|
Post by nomuse on Jan 7, 2007 19:58:55 GMT -4
Methinks he doesn't mean a point source but a giant reflective surface which has lights shone on it by the way. Point source, smpoint source. The geometry stays the say (just plot from the center of the soft source). You do know what the major visual quality of a soft box or bounce sheet is, right? And why that technology might or might not be evident in the Apollo surface record?
|
|
|
Post by greigdempsey on Jan 7, 2007 20:02:37 GMT -4
Methinks he doesn't mean a point source but a giant reflective surface which has lights shone on it by the way. Point source, smpoint source. The geometry stays the say (just plot from the center of the soft source). You do know what the major visual quality of a soft box or bounce sheet is, right? And why that technology might or might not be evident in the Apollo surface record? I believe what you are doing is called obfuscation. However you can point me in the direction of whatever it is you are trying to put across if that pleases you. . I mean a valid source.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Jan 7, 2007 20:07:22 GMT -4
Obfuscation?
Here's obfuscation for you. I just took two replacement lead canisters of identical size and placed them on my desk top. The light I use is mounted to the rear of the desk, thus the angle to one lead canister (using the surface of the desk as reference horizontal) was about 45 degrees, to the second approximately 60 degrees. The further canister had a notably longer shadow.
I invite you to perform a similar experiment. I sincerely doubt, based on your belief that shadows lengthen whilst approaching a light source, that you have actually looked up from your computer to observe actual light in actual space. Don't trust instincts or the ramblings of some internet charlatan -- DO THE WORK! Do the experiment!
(Obfustication was too obfuscated. I replaced the modern term with the more accepted one.)
|
|
|
Post by greigdempsey on Jan 7, 2007 20:20:17 GMT -4
Obfuscation? Here's obfuscation for you. I just took two replacement lead canisters of identical size and placed them on my desk top. The light I use is mounted to the rear of the desk, thus the angle to one lead canister (using the surface of the desk as reference horizontal) was about 45 degrees, to the second approximately 60 degrees. The further canister had a notably longer shadow. I invite you to perform a similar experiment. I sincerely doubt, based on your belief that shadows lengthen whilst approaching a light source, that you have actually looked up from your computer to observe actual light in actual space. Don't trust instincts or the ramblings of some internet charlatan -- DO THE WORK! Do the experiment! (Obfustication was too obfuscated. I replaced the modern term with the more accepted one.) That isn't what I said was it. You do the work. with your hand or walking into the room. Please come over to MSN . I'm a lot smarter and funnier than you are. You will laugh and laugh and laugh at yourself . Believe me. You haven't answered the question why the shadows are longer.
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Jan 7, 2007 20:25:54 GMT -4
Obfuscation? Here's obfuscation for you. I just took two replacement lead canisters of identical size and placed them on my desk top. The light I use is mounted to the rear of the desk, thus the angle to one lead canister (using the surface of the desk as reference horizontal) was about 45 degrees, to the second approximately 60 degrees. The further canister had a notably longer shadow. I invite you to perform a similar experiment. I sincerely doubt, based on your belief that shadows lengthen whilst approaching a light source, that you have actually looked up from your computer to observe actual light in actual space. Don't trust instincts or the ramblings of some internet charlatan -- DO THE WORK! Do the experiment! (Obfustication was too obfuscated. I replaced the modern term with the more accepted one.) That isn't what I said was it. You do the work. with your hand or walking into the room. Please come over to MSN . I'm a lot smarter and funnier than you are. You will laugh and laugh and laugh at yourself . Believe me. You haven't answered the question why the shadows are longer. You would not understand. You are not smart enough to understand, because, by your own standards, you do not have the qualifications. You Lose- by your own rules.
|
|
|
Post by greigdempsey on Jan 7, 2007 20:36:14 GMT -4
That isn't what I said was it. You do the work. with your hand or walking into the room. Please come over to MSN . I'm a lot smarter and funnier than you are. You will laugh and laugh and laugh at yourself . Believe me. You haven't answered the question why the shadows are longer. You would not understand. You are not smart enough to understand, because, by your own standards, you do not have the qualifications. You Lose- by your own rules. That's just hunky dory by me. You missed a great opportunity to show the world what a really clever dude you are.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Jan 7, 2007 20:37:31 GMT -4
That isn't what I said was it. You do the work. with your hand or walking into the room. Please come over to MSN . I'm a lot smarter and funnier than you are. You will laugh and laugh and laugh at yourself . Believe me. You haven't answered the question why the shadows are longer. There was a room on the Moon? Forgive me if I appear to have used my eyes at least one time more often than you, but we are talking the shadow lengths of astronauts on a basically horizontal surface. Light is above that surface (well, if it was below, it would be kinda dark). Nothing you think you see when walking into a room, or waving your hand near a wall, has anything to do with that geometry. Are you so lazy that all you can do is wave your hand in front of a light -- or worse yet, just take someone else's word about what happens when you wave your hand in front of a light? Or are you willing to put money where your mouth resides and put a couple of objects on a table under the light and LOOK at them?
|
|
|
Post by greigdempsey on Jan 7, 2007 20:43:36 GMT -4
That isn't what I said was it. You do the work. with your hand or walking into the room. Please come over to MSN . I'm a lot smarter and funnier than you are. You will laugh and laugh and laugh at yourself . Believe me. You haven't answered the question why the shadows are longer. There was a room on the Moon? Forgive me if I appear to have used my eyes at least one time more often than you, but we are talking the shadow lengths of astronauts on a basically horizontal surface. Light is above that surface (well, if it was below, it would be kinda dark). Nothing you think you see when walking into a room, or waving your hand near a wall, has anything to do with that geometry. Are you so lazy that all you can do is wave your hand in front of a light -- or worse yet, just take someone else's word about what happens when you wave your hand in front of a light? Or are you willing to put money where your mouth resides and put a couple of objects on a table under the light and LOOK at them? I have been over this argument numerous times. It is a good example of something that isn't amenable to high school analysis. Let's not forget I'm the one with the physics degree . You come over to MSN and debate it properly on a level playing field too. Have a laugh, it will do you good. Laughing is healthy.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Jan 7, 2007 20:52:28 GMT -4
I see no reason to register for infantile meanderings like these. Only paying to get hit on the head would be a more stupid concept.
Physics isn't required. What, do you think light rays are bent by gravitational forces between desk lamp and desk? Or perhaps the photons change not only from waves to particles but from following a straight line to wandering around in random directions?
I can not imagine someone could sit there and claim the shadow of, say, a glass would get shorter as it was moved along a table away from a light. It takes a little over a second to do the experiment. You've been posting this nonsense for several minutes at least -- surely you can spare a moment to actually look. I can not imagine what possesses you NOT to try.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jan 7, 2007 20:53:51 GMT -4
Let's not forget I'm the one with the physics degree . How about we get a real in-depth debate here between physicists? No dumbing it down for the layman, just good old hard-core physics with supporting evidence? Are you up to a debate with another physicist? On a topic that deals specifically with physics, so that neither person can say it is not in their field?
|
|
|
Post by greigdempsey on Jan 7, 2007 20:57:39 GMT -4
I see no reason to register for infantile meanderings like these. Only paying to get hit on the head would be a more stupid concept. Physics isn't required. What, do you think light rays are bent by gravitational forces between desk lamp and desk? Or perhaps the photons change not only from waves to particles but from following a straight line to wandering around in random directions? I can not imagine someone could sit there and claim the shadow of, say, a glass would get shorter as it was moved along a table away from a light. It takes a little over a second to do the experiment. You've been posting this nonsense for several minutes at least -- surely you can spare a moment to actually look. I can not imagine what possesses you NOT to try. I could arrange for you to be hit on the head as well. If think it will further your argument.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jan 7, 2007 20:57:40 GMT -4
Let's not forget I'm the one with the physics degree . Did you reply to one of those "get a university diploma" emails? You realize those are scams, right? I don't care about your degree, if it truly exists. I only care about what you can demonstrate, and so far you have not demonstrated any special knowledge. Basically, what I am saying is that you're all talk.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Jan 7, 2007 20:59:08 GMT -4
I think he was trawling, not trolling. The entire purpose of his visit here was to get some activity on his own MSN board.
|
|
|
Post by greigdempsey on Jan 7, 2007 21:05:00 GMT -4
Let's not forget I'm the one with the physics degree . Did you reply to one of those "get a university diploma" emails? You realize those are scams, right? I don't care about your degree, if it truly exists. I only care about what you can demonstrate, and so far you have not demonstrated any special knowledge. Basically, what I am saying is that you're all talk. That's no special knowledge has been required. Come over to MSN and we'll have lots of fun and work out this hoax thing for good. My physics degree was a long time ago but that isn't the point of why I came on here. It was to demonstrate the lack of knowledge of hoax deniers. Someone tell me why the shadows are massively longer The video demonstrain the shadows getting bigger close to the light is no longer on google, What can I do? I have a copy on my computer thank goodness.
|
|
|
Post by greigdempsey on Jan 7, 2007 21:07:30 GMT -4
I think he was trawling, not trolling. The entire purpose of his visit here was to get some activity on his own MSN board. I don't, honestly. I just want to be able to reply to stuff on here in the manner I choose. I stopped posting myself some time ago because I wanted it to die.
|
|