Flat Earthers

[Thor Buttox]

It has been many years since university but I'm pretty sure wavelength only changes in refraction not reflection...

I thought it was frequency that causes colour. And refraction affects the speed and wavelength. But it has probably been even longer...

[Eldron]

I thought it was frequency that causes colour. And refraction affects the speed and wavelength. But it has probably been even longer...

Wavelength "causes" colour. Refraction changes wavelength because the speed of ligut changes (different medium). The formula is: wavelength x frequency = speed of light. In reflection there is only a directional change so no change in frequency, wavelength or speed.

 

I hope :-)

[Pappa Bear]

With a flat earth there would be no downhill events......

[Thor Buttox]

Wavelength "causes" colour. Refraction changes wavelength because the speed of ligut changes (different medium). The formula is: wavelength x frequency = speed of light. In reflection there is only a directional change so no change in frequency, wavelength or speed.

 

I hope :-)

Eish, yes that is what I meant but I said it incorrectly. I meant in different mediums the wavelength changes and will be perceived differently, and therefore frequency is the 'standard' by which the colour can be identified when not in a vacuum.

 

Sorry, I totally fact it up.

[Jenna Chicky]

It has been many years since university but I'm pretty sure wavelength only changes in refraction not reflection...

The only difference being that specular reflection will reflect all of the components of white light and the diffuse reflections that you get from a rough surface does not reflect all the wavelengths as it absorbs most of the blue and green components.

Diffuse light from a rough surface is also scattered in all directions.

[Eldron]

The only difference being that specular reflection will reflect all of the components of white light and the diffuse reflections that you get from a rough surface does not reflect all the wavelengths as it absorbs most of the blue and green components.

Diffuse light from a rough surface is also scattered in all directions.

Which wavelengths the surface absorbs/reflects depends on the colour of the surface not the texture.

 

Edit: Also - specular reflection only refers to the angle of reflection and has nothing to do with which colours are reflected.

[Jenna Chicky]

Which wavelengths the surface absorbs/reflects depends on the colour of the surface not the texture.

 

Edit: Also - specular reflection only refers to the angle of reflection and has nothing to do with which colours are reflected.

Mmmmmm do they take their fees back ?

[Jenna Chicky]

Which wavelengths the surface absorbs/reflects depends on the colour of the surface not the texture.

 

Edit: Also - specular reflection only refers to the angle of reflection and has nothing to do with which colours are reflected.

Mmmmmm do they take their fees back ?

[Patchelicious]

Mmmmmm do they take their fees back ?

If you mean "does the flat earth society give their fees back once so they get exposed so blatantly" probably not.

[Patchelicious]

This argument about my wall or wave lengths or age changing, is a little feeble. Come now, surely we can have a slightly more constructive conversation than that?

[Thor Buttox]

If you mean "does the flat earth society give their fees back once so they get exposed so blatantly" probably not.

You mean it's not fees-able?

 

*hides head in shame*

[popcorn_skollie]

This argument about my wall or wave lengths or age changing, is a little feeble. Come now, surely we can have a slightly more constructive conversation than that?

 

Got some coals for your fire right here. 

 

Hindsight is 20/20, right? That's the premise of a new book that poses the question:  What if we were wrong? Chuck Klosterman's "But What If We're Wrong?" (Blue Rider Press, 2016) deals with the fact that the great march of history shows us that, well … we're always wrong. Aristotle had his run as the smartest man on the planet, but he got disproved by Galileo, who was trumped by Newton, until Einstein ruled the roost. And while there have been some hints of "proving Einstein wrong," nothing has really stuck. But even so, scientific "fact" is a fact only until it's proved wrong.

 

A quote from a book I'm trying to source locally. And admittedly, inspiration for ruffling some feathers up in here. The interview about the book between the author and livescience.com can be found here

[popcorn_skollie]

Mmmmmm do they take their fees back ?

 

I don't even know who I'm quoting here or how inaccurate my paraphrasing is. But someone once said:

 

That two people should not debate except when their intentions are solely for the emergence of truth. 

 

To put it quite crudely. Who is right or wrong should not matter.

Both parties should exercise not only sound logic and reason.

But also humility. Especially if their claims are disproved.

 

As is often the case. People's egos can get in the way.

And the emergence of truth often takes a back seat in favour of finding ways to prove oneself right and the opponent wrong.

When the cracks start to show in ones own argument.

People often resort to usage of logical fallacies or if that fails,

attempt to shroud their initial premise in ambiguity and misinterpretation.

 

I'm not picking sides between you and Eldron but instead of googling the right answer. I'd rather sit back and witness the conclusion myself.

[Eldron]

Mmmmmm do they take their fees back ?

 

How about you use those fees of yours, rise above the 1 line insults and prove me wrong? Present me with some evidence that wavelength changes during reflection.

 

As far as I understand it the speed of light doesn't change during reflection so the frequency and wavelength remain the same - during refraction the speed of light changes so the frequency and/or wavelength have to change to keep the frequency x wavelength = speed of light formula true.

 

Edit: This is how I always thought it worked:

https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/47-colours-of-light

 

Edit edit: I can't find diddly squat showing specular or diffuse reflection changes wavelength - please en"light"en me. No sarcasm or anything - If I'm wrong I'm keen to learn why.

[Eldron]

This argument about my wall or wave lengths or age changing, is a little feeble. Come now, surely we can have a slightly more constructive conversation than that?

 

Argue away sir - I'm keen to find me some answers on the wavelength debate.

[Paddaman]

Got some coals for your fire right here. 

 

Hindsight is 20/20, right? That's the premise of a new book that poses the question:  What if we were wrong? Chuck Klosterman's "But What If We're Wrong?" (Blue Rider Press, 2016) deals with the fact that the great march of history shows us that, well … we're always wrong. Aristotle had his run as the smartest man on the planet, but he got disproved by Galileo, who was trumped by Newton, until Einstein ruled the roost. And while there have been some hints of "proving Einstein wrong," nothing has really stuck. But even so, scientific "fact" is a fact only until it's proved wrong.

 

A quote from a book I'm trying to source locally. And admittedly, inspiration for ruffling some feathers up in here. The interview about the book between the author and livescience.com can be found here

Everything and everyone is wrong, except for flat-earthers and Christian fundamentalists.  They are always right....