Light and Matter (Origins)

by dhw, Monday, May 26, 2014, 20:25 (3833 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: As I said before, much of your confusion is a problem of definition. Where do we define the appearance of 'matter' as it arises from pure energy.-Earlier you wrote: "Technically one can call each particle a matter particle; each particle being a tiny bit of matter. The confusion is that one thinks of them as pure energy, and they are pretty close to that." And my question remains: is there such a thing as pure energy? "Pretty close to" does not = pure. As a non-scientist, I fully acknowledge my confusion, but I'm beginning to think that the confusion is not just the result of my ignorance.-DAVID: [...] The article that started this discussion has chosen to define electrons as the beginning of matter. For historical reasons from the smashing of matter, I don't view the electrons running through the wire from my room's wall to my computer as matter, but as pure energy. Commonsensically, my computer is matter running controlled energy. -You may not view electrons as matter, but that doesn't make them pure energy, does it? Here is a dictionary definition of electron: "a very small piece of matter with a negative electrical charge that moves around the nucleus of an atom" (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English). More confusion?
 
DAVID: Again: matter is energy on the 'outside' but really matter is pure energy on the inside. difficult to be interchangeable, but interchangeable all the same.-Dhw (earlier): Do we know of any form of light that does not need a material source? By extension, do we know of any form of energy that does not need a material source? (This is a genuine question, not an argument.) If we do, why is this experiment so important?-So far you have mentioned plasma, photons and electrons as examples of "pure energy", but there is clearly no consensus on any of them. I can only repeat my questions, with special emphasis on the last one: why is this experiment so important?-dhw: All of this has a bearing on the whole concept of your God as "pure energy". Would you describe him as intelligent plasma?
DAVID: Yes, and I don't know how that works.-This is a neat transition to the panpsychism theme, but let me first ask you directly whether, in view of all the above, you yourself do or do not find the so-called interchangeability of energy and matter confusing.