07-21-2014, 01:31 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragar
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
The Sun emits light; it doesn't strike an object which causes the inverse square law to occur.
|
Seriously, what are you talking about? You're babbling completely incoherently. The inverse square law is a property of geometry, and light 'striking an object' has nothing to do with it.
|
All I'm trying to say is that we would not be able to get an image from a light source that is so far away because there would be no resolution. Thanks for correcting me.
inverse square law: The intensity of light observed from a source of constant intrinsic luminosity falls off as the square of the distance from the object.
|
But there is actual math involved in determining what is "too far away" to be resolved. The higher the intensity at the source, the higher the intensity at various distances away.
And on the other end of this mechanism, receptors vary in their sensitivity, so some can resolve an image with less intense light than others.
|
Show me the math.
|