Optical Occultation of the Sun
(youtu.be)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (59)
sorted by:
" the diffraction limit depends on the size of the object as well as the receptor density in the eye." WRONG - THR APPERENT SIZE OF AN OBJCT MAY DISSAPPEAR TO YOUR EYES BECAUSE OF INBILTY TO FOCUS ON IT , WELL BEFORE THE DIFFRACRTION LIMIT
". If the horizon were the diffraction limit - this would not be possible" THE HORIZON IS THE DIFFACTION LIMIT , IT EXISTS ALL AROUND YOU IN A SPHERE , IT IS NOT THE limit OF ALL SIGHT, IT IS THE LIMIT OF PERCIEVING DEPTH, THERE ARE STILL 2 OTHER DIMENSIONS U CAN PERCIEVE, THOSE BEING LENGTH AND WIDTH
"They do shrink to dots and disappear as they approach the diffraction limit and go beyond it."
APPERENT SIZE ANF DIFFACTION LIMIT ARE NOT THE SAME THING, THE DIFFRACTION LIMIT ENDING WOULD NOT CAUSE AN OBJECT FROM 10 MILES AWAT TO SHINK, IM NOT SAYING THAT, YOU ARE , ONCE AN OBJECT IS ACTUALLY OCCULTED, THE ONLY WAY TO BRING IT BACK IS TO RAISE YOUR VIEWING HEIGHT
That’s true! That’s because of the size of the object and the receptor density, just as i explained! You don’t seem to understand what the diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is or what causes it. I can help if you let me!
If the object is larger, or the receptor density is greater - you can resolve it - regardless of its distance to you (assuming of course, its light can reach you and is bright enough when it does!)
You are positively obsessed with “depth”. Depth is in no way required to see the angular size of objects distant or very close. Why on earth do you think it is?
Imagine a picture. A 2 dimensional picture. No depth, right? Now imagine, in that same picture, you are looking at a car and a bus that are in the far distance one driving in front of the other - perhaps a view from a mountain - which are both much further than the distance to the visible horizon ( a few miles ). Do you really believe that you won’t be able to tell if the bus is larger than the car in the picture? The angular size that is apparent when viewing distant objects does not suddenly stop existing when you lack depth or when things are beyond the distance of the visible horizon. I cannot understand why you think they would, could, or ever do.
Noone said they were! The diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is the point at which you can no longer resolve an object of a given size - because it is too small (apparent size) for the receptor density in your eye. It (diffraction limit/angular resolution limit) is the distance limit where the view of distant objects shrink to a dot (then becoming a fuzzy dot) and then disappear.
You seem to be misunderstanding me. The diffraction limit is the distance at which objects of a particular size (dependent on your receptor density) can no longer be seen AFTER they have shrunk to a dot. The “cause”, if you like, of the apparent shrinking is perspective.
Right, because the light from the “occulted” object is no longer reaching the observer. What is blocking the light? Why can’t the object be zoomed back in upon, like you can with the boats which have disappeared due to being beyond the diffraction limit of the naked eye? If your view were correct, you ought to be able to do that - right?
What is blocking the light? The rising optical non opaque ground that ends at your eye height, thats why the background becomes occulted
"You are positively obsessed with “depth”. Depth is in no way required to see the angular size of objects distant or very close. Why on earth do you think it is? - this is what you doo all the time, irs your signature - you misunderstand something i said and then blame me for making you your brain fart. Depth is a part of everything you see before the horizon, thats just fact, reality, its not my obsession and you. Your example it just ridiculous cause i dont think you could ever see a car past the horizon , and even if you could, the item is still very close as compared to the distance to the stars so for yousa to expect they would act the same way is just more proof at how hard headed you are.
"It (diffraction limit/angular resolution limit) is the distance limit where the view of distant objects shrink to a dot (then becoming a fuzzy dot) and then disappear." you just contradicted yourself by saying of course they are different things and then stating how they are the same, good grief, see the problem is youre such a logical hypocrite, sorta like an illogical lefty, and then youre like "why cant you handle my faults?" Oh yes its must be my problem.....sure Dude, your hopeless.
Objects can become too apparently small to see well before the diffraction limit, and just because an object has reached the diffraction limit, doesnt mean it will shrink to a dot.
The rising of that
nonopaque ground is an optical illusion, how can an optical illusion physically block light? Can you demonstrate this on a smaller scale? If not, why not?I should have been more careful with my phrasing. I meant beyond the distance to the visible horizon at sea level (which is a few miles give or take - and you claim is the diffraction limit/distance) You can easily see beyond a few miles from a higher vantage point, like a mountain - which is why i specified that in the example.
If you believe that the diffraction limit changes when you are up higher - what causes that in your view? Diffraction limit does not change with altitude, and is a physical limitation of the eye/receiver itself.
This is why we need repetition in communication! You just misunderstood me, but your misunderstanding only became clear when you repeated your interpretation of what i told you! Now i can clarify your misunderstanding. This is the way it is supposed to work!
The horizon isn’t exactly the diffraction limit. The diffraction limit IS the distance at which objects (the distance depends on the size of the object) shrink to dots, then become fuzzy dots, and then disappear. The example you gave of the small boats that completely disappear but can be zoomed in upon and fully restored is the perfect example. They are beyond the diffraction limit for the eye, which is why they are no longer visible - even though they are still there and the light from them is still reaching your eye. They can only be brought back into view by the eye with magnification, and they are not yet at the distance of the horizon. This shows plainly that the horizon and the diffraction limit are separate. Please let me know if you still don’t understand or disagree!
Your definition of diffraction limit is unique to you. It has a meaning to everyone else, and has nothing to do with depth perception. I think i understand your particular meaning, but you haven’t been able to convey/explain what depth has to do with seeing objects. The boats that have shrunk too small to see anymore but are not beyond the horizon yet don’t have any depth. But you say they are not yet at the diffraction limit? So things that are within/before the diffraction limit can also lack depth? Then what really determines when depth suddenly stops being perceivable, if it isn’t the distance to the diffraction limit?
"The rising of that non opaque ground is an optical illusion, how can an optical illusion physically block light? Can you demonstrate this on a smaller scale? If not, why not?" The ground is non opaque , opaque being translucent or see though, it optically rising, is not an optical illusion, it is apparent, thats the way you perceive depth , at an angle of the incident light. Can i demonstrate that things are occulted by the horizon - holy - how retarded are you to even ask?
no , i dont need things repeated, you do, cause "idiot"
"he diffraction limit IS the distance at which objects (the distance depends on the size of the object) shrink to dots, then become fuzzy dots, and then disappear." wrong - that apparent size - as ive already said - apparent size and the diffraction limit are not the same thing, stop conflarting the 2. When you zoom ion on the boat - YOUR NOT USING YOUR EYE , YOUR USING ANOTHER LENSE WITH DIFFRENT OPTICS - DAHHHHH
NO MY UNDERWTANDING OF DIFFRACTION LIMIT IS NOT UNIQU TO ME , YOU JUST DONT KNOW WHAT IT IS YOU THINK IT HAS TO DO WITH APPERENT SIZE - IT DOESNT.
dUUDE fLAT eARTH IS NOT THE pSYOP. ITS DUMB PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT THINK THEY KNOW SHIT WHEN THE DONT KNOW FUCK THAT IS THE PSYOP, SO YOU ARE THE PSYOP.
PLEASE GET IT THOUGH YOUR THICK SKULL , DONT EVER MSG ME, YOUR TOO DUMB TO LEARN ANYYTHING, YOU ARE A TROLL AND A STALKER, YOU ARE SICK IN THR HEAD, YOU ARE THE MOST IDIOTIC PERSON IVE EVER TALKD TOO AND IVE TALKED TO MILLIONS. CAN I JUST BLOCK YOU, I THINK IMA TRY THAT CAUSE I THINK YOUR TOO STUPID TO STOP REPEATING THINGS LIKE A BROKEN RECORD. fOR THE LOVE OF GOD , GO AWAY.