: Science contends that electromagnetic radiation and "light" are one and the same.

More precisely light is a small portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Its not a contention because there is no question about it.

:I find this hard to accept for the following reasons: The sun's radiation carries heat to the earth, but that radiation extends outward in all directions from the sun.

Its not really carrying heat, its carrying energy which heats up substances when absorbed. That's why on a cold, but sunny day you feel warm on the side of you that is exposed to the sunlight.

:It follows that "light" waves or particles must take the same paths. We do not feel the heat that radiates in an upward or downward direction from the sun. Only the heat that comes from the center of the side we can see. Why then, do we see the parts of the sun that angle above and below us from the top and bottom? That radiation never reaches our eye (particle or wave) so how can we see it if radiation and light are the same thing.

What ever you are trying to say here makes no sense.

:When we want to increase the intensity of "light" from a flashlight, we place a parabolic reflective dish behind the bulb to direct the radiation into a beam. The sun is like a parabolic reflector, only reversed. We do not hang the naked bulb out in space off the end of the battery pack, or reverse the parabolic reflector to diffuse the light. Why, because the radiation wouldn't reach far enough to light our way in those dark and scary woods. We couldn't see 20 yards, but someone a hundred yards away could see us coming. Change the math from "space-time" to "space-light" and you realize the reason we can see the top and bottom of the sun, is because we are looking THROUGH light to the glow of the radiation.

Are you serious?!? I hope not.

:Einstein's constant "c" is the speed of electromagnetic radiation, and light as well as space can be viewed as being at rest. Light is the cosmological constant Einstein searched for.

Not even close. What are the standard units for the cosmological constant? I'll give you a hint, its not distance per time.

:It is the undefined ether, or aether (whichever you prefer) that earlier science tryed to explain. It is the medium that radiation travels through. There is only one reason I can see for any scientist to refuse to put this to the test. They know it is supported in scripture, where we are told that "light" came on the first day, and the sun, stars, and moon came into control of the intensity of the light on the fourth day.

It doesn't say that. It has been tested and it says: Gen1:3 And God said let there be light and there was light. And God saw the light that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the mourning were the first day. Gen1:14-19 And God said let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night;....And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good And the evening and the mourning were the fourth day.

So here we see a mistake unless God was doing it via time travel. He separated the light from the dark on the first day and then created the sun moon and stars on the fourth too separate the light from the dark. As I said the bible is NOT an authority on science.

• http://hometown.aol.com//zephcochrane/WarpDrives.html

• Re: Radiation and light - CL - January 13, 2000 - 21:26 UTC
  • Re: Radiation and light - Zephram_Cochrane/">Zephram Cochrane - January 14, 2000 - 05:20 UTC