Are you religious?

[StickyEnd]

We are no longer restricted by our senses in gaining knowledge. Even if we did only see in black and white we could still detect colour, infra red and ultra violet. We would alost certainly name it something else, but detect it and learn about it we could still do.

Could you elaborate on this please? If we saw the world in grey my opinion would be that our observations of experiments would be in this colour too, even if they represented colour. Naturally we would be aware of the wave duality etc but for the actual perception of colour what could detect it? My point here being that restriction of senses leaves possibilities open for phenomena that we are incapable of detecting.

~D.C.

We do see in black and white sometimes. Go out on a fairly dark night with only natural light. Only the rods in your eyes will respond and you see in black and white. In daylight a prism would still show distinctive bands of light. We could still measure those bands as different frequencies (just not with our eyes).

If we only saw in black/white the visible spectrum would pretty much all be white. How light/dark something would appear would be more related to amplitude than frequency.

[Dashing_Chap]

Dogs see the world in black & white…

Your points so far have related to popular science, of which I’m an eager fan, but say little about the thread title.

... Perhaps if you relate how your points reflect your view on the religious/god question then a fruitful discussion could take place.

If the universe shows some signs of order in a chaotic system then perhaps it could be related to intelligent design, like an underlying mathematical sequence or pattern for all things? The different dimensions aspect refers to God being outside of time & space & the possibility of his residing in places that are impossible to contemplate. Naturally this is only a theory & in no way reflects any reference to scripture or a man made deity.

Ty for the link btw I shall have fun with this download!

We are no longer restricted by our senses in gaining knowledge. Even if we did only see in black and white we could still detect colour, infra red and ultra violet. We would alost certainly name it something else, but detect it and learn about it we could still do.

Could you elaborate on this please? If we saw the world in grey my opinion would be that our observations of experiments would be in this colour too, even if they represented colour. Naturally we would be aware of the wave duality etc but for the actual perception of colour what could detect it? My point here being that restriction of senses leaves possibilities open for phenomena that we are incapable of detecting.

~D.C.

I don’t have a problem with this point of view if that’s what you believe. However, neither do I have a problem with the belief that my toilet brush is really the creator of the universe and shows us all the way by scrubbing off our sins and poo.

What is needed is sufficient and acceptable evidence. It’s a long thread so to summarise many posters believe different things and we are stuck at the nature of what constitutes evidence (apologies to all for the simplification).

As an aside, Sticky will answer in his own way, but changing sound for light we know that there are frequencies outside of our hearing that other animals can detect. We can now measure them using electronic equipment. Light is similar in that it’s composed of many different frequencies and we can also detect them using the right equipment. The night sights of “winged gods” in their choppers rely on the science being correct. See:

http://www.howstuffworks.com/light3.htm

Ah yes but my point is also shown in the link, 'visible spectrum', we are unable to detect all light waves. Indeed if we could detect everything one might suppose that we would be able to see television tranmission signals as well as the radio waves and sound waves bouncing around the room. Who is to say what the world might be like when we can only see half of it? My main point essentially being that we are restricted by our senses & there may even be things such as dark matter/energy that we have no means to be aware of either naturally or technologically.

~D.C.

[StickyEnd]

Ah yes but my point is also shown in the link, 'visible spectrum', we are unable to detect all light waves. Indeed if we could detect everything one might suppose that we would be able to see television tranmission signals as well as the radio waves and sound waves bouncing around the room. Who is to say what the world might be like when we can only see half of it? My main point essentially being that we are restricted by our senses & there may even be things such as dark matter/energy that we have no means to be aware of either naturally or technologically.

~D.C.

Do you know that sound and light waves have a lot more than frequency differences?

[ScouseD]

Dogs see the world in black & white…

Your points so far have related to popular science, of which I’m an eager fan, but say little about the thread title.

... Perhaps if you relate how your points reflect your view on the religious/god question then a fruitful discussion could take place.

If the universe shows some signs of order in a chaotic system then perhaps it could be related to intelligent design, like an underlying mathematical sequence or pattern for all things? The different dimensions aspect refers to God being outside of time & space & the possibility of his residing in places that are impossible to contemplate. Naturally this is only a theory & in no way reflects any reference to scripture or a man made deity.

Ty for the link btw I shall have fun with this download!

We are no longer restricted by our senses in gaining knowledge. Even if we did only see in black and white we could still detect colour, infra red and ultra violet. We would alost certainly name it something else, but detect it and learn about it we could still do.

Could you elaborate on this please? If we saw the world in grey my opinion would be that our observations of experiments would be in this colour too, even if they represented colour. Naturally we would be aware of the wave duality etc but for the actual perception of colour what could detect it? My point here being that restriction of senses leaves possibilities open for phenomena that we are incapable of detecting.

~D.C.

I don’t have a problem with this point of view if that’s what you believe. However, neither do I have a problem with the belief that my toilet brush is really the creator of the universe and shows us all the way by scrubbing off our sins and poo.

What is needed is sufficient and acceptable evidence. It’s a long thread so to summarise many posters believe different things and we are stuck at the nature of what constitutes evidence (apologies to all for the simplification).

As an aside, Sticky will answer in his own way, but changing sound for light we know that there are frequencies outside of our hearing that other animals can detect. We can now measure them using electronic equipment. Light is similar in that it’s composed of many different frequencies and we can also detect them using the right equipment. The night sights of “winged gods” in their choppers rely on the science being correct. See:

http://www.howstuffworks.com/light3.htm

Ah yes but my point is also shown in the link, 'visible spectrum', we are unable to detect all light waves. Indeed if we could detect everything one might suppose that we would be able to see television tranmission signals as well as the radio waves and sound waves bouncing around the room. Who is to say what the world might be like when we can only see half of it? My main point essentially being that we are restricted by our senses & there may even be things such as dark matter/energy that we have no means to be aware of either naturally or technologically.

~D.C.

There is no evolutionary reason that we should have developed senses capable of detecting certain frequencies of light or dark energy. Bees can see in ultraviolet because their ancestors had a better chance of producing offspring if they could, and the genes were passed on. It wasn’t important for humans.

That we can’t detect certain forms of electromagnetic radiation is not, at least to me, any sort of evidence for a creator. Going further, it doesn’t provide any evidence that I should live my life in worship of a supposed creator or a physical but no less divine (in the sense that some religions believe everything is god) toilet brush.

[StickyEnd]

Christ, on BBC news 23 they are asking why scientists should be more honest than journalists or politicians in their professional activities. I am getting p1ssed off now.

Ignorance is rife.

[Excognito]

.. Light is similar in that it’s composed of many different frequencies and we can also detect them using the right equipment. The night sights of “winged gods” in their choppers rely on the science being correct.

I don't think that's the point DC is getting at. The concept of colour is distinct from the nature of the stimulus. A photon has no colour; it has a frequency. Some colours require a specific mix of frequencies. This might be closer in concept to the 'sound' of a violin, which is quite distinctive and comprises a set of time-varying frequencies/amplitudes.

[ScouseD]

.. Light is similar in that it’s composed of many different frequencies and we can also detect them using the right equipment. The night sights of “winged gods” in their choppers rely on the science being correct.

I don't think that's the point DC is getting at. The concept of colour is distinct from the nature of the stimulus. A photon has no colour; it has a frequency. Some colours require a specific mix of frequencies. This might be closer in concept to the 'sound' of a violin, which is quite distinctive and comprises a set of time-varying frequencies/amplitudes.

I was trying to keep it simple.

The colours inherent in a rainbow (i.e. roygbiv) consist of single (unless at the fringes) frequencies. That was enough to describe the general phenomena in DC’s post, at least for the time being.

Likewise and similar, that individual sine waves add or subtract over time in a sound waveform (as understood in Fourier theorem or indeed genuine additive synthesis) is accepted.

This isn’t a p!ssing contest. Whatever our views let’s try to make them clearly understood, informative and in context.

[StickyEnd]

.. Light is similar in that it’s composed of many different frequencies and we can also detect them using the right equipment. The night sights of “winged gods” in their choppers rely on the science being correct.

I don't think that's the point DC is getting at. The concept of colour is distinct from the nature of the stimulus. A photon has no colour; it has a frequency. Some colours require a specific mix of frequencies. This might be closer in concept to the 'sound' of a violin, which is quite distinctive and comprises a set of time-varying frequencies/amplitudes.

I was trying to keep it simple.

The colours inherent in a rainbow (i.e. roygbiv) consist of single (unless at the fringes) frequencies. That was enough to describe the general phenomena in DC’s post, at least for the time being.

Likewise and similar, that individual sine waves add or subtract over time in a sound waveform (as understood in Fourier theorem or indeed genuine additive synthesis) is accepted.

This isn’t a p!ssing contest. Whatever our views let’s try to make them clearly understood, informative and in context.

I am not having a go at you but colours (as we see them) are not single frequencies. They are a band of frequencies.

[ScouseD]

.. Light is similar in that it’s composed of many different frequencies and we can also detect them using the right equipment. The night sights of “winged gods” in their choppers rely on the science being correct.

I don't think that's the point DC is getting at. The concept of colour is distinct from the nature of the stimulus. A photon has no colour; it has a frequency. Some colours require a specific mix of frequencies. This might be closer in concept to the 'sound' of a violin, which is quite distinctive and comprises a set of time-varying frequencies/amplitudes.

I was trying to keep it simple.

The colours inherent in a rainbow (i.e. roygbiv) consist of single (unless at the fringes) frequencies. That was enough to describe the general phenomena in DC’s post, at least for the time being.

Likewise and similar, that individual sine waves add or subtract over time in a sound waveform (as understood in Fourier theorem or indeed genuine additive synthesis) is accepted.

This isn’t a p!ssing contest. Whatever our views let’s try to make them clearly understood, informative and in context.

I am not having a go at you but colours (as we see them) are not single frequencies. They are a band of frequencies.

Yes, there is a range of frequencies, but for the purposes of this conversation we should be able to agree that coloured vision is just that. Red has a frequency of around 630 to about 740 nm (for those still interested that is about the colour of a ciggy end when not being dragged on). Do we really want to get into the area of a few nm more or less?

I agree that there are there are times to be precise, but DC’s point isn’t one of them.

It’s a judgement and I no doubt sometimes get it wrong. No one, including me, wants this simple and enjoyable discussion to end up in the finer points of quantum chromodynamics.

Edit to add: Damn it... I meant wavelength!

[Dwarf]

Perhaps what the lad was trying to say is something that I have just alluded to in that energies or forces exist, (sorry if the terminology is not de rigeur) which pervade us though we are not necessarily aware of. Therefore, conceptually, why should it not be possible that we are pervaded also by divine energies that simply we have not been able to detect until now?
Given that, as said, a Creator contains within him all creation and therefore all forces and energies also.

Talking conceptually here and offering absolutely no proof or evidence.


What are you lot doing up so late? I'm just back from my friday night pagan ritual sharing fermented plants with my fellows and wor señora is watching some crap on the box.