Political leaders need to have a word with science forums.

I view what you describe more as an illusion than anything else. My use of the word paradox was more of a word play. Regarding the cellar...that's harder for me to wrap my mind around. I understand the space in the cellar is no different than the space of the void between 2 stars, but the 2 star thought experiment is just more satisfying for me personally.

 

I like the 2 star scenario you did myself, we need the same doing with the cellar example, I do admit it is harder to get our heads around. Or maybe I should leave the cellar out until another time and let people first get their heads around the illusion.

Can I have your permission to use your star example in my paper?

 

The slit creates the interference pattern of the EMR, there is no slits naturally in space, the slit is the observer effect.

dialectic
ˌdʌɪəˈlɛktɪk/
PHILOSOPHY
noun

1. 1.
   the art of investigating or discussing the truth of opinions.

Added- Concerning my original title of this thread, does anyone on here observe anything from me that deserves to be banned from science forums?

 

How does it do that?

 

Sounds to me like you are simply asserting a Science Conspiracy Theory and conspiracy theorists are generally as welcome as a fart in a space suit on any forum.

 

If a tree falls in a wood and there is nobody there to hear it, does it make a sound?

 

'Dark' and 'light' are two word that we use to describe what we observe.

Taking those two terms in their informal sense and using them that way in a scientific sense is just insanity.

'Photon' is far more precise and useful in science because, it is a scientifically derived term. Who would have thunk it!

 

Yes, I think that you may have exposed why the bans follow.

 

I am nothing like a conspiracy theorist, if you want to get into a political debate on the etiquette of science forums and the way they mistreat people , I have no problem ''tearing'' up the ''stage''and will happily oblige.

Let me quote you a moderator who knows what they are doing and knows the difference between a new theory section and a main science section.

People were once again attacking me on a personal level instead of ''attacking'' the idea.

Hence my thread title .

 

It's not a personal attack to point out that your theory is fruit bat and has no chance of being published anywhere other than in a vanity publication that will fleece you of thousands of pounds to do so.

 

I have not come across a single person on the planet who can say my theory is not the truth, quoting present information is not a defence against new information, proving the new information to be false is a defence. However I know there is no lies in telling the truth. Axioms do not lie.

 

If light does not pass through the space between the laser and slits, and the slits to the wall, then how do you account for the interference pattern on the wall?

 

To the best of my knowledge no one knows.

 

Radiation passes through the slits that is then detected by the wall and transformed into visible light. The interference pattern being caused by the angled slits congesting the radiation in the ''channel'' but allowing some radiation to ''trickle'' through. It is on par to a drip from a tap or faucet as they say in America. A drip existing because it has been isolated from the main body. If you was to add a smoke medium to the experiment, you can observe the interference pattern in the space..

 

Does not that radiation contain visible light as the source is a laser?

 

There is nothing to suggest that the radiation contains visible light. Visible of course meaning that which can be seen.

 

Meanwhile, Erdogan is banning
the teaching of Evolution in Turkey. <gobble gobble>
Link to references - https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=erdogan+evolution#q=erdogan+evolution&tbm=nws

Just to further discuss political leaders and their need for "science".

Moi

r > g

Stop Creeping ism
Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.
​

 

So how does the visible light traverse the space between the laser and the wall?

 

That is an interesting debate to have . Actually at a glance it was to easy to realise that both views are incorrect views and not honest views. Both views are subjective and the how we came to be should be left undisclosed and open to debate at all times until such a time we no an awful lot more than we do now, there is more evidence that points towards we were brought here.

p.s Just ask them Turkish people if ''God'' needs space to exist in, space being the highest of all ''powers'' in the Universe. Space comes before ''God''.

(in reality all religion is worshipping space).

 

The visible light does not traverse through the space between laser and the wall, the radiation travels through this space. There is two possible options in my opinion, the radiation pulls itself along a constant properties field or the radiation travels through the pre-existed CBMR, the CBMR or field being the ''aether''.

I have in order of occurrence,a void, field(s), CBMR, electro magnetic radiation . A field occupying a spacial void my ''favourite'' choice.

 

How do you know that visible light is not part of the EMR?

 

Because space offers no permeability or permitivity to electro-magnetic radiation . Space does not refract or reflect or diffract electromagnetic radiation. Space has no mechanism to produce visible light.
Electro-magnetic radiation permeates through space isotropic, it can not be any ''thinner''.
I believe the wave length of ''light'' permeating through space is infinite. i.e a flat line.
I then believe that wave-function is ''observer'' affect, the change of function being that when ''emr'' is unable to permeate .

 

Does EMR travel through space?

I seek fact, not belief as belief is not synonymous with fact.

 

Yes , EMR travels through space.

The two beliefs are not fact yet, I think they will be in time. The other parts are present facts about EMR and space. The two beliefs I think I can show to be fact, the notion starts off by showing the misinterpretation of white light that is a mixture of frequencies . We presently think that in the space there is a mixture of frequencies (white light), this thought because of Newtons prism experiment and the fact that mixing RGB together gives white light. However although those experiments are factually true, the misinterpretation of the light in the space being white light is easy to prove wrong, white is very different to the clarity of space we observe.
But you are correct , they are not factual but maybe provable.

 

Have you done experiments in support of your theory? If so, do you have video with a narrative that shows and explains any conclusions made?