/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4962165
The camera's sensor wouldn't get the returning photons due to their absorbed energy after hitting the walls/door/etc. you would get noise.

Finally, one of these I can disprove. Doors are made of wood, and wood doesn't reflect light, so there wouldn't be an image on it to film.

>>4962171
even if it was a perfect mirror:
reflexion

>a powerful computer(like alienware)

lel

>>4962171
No, you can't see something that doesn't reflect light. Learn more, dickhead.

>>4962170
>>4962171
>>4962176
That pic is actually based on recent research. They visualized an object around a corner based on the photons registered on the camera.

>Ramesh Raskar: Imaging at a trillion frames per second
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA

>>4962179
But I can see lots of things don't reflect light. I'll name a few things in this room:
Wooden desk
Wall
Carpet
Paper

I swear, you physics guys have learned so much, it's like you got rid of common sense to make room.

>>4962184
Take a laser when it's night and point it at table. Put a finger close to the table, exactly where you'd expect reflection to go to. Watch in amazment as your finger is lit by diffuse light and realize your own stupidity.

>>4962180
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA
It can work the way the video shows but the angles in the comic are just retarded so that would not work

>>4962175
thought the same thing
that's why it wouldn't work OP

>>4962189
That's just stray light coming off of the laser

>>4962202
go back to /b/

>>4962180
Good watch. Thanks for that link anon.

>>4962221
Seriously? You get mad that you aren't able to intelligently explain why he's wrong so you tell him to go to another board?

>>4962227
Have I not done that already? He is obviously trolling.

>>4962231
I guess I can see what you mean.

>>4962175

> doesn't understand trollcomics

> autistic

lel

>>4962249
> understood the comic
> pointed out a neat joke
> pleb tries too hard to look even remotely intelligent

lel

>>4962189
>varnish

>>4962258
>try wall

>>4962184

3/10

>mfw people are so stupid as to say that wood cannot reflect light

How do we see wood in the first place, then?

>implying the photons leaving the wood still contain the information from the photons that landed on the wood.

>>4962308

>implying the information is lost and not just heavily diffused

>>4962308

>photons
>containing information

Do you even know what photons are?

>>4962337

Do you even know what information is?

>>4962398

I don't think you know how light refraction works.

This thread is very relevant to a video that I just linked to in the other thread.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3d3_1343688888

/sci/ should make more trollcomics that actually work.
Like that one with the helicopter.

Yes it works, and you knew it worked even before making this post as you got the idea from here :
http://www.ted.com/talks/ramesh_raskar_a_camera_that_takes_one_trillion_frames_per_second.html
Now gtfo troll plz.

>>4962680

light refraction is a subset of photons which are a subset of information

Jacob Barnett could make it work.

>>4962165
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120806130848.htm

Oh look, its reality

>>4962752

>>4963086

>>4963097
troll comics that would work.... haha

>>4963097
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_energy

The world is a wonderful place

>>4963122
I don't know a damn thing about geology or engineering, but wouldn't it be possible to do this anywhere? I'm aware that they do it in tectonically active areas where they don't have to dig too deep into the Earth because it's cheaper that way, but digging 2 miles into the Earth raises the temperature to over 120F (at least in the world's deepest gold mine in South Africa).

>>4963097
It's called geothermal energy, bruv. Except it's not infinite. Nothing is, save for the amount of cocks OP sucks.

>>4964209
> implying the universe is known to be finite

>>4963086
I'm calling BS on this one. No way that would work.

>>4964215
>implying otherwise

>>4964242
hahaha, how embarrassing for you.

spend two minutes reading about the geometry of the universe.

>>4964271
>implying it can be confirmed

>implying it's not just a theory

>>4964286
> OH SHIT BACK PEDAL BACK PEDAL

i never said it can be confirmed. i said that the converse wasn't confirmed.

i thought you were just ignorant before, but the fact you think these are the same thing proves that you are actually extremely unintelligent too.

>>4964300
> Calls people unintelligent.
> Refuses to accept any theory as a possibility besides the ones that will win him an argument.
> Can't construct a proper sentence.

When you said, "spend two minutes reading about the geometry of the universe," you were implying that the theory of the universe being infinite is correct. Also, your ignorant statement gave off the feeling that you didn't understand the concept that there's different theories. He happened to point that out, so you're the one who's doing the back-pedalling while essentially saying, "HURR I never said that MY theory was wrong, I just implied that YOUR theory is wrong."