|
40hz
|
 |
« on: August 18, 2012, 03:51:43 PM » |
|
This is awesome! You can now photograph the movement of photons in real time... They've also open sourced the data and software to encourage further research.   |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
superboyac
|
|
« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2012, 03:56:20 PM » |
|
I saw this last week. Fucking incredible. Sorry to curse, but it's the only way to describe it.
Stuff like this keeps me going in life.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mwb1100
|
|
« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2012, 04:16:33 PM » |
|
This is awesome! You can now photograph the movement of photons in real time...
But, Is having everything available in "real time" where we really want to go?In all seriousness, that is amazing. I wonder how they're able to "open/close" the shutter so fast (I know they aren't using a physical shutter, but since I don't know what they are using, that's the term I'm stuck with)? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
40hz
|
|
« Reply #3 on: August 18, 2012, 04:27:45 PM » |
|
Would you believe I was waiting for that?  Unfortunately, there will be no prize for your being the first.  Besides, isn't 'photographing' and 'having' two completely different things?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nosh
|
|
« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2012, 04:43:26 PM » |
|
I wonder how they're able to "open/close" the shutter so fast
It isn't a single shutter. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
NigelH
|
|
« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2012, 05:12:35 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Deozaan
|
|
« Reply #6 on: August 18, 2012, 05:54:18 PM » |
|
Fantastic! Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cranioscopical
|
|
« Reply #8 on: August 19, 2012, 06:05:11 PM » |
|
Kinda makes my Nikon look a bit low-tech. Don't despair, think of it a symbol of quality snaps — nikonography. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Chris
|
|
|
|
Stephen66515
|
|
« Reply #9 on: August 19, 2012, 09:03:50 PM » |
|
Holy shit thats awesome  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No trees were harmed during the creation of this message. Millions of electrons, however, were terribly inconvenienced
|
|
|
|
Edvard
|
|
« Reply #10 on: August 21, 2012, 01:14:07 PM » |
|
Yeah, when I saw that, I was like "WAITAMINNIT!!!..." - How did they get the shutter to open and close fast enough?? You would have to do it faster than the speed of the photon packet, which is physically impossible. WTH?? - How did they get a picture of a photon packet traveling through a transparent object when you need those very same photons striking the image sensor to take the picture?? By the time any photons scattered off the semi-transparent plastic and particulate in the water, the packet would be already gone. Then I heard the guy talk in the TED video about how it's actually a composite of a bunch of timed shots put together sequentially, and I understood how they did the actual video. So, it's not "real time" per se. The answer to the second question is actually twofold and partially self-answering, and how I understand it is, (1) the 'packet' you see is in reality further along than where you see it at that particular frame because it still takes light more time to reach the image sensor than to travel down the length of the bottle, and (2) it's not an image of the actual packet, but the light from the packet that escaped as it went, refracting off the particulate in the water. This, BTW is how we are able to see anything at all; we don't see the thing itself, just the light reflecting off of it. Without the particulate and the semi-transparency of the bottle itself, you wouldn't see anything. Notice how at the beginning of the video, there is no light beam coming in before it strikes the back end of the bottle, where photons start scattering. Cool stuff, anyhow |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
All children left unattended will be given a mocha and a puppy.
|
|
|
|
superboyac
|
|
« Reply #11 on: August 21, 2012, 04:33:13 PM » |
|
Yeah, when I saw that, I was like "WAITAMINNIT!!!..." - How did they get the shutter to open and close fast enough?? You would have to do it faster than the speed of the photon packet, which is physically impossible. WTH?? - How did they get a picture of a photon packet traveling through a transparent object when you need those very same photons striking the image sensor to take the picture?? By the time any photons scattered off the semi-transparent plastic and particulate in the water, the packet would be already gone. Then I heard the guy talk in the TED video about how it's actually a composite of a bunch of timed shots put together sequentially, and I understood how they did the actual video. So, it's not "real time" per se. The answer to the second question is actually twofold and partially self-answering, and how I understand it is, (1) the 'packet' you see is in reality further along than where you see it at that particular frame because it still takes light more time to reach the image sensor than to travel down the length of the bottle, and (2) it's not an image of the actual packet, but the light from the packet that escaped as it went, refracting off the particulate in the water. This, BTW is how we are able to see anything at all; we don't see the thing itself, just the light reflecting off of it. Without the particulate and the semi-transparency of the bottle itself, you wouldn't see anything. Notice how at the beginning of the video, there is no light beam coming in before it strikes the back end of the bottle, where photons start scattering. Cool stuff, anyhow very nice explanation. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how photons are able to carry the information they do. I know there's probability involved, and I've tried understanding the math behind it...but all the probability functions can't really explain how photons carry their particular information. But that quickly leads to the never ending mass/gravity problems. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Arizona Hot
|
|
« Reply #12 on: August 22, 2012, 11:27:38 PM » |
|
They also did this: A camera that can see around corners. The video for that is here and here.   |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 11:44:14 PM by Arizona Hot »
|
Logged
|
"If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning" - Catherine Aird
|
|
|
|
Stephen66515
|
|
« Reply #13 on: November 28, 2012, 05:21:47 PM » |
|
Such a shame, I felt the need to make a gif for it.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No trees were harmed during the creation of this message. Millions of electrons, however, were terribly inconvenienced
|
|
|
|
Arizona Hot
|
|
« Reply #14 on: November 28, 2012, 10:40:41 PM » |
|
Such a shame, I felt the need to make a gif for it.
What gif? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning" - Catherine Aird
|
|
|
|
barney
|
|
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2012, 11:21:12 PM » |
|
What gif?
Gifs are not always animations. It's a graphics format that happens to work for stills, as well . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Make a good day ... barn
|
|
|
|
Deozaan
|
|
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2012, 11:39:23 PM » |
|
Such a shame, I felt the need to make a gif for it.
What gif? Oh you mean this gif?:  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen66515
|
|
« Reply #17 on: November 29, 2012, 08:53:38 AM » |
|
ffs lol ill fix
for now though see attachment
|
No trees were harmed during the creation of this message. Millions of electrons, however, were terribly inconvenienced
|
|
|
|
utube.gif