How far could you see?

Quote from: sokarul on December 19, 2013, 04:40:20 PM

There is no air so pressure waves cannot be created. Not rocket science.

Yes.  So think about it, without pressure waves in space (a vacuum), how can there be light if there is no sound? Light IS sound.  A sonogram (sound) creates an image (a visual perception).

Sonograms work by measuring the time it takes for the sound waves to bounce back.  It then creates an image from those time.  The sound wave are used as a signal only.  The image is produced by the machine based on the information it gains from the signal.

Also, if light and sound were the same thing, when the sound of the bell gets quieter until it is almost completely gone, the inside of the container would also darken as the vacuum is pulled.  You would not be able to see inside the container.

And one more time, in order to see something, light needs to travel and bounce off of an object.  If light does not travel through a vacuum, then the light would not be able to go inside the vacuum chamber and bounce off the bell, travel back out of the vacuum chamber, and enteryour eye.

The bell inside a vacuum chamber disproves you theory that light and sound are the same thing.

Also, if light and sound were the same thing, when the sound of the bell gets quieter until it is almost completely gone, the inside of the container would also darken as the vacuum is pulled.  You would not be able to see inside the container.

No it would not.  The light is penetrating from the OUTSIDE of the vacuum THROUGH the glass. It amazes me how you guys can't understand this.  The light is OUTSIDE THE VACUUM.  Show me light that is created INSIDE it.

The light is penetrating from the OUTSIDE of the vacuum THROUGH the glass. Then THROUGH the vacuum to the bell.  It amazes me how you guys can't understand this.  The light is going from OUTSIDE THE VACUUM THROUGH THE VACUUM to the bell.  It doesn't matter WHERE the light is coming from.

Keeping in mind that an absolute vacuum does not exist anywhere on a macroscopic scale, here is a diagram that shows what would happen in a vacuum chamber using scepti and earth's model of light, and one showing what actually happens (it's a little crude, but I think it's clear enough to get the point across):



Earth, it doesn't matter where the light is created, if you can see the object inside the chamber, then that object is effectively the source of the light that is coming to your eye, regardless of the original source. If light could not propagate in a vacuum, then it would not even penetrate into the chamber to be reflected out again.

Put a digital camera (or any recording device) inside a vacuum chamber (or outside, for that matter) and a flashlight, TURN OFF ALL THE LIGHTS IN THE ROOM and record the light for me.  THEN I will believe you. 

Quote from: BJ1234 on December 19, 2013, 06:54:31 PM

Also, if light and sound were the same thing, when the sound of the bell gets quieter until it is almost completely gone, the inside of the container would also darken as the vacuum is pulled.  You would not be able to see inside the container.

No it would not.  The light is penetrating from the OUTSIDE of the vacuum THROUGH the glass. It amazes me how you guys can't understand this.  The light is OUTSIDE THE VACUUM.  Show me light that is created INSIDE it.

This in the the top 10 dumbest things ever said on FES.

No it would not.  The light is penetrating from the OUTSIDE of the vacuum THROUGH the glass....

and through the vacuum to the object, illuminating it, reflecting back through the vacuum, back through the glass, through the air, to your eyes. 

It amazes me how you guys can't understand this.  The light is OUTSIDE THE VACUUM.  Show me light that is created INSIDE it.

We have. 

Will there be anything else?

Show me light that is created INSIDE it.

What about old incandescent light bulbs? They used to use a vacuum inside the glass bulb to extend the life of the filament, starting from 1840. I believe some light bulbs still use a vacuum. When you consider that the filament is the source of light in this case, and that light has to travel from the filament through the vacuum to reach the outside of the bulb, I really can't see why we're still discussing this.

Oh, and if you want a picture, here:



Okay, so these aren't incandescent bulbs, they're vacuum tubes. The light still originates inside the tube and crosses a near-perfect vacuum before passing through the glass of the tube. Hope y'all appreciated that info, sorry it took me so long to think of posting it!

Quote from: BJ1234 on December 19, 2013, 06:54:31 PM

Also, if light and sound were the same thing, when the sound of the bell gets quieter until it is almost completely gone, the inside of the container would also darken as the vacuum is pulled.  You would not be able to see inside the container.

No it would not.  The light is penetrating from the OUTSIDE of the vacuum THROUGH the glass. It amazes me how you guys can't understand this.  The light is OUTSIDE THE VACUUM.  Show me light that is created INSIDE it.

why does it matter where it is created? If you had a bell that was not in a vacuum but surrounded by it it would still muffle the sound to anyone on the other side.

People don't put lights in vacuum chambers often because it is more hassle and introduces an extra variable to the experiment.

The fact that diodes are examples of light in a vacuum also seems to have escaped you.

Put a digital camera (or any recording device) inside a vacuum chamber (or outside, for that matter) and a flashlight, TURN OFF ALL THE LIGHTS IN THE ROOM and record the light for me.  THEN I will believe you.

What makes you think any of us have a vacuum chamber?

What also makes you think any of us if we DID have a vacuum chamber would want to waste time doing this just so you could say that it obviously wasn't really a vacuum?

Quote from: sokarul on December 19, 2013, 04:40:20 PM

There is no air so pressure waves cannot be created. Not rocket science.

Yes.  So think about it, without pressure waves in space (a vacuum), how can there be light if there is no sound? Light IS sound.

*sigh*
Sound is a mechanical wave.  Light is an electromagnetic wave.  They share many of the same characteristics of waves, but light is also a particle (photon) and, as such, exhibits characteristics that sound waves do not.  Perhaps this diagram will help:

Light bulbs contain gas, either Argon, Neon or Xenon.  They are NOT the same as a vacuum chamber.

Sci, thanks but those vacuum tubes have gas in them:

Gas-filled tubes

Gas-filled tubes such as discharge tubes and cold cathode tubes are not hard vacuum tubes, though are always filled with gas at less than sea-level atmospheric pressure. Types such as the voltage-regulator tube and thyratron resemble hard vacuum tubes and fit in sockets designed for vacuum tubes. Their distinctive orange, red, or purple glow during operation indicates the presence of gas; electrons flowing in a vacuum do not produce light within that region. These types may still be referred to as "electron tubes" as they do perform electronic functions. High-power rectifiers use mercury vapor to achieve a lower forward voltage drop than high-vacuum tubes. - Wikipedia

Spank,
What makes me think that?  The fact that you seem to be an expert on vacuum chambers, that's what.  You have the time to debate this with me so why don't you have time to prove what you say?

  You have the time to debate this with me so why don't you have time to prove what you say?

Why don't you have the time to prove that a flashlight won't illuminate the inside of a vacuum chamber?  We've shown videos of objects visible in vacuum chambers (meaning light is traveling through the vacuum), and videos of darkened rooms with light sources inside (meaning light is traveling through the vacuum).

If you think a flashlight is going to be different, then prove it.

We all know what scepti's reply, followed by your reply in agreement with his, is going to be anyway.

Sci, thanks but those vacuum tubes have gas in them:

Gas-filled tubes

Gas-filled tubes such as discharge tubes and cold cathode tubes are not hard vacuum tubes, though are always filled with gas at less than sea-level atmospheric pressure. Types such as the voltage-regulator tube and thyratron resemble hard vacuum tubes and fit in sockets designed for vacuum tubes. Their distinctive orange, red, or purple glow during operation indicates the presence of gas; electrons flowing in a vacuum do not produce light within that region. These types may still be referred to as "electron tubes" as they do perform electronic functions. High-power rectifiers use mercury vapor to achieve a lower forward voltage drop than high-vacuum tubes. - Wikipedia

Spank,
What makes me think that?  The fact that you seem to be an expert on vacuum chambers, that's what.  You have the time to debate this with me so why don't you have time to prove what you say?

The old vauum tubes were just that. No gas. Of course there were other tubes such as thyratrons, mercury vapor tubes, etc. which did contain gas.

The vacuum tubes also had a "getter" which completed and maintained the vacuum inside the tube. And of course you could see the light from the filament or "heater" as the old radio men called them. That was one of the first tests to see if a vacuum tube was good or bad. Whether or not the tube was "lit up."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getter

Spank,
What makes me think that?  The fact that you seem to be an expert on vacuum chambers, that's what.  You have the time to debate this with me so why don't you have time to prove what you say?

because

A: I haven't had access to a vacuum chamber since I left school and

B: The one there was made of glass which apparently isn't acceptable.

The reason there's no pictures of flashlights in vacuum tubes is no one would have a reason to do it.

Quote from: Spank86 on December 19, 2013, 01:24:35 PM

Well if you can see something inside a vacuum chamber then light is passing through it and coming out from inside.

I can see that bell in the post above so light must be able to pass through a vacuum.

Alright this is what I need to see then because the glass chamber is not working to prove my point.  Someone please record a flashlight inside a vacuum that is not made of glass!

These threads do get confusing at times .....but.....maybe I'm wrong but were you saying that light cannot penetrate through a vacuum ?

 If that were the case, your flashlight wouldn't work because the filament inside the flashlight bulb makes the light and the bulb itself is sort of a miniature vacuum chamber. And flashlight bulbs do work. I think you could prove that yourself ?

Everyone else is confused because they don't grasp the idea that light created outside the glass vacuum is what is illuminating the object inside the vacuum.  A proper experiment requires that there be NO LIGHT coming from outside the vacuum.  Or if there is, there must be an opaque vacuum with a light inside it.  Light bulbs contain gas so they are not considered vacuums.  However, they are a light source so they can be used inside the chamber to show that the light propagates or not.

I would simply like to see if the light dims and goes out as the chamber is evacuated.

Light bulbs contain gas, either Argon, Neon or Xenon.  They are NOT the same as a vacuum chamber.

"In 1840, British scientist Warren de la Rue enclosed a coiled platinum filament in a vacuum tube and passed an electric current through it." and "...the evacuated chamber would contain fewer gas molecules to react with the platinum..."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incandescent_light_bulb

Why would anyone bother making a light bulb with a vacuum inside it if light couldn't escape? It'd be completely pointless. Okay, it's not a total vacuum, but as has been pointed out before, such a thing does not exist on the scales we are talking about.

Sci, thanks but those vacuum tubes have gas in them:

That was interesting info you gave, but I get the distinct feeling you were cherry-picking. This was at the top of the same page you quoted from:
"In electronics, a vacuum tube, electron tube (in North America), tube, or thermionic valve or valve (in British English) is a device controlling electric current through a vacuum in a sealed container."

and this was a little lower down:
"The vast majority of modern day tubes consist of a sealed container with a vacuum inside..."

Here's a home-made vacuum triode:


Also here, you can clearly see that only the filament is glowing, and it is lighting the entire room:

Everyone else is confused because they don't grasp the idea that light created outside the glass vacuum is what is illuminating the object inside the vacuum.  A proper experiment requires that there be NO LIGHT coming from outside the vacuum.  Or if there is, there must be an opaque vacuum with a light inside it.  Light bulbs contain gas so they are not considered vacuums.  However, they are a light source so they can be used inside the chamber to show that the light propagates or not.

Sie sind verwirrt, weil du deinen Freund ficken ohne Schmieröl!

I could put a LED light on the inside of a vacuum. and it would work inside or outside the vacuum, we don't put LED's in vacuums though because they don't need them to work...but they can still work inside the vacuum.  what you are saying though makes no sense, some dude asked if he can see across the see to the other side of the world, the answer to which is obviously no because the earth is curved. you FE'ers need a new model because the old aint working.

also stars are a light source, space is a vacuum(before you try to discredit this, constant(k)/∞ is going to be zero! Space is constantly expanding(even FE'ers flat earth model acknowledges that) if it is constantly expanding then volume(V) is heading towards infinity, mass(m)/volume(V) = density if something has zero density it would be a vacuum. m/∞ is 0 so stars are a light source in a vacuum.

Ok Sci, here's an abstract thought for you...
What if the only reason you can see inside those vacuum tubes is because the light is visible to us OUTSIDE that vacuum?  How can you be 100% sure there is light INSIDE the bulb?  We know the energy is there inside the bulb and creates light in our atmosphere but is it creating light in the vacuum where there is no atmosphere?

Ok Sci, here's an abstract thought for you...
What if the only reason you can see inside those vacuum tubes is because the light is visible to us OUTSIDE that vacuum?  How can you be 100% sure there is light INSIDE the bulb?  We know the energy is there inside the bulb and creates light in our atmosphere but is it creating light in the vacuum where there is no atmosphere?

But how does it get out of the vacuum if light can't travel through a vacuum?
Are you suggesting that there is some form of energy that can travel through a vacuum, then when it enters atmosphere it transforms to light?

That is very interesting claim you have made.  Care to back it up with some experimentation?

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on December 20, 2013, 01:45:15 PM

Ok Sci, here's an abstract thought for you...
What if the only reason you can see inside those vacuum tubes is because the light is visible to us OUTSIDE that vacuum?  How can you be 100% sure there is light INSIDE the bulb?  We know the energy is there inside the bulb and creates light in our atmosphere but is it creating light in the vacuum where there is no atmosphere?

But how does it get out of the vacuum if light can't travel through a vacuum?
Are you suggesting that there is some form of energy that can travel through a vacuum, then when it enters atmosphere it transforms to light?

That is very interesting claim you have made.  Care to back it up with some experimentation?

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Can anyone show me ANYTHING that proves that sound does not make light. Show me one thing that does not use sound to create a light we see.
Anything!

But how does it get out of the vacuum if light can't travel through a vacuum?
Are you suggesting that there is some form of energy that can travel through a vacuum, then when it enters atmosphere it transforms to light?

That is very interesting claim you have made.  Care to back it up with some experimentation?

YES!  That is what Eric Dollard said as well.  I do not know what the energy is but I would LOVE to back it up.

Quote from: BJ1234 on December 20, 2013, 02:03:30 PM

But how does it get out of the vacuum if light can't travel through a vacuum?
Are you suggesting that there is some form of energy that can travel through a vacuum, then when it enters atmosphere it transforms to light?

That is very interesting claim you have made.  Care to back it up with some experimentation?

YES!  That is what Eric Dollard said as well.  I do not know what the energy is but I would LOVE to back it up.

Then you better get yourself a vacuum chamber and a flashlight to prove there is.

Can anyone show me ANYTHING that proves that sound does not make light. Show me one thing that does not use sound to create a light we see.
Anything!

Tritium:



Get some, and see if you can record any kind of sound from it. I couldn't find anything saying that it did make sound, so am assuming it doesn't until evidence is provided to the contrary.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 20, 2013, 02:07:07 PM

Can anyone show me ANYTHING that proves that sound does not make light. Show me one thing that does not use sound to create a light we see.
Anything!

Tritium:



Get some, and see if you can record any kind of sound from it. I couldn't find anything saying that it did make sound, so am assuming it doesn't until evidence is provided to the contrary.

So how does it work then?
Tell me simply, how it glows. What makes it glow?
Be careful here, because the very second you mention REACTION, you do realise what that means, right?

Does INTERACTION count?  "Naturally occurring tritium is extremely rare on Earth, where trace amounts are formed by the interaction of the atmosphere with cosmic rays." - Wikipedia

Scepti, take the time to look up 'radio luminescense' and make an effort to understand it. Suffice to say, the interactions are far to small to create actual sound. They're not even mechanical interactions, so there is no way they could even be considered as sound.

That's enough spoon feeding, work the rest out yourself.

Can anyone show me ANYTHING that proves that sound does not make light. Show me one thing that does not use sound to create a light we see.
Anything!

Do you own a flashlight?