The conference hall debate!

[theorist-constant12345]

Nobody does.

I really do not understand why so many of you do not understand' and are suffering from sort of mental block.

It is very simple to understand.

What you call white light from the sun in space, a mixture of spectral frequencies is observed by sight as no frequency and not visible unless interacting.

 

[James R]

Yes that is correct except the energy conversion/activation, in the brain needs the energy of EM radiation of a specific frequency to become activated. Intensity not has important as a specific frequency(s),

You just agreed that EM radiation is not needed for "light", by your own definition.

Why are you contradicting yourself?

 

[theorist-constant12345]

You just agreeI say that that EM radiation is not needed for "light", by your own definition.

Why are you contradicting yourself?

I have not agreed that em radiation is not needed, where do i say that?

 

[Beer w/Straw]

You have been inconsistent, with it seems like, everything you've said.

 

[theorist-constant12345]

You have been inconsistent, with it seems like, everything you've said.

You would be inconsistent trying to think light as not being a thing, it is not easy to explain new when years of old exist.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Is energy a thing?

 

[theorist-constant12345]

Is energy a thing?

Yes , I think it is .

 

[Beer w/Straw]

But like, photosynthesis and solar panels are what, magic?

 

[theorist-constant12345]

But like, photosynthesis and solar panels are what, magic?

Not magic , an energy conversion

 

[Kristoffer]

Look, tc, no one thinks you're on to something except you. That should give you a hint.
None of your many posts have made much sense.
Everyone has been trying to explain to you where you went wrong, but all you do is refuse to listen or learn.

 

[paddoboy]

Envy gets you no where, you must understand by now what I am referring to .

Envy?? Oh you poor sap!

 

[theorist-constant12345]

UOTE="Kristoffer, post: 3277733, member: 280884"]Look, tc, no one thinks you're on to something except you. That should give you a hint.
None of your many posts have made much sense.
Everyone has been trying to explain to you where you went wrong, but all you do is refuse to listen or learn.[/QUOTE]
Where I went wrong, enlighten me where I am wrong about the light between a ceiling light and the floor being clear?

 

[Beer w/Straw]

If I were to say I could win a debate with you and would feel lesser for engaging you in the first place.

What, if anything, would you say to that?

 

[theorist-constant12345]

If I were to say I could win a debate with you and would feel lesser for engaging you in the first place.

What, if anything, would you say to that?

I would say if you want to debate the nature of light with me , you will not have to feel lesser when you lose.

 

[paddoboy]

Just because you are criticised by knowledgeable people who provide scientific evidence to back up their arguments does not mean that you are an oppressed genius. Sometimes, you are just a rebel trying to pull yourself up by your bootstraps. In the end, the flawed notion that criticism means that you are actually right is a pathetic defense mechanism to avoid responding to objections or backing up your claims with evidence.
You denigrate the knowledge of scientific experts, but compare yourself with Galileo and Einstein.

 

[Kittamaru]

I have not agreed that em radiation is not needed, where do i say that?

When you said that you are "seeing light" when you press on your eyelids with your eyes closed...

 

[Beer w/Straw]

I would say if you want to debate the nature of light with me , you will not have to feel lesser when you lose.

I still leave open the possibility you're just pulling peoples legs.

But, thanks for that. I guess.

 

[paddoboy]

I would say if you want to debate the nature of light with me , you will not have to feel lesser when you lose.

Debating with you is a non event. It cannot happen. Debate requires at least two reasonably intelligent people with knowledge on the subject being debated..

 

[theorist-constant12345]

Debating with you is a non event. It can happen. Debate requires at least two reasonably intelligent people with knowledge on the subject being debated..

What knowledge do you deem there is needed to understand what we observe and what we do not observe?

I will take truths over any text any day. Light is a simple subject .

 

[theorist-constant12345]

I still leave open the possibility you're just pulling peoples legs.

But, thanks for that. I guess.

I have a wordpress blogg, I am awake at 3 am , I spent more time on science than anything else in life, I assure you I am not pulling anyone's leg. I really do understand it, to explain in text with no hand actions is hard, my friends get it .