[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

But it is contradictory. Your present answers are not consistent. You've said that the photons which are instantly at the film are photons that travel there and arrive 8min after they are already there. That means your present answers simply don't work. So which answers will you change to make your account consistent?

No Spacemonkey, they do work. Something is wrong with the way you are interpreting what I'm saying. I didn't say the same photons that arrive at Earth are the same photons that are already there. This is worse than pulling teeth.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

...because we're talking about light coming from the Sun (not the same photons obviously).

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

What photons are not the same as what other photons? The ONLY photons we have been discussing are the ones at the camera film when the Sun is first ignited. No other photons are relevant to the questions you were meant to be answering.

But these photons are constantly being replaced. So I'm not sure what photons you're referring to. The mirror image using constantly changing photons will reveal the object. In this model, the photons would not have any information in them such that we need to think about traveling blue photons before red. I'm really not sure what the problem is.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The only difference is that we are in optical range instantly due to how fast the light is traveling...

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

You said they were traveling 93 million miles at just over 11 million miles per minute. That doesn't get photons anywhere instantly. It takes 8 minutes. This is simple mathematics.

Forget the word "instant", okay? It could be nanoseconds to see the Sun when it's first turned on, but this delay doesn't mean that another object would be further delayed. No matter what the distance between an object and the viewer, it would take a nanosecond to be within optical range if the object was large enough and bright enough to be seen otherwise we would be out of optical range because the object would be too far away or too dim therefore not meeting the requirements.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

...and also due to the fact that seeing efferently creates a closed system which does not require light to travel the actual distance to Earth.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

This again flatly contradicts your previous claim that the photons at the film traveled there from the Sun. How many times will you continue to flip-flop on this simple point? Did these traveling photons travel there or not?

I'm really not flip flopping. The photons did travel and they are different photons that are at the eye every single second.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

What I'm saying is that the photons we are using to see the object are from the light that has obviously traveled...

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

If they didn't travel the actual distance from the Sun to the Earth, then where did they travel from and where did they travel to?

I'm trying to tell you that the light is traveling from the Sun to Earth, but due to efferent vision we are within optical range much quicker than 81/2 minutes. If our eyes were afferent we would be waiting to interpret the light, but how can we decode an image from the light when the inverse square law would turn into full spectrum light?

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I've said this before but you keep talking about distance and time, which don't relate to this model.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

But they obviously do relate to your model. You can't coherently explain what light does in your model at all. That's why you have to keep ignoring questions about distance, time, and travel, and pretending they don't apply.

Time and distance don't apply in this account even if it takes a nanosecond for the light to travel. For all intents and purposes, there is virtually no delay.