I remember reading that the bubble bee example was done at a party on a napkin and the next day the person who showed that bees cannot fly came back and said that he forgot to include something in the calculation.
Message: 1 Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 11:46:30 -0400 From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: K10D Resolving power To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed There is a lot of that kind of stuff. It is like back when they said memory chips could not get any denser because they were approaching the optical limit imaging them. Then some bright guys thought, "who says we have to image them with visible light", and now they use ultraviolet. Then there is the classic "bumble bees can not fly" from aerodynamics. Then they discovered that the fur broke up the laminar flow and that they certainly could, in theory as well as in fact. Here is an interesting speculation. Each ray of light (or photon, they are just different states of the same thing) coming through the lens carries the complete holographic image. Now if a way to capture that without mosaicing and demosaicing the image could be found, your sensitivity would be equal to the number of pixels (each pixel containing the whole image) rather than the sensitivity of the individual pixels. Feasible, even possible? Who knows? -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
