invisible light

A thought recurred this night as I struggled unsuccessfully to image

the Nashville skyline (with its capitol building upper right) from the

Jefferson street bridge as it vibrated with traffic – even light is

invisible until it touches some thing or somebody. Comments and

critique welcome

Chris,

Thanks.  This image surprised me. I was so frustrated with my inability to get a sharp image, I almost overlooked what the light revealed.

Nice shot.  When I think Nashville I always scan the skyline looking for the "Batman" building ;-)... Mike

Mike,

Thanks.  I intentionally cut-out the Batman building.

The smatterings of light against the night provide interesting contrast.  And your title raises a philosophical issue.  (Let me know if you're interested enough for me to mention it.)

Michael,

Many thanks.  Yes, most interested. You have used light in most ingenious ways in your work.

Wayne,

  Wonderful night scene with beautiful lighting & I love the left hand corner, it adds mystery to the scene .  Take care, Patsy

Patsy,

Thanks.  The left corner surprised me.

You asked for it.  I must apologize though, since it's been a very long time since I dabbled in this stuff.  Hopefully what I'm going to say will make a little bit of sense.

There's a family of issues in the philosophy of language concerning meaning and reference.  If we examine the term "invisible light," it appears to involve a paradox.  One way to resolve the paradox is to argue that meaning and reference do not always have to do with a person's actual use of language.  One philosopher who comes to mind tells us that we must understand "I promise . . . " as a promise to engage in a certain course of action; it does not make a statement that is either true or false.

A much simpler way to say all of this is that you obviously intended the title to be understood figuratively rather than literally.

Great discussion, Michael.  But I think I mean it literally.  If we were beside a beam of laser light (for example) we would not see it unless there were dust particles (for example) for it to touch.  But I confess I like saying in a poetic way and seemly figurative way.

Thanks for your quite charitable reply.  I must admit that I had something else in mind, dealing with an issue in philosophy of science.  But as soon as I started I hit a brick wall.  What I actually wrote was mostly bs; I should have stuck with the last sentence only.  It serves me right to think that I can jump back into this stuff since my last teaching experience in 1980.

My best,

michael

Very good.  When I try these shots, I try to get them a bit earlier and not long after the sun sets. Of course, that might not have been feasible here.  All the very best,

Michael,

I think you explained very well.  I just have this personal perception about light not supported by any knowledge of physics but understood in a zen like way.

Tony,

Thanks.  Your point is well taken.  This is quite a challenge balancing extremes of light.