Thus far, our discussion has concerned itself with what light is not, and we have shown prevailing scientific theories on the subject to be fundamentally flawed. However, we have not yet categorized light via its proper ontological designation, a feat possible now that prevailing fallacies have been swept aside.
It is instructive to take note of what we ubiquitously observe about light. First, light requires a source. There would be no light in the absence of stars, the Sun, light bulbs, candles, or some other entity that emits it.
Second, light requires entities to reflect off of in order to be perceived. Light, as it is originally emitted, is not visible in itself, but rather must come into contact with another entity in order for its effects to be perceived. The type of light that reflects off a given entity will determine how the entity is seen. (I.e., white light reflected off a yellow wall will cause the wall to seem yellow. Blue light reflected off that same wall will cause it to seem black.)
Furthermore, the distance of the light source from the target entity will determine how light affects said entity. A candle will render the entities closer to it more visible than the entities farther away. It is also known that some sources of light (the Sun) are capable of illuminating at greater magnitudes and distances than others (the candle).
Thus, whatever light is, it is quantifiable not only in its type (i.e., whether it is yellow, red, etc.) but also in its amount. Additionally, as shown earlier, light does not require continuity of particles in order to propagate; it can overcome a vacuum, i.e., the absence of a medium. On the contrary, it seems that, the more dense the medium, the less receptive it is to light.
Light can propagate through gaseous media, and some liquids (such as water), but not through most solids. Knowing this information, which no individual could miss in the course of daily observation, it is possible to ontologically categorize light as a relationship between the entity which emits it (the source) and the entity which it affects (the target).
The nature of light as a relationship is evident in the fact that it takes an entity to produce and another entity to experience, thereby altering the qualities of the target entity and adding to it the attribute of visibility, among others. Since light is not a particle, it cannot simply be sent from one entity to another and then affect the target entity.
There is no "sending" of light, but rather the relationship is directly between the source entity and target entity, without any entities that must necessarily be intermittent for the relationship to occur. Light is the name for the interaction at a distance which the source and target entities undergo.
In that sense, there is quite a contrast between a wave relationship, such as sound, which requires the presence of billions of periodically vibrating molecules between the source and the perceiver, and light, which requires only the source and target entities. Though, like a wave, light is a relationship, in certain critical fundamental aspects, it is as far removed from waves as relationships can get.
Read other parts of "A Rational Cosmology" by clicking here.
Published by G. Stolyarov II
G. Stolyarov II is a science fiction novelist, independent essayist, poet, amateur mathematician, composer, author, and actuary. View profile
- A Rational Cosmology: The Ubiquitous Qualities of Volume, Length, Width, and Height This 14th essay of "A Rational Cosmology" considers qualities which are universal to all entities: volume, length, width, and height. It explains what these qualities are and why every entity that exists must exhibit...
- A Rational Cosmology: What the Universe is and is Not The term "universe" does not denote a thing, quality, or relationship. Rather, it is the sum of all entities that exist. It is not a "whole" in the sense that a person is a "whole." This fifth essay of "A Rational Cos...
- A Rational Cosmology: The Distinction Between Physics and Cosmology Cosmology is not a branch of physics, as many believe, but rather a field of philosophy. In this fourth essay of his series, "A Rational Cosmology," Mr. Stolyarov presents the essential distinction between physics and...
- A Rational Cosmology: The Requirements for Homogeneous Entities Man does not yet know of any homogeneous entity that really exists, but rational cosmology can inform us what qualifications must be met by an entity that could be termed homogeneous. This ninth essay of "A Rational...
- A Rational Cosmology: The Universe Cannot Be Created This sixth essay of "A Rational Cosmology" explains why the universe could not have been created, either by a God or by a Big Bang. If the universe is "everything that exists," then anything that created the universe...
- A Rational Cosmology: Space-as-Relationship
- A Rational Cosmology: Why There is No Such Thing as Space
- A Rational Cosmology: The Ubiquitous Quality of Matter
- A Rational Cosmology: Coordinate Systems
- A Rational Cosmology: The Axioms of Existence, Identity, and Consciousness
- A Rational Cosmology: The Euclidean Line
- A Rational Cosmology: The Impossibility of the Universe Having a Shape, Boundary,...
|
|