Exactly. I think people forget that the way the other interpret what you say is very important. Even if you are 100% correct, your wording can lead others to think something that is completely wrong. People aren't robots absorbing all information as it is, they interpret and change that information to align with preconceived notions and to make it easy to digest, and this can lead to misunderstanding.
The explanation is also problematic because this "absorption and emission" happens instantaneously, it doesn't absorb some energy, wait for a while, and release the energy. The release isn't isotropic either.
At the end of the day, it might be technically correct to say it is an absorption and re-emission, but it does more harm than good and doesn't really help clarify what is happening.
back_seat_dog t1_j8itvdf wrote
Reply to comment by MasterPatricko in Light traveling through a medium that slows it. Does the same photon emerge? by TheGandPTurtle
Exactly. I think people forget that the way the other interpret what you say is very important. Even if you are 100% correct, your wording can lead others to think something that is completely wrong. People aren't robots absorbing all information as it is, they interpret and change that information to align with preconceived notions and to make it easy to digest, and this can lead to misunderstanding.
The explanation is also problematic because this "absorption and emission" happens instantaneously, it doesn't absorb some energy, wait for a while, and release the energy. The release isn't isotropic either.
At the end of the day, it might be technically correct to say it is an absorption and re-emission, but it does more harm than good and doesn't really help clarify what is happening.