is a shadow less than nothing?

[Uncle Fester]

.

Edited September 19, 2021 by darebak

[fatherpaul]

Yeesh. We need a Taobums poetry corner for all you stanza-philes.

A shadow is created by the obstruction of specular light. That is its only criteria for being classified and categorized as a shadow.

The term shadow is "something" only within the limitations of specific paradigm, just as the rest of observable phenomena.

 

If you are blind, the paradigm in which shadows exist are unobservable to you and therefore non-existent.

 

Maybe it is our vanity and flair for the dramatic that cause us to imagine our shadows being something more or less profound than other natural modulations of light.

 

 

the TTC reads like poetry, not bad company

 

so a shadow is both existent and non-existant, but indeed, one could say this about anything.

 

perhaps the question should be ..what is light?

[mYTHmAKER]

A shadow has no substance but the object that casts the shadow has substance.

You cannot have a shadow if there is no object to interfere with the light.

[fatherpaul]

A shadow has no substance but the object that casts the shadow has substance.

You cannot have a shadow if there is no object to interfere with the light.

 

a shadow is NOT less than nothing

yet it is not substantial

it exists in the eye and mind

briefly or extensively

but when the sun goes down....

 

thank you all for the wisdom and words

 

me and my shadow

will now take leave of this thread

[mYTHmAKER]

"Only the shadow knows"

Edited June 14, 2007 by mYTHmAKER

[Spectrum]

You cannot have a shadow if there is no object to interfere with the light.

 

I'd rather have rainbows & halos.

 

Spherical Interactions w/ Orbital Stanzas,

 

Spectrum

[beancurdturtle]

Or the greenish, flickering, murky glow

of an aged fluorescent tube

in a reeking meth lab.

 

Is it less than a shadow?

[rain]

the darkness dawns here

rain has fallen on the lawn

the droplets hang on every blade of grass

 

for your bare feet

 

sensation

 

dusk

Edited June 14, 2007 by rain

[Taomeow]

This dewdrop world

Is a dewdrop world --

And yet -- and yet --

-- Issa

[beancurdturtle]

Yet issa what?

 

[Taomeow]

Yet issa what?

 

 

Issa this too:

 

 

ISSA

 

 

***

Thus spring begins: old

stupidities repeated,

new errs invented

 

***

Just beyond the gate,

a neat yellow hole

someone pissed in the snow

 

***

People working fields,

from my deepest heart, I bow.

Now a little nap.

 

***

The winter fly

I caught and finally freed

the cat quickly ate

 

***

Mother, I weep

for you as I watch the sea

each time I watch the sea

[Taomeow]

Hmm, this is getting beyond my level of knowledge, but I cannot avoid to notice that wikipedia carries no trace of antiphoton page, because:

"The photon is its own antiparticle" (from here)

 

It's all right, my own knowledge is not that profound either, I just used to hang out for many years with a whole gang of physicists and mathematicians (and married one of them), and they like to talk crazy science whenever you get them sufficiently drunk. And then I picked up a few books along the road.

 

However, Wikipedia blows.

 

When I called a photon a "shadow of the antiphoton," 'twas a metaphor (and I thought of it as a neat one, if I say so myself), since we were talking shadows. No one knows what the counterpart of a photon from anitmatter, or from Dark Matter, would be like, except that it would be of a whole different order of "anti" than a mere antiparticle. However, it seems to have been established that Dark Matter IS reality, and light, in the light of this hypothesis, is its privative. I kid you not.

Edited June 15, 2007 by Taomeow

[goldisheavy]

the material world

including thought

is real,

the space between every thing (material)

is "nothing" (the emptiness that makes the cup useful)

these both seem constant,

but a shadow? is it less than nothing?

 

 

Let's take this a step further and assign it a number, like -5. Of course this is pure crap.

 

How is knowing the answer to this question going to be beneficial? Questions should have a purpose, preferably a weighty one. If you don't have a weighty purpose in mind, it's best to not to waste time asking idle questions, from a spiritual seeker point of view. Asking pointless questions is a favorite human past time, but it has nothing in common with serious spiritual aspirations for wisdom.

 

Waxing lyrical about various nonsense is for the poets.

 

Why waste effort in such vain evaluation? (Like evaluating the substantiveness of shadows... what a waste...) Is it just for entertainment?

[Pietro]

It's all right, my own knowledge is not that profound either, I just used to hang out for many years with a whole gang of physicists and mathematicians (and married one of them), and they like to talk crazy science whenever you get them sufficiently drunk. And then I picked up a few books along the road.

 

However, Wikipedia blows.

 

When I called a photon a "shadow of the antiphoton," 'twas a metaphor (and I thought of it as a neat one, if I say so myself), since we were talking shadows. No one knows what the counterpart of a photon from anitmatter, or from Dark Matter, would be like, except that it would be of a whole different order of "anti" than a mere antiparticle. However, it seems to have been established that Dark Matter IS reality, and light, in the light of this hypothesis, is its privative. I kid you not.

 

I am a mathemathician myself.

 

Look something that can be measured absolutely cannot be a privative. By definition of privative.

 

The fact that there is dark matter, which just amount to things we can measure using gravity, but that we cannot observe does not make it the 'opposite' of light. And if it was the opposite then neither would be the privative of the other, since both can be measured.

So then they would form a polarity (if they really are polarities) of which none is a privative. Much like blue and red.

 

This is the whole point: there are tow kind of polarities, in one case the two opposities share the same privative, in the other one of the two IS the privative. But a privative cannot be measured absolutely.

 

P.S. what does it mean wikipedia blows?

[fatherpaul]

Let's take this a step further and assign it a number, like -5. Of course this is pure crap.

 

How is knowing the answer to this question going to be beneficial? Questions should have a purpose, preferably a weighty one. If you don't have a weighty purpose in mind, it's best to not to waste time asking idle questions, from a spiritual seeker point of view. Asking pointless questions is a favorite human past time, but it has nothing in common with serious spiritual aspirations for wisdom.

 

Waxing lyrical about various nonsense is for the poets.

 

Why waste effort in such vain evaluation? (Like evaluating the substantiveness of shadows... what a waste...) Is it just for entertainment?

"serious spiritual aspirations for wisdom??"

sounds a bit stuffy

 

ill just stay in the shadows

and play

[Wayfarer64]

Shadow is much more than something it is the acknowledgement that something has gotten in the way of light and created a place of rest. It is the manifestation of where matter and light interact. It is the place of darkness and contemplation... And the art thing too-

namaste- Pat

[freeform]

Let's take this a step further and assign it a number, like -5. Of course this is pure crap.

 

How is knowing the answer to this question going to be beneficial? Questions should have a purpose, preferably a weighty one. If you don't have a weighty purpose in mind, it's best to not to waste time asking idle questions, from a spiritual seeker point of view. Asking pointless questions is a favorite human past time, but it has nothing in common with serious spiritual aspirations for wisdom.

 

Waxing lyrical about various nonsense is for the poets.

 

Why waste effort in such vain evaluation? (Like evaluating the substantiveness of shadows... what a waste...) Is it just for entertainment?

 

You can ask questions in different ways - you can ask questions to 'add to knowledge' - you can ask questions to 'change current knowledge' - and you can ask questions to 'stop knowing'.

 

Each one is usefull in it's own way - for spirituality asking questions to stop knowing is usually the most productive (or reductive )

 

fatherpaul's question is masquerading as a question to add to knowledge - and that's how most have treated it, however knowing Paul, it's actually reductive - I feel more confused now than before the question was asked. Confusion is an underestimated state - couple it with curiosity and you have a state that's perfect for leading a spiritual life.

 

And it certainly is entertaining - not just entertaining.

[rain]

 

Issa this too:

ISSA

 

 

***

Thus spring begins: old

stupidities repeated,

new errs invented

 

***

Just beyond the gate,

a neat yellow hole

someone pissed in the snow

 

***

People working fields,

from my deepest heart, I bow.

Now a little nap.

 

***

The winter fly

I caught and finally freed

the cat quickly ate

 

***

Mother, I weep

for you as I watch the sea

each time I watch the sea

 

Love your poem

iznot .."just poetry"

 

and stating that light must be "The Infinite" opposed to the realblackmatter. Hoho! Time for celebration!

Edited June 15, 2007 by rain