position?

You say darkness is not an entity, yet if you removed all the EMR from space then only dark space could exist, I insist because it is the last answer to the logical conclusion and often an only answer.

P.s dark energy is a negative, it would not seem to have energy.

 

 

[Ethos_]

P.s dark energy is a negative, it would not seem to have energy.

Dark energy is the name science has given to the driving force behind the accelerated expansion of the universe and most certainly is a form of energy. We just have no idea what is at the heart or responsible for this release of energy causing this accelerated expansion. And when you say: "it would not seem to have energy", is a confused and misdirected statement. Dark Energy is energy of a form that we don't yet understand. To say it does "not seem to have energy" is a total convolution regarding what the term "Dark energy" is describing. Dark energy does not need to have energy, it is energy.

Instead of saying; "it would not seem to have energy", maybe what you're trying to say would be something like this: "We don't as yet understand what causes Dark energy".

And BTW, Dark Energy has nothing to do with what humans recognize as darkness. The word "Dark" in this case is used simply to denote something unknown and hidden.

[Alan McDougall]

Mr. Dear, Dear Box

If darkness is in your eyes is it not obvious that you cannot see due to the absence of light?

[guest39538]

P.s dark energy is a negative, it would not seem to have energy.

Dark energy is the name science has given to the driving force behind the accelerated expansion of the universe and most certainly is a form of energy. We just have no idea what is at the heart or responsible for this release of energy causing this accelerated expansion. And when you say: "it would not seem to have energy", is a confused and misdirected statement. Dark Energy is energy of a form that we don't yet understand. To say it does "not seem to have energy" is a total convolution regarding what the term "Dark energy" is describing. Dark energy does not need to have energy, it is energy.

Instead of saying; "it would not seem to have energy", maybe what you're trying to say would be something like this: "We don't as yet understand what causes Dark energy".

And BTW, Dark Energy has nothing to do with what humans recognize as darkness. The word "Dark" in this case is used simply to denote something unknown and hidden.

No I meant what I said, dark energy is not an energy like you know, that is why you don't understand it, dark energy is the dark, the dark you can not see, you assume I am incorrect, but if you do not understand it then how do you assume I am incorrect?

Let me explain something to you,

In the Universe only exist two true forces, likewise there is only  two directions, there is a contracting force and an expanding force, now all expanding force is a process of +hf=+ve(W)  which is plus energy is equal to positive direction work(expansion),

Now all contracting work is quite the opposite, -hf=-ve(W)


But the contraction is not an increase in something but rather a decrease in hf.

What you fail to understand and like the rest of the world, gravity is not what you think it is, gravity is the decrease in hf and the contracting force that is a product of process and thermodynamics.

Dark energy which is really dark space is like an infinite volume rubber ball that is at an equilibrium, all the points of the ''ball'' area adjoined but does not have velocity or momentum and things can pass through it as if it was not there, the space remains ''stationary'' but the space passes through things that move through it.

Dark energy is not the cause of expansion, dark energy is the essence of space and the whole , light energy is the cause of expansion,


If you were to place a positive ion in a dark energy void, it would instantly become crushed because the energy inside the particle that stops it contracting is instantly lost to the ''void'' of dark energy.  It is the stars that keeps particles ''charged''. and stops them from contraction annihilation. Likewise charges repel and stop things collapsing into the dark energy.

Dark energy destroys everything.

[Villi]

To answer the question, photons excite retinal receptors and no photons means no excitation and a perception of darkness. Different wavelengths of light hit either rods or cones to produce impulses that travel along optic nerves to the brain and are processed as perception of colour. The lack of these impulses and lack of retinal receptor activation produces what the brain perceives as black.

To add to what this topic has evolved into, I have thought about this "dark energy". I simply think of it as a lack of existence where there is nothing. Not like a vacuum because a vacuum still has time and space. This nothingness has no time or space or anything. It can't even be perceived and not even thought of, maybe.

[Ethos_]

Sorry I missed the joke,

The joke is not the only thing you're missing Mr. Box.

[guest39538]

Mr. Dear, Dear Box

If darkness is in your eyes is it not obvious that you cannot see due to the absence of light?

The absence of visible light is not the same as the absence of light, it is not obvious that when there is a lack of visible light, i.e things reflecting light, we cannot see. I personally think that when there is a lack of visible light, we still can see but there is simply nothing to see that is reflecting visible light.
I do not think it is obvious , I think it is complacency to end it there at the absence of light means dark and no vision.  I can see a laser dot in the dark, this leads me to believe that the dark is not really dark but perceived to be dark. when actually the dark we perceive is actually ''gin-clear'' no different to when we perceive light and the space is ''gin-clear''.