A revolution in thought

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

I can't for the life of me locate the passage in Lessans' book where he wrote about mirror images being in instant physical contact with the retina immediately upon looking at an object. Could someone gimme a cite?

Your niece has a superb voice, but her taste in pro football teams is downright appalling.

Hey, everyone's entitled to his opinion. May the best team win! I hope Ray Lewis gets to be remembered for this final glory!! What a way to go out!!!

[Dragar]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Sorry Spacemonkey but I am not going to go on and on without any progress at all. You can believe anything you want. I do not want to be stuck in this quagmire any longer. You can also believe that Lessans was wrong when it comes to moral responsibility. It's really okay. I do hope that you can get away from this thread, as it's not serving you well.

Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by koan

This coming from Miss "I deserve respect because I'm human" Rafael. That calls for a time out. Go to your room and think about what you've done.

I already thought about it, and you're a lousy reader.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

He never said anything about intellectual competition. That was not the point he was making. You completely misunderstood what he was saying, just like LadyShea misunderstood when he said a boy would fall in love with a girl's genitals.

Originally Posted by koan

That's why he didn't catch the problem. He failed to realize that being tested on your knowledge is intellectual competition. You're right. He didn't say anything about "intellectual competition" in the way he didn't use those words... but that's still what he described when he condemned it.

He did not condemn intellectual competition or any kind of competition for that matter.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You're missing his observation entirely. It doesn't matter what culture it is, when children grow up hearing certain words associated with certain features with a positive inflection, their eyes begin to be conditioned to seeing those features as beautiful and others as ugly or less attractive.
...
No, you are wrong about that. Everyone has personal taste, but when the words are removed that create a standard, the eyes will not be conditioned to seeing certain differences as ugly because they have been conditioned to seeing certain differences as beautiful. This will change the distribution of what people find attractive because they will have not been conditioned by these words, and will never be criticized for their choice in a mate.

Originally Posted by Ernest Becker, "Escape From Evil" p38-9

Nobody was very happy with the way history and civilization had turned out... In a word, the great revolutions of our time, directed against the state as a structure of domination, have not led to the disappearance of the state, and so they have not led to human equality and freedom.

That's true, but eventually the state will dissolve and there will be human equality and freedom.

Originally Posted by koan

What went wrong? ... If it is not only power and coercion that enslave man, then there must be something in his nature that contribuetes to his downfall; since this is so, the state is not man's first and only enemy.

Originally Posted by koan

A study of primitive societies shows

This is what you've been saying as if we don't know it. We do know it. What we can't do is stop it. If we could stop it, banning words will not be the answer. It is the actual perception of divine embodiment that we are fighting. It is a sense of quality. When you hear one person sing and you hear another, do you not have a sense of quality if one person is tone deaf? When you see a person with classic proportions to their face and you see another who has their eyes improperly aligned, do you not sense quality? What is quality? Ask Robert Pirsig, he ended up committed to an asylum trying to answer that question. If you try to tackle it at least learn the art of zen first.

I have read the art of zen and I'm cool.

Again, you're a lousy reader. It could be you're just lacking in comprehension skills. Not sure which it is. Hearing someone who is tone deaf and comparing that to seeing quality in a person's face are two separate things altogether. That's the whole purpose of this chapter which went right over you're head. You have absolutely no understanding as to why you can't compare what we see as beautiful (which has been distorted by words) with what we hear which has not been distorted. Please don't go on and on because you're looking more and more ignorant.

Originally Posted by koan

What you won't do, even if you find the answer to "what is quality?" is eliminate the perception of it. You can take away all the words for it that the world will insist on recreating but you still won't kill quality... or lack thereof. We just know it when we see it, hear it, or otherwise find it. And if it isn't us that has it... we attach ourselves to the source. Next step: Study "Followership" It's an new branch of study so you can get in while the getting is fresh for new opinions.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

What the hell are you talking about? I have absolutely no clue.

Originally Posted by koan

Why am I not surprised?

You're trying so hard to one up me, but you can't. In your effort to find flaws because that's your intent and what you intend you will find (you wouldn't even know if there was a flaw because you have no grasp of what the author is even talking about) you have displayed your utter ignorance. There is no point in discussing this book with you any further.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Sorry Spacemonkey but I am not going to go on and on without any progress at all.

Of course you are. That's all you've ever done since you started here.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You can believe anything you want. I do not want to be stuck in this quagmire any longer. You can also believe that Lessans was wrong when it comes to moral responsibility.

Who asked about moral responsibility? My post was about light.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's really okay. I do hope that you can get away from this thread, as it's not serving you well.

Projection and evasion. I'll ask again:-

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun? It cannot be both, for that is contradictory. So which is it?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Of course you are. That's all you've ever done since you started here.

Who asked about moral responsibility? My post was about light.

No Spacemonkey, you have refuted everything Lessans wrote so I can include moral responsibility in this post since you believe he was wrong on both counts.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's really okay. I do hope that you can get away from this thread, as it's not serving you well.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Projection and evasion. I'll ask again:-

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun? It cannot be both, for that is contradictory. So which is it?

Projection and evasion? What are you talking about dude? You are so confused I cannot deal with you anymore, got it? Of course not.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

No Spacemonkey, you have refuted everything Lessans wrote so I can include moral responsibility in this post since you believe he was wrong on both counts.

If you want to discuss that then go back to the other thread and address my evaded posts on the subject. Stop trying to change the topic.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Projection and evasion? What are you talking about dude? You are so confused I cannot deal with you anymore, got it? Of course not.

You are still projecting and evading. Once more:-

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun? It cannot be both, for that is contradictory. So which is it?

[Spacemonkey]

Peacegirl, your lack of progress is entirely your own fault. Imagine that I'm right for a moment. Then efferent vision is impossible, and you are blocking your own progress in understanding this by refusing to answer any questions addressing the problematic parts of your claims. Now imagine instead that you're right. Then efferent vision is true, and yet I am somehow confused about the role of light in your account. In that case you are blocking your own progress by refusing to help me understand by answering the questions I have about the apparent contradictions in your explanations. Either way, the only way forward is for you to answer instead of evading my questions. As long as you only evade you will never correct any possible errors in your own claims or correct the alleged misunderstandings you think the rest of us have. If you were serious about wanting to make some progress you would answer our questions. Here's one you could start with:-

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Sorry Spacemonkey but I am not going to go on and on without any progress at all.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey]Of course you are. That's all you've ever done since you started here.[/quote]

There was some progress early on, but now there's no progress at all.

[quote="Spacemonkey

Who asked about moral responsibility? My post was about light.

I never wanted to get back into this discussion, and now I don't want to discuss either.

You have refuted everything Lessans wrote so I can include moral responsibility in this post since you believe he was wrong on both counts.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

If you want to discuss that then go back to the other thread and address my evaded posts on the subject. Stop trying to change the topic.

I didn't evade your posts. I don't want to go back though because it will be the same old same old. You really believe your logic is correct, and it's not. I'm tired of hearing about your other worlds where an empirical truth could contradict a necessary truth, and I'm also tired of hearing that the movement in the direction of "greater satisfaction" is a tautology and therefore means nothing because anything you choose is in this direction. It means a great deal. You have no grasp of these principles whatsoever. How unfortunate that you have wasted so much time here and have gotten nothing from it. I realize that the longer I'm here, the more people think of this thread as a joke. They don't even take it seriously anymore. There's nothing I can do about that.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's really okay. I do hope that you can get away from this thread, as it's not serving you well.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Projection and evasion. I'll ask again:-

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun? It cannot be both, for that is contradictory. So which is it?

Projection and evasion? What are you talking about dude? You are so confused I cannot deal with you anymore, got it? Of course not.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

You are still projecting and evading. Once more:-

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun? It cannot be both, for that is contradictory. So which is it?

When we look out at the external world, we are not waiting for light to arrive. If we see an object, the light is already at the retina. If the Sun was ignited but it wasn't bright enough for us to see it, there would be no photons at the retina (and we would not be within optical range), therefore the image would not be resolved. If the Sun was ignited and it was not large enough for us to see it, the photons would not be at the retina and the image would not be resolved. So the conditions that must be met are exactly what Lessans said: The object must be bright enough, and the object must be large enough. If those conditions are met, the mirror image will be at the retina. And yes, I made up the term "mirror image". I also said it's not a perfect analogy but it's good enough for the purposes of this discussion.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

No, I don't want to because you think your logic is correct, and it's not. I'm tired of hearing about your other worlds where an empirical truth could contradict a necessary truth, and I'm also tired of hearing that the movement in the direction of "greater satisfaction" is a tautology. None of you have any grasp of these principles whatsoever.

If you're not willing to rationally discuss the issue, then stop bringing it up. In particular, stop bringing it up when we are discussing the different topic of light and vision.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

How very sad that you have wasted so much time here and have gotten nothing from it. I realize that the longer I'm here, the more people think of this thread as a joke. They don't even take it seriously at this point.

More projection. Once again you admit you are wasting your time here, but you'll still never stop and you can't bring yourself to leave.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

When we look out at the external world, we are not waiting for light to arrive. If we see an object, the light is already at the retina. If the Sun was ignited but it wasn't that bright, there would be no photons at the retina and the image would not be resolved. If the Sun was ignited and it was not large enough for us to see it, the photons would not be at the retina and the image would not be resolved.

The question was 'Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun?' and you have not answered it. No-one is asking you about the conditions that must be met.

At the very first moment when the Sun is ignited it will be big enough and bright enough to be seen, according to Lessans, who says we can see it at this very moment. You say there will be photons at the retina forming a mirror image at this time. I get that. We all do. The question is how they got to be there.

They can't have traveled there from the Sun because that would have taken 8 minutes, and the Sun was not ignited 8 minutes ago. So how did they get there? Did they come into existence there? Did they teleport there? Are they in two places at once?

Try answering the question that was asked.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Peacegirl, your lack of progress is entirely your own fault. Imagine that I'm right for a moment. Then efferent vision is impossible, and you are blocking your own progress in understanding this by refusing to answer any questions addressing the problematic parts of your claims. Now imagine instead that you're right. Then efferent vision is true, and yet I am somehow confused about the role of light in your account. In that case you are blocking your own progress by refusing to help me understand by answering the questions I have about the apparent contradictions in your explanations. Either way, the only way forward is for you to answer instead of evading my questions. As long as you only evade you will never correct any possible errors in your own claims or correct the alleged misunderstandings you think the rest of us have. If you were serious about wanting to make some progress you would answer our questions. Here's one you could start with:-

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun?

You are confused here Spacemonkey because you think photons have to travel from the Sun to Earth. You are missing the most important element in all of this which is how the eyes work, just as you are missing the most important element in how conscience works, yet you think you're right and you're not. The reason I can't do this anymore is because I don't like your attitude toward me, which is very patronistic.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

If you're not willing to rationally discuss the issue, then stop bringing it up. In particular, stop bringing it up when we are discussing the different topic of light and vision.

More projection. Once again you admit you are wasting your time here, but you'll still never stop and you can't bring yourself to leave.

The question was 'Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun?' and you have not answered it. No-one is asking you about the conditions that must be met.

At the very first moment when the Sun is ignited it will be big enough and bright enough to be seen, according to Lessans, who says we can see it at this very moment. You say there will be photons at the retina forming a mirror image at this time. I get that. We all do. The question is how they got to be there.

They can't have traveled there from the Sun because that would have taken 8 minutes, and the Sun was not ignited 8 minutes ago. So how did they get there? Did they come into existence there? Did they teleport there? Are they in two places at once?

Try answering the question that was asked.

This entire model works the complete opposite from your perspective. That's why you are never going to get it in the way you're thinking. The mirror image of any object in the external world is at the retina instantly because of how the eyes work; the image does not get reflected; and it does not travel through space/time. The only reason we can see it is because it is there to be seen. Once again, these photons are already there (the light energy is continuously derived from the Sun so nothing is teleporting) when we see the object. There is no time involved and this is not a contradiction. When the non-absorbed light is dispersed to the point where the object cannot be seen from any distance, then the light is no longer blue or red or green, it is the full visual spectrum.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You are confused here Spacemonkey because you think photons have to travel from the Sun to Earth.

YOU said that is how they got there. Were you wrong? How did they get there then?

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You are missing the most important element in all of this which is how the eyes work, just as you are missing the most important element in how conscience works...

Why do you keep trying to change the subject to other topics you refuse to discuss?

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The reason I can't do this anymore is because I don't like your attitude toward me, which is very patronistic.

All I'm doing is asking you to answer my questions.

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun?

If these photons are there instantly, then they haven't traveled there from the Sun. And you say they didn't teleport there, so how did they get there? Did they come from the Sun or not? If so, then when were they at the surface of the Sun?

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This entire model works the complete opposite from your perspective.

I am coming from your perspective. I am asking only Yes or No questions concerning the things that YOU have said to me. The only perspective you seem to accept is one that ignores all the problems with what you are saying.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The mirror image of any object in the external world is at the retina instantly because of how the eyes work; the image does not get reflected; and it does not travel through space/time. The only reason we can see it is because it is there to be seen.

I already understand this much just fine. There will be mirror image photons instantly at the retina on Earth at the very moment the Sun is first ignited. My question is where they came from and how they got there.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Once again, these photons are already there (the light energy is continuously derived from the Sun so nothing is teleporting) when we see the object.

Light cannot be continuously arriving from the Sun at the very first moment it is ignited, for none of it has yet had time to get there. So this doesn't explain how the instantaneous mirror image photons got to the retina without teleporting.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

There is no time involved and this is not a contradiction. When the non-absorbed light is dispersed to the point where the object cannot be seen from any distance, then the light is no longer blue or red or green, it is the full visual spectrum.

Does the non-absorbed light bounce off objects and travel away at light speed to the retina? If not, then it cannot disperse. Nor does this have anything to do with the newly ignited Sun example where there is no absorption or reflection (but only emission).

[LadyShea]

The object must be bright enough, and the object must be large enough.

Can you determine or define "bright enough" or "large enough" without being tautological? If you answer is "we can see it if it is bright enough and large enough to be seen", that is meaningless.

[koan]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I already thought about it, and you're a lousy reader.
...
He never said anything about intellectual competition. That was not the point he was making.
...
He did not condemn intellectual competition or any kind of competition for that matter.

I love firsts. This is the first time I've every been accused of being a lousy reader and having poor comprehension skills. How very amusing.

Please provide me with the text where Lessans explains the intellectual equivalent for desisting from competition.

Originally Posted by The Amazing Lessans, p498

This is why every competition possible will be designed to test the mettle of each individual for this is the only way a person can get to know himself. The ones who lose in sports will search for an activity in which they can succeed, and if they cannot find any, then they will desist from competition.

Surely you agree that some people run slowly and some people aren't good at philosophy. But what keeps a student from practising philosophy if they're not good at it? He gives us a way to stop the slow runner from entering the Olympics.

[koan]

Let us compare quality. Here is the first bit from a preface to a book containing sketchy knowledge that actually draws you in.

Most people spend 90% of their time doing what other people want them to do instead of what they want to do themselves. Most people, perhaps you, are haunted by self destructive feelings they don't understand. These are feelings which may frighten and depress you, for example: the constant fear that other people are somehow better; the fear that you are now, and will always remain, a second-class citizen in life; or the crushing realization that you always feel poor no matter how much money you earn, and always feel inadequate no matter how great your accomplishments.

Because of two crippling pressures - the constant attempts of other people to exploit you and your own self-destructive feelings of inferiority- you spend your life in an emotional prison instead of a palace. You allow yourself to be surrounded by enemies instead of friends. You accomplish only a fraction of what you are really able to accomplish. You find yourself constantly driven away from the real enjoyments, the real achievements, the real meaning, of your life.

Learn to control your destiny. Study the Ancient sciences, for this knowledge will guide you through the present age of anxiety and depression.

Zolar, The Encyclopedia Of Ancient And Forbidden Knowledge - The Complete Guide To The Occult, 1970

and you... ignoring your progressive apologies prior to the introduction. (Three "foreword" paragraphs prior to the actual intro)

My dear friends, relations, and people throughout the earth, the purpose of this book is to clarify knowledge that must be brought to light as quickly as possible because it can prevent what nobody wants — a nuclear holocaust. With the world in turmoil and on the threshold of an atomic explosion which could be started accidentally and could very well destroy all civilization, I am announcing a scientific discovery that will make war an absolute impossibility and revolutionize the life of man entirely for his benefit. Due to a fantastic breakthrough, to the discovery of a natural, psychological law that was hermetically sealed behind a logical theory that 98% of mankind holds true, the solution to the problem of evil which has plagued mankind since time immemorial is now within reach. By applying this natural law, every bit of hurt that exists in human relations will be virtually wiped from the face of the earth by something so superior to punishment, as a deterrent, that people the world over will be prevented from committing those very acts of evil for which blame and punishment were previously necessary. This discovery will start an atomic chain reaction of thought more powerful than anything yet produced because it offers a solution to every problem of human conduct. You needn’t jump to the conclusion that this is impossible because you can use yourself as a guinea pig in a test that every person can take at the end of the third chapter. Remember, proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Lessans, The Decline And Fall Of All Evil - The Most Important Discovery Of Our Times, 2011 8th edition

Why is one more compelling than the other?


eta: btw, what is the test at the end of the third chapter? I can't see it because I'm such a poor reader.

[koan]

Is this helpful in the discussion of light and how it moves?
This is a quantum physicist explaining to the Dalai Lama how shit was supposed to work and how we found it it is kind of messed up. If he's explaining it to someone who doesn't speak English perhaps it will be useful with peacegirl.

The Dalai Lama and Quantum Physics 1/6 - YouTube

[Dragar]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The mirror image of any object in the external world is at the retina instantly because of how the eyes work; the image does not get reflected; and it does not travel through space/time. The only reason we can see it is because it is there to be seen. Once again, these photons are already there (the light energy is continuously derived from the Sun so nothing is teleporting) when we see the object. There is no time involved and this is not a contradiction. When the non-absorbed light is dispersed to the point where the object cannot be seen from any distance, then the light is no longer blue or red or green, it is the full visual spectrum.

[koan]

Originally Posted by Dragar

I think I understand what she's trying to say. Assuming there was zero light available at the start of this picture and it takes 8 seconds for photons of light to get from the sun to the earth, thereby creating the "necessary conditions," you would still see instantly because of this:

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

YOU said that is how they got there. Were you wrong? How did they get there then?

Why do you keep trying to change the subject to other topics you refuse to discuss?

All I'm doing is asking you to answer my questions.

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun?

If these photons are there instantly, then they haven't traveled there from the Sun. And you say they didn't teleport there, so how did they get there? Did they come from the Sun or not? If so, then when were they at the surface of the Sun?

Yes light energy does travel but the non-absorbed photons, which land on the retina when we're in the optical range, reveal the object, but do not bounce off of the object and travel through space/time.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by koan

Let us compare quality. Here is the first bit from a preface to a book containing sketchy knowledge that actually draws you in.

Most people spend 90% of their time doing what other people want them to do instead of what they want to do themselves. Most people, perhaps you, are haunted by self destructive feelings they don't understand. These are feelings which may frighten and depress you, for example: the constant fear that other people are somehow better; the fear that you are now, and will always remain, a second-class citizen in life; or the crushing realization that you always feel poor no matter how much money you earn, and always feel inadequate no matter how great your accomplishments.

Because of two crippling pressures - the constant attempts of other people to exploit you and your own self-destructive feelings of inferiority- you spend your life in an emotional prison instead of a palace. You allow yourself to be surrounded by enemies instead of friends. You accomplish only a fraction of what you are really able to accomplish. You find yourself constantly driven away from the real enjoyments, the real achievements, the real meaning, of your life.

Learn to control your destiny. Study the Ancient sciences, for this knowledge will guide you through the present age of anxiety and depression.

This is all your projection koan. It's funny how you think you know me, but you don't know squat about me.

Originally Posted by koan

Zolar, The Encyclopedia Of Ancient And Forbidden Knowledge - The Complete Guide To The Occult, 1970

Originally Posted by koan

and you... ignoring your progressive apologies prior to the introduction. (Three "foreword" paragraphs prior to the actual intro)

What do you mean "ignoring my progressive apologies prior to the introduction?"

Originally Posted by koan

My dear friends, relations, and people throughout the earth, the purpose of this book is to clarify knowledge that must be brought to light as quickly as possible because it can prevent what nobody wants — a nuclear holocaust. With the world in turmoil and on the threshold of an atomic explosion which could be started accidentally and could very well destroy all civilization, I am announcing a scientific discovery that will make war an absolute impossibility and revolutionize the life of man entirely for his benefit. Due to a fantastic breakthrough, to the discovery of a natural, psychological law that was hermetically sealed behind a logical theory that 98% of mankind holds true, the solution to the problem of evil which has plagued mankind since time immemorial is now within reach. By applying this natural law, every bit of hurt that exists in human relations will be virtually wiped from the face of the earth by something so superior to punishment, as a deterrent, that people the world over will be prevented from committing those very acts of evil for which blame and punishment were previously necessary. This discovery will start an atomic chain reaction of thought more powerful than anything yet produced because it offers a solution to every problem of human conduct. You needn’t jump to the conclusion that this is impossible because you can use yourself as a guinea pig in a test that every person can take at the end of the third chapter. Remember, proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Lessans, The Decline And Fall Of All Evil - The Most Important Discovery Of Our Times, 2011 8th edition

Why is one more compelling than the other?

One isn't more compelling the another. They are two different books with completely different content. One is a self-help book and my father's is a scientific discovery that is world changing. It's like comparing apples to oranges.

Originally Posted by koan

eta: btw, what is the test at the end of the third chapter? I can't see it because I'm such a poor reader.

The test at the end of the chapter was meant for you to test yourself, not for him to actually give you a test. That sentence is not in the new version.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Yes light energy does travel but the non-absorbed photons, which land on the retina when we're in the optical range, reveal the object, but do not bounce off of the object and travel through space/time.

What? How exactly are these photons traveling to and landing on the retina without traveling through space/time? You just contradicted yourself again. And who said anything about bouncing off objects? We're talking about seeing the Sun, which involves only the emission and not reflection of photons. There is no absorption/non-absorption or bouncing-off/reflection of light involved at all in the scenario I am asking you about. If the mirror image photons at the retina had to travel 93 million miles to get there, then they cannot be at the retina instantaneously as soon as the Sun is first ignited. Try again.

Are the mirror image photons at the retina instantly, or did they travel there from the Sun?

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Yes light energy does travel but the non-absorbed photons, which land on the retina when we're in the optical range, reveal the object, but do not bounce off of the object and travel through space/time.

In the scenario of the Sun being turned on at noon and light being on the retina or camera film at noon, reflection/non absorption isn't a factor.

We are talking about newly emitted light from a newly turned on Sun.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

I am coming from your perspective. I am asking only Yes or No questions concerning the things that YOU have said to me. The only perspective you seem to accept is one that ignores all the problems with what you are saying.

Asking yes or no questions does not mean you're coming from the efferent perspective.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The mirror image of any object in the external world is at the retina instantly because of how the eyes work; the image does not get reflected; and it does not travel through space/time. The only reason we can see it is because it is there to be seen.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

I already understand this much just fine. There will be mirror image photons instantly at the retina on Earth at the very moment the Sun is first ignited. My question is where they came from and how they got there.

They are instantly at the retina but light energy is constantly moving. The only difference is that the non-absorbed photons only get dispersed to a certain point, and then the full spectrum takes over.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Once again, these photons are already there (the light energy is continuously derived from the Sun so nothing is teleporting) when we see the object.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Light cannot be continuously arriving from the Sun at the very first moment it is ignited, for none of it has yet had time to get there. So this doesn't explain how the instantaneous mirror image photons got to the retina without teleporting.

You are not hearing me. I said that if the Sun is not bright enough, then there will be no photons at the eye. Therefore, we might not see the Sun explode instantly, but that changes nothing insofasr as this discovery goes. There are many objects we don't see because they aren't bright enough to see them. So what? That just means they don't meet the conditions for sight. It does not mean that the afferent model is true by default.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

There is no time involved and this is not a contradiction. When the non-absorbed light is dispersed to the point where the object cannot be seen from any distance, then the light is no longer blue or red or green, it is the full visual spectrum.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Does the non-absorbed light bounce off objects and travel away at light speed to the retina? If not, then it cannot disperse.

Not true.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Nor does this have anything to do with the newly ignited Sun example where there is no absorption or reflection (but only emission).

It doesn't matter whether a source is emitting light (in which case I don't believe there would be any absorption), or it is using light from another source to reveal itself. It makes no difference in the efferent account because all that matters is that enough light is surrounding the object, which does not require time.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

In the scenario of the Sun being turned on at noon and light being on the retina or camera film at noon, reflection/non absorption isn't a factor.

It is very much a factor because the non-absorbed photons are what allows us to see the object.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

We are talking about newly emitted light from a newly turned on Sun.

I know that.