meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | 28 | |
| visits | member for | 2 years, 5 months |
| seen | 3 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 523 |
I've got a BS in Physics from the University of Rochester, and I'm over half-way through my masters in optical engineering. I work at the Laboratory for Laser Energetics, where I develop and maintain technology for the Omega EP laser.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laboratory_for_Laser_Energetics
|
May 2 |
comment |
The weight of a cavity of radiation That's equivalent to a beam with zero intensity. |
|
Mar 30 |
comment |
Are there theories that explain wave-particle duality? You've edited the title, but it doesn't change the answer. The explanation is that the universe actually behaves in this strange way. If you want to know "why" you're going to be asking about religion or philosophy. |
|
Mar 30 |
comment |
Are there theories that explain wave-particle duality? No, I'm not. Maybe if you asked a more specific question you would get the answer you want. Right now, you're simply stating a fact and saying it confuses you, and the title refers to it as a problem, as if it were some illusion to be explained away. It's not an illusion, or a problem, or something that can be explained in the context of everyday experience. It is how the world actually behaves. I know it's strange, but that doesn't make it untrue. |
|
Mar 30 |
comment |
Are there theories that explain wave-particle duality? This isn't a "problem". This is how the universe actually behaves. It's unintuitive, but true. |
|
Mar 16 |
comment |
Is there a formula for determining the focal point of a sphere? DarkLightA: doesn't your own link answer your question? |
|
Mar 11 |
comment |
How can some optical microscopes measure height differences of different sample planes with nanometer accuracy? There are many ways to do this. It's going to be necessary to know exactly what type of microscope you are using. If you don't know the type, you should be able to Google the model name. Or at least tell us the model name. |
|
Feb 25 |
comment |
X-ray diffraction (is it possible?) He is saying that it is not clear what you mean by "entire information". |
|
Feb 5 |
comment |
Filter out polarized light You mean a polarizer? |
|
Feb 5 |
comment |
Mirrors and light beam divergence technology limits In general the angular spread of the radiation is the Fraunhofer transform of the near field. For simple near fields, this is analytically computable. In the case of a circular beam, the precise result is $\propto \frac{J_1(\pi x)}{\pi x} $ where $J_1$ is the Bessel function of the first kind. This has its first zero at $x=\pm 1.2$, which is the source of the 2.4 in my previous comment. |
|
Feb 5 |
comment |
Mirrors and light beam divergence technology limits For coherent light, assuming a circular beam, diffraction puts a lower limit on divergence of $2.4 \lambda \over D$ where $\lambda$ is wavelength and $D$ is beam diameter. |
|
Feb 4 |
comment |
Mirrors and light beam divergence technology limits This is not a technological limitation. Beam divergenceis llimited by diffraction. The minimum divergenceis dictated by wwavelength and beam diameter. |
|
Feb 4 |
comment |
Why does the local inertial compass coincide with the stellar compass? If I wrote the crackpot index, this paper would qualify halfway through the abstract. |
|
Jan 31 |
comment |
Where might hertz per dioptre actually be useful? Very cool example though. |
|
Jan 31 |
comment |
Where might hertz per dioptre actually be useful? To be clear, I agree that the observed frequency would be increased as you say, but I think the doppler effect isn't a good explanation. The fact is that the photons moving along the x axis would appear to the stationary observer to gain energy. I have forgotten too much about Lorentz boosts the say why though. Interestingly, photons moving in the y-z plane will be unaltered, with a continuum of frequencies observed as you look nearer to the x axis. These frequencies will be the resonant frequency along their particular chord of the now oblate spheroid. |
|
Jan 31 |
comment |
Where might hertz per dioptre actually be useful? @MartinBeckett: Certainly! Any time somebody describes the curvature of a surface by the reciprocal or its radius, they are using diopters. I believe this is common in many areas of physics and math, but maybe I'm wrong. Regardless, I know first hand that it is very common in optics, both among optical scientists and engineers. |
|
Jan 31 |
comment |
Where might hertz per dioptre actually be useful? Something about your doppler effect comment doesn't seem right to me, but I can't fully figure out why. Part of the problem, if I'm not mistaken, is that the light reflecting from the leading surface would be red shifted, and the light from the trailing edge should be blue shifted. An unrelated point:spherical aberration isn't a problem. It arises when focusing plane waves with a spherical surface. For a spherical incoming wave, a spherical surface is the ideal aberrationless shape. |
|
Jan 30 |
comment |
Spectral luminous efficiency as a function of wavelength The reason you don't often see a function for it is that it's an empirical measurement, not a prediction from theory. Any function you find will simply be some sort of fit to the data. It may be useful for calculations, but it's really nothing more than an interpolation of the data. |
|
Jan 30 |
comment |
Where might hertz per dioptre actually be useful? @martin: We certainly use diopters, we just don't often call them by name. The diopter is the unit of curvature. It's common in optics, and anywhere else you talk about a curved surface. |
|
Jan 26 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
|
Jan 19 |
comment |
Put a sensor at the focal length, behind, or in front? What did you use to make those diagrams? I like them. |
