Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
We would see the Sun the instant it is ignited if it is bright enough. If it isn't, then we wouldn't see it.
You are still missing what I have been saying. If we can see an object (in this case the sun), then that means light has to be at the retina or we wouldn't be able to see it. That means the requirements for sight have been met according to the efferent model. If we cannot see the object, then the requirements for sight have not been met. Either the object is too small or not bright enough to be seen, therefore the photons will not be at the retina.
They traveled Spacemonkey, but we're not talking about millions of miles. We're talking about a small area in which the object is within the optical range.
You're going right back to the afferent model. I can't deal with this.
As I said, if the Sun being ignited causes it to be bright enough, then we will see it because the light will be at the retina. If the ignited Sun is not bright enough yet, then we won't see it.
You're, once again, looking at light traveling which is the afferent perspective. You are not looking at this in terms of the eyes looking at the object, which does not require long distances. It only requires the object to be within the field of view, and it doesn't matter if the object is 100 million miles away or a few feet away, as long as it meets the requirements.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
I am not going back to the afferent model by mentioning traveling light. You yourself have just told me above that these photons traveled to the retina from the Sun. That means the traveling photons I am asking you about are a part of your own account.
|
That is very true Spacemonkey, but you're not looking at it from the efferent perspective. The only way to do that is to understand the difference between receiving light that has traveled through space/time, and seeing objects in real time due to how the brain and eyes work, which, if true, changes the vantage point from which you are coming from. As long as you start your investigation (if you want to call it that) by imagining light bouncing off of objects and traveling long distances, you are going to get the same conclusion and it's going to appear that it's impossible to see the Sun turned on before the light reaches Earth.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
You are contradicting yourself by saying both that these mirror image photons from the Sun are both instantly at the retina and also that they have to travel from the Sun to get there. If they travel at light speed across an actual distance of 93 million miles then they are not going to be there instantly. And if they are there instantly as soon as the Sun first ignites then they cannot have got there by traveling across this intervening distance. So which is it?
|
There you go again. You are not getting it AT ALL. You are not even listening to me when I tell you that the requirements are met if the star is bright enough to be seen by the naked eye or a telescope. If it is not bright enough, we won't be able to see it, but if it is, then the light that allows this to occur (remember, light becomes a condition of sight, not a cause), will automatically be at the retina. I want to state, once again, that until the light gets here from the Sun which takes 8 minutes, we will not be able to see each other because the requirements are not yet met. That is why it's deceiving to talk in terms of long distances since I wouldn't be able to see you 5 feet away, but I would be able to see the Sun ignited if the light was bright enough and the Sun at that moment was large enough (or within my field of view) to be seen.