The creator of the widely shared video above would appear to be unknown.
NASA did not create the video, but it appears to have been made with genuine data from NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO).
The SDO is in geosynchronous orbit around the Earth where it obtains a continuous view of the Sun and records images at UV wavelengths that are normally absorbed by Earth's atmosphere.
The "Plasma Wall" feature matches this single-wavelength view of solar flares observed by NASA as part of its SDO data from last month:
NASA did not create the video, but it appears to have been made with genuine data from NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO).
The SDO is in geosynchronous orbit around the Earth where it obtains a continuous view of the Sun and records images at UV wavelengths that are normally absorbed by Earth's atmosphere.
The "Plasma Wall" feature matches this single-wavelength view of solar flares observed by NASA as part of its SDO data from last month:
Stars are dots, except a few ones. Right ?
So how can you denoize a picture of the night sky. What is the rendering of stars ? A single grey to white pixel ?
So how can you denoize a picture of the night sky. What is the rendering of stars ? A single grey to white pixel ?
When Herschel (and his uncredited wife who was a keen astronomer too) discovered the magnitude 5 planet Uranus on his x227 6" reflector telescope in his garden in New King Street, Bath around 1750 he initially thought it was a comet.
He decided this because no matter how much magnification (Up to X932) he applied, the stars still looked point like, and the object was still fuzzy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranus#Discovery
I suppose that a star will come out as a single pixel if well within the resolution of the telescope, but it's complicated by all the problems like stability, movement of the stars, exposure setting, and numerous other things.
I don't think I can resolve Uranus at 4" on my camera (About 2' resolution). but might see something of Jupiter (50") and Saturn (20") with a 300mm telephoto.
But may be able to spot Uranus moving over a few weeks later in the year. I am working on this from the charts for 15th. July when it will be close to Mars:
I used NASA's simulator to confirm it is in Taurus ATM. You can see The Pleaides and head of the Bull too.
https://science.nasa.gov/uranus/
It's a fun simulator once you get the hang of it.
Lastly, THE NOVA NEWS! No news actually... it's supposed to be in the bottom left between those two bright stars. 😡
But you can see Nu Bootis 10' double star top right. And Nu Corona Borealis double a bit fuzzily toward top left. I could have zoomed them but it didn't really seem necessary.
He decided this because no matter how much magnification (Up to X932) he applied, the stars still looked point like, and the object was still fuzzy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranus#Discovery
I suppose that a star will come out as a single pixel if well within the resolution of the telescope, but it's complicated by all the problems like stability, movement of the stars, exposure setting, and numerous other things.
I don't think I can resolve Uranus at 4" on my camera (About 2' resolution). but might see something of Jupiter (50") and Saturn (20") with a 300mm telephoto.
But may be able to spot Uranus moving over a few weeks later in the year. I am working on this from the charts for 15th. July when it will be close to Mars:
I used NASA's simulator to confirm it is in Taurus ATM. You can see The Pleaides and head of the Bull too.
https://science.nasa.gov/uranus/
It's a fun simulator once you get the hang of it.
Lastly, THE NOVA NEWS! No news actually... it's supposed to be in the bottom left between those two bright stars. 😡
But you can see Nu Bootis 10' double star top right. And Nu Corona Borealis double a bit fuzzily toward top left. I could have zoomed them but it didn't really seem necessary.
Miserable weather predicted for the next week - guess catching the super nova will be a tad difficult. 😟
Not for Super Nova Man! Just got to wait for a gap in the clouds....
I was thinking about why bright stars DON'T just fill one pixel re Monsieur @mchambin. It's a mathematical question of wave mechanics.
When the light goes through the round lens aperture, you get diffraction fringes falling off as 1/r on the sensor.
The faint ones won't trigger adjacent pixels usually, but if the star is very bright, overexposed in fact, the fringes get proportionately brighter and the point turns into a bigger blob, if you follow.
These would fall away as the square for energy, so the Airy disk appears. But is blurred by all the other frequencies present unless you filtered. I am happy with that, and so should you be.
This sort of thing is best left to trained PROFESSIONALS, IMO. But Yes, Fourier Transform methods apply to Wave Mechanics and hence The Quantum.
https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Quantum_Tutorials_(Rioux)/01:_Quantum_Fundamentals/1.13:_Quantum_Mechanics_and_the_Fourier_Transform
My current ponderings are on understanding a Quantum Eraser. It's quite mysterious that linearly polarised photons behave in surprising ways even in the double slit experiment:
The bottom line is quite strange things happen as you change the polarisation:
The Maths is quite fierce, but I am certain you will be interested.
Whatever is going on? 😵
I am considering changing my avatar (currently crazed Computer Geek, Robert Heron, of course) to cultivate the look of the crazed Scadinavian Astronomer Thorsten Westheider:
Apparently I can just buy a £200 200mm F2 lens or even a cheaper 55-200mm f3.5-5.6, and photograph the Andromeda Nebula with a bit of Computer Wizardry on my current stuff:
Cheap is always a good thing, IMO.
What Mr. Dumbo sees:
What Mr. Smart sees:
WOW! Not bad, eh. 150 2s images. Some free software called DSS to stitch them together from RAW.
https://fstoppers.com/groups/12030/...-garden-70-200mm-and-no-astro-gear-whatsoever
How hard can it be! 🙂
https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Quantum_Tutorials_(Rioux)/01:_Quantum_Fundamentals/1.13:_Quantum_Mechanics_and_the_Fourier_Transform
My current ponderings are on understanding a Quantum Eraser. It's quite mysterious that linearly polarised photons behave in surprising ways even in the double slit experiment:
The bottom line is quite strange things happen as you change the polarisation:
The Maths is quite fierce, but I am certain you will be interested.
Whatever is going on? 😵
I am considering changing my avatar (currently crazed Computer Geek, Robert Heron, of course) to cultivate the look of the crazed Scadinavian Astronomer Thorsten Westheider:
Apparently I can just buy a £200 200mm F2 lens or even a cheaper 55-200mm f3.5-5.6, and photograph the Andromeda Nebula with a bit of Computer Wizardry on my current stuff:
Cheap is always a good thing, IMO.
What Mr. Dumbo sees:
What Mr. Smart sees:
WOW! Not bad, eh. 150 2s images. Some free software called DSS to stitch them together from RAW.
https://fstoppers.com/groups/12030/...-garden-70-200mm-and-no-astro-gear-whatsoever
How hard can it be! 🙂
😉
Max Planck wanted to develop an "elegant" formula for blackbody radiation. To do so, he arbitrarily created the concept "quantum" (quantity) and the value. So > 2 x unscience.
Then came Einstein, who didn't understand concepts, and turned "quantum" (quantity) into particles: "quanta", corpuscles, photons. Like Pi or 1/3 into particle, thing. Or water into waters. So another unscientific step.
And because millions of "scientists" can count "particles" so nicely, can also imagine "things" better than intangible concepts, we now have the unscientific "quanta nonsens"-)
"Die ganzen fünfzig Jahre bewußter Grübelei haben mich der Antwort der Frage >Was sind Lichtquanten< nicht nähergebracht. Heute glaubt zwar jeder Lump, er wisse es, aber er täuscht sich." ("The whole fifty years of conscious brooding have not brought me any closer to answering the question >What are light quanta<. Nowadays, every fool thinks he knows, but he is wrong.")
Einstein in a letter to Michele Besso. 1951
Supplementary: At least Max Planck had a stomach ache, although even he could not yet formulate the reification of his concept as a problem:
"Es scheint mir, daß gegenüber der neuen Einsteinschen Korpuskulartheorie des Lichts die größte Vorsicht geboten ist ... Die Theorie des Lichtes würde nicht um Jahrzehnte, sondern um Jahrhunderte zurückgeworfen, bis in die Zeit, da Christian Huygens seinen Kampf gegen die übermächtige Newtonsche Emissionstheorie wagte..." ("It seems to me that the greatest caution should be exercised towards Einstein's new corpuscular theory of light ... The theory of light would be thrown back not by decades, but by centuries, to the time when Christian Huygens dared to fight against the overpowering Newtonian emission theory...") In: Max Planck. Zur Theorie der Wärmestrahlung. Annalen der Physik. 1910
Kids, there are no "photons" or "quanta". There's just a lack of theory and method analysis and criticism: a lack of science;-)
Max Planck wanted to develop an "elegant" formula for blackbody radiation. To do so, he arbitrarily created the concept "quantum" (quantity) and the value. So > 2 x unscience.
Then came Einstein, who didn't understand concepts, and turned "quantum" (quantity) into particles: "quanta", corpuscles, photons. Like Pi or 1/3 into particle, thing. Or water into waters. So another unscientific step.
And because millions of "scientists" can count "particles" so nicely, can also imagine "things" better than intangible concepts, we now have the unscientific "quanta nonsens"-)
"Die ganzen fünfzig Jahre bewußter Grübelei haben mich der Antwort der Frage >Was sind Lichtquanten< nicht nähergebracht. Heute glaubt zwar jeder Lump, er wisse es, aber er täuscht sich." ("The whole fifty years of conscious brooding have not brought me any closer to answering the question >What are light quanta<. Nowadays, every fool thinks he knows, but he is wrong.")
Einstein in a letter to Michele Besso. 1951
Supplementary: At least Max Planck had a stomach ache, although even he could not yet formulate the reification of his concept as a problem:
"Es scheint mir, daß gegenüber der neuen Einsteinschen Korpuskulartheorie des Lichts die größte Vorsicht geboten ist ... Die Theorie des Lichtes würde nicht um Jahrzehnte, sondern um Jahrhunderte zurückgeworfen, bis in die Zeit, da Christian Huygens seinen Kampf gegen die übermächtige Newtonsche Emissionstheorie wagte..." ("It seems to me that the greatest caution should be exercised towards Einstein's new corpuscular theory of light ... The theory of light would be thrown back not by decades, but by centuries, to the time when Christian Huygens dared to fight against the overpowering Newtonian emission theory...") In: Max Planck. Zur Theorie der Wärmestrahlung. Annalen der Physik. 1910
Kids, there are no "photons" or "quanta". There's just a lack of theory and method analysis and criticism: a lack of science;-)
The "quantum eraser" is used in single photon research.
The quantum eraser I have looked into couples the double-slit experiment with photon entanglement.
Light from a laser stimulates a "non-linear optical crystal", which in turn emits two photons with opposite polarisation.
Because of the way they’re produced, the photons are entangled so that measuring one can instantly affect the other.
Photon 1 travels directly to a detector that simply counts it, while photon 2 goes to a double-slit experiment where the usual interference pattern is produced.
Placing a "quarter-wave" filter at one of the slits, the path of photon 2 though that slit can be blocked thus turning off the interference pattern. In this way the wave character of photon 2 is said to be "erased".
Then the remarkable thing! By placing a polarising filter in the path of photon 1, the magic of entanglement causes photon 2 to change polarisation, allowing it to pass though the blocked slit, thus restoring the interference pattern.
It's a tad more complicated than that, but you can read more here: https://nautil.us/how-to-see-quantum-drops-of-light-234850/
A quick google reveals that Thorsten Westheider is a landscape photographer who hails from Hiddenhausen, DE.
https://fstoppers.com/profile/thorstenwestheider
However, he certainly would make a good avatar for you Steve! 😊
Last edited:
Here's a short article explaining why stacking is vital for astrophotography:
https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/...oto-tips/a-guide-to-astrophotography-stacking
The process of stacking requires time and dedication, but in that respect I suppose it's no different from any other hobby.
Just ask yourself Steve, is there enough spare time in your already hobby-packed life to accommodate this new pursuit?
P.S. There is a dedicated guide to using the free program DeepSkyStacker (DSS) here:
https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/...ips/how-use-deep-sky-stacker-astrophotography
Left: a single frame of the Triangulum Galaxy, M33, before any editing. Right: the same galaxy after a number of frames have been stacked.
Credit: Dave Eagle
Thank you for the tips. Unless you have been living under the proverbial stone, you will be aware that tonight is the 7th day of the 7th month in Japan.
The Tanabata, when the weaver girl crosses the Heavenly River to rejoin the cowherd and the two kids.
Thus lonely Japanese girls and boys are tying their most ardent wishes to bamboo poles, in the hope they may come true.
It would be auspicious therefore, if the system7 Star appeared too. My own wishes were for exactly that.
Not a sausage! Oh well...
I thought I would talk about Robert Heron tonight. He was a great hero of mine in my Computer Geek phase around 2007.
Every week I would tune in for the DL.TV internet program, since it was part of my brief as Novatech Customer Advisor (MVP) to be bang up to date on the latest in computers.
Ah, Happy Days. I only eschewed the Black Shirt look since it has overtones that generally make me uncomfortable.
Patrick went on to work with the lovely Veronica Belmont on Tekzilla, in the same ilk. Discussion of iPads, The Cheesecake Factory, and what not.
In case you are wondering why we especially liked Veronica Belmont, click on.
Keep it classy, San Diego.
One of my better posts, I am sure you agree. 😀
The Tanabata, when the weaver girl crosses the Heavenly River to rejoin the cowherd and the two kids.
Thus lonely Japanese girls and boys are tying their most ardent wishes to bamboo poles, in the hope they may come true.
It would be auspicious therefore, if the system7 Star appeared too. My own wishes were for exactly that.
Not a sausage! Oh well...
I thought I would talk about Robert Heron tonight. He was a great hero of mine in my Computer Geek phase around 2007.
Every week I would tune in for the DL.TV internet program, since it was part of my brief as Novatech Customer Advisor (MVP) to be bang up to date on the latest in computers.
Ah, Happy Days. I only eschewed the Black Shirt look since it has overtones that generally make me uncomfortable.
Patrick went on to work with the lovely Veronica Belmont on Tekzilla, in the same ilk. Discussion of iPads, The Cheesecake Factory, and what not.
In case you are wondering why we especially liked Veronica Belmont, click on.
Keep it classy, San Diego.
One of my better posts, I am sure you agree. 😀
Last edited:
Shades of 2021 there, Steve! 😉
I've pictured Orihime (Vega) and Hikoboshi (Altair):
And I've inconspicuously put Veronica on a loop for your delectation.
Finally, a photo of a more mature Robert Heron (seen on the left):
Need I point out that he looks nothing like you! 😀
Attachments
* An interesting segue into the glory days of Geeky and Techy Internet TV with DL.TV:
https://archive.org/details/dl-tv
TBH, with mature hindsight, I found the whole thing presented in an irritating way. Grown people behaving like children for the most part.
To do Tech, you fundamentally have to be serious about what you do. And many of the presenters were. But pandering to a frankly weird audience.
So you might find a useful series on overclocking, for instance, but mixed in with a visit to Comic-Con or Comicon where it is a matter of buying T-Shirts, comics, plastic models and DVDs of the latest Joss Whedon effort.
Advice about keeping the box for resale value aside, I really can live without a plastic TUX penguin on top of my Lunix Computer to advertise my nerd credentials! Really... 🙄
For all that, I have a cunning plan to "Cue the Belmont" for the future to deal with Trolls, and you know who I mean, just as we "Cue the Tesseract" when the 4D maths gets hard hard here. 🙂
* Back to "Quantum Erasers", Spooky action at a distance an' all that. It all becomes less confusing with some clear thinking. This article calls itself a "Critique" which usually means it dispels some wrong thinking, and I think it does.
https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Quantum_Tutorials_(Rioux)/01:_Quantum_Fundamentals/1.13:_Quantum_Mechanics_and_the_Fourier_Transform
Now I follow that well enough. Photons do not make fringes when polarised at right angles. In fact you could block one slit and still get much the same thing, albeit displaced vertically.
Here's where we scratch our heads. Add another polariser (D) at +/- 45 degrees and the fringes come back!
So you can get two results:
That had me scratching my head, because the D Polariser ought to be symmetrical with +/- 45 degrees, or Pi/4 as we prefer to say.
I haven't quite got it all clear in my head, but the key is that the original patterns are reduced in intensity by a half each time you add a layer of polarisation.
So we go one then half then a quarter. In other words we are merely selecting subsets of the original pattern, not creating anything that wasn't there all along. Lasers can apparently produce light photons of any polarisation you like, unpolarised, linearly polarised and circularly polarised.
Bottom line seems to be what I have always thought about Entanglement, is that there really is no spooky action at a distance, and you really aren't travelling back in time.
Some discussion here:
https://geneticjen.medium.com/the-d...riment-does-not-rewrite-the-past-c4491421d6f8
Hope that clears it up! 😆
https://archive.org/details/dl-tv
TBH, with mature hindsight, I found the whole thing presented in an irritating way. Grown people behaving like children for the most part.
To do Tech, you fundamentally have to be serious about what you do. And many of the presenters were. But pandering to a frankly weird audience.
So you might find a useful series on overclocking, for instance, but mixed in with a visit to Comic-Con or Comicon where it is a matter of buying T-Shirts, comics, plastic models and DVDs of the latest Joss Whedon effort.
Advice about keeping the box for resale value aside, I really can live without a plastic TUX penguin on top of my Lunix Computer to advertise my nerd credentials! Really... 🙄
For all that, I have a cunning plan to "Cue the Belmont" for the future to deal with Trolls, and you know who I mean, just as we "Cue the Tesseract" when the 4D maths gets hard hard here. 🙂
* Back to "Quantum Erasers", Spooky action at a distance an' all that. It all becomes less confusing with some clear thinking. This article calls itself a "Critique" which usually means it dispels some wrong thinking, and I think it does.
https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Quantum_Tutorials_(Rioux)/01:_Quantum_Fundamentals/1.13:_Quantum_Mechanics_and_the_Fourier_Transform
Now I follow that well enough. Photons do not make fringes when polarised at right angles. In fact you could block one slit and still get much the same thing, albeit displaced vertically.
Here's where we scratch our heads. Add another polariser (D) at +/- 45 degrees and the fringes come back!
So you can get two results:
That had me scratching my head, because the D Polariser ought to be symmetrical with +/- 45 degrees, or Pi/4 as we prefer to say.
I haven't quite got it all clear in my head, but the key is that the original patterns are reduced in intensity by a half each time you add a layer of polarisation.
So we go one then half then a quarter. In other words we are merely selecting subsets of the original pattern, not creating anything that wasn't there all along. Lasers can apparently produce light photons of any polarisation you like, unpolarised, linearly polarised and circularly polarised.
Bottom line seems to be what I have always thought about Entanglement, is that there really is no spooky action at a distance, and you really aren't travelling back in time.
Some discussion here:
https://geneticjen.medium.com/the-d...riment-does-not-rewrite-the-past-c4491421d6f8
Hope that clears it up! 😆
I feel the need for a definition of "Quantum Eraser": "The quantum eraser is a device that demonstrates quantum entanglement and complementarity and shows how a system can regain its lost quantum behavior by erasing the “which-path” information already obtained about it."
The quantum eraser I mentioned in post #4,490, is described in some detail here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_eraser_experiment
(In the diagram above, BBO = non-linear crystal; QWP = quarter-wave plate.)
In the above set-up each member of the entangled photon pair produced by the BBO is sent off on a different path.
The upper path goes directly to a polarisation detector, while the lower path goes to the double slit experiment.
Because of the entanglement, introducing a polariser in the upper path restores interference fringes that were previously "erased".
Your version of the "which-path" information and the quantum eraser seems to differ, producing as it does "fringes" and "anti-fringes" as shown below:
This is certainly head-scratching! Oh for an article other than the libretext one you posted.
That discussion is about the "delayed choice" quantum eraser experiment.
I notice that it has been debunked by Sabine Hossenfelder. She agrees it doesn't rewrite the past!
And here's what Sean Carroll has to say about the "Notorious Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser":
https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2019/09/21/the-notorious-delayed-choice-quantum-eraser/
I think my brain is about to explode!
https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2019/09/21/the-notorious-delayed-choice-quantum-eraser/
I think my brain is about to explode!