Description: Science is taken by many to be absolute. Is it? Before Einstein, Newton's laws were thought to be the last word in physics because they worked, and while Newton's laws still work for our day to day living, they cannot explain cosmic events or atomic events, ergo Einstein.
Einstein said it was so,
And if anyone would, he'd know.
But what if the speed of light weren't constant?
Suppose it varied by an infinitesimal second?
Who could measure it?
Not even Michelson-Morley, I'd bet.
And who could tell what the effects would be?
Probably not even Albert if he were around yet.
Now here's a proposal,
though it's likely improbable,
That explains how light can act as a wave and a particle.
The speed of light isn't constant,
Nor is its emission instantaneous.
Now that fits with our everyday experiences.
Light must be very fast, for it is outside my window the moment my eyes are opened in the morning. The light from a flash light seems to be instantanious, for it comes at the click of a switch. BUT.... if one is blind, is there no light at all, or just waiting for sight to return. That's like the question about a falling tree in an empty forest, if no one can hear, is there still no sound?
Good question with an unknowable answer, Shadow, I have seen the wave theory before.
Did you know Einstein played violin? I only found that out last night while playing Trivial Pursuit with a bunch of friends at a beach-house. Random info, I know, but thought I'd share.
It's always perplexed yet amazed me at how light can be both matter and energy, swapping between the two just like that. Have you read up about the Hadron Collider and their upcoming experiments to try and find this elusive Higgs Boson? Fascinating stuff, and definitely blurring the lines of science and what I would coin cosmic inner knowledge or some such other metaphysical term...
Anyway, this was just as fascinating. Improbable, but fascinating. To have feet planted in both realms is terrifying yet exciting, and the sign of an open mind...
It would make sense, makes it more of a reaction, which I think life is. But we are dealing with light, iwth energy, and so far as we know it can nver be created, nor destroyed. So probably that is taken out of context, really really insightful though and I dig your style