It feels a bit strange to sit here writing this post. The uncertainty of not knowing if anybody is even reading it or remotely interested.
I am writing this in the past, you shall be reading this in my future, you can here my thoughts of now but with delay.
We see through the transparent state, by evolution our eyes adjusted to the radiation. Changes in EMR contrast making bright or dull.
I do understand that so far, it may seem a bit confusing, and to help , I will take you into a journey of cognitive thought, and an introductions into learning new learning styles.
There are several learning styles , and given the wavelength a persons brain is on, I presume that is their individual style.
Honey and Mumford would be the name to look up in learning styles.
The reason I mention learning styles, is the reason that if you understand my style, you may understand my thoughts and what I am actually talking about.
Theorist -” Theorists adapt and integrate observations into complex but logically sound theories. They think problems through in a vertical, step-by-step logical way. They assimilate disparate facts into coherent theories. They tend to be perfectionists who won’t rest easy until things are tidy and fit into a rational scheme. They like to analyse and synthesize. They are keen on basic assumptions, principles, theories models and systems thinking. Their philosophy prizes rationality and logic. “If its logical its good.” Questions they frequently ask are: “Does it make sense?” “How does this fit with that?” “What are the basic assumptions?” They tend to be detached, analytical and dedicated to rational objectivity rather than anything subjective or ambiguous. Their approach to problems is consistently logical. This is their ‘mental set’ and they rigidly reject anything that doesn’t fit with it. They prefer to maximise certainty and feel uncomfortable with subjective judgements, lateral thinking and anything flippant.”
Most science forums reject people who think like me, who think like this. Where as we are the ones who want to be 100% sure. We want to see hard facts, hard evidence, or a certainty of logical perfection.
People referred to has Troll’s, are often people who missed a few years of schooling, did not complete an education that provided qualifications , saying well done you can remember the books.
Does this make them less smart?, no!, of cause it does not, it only means they may have different understanding of words and meanings compared to the knowledge of a completed education.
It also means that from an adolescent age, when it is easy to except, that they have the advantage of questioning even the slightest perception of none logical process.
”Resistance to certain scientific ideas derives in large part from assumptions and biases that can be demonstrated experimentally in young children and that may persist into adulthood. In particular, both adults and children resist acquiring scientific information that clashes with common-sense intuitions about the physical and psychological domains. Additionally, when learning information from other people, both adults and children are sensitive to the trustworthiness of the source of that information. Resistance to science, then, is particularly exaggerated in societies where non scientific ideologies have the advantages of being both grounded in common sense and transmitted by trustworthy sources.”
What do you see between your eyes and the keyboard? , you see light, but you also see transparent. You see light as transparent, you see the keyboard through that transparent state of radiation.
Your eyes adjusted to that radiation, that is there in all the wavelength frequencies.
Frequencies that constantly modulate at an incredible rate.
Consider the logic, I am unsure who or who has not seen the spectrum wheel spinning, then becoming just white by velocity , the spectrum colours merging.
Imagine if the contrast was turned up to a high frequency, white would fade to transparent.
Thanks for reading more to follow soon….