If you meant that to truly understand reflection you need to understand that a photon is absorbed then a photon is emitted, that’s true. (Or at least I’ll take your word for it; I’m a physics amateur.)
If you meant that there’s no such thing as reflection, that’s false. Reflection is what we call photon absorption and re-emission. (With certain other conditions, like a very short time period, re-emission at the same frequency, and re-emission in a different direction.)
If you meant that there’s no such thing as reflection, that’s false
I’ve said “just reflection”. I was referring to original poster intention and wanted to show him that photons on his retina probably originate from the tree he is looking. Or from the air in the middle. Or from his eye itself.
Absorbed and emitted many times. A rare photon we detect, is from the Sun.
When I first read the great great
grandparent
I almost wrote a response along the lines of the
grandparent,
because it triggered a pet peeve of mine where people use science and
equivocation to say that commonplace knowledge is wrong. (Example: “Your table
is not really solid; it’s mostly empty space.” No, solid is what we call
things like tables that act a certain way at a certain size scale.) But
looking at it again, especially in the light of the
parent,
I see it as exactly in the spirit of the
OP
(which, despite its use of an
unusual sense of “see” along the lines of my pet peeve, got more downvotes than
I think it deserved).
If you meant that to truly understand reflection you need to understand that a photon is absorbed then a photon is emitted, that’s true. (Or at least I’ll take your word for it; I’m a physics amateur.)
If you meant that there’s no such thing as reflection, that’s false. Reflection is what we call photon absorption and re-emission. (With certain other conditions, like a very short time period, re-emission at the same frequency, and re-emission in a different direction.)
(I didn’t downvote it.)
I’ve said “just reflection”. I was referring to original poster intention and wanted to show him that photons on his retina probably originate from the tree he is looking. Or from the air in the middle. Or from his eye itself.
Absorbed and emitted many times. A rare photon we detect, is from the Sun.
When I first read the great great grandparent I almost wrote a response along the lines of the grandparent, because it triggered a pet peeve of mine where people use science and equivocation to say that commonplace knowledge is wrong. (Example: “Your table is not really solid; it’s mostly empty space.” No, solid is what we call things like tables that act a certain way at a certain size scale.) But looking at it again, especially in the light of the parent, I see it as exactly in the spirit of the OP (which, despite its use of an unusual sense of “see” along the lines of my pet peeve, got more downvotes than I think it deserved).
I’ve just corrected that a bit.