Does light truly exist or is it just a man-made concept?

[scarfox]

I think light is the first manifestation of the absolute, meaning it is outside of time and space, which are secondary things anyway. Consciousness is primacy, everything is consciousness and consciousness is everything. What are your thoughts?

The fact that you can measure light does not mean it exists, as it only is measured in the man made mathematical concepts to allow it to work with theory. Einstein can even tell you light does not exist on this plane. A phenomena... something absolute, matter is not absolute and matter is though, conscious, but non existent in the sense that its not just the only thing that is there.

 

[out of whack]

What are your thoughts?

I'd rather not put them in writing.

 

[scarfox]

I'd rather not put them in writing.

Mind boggling answer.

 

[Math Is Hard]

I think light is the first manifestation of the absolute, meaning it is outside of time and space, which are secondary things anyway. Consciousness is primacy, everything is consciousness and consciousness is everything. What are your thoughts?

There is plenty of light "inside" time and space. As far as "outside", that's nonsensical - how would anyone know? What are you driving at?

The fact that you can measure light does not mean it exists, as it only is measured in the man made mathematical concepts to allow it to work with theory. Einstein can even tell you light does not exist on this plane. A phenomena... something absolute, matter is not absolute and matter is though, conscious, but non existent in the sense that its not just the only thing that is there.

We measure everything observable in man-made mathematical concepts. I don't believe Einstein ever said anything about light not existing. If light does not exist, then how am I reading and replying to your post?

 

[scarfox]

What we observe as the constant speed isn't speed at all, When you observe a light beam from the back of the room to your eye in space time, the beginning and the end of that light be marked the same in your frame of reference. You stretch out that zero interval into space and time and you always stretch out 186,000 miles of space for every second of time. And I don't think C (Constant speed) is speed at all, it is a constant ratio of the manifestation of space and time.


Plancks constant the quantum of action:


Every photon of light is an identical unit of action...

The normal view of what happens with light is something like this the photon goes to the point of emission to the point of absorption from lights point of view space and time is so warped that the point of emission and the point of absorption are coincident and the photon is an exchange of action, it's an interaction between two points so from its point of view are coincident there isn't a transmission between space and time. Space and time collapse, there is an exchange of an action from lights point of view, from our point of view it seems to cross space and time...


How did it get there it must of traveled right? Waves, particles? That's because we have stretched out the zero interval into space and time and then tried to ask the question from that frame of reference.

If you look at it from lights point of view, not form our material point of view, it doesn't need to be a wave or a particle it doesn't go anywhere!

 

[chroot]

Personal theories are not welcome here, even in the Philosophy sub-forum.

- Warren

 

[HallsofIvy]

Especially when its impossible to understand what you are saying!

If you must use terms like "the absolute", "outside time and space", "consciousness", "identical unit of action", define those terms. You mention Plank's "quantum of action" but you are clearly using "action" with a different meaning.