Light sticks...

[Marco Wouters]

Hi,

 

I am new here, so complete stupidity…but as Flat-earthers also got some community going…let me give it a shot.

Isn’t it, because energy travels from - towards +, you can also say that + attracts the energy?

Wouldn’t that then make it so that the sun doesn’t shine but the objects around the sun attract the energy? Sucking the light towards it?

To me it looks like light has more of a “sticky” property as a “shiny” property.

If a part of the sun is not observed; does it then shine or not?

Since, if nothing requests energy, why would it shine?

If there is no “positive” to receive the energy then the “negative” does not hold value either or… am I just stupid?

 

“The first law of thermodynamics basically states that energy is conserved; it can neither be created nor destroyed, just changed from one for to another, “The total amount of energy in an isolated system is conserved. The universe as a whole is closed””

 

Now again the question…

If a part of the sun is not observed…so no planets, meteors or anything which can request energy; does it then shine or not?

The sun shouldn’t shine, according to the first law of thermodynamics.

It should not give away any energy if there is nothing to receive it at the other end... else you would lose energy and that’s an impossibility.

This, to my opinion leaves open the question if the sun does truly shine or does the light get requested by its surrounding objects because they need the energy?

in other words...does light stick?

[Sensei]

27 minutes ago, Marco Wouters said:

Isn’t it, because energy travels from - towards +, you can also say that + attracts the energy?

Energy is property of quantum particles. Electrically charged opposite sign particles attract each other, the same sign of charge particles repel each other.

If we have electric neutral particle, it's not attracted by external electric field created by other charged particle.

27 minutes ago, Marco Wouters said:

If a part of the sun is not observed; does it then shine or not?

If you have planet in the opposite region of orbit than Earth. Do you see it? It receives photons from the Sun from region invisible directly from the Earth.

 

27 minutes ago, Marco Wouters said:

The sun shouldn’t shine, according to the first law of thermodynamics.

That's absolute nonsense. If you leave lightbulb, electric oven or TV turned on, and go sleep or outside, you will receive smaller bill for electricity? Electric devices also emit light, emit photons, sometimes in visible spectrum like lightbulb or TV, always in invisible spectrum, due to thermal radiation.

 

27 minutes ago, Marco Wouters said:

in other words...does light stick?

Light can be absorbed by matter. It depends on properties of photon and properties of matter (or antimatter), whether photon will be absorbed, and how much energy will be absorbed, etc. etc.

 

Edited January 25, 2019 by Sensei

[studiot]

2 hours ago, Marco Wouters said:

“The first law of thermodynamics basically states that energy is conserved; it can neither be created nor destroyed, just changed from one for to another, “The total amount of energy in an isolated system is conserved. The universe as a whole is closed””

 

There are several different conservation laws relating to conservation of energy.

They are different because they deal with different situations.

The First Law is only one of them and it actually asserts something quite different from what you have written, since it refers to energy transfer across a system boundary.

Just to emphasise the point made by Sensei.

Energy transfer has nothing to do with attraction between positive and negative.
That again is an entirely different part of Physics.

 

Edited January 25, 2019 by studiot

[Marco Wouters]

Both of you, thanks for your insights...

I just like to think about things like this, am not a "real" scientist.

It does add food for thought.