Timeline for Mathematical expression for refraction within a spherical lens
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 28, 2021 at 21:55 | comment | added | Philip Wood | Re my (a)... Your use of focal length confused me. 'Image distance' would be better. But for my part I should have read your question more carefully, as you did talk about a point object. | |
| Mar 28, 2021 at 21:49 | comment | added | Chern-Simons | @Philip Wood (a) because I also want to show that the spherical aberration ( from a point source at finite distance) for a curveside lens (incident on the curveside, exiting on the flat side) is stronger than that of a flatside lens (incident on the flatside, exiting on the curve side), but this does not seem to be true any more if the incident rays are parallel (i.e. this time the flatside prodcues more aberration due to larger angle of deviation). (b) That's actually worth trying, thanks. | |
| Mar 28, 2021 at 21:27 | comment | added | Philip Wood | (a) If you're interested in focal length, why aren't you considering a ray parallel to the axis? (b) Probably not what you had in mind, but why not do numerical calculations for a given value of $R$ and different values of $h$? Much easier, I'd have thought, than trying to do the general case, but will prove the point just as well | |
| Mar 28, 2021 at 21:25 | history | edited | Chern-Simons | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| S Mar 28, 2021 at 21:08 | history | suggested | Chern-Simons | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
editted title
|
| Mar 28, 2021 at 21:08 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 28, 2021 at 21:08 | |||||
| S Mar 28, 2021 at 21:08 | history | suggested | Chern-Simons | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
title edit
|
| Mar 28, 2021 at 21:07 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 28, 2021 at 21:08 | |||||
| Mar 28, 2021 at 21:04 | history | asked | Chern-Simons | CC BY-SA 4.0 |