altaylar2000

There are two models of light: wave and particle, there is a hybrid. But this is invariant to the issue under discussion. I have no personal "constructions" here, what is said about absorption and reflection in any model is the same.

I don't know where space and mirror have to do with it. Light is reflected by all objects, no mirror is needed, and it spreads in space, space has nothing to do with it

Benefit is not needed, truth is needed. Everyone has their own benefit, the villain has it too

There is no real vacuum system

For me there is only one ethical problem: the problem of the existence of a predator. The predator must be destroyed in its animal or human manifestation: a wolf, a parasite, a swindler. The source of evil on earth is the predator. Eating meat is immoral. The destruction of someone else's life is immoral. The problem with modern society is that these are cowards who do not try to stop the villain. There is no balance between good and evil. For example, the destruction of wolves will not lead to overpopulation of herbivores, because the food resource is limited, and fertility will decline. This is just myth designed for survive of evil The position of the pacifist is vicious as well as the ideology of Jains, Buddhists and Christians, passivity is serve to villain Good moral is moral of aryans: just kill villian Even if there is some kind of balance philosophically, then in reality it will not exist anyway. Once in Old Europe, cannibals and slave owners lived, they caught people and broke their legs so that they would not run away, they ate them and forced them to work for wear, there they find traces of trepanned skulls on living people, оnce upon a time people were brutally killed to extract adrenochrome. and so on. And what is this "philosophy" worth if you saw how your child is savagely killed?

this is just reflection from dust and so on

It has. He believed that the eye is designed so that receptors respond to particles.

Thanks, this is the first answer on the merits of the question This has already been discussed. If this were so, we would see the light directly in front of us, that is, we would not see anything other than a white background. I believe that the light source reflects reflected light, so we see it.

No, it doesn't mean. It has nothing to do with it

no, this is the standard. So far, no one has canceled the fact that light is absorbed and reflected, and we believe in Newton or a wave, all the same it all comes down to this We see the color of objects due to the fact that the object reflects part of the spectrum, and the colors are different because different objects absorb and reflect the full spectrum in different ways

What You described is exactly Newton's theory of vision I have no idea _____ What I mean. Let's forget about the question of whether light is particles, we will just talk about light, abstracting from what it is. If I see a green table, it's because it reflects the green part of the spectrum, roughly speaking. So when I see objects I only see reflected light

Actually, I do not believe in Newtonian anatomy, but if I believed in flying photons, I would ask the same thing: why do we not see them when they fly, but we see when they are reflected

yes, I think it's reflection of reflected light Otherwise we would see the light itself in the air and so on

The fact of the matter is that it's just light. Then why don't we see it before it is reflected

I am now listening to one woman who is known only via youtube, although she does everything efficiently and professionally

By the way, there is also a paradox in the perception of light. If our receptors perceived light, then we would see the light itself, and we only see its reflection from objects.

By the way, there is a "hypothesis" that nature obeys the fibonacci progression, but I have never seen any real proof of this. The very fact that some things can be described by the Fibonacci series does not prove anything.

But that's not what I was talking about. Yes, colors, shapes and much more are recognized, but there is no strict progression like in the music system if you follow this logic, nature has created auditory receptors by order of arithmetic

the color system can also be described like that? I do not see such proportions in the visible spectrum as in the music system. it's random

You want to say that people hear notes in the same way they perceive different colors, and if, for example, I hear a melody that I like, this does not mean that I hear exactly what the author of this melody hears, who knows how to write it in the language of notes? and so coincidentally that this perception is a multiple of 2 in mathematical terms?

You want to say that everyone who does not know the name of musical notes is color blind? To distinguish colors, you do not need to know what they are called. Why then these talks about "ear for music"?

if there are people who do not recognize the frequencies, then they cannot hear the melody

No conspiracy, that's a fact. And this is a dirty imperial policy of centralization

I think that the spirit of the people comes from its origin and is overwritten by the imposed culture and false history, for the sake of imperial interests. I do not like, in particular, when they talk about the "Germanic people", especially considering that modern Germany has a starting point in the Austro-Prussian war, was created on the ruins of Austria Hungary in fact at the end of the 19th century, and Germany was at the mouth of the Rhine. Any nonsense about "German blondes" and so on is imposed. It is necessary to distinguish between the concept of nation and nationality. Nowadays it is customary to mix it

The earth has different potentials in different places. Conductors drawn from different places of the earth can give a discharge, for this reason realized potential equalization systems. It does not matter at all where the body is discharged, to the ground or not, so that the discharge needs a charge, the potential difference at the poles of the "capacitor" And in fact, in most electrical systems, the main protective conductor is not the connection to earth, but the connection to the neutral of the transformer or generator. Connection to earth sometimes not used at all And ground is not a low resistance path. As a rule, this path has more resistance than neutral, and in addition, this resistance is not stable (depending on the weather)