Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Not even ...... sorry, ...... no.But that light halo is not always seen so that proves the moon is not lit by the sun.
Opinion has nothing at all to do with this.If that is the only things that accounts for light emission in your opinion, then I concede.
Opinion has nothing at all to do with this.
I’m not sure how this response relates to my question.If that is the only things that accounts for light emission in your opinion, then I concede.
d_taylor, my man! Do you have an explanation about how the dark craters on the light side of the terminator line and the lit peaks on the dark side of the terminator line occur if the moon isn’t reflecting the suns light?
I honestly don’t understand why you’ve intentionally ignored me for all these pages and utterly refuse to actually explain the phenomenon that you’ve documented so clearly for us.
I honestly cannot come up with an alternative explanation to how the light behaves If it’s not reflecting the sun.
I still don't understand your rationale that there would be any shadow areas if (as you said above) the whole surface is lit. It does not make any sense for any potion of the moon to be in shadow if the entire moon surface is itself is a giant light source.If there is a circle (representing a moon impression) and God causes light to shine from part of that circle that is opposite of where the shadow area is, the light coming from that small section (especially if the light was directed up) can still shine and not over power the shadow area caused by the whole surface being lit.
View attachment 267363 View attachment 267364
I’m not sure how this response relates to my question.
My question is simple and straightforward. No tricks, no trying to score imaginary points, no semantics.
When I see the legitimate/credible photos and video posted by d_taylor , it seems to me that I’m looking at light behaving at the terminator line exactly and precisely as it would behave if the moon were reflecting light from the sun.
What I’m asking for is not extravagant or unreasonable. I’m simply asking for an alternative explanation for the specific light behavior on the photos.
I am seriously hoping someone can give me a plausible and reasonable explanation other than light reflecting, but for some reason, nobody can.
The only thing that I feel like I can conclude is that there is no other possible explanation other than light being reflected from the sun.
I don’t know how much more I can beg and plead for a competing and plausible explanation.
I still don't understand your rationale that there would be any shadow areas if (as you said above) the whole surface is lit. It does not make any sense for any potion of the moon to be in shadow if the entire moon surface is itself is a giant light source.
Your second picture demonstrates beautifully shadows and light reflection. You keep providing photographs that show tall objects (the two on the left) with obvious shadows, and craters where light isn’t reaching and peaks where it still does. How can this be anything other than light shining across the surface of an object that ISN’T self illuminating?If there is a circle (representing a moon impression) and God causes light to shine from part of that circle that is opposite of where the shadow area is, the light coming from that small section (especially if the light was directed up) can still shine and not over power the shadow area caused by the whole surface being lit.
View attachment 267363 View attachment 267364
With God all things are possible.What is plausible and reasonable to you?
With God all things are possible.
I just don’t think an in depth conversation about that is necessary to answer my question.Right, that's the saying: but, what do YOU think is plausible and reasonable. That will tell me what you actually think is possible despite the spiritual platitude we all know.
There are things Chrisrians reject that the Word of God has explicitly said, and dogma and denomination make sport of marginalizing the power of the Most High God, and binding Him to our standards and logic.
I just don’t think an in depth conversation about that is necessary to answer my question.
If you have an answer, and you believe your answer is true, then share it. It’s like I tell my wife sometimes (she’s very non-confrontational). It’s not up to her how people respond to the truth. Our job as Christians is to speak the Truth, how someone receives it is between them and the Holy Spirit.
I can’t ever make someone believe what is true, but if I believe I possess the truth I’m not going to withhold it from someone who’s asking. Especially when they’re not asking cynically.
So again, the more d_taylor posts pictures of the moon, the more it looks apparent and obvious that the light/dark elements and shadows along the terminator line are a result of a “dead” rock reflecting light from another object (the sun).
I currently cannot think of an alternative explanation that can plausibly explain what the pictures show. For goodness sake if you think you possess the answer, share it!
Perfect as a phone call to the Ukraine."Kaon, post: I understand, and I agree with you. But, don't you agree that if we reach an impasse in agreement, it would be prudent to entertain what each of us finds acceptable before going on?
So the surface (or portions thereof) could have a luminescence achieved and controlled by a source of some kind of current? That leads to interesting questions about the source... but for the moment, how does a hemisphere multiply electrons? I can imagine their force being multiplied, but I'm not sure how their quantity could increase. Maybe because they are the same thing(?).If I say the moon emits light like an LED because it receives a current that delivers electrons to the surface of the moon surface/conduction band per unit per hole (acting like a semi-conductor) and emits photons from the surface, what would you consider unbelievable about that? I am not going by other people's analysis, but to acknowledge your question about craters - they behave as electron multiplier hemispheres to amplify the current/change in charge, and increase the photon flux coming from the surface.
LOL! You are incredibly considerate. I have to do this with just about everybody - accommodate a frame of reference. You are a rare gem.I have, in fact, told you the pith of why and how the moon is its own light source - without going into the physics. It may be unsatisfactory to you, which is understandable as well. That is why I asked you what is plausible and reasonable to you. There is literally nothing that is outside of my plausibility and reason, but that is because I have experienced stuff and things, as well as my field and profession affording me the opportunity to vindicate some phenomena of nature for myself. I assume you are some sort of academic (don't know your field); is there anything that is off limits for you intellectually?
Very practical.Ultimately, I get that you are genuinely seeking, and so I want to make sure we don't distract from a real discussion by arguing the intricacies of what is possible - especially given that the "correct" explanation may not be the most reasonable explanation as we know it.
Reality is a fractal zoom. ( lol )The edges reflect light just as a charge in a cubic or cylindrical symmetry object emits electric fields at the edges (not just at the surfaces). The entire surface of the moon acts as a semiconductor; on the large scale light shines uniformly. At the "small" scale (zoomed in so that the surface is as big as the moon), of course you get dendrites, craters, peaks and troughs - in the same way you would when you zoom into a semiconductor, and inspect the holes. You would see similar activity at this level - "quantizing" light emission dependent on the energies within a surface area of the moon material.
"The whole surface" might be what's confusing you.I still don't understand your rationale that there would be any shadow areas if (as you said above) the whole surface is lit. It does not make any sense for any potion of the moon to be in shadow if the entire moon surface is itself is a giant light source.
Perfect as a phone call to the Ukraine.
I hope your question doesn't get ignored.
So the surface (or portions thereof) could have a luminescence achieved and controlled by a source of some kind of current? That leads to interesting questions about the source... but for the moment, how does a hemisphere multiply electrons? I can imagine their force being multiplied, but I'm not sure how their quantity could increase. Maybe because they are the same thing(?).
interesting, thanks.
LOL! You are incredibly considerate. I have to do this with just about everybody - accommodate a frame of reference. You are a rare gem.
Very practical.
Reality is a fractal zoom. ( lol )
So what is it about the edges that they like to emit electric fields?
I've seen some stuff and had things happen too, but art & music were my main avenues for finding language.
SURE...... UH HUH....So the surface (or portions thereof) could have a luminescence achieved and controlled by a source of some kind of current? That leads to interesting questions about the source...
Hi Kaon, thanks for taking the time to respond. I'm open to any explanation that could potentially explain what we physically see. You've put forth a theory on how the moon produces its own light. Great. What I would like to do if you'll humor me is test that theory based upon the picture that d_taylor took of the moon that I quoted above.I understand, and I agree with you. But, don't you agree that if we reach an impasse in agreement, it would be prudent to entertain what each of us finds acceptable before going on?
If I say the moon emits light like an LED because it receives a current that delivers electrons to the surface of the moon surface/conduction band per unit per hole (acting like a semi-conductor) and emits photons from the surface, what would you consider unbelievable about that? I am not going by other people's analysis, but to acknowledge your question about craters - they behave as electron multiplier hemispheres to amplify the current/change in charge, and increase the photon flux coming from the surface.
I have, in fact, told you the pith of why and how the moon is its own light source - without going into the physics. It may be unsatisfactory to you, which is understandable as well. That is why I asked you what is plausible and reasonable to you. There is literally nothing that is outside of my plausibility and reason, but that is because I have experienced stuff and things, as well as my field and profession affording me the opportunity to vindicate some phenomena of nature for myself. I assume you are some sort of academic (don't know your field); is there anything that is off limits for you intellectually?
Ultimately, I get that you are genuinely seeking, and so I want to make sure we don't distract from a real discussion by arguing te intricacies of what is possible - especially given that the "correct" explanation may not be the most reasonable explanation as we know it.
The edges reflect light just as a charge in a cubic or cylindrical symmetry object emits electric fields at the edges (not just at the surfaces). The entire surface of the moon acts as a semiconductor; on the large scale light shines uniformly. At the "small" scale (zoomed in so that the surface is as big as the moon), of course you get dendrites, craters, peaks and troughs - in the same way you would when you zoom into a semiconductor, and inspect the holes. You would see similar activity at this level - "quantizing" light emission dependent on the energies within a surface area of the moon material.
Let's say everything I said is just a model for the explanation. Would you entertain it? If not, it is fine.
Hi Kaon, thanks for taking the time to respond. I'm open...
But let's give your theory a try. If you can look at the picture and explain to me a few of the facts of the photo, then I can at least say that there is a working alternative explanation.
1) Why are the two objects on the left giving off shadows like they are?
2) Why is the front half of the crater dark but the back half still light?
3) Why are the taller peaks on the dark side of the terminator line still light?
If you can give answers to those 3 questions in a way that is consistent with your view, then I'll happily concede that there may be more to the idea that the moon is its own lightsource than I previously thought.
That all makes logical sense. The only follow up question I would have is regarding your explanation that the shadows in the photo are a result of earth-shine...The earth's luminosity against the moon is 1000x stronger. Since the incidence faces of the moon/earth will always be antiparallel, the earth will "shine" on the moon; the flux would be in the direction of the surface area (direct to the moon, since the surface of the earth is larger than the surface of the moon). This will cause the shadows, even though the moon emits its own light as well.
It would be like having an LED TV in a room of 20 100W light bulbs (arrayed in a semi-circular pattern with the light incident on the TV.) You will see a shadow on the back of the wall even though there is light coming from the TV itself. The zoom amplifies the affect of this shadow.
From our perspective (the 20 light bulbs), we see a bright TV shining in our direction.
It is extremely hard for me to determine the sides of the edges of the crater, but you can still see the edge effect. The center is illuminated slightly (less than the edges), so the shadow may due to our luminosity hitting that taller side (casting a back shadow).
These dendrites are an example of the edge effect as well - collecting at sharp points and emitting higher flux of photons. It is similar to why a needle shines at the point and edges (if applicable) even though there is equal light distribution.
This is also loosely basing the moon and earth on the solar model - which I do not agree with. But, to entertain the thought experiment, I have answered everything according to this model. Let's see if this is intellectual entertainment first, then maybe I can explain it according to a model that is much easier (in my opinion) that the solar model.
We'll see if these explanations are satisfactory to you even in the marginal sense. If so, we can continue. If not, no pressure or fault: I am (for now) presenting this as a model.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?