Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #595211
| Message-ID | <57C520E3.34EA@ix.netcom.com> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-29 23:00 -0700 |
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Viewing the spokes |
| References | (3 earlier) <583f9d-24b.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <57c4f364$0$33773$c3e8da3$cc4fe22d@news.astraweb.com> <lpdf9d-a3c.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <57C512C7.49E3@ix.netcom.com> <gehf9d-vgc.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> > >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > >> > On 8/29/2016 9:14 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > >> >>> On 8/29/2016 2:00 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> >>>> Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> 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. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> <snip babble> > >> > > >> > 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. > > I can see the concept of instantaneous is too complex for you. > > -- > Jim Pennino i don't have an instamatic camera...
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Viewing the spokes Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-29 12:08 -0500
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-08-29 18:00 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-29 21:00 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-08-30 01:14 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-29 22:45 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-08-30 04:14 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-29 21:59 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-08-30 05:16 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-29 23:00 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 18:29 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-29 18:29 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-29 18:46 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-30 19:40 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-30 22:07 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-30 23:48 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-31 09:54 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-02 10:00 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-02 13:23 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-03 11:30 -0700
Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-03 13:18 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-03 14:57 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-03 16:01 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-04 12:46 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green Ergios <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-07 12:32 -0500
Re: Red, Blue and Green noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 12:12 -0700
Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-07 23:22 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-03 16:03 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-03 16:06 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 00:18 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 12:52 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-07 10:01 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-09-07 10:12 -0700
Re: Red, Blue and Green The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 09:47 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-31 14:32 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-04 11:39 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-04 20:36 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 09:08 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 12:32 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-09 17:51 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-10 00:10 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-09 20:43 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-10 00:57 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-09 21:07 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-10 01:33 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-12 20:59 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-13 02:41 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 19:43 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-12 21:29 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-13 02:43 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 13:28 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 17:14 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 21:52 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-14 05:11 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 17:49 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 00:50 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 21:52 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 04:11 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 16:58 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 21:40 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 20:56 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-17 01:47 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-17 17:24 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-18 00:07 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 14:26 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 15:04 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 12:54 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 19:47 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 23:24 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-15 05:12 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 15:45 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 21:36 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 02:58 +0000
Re: Viewing the spokes "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 12:15 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-09-15 09:15 -0400
Re: Viewing the spokes "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 15:48 -0700
Re: Viewing the spokes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 15:33 -0700
csiph-web