The cosmic powers over this present darkness.

a reply to: Untun

There is no physical source of darkness that is the point.

And one of the main differences between the two.

Else show it to me, please?

Light requires a physical source to produce light, darkness does not and only requires the absence of light.

a reply to: andy06shake

Once a rock is used as a paving stone it becomes a street.

a reply to: andy06shake

The physical sources of darkness are all physical sources that do not produce light.

a reply to: Untun

That's rather poetic.

But the street itself is no more self-aware than the rock.

Unless its name is "Danny".

The people that occupy and travel along said street, however, well that's a whole nother kettle of fish.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Untun

The physical sources of darkness are all physical sources that do not produce light.

Buddy that's what is called a complete cop-out. LoL

The universe simply is not as boolean as that nor the principles, variables and constants along which it operates.

Give me a physical source that produces darkness please or accept that there are none.

You could possibly come away with something along the lines of a black hole but thats down to gravitational pull which is so strong that nothing, even light, can escape it. They do not produce darkness per say.

a reply to: andy06shake

Have a room with a table and remove all light sources. The table is a source of darkness as well as everything else in the room, even the room itself.

a reply to: Untun

No the lack of light sources aka removal and absence of light would equate to darkness and have nothing to do with the table.

Tables don't produce darkness Untun but the lack of visible light.

They may be able to block a light source but they don't produce darkness.

You cannot give me a physical source that produces darkness because there are none.

a reply to: andy06shake

You claim the physical source of darkness is the absence of something, the absence of light as you say.

That's like saying an empty plate is the source of your food to eat.

Complete nothingness does not qualify as a source of something since it is complete nothingness and nothing can come from complete nothingness cause all complete nothingness does is being nothing, complete nothingness doesn't exist by the way so nothing coming from complete nothingness is not a thing.

Either darkness has a source that is not something that is not there, or darkness doesn't exist at all.

a reply to: Untun

You claim the physical source of darkness is the absence of something, the absence of light as you say.

Indeed and once again the absence of light, but it's not physical.

That's like saying an empty plate is the source of your food to eat.

I can't see why care to explain?

Complete nothingness does not qualify as a source of something since it is complete nothingness and nothing can come from complete nothingness cause all complete nothingness does is being nothing, complete nothingness doesn't exist by the way so nothing coming from complete nothingness is not a thing.

Nothing above there makes sense I'm afraid.

The concept of "nothingness" is used to describe the absence or lack of something.

Either darkness has a source that is not something that is not there, or darkness doesn't exist at all.

Darkness does not have a source, again it's simply the absence of light, or else you would be able to point to a physical source that produces darkness.

There are even some materials that absorb light rather than reflecting it, but they don't create or emit darkness.

As to its existence, well darkness certainly exists in the absence of light, there is no real doubt about that fact.

a reply to: andy06shake

Without light the material world is darkness and is the source of darkness for only darkness can be the source of darkness. With light the material world still is a source of darkness, just seen. You do not see the light, you see the darkness, the light makes the darkness visible.

a reply to: Untun

Without light the material world is darkness and is the source of darkness for only darkness can be the source of darkness.

So you are claiming that the source of darkness is now the material world?

That almost sounds like Gnosticism.

So how does the material world produce darkness?

With light the material world still is a source of darkness, just seen.

How would you see without light, for a start, it's kind of how your eyes function allowing you to perceive the material world.

you see the darkness, the light makes the darkness visible.

By its very definition, darkness is not visible, again darkness is the absence of light, you don't see darkness but light.

I seem to be repeating myself now buddy, and it's not that hard a concept to understand.

There simply is no physical source of darkness I'm afraid, its just not how the concept works.

Darkness equates to the lack of light and not the addition of something else.

Anyhoo need to take a break for a while and go out with the dog.

a reply to: Untun

I thought Stevie Nicks was the darkness?

Interesting choice to use a notorious pagan for a thread on not being deceived by Satan. A Black Magic Woman no less.

a reply to: Degradation33

PM4U

originally posted by: ltrz2025
a reply to: andy06shake

... The real question is where light comes from and what energy truly is. You won't find those answers in the mainstream physics model, I can assure you that.

It is generally believed that light consists of energy particles that have wave properties. To this day, however, man still cannot give a complete answer to the question propounded over three millenniums ago by the Creator of light: “Where, now, is the way by which the light distributes itself?”​—Job 38:24.

One writer called this inquiry about light “a profoundly modern scientific question.” By way of contrast, some Greek philosophers felt that light emanated from the human eye. In more modern times, scientists have thought that light consists of tiny particles. Others have thought of it as moving in waves. Today, scientists believe that light behaves both as a wave and as a particle. Still, the nature of light and how it “distributes itself” is far from fully understood.

Similarly, Job 38:19 asks: “Where, now, is the way to where light resides? As for darkness, where, now, is its place?” You may be aware that for a long time, the view prevailed that light travels like a wave, like the ripples we can watch in a pond. Then in 1905, Albert Einstein explained that light acts like packets, or particles, of energy. Did that settle matters? Well, a recent encyclopedia asks: “Is light a wave or a particle?” It answers: “Seemingly, [light] cannot be both because the two models [waves and particles] are so different. The best answer is that light is strictly neither.”

All this goes to demonstrate is that human philosophies/ideas/beliefs/opinions come from people who have limitations. On one occasion, “Jehovah proceeded to answer Job out of the windstorm and say: ‘Who is this that is obscuring counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up your loins, please, like an able-bodied man, and let me question you, and you inform me. Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth? Tell me, if you do know understanding.’” (Job 38:1-4)

Humans by nature have limitations. Additionally, their experience in life is relatively brief and is usually confined to one culture or one environment. The knowledge they possess is thus restricted, and everything is interconnected to such an extent that they constantly find aspects that they had not adequately considered. Any philosophy/idea/belief/opinion that they originate will reflect these limitations.

a reply to: andy06shake

Ok, so you just don't want to go there. I agree to disagree.

a reply to: Untun

Go where?

a reply to: andy06shake

Right, thx for the conversation. Take care.

a reply to: Untun

Will do Untun.

Still not quite sure what you meant by "so you just don't want to go there" comment all the same?

I hope i have not somehow caused offense by anything i said, as it certainly was not my intention.

You have yourself a good day.

a reply to: whereislogic

I'll to speak shortly, because I doubt anyone here will understand. First of all, people confuse light with illumination, that's the first mistake. The source of light (aka the primordial light, also known as the Dark Sun) and illumination are two different things. Physically, they are actually opposites. Where there is primordial light (which is not physical, and not a wave), there is no illumination. What we call the primordial light is a hysteresis, a transverse coaxial circuit, the rate of induction of the luminiferous aether (the real theory of physics which was buried by the Einstein psychological operation that turned physicists into materialistic whores).

Then, the phenomena we call illumination (which requires matter, hydrogen) "behaves" like a wave, but the truth is that "waves" don't exist at all. There are no waves, but "something" that is waving, creating a disturbance in the field. The issue with "modern scientists", aka materialistic whores, is that they cannot "see" that "something" where the "waves" originate from, so they assume that waves can exist by themselves, which is completely retarded. They don't even understand the nature of the field.

take away everything, and the darkness is you..that is if You are visible and the only thing that is visible in a void..where will your shadow be? if there is no sun in a white room of light and nothing else..what if the room is dark? where is the darkness? If it can be seen in the 'light' with no sun the only thing dark is that thing because it will be the shadow..lol