Saturday, December 01, 2012

did modern man INVENT light?

"Is 'light' merely a product of our bi-focal genetic make-up?"

What the hell is this question, surely light is a real phenomenon? A real 'thing', an entity or 'theory backed up by hard evidence'? Hasn't light been proven to exist as either a wave or particle? It has, right?

Well, I'm not so sure about that, Tonto.

Think about it, each eye gets a FLAT IMAGE of the outside world from the inner surface of the eyeball aka The Retina. Each of these flat images is passed to the opposite side of the brain (there's still no convincing explanation of why we're wired this way). Each image is then 'compared' somehow to give us the 'illusion of depth'.

We're bifocal and we're taught, "Therefore 'light travels' in straight lines," but does it?

Refraction (and reflection) alone show us that 'light' interacts in all sorts of curious ways with matter. And we have a whole MSC or Mathematical Science Construct of this 'light' or 'photon' originating in the 'outer electron shells' of an 'atom'. It's an agreed topic of understanding among the 'community'.

But is 'light' itself not just an illusion?

Is it not like the zero and infinity of mathematical counting-culture? What? Zero and Infinity, to give use their proper noun-age. They don't exist. Seriously, ask any 'serious' mathematician and he'll admit, "Yup, we made them up so that 'the math works'," it's what he/she'll say, if you catch them on an honest day.

Isn't one of the Key (so called) Scientific Principles, "Nature abhors a vacuum."? I can only count a (whole number) of apples, and this is mainly because the 'tacit agreement, apple' is a whoolly-defined 'individual' entity by definition - just as humans are termed 'individual' with NO EVIDENCE to profess such. These 'structural philosophical inventions' often get in the way of common sense observation. You can't COUNT a nothingness of some-thing, as you similarly can't count an infinitiness of some-thing. Zero and Infinity (as much as they're the source of clever fractals and machine code et al) TOTALLY DESTROY the foundation upon which the Counting System that gave birth to mathematics was built.

Zero and Infinity are a logical step too far; like God, or Satan.

Similarly, though we 'think' we 'understand' this effect we call 'light', we don't. Not one bit. It's an INVENTION of modern bi-focal thinking in a localised gravity environment. If we had one eye, we'd have NO DEPTH PERCEPTION and we'd have to invent some sort of time-based algorythm to explain DISTANCE - some pixels just 'take longer' to attain a 'touch' element. We could invent a 'science' that'd explain 'photonic delay' as a property of psychic will or some other such mumbo-jumbo. We'd have our hands out in front of us CONSTANTLY WAITING for the pixels our one eye is showing us to gain some sort of physical or resistive property, at the very least. I'm not sure we'd BELIEVE the universe had depth, we'd transpose 'some other property' into its stead.

In summary: we're conned by our eyes and must refrain from rationalising the Religion of Science so that 'the math works'. We must remain curious, ever vigilant; never complacent.

2 comments:

dognamedblue said...

there's an interesting documentary on Showcase 2 Sky 192 "the living matrix" at 6pm tonight which, far to briefly, covers bio-photons created inside the body on an atom/cellular level [along with rupert sheldrake & bruce lipton]

kiminimunekyun said...

Wow. Thank you for this great observation which I will keep in mind. I'd bet that "light" is just another simplistic way for us to explain what we observe, rather than an absolute reality.

As of now I'm leaning towards the "holographic" view of reality, that is, that everything I see is effectively recreated by/via my brain (possibly based on a shared or "universal" template of everything) for my senses to sense at the time of my observing it.