The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: Jonathan Kirwan
Subject: Re: Make infrared goggles inexpensively (like $10!!!)
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:23:50 GMT
Organization: AT&T Broadband
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:23:50 GMT
On 17 Sep 2002 01:41:17 -0700, email@example.com (William J. Beaty)
>Jonathan Kirwan wrote in message news:...
>> There is a
>> quantum effect in the light involved in sight, none such in hearing.
>> Any analogy between them doesn't hold well.
>You seem to be arguing that an optical sensor's frequency
>response curve cannot be treated the same as an audio sensor's
>curve. Since when? Unless it comes down to triggered fluorescence
>effects or rare phenomona such as "squeezed light" noise effects,
>a frequency response curve is still a frequency response curve.
>Quantum mechanics doesn't force us to handle an optical frequency
>response in a different way. (In other words, in the limit of
>large numbers of interactions, QM becomes classical physics, and
>optical lowpass filters behave like RF lowpass filters.)
You are just arguing for arguing's sake, it seems. Not from really
understanding this. For now, I just don't have the time to worry
>Yes, there ARE some exotic situations where QM makes a difference.
>But filter response and sensor response curves are not an example.
I was addressing myself to your example of being able to hear 30kHz if
the power in that band was strong enough as an explanation as to how
one might see other wavelengths. There IS a mechanism which can allow
higher frequencies to generate sufficient travelling waves to be
detected as sound in the cochlea. But that mechanism depends on
nothing similar to how light interacts in the pigments in cones and
rods. And the analogy you gave doesn't apply.
I'm just surprised you could think so.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup