Path: csiph.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 23:59:41 -0500 Message-ID: <57C512C7.49E3@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 21:59:51 -0700 From: The Starmaker Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: Re: Viewing the spokes References: <5q9e9d-de8.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <57c4dabd$0$31279$c3e8da3$dd9697d2@news.astraweb.com> <583f9d-24b.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <57c4f364$0$33773$c3e8da3$cc4fe22d@news.astraweb.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 67 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 108.219.229.47 X-Trace: sv3-KDVZSCXIdU02kTh8TrsU5NkCepth7rb/rZHBFk93M2fm+PlTuIykYQsijXnLzyw8UfDohLlAsQNuC6y!48HWUUYs2BJ+m5VYWSnLStvFX2AzlExHU6iQAB6heDAYnqcXwqbjgErU23zoqZ/zjoEJN/IhPtNK!c6jMuH+TMdQ= X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 3998 Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:595209 jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > > benj wrote: > > On 8/29/2016 9:14 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> benj wrote: > >>> On 8/29/2016 2:00 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>>> Sergio wrote: > >>>>> Viewing the spokes > >>>>> > >>>>> A wheel with spokes rolls on the ground. A stationary camera takes a > >>>>> picture of the wheel. Due to the nonzero exposure time of the camera, > >>>>> the spokes will generally appear blurred. At what location(s) in the > >>>>> picture does (do) the spoke(s) not appear > >>>>> blurred? > >>>> > >>>> Depends on the speed of the wheel, the expossure time and the pixel size. > >>>> > >>>> For sufficiently short exposure time and sufficiently slow wheel, nothing > >>>> will appear blurred. > >>>> > >>>> For a long enough exposure time and a faster wheel, everything will be > >>>> blurred. > >>>> > >>>> In general, if nothing in the image moves more than a a few pixels during > >>>> the exposure time, the image will not appear to be blurred to the naked > >>>> eye, but would be visible under magnification. > >>>> > >>>> If nothing in the image moves more than about a half pixel during the > >>>> exposure time, nothing will be blurred. > >>> > >>> Usual chimp blather pretending to be 'smart" about science by throwing a > >>> bunch of jargon around (nobody ever said the images were digital, > >>> chimpo) > >> > >> It doesn't matter if the image is digital or on Kodachrome film. > >> > >> If the medium is film, you have to determine the pixel size from the > >> grain size. For prints there is the grain size of the negative and > >> then the grain size of the print paper and enlargement factor to concider. > >> > >> That one can do instantaneous calculations of position is irrelevant. > >> > >> The amount of blurring will be vastly different for an exposure time of > >> 1/1000 of a second versus 10 seconds. > >> > >> > >> > > > > Senile babble trying to change subject from fact that he missed the > > entire point. Sure just babble on with irrelevant facts and maybe > > someone will be snowed and not notice you totally buggered the question > > and the head kook had to straighten you out. > > If you mean your post where you said where the wheel touches the > ground it is stationary, then your head is clearly up your ass. > > It is stationary only instantaneously while the exposure time of any > camera is NOT instantaneous. > > If you posit an instantaneous exposure time, then nothing on the > wheel is moving so there is never any blurring. > > -- > Jim Pennino the spokes atoms on the wheel is always moving...so there is always a blur...never say never.