Notices
Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Light Reflections; Color

  1. #1 Light Reflections; Color 
    Forum Masters Degree SuperNatendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, TN USA
    Posts
    505
    Ok, we get color because of the part of the spectrum that is absorbed and the part that is reflected.

    Let me see if I have this right. When light hits a group of atoms, the light travels fast enough that some of the light hits the electrons and bounces back, and some of the light hits the nucleus and bounces back, managing to avoid the electrons, and some of the light will bounce back and forth between the nucleas and the electrons before it eventually escapes.

    Is it possible that this interaction of the light inside the atom are what causes the spectrum to reflect more of one color than the rest?


    "It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense." - Mark Twain
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    956
    I don’t think it’s even possible for light to get inside an atom. Atomic diameters are of the order of about 50 picometres (that’s the atomic diameter of a hydrogen atom anyway). Visible light on the other hand has wavelengths of between 400 and 700 nanometres – or between 400*000 and 700*000 picometres. That’s way too big for the light to get in. :?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Masters Degree SuperNatendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, TN USA
    Posts
    505
    So all visible light is being reflected by electrons then, even though a single photon is small enough to penetrate an atom?

    If all light is reflected by electrons, is the wavelength of the color simply dependant on the effect called "surface reconstruction"? What causes the "absorption" of certain wavelengths of spectrum? Is absorption a misnomer?
    "It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense." - Mark Twain
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    NC USA
    Posts
    488
    *
    You have the right idea that color is the result of light's interaction with matter, but I suggest it is misguided to get down to electrons and nuclei. It is especially misleading to think of light "bouncing off" anything.

    Color results from the selective absorption, transmission, and reflection of light. In the cases of the elements, such as mercury vapor or krypton, for example, certain sharp frequencies of incident light are absorbed giving rise to spectral lines. These represent electron transitions. But this is not the usual case.

    For most compounds, light is absorbed by the molecule as a whole. Resonant frequencies are absorbed by the chemical bonds, resulting in increased levels of vibration or rotational mode. The energy is dissipated as heat. It is not re-radiated as light. (Phosphorescence and fluorescence may be exceptions, but there is a frequency shift). The remaining light is then seen by transmission, scattering, diffusion, etc.

    Reflection of light, especially from polished metallic surfaces, may be handled most easily by considering the electric and magnetic vectors using Maxwell's equations. I'll not go further into that; I simply wanted to mention that it is futile to try to imagine photons bouncing off of electrons.

    *
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveF
    *
    You have the right idea that color is the result of light's interaction with matter, but I suggest it is misguided to get down to electrons and nuclei. It is especially misleading to think of light "bouncing off" anything.

    Color results from the selective absorption, transmission, and reflection of light. In the cases of the elements, such as mercury vapor or krypton, for example, certain sharp frequencies of incident light are absorbed giving rise to spectral lines. These represent electron transitions. But this is not the usual case.

    For most compounds, light is absorbed by the molecule as a whole. Resonant frequencies are absorbed by the chemical bonds, resulting in increased levels of vibration or rotational mode. The energy is dissipated as heat. It is not re-radiated as light. (Phosphorescence and fluorescence may be exceptions, but there is a frequency shift). The remaining light is then seen by transmission, scattering, diffusion, etc.

    Reflection of light, especially from polished metallic surfaces, may be handled most easily by considering the electric and magnetic vectors using Maxwell's equations. I'll not go further into that; I simply wanted to mention that it is futile to try to imagine photons bouncing off of electrons.

    *
    A friend of mine built one of those mirrors where you look into it. And it just keeps creating an ever deeper reflection that looks like a duplication of the reflection again and again into infinity.
    My thought was if you bounce light that many times. Off those surfaces, that are mountainous and valley ridden. And still do not get distortion. There must be another answer.
    Fortunately my school was based on pre Worlds War Two stuff. A lot of it came from Germany. And scientists that isolated the elements for the periodic table.

    We learned the idea that the surface of an object is where ambient radiation leaves its charge. That charge is carried in all directions by ambient radiation leaving the object. That precise high speed ambient radiation is slowed, just a bit, just enough to carry the exacting information about the surface to your eye or anything else.

    This is an animation of how I was taught light works. Obviously I cannot draw in all the ambient radiation that would be there. Because it would totally obscure the singular electron leaving each surface. And the importance of its angle and purpose. But you could imagine the total chaos of all the ambient radiation simultaneously travelling in all directions at once.
    That is where we really live. There are no safe places for tyrants.

    http://www.Rockwelder.com/Flash/mrbill/mrbill.html

    But this is a viable solution to bouncing and refraction without a change in velocity. Somehow I cannot imagine light making sharp turns, and not changing speed. Stop comes to mind if you are looking yourself right in the mirror.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Masters Degree SuperNatendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, TN USA
    Posts
    505
    But they have to bounce off of something, and since atoms are the fundamental building blocks of matter, then the matter that reflects the light is reflecting the light off of the electrons themselves. You don't have to be polished metal to reflect light, otherwise we wouldn't be able to see anything with our eyes. Thats how we get colors, the light produced by our sun hits a red shirt and more red is reflected than any other color of the visible spectrum.

    Where do these photons that get "absorbed" by atoms go? I have a feeling they are not absorbed but that their wavelengths are changed.
    "It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense." - Mark Twain
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperNatendo
    But they have to bounce off of something, and since atoms are the fundamental building blocks of matter, then the matter that reflects the light is reflecting the light off of the electrons themselves. You don't have to be polished metal to reflect light, otherwise we wouldn't be able to see anything with our eyes. Thats how we get colors, the light produced by our sun hits a red shirt and more red is reflected than any other color of the visible spectrum.

    Where do these photons that get "absorbed" by atoms go? I have a feeling they are not absorbed but that their wavelengths are changed.
    Here are a few that get me. No matter how light works.

    Shine a red laser through a red rose. It glows white almost blue white.

    Shine red light on any color that does not have red in it, and it will look black. Purple is a combination of red and blue and looks red when you shine red light on it.

    The old school was that the other colors absorb red light and reflect nothing. And in the case of the red object do not absorb the red light and reflect red light. I have trouble with the rose in your world.

    In my world the red light would excite the surface of red more then any other color, and when ambient radiation comes out of the object it is slowed to the speed of red light. Or in the case of the red laser on the red rose, accelerated to white light.


    This is shinning a very red laser through a yellow amber object. You may note the yellow color created it looks yellow in real life.

    http://www.Rockwelder.com/WMV/laseryellow.wmv

    This is shinning a very red laser through a red rose.

    http://www.Rockwelder.com/WMV/laserose.wmv



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    I also have a problem with the idea of different colors being absorbed and therefore determining the net color output of a body. White light sources do not emit (according to what I heard we know) red, green, blue, or cyan, magenta, and yellow photons. Yet, we classify white light as a combination of all colors. Is this not a blatant contradiction?

    This has led me to what you said, SuperNantendo, that photons are not absorbed (and leave the ones left that determine its color), but are rather modified by the structure of the element/chemical. This then, would lead to the idea that what determines how dark an object is, is related to how many photons the material cares to absorb per unit of time.

    I think the absorbed photons are converted to electrons....though there are many other theories out there.
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Fusion
    I also have a problem with the idea of different colors being absorbed and therefore determining the net color output of a body. White light sources do not emit (according to what I heard we know) red, green, blue, or cyan, magenta, and yellow photons. Yet, we classify white light as a combination of all colors. Is this not a blatant contradiction?

    This has led me to what you said, SuperNantendo, that photons are not absorbed (and leave the ones left that determine its color), but are rather modified by the structure of the element/chemical. This then, would lead to the idea that what determines how dark an object is, is related to how many photons the material cares to absorb per unit of time.

    I think the absorbed photons are converted to electrons....though there are many other theories out there.

    I also agree that white light is not red, yellow, green, blue, violet, Ultra violet, and x-rays.

    However you can create all of those with white light.

    The reason is that they are all very close in velocity.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Fusion
    White light sources do not emit (according to what I heard we know) red, green, blue, or cyan, magenta, and yellow photons.
    Where did you hear that?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    So then, they emit a red, green, and blue photon side by side in perfect amounts? :?
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    NC USA
    Posts
    488
    It does not have to be equal. That's why some stars appear bluish or red or yellow. But basically, yes, all 'colored' photons are present in white light.

    *

    *
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    ..............what determines the quantity of photon colors emitted by a light source?
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveF
    It does not have to be equal. That's why some stars appear bluish or red or yellow. But basically, yes, all 'colored' photons are present in white light.
    What happens to the other colored photons? When they strike only a red object?

    I do not believe in photons myself. I believe light is different velocity electrons.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Colours can be produced in many ways. The main principle behind this is the distribution and selection of photons of varying wavelength. Eventually, it is the eye-brain-system that interprets photon wavelengths as colours. In this sense, white light is what this system produces for an even distribution of wavelengths within our window of perception.

    Material that appears in a distinct colour just absorbs photons in such a way that only the ones having the corresponding wavelengths are re-emitted/reflected. This is based on the chemistry of the paint - often by special configurations of the electronic bond between atoms in molecules. The photons that are absorbed excite other forms of energy like e.g. vibrations in the paint material leading to a slight temperature increase. This is also why the perceived colour also depends on the colour of the light that hits it. If the two colours are complementary, the impression should be almost greyish-black.

    Coloured light can be produced either by heat radiation (continuous spectrum by statistical movement of electrons=Planck radiation) or single quantum transitions (single spectral lines by orbital changes of electrons). The difference can be observed when watching the light of a common light bulb and of a neon gas tube (it contains no neon, but mostly argon gas) through a prism. You will see that the light bulb has a continuous spectrum while the tube shows a series of different colours (spectral lines). The colour of the light from a light bulb depends on the electric energy applied to it, while the mixture of the spectral lines determines the colour of the light from a gas tube.

    The whole matter is so complex that I stop here. I just did not even mention effects like scattering or refraction.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Dishmaster
    Colours can be produced in many ways. The main principle behind this is the distribution and selection of photons of varying wavelength. Eventually, it is the eye-brain-system that interprets photon wavelengths as colours. In this sense, white light is what this system produces for an even distribution of wavelengths within our window of perception.

    Material that appears in a distinct colour just absorbs photons in such a way that only the ones having the corresponding wavelengths are re-emitted/reflected. This is based on the chemistry of the paint - often by special configurations of the electronic bond between atoms in molecules. The photons that are absorbed excite other forms of energy like e.g. vibrations in the paint material leading to a slight temperature increase. This is also why the perceived colour also depends on the colour of the light that hits it. If the two colours are complementary, the impression should be almost greyish-black.

    Coloured light can be produced either by heat radiation (continuous spectrum by statistical movement of electrons=Planck radiation) or single quantum transitions (single spectral lines by orbital changes of electrons). The difference can be observed when watching the light of a common light bulb and of a neon gas tube (it contains no neon, but mostly argon gas) through a prism. You will see that the light bulb has a continuous spectrum while the tube shows a series of different colours (spectral lines). The colour of the light from a light bulb depends on the electric energy applied to it, while the mixture of the spectral lines determines the colour of the light from a gas tube.

    The whole matter is so complex that I stop here. I just did not even mention effects like scattering or refraction.
    So your theory is that intermittent photons, their frequency, is what causes the eye to send a certain color to the brain?

    Like if a photon hits at some frequency you see blue, and if it hits twice as many times in the same time frame you see red.

    So if you see purple, you are just amazing. Like a radio receiver. Except that you would need about an infinite number of antennas. To decipher the different frequencies. And then different band receivers to collect all the different frequencies. Simultaneously.

    Yea a lot of thought went into that theory. Ha-ha.



    It is just velocity, and how deep the electron delivers light.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    So your theory is that intermittent photons, their frequency, is what causes the eye to send a certain color to the brain?

    Like if a photon hits at some frequency you see blue, and if it hits twice as many times in the same time frame you see red.

    So if you see purple, you are just amazing. Like a radio receiver. Except that you would need about an infinite number of antennas. To decipher the different frequencies.
    No, you only need three. Even the universal scientists knew that. It dates back to the Young-Helmholtz theory of the nineteenth century.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%E...lmholtz_theory
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    So your theory is that intermittent photons, their frequency, is what causes the eye to send a certain color to the brain?

    Like if a photon hits at some frequency you see blue, and if it hits twice as many times in the same time frame you see red.

    So if you see purple, you are just amazing. Like a radio receiver. Except that you would need about an infinite number of antennas. To decipher the different frequencies.
    No, you only need three. Even the universal scientists knew that. It dates back to the Young-Helmholtz theory of the nineteenth century.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%E...lmholtz_theory
    Ok so now you have three antennas and three receivers setup to receive three different colors of light.

    Now how do you tell the varying colors of light.

    And when you get a hit on your digital receiver how are you going to tell the intensity of each color? By the frequency of the frequency of color?

    That is where the way I learned it shined. All analog. Color variation is just penetration. Intensity is just more hits per unit area. Almost like high definition.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    927
    for those unfamiliar with the bouncing of light, this may help:

    http://www.geomerics.com/enlighten-why.htm

    as a 3d artist, i deal a lot with these things.


    here's what refraction is:


    the link on radiosity might be what you're looking for, for understanding light scattering.

    because the fundamental physics behind professional 3d programs is so good,
    a great artist can create near-photoreal images, such as this:



    or this:

    if the established physics didn't work, you wouldn't get any output at all,
    or at best, stuff like this:

    when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
    A.C Doyle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    Dishmaster, go on with scattering if you know about it. Sources like wikipedia do not seem to be very in depth with it.

    As for refraction, the part that I do not understand is....when light enters a diamond of a particular structure, it is able to bounce off the inner walls of the diamond to such an extent that the light becomes temporarily trapped. How does this work?

    So white light sources actually emit a red, green, and blue photon? How do we know it is that exact color combination? it could be one of the others that forms white light.

    If we do not know this for certain, then is it possible that white light photons are only emitted with 'spectral nodes' of vibration on various quantum positions that through interpretation add up to white light?
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    927
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Fusion
    Dishmaster, go on with scattering if you know about it. Sources like wikipedia do not seem to be very in depth with it.

    As for refraction, the part that I do not understand is....when light enters a diamond of a particular structure, it is able to bounce off the inner walls of the diamond to such an extent that the light becomes temporarily trapped. How does this work?

    So white light sources actually emit a red, green, and blue photon? How do we know it is that exact color combination? it could be one of the others that forms white light.

    If we do not know this for certain, then is it possible that white light photons are only emitted with 'spectral nodes' of vibration on various quantum positions that through interpretation add up to white light?
    from what i know, white light emits light of every wavelength, from deep infrared to ultraviolet, the problem with our eyes however, is that we can only perceive the red green and blue, as those are the wavelengths our eyes react to. all the intermediary wavelengths are perceived as a varying mix of these three base colours.

    it is important to understand how the eye works, to understand how the light affects it.

    as for diamonds, its probably similar to what happends with a magnifying lens, in that the shape focuses the light, so studying optics, should answer those questions.
    when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
    A.C Doyle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Fusion
    Dishmaster, go on with scattering if you know about it. Sources like wikipedia do not seem to be very in depth with it.

    As for refraction, the part that I do not understand is....when light enters a diamond of a particular structure, it is able to bounce off the inner walls of the diamond to such an extent that the light becomes temporarily trapped. How does this work?

    So white light sources actually emit a red, green, and blue photon? How do we know it is that exact color combination? it could be one of the others that forms white light.

    If we do not know this for certain, then is it possible that white light photons are only emitted with 'spectral nodes' of vibration on various quantum positions that through interpretation add up to white light?
    Let's start with the last topic: There are no white photons. Every photon has its unique wavelength. Wavelengths between about 300 nm (nanometres=10^-9 m) and about 800 nm cover the spectrum between violet/blue and red that our eyes can detect. The generation process of photons (quantum transitions between single fixed energies) determines the wavelength. The mixture of wavelengths can be analysed via spectrographs. A prism is a very simple one, but there are even better ones (e.g. gratings) with much higher spectral resolution powers. Any combination of complementary colours can produce white light (see additive colour mixing of light vs. subtractive colour mixing of dye). Our eyes+brain can only perceive the sum of them all, because the photon impact rate is tremendously high.

    Light can be "trapped" because of "total reflection". This phenomenon can occur whenever light travels from a dense to a less dense medium. The ratio of refractive indices determines the critical angle, at that the light is reflected. In microscopic detail, this is caused by diffraction of the photons at the crystal ions. You get a series of constructive and destructive interferences of particular waves produced by the interaction of the photons with the ions which in this case leads to the appearance of a new wavefront of photons that appears to have been reflected at the surface. This can - as far as I know - in principle also appear at lattice structures within crystals.

    Scattering is in detail another interaction between photons and small particles. It is strongest, when the particle sizes are of the order of the wavelength. This causes a strong wavelength dependence of scattering. One can imagine the particles as small antennas absorbing photons. The electrons in the particles start oscillating - like in common radio antennas - which in turn re-emits photons of the same wavelength, but now in an arbitrary direction. So, in summary, the direction of photons is re-distributed depending on their wavelengths. Therefore, if you look through a medium of fine particles, you will notice that any light source behind it appears in a different colour.

    An experiment: Take a glass, fill it with water and pour a drop or two of milk in it, so that it becomes slightly cloudy. Now put it between you and a white light source. It works best, if there is only one light source in the room. You will notice that it appears reddish. If looked from the side, the liquid is slightly blueish. Red photons are scattered less than blue ones.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Ok so now you have three antennas and three receivers setup to receive three different colors of light.

    Now how do you tell the varying colors of light.

    And when you get a hit on your digital receiver how are you going to tell the intensity of each color? By the frequency of the frequency of color?
    Who said anything about digital? Didn't you ever have an old fashioned radio receiver tuned to a certain frequency? If you were off a little bit you still got a signal, just not as strong. So if you had two radios tuned to two frequencies, and they were equally weak, you would probably figure the broadcast frequency was half way between.
    That is where the way I learned it shined. All analog. Color variation is just penetration. Intensity is just more hits per unit area. Almost like high definition.
    Just exactly where did you learn this stuff? Not in a real school. I think you're making it up.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Dishmaster
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Fusion
    Dishmaster, go on with scattering if you know about it. Sources like wikipedia do not seem to be very in depth with it.

    As for refraction, the part that I do not understand is....when light enters a diamond of a particular structure, it is able to bounce off the inner walls of the diamond to such an extent that the light becomes temporarily trapped. How does this work?

    So white light sources actually emit a red, green, and blue photon? How do we know it is that exact color combination? it could be one of the others that forms white light.

    If we do not know this for certain, then is it possible that white light photons are only emitted with 'spectral nodes' of vibration on various quantum positions that through interpretation add up to white light?
    Let's start with the last topic: There are no white photons. Every photon has its unique wavelength. Wavelengths between about 300 nm (nanometres=10^-9 m) and about 800 nm cover the spectrum between violet/blue and red that our eyes can detect. The generation process of photons (quantum transitions between single fixed energies) determines the wavelength. The mixture of wavelengths can be analysed via spectrographs. A prism is a very simple one, but there are even better ones (e.g. gratings) with much higher spectral resolution powers. Any combination of complementary colours can produce white light (see additive colour mixing of light vs. subtractive colour mixing of dye). Our eyes+brain can only perceive the sum of them all, because the photon impact rate is tremendously high.

    Light can be "trapped" because of "total reflection". This phenomenon can occur whenever light travels from a dense to a less dense medium. The ratio of refractive indices determines the critical angle, at that the light is reflected. In microscopic detail, this is caused by diffraction of the photons at the crystal ions. You get a series of constructive and destructive interferences of particular waves produced by the interaction of the photons with the ions which in this case leads to the appearance of a new wavefront of photons that appears to have been reflected at the surface. This can - as far as I know - in principle also appear at lattice structures within crystals.

    Scattering is in detail another interaction between photons and small particles. It is strongest, when the particle sizes are of the order of the wavelength. This causes a strong wavelength dependence of scattering. One can imagine the particles as small antennas absorbing photons. The electrons in the particles start oscillating - like in common radio antennas - which in turn re-emits photons of the same wavelength, but now in an arbitrary direction. So, in summary, the direction of photons is re-distributed depending on their wavelengths. Therefore, if you look through a medium of fine particles, you will notice that any light source behind it appears in a different colour.

    An experiment: Take a glass, fill it with water and pour a drop or two of milk in it, so that it becomes slightly cloudy. Now put it between you and a white light source. It works best, if there is only one light source in the room. You will notice that it appears reddish. If looked from the side, the liquid is slightly blueish. Red photons are scattered less than blue ones.
    That was totally ridiculous.

    Look at what happens when you place three see through primary color films on top of one another. Probably why they got rid of the Alps printer.

    It makes black. Now your theory cannot explain this. My understanding can. Because remember my understanding says that light you see from an object is just electrons from behind the object. Being slowed as they leave the object. To reflect the surface voltage to the eye or camera. I say reflect, I mean in a sense to show the surface condition, not bounce.

    The last color I print, say it is powder blue. Is not reflected by your blue photon theory.

    Now check out the yellow film over the blue film. It creates green. Now the blue photons according to your theory, says that the photons are bouncing up from the blue at frequency "x", passing through the yellow and speeding up in frequency, not to yellow, but only green. That says to me that you do not know to much about digital, much less analog communication.

    Frequency is what is detected, as light strikes things.
    However frequency is not what causes light. It is the voltage. At and above the surface of an object. And it is ambient radiation that carries this voltage to you.

    You are trying to say that as each photon leaves an area, that it can pass through another and somehow have its timing changed? You can reverse the colors blue and yellow and get the same effect. So your theory is flawed and incredibly over complicated and hypocritical.

    What I was taught is basically simple, and is the basis for understanding the complexities, these basics form.

    And yes definitely I was taught this in school. You have to understand that some Americans took what George Washington and Benjamin Franklin did, to heart. And we are not afraid to die for truth.
    We have incredible focus. And are not drawn away by silly pursuits. As most of America was.

    A war for us might last fifteen minutes.

    It was totally and undeniably shown that most Americans are happy to sit and wait for mommy to fix it. Rather then to assume the male role and take responsibility for the atrocities in science.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Ok so now you have three antennas and three receivers setup to receive three different colors of light.

    Now how do you tell the varying colors of light.

    And when you get a hit on your digital receiver how are you going to tell the intensity of each color? By the frequency of the frequency of color?
    Who said anything about digital? Didn't you ever have an old fashioned radio receiver tuned to a certain frequency? If you were off a little bit you still got a signal, just not as strong. So if you had two radios tuned to two frequencies, and they were equally weak, you would probably figure the broadcast frequency was half way between.
    That is where the way I learned it shined. All analog. Color variation is just penetration. Intensity is just more hits per unit area. Almost like high definition.
    Just exactly where did you learn this stuff? Not in a real school. I think you're making it up.

    Yes I actually used to build old analog tuned radios. Wow, I am old. Ha-ha.

    However the poor tuning was not a partial reception but rather an intermittent reception.
    Or a reception from a more powerful source, overriding the intended signal to be received.

    You are trying to boil the human eye down to a digital device. When it is totally analog. Analog is number one for speed. And it allows the least amount of transmission over a given time to send the most information.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Yes I actually used to build old analog tuned radios. Wow, I am old. Ha-ha.

    However the poor tuning was not a partial reception but rather an intermittent reception.
    Or a reception from a more powerful source, overriding the intended signal to be received.

    You are trying to boil the human eye down to a digital device. When it is totally analog. Analog is number one for speed. And it allows the least amount of transmission over a given time to send the most information.
    Like I said... it's analog. And why won't you say where you learned your physics? You keep talking about the way you learned, like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. What's the big secret?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Yes I actually used to build old analog tuned radios. Wow, I am old. Ha-ha.

    However the poor tuning was not a partial reception but rather an intermittent reception.
    Or a reception from a more powerful source, overriding the intended signal to be received.

    You are trying to boil the human eye down to a digital device. When it is totally analog. Analog is number one for speed. And it allows the least amount of transmission over a given time to send the most information.
    Like I said... it's analog. And why won't you say where you learned your physics? You keep talking about the way you learned, like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. What's the big secret?
    Analog is variable voltage. Causing a variable effect. If the signal is analog and not an on and off digital signal.
    In analog communications frequency, just opens a window, for variable voltage to be received, within a certain voltage range. Only because you cannot easily send pure continuous DC transmissions over the air. You could though in copper line.

    In the eye there may very well be a frequency that your eye pumps to your brain or a frequency the retina can absorb light.
    At about 35 frames a second a monitor starts to look very steady to the human eye. Yet a camera can catch the distortions. Much like a stroboscope.
    So in that respect frequency may play a part in your eye.

    But the frequency of strikes in a given area, almost like asteroid strikes on the retina, and perhaps the intensity of electrons of a certain color/velocity would probably cause intensity of color.

    I was taught that in the back of the retina, it was the penetrative power of the electron that created different colors.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    927
    [quote="William McCormick"][quote="Harold14370"]
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick

    I was taught that in the back of the retina, it was the penetrative power of the electron that created different colors.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    and where did you learn this?
    when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
    A.C Doyle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    That was totally ridiculous.

    Look at what happens when you place three see through primary color films on top of one another. [...] It makes black. Now your theory cannot explain this. My understanding can. Because remember my understanding says that light you see from an object is just electrons from behind the object. Being slowed as they leave the object. To reflect the surface voltage to the eye or camera. I say reflect, I mean in a sense to show the surface condition, not bounce.

    The last color I print, say it is powder blue. Is not reflected by your blue photon theory.
    Since I am not afraid of your threats of annihilation, I want to answer this. I think you deliberately misunderstand everything so that it fits into your picture. Do you know the difference between additive and subtractive colour mixing? No idea what these "see through primary films" are, but every transparent coloured layer has its colour by the simple reason that it only allows those photons to pass through that produce the perception of this colour in our eyes. Colour is not a property of the material, it is how our eyes interpret it. Of course, when you have a "blue layer", only photons that produce the impression of "blue" can pass. This does not exclude photons of different wavelengths, as long as they are a few that only contribute little to the final colour. I am sure, there are no chemicals that can filter out photons perfectly, but they just change the distribution of wavelengths. Now, when the remaining photons pass the next layer, say yellow, another set of photons is sorted out. The ones creating a green impression remain. At the same time, the intensity (brightness) is reduced, because there are less photons. If you have too many layers, you will finally end up with too few photons to be detected. The same is true for filters that sort out complementary colours.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •