After reading the article "Does Light Exist Between Events?" by Jim Walker at http://members.icanect.net/~zardoz/light.htm, it dawned on me that Gadfly and I are saying the same thing.
Here in a nut shell is what Jim Walker had to say. The existence of material substance cannot be denied. The existence of light cannot be proven, however, the effects on substance which give the appearance of the behavior of light do occur. Light is, therefore, the perception of behavioral transformations of substance.
This is equivalent to the first versus of Genesis, as follows.
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Walker accepts material existence, thus, he would not have difficulty accepting the existence of earth. In Walker's universe, the genesis of light was not described, however, we can assume from the way he presented his concepts that light did not generate from nothing. What he describes is the spatial interaction of substance which obeys models for the behavior of light. These models do not prove the existence of light. They describe the behavior of light
Here is a comment by Walker:
Again, I cannot answer these questions, but I can create concept models just as workable as those who believe in the existence of light as a discrete particles. No one has yet proved that light can gravitate, regardless of how many descriptions say that it does. Beliefs, regardless of how many believers, do not equal proofs.
What Walker is describing is the quandary of light as it interacts with substance. In his opinion, and probably a correct opinion, light is dependent upon the perception of beliefs. Thus, I would propose that the first verse in Genesis supports Walker's belief interaction system. In other words, the existence of heaven is dependent upon belief. That would help explain all the different models for getting to heaven, just like science has many models for predicting the behavior of light.
This brings us to the next verse in Genesis.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
This statement implies the same perception model postulated by Walker. Until the void is transcended and the earth is given form to remove it from darkness, there is only the spirit of a Creator and thus a Creator's heaven which holds the spirit. It is incorporeal and immaterial, but is it significant?
About spirit, Walker cannot make a commitment any more than he can make a
commitment to the existence of light..
But even in a virtual sense, the squiggly line imparts the idea of something with frequency traveling in space from point 6 to point 5. Of course no one has ever seen these photons; they exist virtually. So do spirits, I hear tell.
This brings us to the moment of enlightenment.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
This statement does not describe light, it describes the expression of light as coming from the voice (or any communication medium for which the idea "said" can apply) of the Creator. Genesis leaves light from the voice of God in the same state as Walker leaves light.
However, the God of Genesis adds some detail to the nature of light which
helps to establish its purpose.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
In this form, light is the essence of enlightenment of a communication for its own sake. It causes day, which is another word for light. The communication is within the Creator's expression and what effect the communiation will have on the earth and the Creator's heaven. As we said before, earth is accepted as substance. In light of the meaning of Day/Night and morning/evening as it was perceived by the Creator in Genesis, light is that which discriminates. This is in perfect agreement with Walker. Light discriminates the behavior of substance.
Here are some pertinent remarks on beliefs expressed by Walker.
Unfortunately, Albert Einstein could not accept quantum randomness either and his intransigent beliefs outlined his barrier to further understanding. Along with his fame and influence, so also went his classical reality descriptions of light .
Unfortunately, physicists, as all human beings, can fall prey to beliefs and faiths.
Most physicists do not concern themselves with the epistemological questions of science. And as J. C. Polkinghorne put it, "Your average quantum mechanic is about as philosophically minded as your average mechanic." (Polkinghorne, 1984). In the language of quantum mathematics, the paradoxes do not appear. Physicists aim for useful reliable predictions, and if their physics does not agree with common sense, then it doesn't matter. But in ignoring the consequences of describing physical events in an inaccurate way, it can lead the lay person and, indeed, other scientists, to wrong conclusions. Who can calculate how many research dollars and wasted time came about because of false beliefs?
These comments clearly indicate that Walker could distinguish the "living" form the "non-living." For by his expressions, he is saying that identity and action are functions of belief. He personally does not desire to take the step of faith which is an expression of belief. However, he cannot avoid making a statement regarding the fact that he has difficulty crossing the bridge between substance and truth. Thus, he can be identified as an individual whose belief is non-belief i.e. a "free thinker." This is not just a matter of semantics. On the contrary, it is the fundamental gateways of gods and men. Until a person crosses through the gateway of the gods, they have an identity which must decrease relative to substance. Substance is the bottom line in Walker's this type of perception. The decrease in identity corresponds to the loss of entropy in the material universe. If Walker could make the leap of faith and declare himself to be all substance, then that identity must follow the laws of substance into oblivion, or perdition, whichever you prefer. As long as the identity is substance, there can be nothing beyond substance.
In Ancient Egypt there are several great temples which are designed in such a way that they express Walker's dilemma. One of the most famous if the Temple at Luxor. At its entrance the temple has an avenue of Ram headed sphinxes. I would propose that some understanding of this construction could be gained if we use the motto for the ram constellation Aries. Throughout the ages, Aries has been identified with the expression I Am. This is Walker's position with regard to himself and the substance of the Cosmic Earth. The avenue of the I Am leads to a Great Wall of the Ruler. His own words for Einstien were "his intransigent beliefs outlined his barrier to further understanding." In order to get through the wall, one can take the body beyond its ramparts. But that will not change the body nor the identity. If the individual crosses through the wall and also declares I Believe, then a transubstantiation occurs, e.g. Einstien becomes a quantum mechanic. This transubstantiation was denied for fellow scientists in Walker's words; "Beliefs, regardless of how many believers, do not equal proofs." Psycho-spiritually this shows that Walker could not pass through the Avenue of Aries because of the barrier of Pisces His I Am was stopped by the denial of I Believe.
Pisces has the motto name, "I Believe." There are two fish in Pisces. The line to the east fish stands perpendicular to the ecliptic between Aries and the middle of Pisces. Using the precessional direction in which Aries is headed, this line represents a wall to ego perception. At Luxor, this is the Wall of the Ruler. The rational consciousness cannot proceed into the temple with out giving up its hold on its own identity. This fish can be identified with a negative belief complex. We could give it the name "I Doubt" to carry its spirit. In the process of life, doubt is just the spirit of negative belief. It is not more or less rational than positive belief.
Once the Wall of the Ruler is crossed by a non-rational consciousness, new meaning can be received by the individual. This requires that the individual take the "leap of faith" and commit to a new belief. The second fish can be appropriately named "I Believe." This so called "I Believe" fish is located above the ecliptic directly in line with the Great Square, which is a "window of appearances." This name was used by Akhenaten in the destroyed palaces and temples at Akhetaten (El Amarna, Egypt). You do not have to believe that these meanings are "real" to communicate with them. All you have to believe is that some unknowable essence, call it "That I Am," has said that these meanings apply. If we accept this process, and then follow the "That I Am" through the rest of Pisces, we arrive at the constellation Aquarius. This constellation has the motto name "I Know." Thus, this analogy of the Temple at Luxor agrees with the constellations symbolized by its construction. The messages written inside the great temple all say, as it is above, so it is below.
The point of Walker's article, and this analysis of it, is that light, whether electromagnetic particle, wave, wavicle, or enlightened hypothesis, does not reveal anything until something is believed. When belief is absent of doubt, the meaning becomes knowledge. Knowledge may be material truth, but it is not so obligated to be, unless the believer chooses. If the choice is not consistent, the believer falls into oblivion, for the firmament is not estabished. If the choice is consistent, then that is when the light is turned on for others to test the belief. It does not mean the light is real or that the meaning is truth, it is just a process of communication. Belief is a choice that can make or break communication.
As a person who has crossed the wall of Scientific Creationism, I cannot prove truth any more than science can prove the existence of light. But, should you ever decide to go walking in the formless dark void, remember that in nearly all cases some "That I Am" has gone through the wall before you. In the words of Tom Bodet in the Motel 6 advertisements just common on over, "We'll leave the light on for you."