Does The Sun Really Exist?

[QueSi]

The same way we can see light reflected off of Jupiter.

Right, reflected off of, not emanating from.

 

[Skaloop]

Right, reflected off of, not emanating from.

Right, and if the Sun stopped emitting light, we could see light reflected off of it if we had a big enough and bright enough light. Just like the Sun is big enough and bright enough that we can see its light reflected off of the GAS giant Jupiter.

Just like if I turned all the lights off in my house, I could see the electric coil on my stovetop by either shining a flashlight on it to see reflected light, or turning the element on to see it by emitted light. Not gas, but the principle is the same.

 

[itdepends]

Right, and if the Sun stopped emitting light, we could see light reflected off of it if we had a big enough and bright enough light. Just like the Sun is big enough and bright enough that we can see its light reflected off of the GAS giant Jupiter.

Just like if I turned all the lights off in my house, I could see the electric coil on my stovetop by either shining a flashlight on it to see reflected light, or turning the element on to see it by emitted light. Not gas, but the principle is the same.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since it's assumed that our sun is on the path to becoming a white dwarf star, assuming it reaches that level, it will still have a small amount of luminosity, yes ?

For our sun to stop emitting any form of light whatsoever (or heat), it would have become a black dwarf, which is a theoretical object at this point, right ?

 

[freezerman2000]

it will have a small amount of luminosity,but the heat out put will be dwarfed by what it is emitting now.
Mankind will not see this happen,though,Earth will be literally a burned out cinder by that time.

 

[Skaloop]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since it's assumed that our sun is on the path to becoming a white dwarf star, assuming it reaches that level, it will still have a small amount of luminosity, yes ?

For our sun to stop emitting any form of light whatsoever (or heat), it would have become a black dwarf, which is a theoretical object at this point, right ?

Well, I'm not sure. I was just playing along with the hypothetical that if the Sun did stop emitting light and there was some way that there would still be eyes to observe it and we had a bright enough light source, we could see light reflected off of the Sun. As freezerman said above, such a situation would in actuality not leave any Earthly observers.

 

[Skaloop]

it will have a small amount of luminosity,but the heat out put will be dwarfed by what it is emitting now.
Mankind will not see this happen,though,Earth will be literally a burned out cinder by that time.

If it were emitting no light whatsoever, would it be a black hole? And if so, is Earth within the event horizon? (I'm guessing not, since if the Sun became a black hole, it would have the same mass, and since we're not currently drawn into the Sun we wouldn't be even if it became a black hole (if that's even possible for our relatively small Sun of a star (and disregarding how our Sun becoming a black hole would destroy Earth anyway))).

I hope I got all the parentheses correct...

 

[itdepends]

If it were emitting no light whatsoever, would it be a black hole?

That's actually an interesting point, and I suppose I should have qualified visible light verses electromagnetic radiation of any wavelength

And if so, is Earth within the event horizon? (I'm guessing not, since if the Sun became a black hole, it would have the same mass, and since we're not currently drawn into the Sun we wouldn't be even if it became a black hole (if that's even possible for our relatively small Sun of a star (and disregarding how our Sun becoming a black hole would destroy Earth anyway))).

I hope I got all the parentheses correct...

Well, drawing from memory only lol ... I don't think our sun could sufficiently produce a black hole. Hence, the path to red dwarf (when it gets bigger), and eventually swallowing the earth as it throws off it's outer parts, fusing further in becoming a white dwarf ... and then theoretically it could become a black dwarf. So if I understand it correctly, it would have swallowed the earth up before it ever got to the point of where it could even "dream" of becoming a black hole and forming an event horizon.

 

[Skaloop]

That's actually an interesting point, and I suppose I should have qualified visible light verses electromagnetic radiation of any wavelength

Well, drawing from memory only lol ... I don't think our sun could sufficiently produce a black hole. Hence, the path to red dwarf (when it gets bigger), and eventually swallowing the earth as it throws off it's outer parts, fusing further in becoming a white dwarf ... and then theoretically it could become a black dwarf. So if I understand it correctly, it would have swallowed the earth up before it ever got to the point of where it could even "dream" of becoming a black hole and forming an event horizon.

Ah, right, I forgot about the pre-collapse expansion. If it were to ever happen, we'd be part of the black hole. Kinda cool, really. Something to possibly look forward to.

 

[itdepends]

Ah, right, I forgot about the pre-collapse expansion. If it were to ever happen, we'd be part of the black hole. Kinda cool, really. Something to possibly look forward to.

Well, maybe we don't have to wait that long ..... (insert LHC micro black hole comment here)

 

[Wiccan_Child]

If the sun stopped putting off light, could it be seen with the naked eye?

If the Sun stopped emitting light, then we could see it by reflection or absorption (i.e., a silhouette). It's a moot point, though, because it does emit light, which is why we can see it.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

That is what I said, you violated the premise of the question. That is illegal. You are not answering the question.

The premise states the hypothetical. There's nothing in the question about 'solving' the cause of the hypothetical.

"OK guys, this little girl has cancer. What can we do to cure her?"
"Well, we could try aggressive chemotherapy to try to force it into remi-"
"NO NO NO THAT VIOLATES THE PREMISE AND IS ILLEGAL!"

Can't you see how silly you sound?

 

[Tomk80]

Can't you see how silly you sound?

His arrogance prevents him from seeing that. That's Juvenissun's main problem.

 

[Doveaman]

The premise states the hypothetical. There's nothing in the question about 'solving' the cause of the hypothetical.

"OK guys, this little girl has cancer. What can we do to cure her?"
"Well, we could try aggressive chemotherapy to try to force it into remi-"
"NO NO NO THAT VIOLATES THE PREMISE AND IS ILLEGAL!"

Can't you see how silly you sound?

According to the OP, you are convincing a blind man the sun exists.

If you restored his sight, you are no longer convincing a blind man.

The man has to be blind while he is being convinced.

Hope this helps.

 

[Doveaman]

What is 'God-energy'?

The energy generated by God to form the universe:

“We understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” (Heb 11:3).

What is dark-energy?

 

[Doveaman]

By setting up experiments that tease out what the cause is.
For example, the first thing would be to determine when you feel the warmth and when you don't. This would give you a fix on the direction of the source of the warmth. You could use instruments to further determine this direction, the same way we determine other sources of electromagnetic radiation like x-rays.

The experiment only tells me about the direction of the warmth, but it doesn’t tell me it’s the sun.

Basically, you start with the most basic observations and go from there, building on the previous observations and refining them.

Bear in mind I am born blind and cannot observe anything.

Of course it's not unknown to them. Because they can make use of the knowledge acquired by other persons.

Is this similar to how we make use of the knowledge of God acquired by other persons?

Is that knowledge valid too?

Certain aspects of his perception were wrong.
Again, parts of it, yes.

That’s the problem with being blind, isn’t it? There’s always something wrong with our perception.

 

[Doveaman]

Is that the same "faith" as your belief in your infallible interpretation of scripture?

The faith is similar.

Faith is nothing more than confidence in someone whom you trust to know what they are doing.

I have faith in my doctor because I trust him to know what he is doing.

I also have faith in God because I trust Him to know what He is doing.

The faith is similar, but the persons whom you trust are not, one is fallible and the other is not.

The doctor whom I trust is fallible and this is why I sometimes have doubts about his prescriptions.

On the other hand, the God in whom I trust is infallible, so I have no doubts whatsoever about His prescriptions.

 

[Doveaman]

If I gave you a raised textured map of God-energy, would you be convinced God exists?

Could you describe the instrumentation and how it works?

The ‘raised textured map’ to the blind man who cannot see the sun would be equivalent to the Bible for someone who cannot see God.

They both have to be supplied to the blind and read by the blind.

 

[itdepends]

Bear in mind I am born blind and cannot observe anything.

With all due respect, your OP only stated you were born blind … no other qualifiers such as not healing your blindness, or correcting it. The qualifiers were to prove or convince. Correcting your vision impairment would accomplish those things.

However if you want to be convinced or have it proven and still remain blind, on a practical level you could not be convinced or have proven to you the existence of anything you could not detect with your other senses or were relevant to your life and experience. However on a practical level, you could possibly be convinced of the existence of the sun because if I left you out in the sun and you started to get sunburned, I could explain to you the pain you were experiencing and the effects of such burns. So you could still detect the effects of the sun with your senses, and it would be to your advantage (if you want to avoid burns, scarring, pain, etc) to trust the person telling you that "fire is hot" so to speak. I suppose you could believe that what caused your sunburn was a fire breathing dragon, or that Kim Jong Il caused a great ball of flame to rise and torment your skin …. regardless, you would most likely choose to not do things that would cause you to burn along the rest of us.

A more difficult thing to prove or convince you of, say, would the existence of moons around Jupiter or some such. As a blind person, and with no practical or relevant reason to acknowledge they exist, there would be no real motivation to accept someone's knowledge on such matters. You could just as easily accept it, or deny it, seemingly without consequence. The sun is different however, as you can still suffer direct consequences of it's effect on yourself personally. In other words, you are more likely to have a vested interest in understanding the sun, since it can damage you.

So there is the issue of practicality as well, which may motivate someone's trust in information.

There was a Chapelle Show awhile back, where they did a skit and Chapelle was the head of the KKK, but he was born blind, and no one ever told him he was African-American lol. He had thought he was white all that time, and wrote many books on the racial superiority of whites and how great the KKK was and all …. whenever he gave speeches he was dressed in the garb with the hood and all, so no one even suspected he wasn't white. Later in life he found out and divorced his own wife lol. This thread reminds me of that skit

 

[Doveaman]

This would be trust, not faith.

Faith is confidence in someone whom you trust.

 

[Doveaman]

With all due respect, your OP only stated you were born blind … no other qualifiers such as not healing your blindness, or correcting it. The qualifiers were to prove or convince. Correcting your vision impairment would accomplish those things.

Maybe the OP wasn't clear enough for some people, but the intent still remains: You are convincing a blind man that the sun exists.