I understand the principle of noise cancelation... and yes the right phase is 180 not 90, I was confounding the invertion of signal of sine/cosine function to the phase between them... in fact cosine graph is the same than sine graph with 90 degrees phase... so cosine plus 90 phase would negate a sine the sames as a sine 180 phase would negate a sine. But even so sine 180 isn't the opposite of sine (or -sine isn't opposite of sine) in concept, they just goes to the final result you contemplate.

Is dark the opposite of light??? Nope it's the same as in temperature, a scale of luminance. And even so a "complete black" cavity still radiate when it's hot. So again there is no proof of inteligent creator just because some things have perfect opposites. Much of what we think are opposites aren't discrete entities but just two poles of one scale.

Not all humans believe they are above animals or even more inteligent... And even though animals can't write or talk to us so we wouldn't see their thoughs they use very complex mathematical constructs by instinct. Do you think you as a very bright human could fly by yourself or using a plane without studying it? And even flying do you make all the calculations or is the aircraft already prepared to do it??? Birds do all of that all the time while flying.

"Is dark the opposite of light??? Nope it's the same as in temperature, a scale of luminance. "

i will concede that you are right here i was wrong here also

however the fact that light shows characteristics of both particles and waves means that it does have an opposite that can negate it since that holds true for both waves and particles

" Much of what we think are opposites aren't discrete entities but just two poles of one scale."

i didn't say at any time that they were discrete from the beginning i said that there is a scale between the two so it appears like you are agreeing with me

"Not all humans believe they are above animals or even more inteligent"

true but i'm talking about generalised ideaas that most people hold

"And even though animals can't write or talk to us so we wouldn't see their thoughs they use very complex mathematical constructs by instinct. Do you think you as a very bright human could fly by yourself or using a plane without studying it?"

again true but the difference between us and them is that we have a far higher capacity to learn and conceptualise outside of our base instincts 

most people could fly an aeroplane if they dedicated enough time to it and were taught... the same does not apply to any other animal

Care to show what anulates or negates light?

For two things to be opposite just because they are poles isn't opposition. If you "sum" the hottest and the "coolest" the lightier and darkest, etc you wouldn't end with 0. The people without knowledge or in simple conversation simplify them to opposites by comparison not that they really are. Even if we just had two temperatures one would be hot and the other would be cold, that still wouldn't make them opposite unless they were the poles on the scale.

On the animals, yes most think they are inferior because they lack critical thinking or other forms of racionality.

On the learning, that is evolution. No being knew how to have more than one cell at the beggining, or how to swim, walk, fly. It was learnt through milleniums. But I conced no know specie outside humans are capable of the same learning (although some apes can learn some complex things and some animals can learn tricks).

"Care to show what anulates or negates light?"

i just explained it all waves and particles can be negated, since light consists of paticles moving in a wave like fashion they can be negated... otherwise our theories on particles and waves are rubbish

" If you "sum" the hottest and the "coolest"

actually no thats false if you dump ice into boiling water depending on if you matched the temperatures correctly you could achieve equilibrium ( on our temperature scales ) between the two

" the lightier and darkest"

i already conceded that i was incorrect here and explained that light due to its wave paticle duality must have a negation

"Even if we just had two temperatures one would be hot and the other would be cold, that still wouldn't make them opposite unless they were the poles on the scale."

well the fact that they cancel each other pretty much makes them opposites to me

"No being knew how to have more than one cell at the beggining, or how to swim, walk, fly. It was learnt through milleniums."

fair enough how did the cells learn though? you seem to be implying that cells have consciousness