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: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 00:59:48 -0500
Message-ID: <57C520E3.34EA@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 23:00:03 -0700
From: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
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: <nq1q63$bdd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <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> <lpdf9d-a3c.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <57C512C7.49E3@ix.netcom.com> <gehf9d-vgc.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 79
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 108.219.229.47
X-Trace: sv3-wYsBfK+ioZ9wXqWH5en60MX7m7wkEasnEuvqacY5dVmUXqSF/9H2aQv2toahWYqnM3us+4QLAJv1a2z!m9tLI5z3wakTNOTOIOOKJ5weghiFevqAidmaZU/CE2Ncn+YnEbTZkEL+pC1Efme3LeUg/NAxMkMY!V6++7s7kHjI=
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: 4487
Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:595211

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...