Descriptions of and differences of light, color and sound

1. 68

   SparklingJewelposted 17 years ago

   SparklingJewel wrote:
   
           ... here is  a statement/question...
           Everything in the universe, in all dimensions, is make up of light. Light is vibration, there are different levels of vibration within the spectrum of light, that create the colors. You know the rainbow colors are of the white light.
           And sound is vibration, too. So each color has its own sound/vibration ! right?
           So, is this connected to the expanding and accelerating in a spiral universe?
   
   
   protjack wrote:  Hi there. Light is the "vibration" of the electromagnetic field and sound is the vibration of particles of air, materials or other media, so it's not the same and you cannot connect it so easily as you have done.
   
       To add one more thing, to the best of my knowledge, the statement that everything is made of light is not nearly true.
   
   SparklingJewel wrote:   Would you explain more or recommend a book or website that would be good for a novice to read and learn from concerning light,color and sound.
   As well as address that everything is not made up of light...what do you mean? any reference to other reading?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      sandra rinckposted 17 years agoin reply to this

      An experiment with light and dark,
      on an overhead projector, a light bulb was placed on it.  When the light was turned on it was darker on the projection screen, when off it became inverted.  Try it out. 
      The darkness of space may very well be the brightest light of light, in which case everything we do is in the dark. 
      Our illusion I guess would be that how we recieve or precieve light is unfathomly dark in comparison. 
      Confussion?

      replyreport
2. 80

   StefanMDPposted 17 years ago

   "Isaac Asimov's Guide To Science" is an excellent introduction at science for novices.

   replyreport
3. 66

   Mishaposted 17 years ago

   Jewel,
   
   I see where you coming from. The guys are just unfamiliar with the concept of God being Light (or Light Being God for that matter), so they didn't understand your question...

   replyreport
   1. 59

      protjackposted 17 years agoin reply to this

      Decide if you want to discuss God or science

      replyreport
      1. 68

         SparklingJewelposted 17 years agoin reply to this

         protjack- I did post on this science page asking scientific questions to the best of my ability. so answers from what I have asked, are asked for. if you have anything  to offer please, relay it, thanks.
         
         Misha- you know me too well,   sometimes only we as individuals, that think in certain ways about the universe, can put together the information that we have had to ask for as separate subjects.

         replyreport
4. 66

   Mishaposted 17 years ago

   Especially in the area of quantum physics those topics are heavily inter-related...

   replyreport
   1. 59

      protjackposted 17 years agoin reply to this

      No.

      replyreport
5. 66

   Mishaposted 17 years ago

   I remember reading a book on that several years ago. It was in Russian, but translated from English. I can't find it now, though, but try to search for "quantum mechanics religion" and you will see that resounding "no" does not make any sense here...
   
   just one of examples: http://www.drury.edu/ess/philsci/bell.html

   replyreport
6. 68

   SparklingJewelposted 17 years ago

   from   http://www.drury.edu/ess/philsci/bell.html   
   
   In sum: those who stubbornly hold to an atomistic, dualistic view of the world, as ostensibly "scientific," despite the developments of relativity and quantum mechanics, are the "flat-earthers" of our day.
   
   In our day, the obstacle to changes in scientific views is not so much a monolithic religious orthodoxy - but a secular dogmatism that believes its views to be "scientific," despite what science now says.
   
   right-on !

   replyreport
7. 59

   protjackposted 17 years ago

   1st, this is "Science" forum. So read this:
   
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science
   
   Then you will conclude you're off-topic.
   
   2nd, if you want to put Jesus in physics books, consider a career in american education system (there is actually no american education system, but let's call it that way).

   replyreport
   1. 68

      SparklingJewelposted 17 years agoin reply to this

      Frankly, protjack...as I said...I asked scientific questions to the best of my ability. I was/am looking for scientific information. I'm not quite sure what "lit your pants on fire", but I do want some scientific information. If you have some that you would like to share I am all ears...as long as you can do it without criticizing what you assume about my thought processes. Seems pretty simple to me. I enjoy sharing perspectives and information in the spirit of respecting each others differences. Can you be nice ? If not, than simply don't answer, thank you.

      replyreport
8. 66

   Mishaposted 17 years ago

   Wanna fight? OK
   
   1. Wikipedia reflects the opinion of a group of it's editors, and only that opinion. It cannot be considered an authoritative source, and therefore can't be used in a debate to prove the point.
   
   2. Original question was asked in an attempt to clarify the nature of things as they relate to light - if I understood it correctly - and involves both scientific and religious parts. We *are* on topic, and if you don't understand this, it is your problem, not mine
   
   3. Neither Jewel, nor myself mentioned Jesus. Neither of us is Christian, either.
   
   4. Religion does not equal Christianity
   
   5. We can decide on our careers ourselves, thank you In fact, we both did this long ago...
   
   On a side note, I don't know about your scientific qualifications, but I hold masters degree and many years of experience in engineering - which is pretty exact applied science, so I have at least some understanding of what I'm talking about

   replyreport
   1. 68

      SparklingJewelposted 17 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks, Misha!

      replyreport