>>13988525>A wave of water in pudding?A wave in pudding.
>Waves of what?Already answered, schizo.
>>says the person who can't tell the difference between a verb and a noun and when defined as a noun still elaborates that it's idiomaticWhere did I become confused? Every instance of the word "wave" I have used in this thread is as a noun. Another schizo hallucination that doesn't even explain why you falsely claimed I said light is pudding.
>You said yes "a wave".No, I said "of anything." Thanks for confirming your illiteracy.
>And when I splash my hand in pudding, my hand emits pudding right?I don't what you mean by your hand emitting pudding. Your hand is displacing pudding.
>I can't argue over an unknownIt's not unknown, I already answered the question. It's only unacknowledged, by you.
>A wave IS a behavior.A wave of WHAT? You're not making any sense.
>It obviously isn't a thingMore pointless semantics. What is the difference between the behavior of waves and waves as a behavior? You're not even arguing against anything I said, just whining about how I phrase it. LOL.
>From the person who just said "yes" when asked if light was pudding.Where did I do that you fucking schizo? More pathetic hallucinations. Take your meds.
>So what is the medium of light if it "waves"?Why would light have a medium? It's not a wave. And I don't know what you mean when you say light "waves." If you mean light shares some behaviour with waves then you need to prove that behavior necessitates a medium. You're still arguing as if I ever said light is a wave when I told you it's not from the beginning. Why can't you learn how to read?
>I am asking you specifically what light waves are made of.I don't know what you mean by "light wave" since light is not strictly a wave, but electromagnetic radiation consists of oscillations in electric and magnetic fields.
>You don't have "the dog" in this analogy.The dog I this analogy is light. Illiterate retard.
