Seeing is different than believing

  • Thread starter Thread starter aman malik
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of perception and its relation to time, questioning whether what we see represents the present, future, or past. It posits that seeing something implies it has already occurred, suggesting that our visual experiences are inherently tied to the past. When observing celestial objects, the discussion emphasizes that we are always viewing ancient history due to the vast distances involved. In contrast, even in close proximity, there is a slight delay in perception caused by the time it takes for light to travel and the neurological processing in the brain. Ultimately, the conversation raises the intriguing question of whether we can truly believe in what we see.
aman malik
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
what are we seeing the present,the future ,or the past??
 
Space news on Phys.org
Depends what you mean and how you define each. If you consider that to be able to see something means that it has happened (optical trickery aside) then everything is in the past.
 
aman malik said:
what are we seeing the present,the future ,or the past??

If we are talking about celestial objects, definitely the past. Ancient history, in many cases.

If we are talking about things in the same room, there is the latency of the light traveling across the room plus the latency of the whatever happens neurologically between the retina and the occipital cortex, combined for a few nanoseconds.

Are you seeing something you don't believe?
 

Thread 'Matter density right after the decoupling'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
View full post »

Thread 'Rutgers finds a transparent Einstein Cross - apparently a dark matter "halo".'

The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
View full post »

Thread 'Big Bang and Infinite Universe'

Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Why do we assume the existence of time (flow)?
Replies
2
Views
1K
I One difference between GR and quantum mechanics
Replies
10
Views
1K
I Which theory of time is the most evidence-based?
Replies
32
Views
2K
I Cosmic Event Horizon – Does it have any real effects?
Replies
9
Views
3K
B Can We See Beyond the Voids in Our Universe?
Replies
14
Views
2K
B Do all events in my past lightcone have fewer past events in theirs?
Replies
14
Views
1K
B What If We Could See the Past by Placing a Mirror on the Sun?
Replies
13
Views
2K
I How is the arrow of time defined?
2
Replies
52
Views
6K
Interested in geology, astronomy, and other scientific topics
Replies
7
Views
156
I Using GR to predict the shape of the entire universe?
Replies
24
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top