Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragar
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragar
That last paragraph is particularly bizarre.
We know we can use the light to make images. But in in Lessan's world, what we see should not match what is recorded on, say, a CCD, since the latter is information carried by light (which took time to reach us), while the former is what we see (and hence took no time to reach us).
What a weird way of trying to view the world.
|
A light source can project images onto a CCD. There's no conflict here. |
Yes, there is. If we see according to how Lessans thought, we should see things instantly. But we know that light has a finite speed. So our images from light should be of the past, while what we see is the present. Those are two different things.
So why don't they? |
Dragar, this has been the topic of conversation for hundreds of pages with no resolution [in my opinion]. The question still remains: Are we seeing the past due to the finite speed of light, or are we seeing the present due to light being a condition of sight? |
That's just a dodge.
If Lessans is right,
then what we
see (being instantaneous) is different to images constructed from
light (which is not instantaneous) using a CCD (for example).
But when we compare these two things, in reality they are not different. Why?