We were in the wrong thread. If I hear David using belittling language, I won't answer him regardless of who copies his posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm
It's very simple, peacegirl. There is a rocket ship sitting on a launch pad. In the sky is a little red dot. It's Mars.
Lessans claims that the little red dot in the sky is where Mars actually is at the time we launch the rocket. If that were the case, the rocket would have to be programmed to follow a particular trajectory to reach Mars.
Science, on the other hand, says that where Mars APPEARS TO BE in the sky, is not where it actually is. Where it ACTUALLY is, is further along in its orbit, but we don't see it at that different location from the earth, because the light has not arrived at our eyes yet.
If science is right, the rocket would have to be programmed to follow a DIFFERENT trajectory to reach Mars, than it would be if Lessans were right.
The launch to Mars, therefore, is a clear test of whether we see in real time or delayed time. NASA sends to the rocket to Mars according to delayed-time trajectory, thereby conclusively proving that Lessans' claim that we see in real time is wrong.
You have nothing to say to this. In the face of this conclusive disproof of Lessans, to hold to your position that we see in real time is either irrational, or dishonest, or both.
|
Can someone access the actual calculations from Nasa? Just curious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
So you're now saying that we wouldn't see the Sun the moment it was "turned on," but would have to wait 8 1/2 minutes, for the light to reach us?
|
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that we cannot detect photons coming from the Sun before those photons reach Earth. Once they reach Earth, we would be able to see each other because it meets the requirements of efferent vision.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
Because in the experiment, they measured the speed of light by timing how long it took to see the reflection of the light bulb. (And thus neatly demonstrating that we don't see it immediately.)
|
Quote:
|
Just like the example of the spot on the moon, it would be very difficult to determine, with accuracy, whether the light bulb could be seen before the light made its return.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davidm
1. No, it is not difficult. It is EASY.
2. Let me again call everyone's attention to this weasel's weaseling ways. When we bring up objects at an astronomical distance that disprove real-time seeing, like the moons of Jupiter, she says these can't count, because they are done in space -- too far away! Of course this objection is absurd, ESPECIALLY since Lessans himself used astronomical distances in his sun example.
OK. So then we give her short-distance examples, like the laser hitting the moon and the experiment discussed by specious_reasons. Now, she lies, the distances are too short -- the findings are unreliable!
So neither long-distance nor short-distance nor medium-distance experiments, all of which show we don't see in real time, are reliable according to her!
 Truthless, dishonest, prevaricating little twit.
She is currently pretending to ignore me (p-ignore). I would appreciate if someone would quote this and also my Mars rocket example about a page back so she can't pretend she isn't reading them. Thanks.  |
Done. |
It depends on the experiment. The experiment regarding mirrors and light bulbs is confusing because the light bulb is still within range, which means that it is present in some form. Therefore, this experiment is inconclusive. In order for it to be conclusive, we cannot have the object present at all. Afferent vision presupposes that all we need is light (photons) in order to see said object. The minute you bring the actual light bulb into the experiment, it's already unreliable.