|
|
05-25-2011, 01:00 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
peacegirl, please clarify something for me because now I am really confused. Did Lessans (and do you) believe light can and does carry information that some devices (aside from a camera and the eyes) can detect and convert to an image, sound, or data set?
|
Of course.
For examples, do you accept that lightwaves are carrying your voice on a phone call or the image in a fax transmission over a fiber optic network, or that a radio receiver is converting the information received from the radiowaves to sound via the speakers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Reposted as it's on the bottom of the last page
|
Yes, lightwaves definitely do these things. It's proven. This is not what is being debated.
|
05-25-2011, 01:03 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goliath
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
You do know, do you not, that that don't actually give the Mars Rovers verbal commands?
|
Position title: Mars Rover Communication Specialist.
Qualifications: A major set of lungs, and the ability to have screams heard at a distance of millions of miles, including through a vacuum.
|
|
You're so funny I forgot to laugh.
|
05-25-2011, 01:06 AM
|
|
Spiffiest wanger
|
|
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Just 19 pages to go, now.
And remember: We've booked 10 SOLID PAGES for the Page 200 party, Pages 200 through 209 inclusive. Thus we won't have the problem of too little celebration time that we found in the Page 100 party, when only one page was available for an epic blowout. The one-page limitation probably accounted for problems like someone (who knows who he is! ) sticking his dick in the mashed potatoes.
|
05-25-2011, 01:14 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Verbal commands? What?
And what about the data sent back from Mars? They use lightwaves to communicate, peacegirl, which means the light carries information.
|
I'm not even debating this. I'm only talking about light in relation to vision because of how the brain works.
|
05-25-2011, 01:18 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
To be honest, he hasn't had the time to study the book in depth since going to college.
|
I wonder why!
|
His not reading the book has nothing to do with the content. He's just a very busy guy. He is doing a fellowship, he owns a business, and he has a child. What do you want?
|
05-25-2011, 01:24 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
As far as compensating for the time delay so Rover wouldn't fall off a cliff, where's the proof that this would have happened?
|
You mean, umm ... other than the observed fact that it takes several minutes (corresponding exactly to the amount of time it takes for light to traverse the distance) for the Rover to receive and respond to commands from Earth?
Or the observed fact that it takes hours for the Voyager probes (which are several light-hours away from Earth) to receive and respond to commands from Earth?
Or for that matter, the observed delay of about 1.3 seconds between the transmission of signals from the Earth until they were received by the Apollo astronauts in lunar orbit? (The Moon is 1.28 light-seconds from Earth.)
Or, heck, the observed communication delays with all of the space probes that we've launched into the Solar System -- delays which always correspond exactly with the delays imposed by the known speed of light?
|
What does any of this have to do with whether we can see in real time with the naked eye?
|
05-25-2011, 01:26 AM
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
She ignores anyone who asks a question she cannot answer.
Which means she pretty much ignores everyone. She has been ignoring the information of TOWM* for months now.
Yet ye act surprised. . . .
--J.D.
*"The Oppressive White Man"--Wounded Knee! Trail of Tears!
|
05-25-2011, 01:28 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
If light doesn't convey information, the entire science of astronomy is a great big scam. So is a great deal of physics. And chemistry. Not to mention the computer industry.
|
How can you say that Lone Ranger? It doesn't change astronomy or chemistry or computers just because Lessans claims we have efferent vision.
|
He can say it because, as has been repeatedly pointed out to Your Royal Highness, if we could seen instantaneously, everything that we know about physics would be wrong.
|
That is not true David. The only thing that would change is the belief that the light creates the image through signals, which also means that we would be seeing the present, not the past.
|
05-25-2011, 01:33 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Quote:
I'm not arguing with you at all. Light and the technologies that have been created as a result of understanding how light works is absolutely amazing.
|
Yet Lessans seems to have been saying that light cannot or does not carry information.
|
He never said that. All he said was that images (or signals) coming from the light are not what allows us to see. Light is a condition of sight which means that we see objects or images directly if sight is efferent. That's it.
|
05-25-2011, 01:43 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm
Just 19 pages to go, now.
And remember: We've booked 10 SOLID PAGES for the Page 200 party, Pages 200 through 209 inclusive. Thus we won't have the problem of too little celebration time that we found in the Page 100 party, when only one page was available for an epic blowout. The one-page limitation probably accounted for problems like someone (who knows who he is! ) sticking his dick in the mashed potatoes.
|
I just want to know if I'm invited?? Probably not.
|
05-25-2011, 01:46 AM
|
|
Jin, Gi, Rei, Ko, Chi, Shin, Tei
|
|
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Okay, hypothetical time.
Let us say that the Sun is not shining.
Now God turns the Sun on.
Question 1: Do you not agree that as soon as we see the Sun shining, we have gained new information? [E.g. "The Sun was not shining previously, now it is shining."]
Question 2: Do we see the Sun shining as soon as it comes on, or 8.5 minutes later?
__________________
“The greatest way to live with honor in this world is to be what we pretend to be.” -- Socrates
|
05-25-2011, 03:05 AM
|
|
I'm Deplorable.
|
|
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Well on our way to 200, ?
|
Are we there yet ?
|
??
|
??
|
??
|
??
|
??
|
?? - I'm getting thirsty.
|
??
|
??
|
?? can you hurry, I gotta go.
|
05-25-2011, 03:14 AM
|
|
I'm Deplorable.
|
|
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
I just want to know if I'm invited?? Probably not.
|
I thought I did that already, Oops I forgot I'm on ignore, How can I take you if you're not talking to me. I could sneak you in under my coat, but then your on your own.
|
05-25-2011, 03:16 AM
|
|
I'm Deplorable.
|
|
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Does everyone know what they're bringing to the party?
|
05-25-2011, 03:19 AM
|
|
I'm Deplorable.
|
|
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
And NO Peacegirl, DO NOT BRING BOOKS as party favors.
|
05-25-2011, 04:00 AM
|
|
I said it, so I feel it, dick
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Quote:
I'm not arguing with you at all. Light and the technologies that have been created as a result of understanding how light works is absolutely amazing.
|
Yet Lessans seems to have been saying that light cannot or does not carry information.
|
He never said that. All he said was that images (or signals) coming from the light are not what allows us to see. Light is a condition of sight which means that we see objects or images directly if sight is efferent. That's it.
|
You extrapolated that to cameras, stating that cameras take pictures of the object "directly", because the image cannot be converted from information in the received light. Are you now saying that you were wrong in that extrapolation? Or are cameras, like eyes, different than other types of lightwave receiver/converters?
|
05-25-2011, 04:13 AM
|
|
Projecting my phallogos with long, hard diction
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dee Cee
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
|
05-25-2011, 04:37 AM
|
|
Flyover Hillbilly
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Juggalonia
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm
The one-page limitation probably accounted for problems like someone (who knows who he is! ) sticking his dick in the mashed potatoes.
|
Looks like I'm relegated to parking cars for the 200-page party. Stick your dick in one bowl of mashed potatoes and you're branded for life.
__________________
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis D. Brandeis
"Psychos do not explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a fuck how crazy they are." ~ S. Gecko
"What the fuck is a German muffin?" ~ R. Swanson
|
05-25-2011, 05:05 AM
|
|
I'm Deplorable.
|
|
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin
Looks like I'm relegated to parking cars for the 200-page party. Stick your dick in one bowl of mashed potatoes and you're branded for life.
|
If you're parking cars just be careful where you stick it, I don't want you getting stuck, and have to drive home with you draging behind my car.
|
05-25-2011, 05:37 AM
|
|
I said it, so I feel it, dick
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Also, why do you accept that it's been proven that light carries information that various devices can receive and convert to electrical impulses to spit out an image or sound or whatever, but you won't accept that the eyes and cameras and microscopes and telescopes have been proven to do the same thing?
|
05-25-2011, 12:29 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
Okay, hypothetical time.
Let us say that the Sun is not shining.
Now God turns the Sun on.
|
Yes, we get new information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
Question 2: Do we see the Sun shining as soon as it comes on, or 8.5 minutes later?
|
IF SIGHT IS EFFERENT (right now I'm calling it a theory so you don't get all bent out of shape), then yes, we would see the sun shining as soon as it comes on and not 8.5 mintues later because nothing is traveling to the eye and being converted into an image. I better run for cover before I get slammed.
Last edited by peacegirl; 05-25-2011 at 04:17 PM.
|
05-25-2011, 12:33 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
I just want to know if I'm invited?? Probably not.
|
I thought I did that already, Oops I forgot I'm on ignore, How can I take you if you're not talking to me. I could sneak you in under my coat, but then your on your own.
|
I just took you off of ignore; I believe in second chances.
|
05-25-2011, 12:41 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Quote:
I'm not arguing with you at all. Light and the technologies that have been created as a result of understanding how light works is absolutely amazing.
|
Yet Lessans seems to have been saying that light cannot or does not carry information.
|
He never said that. All he said was that images (or signals) coming from the light are not what allows us to see. Light is a condition of sight which means that we see objects or images directly if sight is efferent. That's it.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
You extrapolated that to cameras, stating that cameras take pictures of the object "directly", because the image cannot be converted from information in the received light. Are you now saying that you were wrong in that extrapolation? Or are cameras, like eyes, different than other types of lightwave receiver/converters?
|
I did not say that, and if I did, that's not what I meant. Cameras use lightwaves (that are reflected from the object) to create a picture. But the eyes are different. I said up to the point of the retina, a camera is very much like a human eye. But the mistake is at the juncture of the retina and optic nerve. It is believed a transduction is occurring that turns light into a chemical impulse, which then gets decoded by the brain into an image. This is what Lessans is disputing because his [theory] states that the brain is looking, through the eyes, at reality (if he is right about efferent vision), thus we are seeing what's out there in real time, with light being a necessary condition.
Last edited by peacegirl; 05-25-2011 at 03:22 PM.
|
05-25-2011, 12:48 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Also, why do you accept that it's been proven that light carries information that various devices can receive and convert to electrical impulses to spit out an image or sound or whatever, but you won't accept that the eyes and cameras and microscopes and telescopes have been proven to do the same thing?
|
It all goes back to the brain. Even though it appears logical that the eyes would work exactly like a camera, and other devices that use light in the same way, we are talking about the brain, which works differently than previously believed. In other words, it is believed that the light mixes with the photoreceptors to cause a change in molecular structure which gets turned into a specialized impulse that carries the information necessary to interpret what is coming from that information. But this completely wrong if Lessans turns out to be right.
|
05-25-2011, 12:57 PM
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
--J.D.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 88 (0 members and 88 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:25 AM.
|
|
|
|