Re ceiling dials,

Lets get empirical:

I. Take a piece of ordinary looking glass and hold it by 
its lateral edges, close to and beneath, your eye, and 
look at some test grid (e.g. the day squares on a 
calendar) across the room.  Compare the appearance of 
the squares' lines by low-incidence reflection from the 
mirror, with direct view by the same eye.  Are the 
horizontal lines of the top and bottom of the squares 
more -- or less -- distinct than the vertical lines of 
the squares' sides?  If there is a difference between 
the clarity of the vertical and the horizontal lines, 
this is an indication of astigmatism. If it occurs only 
in the low incidence mirror reflection, the mirror is 
not flat.  If it occurs also in the direct view, your 
eye is then its source. If it occurs not at all, or only 
slightly in either or both cases, you can probably use 
that mirror for a reflected dial, since the incidence 
angles for the working dial will be larger than for this 
test, which is a surprisingly sensitive one.

Try the same test on a piece of window glass.  (If you 
wish, you can later make it into a front-surface-only 
mirror by "grinding" the back side on a piece of 
carborundum paper, and coating it with black paint.)

Question: If the effect on a narrow grid line is so
small an angle across the room, how much difference will
it make in reading the time on a ceiling dial?

Place patterns of masking tape (cross lines or 
apertures) on these mirrors, and see if they help
to define a reading-point on the ceiling. If they do,
you can paint more lasting patterns directly on the 
glass. (You know, just like when painting the trim
around your house windows.)

II. Put a little water in a shallow dish (e.g. an
inverted plastic "snap lid" from a small jar or 
cannister) and place it on a sunlit window sill or 
horizontal table-surface.  Note the visibility of the 
reflected light spot. Repeat the experiment with some 
cooking oil in place of the water.  Do a "river dance" 
beside the window.  Observe any effects on the light spot
for each liquid.

(For a more permanent  device, mineral oil will be
less perishable and available with higher viscosity, for 
better damping.  But you'll still need a transparent 
cover to keep dust from settling on the surface.  While 
you're playing with these liquid mirrors, note that 
miniscus effects have little importance for one's
ability to "read" the spots in practice.) 

Question: Do you really need mercury to make a self-
leveling mirror?

Sciagraphically,

Bill Maddux

   ------------------------------------------------
[The mercury paraboloid experiments "decades ago" were 
the work of Dr. R. W. Wood, Professor of Experimental 
Physics at Johns Hopkins, who in 1908 - 1909 used a 20 
inch diam. rotating shallow pan of Hg in an attempt to 
produce an optical mirror.]

Reply via email to