Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
Peacegirl, here is that question concerning conscience again which you have yet to answer with anything but weaseling evasion:
What support did Lessans provide for your claim that under his changed conditions, people will be unable to harm others without justification?
If you'd rather discuss efferent vision (despite previously insisting that you would not be returning to this topic), then here are some questions on that topic for you to answer:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
You need to answer these questions without contradicting yourself, otherwise real-time photography and efferent vision remains impossible:
1. What is it that interacts with the film in a camera to determine the color of the resulting image?
2. Where is whatever it is which does this (when it interacts)?
3. Which properties of whatever it is that does this will determine the color of the resulting image?
4. Did the light present at the camera initially travel from the object to get there?
5. How did the light already present at the camera get to be there, i.e. where did it come from?
6. Can light travel to the camera without arriving at the camera?
7. Can light travel faster than light?
8. Is wavelength a property of light?
9. Can light travel without any wavelength?
10. Can wavelengths travel independently of light?
11. Do objects reflect light or does light reflect objects?
12. What does a reflection consist of?
13. What does light consist of?
14. Do you agree with our account of what it means for the ball to be blue (i.e. that it is presently absorbing all non-blue light striking it, and reflecting from its surface only the light of blue-wavelength)?
15. What happens to any light striking the surface of an object which does not get absorbed, after it strikes that object?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
Why does efferent vision still have no answers to the following simple questions?
When sunlight (including light of all wavelengths, including blue) hits a blue object, what happens to the blue-wavelength light as it hits that object? At one moment it is travelling towards the object along with all the light of other wavelengths. Then it hits the surface of the object. Then what?
Does it bounce off the surface to travel away from it? [Y/N?]
Is it absorbed by the blue object? [Y/N?]
Does it cease to exist? [Y/N?]
Does it stay there, at the surface of the blue object? [Y/N?]
Does it teleport itself instantly to any nearby films or retinas? [Y/N?]
If none of the above, then what? [Insert answer here]
1. Did the specific photons (at the camera when the photograph is taken) exist immediately before the photograph was taken? [Yes or No]
2. If so, then according to efferent vision where were those specific photons at the moment in time immediately preceding the taking of the photograph? [State a location]
3. If something is at the same place at two consecutive times, is it moving during that time period, or is it stationary?
|
Show us all again how you never ignore or evade questions, Peacegirl. |
I did not evade these questions. I don't think they are useful. If an object is within the camera's field of view, and the camera is taking a snapshot of the actual object due to light's presence, that means that the photons that come first and second have absolutely nothing to do with this model of sight. You are getting confused due to the belief that the photons are traveling, striking the film, and a delayed image formed. That is not how I believe it works based on Lessans' observations.