| > It didn't say there was no way to channel the information about the surroundings into any photosensitive device. No it specifically said >"This is why you can’t see things in dark; no light means...". Not sure how to make the distinction any simpler, maybe you can follow: If there is no light, then it is dark (true) - thats what you claim is being said, but thats not what is said, what is said is If it is dark, then there is no light (false) - any time you have been in the dark, there has always been light. >Probably much like looking at a solid object embedded in colored but not opaque glass. The ability to see things inside other visible things is not foreign to the visible light spectrum. Sure the non-imaginative approach is to say just superimpose 3 images on top of one another with each image having some transparency. And sure that may make sense for objects like bone inside the persons outer skin...but emitted heat is not a solid object inside another solid object, it neither embedded in the object (its emitted) nor solid. |
'light' means either electromagnetic radiation or visible light, depending on context.
In this context, it means visible light. I'm not sure what you get out of pretending otherwise.