Star triangle paradox

and the question is...

are those photons physically reaching us? Because that is the implication RO, Alex and yourself are suggesting.

That is correct.

So again I ask are, you saying that we are seeing the photons that are in the distance? As an exampe: if the sun were to explode would we see it instantly because we would not need to wait for the photons to reach the earth (about 8 minutes) we would simply see the photons when the event occurs at the suns surface?
 
How do you know the photons are reaching us?

Because if you prevent all photons from reaching our eyes we can't see. Experiments to prove this are trivial. For example, you could set up a powerful visible laser shining into a clean vacuum chamber and then out into a perfect absorber. Even if you were in the chamber, you could not see the laser beam, because all the photons would exit the chamber into the absorber and none would reach your eyes.

Indeed, if there were no other sources of illumination in the chamber you wouldn't be able to see a thing - even with the laser beam in the room with you. The only way you could see it would be to reflect some of the beam into your eyes with a reflector (like your hand, a piece of dust etc.)

You can't see photons. You can only see photons that reach your eyes.

Give an example, show me a link that shows this to be true. Just saying "because we see it", which is probably your response, but that is not good enough of an answer.

http://www.laserist.org/Laserist/showbasics_9.html
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_can_you_see_light_from_a_laser_beam
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoreceptor_cell
 
So how do you see photons which have not yet reached your eyes? :shrug:
 
depends how bright they are.

I thought that is what you were implying. Yikes.

The ONLY way we see anything is that photons enter our eyes through our pupils and the photon hits a rod or a cone and is converted to an electrical signal and sent to the brain via the optic nerve. Check this out.

What you are saying is just a silly as saying we can instantly here thunder no matter how far away the lightning is because we can hear the sound waves before they reach our ears.
 
John99 there is no shame in being wrong - there is great shame in refusing to admit that you are wrong.

I am wrong all the time - just ask my wife...;)
 
John99:

Give me time to go look at it again. We are going through a lot of information that overlaps into that door example. Right now we are attempting to reach definitive conclusions. These things take time...and dont give me a time limit.

You appear to be trolling again.

Since you have avoided answering direct questions, I am going to impose a time limit on you again.

You will now answer the following questions:

1. Is it true that light has a finite speed? Yes/no
2. Does it take light from a door some time to cross the room to your eyes? Yes/no
3. Do you see light coming from a door some time after it was emitted? Yes/no
4. If the speed of light is $$3 \times 10^8$$ m/s and the door is 3 metres away from your eyes, does the light take 10 nanoseconds to reach your eyes? Yes/no
5. Do you withdraw your previous claim that you see the door as it is now and not 10 nanoseconds ago? Yes/no

You will answer these questions the next time you post to this thread, or be banned for trolling.

If your answer to question 5 is "no", you will post your understanding of how you see light from a door.

You currently have 2 active infraction points. If you are banned, it will be for 14 days.

If you choose to cease posting to this thread, you will respond to these questions by PM to myself.

If I do not hear from you within 2 days from the time of this post you will be banned.
 
John99 has replied, informing me that he is unable to respond until Tuesday. I have therefore temporarily banned him until Tuesday, and we'll take up the matter then.
 
I couldn't help but think of this guy:

wimpy.jpg
 
Last edited:
I note that, despite a requested temp ban while he "prepared" his answer, John99 has since been back and made numerous posts while assiduously avoiding this thread. Could we be informed as to whether or not he has made some of "valid" reply to you James, or is he doing his usual trick and avoiding giving any reasons for his ridiculous beliefs in the hopes of coming back to the topic from another angle and repeating his nonsense?
 
Thankyou Dywyddyr.

John99 has now been notified that a response is required within 24 hours.
 
John99 decided he needed more time, so I have given him a week away from sciforums.
 
Back
Top