Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,683   Posts: 1,669,366   Online: 732
      
Page 28 of 31 FirstFirst ... 1822232425262728293031 LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 301
  1. #271

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    Sorry, I should have been pedantically precise in my language. [...]
    If you think it's about language, the optics 1.0.1. explanation i snipped away would be rather empty and redundant.


    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    As to the first part - so photons don't have colors. They have energies, and color is how the detector 'interprets' that energy.
    How many times do you want to have that repeated? How many times do you want to repeat that yourself?

    Photons also have wavelengths (well... they don't. Waves have wavelengths), and colour is how the detector 'interprets' that wavelength.

    Photons also have [etc.]

  2. #272
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    24,527
    Images
    65
    Actually, a film exposed to pure sodium vapor lamp light sees a stream of photons with the energy level that causes the appearance of "yellow" light with a frequency of 600 nm (Red + Green). These photons excite two layers of a color film, the Red and Green layers, thus producing a "Yellow" record which is minus Blue. If anyone has another opinion, they can post it in detail. I have given the two applicable references, the Sodium vapor wavelength and the Kodak film sensitivity curves.

    I await another explanation that that stream of 600 nm photons.

    PE

  3. #273

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Actually, a film exposed to pure sodium vapor lamp light sees a stream of photons with the energy level that causes the appearance of "yellow" light with a frequency of 600 nm (Red + Green). These photons excite two layers of a color film, the Red and Green layers, thus producing a "Yellow" record which is minus Blue. If anyone has another opinion, they can post it in detail. I have given the two applicable references, the Sodium vapor wavelength and the Kodak film sensitivity curves.

    I await another explanation that that stream of 600 nm photons.
    Why, you have already given one!


    You also revert to a multi-emulsion, filtered colour film to explain why an emulsion can respond to yellow light.

    And still that really nonsensical idea that 600 nm is "(Red + Green)"...
    Here is the light produced by a sodium lamp.

    Where is that red and green?

    It must be clear to you too, PE, that this tri-colour talk is all good and well, in a tri-colour context. And that your continued insistance on using it all the time is, plain and simple, wrong.
    If not, i believe you will never see the light.

    So back to Big Yellow as far as i'm concerned.

  4. #274

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,787
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Rogers View Post
    Can a wavelengh have more than one energy level?
    I'm not exactly sure what you mean by 'energy level' in this context. If you mean a photon's energy, then no. A photon with a given wavelength has a given energy and vice versa. And a photon with a given wavelength has a given frequency and vice versa.

    If you don't mean that, you'll have to clarify it.

    And veering incredibly far off course (from news about Kodak to quantum mechanics, wow!), to say that photons don't have wavelengths isn't quite correct. I'm tapping out on that though. If someone wants to know more about quantum mechanics and wave-particle duality, let me know. I feel QG doesn't particularly care about it though, so it's not worth my time.

  5. #275

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    [...] And veering incredibly far off course (from news about Kodak to quantum mechanics, wow!), to say that photons don't have wavelengths isn't quite correct. I'm tapping out on that though. If someone wants to know more about quantum mechanics and wave-particle duality, let me know. I feel QG doesn't particularly care about it though, so it's not worth my time.
    You feel wrong. And Q.G. already knows about it.
    So yes, it would be a waste of time as far as i am concerned.

  6. #276

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,787
    Images
    2
    I feel wrong about what exactly? Pretty sure that photons (even a single photon) can exhibit wave-like behavior.

  7. #277

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    I feel wrong about what exactly?
    You wrote this
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    [...] I feel QG doesn't particularly care about it though, so it's not worth my time.
    5 minutes ago, two posts up.
    You forget fast, don't you?

  8. #278

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,787
    Images
    2
    Oh, I said I don't particularly think you care about learning about quantum mechanics. It's clear at this point you are just trolling about so it's not really worth going into an in depth discussion about that. If you do have actual knowledge of it, it certainly doesn't appear that way by the manner you are expressing yourself.

    Sorry if your sentence was a bit hard to parse.

  9. #279

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,555
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    I'm not exactly sure what you mean by 'energy level' in this context. If you mean a photon's energy, then no. A photon with a given wavelength has a given energy and vice versa. And a photon with a given wavelength has a given frequency and vice versa.

    If you don't mean that, you'll have to clarify it.

    And veering incredibly far off course (from news about Kodak to quantum mechanics, wow!), to say that photons don't have wavelengths isn't quite correct. I'm tapping out on that though. If someone wants to know more about quantum mechanics and wave-particle duality, let me know. I feel QG doesn't particularly care about it though, so it's not worth my time.
    When I enquired about red light exposing unsensitized emulsions, one of the possible explanations was that practically any wavelength could make the grains developable, if it had sufficient energy.

    Not being coherent in physics,
    I just assumed that it was just something else I did not understand about light.

    The other explanations were logical enough to satisify me and
    I never solved the mystery of what that explanation was really all about.

    Thinking about now,
    I wonder if the "energy" of a wavelength is somehow concentrated by increasing it's coherency?

  10. #280

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    Oh, I said I don't particularly think you care about learning about quantum mechanics. It's clear at this point you are just trolling about so it's not really worth going into an in depth discussion about that. If you do have actual knowledge of it, it certainly doesn't appear that way by the manner you are expressing yourself.

    Sorry if your sentence was a bit hard to parse.
    No, Tim.
    Talk like that is "just trolling about".

    I have kept to the matter in hand in each and every single post i have made.
    If you want to discuss quantum mechanics, that's fine with me. Let's!
    If you think that i don't care about it, suggest that i don't know, and don't want to know, about it, you're being incredibly presumptuous. And very wrong to boot.
    And passing your inability to understand off as someone else's inability to make something clear to you? Well... Don't.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin