🚀 go-pugleaf

Fellas, Fellas, Fellas, and the occasional Gal.

Lets think about this for a moment.

  Darkness, as oposed to non-darkness, is the absense of that which
produces the non-darkness (ie.. light, brilliance, photons, etc....).  To
define the situation in which it exist is to define a point in space where
no photons exist at a given instance in time.  If all points in space
contain a photon then all points in space are in a state of non-darkness. 
Now, to define a point in space in which no photons exist is to say that
these points are removed from all pathways of all sources which produce an
incedent photon toward these points, or that all times at which a photon is
to arive at any point along any path are removed to define the times that
these points are in darkness.  
  Now consider a photon, the originator of what we define as light, is
quanitized in time and space.  In other words it has temporal and spatial
dimensions.  And consider that these diminsions are localized, or known to
some arbaritary precision.  Unless this precision is know to an infiniate
degree, or known exactly to infinate precision, then there is a region in
which we do not know if the photon exist or does not exist.  No matter how
small this uncertainity is, it is always enough to hamper us from knowing
exactly when a point close to this boundry of what we call the photon is in
the same place as the photon or slightly outside the photons boundry.  But
if we assume that the boundrys are sharp and have an exact edge, both
leading and trailing edge, then we can deduct the nature of the motion of
darkness.  However this IS an assumption...!


someone else can finish this, I am tired and want to sleep....