Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Digital camera noise reduction idea

Oh? I guess physics has changed in the 40 years or so since I last
studied it. Seems to me, that at that time, light was made up of
'photons', and was only in the 'electromagnetic spectrum' by virtue of
wavelength considerations. VERY different from the flow of electrons,
at least by the standards I studied. Has this changed?

Oh and another thing to cook your noodle; gamma rays are
electromagnetic and can cause nuclear reactions.
How you like that? Learn that 40 years ago?
 
R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
No but there seems that there's some confusion here: light is precisely
coupled undulations in the electric and magnetic fields. These are
quantised, and the quantum is called the photon.

The flow of electrons is another story. But it can be cast in the same
terms. For that matter, sound waves in solids can be cast in the same
form: there, you'd probably think of them as "waves", but in fact they
can also be thought of as consisting of particles-phonons. And so on.

Somebody once told me that even machine-gun bullets will show a
diffraction pattern.

That'd be a fun experiment! ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
A

acl

Jan 1, 1970
0
Somebody once told me that even machine-gun bullets will show a
diffraction pattern.

That'd be a fun experiment! ;-)

Hah, in fact, everything will; for that matter, the person who told
you that could, in principle, form a diffraction pattern with you :)
The reason we don't see all these effects is that the wavelength of
the wavepacket describing you is, basically, zero, so you behave
classically (just like for light we can use ray optics so long as the
light doesn't pass through an aperture comparable to its wavelength or
smaller).

The largest objects for which wave effects have been observed so far
are buckyballs (c60 fullerenes), by the group of Zeilinger in austria:
http://www.univie.ac.at/qfp/research/matterwave/c60/index.html
(well, maybe larger things have been already done, but I haven't heard
about them). People are now trying to diffract a virus, which is
practical if difficult; this should start posing interesting
philosophical problems!
 
R

Rich Grise, Plainclothes Hippie

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hah, in fact, everything will; for that matter, the person who told you
that could, in principle, form a diffraction pattern with you :) The
reason we don't see all these effects is that the wavelength of the
wavepacket describing you is, basically, zero, ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ah! Now I get it! I Am The Zero Point! ;-D

Thanks!
Rich
 
R

Richard Henry

Jan 1, 1970
0
I was curious if anyone has thought of the following way to
reduce image noise, in particular noise that comes from an
electromagnetic source i.e. not light. The idea is,
just cover most of the camera with tinfoil, everything except
the lens of course. By this method, the only signal noise
that affects the analog sensor elements will be of either
internal origin (the circuits) or optical.

But will it work? I haven't tried it, since I temporarily don't
have a digital camera.

If you are seeing images on the display caused by external rf, then
you are holding a television, not a digital camera.
 
R

Ron Hunter

Jan 1, 1970
0
Oh and another thing to cook your noodle; gamma rays are
electromagnetic and can cause nuclear reactions.
How you like that? Learn that 40 years ago?

Yep, although not nearly as penetrating as some others.
 
R

Ron Hunter

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
Somebody once told me that even machine-gun bullets will show a
diffraction pattern.

That'd be a fun experiment! ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

Can you imagine trying to convince the teacher that you only brought
that machine gun to school as part of your science project? Grin.
 
R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
Can you imagine trying to convince the teacher that you only brought
that machine gun to school as part of your science project? Grin.

I think for an effective demo your target needs to be something
like prison bars. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
Top