“Revolution in Thought: A new look at determinism and free will"

[peacegirl]

Light as a cosmic time machine.

Wherein the fact of delayed-time seeing is explained, yet again.

Yep, that's the theory.

 

[peacegirl]

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

No, peacegirl, you don’t understand. Admittedly that is poorly written, but the writers are taking for granted that people understand light-time delay. What the article is saying that energetic particles from a flare arrive AFTER the flare itself it seen — sometimes in as little as 8 minutes, but often days later. “see a flare when it occurs” is just shorthand for seeing the flare before the arrival of the energetic particles. The flare light still took some 8.5 minutes to reach the earth to be seen by the telescope. If you don’t believe me, email the writer.

I'm not going to email the writer. Of course he would say he didn't mean it the way it sounded. He made a distinction between the particles that take 81/2 minutes to get here and the actual flare which could be seen as it's happening in real time.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

 

[DBT]

Eyes have evolved from light sensitive cells to detect light. When there is no light to detect, it is dark....being in a dark room, lights off, etc.

 

[DBT]

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

 

[peacegirl]

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

 

[pood]

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat.

No, they are not, peacegirl. I explained to you what is going on. Want me to email the author? It was badly worded, but this is to be expected from New Scientist, a popular science rag that is not a good source of knowledge.

 

[DBT]

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

 

[peacegirl]

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat.

No, they are not, peacegirl. I explained to you what is going on. Want me to email the author? It was badly worded, but this is to be expected from New Scientist, a popular science rag that is not a good source of knowledge.

Maybe the newness of this science mag is just what we need. Even if you email him, he isn’t going to say we see in real time. Are you kidding me? Let the evidence speak for itself.

 

[peacegirl]

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

I don't think so. They said that it's hard to know when a flare will be triggered, which is what they are trying to figure out because of the danger of particles. This is what the author said:

Predicting solar flares is difficult, because we don’t know exactly how they are triggered. While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

 

[steve_bank]

So OK, let’s discuss this book, in which the author talks about the “new world” that will emerge when everyone accepts his argument, a world that he says may have to be enforced at military gunpoint for those laggards and slugabeds who don’t accept his claims.

I read similar in TTrotsky's History Of The Russian Revolution.

 

[DBT]

Light as a cosmic time machine.

Wherein the fact of delayed-time seeing is explained, yet again.

Yep, that's the theory.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

I don't think so. They said that it's hard to know when a flare will be triggered, which is what they are trying to figure out because of the danger of particles. This is what the author said:

Predicting solar flares is difficult, because we don’t know exactly how they are triggered. While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

''When it occurs'' just means when it is observed to occur by us, which is 8.5 minutes after it happened on the sun. Where the solar wind, which varies from about 200 kilometers per second to 900 kilometers per second takes far longer to arrive than light.

 

[peacegirl]

So OK, let’s discuss this book, in which the author talks about the “new world” that will emerge when everyone accepts his argument, a world that he says may have to be enforced at military gunpoint for those laggards and slugabeds who don’t accept his claims.

I read similar in TTrotsky's History Of The Russian Revolution.

Did you read the book? If you didn’t, you can’t say that military enforcement is mentioned. It’s your imagination that has taken over all objectivity.

 

[peacegirl]

Light as a cosmic time machine.

Wherein the fact of delayed-time seeing is explained, yet again.

Yep, that's the theory.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

I don't think so. They said that it's hard to know when a flare will be triggered, which is what they are trying to figure out because of the danger of particles. This is what the author said:

Predicting solar flares is difficult, because we don’t know exactly how they are triggered. While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

''When it occurs'' just means when it is observed to occur by us, which is 8.5 minutes after it happened on the sun. Where the solar wind, which varies from about 200 kilometers per second to 900 kilometers per second takes far longer to arrive than light.

That doesn’t add up from the previous example. In fact, there was a clear distinction between particles arriving 81/2 minutes later and seeing the flare when it was happening which were not the same time as particles arriving. Anyway, there will continue to be dissension on this topic and nothing will be resolved. It will just be more of the same banter back and forth which will get us nowhere. So, for now, I’m not going to discuss this topic anymore. Obviously the present thinking will win out especially when no one cares to read the author’s demonstration as to why he believed the eyes are not a sense organ. It doesn’t pay until it is picked up by scientists who can test this and confirm one way or another which position is correct.

 

[pood]

Light as a cosmic time machine.

Wherein the fact of delayed-time seeing is explained, yet again.

Yep, that's the theory.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

I don't think so. They said that it's hard to know when a flare will be triggered, which is what they are trying to figure out because of the danger of particles. This is what the author said:

Predicting solar flares is difficult, because we don’t know exactly how they are triggered. While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

''When it occurs'' just means when it is observed to occur by us, which is 8.5 minutes after it happened on the sun. Where the solar wind, which varies from about 200 kilometers per second to 900 kilometers per second takes far longer to arrive than light.

That doesn’t add up from the previous example. In fact, there was a clear distinction between particles arriving 81/2 minutes later and seeing the flare when it was happening which were not the same time as particles arriving.

Once again, you willfully misunderstood what the author was saying.

 

[peacegirl]

Light as a cosmic time machine.

Wherein the fact of delayed-time seeing is explained, yet again.

Yep, that's the theory.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

Space Technology 5

Official home page for NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission. The project will validate methods of operating several satellites as a single system and test multiple technologies in the harsh space environment of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.jpl.nasa.gov

I’m trying to understand the proof of radio waves and delayed vision coinciding with no interruption that could mess things up.

Was there some point to you posting that?

x-rays and gamma rays and radio are light. We already explained the electromagnetic spectrum to you. Like all light, it takes 8.5 minutes for x-rays and gamma and radio waves to arrive at the earth from the sun. That includes light in the visible spectrum, the only part of spectrum we can see in. Therefore we are always seeing the sun as it was some 8.5 minutes ago.

While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

We can now predict dangerous solar flares a day before they happen

Large solar flares can put astronauts’ health at risk and damage satellites, but we haven’t had an early warning system for them – until now

www.newscientist.com

To predict when a flare is likely to happen, they are looking for magnetic field pre-flare conditions that cause flares.

That is true, but they are seeing the flare as it is happening, not 81/2 minutes later when the dangerous particles arrive and become a threat. There is a difference. Why? Because I believe the telescope, which functions like the eye, sees the flare happening as it is taking place. This is not such a far out idea as people are making it out to be. They are just incredulous that science could have been that wrong since so much is based on their belief that we see the past from millions or billions of years ago.

It reminds me when my aunt told her son around 6 or 7 years old that Santa did not exist. He got so upset he told her she’s a liar. He would not accept that he wasn’t real. Moral of the story: It’s hard to let go of a belief that is close to one’s heart and consequently may get in the way of the search for truth.

They are seeing conditions within the magnetic field that lead to a solar flare. The magnetic field conditions are seen 8.5 minutes after they happen on the sun. Then the predicted flare happens and it takes 8.5 minutes for that light/information to reach us.

I don't think so. They said that it's hard to know when a flare will be triggered, which is what they are trying to figure out because of the danger of particles. This is what the author said:

Predicting solar flares is difficult, because we don’t know exactly how they are triggered. While telescopes can see a flare when it occurs, providing some warning, energetic particles can arrive at Earth in as little as 8 minutes – potentially putting astronauts’ health at risk and damaging satellites before we have time to react.

''When it occurs'' just means when it is observed to occur by us, which is 8.5 minutes after it happened on the sun. Where the solar wind, which varies from about 200 kilometers per second to 900 kilometers per second takes far longer to arrive than light.

That doesn’t add up from the previous example. In fact, there was a clear distinction between particles arriving 81/2 minutes later and seeing the flare when it was happening which were not the same time as particles arriving.

Once again, you willfully misunderstood what the author was saying.

I did not willfully misunderstand anything. It is you, not me, who willfully refuses to read and understand why Lessans claimed the eyes are not a sense organ. You don’t have a clue. Trying to defend your position, you couldn’t even admit that dogs cannot recognize the human partners from a damn picture. Show me where you see a dog responding with some form of recognition. This is very much related so don’t accuse this of being a non-sequitur.

 

[DBT]

Dogs recognize a person by sight, sound and smell. Photos of people are a different matter. But there are experiments where a dog recognizes pictures of objects. The dog is shown a picture, then collect the pictured object (a toy) from a selection of different toys scattered on the floor in another room.

 

[steve_bank]

The thing is reality works regardless of what we call it.

There is always a finite delay between cause and effect. It is measurable. Electrical, chemical, or mechanical.

Hit one end of a metal rod and it takes time for the effect to propagate to the other end. The speed of light is an upper bound on the sped of a computer.

The scientific model of visual perception involves the theories of electromagnetic and quantum mechanics.

The portion of the electromagnetic spectrum can detect is called the visible spectrum. There are species that can detect EM radiation outside our visual range.

Rattlesnakes have a sensor that detects infrared radiation.

Infrared sensing in snakes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Light in common usage refers to the entire EM spectrum. Light is modeled as a wave propagating in space. When interacting with matter it is modeled as a particle, quantum mechanics. Photons.

Photons are absorbed by photo-receptors in the eye resulting in the creation of electrons.

When the energy of the photon in electron volts matches the bandgap energy of the photosensor atoms absorption occurs.

I worked in optics.

Perception and sensory are loaded contextual words. Different areas and fields can have different meaning. After all there are only 26 letters ad a limited pronounceable number of combinations.

Terns are always adapted and co-opted.

I call the eyea bio;logical photo sensor with a focal plane array. The retina is comprised of an array of red green blue photodetectors, pixels.

 

[peacegirl]

Dogs recognize a person by sight, sound and smell.

Not by sight alone.

Photos of people are a different matter. But there are experiments where a dog recognizes pictures of objects. The dog is shown a picture, then collect the pictured object (a toy) from a selection of different toys scattered on the floor in another room.

That could be true. Do you know of any video that shows this? There was a dog named Chase that could identify over a thousand toys by name. But this still does not prove dogs can identify individual features from a still photograph or a computer screen. They should be able to by wagging a tail or some other show of recognition if the image of their master was traveling to their eyes.

 

[DBT]

Dogs recognize a person by sight, sound and smell.

Not by sight alone.

The evidence suggests otherwise;

''According to veterinarians, the answer to both of those questions, is yes — under the right circumstances. Dogs can distinguish between different people based on appearance at that time. In other words, if you’re sporting a drastically different hair style or are wearing a uniform instead of your everyday clothing, your dog may not be able to identify you in a picture.


Research does show that dogs can identify a familiar person in a photograph. In a study published in the Journal of Vision, 12 beagles and 12 cats were given individual handlers who worked with them two hours a day for six months. Afterwards, they were given a visual test to recognize the face of their handler versus a non-handler. The result? The dogs chose the face of their handlers 88% of the time, while the cats chose their handlers 55% of the time.


Additionally, these dogs were also able to identify the face of an animal that lived with them. In fact, they chose the familiar animal more often than an unfamiliar animal. The study found that dogs chose the face of a dog they knew 85% of the time, while the felines chose the face of a familiar feline 91% of the time.''

Can your dog recognize you in pictures?

Can your dog recognize you in pictures? Science shows that dogs have the ability to differentiate between faces in photographs!

www.morrisanimalinn.com

Photos of people are a different matter. But there are experiments where a dog recognizes pictures of objects. The dog is shown a picture, then collect the pictured object (a toy) from a selection of different toys scattered on the floor in another room.

That could be true. Do you know of any video that shows this? There was a dog named Chase that could identify over a thousand toys by name. But this still does not prove dogs can identify individual features from a still photograph or a computer screen. They should be able to by wagging a tail or some other show of recognition if the image of their master was traveling to their eyes.

''There's a growing pile of puppy research suggesting that dogs can indeed recognize their fellow furry friends and their humans in photos. It's not just wishful thinking when we see their ears perk up as they gaze at a picture of their pack. And while they might not be ready to join the art critique circuit, dogs do process visual info in their own special way.''

Can Dogs See Pictures?

Ever caught your pup staring longingly at a photo of you two from last summer's beach trip? Or maybe Fido seems to give a tail-wag of approval whenever he spots a picture of his doggy pals. It's enough to make you wonder: "Can dogs see pictures?" The answer is yes! And not just see them, but...

westandwillow.com