Peter Lindemann: "We've been lied to about almost the nature of everything"

[WhiteLove]

Peter Lindemann: "We've been lied to in such a whole-sale manner about almost the nature of everything. You cannot see light, you only see what light reflects off of."

J-m4pPGIPZg

[Aurelius]

yup .. 'tis all true and this is why and how light is actually created (http://www.keshefoundation.org/shop/product/view/4/139)

[Ernie Nemeth]

And the color of an object is actually the only color that object is not. It reflects the color we see - it absorbs the rest.

[aviators]

OK in other words earths atmosphere becomes the screen for light projectors.
Is this why there is never any stars from the pictures taken from the moon?
Hmmm.....

[Carmody]

OK in other words earths atmosphere becomes the screen for light projectors.
Is this why there is never any stars from the pictures taken from the moon?
Hmmm.....

the moon vs stars in images thing, is strictly a matter of contrast capacity, range of dynamics of light capacity in the given camera. No camera, or eyeball known to exist in the human sphere, can capture the range of light levels, in one shot.

simply put, if even a single shaft of sunlight reflected off of a flag pole, on the surface of the moon is in a shot,and they try to capture the image of that, by putting the camera on the surface of the moon and pointing it upward at the sky..with the pole still in view....if they do this, and try to get the stars in the shot.....the light from the flagpole would wash the image out to being a whiteout.

The CR, or contrast range capacity of the best cameras and optics today (glass, coatings, barrel designs. etc), in real world, not theoretical use, but real world...is about 800:1, or maybe 1000:1, in the best cases, and I'm not familiar with that existing, and I've handled a lot of good optics.

That range of contrast, 800 times brighter than the darkest parts of the image (that is what 800:1 CR means), that is not even close to the level or requirement for snapping a shot of the flagpole vs that of the moon starscape, in the one single image. If there is any sun light in the surface moon camera shot, light reflected off the dunes and whatnot, if it enters the lens at all, it would swamp out any attempt to take a shot of the stars.

The CR differential of the flagpole reflected sunlight vs the darkness of space and the starlight, is probably 5000:1 or 10000:1 CR.

Most people never understand this as their eyeballs are capable of 1,000,000:1 in dynamic range, but the eyeball's iris opens and closes to get to the best adjusted level of incoming light, to be able to realize an image. That CR range of the given iris adjusted eye is considered to be approximately 350:1 CR. (as a simple number, it is more complex than that)

Also, the face-glass of the space suits of the astronauts have a darkening and lightening capacity so the astronauts can get around this incredible intensity difference issue and be able to see in the sunlight of space and in the darkness of space. The human eye cannot handle it all on it's own. it needs some serious assistance. And, ultimately... the cameras are still not as good as the human eye.

[huyi82]

And the color of an object is actually the only color that object is not. It reflects the color we see - it absorbs the rest.

so if my laptop or space is black what color is it really? black and white are not supposed to be a colour, does this info from Peter Lindemann explain why some people are born colorblind, what if we are the people who are colorblind and they are not? gives you something to think about.

[aviators]

OK in other words earths atmosphere becomes the screen for light projectors.
Is this why there is never any stars from the pictures taken from the moon?
Hmmm.....

the moon vs stars in images thing, is strictly a matter of contrast capacity, range of dynamics of light capacity in the given camera. No camera, or eyeball known to exist in the human sphere, can capture the range of light levels, in one shot.

simply put, if even a single shaft of sunlight reflected off of a flag pole, on the surface of the moon is in a shot,and they try to capture the image of that, by putting the camera on the surface of the moon and pointing it upward at the sky..with the pole still in view....if they do this, and try to get the stars in the shot.....the light from the flagpole would wash the image out to being a whiteout.

The CR, or contrast range capacity of the best cameras and optics today (glass, coatings, barrel designs. etc), in real world, not theoretical use, but real world...is about 800:1, or maybe 1000:1, in the best cases, and I'm not familiar with that existing, and I've handled a lot of good optics.

That range of contrast, 800 times brighter than the darkest parts of the image (that is what 800:1 CR means), that is not even close to the level or requirement for snapping a shot of the flagpole vs that of the moon starscape, in the one single image. If there is any sun light in the surface moon camera shot, light reflected off the dunes and whatnot, if it enters the lens at all, it would swamp out any attempt to take a shot of the stars.

The CR differential of the flagpole reflected sunlight vs the darkness of space and the starlight, is probably 5000:1 or 10000:1 CR.

Most people never understand this as their eyeballs are capable of 1,000,000:1 in dynamic range, but the eyeball's iris opens and closes to get to the best adjusted level of incoming light, to be able to realize an image. That CR range of the given iris adjusted eye is considered to be approximately 350:1 CR. (as a simple number, it is more complex than that)

Also, the face-glass of the space suits of the astronauts have a darkening and lightening capacity so the astronauts can get around this incredible intensity difference issue and be able to see in the sunlight of space and in the darkness of space. The human eye cannot handle it all on it's own. it needs some serious assistance. And, ultimately... the cameras are still not as good as the human eye.

Thanks for that.. I think I get what you are saying...
My question is ;do we have any pictures of earth from deep space or from the moon that show the stars as well.
Here on earth you can capture the moon and stars with a normal camera.
Time exposures also help. Could this be done from the moon?
I am just wondering because of the speakers comment on how we see stars only
because of our atmospheres "screen" per say. Does this make sense?

[Ernie Nemeth]

"Space" is black because it is the absence of matter - there is nothing to reflect the light. And stars, for the most part, emit light of various colors - they are the source of the light in space.