I see the entire visual universe as local. You see big I see small.
It is always dark, Light is an illusion and not a thing!
- Thread starter theorist-constant12345
- Start date
- Status
Well that might be, but you ignore that the content of the spectrum gives us information about the outside world.
I do not ignore this, the content of the spectrum is defined within the unvaried I mention, the unvaried being a lot nearer than the distance stars you monitor.
Everything science has about light, is an illusion inside an illusion. And the only process involved in any of this, is our brain interaction.
So then why does a distant star show the spectral lines for the elements in its atmosphere? It can't be accident. The lines are very specific. I am really trying here. You are failing to communicate your ideas.
I am not 100% clear what you mean by spectral lines, and watching the video made me no wiser. However , why would it not work, if we see in the dark, this is just another interaction different to the unvaried.
The spectrum wavelengths, are directly proportional to the interaction.
ahh i see, you're focused on the low level minded tactic of grammar policing.
if it takes capital letters for you to understand something, then i would suggest increasing your thinking functions.
anyone who actually understands language would not have problems understanding anything i type.
Therein lies the reason why your posts reflect such stupidity and inane scenarios
"I see as far as I do because I stand on the shoulders of giants"
The metaphor of dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants(Latin: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes) expresses the meaning of "discovering truth by building on previous discoveries". While it can be traced to at least the 12th century, attributed to Bernard of Chartres, its most familiar expression in English is found in a 1676 letter of Isaac Newton:
That is a lie and probably part of the reasons you have been banned from so many other forums.
That is another lie.
You have nothing, and sprout illogical concepts that are on the level of fairy tales like "The Big Bad Wolf and the three little Piggies"
And I have no doubt you'll continue with your huffing and puffing until you are also banned here.
Then simply do not have an alternative theory section, a speculation section, or members.
It is simple, we see on the surface in daytime by temporal night vision, prove we do not?, I know you can not.
So my alternative view stands, unless science can prove otherwise, it makes for the same reading, if not better.
Landau Roof
Registered Senior Member
Except that, like so much else of what you say, "we see on the surface in daytime by temporal night vision," makes absolutely no sense.
Be-bop-a-lula a rama lama ding dong. Can science prove otherwise?
The alternative theories section is for alternative theories, not nonsensical statements. So in refutation to your alternative theory, I argue yabba dabba doo and twenty three skidoo.
I have provided experimental procedure and observation experiment. I have simply proved time dilation to be incorrect, and you doubt my ability?
night vision by timing, increased intensity by curvature momentum, it is easy to understand. Really basic stuff
Landau Roof
Registered Senior Member
Science guys! Do you know what Top Cat means here?
You would not be saying that if you could actually understand the alternative theory, because all the work done is easily explained.
If you are in a stationary position on Earth at night, you rotate into the light. by timing, temporal.Science guys! Do you know what Top Cat means here?
Landau Roof
Registered Senior Member
'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Landau Roof
Registered Senior Member
I was asking the scientists, not you Top Cat.
A lack of knowledge does not make a person stupid.
Simply garbage , but the burden of proof I have provided. It is not my fault you can not be objective and view the most obvious facts.
- Status