Ultraviolet & Infrared Light...

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

What is very interesting is that an INSPEC search on J. Nordberg turns up 185 hits from 1995 to date...not ONE having to do with this theory. Am I to conclude this has never been accepted in a refereed journal?? If true, is there a REASON why? I need particle unification theorems to build my quantum computer. Is anyone working on unification? We can rebuild it and make it better!

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

There are two 'flavours' of primary colours. Your post referrenced the subtractive primaries, where the colour percieved by the eye depends on the wavelengths which are absorbed by the paint. However, when discussing the electromagetic spectrum one has to refer to the additive primaries - where the perceived colour produced depends on the mixing of red, green and blue light. Good, then you should have no trouble teleporting the encrypted information to Spain for my next art show. Here, I’ll make it easier for you, just scan the surface of my painting and then reproduce a replica in some other point in space-time.

CalliArcale · Apr 6, 2005

I'd like to speak a bit about color, primary colors, and additive versus subtractive color theory in the context of the physiology of the eye. What is color? Color is how we perceive various wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation. We can see everything from red to violet; infrared and ultraviolet are just beyond what our eyes can detect. It is important to remember that color is only perception; to a photon, all that matters is its wavelength. Blue is shorter than red, but there is no other fundamental difference between the two, and there is no clear dividing line between them. So why do we perceive such clearly distinct colors? This has to do with the way our eyes work, and is actually the reason why there is such a thing as a primary color. Unless you happen to be colorblind, this is how your eye works. Light enters through the pupil, passing through a flexible lens that focuses the light on your retina (or somewhat before or after it, depending on any refractive errors in your lens). Your retina is covered with millions of specialized photosensitive cells that are really modified neurons. (Anatomically speaking, you can make a good case for your eye being part of your brain.) I'm sure you've heard of the two basic kinds: rods and cones. Counterintuitively, they do not face forward. They actually face the reflective material at the back of the retina. You have about 6.5-7 million cones and 120-130 million rods. The rods are sensitive to all visible wavelengths of light. All of them will respond equally to any photon detected in visible frequencies, so what they produce is basically grayscale. The cones, however, come in three varieties. One is most sensitive to 430-440 nm (red), one is most sensitive to 535-540 nm (green), and one is most sensistive to 560-565 nm (blue). Red, Green, Blue. This is the reason why we have primary colors. It has nothing to do with unique properties of different wavelengths of li <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

Titanium oxide is particularly favored for this Metallic Hydrogen Oxide too.

CalliArcale · Apr 6, 2005

As I think about it, I think it's actually titanium dioxide -- my memory is not helping me on this. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> The spectral signature of this compound was used to help clinch the theory that the NEO Earth captured a few years ago (J002E3) was actually the S-IV-B (Saturn V upper stage) used for Apollo 12. It's covered in the stuff, which is not commonly found on asteroids, and which is very popular for painting the outsides of rockets and spacecraft. The upshot of bright white paint is that it helps with thermoregulation; it reflects the Sun's heat. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

mrmorris · Apr 6, 2005

"Metallic Hydrogen Oxide too. " Hydrogen Oxide is the chemical name for water. It's neither metallic, nor useful as a pigment.

CalliArcale · Apr 6, 2005

I can't believe I didn't even notice that....I just glossed past it. It's possible jatslo is referring to the way a particular pigment is referred to on the package; sometimes they only include part of the chemical name. (Artists are not always chemists. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> You'd think paint manufacturers would employ chemists, though....) A popular name for water is dihydrogen monoxide: DHMO. Under this unexpected name, it has starred in many reports and science projects as students try to put one over on a few more people. It's amazing how many times fresh blood can be found for the prank, really, especially since it's usually pulled on people who really ought to know better (like teachers). The high point of the DHMO joke is this website: Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division. They explain the huge numbers of deaths annually due to dihydrogen monoxide in the environment, how commercial DHMO emissions are altering weather patterns, that DHMO is found in all cancer cells, and so forth. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> jatslo, did you perhaps mean a different chemical? I admit the only white pigment I've used in my own paintings has been the ever-popular "Titanium White", so I don't know what others are out there. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

Think about radio waves and paint for a second, and then state your first thought.

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

Hydrogen Oxide is the chemical name for water. It's neither metallic, nor useful as a pigment. Water is a by-product of burning hydrogen, yes. I am talking about burning an undiscovered metal transformed from liquid hydrogen. I newly undiscovered oxide is produced when you burn the metal. This oxide could be utilized in stealth technologies.

CalliArcale · Apr 6, 2005

Oh, so you're referring to an *imaginary* pigment? <img src="/images/icons/shocked.gif" /> Well, I wasn't expecting that. From the way you talked about it, you made it sound as if it really existed. Okay, I took a fair bit of chemistry before switching to computer science. What you describe won't work. First of all, liquid metallic hydrogen is an exotic material that only exists under really fantastically extreme pressures. It's not something you can paint on the outside of a vehicle. Secondly, it doesn't matter what state the element was in before you bond it to another element. Once you make that bond, the chemical properties change dramatically. It doesn't matter if your hydrogen is solid, liquid, or gaseous. Once you bond two hydrogens to one oxygen, you've got water. Thirdly, the extreme temperatures and pressures under which liquid metallic hydrogen can exist preclude bonding it to anything. It won't even bond to itself, which is its normal state when its either a liquid or a gas. It's more like a plasma too dense to act like a plasma. Fourthly, this putative molecule is nonexistent. How, then, do you know it will reflect all colors of visible light, just like titanium oxide? I suppose you could compare it to real H2O properties -- water does indeed reflect very well indeed. Enceladus, which is composed mostly of water ice and has a very young surface, has an albedo (reflectivity) in visible light of nearly 1.0. It is the shiniest object in the solar system. Lastly, why would you want a super-reflective substance on a stealth vehicle? Making it reflective will only make it brighter and more obvious to spot. Stealth vehicles are normally non-reflective in radar wavelengths and either non-reflective in visible wavelengths (that is, they're painted black) or are painted in camoflage colors (as with the F-22 Raptor). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

CalliArcale · Apr 6, 2005

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Think about radio waves and paint for a second, and then state your first thought. <hr /></blockquote> I'm afraid you've lost me there. What do radio waves have to do with visible light, apart from being electromagnetic radiation? They are far too long for our eyes to detect, and so the rules of primary colors do not apply to them. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

yurkin · Apr 6, 2005

Calli That’s really interesting. So we don’t actually see full spectrum in color. Thanks

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

definetly not. We see only a very, very small portion of the spectrum, from ~400 nanometers (nm) to 700 nm. The spectrum ranges from kilometer long radio waves to gamma rays that are .001 nm or so. Big, big range! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

CalliArcale · Apr 6, 2005

No, we do see the full visible spectrum in color. But the way we see it is by comparing the data from three different cells sensitive to different regions of the visible spectrum. The cones are most sensitive in red, green, and blue, but they do also detect the intermediary frequencies to a lesser degree, and they overlap a bit on those intermediary colors. By comparing how strongly each of the cones is firing in comparison to the others and correlating it to the overall light level (determined by the colorblind rods, which are most sensitive in the green range but which are much more sensitive to light in general), your retina deduces what the color should be. The information is then passed on to the visual cortex at the back of the brain. EDIT: After reading Saiph's response, it looks like there are two ways to take the comment. I don't know which of us understood you correctly, yurkin, so I'll leave mine up too in case it's helpful. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

yurkin · Apr 6, 2005

Yeah I was referring to visible spectrum when I said full spectrum. Okay I read it over I think I get it now.

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

First of all, liquid metallic hydrogen is an exotic material that only exists under really fantastically extreme pressures. It's not something you can paint on the outside of a vehicle. Then how is Titanium Oxide manufactured? Last time I looked up Titanium, Titanium was a metal, so why couldn't I utilize metal hydrogen oxide as pigment? Secondly, it doesn't matter what state the element was in before you bond it to another element. Once you make that bond, the chemical properties change dramatically. It doesn't matter if your hydrogen is solid, liquid, or gaseous. Once you bond two hydrogens to one oxygen, you've got water. Excuse me, but if I transmute lead to gold, I have gold, not lead. The periodic table of elements could have a new candidate, and that element could break down into some cousin of water. Thirdly, the extreme temperatures and pressures under which liquid metallic hydrogen can exist preclude bonding it to anything. It won't even bond to itself, which is its normal state when its either a liquid or a gas. It's more like a plasma too dense to act like a plasma. Hey, their making progress, and I believe they are going to figure it out real soon. Fourthly, this putative molecule is nonexistent. How, then, do you know it will reflect all colors of visible light, just like titanium oxide? I suppose you could compare it to real H2O properties -- water does indeed reflect very well indeed. Enceladus, which is composed mostly of water ice and has a very young surface, has an albedo (reflectivity) in visible light of nearly 1.0. It is the shiniest object in the solar system. That's right, the brightest, but that does not definitely define metal hydrogen as the brightest. I think it is transparent when purified, and I don't think it will refle

a_lost_packet_ · Apr 6, 2005

jatslo - ...Another Note: If we applied enough pressure to liquid hydrogen, the heat would eventually turn the metal into a newly discovered carbon. We could then place the same carbon in the anvil, and convert the carbon to crystal, grind up the crystals for use in pigments... <blink /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

If your an expert on carbon, then why don't you tell us how to manufacture carbon, instead of <blink>. What a waste of bandwidth.

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

your statement of "newly discovered carbon" doesn't make any sense. The only way to make carbon from hydrogen is through fusion. Which does not involve "liquid hydrogen" and produces standard, everyday isotopes of carbon. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

your statement of "newly discovered carbon" doesn't make any sense. Why is it so hard to invision newly discovered anything, when your in town?

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

because you don't give me any evidence. I produce evidence, and thurough, logical arguements to answer your questions and posts. You make wild, disconnected statements. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

petepan · Apr 6, 2005

Calli, As I think about it, I think it's actually titanium dioxide -- my memory is not helping me on this. Your thinking is correct, it is Titanium Dioxide that is used to make white paints (and inks too). My job entails colour matching and we use TiO2. Cheers Peter

a_lost_packet_ · Apr 6, 2005

Jatslo - If your an expert on carbon, then why don't you tell us how to manufacture carbon, instead of <blink>. OK. Go to the store and buy a box of graphite pencils. Chop them up and remove the wood, metal collar and eraser. Put the graphite in a pile. You now have a pile of carbon. (Well, with a few additives thrown in by the pencil manufacturer I bet.) Do this a bunch of times. Then, you will have a bigger pile of carbon. If you grind it up really, really, well, then you will have a pile of finely ground carbon. You could do the same with diamond rings. But, I can never find out how to remove the eraser. :/ In all seriousness; Jatslo. I'm "all for" people getting excited about learning new things. However, some of this is obviusly very new to you. You may wish to study some of it a little more closely before you post. You should also study a little bit more before you start to criticize others when they correct you, ask questions or proclaim that they can't understand what you are writing. They may have very valid reasons. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

gfpaladin · Apr 7, 2005

Then how is Titanium Oxide manufactured? Last time I looked up Titanium, Titanium was a metal, so why couldn't I utilize metal hydrogen oxide as pigment? Titanium oxide can be processed from the ore rutile or the ore illmenite. There is no 'ore' for metallic hydrogen. Excuse me, but if I transmute lead to gold, I have gold, not lead. The periodic table of elements could have a new candidate, and that element could break down into some cousin of water. You are confusing two different processes. When you speak of changing lead to gold, (1) you are talking about a change in atomic number, which means a change in the number of protons/neutrons present. and (2) you are STILL on the periodic chart of elements. Yes, the table could have new ELEMENTS (witness the research that went into the lanthanoid and actinoid series). You appear to be confusing ELEMENTS with MOLECULES formed from bonding elements. The process you are confusing this with is 'atomic and molecular bonding'. We can divide bonding into two broad classes: (1)Primary atomic bonding and (2)Secondary Atomic and molecular bonds. The former consists of ionic, covalent, and metallic bonds. The latter consists of permanent dipole bonds (van der Waals bonds) and flucuating dipole bonds. As a side note, the hydrogen bond is a special case of the permanent dipole-dipole interaction between polar molecules. I think it is transparent when purified, and I don't think it will reflect much light at all. And the evidence you are basing this on is...? newly discovered carbon Carbon, the element, is well known. Are you speculating on a newly discovered lattice structure of carbon? I fail to see why you would use fusion to create the element C first!

gfpaladin · Apr 7, 2005

I need particle unification theorems to build my quantum computer. Actually, I don't think that is true. You need to understand qbits and how to manipulate them, right?

Ultraviolet & Infrared Light...

jatslo

Guest

jatslo

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

jatslo

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

mrmorris

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

jatslo

Guest

jatslo

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

yurkin

Guest

Saiph

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

yurkin

Guest

jatslo

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

jatslo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

jatslo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

petepan

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

gfpaladin

Guest

gfpaladin

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page