Wrong type of Light.

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_interzone.ucc.ie>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 06:38:12 GMT

Phil "Don't need no steekin' attributions" Hibbs, quotes me:
> >Having Celestial Light be quantatively, provably
> >different from any other sort -- including reflected
> >Celestial Light, presumably, seems yet more
> >goofiness in an already goof-rich theory.

> How can celestial light possibly be exactly the same as solar light?
> They are from a different source, there *must* be differences.

Solar light _is_ celestial light, at least as I was using the term, and as I think Nick was using the term in the given context. And as I think Sainted Greg (may his cockles be forever warm!) uses it, hence "Celestiology", rather than "astrology".

Anyhoo, what quantative, provable differences would you suggest between starlight (say) and solar light?

The original question, though, was (solar|moon|planetary|stellar) light

• allegedly non-bendy, and mundane light -- allegedly quite notoriously bendy. Note that "mundane" light would include not just the light reflected from your friendly neighbourhood Gloranthan, but also, say, torchlight, or from a Lune, or from a helioscope...

Lightly,
Alex.

---