on 2004/05/15 11:15 AM, Joe Gwinn at joegwinn@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 22:09:22 -0400
>> From: Andrew Gullen <andrew.gullen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> on 2004/05/13 8:20 PM, Cyrtolite@xxxxxxx at Cyrtolite@xxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>>> The spots are about perfectly circular and the larger ones are
>>> composed of concentric rings.
>>
>> They aren't Newton rings are they? Or have we discussed this already?
>
> No, they aren't Newton Rings, which arise when two pieces of glass
> (say two lenses) get too close together, close enough that
> interference becomes noticeable.
>
> They are diffraction (Airy) patterns in the shadows of particles of
> dust on the glass cover of the image sensor.
You could be right - how far (how many diameters?) does the object have to
be in front of the sensor to see these instead of a normal shadow?
Newton rings would imply non-uniform thickness of a layer in front of the
sensor, or an air gap, of dimension (I think) lambda/2 to a few lambdas or
so - correct me if I'm wrong; it's been a while. However, they probably
wouldn't be perfect circles unless the flaw was circularly symmetric, so as
I said, you're probably right. Which, for Scott's sake, is good. And now
that I think about it wouldn't Newton rings have to be darker, not lighter?
Andrew
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|