Angled relative to what? Space has no angles because space has no direction or boundaries we know of at this time. Angles are relative to an observers position relative too, two other points.
I never said space was empty and the chances of space being ''gin'' clear if it were empty , I am about 99% sure by the evidence. My notion simplified is this, what colour is the water in a glass with the lights out?
neither are angles but perhaps you could give us the angles involved in your own warehouse example. was the ground elevated, lower or the same at the observer 2 position?
''Angles'' exist in the warehouse because the warehouse makes it relative, but the ''angles'' are still straight lines from point source to point source. The floor in the warehouse is flat, a plane . There is no loss of sight in the scenario because of curvature of the plane . The inverse square law and vanishing point perspective is all you need to consider in this scenario. You observe an object close up to be 3d, a bit further away it becomes a visual 2d, further away it becomes 0d
so in one post angles exist but in another they dont. Got it. As a scientist I find this fascinating.
It "IS" the same color it was with the lights on. The ONLY difference is we can see it when light is present and visible to our eyes. What color is it in infrared light?
In one scenario angles exist, in a different scenario they don't. In simplicity remove all the visual matter from space, there is nothing to work with and angles are gone. Angles are relative to something else. They always have been and they always will unless the Universe gets a this way up sign.
The same ''colour'' it was in normal light or the dark. It remains transparent always. In an experiment put a glass of water in front of a black background and step back a bit, the water will look dark but I assure you it is an optical illusion. Go back and empty the glass, then step back and look again, the air in the glass will look dark , again an optical illusion. Remove the air from the glass and step back and look again, the space may look dark but it is not. It remains clear and transparent. added- this lake is crystal clear like tap water , https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=h...AUICygC&biw=1920&bih=949#imgrc=dDschSxJ8lC3pM: added- the background dark looking space in this picture is not dark in colour. It is clear like the lake. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=s...AUICigB&biw=1920&bih=949#imgrc=5lbzNdWTjGtNmM:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?biw...7...0i67k1.0.HAMxXAhusbw#imgrc=CUaszoHnvc2YoM: A man on earth says to the astronaut it is dark outside tonight, the astronaut replies, ''only in your imagination''.
The very nature of science demands that we must always ask more questions. But Man is limited to his own finite ability to ask questions that might pertain to the answers which he isnt even wired to comprehend. Best to attempt mastery of that which avoids us. Treating each other right. And things like that. Also gravity. Umkay?
And....if boiling? What if it's frozen? You see...light is radiation which varies in wavelength depending on the medium it travels in as well as various external influences. "Space" is one of those mediums and this is very easily shown on any clear night when we look up. Our Milky way Galaxy has on the order of 200 Billion stars and would be so bright we would not have dark nights were it not for massive amounts of debris and dust obscuring the light from our view.
I see...so I should take your "Assurance" above my perceived reality? I highly recommend you do not include this in your "Paper" as I will be unable to submit it out of personal embarrassment.
I always ask more questions, my idea of science is to advance the knowledge we have. Looking at this knowledge in depth is quite revealing.. To be honest some of science is really sloppy thinking . Gravity is easy, N is attracted to N. M=N
My paper will just deal with time, there will be no embarrassment to the truth. My other notions we can deal with at a later date. Lets firstly correct science on time as they certainly have not a real clue about time or the mechanics of time.
either angles exist or they dont. Youve made two opposing comments. Ill ask again. Do angles exist? Yes or no.
Okay, but when writing on time please place it in context to be taken seriously. Relativity is a fickle mistress.
If its boiling it is becomes sort of frosted by the bubbling, the same as when it freezes. This is because of the permeability of the substance in different states. I know light is radiation which varies in wavelength . But a future notion you will have to consider is this, light is the electromagnetic fields varying in magnitude rather than photons traversing through a field. The field itself becoming a wave at a particular position of the linear.
I have time wrapped up in a nut shell, the caesium atom is an indirect measurement of time and to call it a time dilation instead of a timing dilation is really poor semantics and incorrect, this makes it ambiguous for the person learning time dilation. To say time slows down or speeds up is ambiguous and gives the reader the impression that actual time speeds up and slows down. The only way we could actually say a time dilation instead of a timing dilation is if we define time in physics, time is a measurement directly proportional to ageing. The Caesium frequency being a frequency of ageing. However I do no believe that to be the case, because time a quantifiable measurement indirectly proportional to ageing.
Correct, the object retains its volume always, a visual contraction is not the same as a physical contraction. added- This will shock you, any body in the Universe has 0 dimensions visually relative to an infinite universe.
This makes absolutely no sense in context. Light is not effected by "Bubbles" (whatever you mean here) and freezing does not cause them regardless....I can only assume you are terribly confused or so far out of your element you can no longer even see where you are. Infrared light is heavily influenced by temperate variation for wavelength, rendering it visible in our instruments by color and wave shift.
I am not confused +E = >N You do not know my N-field theory so obviously you will not understand. The water gains permeability when it gains energy to help the stop the light passing through it. A greater force field if you like. N cannot traverse through N because N is likewise.. Field density and Q.F.S playing a part.
Well. Unfortunately, the knowledge which we tend to claim we possess is most often premised upon materialist assumptions. There's a lot to say about that. It's reflective of the devolution of science as a field. And, yes, M=N. But how we see it is the difference between gravity left rendered a simple algorithm and gravity evolved to a different way of thinking. You see?
