more than one type of light?


askandanswer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Can anyone suggest what the relationship might be between the stuff that emanates, on the one hand, from my light bulb, and the sun, and a fire, and, on the other hand, the stuff referred to in Doctrine and Covenants 88: 7-13? Are they different forms of the same thing? Are they completely different things that happen to use the same word - light- to describe them? Is the word we use for the stuff coming from my light bulb simply an analogy for the light referred to in the scriptures? Or is there some other answer? We have a guy in our stake with a Ph.D in physics, with a special interest in light, and he is not aware of any LDS or scientific studies that have considered this question, but the scriptures seem to suggest that there is a connection between these two types of light.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Light has a spectrum, of which visible light is only a small portion. Radio waves are also a form of light, and we've figured out ways to piggyback information on a light wave which your stereo then interprets into sound.

 

I mention this to magnify and contrast TFP's opinion. If it is symbolic, you can take it farther than what Joseph (technologically) knew at the time of the revelation. Or it could turn out to be literal, that there are forms of light that carry packets of spirit information. I know of no sources that explore such (except a simple analogy (by Widtsoe maybe?) comparing seerstones and a "sea of glass" to radio technology).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone suggest what the relationship might be between the stuff that emanates, on the one hand, from my light bulb, and the sun, and a fire, and, on the other hand, the stuff referred to in Doctrine and Covenants 88: 7-13? Are they different forms of the same thing? Are they completely different things that happen to use the same word - light- to describe them? Is the word we use for the stuff coming from my light bulb simply an analogy for the light referred to in the scriptures? Or is there some other answer? We have a guy in our stake with a Ph.D in physics, with a special interest in light, and he is not aware of any LDS or scientific studies that have considered this question, but the scriptures seem to suggest that there is a connection between these two types of light.

This scripture has considered the difference; D&C 131; " There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes;"

 

In other words, if impure eyes can see the particular light one is talking about, like the sun or the moon, then that source of light, by definition is not fine matter, it is not spiritual matter.   There is fine matter and there is course matter, two different things that we have not been told the specifics about other than the fact that our bodies, our retinas, our brain cannot discern the fine matter, it is only discerned by pure spiritual sight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This scripture has considered the difference; D&C 131; " 7 There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes;"

 

In other words, if impure eyes can see the particular light one is talking about, like the sun or the moon, then that source of light, by definition is not fine matter, it is not spiritual matter.   There is fine matter and there is course matter, two different things that we have not been told the specifics about other than the fact that our bodies, our retinas, our brain cannot discern the fine matter, it is only discerned by pure spiritual sight.

 

Is light (even visible light) matter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is light (even visible light) matter?

Using theology terms yes.  According to the scirpture, there is no such thing as immaterial matter.

 

There is no fine vs course matter line drawn by the size of the particle, it isnt drawn between atom vs subatomic particles.  I think that is a misconception drawn by using the unfortunate words, "fine" and "course".  Fine and course have nothing to do with size.  It only is used to describe physical vs spiritual or impure vs pure.  It may have been a more exact choice of words to say "impure" matter and "pure" matter.  As far as we know "fine" matter may be a 1000 fold magnitude bigger than "course" matter. I think it is also a misconception to suggest that enough "fine" matter stacked and pushed together would make some quantity of course matter.  If anything it should be the other way around, enough course matter stacked together might make an ounce of fine matter as we are now in a "fallen" or "less than" state.  As far as we know, the two are not on the same scale, one does not produce the other, they exist in their own realm.  Yes they interact when told to interact but they are in their own systems.

 

The only thing that may not be matter is the void that sits outside any measurable extent of the Universe.  But maybe one day we will see there is matter out there as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Light is affected by gravity. I take that to imply it does indeed have a very, very, very, very, very small mass that we are not capable of measuring.

 

To clarify this: Light has no "rest mass", but it does have "relativistic mass". This is very easily calculated from Einstein's famous equation E=mc². Solving for m gives:

 

m = E/c²

 

From here, it's as easy as plugging in numbers and getting your answer. Energy E in a photon is equal to the frequency f times the Planck constant h: E=hf. Substituting for E gives:

 

m = hf/c²

 

If we want to use wavelength λ instead of frequency f, they are inversely proportional: f=c/λ. So,

 

m = (h/c²)(c/λ) = h/λc

 

Plugging in the following numbers:

 

h = 6.62606957 × 10^(-34) m² kg / s

c = 299792458 m / s

λ = around 500 nm = 5 × 10^(-7) m for visible bluish-green light

 

gives the relativistic mass of a single photon:

 

m = h/λc

= [ 6.62606957 × 10^(-34) m² kg / s ] / [ (5 × 10^(-7) m) (299792458 m / s) ]

= 4.4204378e × 10^(-40) kg

 

So there you have it. The (relativistic) mass of a single photon is on the order of 5 × 10^(-40) kg.

 

For comparison, the mass of an electron, one of the tiniest pieces of matter known, is about 9.11 × 10^(-31) kg, or almost two hundred million times larger. Moral: Light doesn't "weigh" very much.

 

[EDIT: Had to correct my math, because 500 nm = 5 × 10^(-7) m, not 5 × 10^(-5) m. I always get tripped up by stupid little things like that. My wife still laughs at me for a class I took 25 years ago in electromagnetism, where I had some huge hairy awful triple integral that I couldn't solve correctly even after hours of work, and she glanced at it and said, "Wait, isn't eight times nine seventy-two?" Maybe that's why I'm a writer now...)

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, you are the first person who has made me understand how a particle said to be massless could have mass. (are we derailing this?)

 

Seems on topic to me. :)

 

But a bit strange.

 

When we receive light from the Holy Ghost, we literally have some material -- with mass as suggested by SemSnooz and proven by Vort -- put into our bodies.

 

I suppose it's possible...

 

:huh:  :hmmm:  :dontknow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I know of no sources that explore such (except a simple analogy (by Widtsoe maybe?) comparing seerstones and a "sea of glass" to radio technology).

 

I think a computer chip is a much better analogy than radio technology, and I think there is reason to speculate that it might be more of a description than an analogy. The world will ultimately become a giant seer stone in its celestialised state,  D&C refers to the world in its celestialised condition as a sea of glass and fire. Silicon, from which glass is made, and fire, in the form of electricity, are the two main ingredients of a computer chip.

Edited by askandanswer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a computer chip is a much better analogy than radio technology, and I think there is reason to speculate that it might be more of a description than an analogy. The world will ultimately become a giant seer stone in its celestialised state,  D&C refers to the world in its celestialised condition as a sea of glass and fire. Silicon, from which glass is made, and fire, in the form of electricity, are the two main ingredients of a computer chip.

 

Whereas I think both analogies are like comparing a water pump of some sort to whatever method God used to part the Red Sea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone suggest what the relationship might be between the stuff that emanates, on the one hand, from my light bulb, and the sun, and a fire, and, on the other hand, the stuff referred to in Doctrine and Covenants 88: 7-13? Are they different forms of the same thing? Are they completely different things that happen to use the same word - light- to describe them? Is the word we use for the stuff coming from my light bulb simply an analogy for the light referred to in the scriptures? Or is there some other answer? We have a guy in our stake with a Ph.D in physics, with a special interest in light, and he is not aware of any LDS or scientific studies that have considered this question, but the scriptures seem to suggest that there is a connection between these two types of light.

Parley P. Pratt suggested a connection in his book The Science of Theology. He said:

 

The purest, most refined and subtle of all these substances, and the one least understood, or even recognized, by the less informed among mankind, is that substance called the Holy Spirit.

This substance, like all others, is one of the elements of material or physical existence, and therefore subject to the necessary laws which govern all matter, as before enumerated. Like the other elements, its whole is composed of individual particles. Like them, each particle occupies space, possesses the power of motion, requires time to move from one part of space to another, and can in no wise occupy two spaces at once. In all these respects it differs nothing from all other matter.

 

This substance is widely diffused among the elements of space. This Holy Spirit, under the control of the Great Eloheim, is the grand moving cause of all intelligences, and by which they act. Those beings who receive of its fulness are called sons of God, because they are perfected in all its attributes and powers, and being in communication with it, can, by its use, perform all things.

Those beings who receive not a fulness, but a measure of it, can know and perform some things, but not all.

 

This is the true light, which in some measure illuminates all men. It is, in its less refined particles, the physical light which reflects from the sun, moon, and stars, and other substances; and by reflection on the eye, makes visible the truths of the outward world. It is, also, in its higher degrees, the intellectual light of our inward and spiritual organs, by which we reason, discern, judge, compare, comprehend and remember the subjects within our reach.

 

Its inspiration constitutes instinct in animal life, reason in man, vision in the Prophets, and is continually flowing from the Godhead throughout all His creatures.Such is the Godhead, as manifested in His words, and in His works. He dwells in His own eternal palaces of precious stones and gold, in the Royal City of the heavenly Jerusalem.He sits enthroned in the midst of all His creations, and is filled and encircled with light unapproachable by those of the lower spheres. (see http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/35470/pg35470.html Ch V)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone suggest what the relationship might be between the stuff that emanates, on the one hand, from my light bulb, and the sun, and a fire, and, on the other hand, the stuff referred to in Doctrine and Covenants 88: 7-13? Are they different forms of the same thing? Are they completely different things that happen to use the same word - light- to describe them? Is the word we use for the stuff coming from my light bulb simply an analogy for the light referred to in the scriptures? Or is there some other answer? We have a guy in our stake with a Ph.D in physics, with a special interest in light, and he is not aware of any LDS or scientific studies that have considered this question, but the scriptures seem to suggest that there is a connection between these two types of light.

 

It seems obvious to me that light in scripture is symbolic of divine intelligence.  In Genesis the first step of creation is the bringing of light - but it is the second step that is suggests that the light spoken of is symbolic.  The second step is to separate the light from the darkness.  Physical light does not require an additional step to dispel darkness.   If we submit that the scriptural "beginning" is a Chiasm that connects to the final judgment then the symbolism of light to divine intelligence can be used to better understand covenants and why there is one true and living G-d associated with light symbolizing divine blessings and darkness associated with evil and the disadvantages or curse of evil.  Symbolic use in scripture to help man understand divine principles is quite common.  For example Christ claimed that "living water" or a fountain of eternal youth flows as water from him as a spring.  When Jesus made that statement, it was in the temple grounds during the libation festival celebrating the ancient water source of Jerusalem - obviously the basis of his remarks were symbolic - as was a great deal of his sacred teachings.

Edited by Traveler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scriptures could be referring to literal light or figurative light(Light illuminates and makes plain, banishing shadows. Dark is simply the absence of light. You cannot force darkness in to a lit room).

But light, as a literal thing, is a strange and peculiar item.

If you have two cars travelling at 20 miles per hour towards one another, they are moving 40 miles per house relative to one another. If two beams of light are travelling towards one another, they are moving the speed of light relative to each other. Not 2* the speed of light. If someone is watching light and expecting it to behave as a particle, it behaves as a particle. If they are watching light and expect it to behave as a wave, it behaves as a wave.

So it could be literal or figurative. Either way, as long as you're getting the lesson's point, I'm sure God is happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These verses do not seem to be overly symbolic to me. They seem to be saying that truth shines and that this truth is the light of Christ, and that it is this light which shines from the sun and the moon and the stars, and which (verse 11) also gives us knowledge. 

 

 Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made.

 As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made;

 As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made;

 10 And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand.

 11 And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings;

 12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fillthe immensity of space—

 13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the powerof God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.

Verse 11 really seems to suggest to me that there is one kind of light with two characteristics, or properties, one of which is to shine, and the other of which is to quicken our understanding. Parley P Pratt seems to have come to the same conclusion, when he stated, (with thanks and acknowledgement to James 12) that 

It is, in its less refined particles, the physical light which reflects from the sun, moon, and stars, and other substances; and by reflection on the eye, makes visible the truths of the outward world. It is, also, in its higher degrees, the intellectual light of our inward and spiritual organs, by which we reason, discern, judge, compare, comprehend and remember the subjects within our reach.

This makes me wonder whether there is any connection between the dual wave/particle nature of light, and the dual impure/pure, or refined/coarse matter nature of light.

I also think that it might not be a coincidence that so much truth and knowledge, and yes, a lot of lies and filth, is conveyed rapidly around the world by means of light, travelling along fiber optic cables. This is a successful man-made attempt at conveying truth through light. Perhaps this can be regarded as a very early and primitive prototype of what God does, or if that is to much to say, perhaps we could say that the conveying of truth through the means of light at least has some similarities to what God does. This idea fits well with another idea that I like to ponder about, and that is, that as the second coming gradually gets closer, and as we gradually prepare, and are gradually prepared for, our eternal life, that many of the things of this earth, will gradually come to resemble what will come after the life and place in which we will live after this life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is symbolic. The light we receive from God allows us to see and understand gospel truths. Turning on a light bulb does not.

Try reading the scriptures in the dark, and then see what happens when you turn the light on. Does it not increase your ability to see gospel truths?  :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try reading the scriptures in the dark, and then see what happens when you turn the light on. Does it not increase your ability to see gospel truths?  :P 

I have spent many nights in the dark, on my knees, praying and have been touched by the Holy Ghost answering my prayers while in the dark.  I am sure many have had similar experiences.  It is simply symbolic.

 

It says in the verses you gave that it is symbolic of the "power thereof by which it is made".  This includes the power by which the Earth was made which does not emit much light.  Our eyes also do not emit light. 

 

Try turning off the lights and see how much light you emit.  You were given light (according to those verses), so if that is the type of light you were given then you should be emiting that type of light in the dark.

 

Obviously this is symbolic.  And yet the "light", that type of knowledge and power, was used to make the sun that now gives off radiating light detected by cells in the retina.

 

[Emit = produce ... not just reflect]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try reading the scriptures in the dark, and then see what happens when you turn the light on. Does it not increase your ability to see gospel truths?  :P 

 

Since half my scripture reading is listening to audio recordings...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Abraham we are given understanding that intelligence is the light of truth.  Hmmmmmmm can someone be in the dark and exercise intelligence? Perhaps?????  Can darkness exist where there is light?  In a way there can be both light and darkness.  I have experienced darkness dispute the fact that infrared light was abundantly present - and then, having put on infrared goggles been overcome by the presents of light.

 

We can be in the dark while surrounded by light - both physically and spiritually.  As the saying goes - there are none so blind as those that will not see.  Is there a difference between spiritual and physical light - no there is not -------- and yes there is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Abraham we are given understanding that intelligence is the light of truth.  Hmmmmmmm can someone be in the dark and exercise intelligence? Perhaps?????  Can darkness exist where there is light?  In a way there can be both light and darkness.  I have experienced darkness dispute the fact that infrared light was abundantly present - and then, having put on infrared goggles been overcome by the presents of light.

 

We can be in the dark while surrounded by light - both physically and spiritually.  As the saying goes - there are none so blind as those that will not see.  Is there a difference between spiritual and physical light - no there is not -------- and yes there is.

The goggles converted infrared light into visible light.  So goes back to original post asking about differences between what is emenating (key word) from light bulbs vs the light of intelligence type light.

 

An interesting side question would be, is there intelligence type light that does not emit (i.e - placed under a bushel)?   The metaphor might have to do more with the characteristics of light emmision and giving light to other things as opposed to just light itself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Christ was born a new light appeared. When he died, there was great darkness. When Joseph Smith first tried to pray in the Sacred Grove he was surrounded by darkness. This light and darkness was seen and testified of by many. This suggests that in these instances, the light and darkness was physical, not spiritual. These events would seem to weaken the arguments that the light associated with godliness and the darkness associated with evil is symbolic and this may have implications for the argument that there are two types of light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Christ was born a new light appeared. When he died, there was great darkness. When Joseph Smith first tried to pray in the Sacred Grove he was surrounded by darkness. This light and darkness was seen and testified of by many. This suggests that in these instances, the light and darkness was physical, not spiritual. These events would seem to weaken the arguments that the light associated with godliness and the darkness associated with evil is symbolic and this may have implications for the argument that there are two types of light.

Symbolic associations are just that.  They are there to help us understand things at a different level.  When we talk about a "burning in the boosom" or change of heart, for example, we are not actually talking about our chest or heart.  If someone receives an artificial heart, have they had a change of heart?   Have they lost all their desires?  Is the person now a different person?  In a literal sense, the only thing that we know changes personality are changes to the brain.  Emotional responses, desires, reactions to environment are all funnled through the brain, not the heart.  So, is a person wrong in saying that they have had a 'change in heart' when what they are talking about really is a spiritual change or a change in their level of righteousness when a "change in their executive funtioning in the brain" might be a more exact physiologic representation of the spiritual event?  No, it isn't wrong because we know we are using symbolic terms.  When we eat the bread of the sacrament are we eating actual flesh? Do we need to spill actual blood to repent? Confusion arises when we lose the abstract meaning of the phrase and think of it as purely concrete.

 

If one takes all things in the scriptures as literal associations then one should do that across the board and not pick and choose which ones are literal and which ones are not.  I would say most things in the scriptures and in particular the Bible are representations of the actual.  The Book of Mormon and the D&C are slightly more simple and plain in their presentation and then modern prophets and apostles help us understand better what is literal vs symbolic. 

 

Jesus spoke in parables to confound those that did not have spiritual insight and to enlighten those that had spiritual insight.  Spiritual insight requires an abstract understanding of the physical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scriptural references to light are perfect, because of the powerful symbols this usage creates with remarkable accuracy (e.g. sun at the center of the universe, warmth and energy, light provides all life, reveals truth, moves away darkness etc.).

 

However, spiritual light is a real thing also, and with the proper tools, you could measure it.  Spiritually we feel it, we also can see it (with spiritual eyes and spiritual gift abilities).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share