Live data from Hacker News

NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

nist.gov

181–190 of 201 posts

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#181
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And those fluent in languages that have additional distinct color names can differentiate subtle differences in the shades of colors that non-speakers cannot even differentiate. The ability to label more colors is not the ability to perceive more colors. The ability of your cone cells to recognize a difference in color between two samples is unaffected by language.

Your cone cells do not perceive anything whatsoever. Your brain does that part. Those who grew up with words (meaning) assigned to subtle variations in colors can tell those colors apart without a reference to compare it to better than, and much faster than those who haven't grown up with learning the distinction. We know this to be obvious of sounds, musicians who can tell if a note is slightly out of tune when othe…

> Your cone cells do not perceive anything whatsoever.

They most certainly do. Your brain may apply meaning to the signals the cone cells send, but it is the cone cells which send a signal for one color and a different signal for another. That's what perception is.

> Those who grew up with words (meaning) assigned to subtle variations in colors can tell those colors apart without a reference to compare it to better than, and much faster than those who haven't grown up with learning the distinction.

No they can't. There is no evidence at all of better color differentiation, and if they were able to better differentiate then they wouldn't be faster because those who were less capable would never be able to. The vocabulary makes labeling faster, and that is all that such tests are measuring.

> We know this to be obvious of sounds, musicians who can tell if a note is slightly out of tune when others who haven't learned how can't.

Knowing the names of notes doesn't make it any easier to tell if a note is out of tune. If you weren't aware before, middle C is 261.62 hz. Can you now tell if a note is .01 hz off middle C? No of course not. Musicians learn to differentiate notes because they spend tremendous amounts of time listening to sound and being corrected when the note they hit isn't the one they are going for. Similarly an orange farmer will know the difference between the color of a ripe orange and the color of a few days under ripened orange, despite not having a distinct word for either. If you're having a blind taste testing competition between someone who drinks lots of wine but has no formal education, and someone who is extremely learned in somellier vocabulary but has never actually had a glass of wine before, it's pretty obvious who is going to be better at distinguishing two vintages.

> You're not thinking in photons. Your brain is making up meaning from the stimulation your eye received from photons. The perceiving part is learned.

You are perceiving photons, or more accurately the firing of neurons triggered by those photons. The meaning your brain applies is a label for what you are perceiving - it's a categorization. You see the color of an apple, you learn that color is called red. You see another apple, and you ask why that one's a different color, and then you are told there are also green apples. But you did not need to be taught to differentiate red apples and green apples, you directly perceived it. The difference between cyan and azure exists even if you don't have the vocabulary to communicate that difference to someone else.

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#182
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fiber has fairly narrow windows in which it is as transparent as it needs to be to go long distance. We're already pretty good at filling these windows with conventional semiconductor lasers. What this is actually interesting for is being able to access arbitrary atomic transitions, many of which are outside the range of conventional semiconductors (too short, usually - there's a big hole between green and red for se…

This is true. But even within this window, e.g. between 1100 nm infrared and 700 nm red, we could put 40 different "colors" at 10 nm steps. Separation at the receiving end may become hard though.

They already do 1nm in dwdm.

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#183
post #110
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And those fluent in languages that have additional distinct color names can differentiate subtle differences in the shades of colors that non-speakers cannot even differentiate. The ability to label more colors is not the ability to perceive more colors. The ability of your cone cells to recognize a difference in color between two samples is unaffected by language.

I think you are correct, but the likelihood of perceiving probably is tied to language. It's amazing how much time we spend on autopilot.

There is a difference between perception and categorization. You perceive the difference between salmon and fuchsia regardless of whether you have a word for them or not. You might refer to either color as pink, not because you failed to perceive the difference but because you don't particularly care about communicating the difference.

It's like measuring with a ruler. If you have mm notches then you'll be more likely to describe one thing your measuring as 31mm and another as 29mm, whereas if you have only cm notches then you'll probably say one is just over 3cm and another is just under 3cm. In the second case, you're measuring with a less accurate tool because you don't care as much about accuracy. Hell you may say they're both about the same size if that 2mm difference is insignificant enough. But regardless of how you communicate the length, their lengths exist and you qualitatively perceived them.

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#184
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And those fluent in languages that have additional distinct color names can differentiate subtle differences in the shades of colors that non-speakers cannot even differentiate. The ability to label more colors is not the ability to perceive more colors. The ability of your cone cells to recognize a difference in color between two samples is unaffected by language.

I remember back when I thought that perception was this simple.

What I described is anything but simple; it's just not related to language.

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#185
post #24

Everyone talking about magenta and brown, but you can see an illusory color right now even without lasers! https://dynomight.net/colors/ behold, some kind of hyper-turquoise

i just see cyan on the first one, seems like an exaggeration if anyone is expecting to see 'new' colors

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#187
post #59

> When it comes to information transfer and processing, light can do things that electricity can’t. Photons — particles of light — are far zippier than electrons at working their way through circuits. Electrons themselves don't move at the speed of light, but information transfer (i.e. communication) via electrons does happen close to the speed of light. A subtle, but important, distinction that's often misunderstood…

About 0.6c for cat6 cables, different types of cables can be slightly faster. Speed of light in fiber is also 0.6c due to the refractive index of the core.

Is that through solid-core fiber? Because hollow-core fiber also exists.

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#188
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your cone cells do not perceive anything whatsoever. Your brain does that part. Those who grew up with words (meaning) assigned to subtle variations in colors can tell those colors apart without a reference to compare it to better than, and much faster than those who haven't grown up with learning the distinction. We know this to be obvious of sounds, musicians who can tell if a note is slightly out of tune when othe…

> Your cone cells do not perceive anything whatsoever. They most certainly do. Your brain may apply meaning to the signals the cone cells send, but it is the cone cells which send a signal for one color and a different signal for another. That's what perception is. > Those who grew up with words (meaning) assigned to subtle variations in colors can tell those colors apart without a reference to compare it to better t…

> That's what perception is.

No, it isn't. Perception is a process, and ingress only a part of the process.

Perception (from Latin perceptio 'gathering, receiving') is the organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information, in order to represent and understand the presented information or environment.[2] All perception involves signals that go through the nervous system, which in turn result from physical or chemical stimulation of the sensory system.[3] Vision involves light striking the retina of the eye; smell is mediated by odor molecules; and hearing involves pressure waves.

Perception is not only the passive receipt of these signals, but it is also shaped by the recipient's learning, memory, expectation, and attention.[4][5] Sensory input is a process that transforms this low-level information to higher-level information (e.g., extracts shapes for object recognition).[5] The following process connects a person's concepts and expectations (or knowledge) with restorative and selective mechanisms, such as attention, that influence perception.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception

> No they can't. There is no evidence at all of better color differentiation

Yes, there is. Example: "Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17470790/

> Knowing the names of notes doesn't make it any easier to tell if a note is out of tune.

I didn't say that. But having a deep familiarity with tones does.

> Musicians learn.

Yes, I know. I majored in Music and have 30 years experience.

> they spend tremendous amounts of time listening to sound and being corrected

I'm confused since you seems to have just switched sides of the argument completely and entirely here. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are thinking that _having_ knowledge (knowing the words and vocabulary) is what I meant. But that is not what I meant. I meant to speak about the _understanding_ you have when you intimately familiar and experienced.

> The difference between cyan and azure exists even if you don't have the vocabulary to communicate that difference to someone else.

Those colors are pretty different and aren't that interesting to study, from a linguistic relativity point of view. Colors much closer together, like #187af7, #1b85f5 and #187af7 are.

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interference is a wavelength too. Maybe not pure but it is one. Afaik they cannot be interpreted as two separate wavelengths and then “brain combined” when the aperture (the retina) is so small.

I haven't heard of a wavelength of 2 frequencies merged. It is like saying what is the wavelength if you tune to 2 radio stations with 2 radios (assume silent transmition for simplicity). There are 2 wavelengths.

> I haven't heard of a wavelength of 2 frequencies merged. It is like saying what is the wavelength if you tune to 2 radio stations with 2 radios

No, any wave has a wavelength. You can add sin(3x) to sin(2x) and the resulting wave is a perfect fifth. Its wavelength is determined by its components; since sin(2x) has a wavelength of π and sin(3x) has one of 2π/3, the combined wave will have one of 2π.

The difference is that sin(2x) and sin(3x) are both sine waves, while their sum is not. There is no such thing as a pure tone of two merged frequencies, but there are many possible waves at any given frequency that aren't pure tones.

Re: NIST scientists create 'any wavelength' lasers

#190
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 0.6c for cat6 cables, different types of cables can be slightly faster. Speed of light in fiber is also 0.6c due to the refractive index of the core.

Is that through solid-core fiber? Because hollow-core fiber also exists.

Yes. It does, but it's not widely used, it barely just got out of the lab.
Post reply on HN