Ophiolite Posted December 12, 2004 Posted December 12, 2004 I thought the title of this thread included the phrase - "a little bit of fun". It seems to have to degenerated into an internecine squabble! Note: Actually it seems all quite good natured, but I have been waiting thirty years for an opportunity to use the word internecine, ever since seeing the film The Internecine Project while deep in the jungles of Irian Jaya. I got tired of waiting.
Tesseract Posted December 12, 2004 Posted December 12, 2004 well technically ball does not mean spherical, ever seen a football? (rugby?) but the author did clarify later that were talking spherical here. technicallity just makes things more complicated...
Tesseract Posted December 12, 2004 Posted December 12, 2004 I thought the title of this thread included the phrase - "a little bit of fun".It seems to have to degenerated into an internecine squabble! Note: Actually it seems all quite good natured' date=' but I have been waiting thirty years for an opportunity to use the word [i']internecine[/i], ever since seeing the film The Internecine Project while deep in the jungles of Irian Jaya. I got tired of waiting. internecine? What? that means this thread is related to "bloodshed and carnage"...???
mossoi Posted December 12, 2004 Author Posted December 12, 2004 internecine? What? that means this thread is related to "bloodshed and carnage"...???LOL! I had this debate originally with a school friend during chemistry about 10 years ago - that almost became internecine!
Tesseract Posted December 12, 2004 Posted December 12, 2004 Ive never heard of a squabble that was internecinious (sp?). I think thats a war.
MOTP Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 "I think it actually has to do with how closed off the ball is from external sources of light. "blue" can only be perceived in the presence of light, so if it is very closed off, no light can enter it. Therefore, 99% of its volume is not blue, but black. " that assumes blue means it is currently reflecting blue light. No, what I had meant was that If you are talking about the volume of the ball, and not just its surface area, then the air inside it isn't going to be blue, but clear. Even if you call it "black" as in it would appear black were your eyes within it, it still would not be blue. Volume-wise, the ball isn't going to be blue for more than a fraction of its colors. Since the hollowness is what causes this irregularity, it's safe to assume that it is more spherical than blue. while that assumes some very very strange definition of blue, where i guess blue means its full of blue light because thats what it absorbs? Exactly. Because of the nature of our eyes, and light in general, we see whatever the ball doesn't keep for itself and don't see what is actually being taken by the ball. We are effectively proving that "One man's trash is another man's treasure". By the act of perceiving a certain color, it means that that is exactly what the ball is not Blue: having the characteristics to reflect blue light. As long as it reflects blue light the ball is blue. Much as the dictionary might say otherwise, the ball is the opposite of whatever color is perceived at any given moment. The ball is perceived to be blue, but is the opposite. If we somehow had some kind of instrument to identify what color the ball is, and not what it's given off (which we do, it's called reversing the color scheme and it makes for a very strange world indeed) then we would see it is more any other color than blue, even if it has some blue here and there (reflecting red and green) Furthermore, other factors have to be taken in, because a ball isn't simply "blue" and "hollow". Otherwise, we would have to consider the weighted average of all the major possibilities, and that would degrade the "blueness" and "spherical-(ness?)" quite a bit.
sepultallica Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 well, if you were to ask a dog, he would not be able to answer you because it couldnt speak. but if it could, he would tell you that it he was colorblind and couldnt tell if it was blue or not. he would say that it looked mighty round.
Callipygous Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 Exactly. Because of the nature of our eyes' date=' and light in general, we see whatever the ball doesn't keep for itself and don't see what is actually being taken by the ball. We are effectively proving that "One man's trash is another man's treasure". By the act of perceiving a certain color, it means that that is exactly what the ball [b']is not[/b] im sorry, but thats just idiotic. yes, you are absolutely right that the ball is full of blue light, but that is not a definition of blue anyone will ever use (with regards to a material, obviously a blue light bulb is full of blue light). color is defined perception. as in "how we see it", if we see it as blue, its blue, not "everything but blue."
Tesseract Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 Much as the dictionary might say otherwise' date=' the ball is the opposite of whatever color is perceived at any given moment. The ball is perceived to be blue, but is the opposite. If we somehow had some kind of instrument to identify what color the ball is, and not what it's given off (which we do, it's called reversing the color scheme and it makes for a very strange world indeed) then we would see it is more any other color than blue, even if it has some blue here and there (reflecting red and green) [/quote'] If it has the characteristics that reflect blue light it is blue!
Top Boy Posted December 27, 2004 Posted December 27, 2004 In the spectrum of light we see the color of the spectrum which is not available. Therefore, the ball being blue, means it has all the other colors of the spectrum confined, thus offering our variable to be blue. In this understanding, the ball is not blue... Now, the ball being hollow, must mean that there is two halves to the sphere, thus presenting two more measurable sides of the color missing, being blue. In this the blue would be more than the sphere, considering the inside of the halves hosting another sizeable amount of blue. Finally, the riddle would be an eyeball, because it is a ball, and is holow when seen through the pupil, yet has two diameters of blue, the inside near pupil and the outside near the cornea. Thus two diameters, of the ball, inner and outer would be linear length and the iris would be blue and depth. The two worlds of pressure and depth equal one tear. Is the tear hollow? It must be, because it begins at one pressue of oxygen, projects a second element of wetness, and ends at another dimension of water. Another symbol for this riddle is the true astrological sign for pisces, which is )I( - blue is measured differently than size, giving irrelevance in how we measure.
Callipygous Posted December 27, 2004 Posted December 27, 2004 In the spectrum of light we see the color of the spectrum which is not available. Therefore' date=' the ball being blue, means it has all the other colors of the spectrum confined, thus offering our variable to be blue. In this understanding, the ball is not blue... Now, the ball being hollow, must mean that there is two halves to the sphere, thus presenting two more measurable sides of the color missing, being blue. In this the blue would be more than the sphere, considering the inside of the halves hosting another sizeable amount of blue. Finally, the riddle would be an eyeball, because it is a ball, and is holow when seen through the pupil, yet has two diameters of blue, the inside near pupil and the outside near the cornea. Thus two diameters, of the ball, inner and outer would be linear length and the iris would be blue and depth. The two worlds of pressure and depth equal one tear. Is the tear hollow? It must be, because it begins at one pressue of oxygen, projects a second element of wetness, and ends at another dimension of water. Another symbol for this riddle is the true astrological sign for pisces, which is )I( - blue is measured differently than size, giving irrelevance in how we measure.[/quote'] lol... that was a joke, right? right??
Top Boy Posted December 27, 2004 Posted December 27, 2004 Well, you can see it as a joke, or a simple understanding. I have a ball. Could me, I have great fun. But the fun, turns out to be plastic (fake) and hollow (empty feeling), it is too blue; meaning it is too sad. That is why I put in the tear drop. It's lots of fun, until someone gets hurt. So, the two worlds, pressure and depth, cause one to cry. Thus, a tear. Maybe that is just how I read the idea. Either concept, works with a conclusive answer for the riddle, that demonstrates a ball somewhat blue. Another simple definition is that the blue and spherical "measurements" would be equal. Or you could ask, more blue or spherical - than what?
Tesseract Posted December 29, 2004 Posted December 29, 2004 Well, you can see it as a joke, or a simple understanding. I have a ball. Could me, I have great fun. But the fun, turns out to be plastic (fake) and hollow (empty feeling), it is too blue; meaning it is too sad. That is why I put in the tear drop. It's lots of fun, until someone gets hurt. So, the two worlds, pressure and depth, cause one to cry. Thus, a tear. Maybe that is just how I read the idea. wtf does this mean?Its the colour blue!!!"Could me, I have great fun"? Thats completly abstruse...this is no real riddle anyway, it clearly says in the riddle thats its both spherical and blue.
PersonCube Posted January 4, 2005 Posted January 4, 2005 How do we /really/ know it is a blue or a sphere at all? We are only told it is. What if a sphere is really a cube? It is just someone of higher power makes us believe... That's the problem with human knowledge... we /know nothing/ we only believe what we are told...
Sayonara Posted January 5, 2005 Posted January 5, 2005 It's a thought experiment. You get what you're given.
Tesseract Posted January 6, 2005 Posted January 6, 2005 Why do people keep trying to pick this thead apart and make it more complicated?
ffsjoe Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 How do we /really/ know it is a blue or a sphere at all? We are only told it is. What if a sphere is really a cube? It is just someone of higher power makes us believe... "How can you tell that the past isnt a fiction designed to account for the discrepancy between my immediate physical sensations and my state of mind?" lol
Tetraspace Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 How did we get from what you just said from blue spheres...
Deified Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 I think there is something in what Top_Boy said, if you were to slice the ball in any way(say in half) you are decreasing the amount of spherical and increasing the amount of blue. But then again, why on earth would you slice a plastic ball? Well how about this: The ball is mentioned as such before it is stated that it is also blue. The earlier mention combined with the use of the word "also" imply that the spherical nature of the ball is more important than the blue nature of the ball. And yes I do realize that everything I've said just now is complete rubbish.
Tesseract Posted January 9, 2005 Posted January 9, 2005 And yes I do realize that everything I've said just now is complete rubbish. Quite I dont think modifying the ball would be an answer to the riddle. "Also"?
Sayonara Posted January 9, 2005 Posted January 9, 2005 Not an answer per se, but it demonstrates that the potential blueness wins out against the potential sphericalness in different states of ballness, which is often - to humans - justification for claiming one trait is more evident than the other.
Deified Posted January 10, 2005 Posted January 10, 2005 "Also"? In the original question you said the "The ball is also blue"
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now