Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 219 posts

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#71

Post by paulpauper »

ttul wrote: post #33
zaroth wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gave me shivers reading it. Beautiful example of the incredible mystery of the human mind. Poof! And the solution materialized. Of course, all the groundwork had been laid. All the neurons primed. Just incredible. And that formula. Damn.

That was my thought. Why is it so damn complex? You’d think the solution would be simpler.

the full equation for general relativity would take many pages to print, but Einstein notation makes it much shorter looking. This was not the case here.

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#72

Post by xtiansimon »

soganess wrote: post #58
hyperpallium wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This raises the perennial question of whether product placement is a legitimate source of funding for fundamental scientific research. After placing an ice-cube in my delicious glass of refreshing coca-cola brand carbonated beverage, I yelled Eureka! and jumped out of the bath. Is that really how it happened? Is it not inconsistent with the pursuit of truth?

It's really natural, on first mention, to refer to something using a member of the degenerate set of its most unique identifier, right? From that point on, to avoid repetition, mix in antecedents or generic names. Brands exploit this mechanic in language so that any time a, thereto unknown, good has to be addressed, that identification become advertising. It shifts from being a unique identification of an object/item…

>> It's really natural, when first mentioning it, to call something using by a member of the degenerate set of its most unique identifier, right?

Huh? ‘degenerate set’ being what, the brand placement? I likes me some Semiotics, though not sure what this passage refers to.

In the context of a photography site, brand mentions must be a hazard. The author has no problem name dropping an Ancient Greek, Newton, Leibniz, Huygens. Why not Nutella? Rather than increasing the cognitive gap between the auditor (us) and the subject (2000 year old problem), Nutella seems to take the shining brilliance of those luminaries down a notch and in line with the form of writing—a neutral density filter? Haha. Or maybe it’s just a laugh and some color.

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#73

Post by paulpauper »

zaroth wrote: post #29
mykowebhn wrote: post #25

> After months of working on solving the problem, Rafael González recalls, “I remember one morning I was making myself a slice of bread with Nutella, when suddenly, I said out loud: Mothers! It is there!” > He then ran to his computer and started programming the idea. When he executed the solution and saw that it worked, he says he jumped all over the place. It is unclear whether he finished eating the Nutella bread.…

Gave me shivers reading it. Beautiful example of the incredible mystery of the human mind. Poof! And the solution materialized. Of course, all the groundwork had been laid. All the neurons primed. Just incredible. And that formula. Damn.

mind-blown by that formula

amazing what people think of

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#75

Post by ChuckMcM »

This is a seriously awesome piece of work. The mathematics in the paper are pretty dense but if you're ok with vector calculus its not too bad.

The implication here is that you can build lenses that have a consistent focal plane across their entire surface. A pair of glasses made this way would have crystal clear vision regardless of your 'look' direction (as an example). It also suggests that you could build lenses for lasers that were much more consistent, so a laser projector could project an in focus image from edge to edge rather than "fuzzing out" at the corners.

If there is a top prize in optics these guys clearly deserve it.

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#76

Post by godelski »

michelpp wrote: post #31
joeberon wrote: post #21

Slightly related: One thing I've learnt in Physics is that there are still a huge number of practical and fundamental problems to be solved. You might expect everything easy will already be done by now but that's just not true. Hence we still manage to write so many papers! In fact many Physicists have too many papers they want to write and not enough time to write them. This was a huge surprise for me coming in to m…

I agree with this big time. One of my favorite Feynman quotes is that science is an "expanding frontier of ignorance". There is always somewhere to go and something on the other side, that may change everything and invalidate deeply held convictions forever, all it takes is the guts to, again quoting Feynman, "be willing to stick your neck out".

While Feynman is correct on expanding the frontier of ignorance Asimov is also correct about the relativity of wrong (that we come asymptotically closer to the truth). This is why people think most of physics is solved, because in the context of what most people need it is extremely accurate.

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#77

Post by noir_lord »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #75

This is a seriously awesome piece of work. The mathematics in the paper are pretty dense but if you're ok with vector calculus its not too bad. The implication here is that you can build lenses that have a consistent focal plane across their entire surface. A pair of glasses made this way would have crystal clear vision regardless of your 'look' direction (as an example). It also suggests that you could build lenses…

That would have pretty amazing applications (well everywhere) but in VR definitely, my Rift S is an amazing piece of kit but aberration is still noticeable on the outside edge (when aiming down a gun sight in Pavlov for example).

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#78

Post by andrewflnr »

hyperpallium wrote: post #42
mykowebhn wrote: post #25

> After months of working on solving the problem, Rafael González recalls, “I remember one morning I was making myself a slice of bread with Nutella, when suddenly, I said out loud: Mothers! It is there!” > He then ran to his computer and started programming the idea. When he executed the solution and saw that it worked, he says he jumped all over the place. It is unclear whether he finished eating the Nutella bread.…

This raises the perennial question of whether product placement is a legitimate source of funding for fundamental scientific research. After placing an ice-cube in my delicious glass of refreshing coca-cola brand carbonated beverage, I yelled Eureka! and jumped out of the bath. Is that really how it happened? Is it not inconsistent with the pursuit of truth?

> This raises the perennial question ...

Not really, no. There's no scientific funding riding on your reading this article in a photography magazine.

Specificity is almost always recommended in any creative writing from song lyrics to infotainment like this. It enhances humor and mental imagery, which enhance general enjoyment. That's all that's happening here. Hanlon's razor is your friend.

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#79

Post by jjeaff »

soganess wrote: post #58
hyperpallium wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This raises the perennial question of whether product placement is a legitimate source of funding for fundamental scientific research. After placing an ice-cube in my delicious glass of refreshing coca-cola brand carbonated beverage, I yelled Eureka! and jumped out of the bath. Is that really how it happened? Is it not inconsistent with the pursuit of truth?

It's really natural, on first mention, to refer to something using a member of the degenerate set of its most unique identifier, right? From that point on, to avoid repetition, mix in antecedents or generic names. Brands exploit this mechanic in language so that any time a, thereto unknown, good has to be addressed, that identification become advertising. It shifts from being a unique identification of an object/item…

Hazelnut spread is one of those things that is much more commonly referred to as the brand name. No one says "Reynolds wrap" they say "aluminum foil".

No one says "hazelnut spread", they say Nutella.

No one says "resealable sandwich bags", they say ziploc bags.

Re: Goodbye Aberration: Physicist Solves 2,000-Year-Old Optical Problem

#80

Post by ricardobeat »

amluto wrote: post #68

The article talks about the corners of an image being less sharp than the center. That’s not spherical aberration; that’s off-axis aberration. Spherical aberration causes the image to be less sharp at larger apertures. I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if this result helps indirectly with off-axis aberration, though — a closed-form solution to the spherical aberration problem may make it easier to optimize for lens sh…

What’s your background? In the photography field this is known as spherical aberration indeed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_aberration
Post reply on HN