Re: Contious optical receiver

On 9 Aug, 23:14, j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
jonas.thornv...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 9 Aug, 19:54, j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
jonas.thornv...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 9 Aug, 18:14, j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
jonas.thornv...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 9 Aug, 16:52, Sam Wormley <sworml...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
jonas.thornv...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Is it possible to blend light frequencies from different sources
through a prism?

Certainly.
What differ a prism from a RGB mask?
I guess there must be somekind of relation between the size of the
pixel unit and the receiver/receptor device for the actual blending of
wavelength to take place. Given big enough pixels no blending take
place.

There is no physical "blending" of light from an RGB mask, rather
it is in how the eye and brain work leading to the perception that
the individual colored dots blend into one of another color.
So you say the blending a CCD record is not physical?
So our brain create the RECORDED CCD result so when you print out the
picture from a recorded monitor or TV you still have the RGB
information "IDIOT"?

No, I said the human perception of a CRT's three discrete colored
dots as a single dot of another color is an optical illusion caused
by the way the brain and eye work.

You do know movies are a rapid series of still pictures the brain and
eye "blend" into what appears to be motion, don't you?

Same thing, sorta.

As far as CCD's go, they work like CRT's in reverse.

The sensor array has a color filter mask over it so each "pixel" is
actually three pixels of three different colors.

There is no mixing of light frequencies to produce light of a different
frequency in any of this.

That would require something that reacts none-linearly to light, which
don't exist either in the human body, CRT's or CCD's.
If you cared to read what i wrote...

It would be easier if you learned English.

Well if receptors and brain can do there sure have to be an algorithm
behind doing the blending of the three sources with different
luminance, and i see no problem with an electronic DEVICE LIKE A CCD
doing the same thing.

That's because you have no understanding of what is going on.

The whole point of CCD cameras, or any color camera for that matter, is
to "unblend" the light frequencies into three discrete values.

It doesn't matter if there are three filters picking up 3 different
wavelenghts they are mixed down using an algorithm. The question is
there a way to bypass the computational effort "algorithm" mixing
using an optical device like a small lens or prism.

There is NO, repeat, NO mixing going on in a CCD.

The output is 3 numbers for each "pixel" which represent the intensity
of 3 different colors.

One more time, there is NO, repeat, NO mixing going on in a CCD.

There is quite the opposite happening.

Well visible light have a range Wikipedia"The visible spectrum (or
sometimes optical spectrum) is the portion of the electromagnetic
spectrum that is visible to (can be detected by) the human eye.
Electromagnetic radiation in this range of wavelengths is called
visible light or simply light. There are no exact bounds to the
visible spectrum; a typical human eye will respond to wavelengths in
air from 400 to 700 nm, "450-750 terahertz"

If your eyes is attached to a blue wall the wall reflect the incoming
light 450-495 nm "i do not know how to convert to terahertz".

NOW THE CONCLUSION IDIOT... LIGHT DO NOT TRAVEL AS RGB...EACH COLOR
HAVE A LIMITED RANGE SPECTRA....WHEN YOU LOOK ON A MONITOR AND SEE
BLUE...THE MONITOR SENDS OUT WAVELENGTH OF 400 TO 700 NM

THE PIXEL FILTER/SHADER BLENDS RGB TO "ONE WAVE LENGTH". SIMILAR THE
CCD SPLIT THE WAVELENGTH INTO COMPONENTS.

RGB OR CMYK IS JUST FILTERS FOR "ONE WAVE LENGTH" YOU COULD PROBABLY
MAKE A CMYK SHADER FOR A MONITOR AND IT WOULD WORK JUST FINE IF THE
YOU HAD A CMYK SPLITTER AND THE TRANSMISSION WAS CMYK

THERE WILL NEVER BE ANY CMYK OR RGB CODED LIGHT TRAVELLING THE AIR
BLUE IS BLUE AND EACH BLUE COLOR HAVE ONE SPECIFIC SPECTRUM WITHIN THE
RANGE OF 400 TO 700 NM

WIKIPEDIA:"Better color separation can be reached by three-CCD devices
(3CCD) and a dichroic beam splitter prism, that splits the image into
red, green and blue components. Each of the three CCDs is arranged to
respond to a particular color. Some semi-professional digital video
camcorders (and most professionals) use this technique. Another
advantage of 3CCD over a Bayer mask device is higher quantum
efficiency (and therefore higher light sensitivity for a given
aperture size). This is because in a 3CCD device most of the light
entering the aperture is captured by a sensor, while a Bayer mask
absorbs a high proportion (about 2/3) of the light falling on each CCD
pixel"

J

Ignorant twit.
IDIOT......

Uneducatable moron.

I hope you are not............


Using three cathodes directed to respective filter of a single "PIXEL"
cell and downmixing the RGB through a prism would lead to blasing fast
computation given a logic and aritmetic based on RGB and would not be
limited to binary computations. It is fully possible to develop an
aritmetic with base 4,8,16 or 24. Now you line up a grid of those
babies and build an architecture around it, using devices as optical
routers as feedback systems to the cathodes. You would preferably have
to create a new kind of storage, so you get rid of the freaking AD/DA
quantisisers.

Babbling nonsense.

No it is not

You haven't a clue how any of this works.

I actually have actually programmed an arithmetic system around RGB
once.

I am quite serious when i say that we will see such systems within 10
years, nonebinary computers without AD/DA binary quantisisers.
Computational systems not based in binary aritmetic and logic gates.
Instead analog computational systems using multivalued aritmetic based
on downmixing wavelenghts from ordinary cathodes and pixel shaders
through a prism using optical routers as feedback systems.

Utter, rabid, nonsense.

Many years ago a friend of mine told me the same when i told him of
digital cameras.

Spend some time on Wiki and read up how how eyes, cameras, and CRT's
work before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.

I would ask you the same

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.- Dölj citerad text -

- Visa citerad text -


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Contious optical receiver
    ... What differ a prism from a RGB mask? ... So you say the blending a CCD record is not physical? ... The output is 3 numbers for each "pixel" which represent the intensity ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Contious optical receiver
    ... What differ a prism from a RGB mask? ... wavelength to take place. ... Given big enough pixels no blending take ... and i see no problem with an electronic DEVICE LIKE A CCD ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Contious optical receiver
    ... What differ a prism from a RGB mask? ... So you say the blending a CCD record is not physical? ... The sensor array has a color filter mask over it so each "pixel" is ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Contious optical receiver
    ... What differ a prism from a RGB mask? ... spectrum that is visible to the human eye. ... It isn't simply pure wavelength. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Contious optical receiver
    ... What differ a prism from a RGB mask? ... So our brain create the RECORDED CCD result so when you print out the ... The sensor array has a color filter mask over it so each "pixel" is ...
    (sci.physics)