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

[pood]

What is this alternative explanation? How exactly can information about a distant object be instantly at the eye? I have not seen that explained.

We see the object due to light, DBT. Nothing changes other than this dispute regarding time. I gave his reasoning. Were you here when I posted the chapter?

The light we see has travel time between being radiated or reflected and being detected by the eyes.

The reflected light is detected by the eyes in both accounts, so you cannot use this as your refutation.

Eyes cannot detect light until the light reaches the eyes. Real-time seeing is physically and logically impossible. Case closed.

You're just plain wrong, and saying it a thousand more times isn't going to do anything to make it more true. Eyes can detect light instantly in efferent vision, so there is no gap between the eyes and the object.

Eyes cannot detect light instantly. You are wrong and your author was a total nutter.

Look Pood. You are defending your belief (not truth) with all you've got, as I am defending mine. Which one is truer has yet to be seen. But for now, the twain shall never meet and will go on forever if we let it. .

I am defending facts, not belief. Belief has nothing to do with it. Your author was a nutter.

 

[bilby]

Which one is truer has yet to be seen.

Yours has been proven false. It entails contradiction.

Anything that doesn't entail contradiction is truer than that.

 

[peacegirl]

I can't keep kowtowing to you personally since you keep telling me that time in this account is the same as distance.

No I don't. I say that time is inextricably linked to distance. Which it is, through the concept called 'speed'.

We know distance is real, but when we see the object (not the light which is secondary), the proof is not as airtight as you believe.

This fragment of a partial thought is typical. It means nothing to anyone except you, because it assumes a whole bunch of shit that exists only in your head. "The proof"? Which proof? The "light is secondary"? What light? My explanation of why you MUST be wrong makes no mention of light.

Assuming he was right about the workings of the brain and eyes, there doesn't have to be a mention of light. It naturally follows that light becomes a necessary condition, but does not travel through time, even though distance or space between the object and the eyes exists.

We know that eye and object are separated by distance. We know that any change in the object cannot be transmitted across that distance without it taking time.

Those two sentences are all that is required to show that any and all claims of instant vision must be false.

NO, how many times do I have to repeat that if the brain looks through the eyes, as a window to the world, then seeing the present, not the past, is absolutely true and doesn't defy physics because it doesn't say that light doesn't travel. I tried to explain that new photons are always replacing old ones, but this does not change our view of the object, which would mean we would see the change of color from red to blue, not red in delayed time. This has nothing to do with how fast light travels.

You can't even begin to refute this, so you frantically wave your arms and try to distract from that fact. Your communication skills are utter dogshit. You don't know how to think, and you don't know how to communicate. What good are you?

I don't know.

I am not here to convince you personally.

You are not going to convince anyone of anything.

You don't know that unless you have psychic powers.

Take it for what it's worth, and if it's worth nothing in the way you have dissected it, then let it go.

Let WHAT go? Be clear, concise, and specific. FFS.

This whole claim.

 

[peacegirl]

Why is it so? - Professor Julius Sumner Miller

A story I heard from a physicist.

AE was in the audience at a presentiment.

At the end the speaker said ‘Therefor this must be true’.

AE asked: ‘ ‘But why must it be true?’
Speaker: ‘Because it is written.’
AE: ‘Written where?’
Speaker: Po0ndimg his fist on the lectern ’Because it is written in my book!’

Now that's funny!

 

[peacegirl]

The Power of Faith.