Re: memetics-digest V1 #914

From: Dace (edace@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri Feb 01 2002 - 21:13:54 GMT

  • Next message: Dace: "Re: ality"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id VAA07883 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 1 Feb 2002 21:18:30 GMT
    Message-ID: <006e01c1ab65$5b793040$0d86b2d1@teddace>
    From: "Dace" <edace@earthlink.net>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <20020201154729.95146.qmail@web12302.mail.yahoo.com>
    Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #914
    Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 13:13:54 -0800
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    > > If photons were unable to travel in the early
    > > universe, how could they have possessed *any*
    > > wavelength, much less "every wavelength," as you
    > > assert?
    >
    > Photons travelled freely between electrons, absorbed
    > and emitted over and over again.

    I see.

    > Only after 300,000 years did the elctrons settle into stable
    > orbits around atoms, freeing photons to move unimpededly
    > from that time to now. Ted it is a little like the way in
    > which we see the sky as blue. Solar photons are
    > scattered - absorbed and re-emitted - by dust
    > particles in the atmosphere. It is this that gives
    > our sky its blue colour. (Because white light is
    > absorbed and blue light is re-emitted).
    >
    > Now imagine this occurring not just for white and
    > blue, but for all colours, up to wavelengths equal to
    > the diameter of the Universe, and you have the
    > principle of the Big Bang at this epoch.

    Fascinating. I've really misunderstood this.

    > > It's not light. It's just photons. It's the
    > > particles which, when assembled, will constitute
    > > light. To say an unformed set of photons
    > > constitutes light is like saying a stack of bricks
    > > is a house.
    >
    > Hmmm. Ted, a single photon is "light" - it can be
    > destinguisged as such, even to the human eye. One
    > does not need to assemble photons in any fashion to
    > have light. They are light. Pure and simple, just as
    > bricks are bricks.
    >
    > Hope this helps
    >
    > John

    Absolutely! Thanks for clearing this up.

    Ted

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 01 2002 - 21:27:04 GMT