Notices
Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: How Could Sound Have Created Light?

  1. #1 How Could Sound Have Created Light? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Can sound create light? Genesis 1:3 says, "God said, Let there be light", and there was light".

    Is there any scientific basis on which to consider the possibility that light is or was or can be created from sound?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    4,708
    Was God called Maxwell?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    Was God called Maxwell?
    I know that some call him Bob and that Maxwell had a silver hammer.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    Was God called Maxwell?
    Should I be on Wikipedia? Or is there a better source? Did Maxwell actually create light from sound then? I'm not seeing that he did from what I just read. Or how anyone could.
    Last edited by Oscar K; December 19th, 2020 at 02:35 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    4,708
    No ,just a weak joke.

    His theory of electromagnetic propagation did prove sound though
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar K View Post
    Can sound create light?
    Every time you talk on your cellphone your voice is converted to light (EM radiation).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Origin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar K View Post
    Can sound create light?
    Every time you talk on your cellphone your voice is converted to light (EM radiation).
    Interesting observation - I will need to give that some thought. Would you say that light IS created by your voice then? Or not quite exactly?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar K View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Origin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar K View Post
    Can sound create light?
    Every time you talk on your cellphone your voice is converted to light (EM radiation).
    Interesting observation - I will need to give that some thought. Would you say that light IS created by your voice then? Or not quite exactly?
    Your voice or more accurately the vibrations of the air from your voice are converted to an electrical current which is then converted to EM radiation. You can also use visible light to transport your voice, think fiber optics.

    Sounds, which are just pressure waves in the air, cannot 'turn into' light directly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    That helps, ta.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    So a voice of God-activated event would be a fair interpretation of the verse as opposed to sound causing light. Excellent - progress!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    61
    If you are going to evoke a God why worry about science? The God of the torah created by fiat.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Origin View Post
    If you are going to evoke a God why worry about science?
    Why not? Genesis says x - does science refute it? Was there a Bethlehem? Are graven images bad? Is Genesis (for one) two complete(ish) texts melded into one complete text?

    On the latter the question is more important than the truth in some ways because the lack of enquiry into it says a lot about the nature of Truth. Which is to say that it needs to be convenient to express it. So those who might know the truth will keep it to themselves if not suited to their purpose. The truth is that Brabant tin openers are the most durable you can buy. But I'm not selling them to you so this truth has remained hidden until now.

    What if the Bible wasn't true? What if naysayers found evidence suggesting it was? Bible bashers wrong, naysayers in no better position. Who gains from the truth being told? Here goes: Genesis and following books can be ripped apart into 2 distinct stories, each with almost exactly the same elements. Once seen there's no denying it. Can discuss further if anyone interested. That's bad for believers. But no good for opponents - maybe makes their position worse in my opinion - don't know if it would or not but it would appear risky. Here's why: TWO stories? Each with similar elements? Written by different people at different times in different places? Does that tend to confirm or refute the truth of Biblical claims? 'The Bible' could be proven 'wrong' - but the 'facts' would have more credibility.

    The upshot being that Christians don't want to know the truth and naysayers have nothing to gain and so the truth is not out there. Except in Isaac Asimov's superb book. If you wish to be open minded you only have to question how many of each animal went into the ark. It was two. But it was also seven. God created Adam and Eve, but then he created Eve from Adam's rib. Everything is repeated. It's like the editorial of two newspapers being merged into one

    But nobody cares enough to bother investigating - and why would they? Will you? I know what the Bible is better than most, I think, simply because I know its true nature as far as this particular revelation. Because it is a revelation when you see it. Regardless of belief or not in its content the fact is the format is wonky - but it does make it more 'believable' in my opinion. If I were a fervent anti-theist I'd probably err on the side of pointing it out and destroying any pretense of it being the infallible 'word of God'. If I were a fervent theist I would be disheartened at first but then realize that it actually strengthens my position but can't tell anyone about it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    1,142
    The bible has been studied from many points of view for thousands of years. If you wish to take genesis literally, that is your prerogative. Science does not, so your original question is moot.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by mathman View Post
    The bible has been studied from many points of view for thousands of years. If you wish to take genesis literally, that is your prerogative. Science does not, so your original question is moot.
    "Can sound create light?", was the science-based question. The Genesis view was put there because that's its view. Does the placement of the statement invalidate the scientific enquiry? Imagine the question without the statement - do you detect anything unscientific there? Sometimes it helps to take things literally. but not Genesis, as per my subsequent post.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar K View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mathman View Post
    The bible has been studied from many points of view for thousands of years. If you wish to take genesis literally, that is your prerogative. Science does not, so your original question is moot.
    "Can sound create light?", was the science-based question. The Genesis view was put there because that's its view. Does the placement of the statement invalidate the scientific enquiry? Imagine the question without the statement - do you detect anything unscientific there? Sometimes it helps to take things literally. but not Genesis, as per my subsequent post.
    Sound is a series of compression waves in a medium of some kind (which can be solid, liquid or gas). There is a phenomenon called piezoluminescence, by which certain crystals can give off flashes of light when the crystal structure is distorted by compression.

    I have never heard of sound being converted to light this way, but I can imagine it might be possible under some extreme conditions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    1,142
    Sound can be converted to light (as previously stated) and vice versa. I do it all the time when I am on the phone (Verizon FIOS).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Sound is a series of compression waves in a medium of some kind (which can be solid, liquid or gas). There is a phenomenon called piezoluminescence, by which certain crystals can give off flashes of light when the crystal structure is distorted by compression.

    I have never heard of sound being converted to light this way, but I can imagine it might be possible under some extreme conditions.
    That's a good answer. Ta.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    1,142
    This forum is the Scientific Study of Religion. Sound to light (Genesis version) doesn't appear to have any scientific basis.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    4,708
    That would be a literalist interpretation of the Bible ,even for Creationists,wouldn't it?

    I assume it is because God said "let there be might" that one might deduce that the sound created light.

    Or did I misunderstand?

    When I took that stuff seriously I didn't imagine it was the conversion of sound to light (even if Origin's cell phone example is valid)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    That would be a literalist interpretation of the Bible ,even for Creationists,wouldn't it? I suppose, but that's what it said so I'm looking at it on its own terms as opposed to interpreting it as anything other than what it says. As in "Bob clapped his hands and there was noise" could be interpreted to mean that Bob made the noise by clapping his hands or it could mean something else. I'm saying that one source (The Bible) says X. Now I want to know what the other source (science) says about X. Does S agree that the claim of B is a possibility or not? We had a suggestion or two that might put us on track for further examination of the claim. No point in asking a theist - we know they haven't really thought about it too deeply or formed a coherent or valid view from the evidence and that they wouldn't anyway, whereas some on here have had a crack at it and tried to help me understand the inexplicable.

    I assume it is because God said "let there be might" that one might deduce that the sound created light.

    Or did I misunderstand? As stated above.

    When I took that stuff seriously I didn't imagine it was the conversion of sound to light (even if Origin's cell phone example is valid)
    I never imagined it either but until I read Asimov's book I was unaware of a lot of things about the Bible. But disregarding all of that, and starting from the beginning of any document in which you expect to find substantive information, anything unusual or odd should be questioned right from the start. Yes, it could be breezed past but if I don't know what it means I'm stopping right there to try and figure it out. It's nothing to do with wanting the document to be true or not. I'm just that kind of reader. We all skip complicated technical stuff but if it is so basic - fundamental - and bizarre - I'm not interested in any interpretation (which I don't have here) other than my own unless it's at least coherent. If there appears to be no coherent explanation but nobody questions it - well, they can do that if they want but I'm compelled to question it.

    BUT that's me. I'm into practical law so I'm a letter of the law guy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    1,142
    Trying to put the events in the bible on a scientific basis is a fools errand. For example, the earth did not stop rotating for the battle of Jericho.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by mathman View Post
    ...earth did not stop rotating for the battle of Jericho.
    Haven't got that far yet. Only just got past the flood.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    1,142
    There may be some historical basis for flood story. https://www.ancient-origins.net/huma...evidence-00263
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by mathman View Post
    There may be some historical basis for flood story. https://www.ancient-origins.net/huma...evidence-00263
    Thank you for that. I'd like to be able to say something about the article but it was a bit cursory. Nothing of any real merit although there are a few facts and theories to refer to.

    Looking at amateur archaeologists on field trips the one thing that we can see which might indicate that the ancients may have had knowledge of more advanced tools and construction techniques is the brickwork. Beautifully constructed levels with impossible fitting stones but layered at later dates with increasingly bad building and materials. I find this fascinating and it does suggest some sort of global event or events wiped out much human life in some areas. If I had my life to live again in a different way I could do worse than explore ancient monolithic structures for a living or hobby. May still do it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    1,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar K View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mathman View Post
    There may be some historical basis for flood story. https://www.ancient-origins.net/huma...evidence-00263
    Thank you for that. I'd like to be able to say something about the article but it was a bit cursory. Nothing of any real merit although there are a few facts and theories to refer to.

    Looking at amateur archaeologists on field trips the one thing that we can see which might indicate that the ancients may have had knowledge of more advanced tools and construction techniques is the brickwork. Beautifully constructed levels with impossible fitting stones but layered at later dates with increasingly bad building and materials. I find this fascinating and it does suggest some sort of global event or events wiped out much human life in some areas. If I had my life to live again in a different way I could do worse than explore ancient monolithic structures for a living or hobby. May still do it.
    The theory which (to me) seems more credible refers to a rapid rise to what is now the Black Sea, resulting from the opening of the Bosporus. It definitely was not worldwide. It appears that there were flooding stories among different groups in the area.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Does light amplify sound waves?
    By R.C. Skarnes in forum Physics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 9th, 2013, 01:44 AM
  2. Sound and light therapy
    By gattaca in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 22nd, 2009, 04:34 PM
  3. Light and Sound in a vacuum -
    By Ifyouseekmoney1234567890 in forum Physics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: June 18th, 2009, 10:33 PM
  4. light and sound question
    By ttcfraser in forum Physics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 20th, 2009, 08:05 AM
  5. Speed of Sound & Light?
    By Jason72 in forum Physics
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: January 12th, 2009, 07:44 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •