in spaaaaaace!! there's science

[cowsmanaut]

unserious, There is SOME distance added.. however in the photo, the camera is presenting some added distance.. There are other photos online that show it's not that great of a distance.
here's another article.. don't look at the photos.. just look at the video. This is not the exact same mirror, it's just advancing the same principle by another group of people. You can see clearly in the video that you know where the other car is based on the position in the mirror.. I had no trouble at all.. and there were NO blindspots..

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-rearview-mirror.html

As for the meteor, it's 55 feet wide.. (17 meters) that's huge! It's rated ad 500 kilotons. that's the same as this bomb http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_King
Now, as bad as that was.. they should be glad that the 150 foot meteor that passed VERY near by didn't decide to join him!
Apparently they didn't have clear calculations of what size the meteor was at first.. it wasn't until much later they worked it out. I imagine trying to work out the details of some large chunk of space debris traveling at high speed is not an exact science

It's really a shame that nothing was done about it though (if even possible).. had they been able to detect it sooner there would be about 1000 people who'd be a lot happier right now At the very least an evacuation of the area.

[Bit]

Yes, if such a fast thing hits even just gas, it will create a shockwave. And if it survives this and hits the ground, then there will be a second shockwave...

[cowsmanaut]

What should really freak us out is the fact that there is plenty of debris like that out there and we have no clue.. There's a theory that mars was bombarded and it threw it out of orbit of the "safe zone" or "life zone" .. giving it it's now odd orbit. Not sure that the change of orbit would be the worst of it though. since if it can hit it that hard.. nothing would be left alive anyway :S

[Seriously Unserious]

unserious, There is SOME distance added.. however in the photo, the camera is presenting some added distance.. There are other photos online that show it's not that great of a distance.
here's another article.. don't look at the photos.. just look at the video. This is not the exact same mirror, it's just advancing the same principle by another group of people. You can see clearly in the video that you know where the other car is based on the position in the mirror.. I had no trouble at all.. and there were NO blindspots..

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-rearview-mirror.html

I took a look at the link above and it definitely gives a much better demonstration on that type of mirror. It also helps that it's actually a mirror designed for and installed in a car, not just an ordinary rectangular mirror held by hand next to a standard side view mirror. I still say the 1st mirror has a significant size distortion though (designed by Dr. R. Andrew Hicks), but the 2nd 1 (designed by Hocheol Lee, Dohyun Kim and Sung Yi) does not have that size distortion. Both are different designs by different people so my vote goes with the 2nd design.

What should really freak us out is the fact that there is plenty of debris like that out there and we have no clue.. There's a theory that mars was bombarded and it threw it out of orbit of the "safe zone" or "life zone" .. giving it it's now odd orbit. Not sure that the change of orbit would be the worst of it though. since if it can hit it that hard.. nothing would be left alive anyway :S

I've heard about new research into the "life zone" around stars, and it turns out this life zone starts further out from stars then was 1st believed, in Sol's case about 1/2 way between Earth and Venus, and extends out almost to Jupiter. Of course, other factors go into this "life zone" as well, the composition of the planet, other objects nearby that emit significant amounts of energy (and Jupiter does emit quite a bit of energy), plus many other factors.

[cowsmanaut]

The problem with the photos in the second link is that both are curved mirrors.. one is the classic curved mirror we all agree distorts things badly.. and the other is very close to the mirror in the first link I sent. However in the first link they compare to a flat mirror, and they've zoomed on the camera which distorts the image further. So the contrast between both mirrors appears much greater..

Let me describe a bit better... when you walk towards a window.. you gradually see more and more and when you back away again what you see changes.. using a zoom on the lense just narrows the area we see at that distance. So on the flat mirror, he's moved back which means we see less, but zoomed in to make the photo larger. In the case of the curved mirror it already shows more because of the curvature so it appears to have greater contrast. Take a look at the image I've made.. these images were rendered off in 3D using a reflective plane, both curved and straight versions are shown.. one where I dolly in (meaning my position changes) the other where I've zoomed with a lense. Look at the red and black lines to the left. They show how much more contrast there is in the size of one of the buildings by zooming in. This shows you how much more distortion your position and zoom can change between the two types of surfaces (curved and flat)



However in the second link they are both curved thus giving a broader view on both..Which means there is less difference between them. if shown against a flat mirror, you'd probably have the same opinion.. that it appears much farther. However the video demonstration shows just how easy it is to make out where the objects are despite that apparent distance shift. You'll just have to trust me that both mirrors are VERY similar. The problem for me, is that I see this kind of thing all the time.. my job is to observe and break down these images to find out how they were made so I can match CG to them.. so I probably see things most people will not.

[Seriously Unserious]

Uhm, that 4 photo set is showing 2 different comparisons. the 1st comparison is standard curved vs new design, the 2nd comparison is standard flat vs new design. Also, I'm basing my comparison on what I see in the mirror, not what I see in the background. Then I'm taking a look at the video to see how it works in a real life situation. The comparisons are still important for me to judge between this new design and the older existing designs so I can judge which is better. The video is good for what it does, which is show how the mirror works in action, but does not show how it compares to existing designs under the same conditions. The 4 photo set at the top of the page does show a comparison. Granted there may have been some zoom trickery done there and as you are an expert in that area I will trust your word for it, but that photo is not the only thing I'm basing my decision on. I don't think using zoom trickery was necessary in this case to show that the new design has advantages over the existing designs, and am disappointed that the authors of that article may have resorted to such tricks when I believe that they are totally unnecessary and the design should simply be allowed to speak for itself.

[cowsmanaut]

I admit I didn't read the full description under the 4, just looked for the relevant info in the article to see if it was similar design. However, in my defence, If you look at the left edge of C, you will see the wall is slightly bent. Then look at the right side of C as well and there's some minor distortion there too.. So it's surface is not entirely flat. Despite what they claim. Could be just manufacture defect.. or perhaps their definition of flat is different. Since I note that in image A it appears to mainly be bent at the outside (left side) edge. So perhaps they allow for distortion at the outside edge of their mirrors.

I also agree that the second link has a better design over all, but he's also a few years later. I would expect having seen the other mirror and seeing how to improve upon it. The probably dialed back a little, moving that 45 degrees to more of a 40-35 degrees instead. Since 15 degrees for a flat mirror is horrible.. especially since a lot of people already don't place them correctly. (pet peeve of mine)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwzUE6PHk4U

Another trick they don't mention in that video is that you don't really need to see too much of the sky (unless you're paranoid of planes landing on you).. but if you can see a bit of the ground behind your car, it helps a lot for parking..

Anyway, I don't think the zoom was intended as a trick.. just a guy with a camera that was probably to big to use from the front seat so he had to zoom in from the back.. it hampers the image more than helps. Since as you've all pointed out, it looks like the distortion between the two is much heavier making it much less desireable.

[Seriously Unserious]

In the 4 pictures, the top left picture, A, is the standard curved mirror, the top right, B, is the new disign. For the bottom pair, the left, C, is a standard flat mirror, and the right, D, is the new design. From what I read, this new design has a flat mirror for the majority of it, with a small, slightly curved portion at the outside most edge (left edge for the driver's side mirror) which is just enough to get the mirror to cover the blind spot, but not enough to cause a size/shape/distance distortion of any significance. At least that's the claim, and that's what I see in the photos and video.

[cowsmanaut]

now thar is some right good science.. yar matey.. I'll coat me pirate ship with this and glide atop the waves like a gilded angel!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPM8OR6W6WE

[Bit]

Does it harm hair?

[Seriously Unserious]

I guess that would depend on if it's made of something toxic or not. Care to try it and find out?

[Zyx]

Exciting! We now have a tool to detect and analyze the atmosphere of exoplanets!
http://phys.org/news/2013-03-astronomer ... solar.html

[terkio]

the atmosphere of exoplanets!

Oh, no. Not another Global Warming thread !

[Seriously Unserious]

Global Warming, Global Warming, Global Warming, Global Warming Global Warming, Global Warming, Global Warming, Global Warming,

Global Warming!




Global Warming



There you go terkio, just for you.

[terkio]

Exciting! We now have a tool to detect and analyze the atmosphere of exoplanets!
http://phys.org/news/2013-03-astronomer ... solar.html

Global Warming from the shooting star http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu_8qdFTAE8

[Seriously Unserious]

and now here you are turning this into another Global Warming thread!

btw that was a pretty good old school cartoon. I'd never seen Tintin before.

[Zyx]

Well, if you want an example of global warming, check on Venus: 96.5% CO2, 465 °C...

[Seriously Unserious]

terkio will just love this, looks like we are getting another Global Warming thread after all.

but yeah, Venus is a great example of global warming at it's finest.

[Bit]

Wtf - I'm still in the global warming exception zone . I WANT SPRINGTIME! NOW!!!

If at least Rasmus would be around and could warm my heart - as a Swede he'd surely mock about those 0° C...
So - let the Canadians help me out! Cows?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd7c5tQCs1I

off-topic, hm?

[Seriously Unserious]

MOO-wahahahaha

You're going to the Viking hell BIt! Nothing but ice and frozen show and never a temp above 0! FOREVER! BWAHAHAHAHA!:twisted:

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Where me and Cows live it was sunny for a few days there, but as of last night the rain's started again. I'd share that rare sunshine with you if it were possible but it's just too rare around here this time of year. I know you asked for Cows and got me instead but since I live in basically the same city as cows, maybe some of my Vancouver weather will rub off on you and you can have 5 to 10 C and rain too!

Looks like you just got the Unserious side of me this time...

I just noticed, the weather thread has Ghostbusters quotes in it and this general Science thread has weather talk in it, talk about off topic!

[beowuuf]

So.....what you're saying is you need a Ghostbusters thread to speak about science in, right?

[Seriously Unserious]

I think the GB quotes should probably be split off into their own thread so we can restore the weather thread to talks of a weather and climate nature, while discussing Ghostbusters to our heart's content in a seperate thread.

and remember: "no job is too big, and no fee is too big"

[Bit]

For scientists that's all a must - it's called brainstorming...

[chiefy]

yeah that is top

I think the GB quotes should probably be split off into their own thread so we can restore the weather thread to talks of a weather and climate nature, while discussing Ghostbusters to our heart's content in a seperate thread.

and remember: "no job is too big, and no fee is too big"

no job is too big, and no fee is too big that is straight from the movie 1 and that is legendary - love that!

so, will Bill Murray do Ghostbusters3 or not?

[Seriously Unserious]

I hope so, he does a perfect Dr. Peter Venkman

[Bit]

Serious interrupt: what do you think about Kepler E & F?

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/kepl ... r-planets/

[Seriously Unserious]

Here's a video about a new type of power generation that looks like it's completely clean and inexpensive:
The Bloom Box
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shkFDPI6kGE

After watching these 2 videos it's clear to me that this technology is for real, it's already in use on a limited test basis and is outperforming the 2 most popular clean energy sources, solar and wind power. IMO this does look like a part of the solution to our pollution and energy problems. I'd love to see many more inventions like this getting into the market place.

[terkio]

it doesn' t produce energy.
it is a battery, it converts energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_Energy_Server

As I understand:
it can convert electricity into hydrogen or the other way around.
it is an alternative to the already existing fuel cell.
it can produce electricity from natural gaz, which is an alternative to already existing power plants.

Alternatives, no major break through.

[Zyx]

And not much cheaper.

[linflas]

A-we-some.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aZbJS6LZbs