[Just thinking (OP)]

I have been thinking about light and just what it is and I have come to the conclusion that it is not what we think. We have heard the expression if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it does it make a sound. Well if photons land on an object and there is no one to see it does it produce light. Light is perceived by the light receptive rods in our eyes this is like the CCD in a camera well if there are no light sensitive receptors available in the universe will light still exist no. Yes there will still be photons but direct and reflected light not likely plants live on the light so they say but plants do not have eyes so what plants really live on is the energy of the photon not the perceived light that only an eye can see. So to sum up photon + object + eye = light. Photon + object = energy no light. What do you think?

[Janus]

The light striking the rod and cones in your eyes are "perceived" by the energy the photons transfer to them. This is no different than plants using this energy. Both are just a physical interaction between matter and photons.
Saying that photons aren't "light" unless they are "perceived" is just philosophical hubris in my opinion.   It's an arbitrary dividing line that serves no purpose.

[Just thinking (OP)]

The light striking the rod and cones in your eyes are "perceived" by the energy the photons transfer to them. This is no different than plants using this energy. Both are just a physical interaction between matter and photons.
Saying that photons aren't "light" unless they are "perceived" is just philosophical hubris in my opinion.   It's an arbitrary dividing line that serves no purpose.

Light is perceived by our brain plants have no brain plants do not see light now you have learned something.

[Bored chemist]

"Is light real?"
Yes

if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it does it make a sound.

Yes.

Light is perceived by our brain plants have no brain plants do not see light now you have learned something.

You learned why commas are useful.

[Just thinking (OP)]

"Is light real?"
Yes

Quote from: Just thinking on Today at 00:02:32

    if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it does it make a sound.

Yes.

Only if there is an eye and an ear and a brain to perceive it. My point all along. And a good brain can fill in for the punctuation.

[Origin]

Only if there is an eye and an ear and a brain to perceive it. My point all along.

Yep, no science just a silly philosophical argument.

[Just thinking (OP)]

    Only if there is an eye and an ear and a brain to perceive it. My point all along.

Yep, no science just a silly philosophical argument.

There is nothing philosophical or silly about the truth. The silly part comes from the ones that are deaf and blind.

[Just thinking (OP)]

It's better than that can't be true. But it is true and that is science and fact. Thank you.

[Bored chemist]

There is nothing philosophical or silly about the truth

https://xkcd.com/169/

[Just thinking (OP)]

There is nothing philosophical or silly about the truth

No thank you.

[Just thinking (OP)]

If you have a camera but don't take a photo then no picture exists. If there is no eye then no light exists. Full stop.

[Bored chemist]

If you have a camera but don't take a photo then no picture exists. If there is no eye then no light exists. Full stop.

nonsense.

[Just thinking (OP)]

    If you have a camera but don't take a photo then no picture exists. If there is no eye then no light exists. Full stop.

nonsense.

It would be helpful if you were to explain as of to date there has been no debate only denial. Please make an effort.

[Bored chemist]

It would be helpful if you were to explain as of to date there has been no debate

Because there is nothing to debate.
You have made an assertion with no evidence.
It can therefore be dismissed with no evidence.

The fact that the assertion is nonsense doesn't help your case.

[Just thinking (OP)]

Because there is nothing to debate.
You have made an assertion with no evidence.
It can therefore be dismissed with no evidence.

The fact that the assertion is nonsense doesn't help your case.

So what you believe is that photons are light even if not perceived by light receptive rods. That is like saying a boat works without water. OK.

[Bored chemist]

So what you believe is that photons are light

They are.

[Just thinking (OP)]

    So what you believe is that photons are light

They are.

No photons and the eye are what produce light in combination photons on their own are just energy.

[Just thinking (OP)]

I have noticed that comebacks are rather slow I guess we do need some research. Have you tried WikiHow?

[The Spoon]

    So what you believe is that photons are light

They are.

No photons and the eye are what produce light in combination photons on their own are just energy.

Utter nonsense. Light is electromagnetic radiation. Are you denying that a light dependent resistor works because there are no rods and cones? What about a CCD or CMOS detector?

[Just thinking (OP)]

Utter nonsense. Light is electromagnetic radiation. Are you denying that a light dependent resistor works because there are no rods and cones? What about a CCD or CMOS detector?

They do work and we can see that. Can a CCD or a CMOS see light do non living things see light NO we see light we have a brain I hope. The brain sees light by the means of our eyes and that is by the direct source or by the means of a monitor.