71–80 of 83 posts
I'd love to see a movie demonstrating what this looks like!
Here's a pic http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/dn16585-amazing-mirrors/...
Not exactly new: http://www.truemirror.com
No, that link is for 2 mirrors. What Prof. Hicks made is a single curved mirror. That is new. That is why his results got published and he was awarded a patent for it. If you had bothered to read the linked article, you'd already understand the distinction.
Also the curved mirror doesn't present the image at full size, it appears smaller.
> When you look in a normal mirror, the image you see of yourself is in reverse. Funny thing: Mirrors don't reverse left and right. They reverse front and back. So this "non-reversing" mirror is actually mapping y to -y, x to -x (Where the mirror is in front of you in the z-direction. Curious. Edit: I believe tomerv below is correct: x is mapping to -x but y is kept the same.
Demonstration time: Write something on a piece of paper. Hold the paper up to the mirror. Now replace that with a transparent piece of plastic.
After knowing the Feynman puzzle, I think this is probably more correctly described as a reversing mirror. If you look into a metal spoon, you'll see both X and Y reversed. So I'm wondering if you could make this mirror simply by only curving the horizontal part. That's kind of what it looks like in the photo. And if so, why didn't someone think of this early? It's quite obvious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because most people don't read at all, or read BS (self-help books, how to succeed, cheap thrillers, 50 shades of gray...)
Have you read fifty shades? I find that people like to bag on stuff they've never actually experienced first hand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Embarrassingly, I listened to a youtube video where a woman read the book aloud (I listened for about 30 pages). She ended up hitting herself in the head about a dozen times because the writing is that awful.
Fifty Shades is pornography for women. IMHO that's the only reason everyone is clutching their pearls about the bad writing. Your typical male pornography storylines/cinematography are much, much worse - and yet they are typically spared the high-brow literary scrutiny.
Male porn is just porn, but "50 shades of gray" is presented as it is a regular book...
> When you look in a normal mirror, the image you see of yourself is in reverse. Funny thing: Mirrors don't reverse left and right. They reverse front and back. So this "non-reversing" mirror is actually mapping y to -y, x to -x (Where the mirror is in front of you in the z-direction. Curious. Edit: I believe tomerv below is correct: x is mapping to -x but y is kept the same.
I still don't intuitively understand how reversing front to back results in what we perceive as a left/right inversion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because most people don't read at all, or read BS (self-help books, how to succeed, cheap thrillers, 50 shades of gray...)
Have you read fifty shades? I find that people like to bag on stuff they've never actually experienced first hand.