11–20 of 37 posts
11k fps. Wow. I will never get tired of watching this stuff. That got me thinking, is there any theoretical limit to the number of frames that can be captured in one second?
11k fps. Wow. I will never get tired of watching this stuff. That got me thinking, is there any theoretical limit to the number of frames that can be captured in one second?
Great video, the nature article is much more informative than the one linked. From the nature article, it seems this was the first video of natural bidirectional lightning, not triggered by rockets or aircraft: "In contrast to studies of rocket-triggered lightning and lightning initiated by aircraft, which found delays of 3–6 ms between the onset of negative and positive leader branches, this natural event exhibited…
EDIT: From the linked Wikipedia entry: "Because of the much greater distance to ground, the positively charged region can develop considerably larger levels of charge and voltages than the negative charge regions in the lower part of the cloud."
11k fps. Wow. I will never get tired of watching this stuff. That got me thinking, is there any theoretical limit to the number of frames that can be captured in one second?
Electricity travels at about one third the speed of light. That would make a hard limit. Both shutter and data transfer speed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Electricity travels at about one third the speed of light. That would make a hard limit. Both shutter and data transfer speed.
But that would just be for one recording device. If you could use multiple devices, perhaps with small POV differences that could be corrected, I would expect no limit in that "lossy" case.
Great video, the nature article is much more informative than the one linked. From the nature article, it seems this was the first video of natural bidirectional lightning, not triggered by rockets or aircraft: "In contrast to studies of rocket-triggered lightning and lightning initiated by aircraft, which found delays of 3–6 ms between the onset of negative and positive leader branches, this natural event exhibited…
Are the positive ones the "bigger" ones? EDIT: From the linked Wikipedia entry: "Because of the much greater distance to ground, the positively charged region can develop considerably larger levels of charge and voltages than the negative charge regions in the lower part of the cloud."
Also, having Cloud to Butt extension installed made reading that Wikipedia quote quite interesting...
and the internet facing community surrounding its research seems divisive
can anyone speak to the sort of research currently being done on the study of lightning and its initiation?
are there efforts to recreate assumed initial conditions?
thoughts on the source of the huge amounts of directed energy? does the strike harvest from the vast collection of charged particles within the cloud or is it created by electrostatic interaction of individual ions, similar to http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v7/n3/full/nchem.2161.ht...?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Electricity travels at about one third the speed of light. That would make a hard limit. Both shutter and data transfer speed.
But that would just be for one recording device. If you could use multiple devices, perhaps with small POV differences that could be corrected, I would expect no limit in that "lossy" case.
A sphere 1km across has a surface are of 4pi1km^2 which is roughly 10^7m^2. If you had 1cm^2 sensors then you get 10^4 sensors per m^2, which means you get 10^11 sensors total. At 11k fps (10^4) that's a total of 10^15 fps.
Note that Planck time is 10^-44 so such an arrangement probably wouldn't help for detecting quantum gravity because you'd run out of matter in the universe before you could construct the sensors.
11k fps. Wow. I will never get tired of watching this stuff. That got me thinking, is there any theoretical limit to the number of frames that can be captured in one second?
11k fps. Wow. I will never get tired of watching this stuff. That got me thinking, is there any theoretical limit to the number of frames that can be captured in one second?
Not that it isn't awesome how fast cameras are, just keep in mind, the clip is 25ms. So at 11,000 fps, that would be 275 images (11 frames per ms). Not sure if we actually have a camera that can take 11,000 images in 1 second. (I guess that depends on the resolution)
These can do 25k fps at 1280x800 pixels (and 1 million fps at 128x32 pixels): http://www.visionresearch.com/Products/High-Speed-Cameras/UH...