A revolution in thought

[The Lone Ranger]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It seems to me that bees would be confused being able to see in two different spectrums, but they're not, so I doubt if they would be confused in this case either. Interesting topic though.

Honeybees Navigate with a Map of Polarized Light | Answers in Genesis

No, honeybees do not "see in two different spectrums." After all this time, you apparently still don't even know what a "spectrum" actually is (much less what the plural of "spectrum" is). Amazing!


So, you're saying that a honeybee does see two different images when it looks at the Sun? Seriously? Again, I would point out to you that how honeybees see and navigate has been quite thoroughly studied, so I'd advise you to think carefully* before you answer.


And did you actually quote "Answers in Genesis," of all sources? You couldn't possibly have picked a less-appropriate and less-reliable source if you tried!




*Yes, I appreciate the futility of asking peacegirl to think.

[But]

Actually, because the apparent motion of the Sun is caused by the Earth's rotation, we would see the Sun in the same place in both cases. I've made the same mistake in this thread.

[davidm]

Well, peacegirl, now you have stump jumpers, thunderkunts, heyjews and juggalos to market daddy's book to. That is a pretty robust demographic, considering that it constitutes the core support of Donald Trump.

[Ari]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

But my question is how can something be magnified by a camera or a telescope if it's not within the range of detection?

There's no such thing as 'range of detection' what you're referring too is resolution.

If something is smaller than a single pixel it wont be seen because the light is effectively inbetween pixels.

But wait, its light still gets detected, some of its light enters the pixel above, below, to the left and right of where the object should be. by using careful math and raw data from a sensor it's possible to figure out how much light from that object entered each adjacent pixel and extrapolate out the object.

Or the simpler version is to either magnify the image (what a lens does) or increase sensor density and resolution (what happens when you buy a bigger megapixel camera).

[But]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

We should see a solar flare (for example) erupt at the same time we detect radio waves.

Flare star - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The brightness increase is across the spectrum, from X rays to radio waves.

UV Ceti and the flare stars | aavso.org

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Bump.

Bump.

Last chance, Peacegirl.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

No, honeybees do not "see in two different spectrums." After all this time, you apparently still don't even know what a "spectrum" actually is (much less what the plural of "spectrum" is). Amazing!

A spectrum (plural spectra or spectrums) is a condition that is not limited to a specific set of values but can vary infinitely within a continuum. The word was first used scientifically within the field of optics to describe the rainbow of colors in visible light when separated using a prism.

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

So, you're saying that a honeybee does see two different images when it looks at the Sun? Seriously? Again, I would point out to you that how honeybees see and navigate has been quite thoroughly studied, so I'd advise you to think carefully* before you answer.

It has to do with the bee's ability to use the Sun's ultraviolet and polarized light for navigation, landmarks, and the earth's magnetic field to regulate their internal clocks.

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

And did you actually quote "Answers in Genesis," of all sources? You couldn't possibly have picked a less-appropriate and less-reliable source if you tried!

This may be more reliable.

Honey Bee Navigation - Utah Pests - utahpests.usu.edu




*Yes, I appreciate the futility of asking peacegirl to think.[/QUOTE]

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Bump.

Last chance, Peacegirl.

Last chance for what Spacemonkey?

[Ari]

So Peacegirl, do radiowaves act like visible light or not? You've given two different answers and both can't be correct.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by But

Flare star - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

UV Ceti and the flare stars | aavso.org

I'd like to see the solar flares (or flare stars) and the radio emissions appearing at the same time using both an optical and a radio telescope. There should be a video of this somewhere.

A person cannot view a solar flare by simply staring at the Sun. (NEVER LOOK DIRECTLY AT THE SUN! EYE DAMAGE CAN RESULT.) Flares are in fact difficult to see against the bright emission from the photosphere. Instead, specialized scientific instruments are used to detect the radiation signatures emitted during a flare. The radio and optical emissions from flares can be observed with telescopes on the Earth. Energetic emissions such as x-rays and gamma rays require telescopes located in space, since these emissions do not penetrate the Earth's atmosphere.

Telescopes

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Ari

So Peacegirl, do radiowaves act like visible light or not? You've given two different answers and both can't be correct.

They don't act like visible light because we cannot see them, although these waves can be converted into an image.

http://www.gb.nrao.edu/epo/image.html

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by But

Actually, because the apparent motion of the Sun is caused by the Earth's rotation, we would see the Sun in the same place in both cases. I've made the same mistake in this thread.

I believe the Earth would have moved in the 8.5 minutes that takes for the Sunlight to get here, so that should put it in 2 different positions from the perspective of the Earth. Or what did I miss?

[Ari]

Peacegirl, is 'converting them to an image' the same as seeing them?

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Last chance for what Spacemonkey?

For you to show some sincerity. To demonstrate that it makes a difference whether or not I refrain from insulting you. So far it looks like you will weasel and evade no matter how politely I address you. Is that the case? If so, then it makes no sense to threaten to weasel and evade unless I address you politely. You cannot threaten someone by saying you might do what you are already doing. Do you understand this?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Honeybees Navigate with a Map of Polarized Light | Answers in Genesis

The people who do "answers in Genesis" are creationists, and believe the Earth is 6'000 years old. I used to watch their programs to laugh at their ending, the science was OK, but the interpretation was screwy. They would always claim some form of irreducible complexity, they didn't know how something so complex could have evolved, an argument from ignorance.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

They don't act like visible light because we cannot see them, although these waves can be converted into an image.

Radio Image

So visible light and the rest of the spectrum are different? How do the photons know what part of the spectrum they are part of, and how do they know whether to jump instantly to our eyes, or to wait till they have traveled to us to reveal themselves. Or are you saying that the eyes somehow are in contact with the visible photons only, and can control their actions, that is really spooky action at a distance.

Photon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'd like to see the solar flares (or flare stars) and the radio emissions appearing at the same time using both an optical and a radio telescope. There should be a video of this somewhere.

Why? Most ideas that are totally obvious to everyone who knows anything about the topic, do not warrant special attention, except to the people who are too stupid to figure it out for themselves.

[But]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I believe the Earth would have moved in the 8.5 minutes that takes for the Sunlight to get here, so that should put it in 2 different positions from the perspective of the Earth. Or what did I miss?

I guess you just have to draw a picture and play around with it. Think of the spherical wavefronts that expand around the Sun. If the Sun stays in the center of those from the observer's perspective, the result doesn't depend on the speed of light.

[But]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'd like to see the solar flares (or flare stars) and the radio emissions appearing at the same time using both an optical and a radio telescope. There should be a video of this somewhere.

The brightness increase is across the spectrum. Which part of this don't you understand?

http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/...om-a-mini-star

The star's brightness in visible and ultraviolet light, measured both by ground-based observatories and Swift's Optical/Ultraviolet Telescope, rose by 10 and 100 times, respectively. The initial flare's X-ray output, as measured by Swift's X-Ray Telescope, puts even the most intense solar activity recorded to shame.

There's your youtube video.

NASA | Swift Catches Mega Flares from a Mini Star...

[Ari]

I don't quite see how that works either. The sunlight the earth is running into as it spins is still ~8min older than the sunlight if it jumped to your eye and thus 8 minutes of rotation will need to pass between the two.

[Ari]

In addition it would seem Peacegirls concept of certain em-waves acting different than others (as well as relativity being bs) would make laser cooling not work, given that laser cooling is based on the relative motion of atoms causing the wavelength of light to expand or contract based on their motion towards or away from it.

Her ideas also would have an impact on the internet as no matter how fast your connection is, there's a hard limit of 70ms latency when accessing data on the opposite side of the world (assuming a perfect system and fiber optics).

[But]

Originally Posted by Ari

I don't quite see how that works either. The sunlight the earth is running into as it spins is still ~8min older than the sunlight if it jumped to your eye and thus 8 minutes of rotation will need to pass between the two.

It's 8 minutes older, but it comes from the same direction.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'd like to see the solar flares (or flare stars) and the radio emissions appearing at the same time using both an optical and a radio telescope. There should be a video of this somewhere.

peacegirl, peacegirl, peacegirl, are you finished editing your post? Is this really what you want to see? Because NASA has a whole mission that just watches the sun all the time! It just watches teh sun at all different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, including the visible spectrum. It also has a phenomenal website with fantastic videos.

Solar Dynamics Observatory - Argo View - YouTube
SDO Jewelbox: The Many Eyes of SDO (1/2) - YouTube
SDO Jewelbox: The Many Eyes of SDO (2/2) - YouTube

BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE: NASA also has another mission, STEREO, which monitors the sun in other parts of the spectrum, including radio.

Anyway: Three Satellites Hone in on Solar Flare | NASA

There are all kinds of videos of different observatories observing the same solar event at different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum at the same time!

NASA's Solar Fleet Sees Massive Filament Erupt on Sun - YouTube
STEREO's View of Aug. 24, 2014 Eruption - YouTube
NASA | Many Views of a Massive CME - YouTube

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by But

It's 8 minutes older, but it comes from the same direction.

The light from the Sun would come from the same direction, relative to the stars, but the Earth would have rotated 8.5 minutes and moved in it's orbit around the Sun. So the Sun would be in a different position according to an observer on Earth.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by davidm

Well, peacegirl, now you have stump jumpers, thunderkunts, heyjews and juggalos to market daddy's book to. That is a pretty robust demographic, considering that it constitutes the core support of Donald Trump.

Hey! I'm right here ya know, would you prefer Hillary to Trump?

Even if she's in prison, stupid people could still vote for her.