-
No Roland. I made a reference to a (slightly) more detailed explanation. It is not averaging over time. It is measuring DIFFERENT parts of Fourier transform at different times. The...
-
@chromos: > “…To learn more, I recommend studying Schwarzschild metrics.” Seems you knowledge comes from an undergraduate class in physics. These classes would typically discuss only what happens...
-
[Continued…] This effect is very easy to describe in mathematical form — but this is separated by a few dozens of levels of abstraction from what people are used to discuss.
-
@zxaar: > “space and time do stay intact even at the center of black holes ” Where did you get it from? “Popular mechanics”?! Or “Times”? As BoS (essentially) mentions it above, “there is no...
-
Before thinking about the consumer version, keep in mind that it probably took MANY megahours of post-processing to get those 36 pixels.
-
> “… as there is no sensor size. ” Come on! The sensor size is 13Mm×13Mm. (The number of working pixels is, of course, very small — but the OP did not ask about this!)
-
Hawking Radiation is 100% no-nonsense radiation. Inspect its spectrum: it is an honest black-body spectrum.
-
Ronald, did you read the article above? It seems to claim exactly the opposite to what you wrote! The image seems to change on timescale of minute(s). From what I can see, these images are just...
-
@Victor Engel: > “… the current theory is …” There is no such thing as “the current theory”. There is GR — and there are 100s of alternative theories. The currently known data gives no way to...
-
This is not Gaussian blur — just plain upscaling from a 6×6 pixel image. (Plus “a kind of motion blur”. ...
-
In short: it is upscaled. It has “a certain analogue” of a motion blur. Otherwise, it is in perfect focus.
-
Nope. It is in perfect focus. It is just an upscaled 6×6 pixel image. ⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜ Well, I cheated a bit. The angular sizes of Cygnus X’s and of M87’s black holes are practically the...
-
> “… all of which have different evolutionary features” AFAIK: Nope! “Different combinations of many evolutionary features” — yes. The reason: “Convergent Evolution” is a very strong...
-
Are there cameras which can focus-stack with E mount lenses? I know that focus bracketing on Fuji GF has some very strong limitations since, essentially, the lens “has no ability to return to THE...
-
Why this obscession with “legally blind”? I know TONS of people who can see well, — and I know that some of them make great photos — who are absolutely helpless with reading something up close if...
-
@tm8: seems to have been a brain fаrt! Indeed, coma images a point source as a line, with different concentric areas of the lens creating different regions of this line. The smaller the aperture,...
-
Evolution DOES WORK this way. If it were not only “a small incremental advantage, relevant for a geologically short time only”, it would reappear (via convergent evolution) 100s of times in the...
-
@tm8: no, coma does not depend on ƒ/number.
-
Robert, do you realize that it is very hard¹⁾ to “take the same photo” with Hubble and Webb? The instruments are very different — their capabilities “do not compete”, but ”complement each...
-
The design papers (from about 10 years ago) discuss possibilities of fine-tuning to optimize different areas of the sensor. But if Iυnderstood it correctly, the potential improvements are going to...
Activity older than 12 months is not displayed.
|
ilza has not added any gear yet.
Total messages |
142 |
Threads started |
12 |
Last post |
9 months ago |
|