search results matching tag: optics
» channel: motorsports
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
Videos (252) | Sift Talk (6) | Blogs (34) | Comments (470) |
Videos (252) | Sift Talk (6) | Blogs (34) | Comments (470) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
King Tut Tomb Scans Support Theory of Hidden Chamber
A 1/4" hole drilled in the wall and a fiber optic camera w/ LED should reveal all, no?
How to ... Easy Optical Illusions
No need to change anything on my account, but I think a title like "Simple Optical Illusions to Entertain Children" would be much clearer.
Maybe that's just me.
M'kay ... Next clue was 'Easy' in the title. Perhaps I should've been more detailed in the description?
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Back to School
I also need logarithms daily as an optical engineer.
That said, a CPU only does +,-,*,/, and approximates everything with those basic functions, so maybe he's onto something...nah...:)
Drone Captures Hikers' Near Death In Maui Flash Flood
That shot at 3:43 created an optical illusion for me causing me think the depth was inverted (the way those inverse/hollow reliefs appear to continuously follow your point of view; I'll link if you don't know what I'm talking about).
Anyway, if you can get your eyes to do, quite trippy. It made the river look as though it were perfectly balanced on a long ridge, with the forest falling away down sharp cliffs on either side. I think my eyes were focused on the river at the time.
Watch the trip your luggage makes at Amsterdam Schiphol
That was about half way through.
I wanted to see the part where the optical recognition system detects fragile stickers and gives it an extra big boot with a robot foot.
Fascinating. We went through that airport about a month ago. I am still trying to see the spot in the video where our luggage didn't make it on our flight and showed up 3 days later.
Electron microscope image capture with an oscilloscope
I agree, incredible. Not only incredible how scientifically brilliant we humans can be, but how incredibly wasteful we can be. I mean, Jeez, this piece of optical wizardry was simply dumped in the trash!!!
Thats incredible...
insane camera zoom
With 83x optical zoom it is a beast in deed!
NOW-IS BIGBANG NOW IS (classic)
*ban
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=985bw09PR3s
*related=
http://videosift.com/video/NOW-IS-51-NOWIS-Optical-Illusions
http://videosift.com/video/BIGBANG-NOW-IS-BIG-BANG-NOWIS-electro
Living in a Secret Chinese Bitcoin Mine
someone should introduce these guys to fibre-optics...
Also, I don't see them wearing any ear protection at all - those guys who live on site will be deaf by the time they're 30. (if the company lasts that long)
Does the electricity provider accept Bitcoin as payment?
Hopefully nobody tells the Chinese government that Bitcoins are often used for illegal activities...
A Chameleon Like No Other
After years of watching hundreds of optical illusions, magic tricks etc , I really thought I was immune to the best possible versions of this kind of stuff, but this one caught me out completely. Absolutely brilliantly done.
I didn't catch it until she lifted her legs. And even worse, its SO obvious once you see it. makes the trick better IMO
Virtual reality, explained with some trippy optical illusion
? I'm confused. I admitted my 'test' was lacking, and deferred to @ChaosEngine who didn't trust his eyes but measured...so I am no longer certain it's 'fake' at all, in fact I was careful to NEVER call it 'fake'. Perhaps you only read my first post in this thread and missed my admission that I was wrong?
As I said, I think there's a reason it LOOKED like it did to me...probably the surrounding color reflecting off the white paper I used to mask off and 'coloring' the grey squares....and likely the paper I used was not perfectly straight to use as a straight edge....and measuring anything on a screen is less than perfect, which is why I poorly measured the table and lines...the second time I measured it I did better, and I admit they are the same size contrary to my original statement.
I also only saw grey pills.
The reason I was skeptical is I've seen these same 'illusions' faked many times. For instance, the last time I saw the Rubik's cube, the tiles had dark shaded colored edges they removed when 'masking off' which obviously changed the color. It's not that I don't 'believe' in optical illusions, I just think people are cheaters more often than not these days and fudge things they don't need to fudge. This time it was my method of 'masking off' that seems to be my issue...I don't have an image editor that will do much for me here....sadly...but it doesn't mean I don't trust Chaosengine who did and set me straight.
OK? ;-)
@newtboy - I'm blown away at how certain you are it's all fake. I suggest you do what I did: Instead of using paper on your screen, just take a screenshot and insert into an image editor and inspect things there.
I cut the three tiles out and pasted them side-by-side and they are in fact the same color: http://i.imgur.com/e5lcV5P.png
I dragged straight lines on the checkerboard before and after the dots were added, and it has only straight lines.
I copied/pasted the blue tabletop, rotated it and it fit perfectly on the other one: http://i.imgur.com/QzT8nc8.png
Nothing was fudged in the video. It just shows how powerfully your brain is latching onto what it believes it is seeing.
It's like that dress photo from a few weeks ago. "Is it white and gold or purple and black?!" Many people were hardcore in one direction or the other.
The only one that left me confused is the pills. 1) He said they were red and blue, but they were yellow and turquoise. 2) They had holes in the pills allowing the background color through; it was only there that they looked colored, otherwise they were just gray. I suspect they were just trying to shoe-horn in a red pill blue pill Matrix reference.
ant (Member Profile)
Your video, Virtual reality, explained with some trippy optical illusion, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
Why Every New Macbook Needs a Different Goddamn Charger
It is bullshit, but it's not a problem unique to Apple.
I've never owned a mac, but every goddamned Dell laptop I've used has had a subtly different charger, and they're mostly just a round plug!
As for usb-c for video, meh. People kvetched when they dropped the optical drive, the VGA port, etc. (Hell I remember people complaining on the windows side when laptops stopped having serial ports!) Technology moves forward... and Apple is known for pushing new techs at the expense of old ones.
Still can't believe they put a 480p camera on it, though.
Seriously, what is this? 2005?
How Digital Light Processing (DLP) Works
Lol. Right. I was curious and tried to Google the price of one and didn't have much success... admittedly I spent like less than 2 minutes before giving up (aka I scanned the first page and first page of shopping), but near as I can see, a good optical microscope will cost $2-4k, with most high end hobby ones around $3-500 range. I doubt there's a hobby range in SEMs. The only one I saw during that minute and a half search was a used one for $25k another for $27k and an auction listing that went for $2k (which compared to others seems out of price). Anyhow, between the auction price and the used listings, I figure roughly you are looking at $5-25k if you know where to look... Who knows what actually spending more time would have given me, but either way, I'm fairly sure a SEM is beyond most people's budgets.
Dang, I never thought of looking at my DLP projector chip in my SEM.
Fairbs (Member Profile)
Actually, since the development of adaptive optics, ground based telescopes aren't obsolete at all. Even without adaptive optics they have their uses, and some interesting science is done with them.
Getting telescope time on a space based telescope (or large ground based telescope for that matter) is quite hard, which limits the things astronomers can do with them.
That makes sense since space is a vacuum that they would test it in a vacuum. For some reason, I was thinking it was a land based telescope. I guess those are pretty much obsolete at this point.
Thanks!