You are splitting hairs by trying to make me look wrong.
You look wrong because you are wrong, generally. Sometimes, you write something that is correct, but most of the time, not so.
You and everyone else know what I mean by now.
Not really because you often obfuscate contradictions with vagueness and the wrong selection of technical terms. For example, see below.
The object's reflection is the same whether it travels through space/time or not. Call it what you will, that isn't even the issue. The issue is whether that reflective light reveals or brings.
Light is light, true, but the light that strikes an object is not taking on that wavelength/frequency
Oh LORDIE! Two problems here. (1)
Wavelength and frequency and TWO SEPARATE THINGS. You can't keep running around in the thread using "wavelength/frequency" as a concept and expect everything you say to be universally true for each instance you do so. In this particular instance, wavelength DOES change with the medium that light travels in: glass, water, air, etc. Frequency does not. (2) Now you are using the word "that" as a referent to something you haven't brought up and so it is vague. For all appearances, it looks like you think the medium has a wavelength that is being discussed. That wouldn't make sense as an antecedent and so a valid interpretation is missing due to your ambiguity.
None of this alters the soundness of the claim. You are focused on the conclusion regarding light without paying attention to its first premise. Conclusions come after, not before a proof. If I used the wrong term, sorry, but it doesn't change the point that whatever is seen in delayed time is seen in real time. The only difference is that we would be seeing the world in the present, not the past. Let's focus on that, not a detail that is a distraction.
-------------------------------------
When light passes through a medium,
its wavelength changes, but its frequency remains constant.
This happens because the
frequency of a light wave is determined solely by the source that produced it. Once a wave is generated, the number of wave crests passing a point per second (the frequency) does not change as it moves from one medium to another
scienceinsights.org+1.
The
speed of light, however, depends on the optical properties of the medium (such as its refractive index). In a denser medium, light slows down, and in a less dense medium, it speeds up
and traveling in delayed time to the eye. That's why I said photons travel with an intrinsic property of their own before and after striking matter.
They do, but it is not wavelength because as light travels through different media, both the speed and wavelength change.
Got it. Thank you for the info, but it's still a distraction.
A photon always has a wavelength before it strikes an object, because its wavelength is an intrinsic property determined by its energy and frequency, not by any interaction with matter.
This is false: the wavelength of light is intrinsically linked to its frequency, but its actual value in space is determined by the medium it occupies. You cannot define the wavelength of a photon in a medium without accounting for the medium's refractive index (
n). The equations are as follows:
First, the frequency (
f) is fixed by the source:
f =
c /
lambdavac
Where
c is the speed of light in a vacuum and
lambdavac is the vacuum wavelength.
When that light enters a medium with a refractive index
n, the wavelength
lambdan becomes:
lambdan = lambdavac / n
Because
n is a property of the medium (extrinsic to the photon), the wavelength
lambda changes as the light moves from a vacuum (or air) into glass or water (for examples). Therefore, wavelength is not an intrinsic property; it is a product of the photon's interaction with the medium.
I meant that a photon has an intrinsic wavelength in a vacuum, but it is essential to understand that even though the wavelength changes (not the frequency) depending on the medium it goes through does not in any way disprove the claim that whatever is seen in delayed time is seen in real time. Nothing changes other than the tense that goes from past to present. This supports his claim.
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=2cdb...XZlbGluZyt0aHJvdWdoK2MmZm9ybT1DU0JSQU5E&ntb=1
Does a Photon’s Wavelength Change Permanently When It Interacts with Matter?
When light (a photon) strikes matter and changes its wavelength,
that change is temporary and depends on the interaction type. The key point is that
frequency (and thus the photon’s “intrinsic” energy) remains constant unless the photon is absorbed and re‑emitted or its energy is altered in some other way
British Columbia/Yukon Open Authoring Platform+1.
Why the Wavelength Changes in a Medium
In a transparent medium like glass or water, light slows down because it interacts with the atoms. The speed in the medium is v=c/n, where n is the index of refraction. Since c=fλ (frequency × wavelength = speed), if v decreases and f stays the same, the wavelength λn in the medium becomes shorter than in vacuum
British Columbia/Yukon Open Authoring Platform+1. This is a
wave effect — the photon’s frequency is unchanged, but the wave “fits” into the medium’s structure with a shorter wavelength.
When the Wavelength Returns to Vacuum Value
If the light exits the medium back into vacuum, the speed returns to c and the wavelength reverts to its original vacuum value. The photon’s frequency is unchanged, so the wavelength in vacuum is the same as before the interaction
British Columbia/Yukon Open Authoring Platform.
Non‑Linear or Absorptive Interactions
If the interaction is
absorptive (e.g., the photon is absorbed by an atom and re‑emitted at a different frequency), the wavelength change is permanent for that photon. In this case, the photon’s energy is altered, and it will continue with the new frequency/wavelength in vacuum. This is how
spectroscopy works — matter can absorb and emit light at specific wavelengths
Science Mission Directorate.
