Reply to comment on viXra concerning Moon analysis-
I do not say I'm presenting a scientific analysis. I'm looking at the logic and semantics of the question.
I do not assert the Moon is only an image in the space-time thus electromagnetic radiation. You are putting your own confusion 'into my mouth.' You are muddling categories. What, 'the Moon " refers to isn't specified by the question which is a problem for answering the question correctly . That is what Einstein didn't do, though he was close in posing the question.
Abraham Pais said "We often discussed his notions on objective reality. I recall that during one walk Einstein suddenly stopped, turned to me and asked whether I really believed that the moon exists only when I look at it." Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 863-914 (1979), p. 907 .Like the Schrodinger's cat paradox calling attention to the lack of pre measurement objective state,he uses the Moon for the purpose. This is about objective local realism too.
'the' Moon' can mean; the observer independent existing material object, the seen observation product , experienced as existing externally but generated by internal brain activity which produces virtual spacetime, the concept and the visualization of the moon by brain activity we call imagination. Though not usually referred to we can also mention the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the material body but not yet received by an observer. That is what I refer to as potential sensory data ,signals (or potential sensory information .)
The observation product called 'the Moon' only, isn't generated by the observer when not looking or eyes are closed or blindfolded etc. There is still the existing observer independent moon, the potential sensory data in the environment, the concept of Moon held in imagination stored in memory and other records.
I am providing evidence of object permanence. The illusions and child psychology also relate to object permanence. That is about existing unmeasured and unobserved i.e. Observer independent existence.I do not say I'm presenting a scientific analysis. I'm looking at the logic and semantics of the question.
I do not assert the Moon is only an image in the space-time thus electromagnetic radiation. You are putting your own confusion 'into my mouth.' You are muddling categories. What, 'the Moon " refers to isn't specified by the question which is a problem for answering the question correctly . That is what Einstein didn't do, though he was close in posing the question.
Abraham Pais said "We often discussed his notions on objective reality. I recall that during one walk Einstein suddenly stopped, turned to me and asked whether I really believed that the moon exists only when I look at it." Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 863-914 (1979), p. 907 .Like the Schrodinger's cat paradox calling attention to the lack of pre measurement objective state,he uses the Moon for the purpose. This is about objective local realism too.
'the' Moon' can mean; the observer independent existing material object, the seen observation product , experienced as existing externally but generated by internal brain activity which produces virtual spacetime, the concept and the visualization of the moon by brain activity we call imagination. Though not usually referred to we can also mention the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the material body but not yet received by an observer. That is what I refer to as potential sensory data ,signals (or potential sensory information .)
The observation product called 'the Moon' only, isn't generated by the observer when not looking or eyes are closed or blindfolded etc. There is still the existing observer independent moon, the potential sensory data in the environment, the concept of Moon held in imagination stored in memory and other records.
I am providing evidence of object permanence. The illusions and child psychology also relate to object permanence. That is about existing unmeasured and unobserved i.e. Observer independent existence.