A version of this video (and all my other educational ones) without background music is available on my DailyMotion: www.dailymotion.com/video/x891x7z

@nowsc

Жыл бұрын

Could you just mention a couple of examples here? I clicked on that link and it just never ends with videos, and I am not going to bother with it.

@nowsc

Жыл бұрын

Just tell me if you don’t know, instead of sending me off to some link

The mud and asphalt analogy was FUCKING BRILLIANT

@toxin1662

Жыл бұрын

@pyropulse Well I always thought analogies are useful to demonstrate how things behave, not why they behave the way they do. I.e now I understand that a light ray which is refracted behaves similarly to how a truck which drives through mud would behave. In my mind the quality of an analogy is determined by it's accessibility and not it's descriptiveness or detail. Of course you could call this blindly going along with something but I call it trusting the person making the analogy. If you don't want to give them the benefit of the doubt, fine but why do you give it to any other source of information then? After all isn't the metric by which you determine what and whom to trust also defined by things you have trusted in the past? So to me it seems you'll have to blindly go along with things either way if you want to do anything at all.

@LucVignolles

Жыл бұрын

@pyropulse I don't know how far you are in your field of study, but you'll realize at some point that everything in physics is some sort of analogy for reality, even down to the most elaborated mathematical descriptions. We don't have a perfect theory for anything yet, all we have are better and better approximations, and all that matters is how useful these approximations are. In the present case the truck analogy isn't even a bad one, as you usually use plannar waves to demonstrate refraction with the wave description of light, and these plannar waves have a spacial width All of this is to say that i disagree with you, analogies are incredibly useful, as long as you know their limitations, and that is also true for any actual theory on anything

@LucVignolles

Жыл бұрын

@pyropulse Well yeah, F=ma is a pretty powerful tool to study the motion of point-like bodies. But every time you use it to study the effects of gravity, you are using the fact that Gravity is **analogous** to a force, while we know now of a better description for them in the form of the theory of relativity, which doesn't involve a force. You could also plug this formula with a centrifugal force, but you need to remember that the effects of that force are **analogous** to the effects of a non-Inertial frame of reference. It's still a fictious force.

@LucVignolles

Жыл бұрын

@pyropulse so from the point of view of someone preferring inertial frames of reference, those forces are an analogy, a perfect one actually, meaning that the underlying math is the same and you'll get the same results. I guess that's what you mean here by real In the case of the truck here, it's useful to get intuitive understanding of why simply changing the speed of propagation of something can alter it's direction. Nothing more than that Not powerful enough to get mathematical results, sure, but better than nothing when explaining to someone with little understanding of the wave like properties of light Would you have been happy if instead then analogy with mechanical waves had been used ?

@jamesrindley6215

Жыл бұрын

Unfortunately the mud and asphalt analogy is wrong. If you want to understand it then look at Fermilab "Why does light bend when it enters glass?".

Honestly this is the best video that explains how focus and focal length works

What a great video! I can only imagine that you have a career in teaching, since you are great at explaining complex matters, so that they appear simple!

I'm reading up on visual perception for a cognitive psychology class. This was very helpful to get me around the basics of how our visual system works. Also made me realize how much our eyes (and our bodies and our brains) are doing so much work. Thank you very much for this content! 🎉

Very nicely written and produced! Optics is a vast subject, and it’s mysterious to most people. But , you have demystified it and distilled it down to just 12 entertaining minutes. I’m really looking forward to what you have to say about x-Ray optics. Bravo!

The focus and Lenses part really clicked with me as too why we only dealt with point sources, I just never knew that was all that was needed! Thanks for the nostalgia!

Very fascinating video with a mundane title. Should have been something like "Why telescopes use mirrors and microscopes/cameras use lenses"

@sdgamer9427

8 ай бұрын

That's misleading. Newtonian telescopes use mirrors, but Refractive telescopes use lenses with no mirror.

People's ability to emulate perception used to be nothing short of magic to me before watching this video. Thanks for providing such a succinct explanation.

That's the best video I've seen about the topic, it's just what I was looking for. I need more!

What an excellent video- covering a huge range efficiently and effectively. Concise, clear, with enough scope to give a great intro in a short time but without giving any misconceptions. Excellent work, highly underrated. Thank you.

Only 1k views, this is great, this needs more views.

I’m 53. I wish I had seen this when I was 15 during my first physics class, if for no other reason than to grasp why images can be inverted. The use of animation to help reinforce a concept, along with this brilliant description of the concept, is astounding to me. Using this as an example, if I don’t get a fundamental understanding of optical inversion, I’ll end up with 38 years of difficulty with geometric optics. But if/when I get a grasp of the basics at an almost intuitive level, building upon that knowledge is possible. Nice work.

@opticaldaira

12 күн бұрын

very sad story ;(

I was always comforable with wave optics but never with ray optics because the concept of focus and "forming an image" was never clear to me. I had the factors you listed in mind but wasn't able to put all of them together and make it click. You hepled me do that. Thanks a lot!!

@ronjon7942

Жыл бұрын

It’s truly amazing getting that ‘click.’ It’s what allows me to build upon the basics. See my comment a few above…

Great video. Would love to see a video on nonlinear optical processes (e.g., supercontinuum generation).

@ImprobableMatter

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks, I am hoping to get around to more advanced optics topics in due time, but one of the first I am planning to cover is x-ray optics since I have some experience in the field.

@boredscientist5756

2 жыл бұрын

@@ImprobableMatter Agree! (working on Photonic Crystal Fibers and supercontinuum generation here, can help if needed)

@boredscientist5756

2 жыл бұрын

Totally ;)! Let's talk about Photonic Crystal Fibers while he is at it!

@benhammel7173

2 жыл бұрын

@@ImprobableMatter definitely looking forward to that! I use XRD in my research and generally interested in x-ray scattering and spectroscopy. Curious to see what you discuss in your video.

@davifr

2 жыл бұрын

@@ImprobableMatter Great! I'd love to see a video about both of these topics.

Me and my 12 year old son really liked your video!

Thank you so much for making this. I was having some trouble understanding how the lens focus light rays that were perfectly orthogonal to the lens and parallel. Nearly every other video or image describing this gave these extremely simple examples which to me all seemed to contradict each other. Your example at 6:05 finally made it make sense.

The reason why in your everyday life you don't notice things becoming blurry in the distance is because your brain tricks you in a few ways. Firstly your eye is actually never standing still, it's constantly darting all over to scan your FOV, it's just so fast and the movements are so minor that you don't consciously notice and your brain just sorta edits it out. Secondly your brain will just remember what a place looked like the last time you focused on it and just keep that there, so to you it looks like it's still in focus. Lastly your brain doesn't necessarily need to have your eyes focused on an object to recognize what it is, it's really good at recognizing objects and as such will just reconstruct them even from a blurry image and make it look sharp to you. This however is also the basis of most visual illusions and is why you often have the experience of thinking you saw something out of the corner of your eye only to look and see it's something totally different, especially when you think you see someone. Your brain is especially biased towards recognizing humans and especially faces and as such will often wrongly see them and insert them into places where they aren't. The fact that we experience the world as basically unconstrained by the limits of optics, unless you use glasses, has also presented a huge issue for movie makers. Cameras of course can't do any of these things and when we watch a movie we just see it on a 2D plane were we don't need to bother focusing at all. For a long time therefore movie makers did everything to avoid having visible blur because it looked unnatural or were very careful about making the audience not notice it, early on in the history of cinema it also tended to be the goal to avoid calling attention to the fact that someone was watching a movie. Later on however that taboo was broken and movie makers started using focus and blur as an active tool, it's fairly common for example to focus on an object in the foreground to only later reveal the background when something happens in it. This also lead to media which never had this issue in the first place to reverse engineer the effect, animation and games of course never had to deal with focus since the scene is rendered as a 2D image, but methods to replicate the action of a lens were found in order to utilize similar effects.

@ronjon7942

Жыл бұрын

This was great. I find it interesting to zoom in on a jpeg of an aircraft. I really , really like airplanes and have trained myself to recognize a lot of them from most angles, even when the image is only of a small part of the entire craft - much like your description of humans being able to easily recognize faces. Anyway, what I find interesting is after zooming in until the image is so pixelated it’s not recognizable, I’ll zoom back out until my brain recognizes the airplane. Then my brain somehow replaces the poor quality image from that’s in my memory, and my recollection of the airplane will be clear and in the orientation of it in the image.

Answered everything I wanted to know about optics of camera lens and human eyes. Explained so many things that textbooks could not. Thank you!

You should cover every basic science topic. You made it sound so easy to understand. You should start a basic educational video series about science,i would pay for it! Thanks for the video!!

Very good explanation. You have clarified quite a lot my understanding of optics, thanks!!

I recently found your channel and subscribed, I'm excited to see where it goes and how it grows

You have simplified such a complex topic amazing

These videos are so clear and well presented... I hope you keep making them. Thank you very much!!!

I can't imagine a much better video on this topic than what I just watched! Great explanation and illustrations!

Incredible explanation! This video caused a 'click' in my brain and the concepts are much more clearer now for me.

I must pause and say, bravo sir. This is delightful, thank you.

Hello! First off - major thanks for the videos you are posting. They are just about the best I’ve ever seen on the topics you discuss! I have a question: What software are you using to create your graphics?

@ImprobableMatter

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks. I am using InkScape, which is a free and open source vector graphics editor.

@themagicswedesk8

2 жыл бұрын

@@ImprobableMatter Thank you for the reply!

Your early videos are confusing. Your later videos are insanely engaging I look forward to see wtf you're going to do with this

@ImprobableMatter

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks, that's why it's called Improbable Matter. :)

I absolutely love these videos! Optics and signals are incredibly interesting! Also, I wasn’t expecting to hear the famous Tico Tico!

Hmmm...... you have made a dizzing-enigma into the obvious, Well-Done.

This is the best video on cameras i have ever seen, thank you!

I always thought refraction in glass occurs because light as an electromagnetic wave is an object that follows the laws of quantum theory and thus, is forced to take the fastest way, which isn't straight because then it needed to travel all the way through the glass, along the hypothenuse. So it needs to go a longer distance through the air before entering the glass at an angle closer to the normal, reducing the length of the hypothenuse and therefore the distance it has to travel through the glass. I learned that in a physics book adressed to 12 year olds, nevertheless, I honestly think that this explanation sounds way more convenient than the "light is driving around a corner with the outer tires turning faster than the inner ones" one.

@ImprobableMatter

Ай бұрын

Yes, the more advanced explanation is that the path is the fastest, due to the difference in electric permittivities between glass and air.

What I find amazing is lenses evolved in nature to the level of sharpness we and other mammals and birds can see.

I love these videos!

this man knows everything

Great explanation! It helped me a lot!

Very informative. Thank you.

helps explain why close objects like roses in our garden are blurry and apartment buildings several miles away are crystal clear!

So well explained! Thanks a lot!

Excellent explanations!

amazing video and very well explained. thank you!

This was great, thank you loads!

I loved this

very clear! thank you for what you do!

Great video. Which software did you use to do the animations?

@ImprobableMatter

8 ай бұрын

Inkscape.

this video was on fire!

Superb

amazing video

thank u ashens

Never seen the example with the mudy road and the car Perfect analogy though

Awesome, do more educational videos, you are on fire

How is the size of the focal plane determined?

@ImprobableMatter

4 ай бұрын

In principle, it can be as large as you like. In reality, it's to do with how big your optic is, how big your detector is, the housing and so on.

Question: If in a telescope I have two eyepieces with different focal lengths. One has 20mm focal length while another is at 10mm, with the 10mm supposedly producing greater magnification but with a narrower field of field. The trouble is I don’t know why it is like that- why does the 10mm focal length produce greater magnification but is limited to a narrower field of view. I would assume it’s to do with the shape of the lens having more curvature and thus refracting power, but I don’t know how this links in with seeing a larger image. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.

@ImprobableMatter

3 ай бұрын

I would have thought it would be the other way around, like here: www.edmundoptics.co.uk/knowledge-center/application-notes/imaging/understanding-focal-length-and-field-of-view/

@townley1017

3 ай бұрын

@@ImprobableMatter I don’t know if it’s anything to do with it being a telescope and not a camera ? I have a physics book that says the opposite to my telescope manual but it’s talking about a camera in the book🤷🏼‍♂️

@ImprobableMatter

3 ай бұрын

@@townley1017Might be another aspect of the design. What are the different lenses are like, physically?

@townley1017

3 ай бұрын

@@ImprobableMatter I’ll have a look. The book I’ve got is very thorough so I should find my answer in there. I’ll report back once I’ve figured it out.

Great Video. There is just one thing at 3:45 that could lead to missunderstandings. The squash ball loses some energy when it touches the wall, so the angle of exit is different to the angle of entry.

Superb.

Please tell me what dictates the resolving precision of a mirror or lens and why.

@ImprobableMatter

Жыл бұрын

The resolution is determined by how precisely the optic is shaped, by the wavelength of the light, among other things.

@philflip1963

Жыл бұрын

@@ImprobableMatterThanks for the reply. I've also recently been informed that though parabolic mirrors would be excellent since they do not suffer form spherical aberation they would be far more difficult to shape accurately enough for visible light.

Me encantó cada segundo, resumiste años de mis estudios de optica, me encantó.

Very good video make more like this pls ❤

2:20 wait, so everything's upside down and my brain lies to me all the time...?

@ImprobableMatter

2 жыл бұрын

Always has been.

Nice 👍🏾

Great video, I learned a bit. Im still fuzzy on what the aperture’s actual function is in a modern camera. Does it serve the same function as an adjustable pinhole box? I just feel like the function has to be different when lenses are in play.

@ImprobableMatter

7 ай бұрын

First of all, your camera has to have some size of aperture - it can't be infinitely big or infinitely small. The reason to adjust the size of an aperture on a modern camera (it has lenses to focus the light, no need to use the pinhole effect) is to adjust how much light is getting in and therefore how bright the image is. If the image is too bright, it might saturate and everything becomes washed out. If the image is too dark, you can't see anything.

@cdelapaz5

7 ай бұрын

For some reason I feel like im missing some simple stupid principle that I cant wrap my brain around. So I appreciate the explanations. I do get that the aperture blocks light and how it affects shutter speed and all that. However it somehow affects focal length right? because then you widen the aperture, you get that blurry effect behind your subject, basically you narrow your “in focus” range.

@ImprobableMatter

7 ай бұрын

You're not wrong to be confused, there is something I didn't get to in this video called "depth of field". It's not the focal length, but it is to do with what happens to objects that aren't quite in focus. A smaller aperture means things away from the focal point are clearer (but the whole image is dimmer).

fiberoptics would be fascinating to know more about simci it is the very medium this data is sent thru 🤩

@ronjon7942

Жыл бұрын

Well, only the binary data is sent; actually all kinds of channels are able to be sent through fibre due to its incredible capacity for bandwidth. It’s only after a computer reassembles this binary data and decodes it into an image…or text, or video, or etc….that you’ll see on the display. Fibre optics use optical laws to transfer data, but it’s still just a type of medium for data transfer - just like a wired or wireless connection also passes digital data.

Great video! I just have a question that I can't quite comprehend. Imagine I have a telescope which consists of two convex lenses, and I'm trying to image the moon. Since the moon is basically at "infinite distance" (relatively to the objective, i.e. the lens closest to the moon), a real image of the moon is created at the focal length of the objective. Firstly, I don't understand how big this image actually is, since the magnification formula says that M=-d_i/d_o, and d_o is huge (the distance of the moon) while d_i is equal to f (say 200mm). So the magnification should be an extremely number, right?. Then, a second lens is used to create a second image of this first image. Lastly, my eyeball effectively acts as another lens and can look at this second image after the eyepiece and supposedly it should appear enlarged. Why does the image appear enlarged? Have I made some wrong assumptions? Thank you!

@ImprobableMatter

2 жыл бұрын

Have a look at an example like this: www.livephysics.com/problems-and-answers/optics/lens-system-image-distance-magnification/ For the moon, you might as well set the distance to the object to infinity. The magnification applies if you put a digital camera detector (CCD) at the final image plane. Just imagine your entire eye is the same as the detector (you can consider another system with a third lens if you like, but you'll get the same answer).

Whatever your undertaking may be, good optics are paramount.

10/10 thanks:)

How about vision?

Optical fibers are missing sadly!

Certo então só r viu se fala alguma novidade sobre as roupas e é só

Please make a video on how the camera of a U2 spy plane film objects while traveling over 70 000 feet above the surface

Pixels Understood is solution To images formed by television

The colour brown 8⁠-⁠)

🙏🌹🇮🇳 PSSPPP 🇮🇳 PALOJU JAI SRIRAM 🇮🇳🌹🙏

Fé no nosso país de um beijo e o almoço de ontem foi muito boa noite e é o almoço de ontem e o cafezinho da tarde

Fala alguma é só no centro da cidade de um e e o almoço amanhã às três dias quando chegar no trabalho da empresa de trabalho e o almoço de ontem foi embora e é só no centro

nice work, you could continue with the story by talking about the 4k (and beyond) myth, where ppl think their camera can record 4k+ resolution but the lens is already restricted to 2k and they are only generating data rubbish ;-)

@sashimanu

Жыл бұрын

What makes you think the lens (even the el cheapo entry level 18-600 paperweights) are resolution limited to only 2000 line pairs on the longer side of the picture?

@snakeoilaudio

Жыл бұрын

@@sashimanu you can measure the resolution

The THumbnail looks like a string instrument, like a banjo or smth.

Ch e é só centro de São Paulo e é só no é no centro de um beijo e é só no é só no centro é só no é o almoço amanhã e te falo se eu for lá buscar no centro de São Paulo e é só r o almoço

T amo muito muito sucesso sempre felicidades e muitas alegrias para você também e o almoço amanhã de manhã e o cafezinho tava no forno e é só r o almoço de ontem e o almoço amanhã de manhã r da manhã e a noite toda hora ri muito forte mas se encontra

D fui no

F e o almoço amanhã às noite eu te mando msg de manhã e o cafezinho tava precisando de alguma coisa ER no grupo de manhã r da manhã e o cafezinho da tarde para todos vcs vão vir aqui

Gr CV para todos os momentos da vida da vida de vcs e de e o cafezinho tava no centro da igreja

Fé e é o almoço amanhã de manhã r da um beijo no coração e o almoço amanhã de um pedido para mim ir no mercado e o cafezinho tava precisando de alguma coisa de mim ER r viu se fala comigo no grupo de manhã e o almoço de hoje

C a tarde toda vez por favor te amo tanto o almoço amanhã de manhã e a gente vê o valor de cada vez no centro de São Paulo e é o almoço de ontem e é o cafezinho da manhã e a gente se encontra lá no grupo de manhã r viu se fala é só r viu o

G Du ei ele é só r o cafezinho tava precisando muito muito muito muito sucesso sempre vcs vão vir embora agora a noite a todos da família e o cafezinho tava no forno e o cafezinho da tarde para você e a gente se encontra no shopping hj é só no centro de um beijo e o almoço de hoje e é o cafezinho tava precisando muito de um pedido de um pedido de

F e é só no é só no é só no é o almoço amanhã de manhã e a noite a gente vê se encontra lá ER no grupo de manhã e a noite toda vez por causa de mim ir lá buscar

Fala comigo no grupo da família e é o almoço de hoje e é só no centro de um beijo e é só r o almoço de hoje né se fala alguma novidade da vida de vcs e de e é

G o cafezinho tava no forno e é só r viu o almoço de ontem e o almoço de ontem foi embora e é só r viu se encontra no shopping né amiga e é só no centro de um e e o almoço de hoje e é só r o almoço amanhã de manhã e

D fui lá no grupo da escola da e e é só no é só no é o cafezinho da manhã e a noite a gente vê o valor de cada um pedido para todos vcs estão fazendo as coisas por ai sim entendi agora eu tô aqui no hospital agora da é r é o cafezinho tava é o é só no é só no é

C BB GG GG e o almoço de hoje né se encontra lá no grupo da escola da tia Maria e a gente se fala e é só no é só no centro da igreja de um beijo e é só r viu o almoço de ontem foi

“How optics work”… so, optics is plural?

@ImprobableMatter

Жыл бұрын

You can have a single optic, yes.

@nowsc

Жыл бұрын

… what would be a couple of examples of the single optic? Thanks in advance!

@ImprobableMatter

Жыл бұрын

@@nowsc "You can learn about a new type of optic for spacecraft in the video linked at the end."

@ronjon7942

Жыл бұрын

You’ve the God given gift of evolution of an optic nerve.

@nowsc

Жыл бұрын

@@ronjon7942 I’m not religious. Please leave religion out of it when you’re telling me things. Kindest regards.

Y a noite toda ET de t e é só r o almoço de hoje né a gente se fala alguma novidade sobre as crianças e o almoço de ontem foi muito difícil é r é é é r é o cafezinho da manhã de manhã r da um jeito r e a

Du ND no celular g Du ND de e é só r viu se encontra lá ER hoje e é o almoço de hoje né a gente vê o cafezinho da tarde para todos os dias de natal de natal de natal de natal de natal de natal de natal de um beijo no rosto e é só no centro

Gr de manhã r da um jeito r e o almoço amanhã de manhã r da manhã de um jeito de ir no mercado e é o cafezinho da manhã de manhã r da manhã de um beijo e é só r o almoço amanhã de um beijo no coração de Deus no comando e o cafezinho da manhã e o

F da vida da e é é é é o errrre rret de todos vcs vão ficar e é só r o cafezinho e o almoço de ontem e o almoço amanhã de manhã e a gente

G Du ND no celular da tua irmã e é só r o cafezinho e é só no é só r o almoço de ontem foi embora amanhã de manhã e a gente vê

Great lesson in the basics of geometric optics, but can you explain how a holographic image is captured and why EUV lithographic masks look like holograms?

Yikes🎉

You do not have scientific honesty in transmission. The word camera comes from the Arabic word قمرة, and the Arab scientist Ibn al-Haytham (965-1038), was the first to explain how to see and reverse the image