It would have been a great illustration if only he had been able to count the
drops. Because he couldn’t I felt that it was a rather pointless one. And I
come back to his definition of noise: the variation in numbers of drops doesn’t
seem to me to be a clever way to describe it.
Chris
> On 22 Sep 15, at 01:13, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Actually, I rather liked the analogy of raindrops and the quantum nature of
> light. Made perfect sense to me.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> On 9/21/2015 5:25 PM, ChrisB wrote:
>> Not as far as I could tell, Moose. I didn't mind the article, but I didn't
>> like his description of noise: the variation in light hitting the sensor.
>>
>> I think that you'd enjoy reading it.
>>
>> Chris
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|