6 ms·
Video: At one trillion frames per second, you can see light move
- mef 14y agoResearch details http://web.media.mit.edu/~raskar/trillionfps/ http://web.media.mit.edu/~raskar/trillionfps/
- Evbn 14y agoWhy does the researche call it "trillion fps", when it is really 1/trillionth sec frame? That sort of misrepresentation is supposed to be saved for the news office or the popular press. The achievement is interesting enogh without the deceptive exaggerations.
- kghose 14y agohttp://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3346609 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3346609
- jeffreyg 14y agowhy not just link to the TED video instead of a blog that offers nothing additional? http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/ramesh_raskar_a_camera_that_takes_one_trillion_frames_per_second.html http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/ramesh_raskar_a_camera_that...
- luckylemon 14y agoI just happened to see it on that blog, and wanted to quote its phrasing (which doesn't appear on the video's own page as far as I can see). Sometimes a sentence adds a lot.
- mycodebreaks 14y agoThis is a clear violation of HN guideline. HN guideline is: "Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they found on another site, submit the latter."
- nopal 14y agoHe's obviously new here, so why not cut him a break. luckylemon, it's true that there's a guideline regarding blog posts that link to other material. You can see of the guidelines by following the link at the bottom of the page [1]. Thanks for contributing something you feel is interesting. [1]http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- luckylemon 14y agoOK, will do in future. Thanks for pointing me to the rule.
- acavailhez 14y agoAs it was stated before, it's not a 10^-12 seconds camera, it's a very short pulse laser cleverly synchronized with a very short span camera. This experiment would not work with a moving object for instance. It still has interesting applications though.
- phpnode 14y agoI could be wrong, but as long as the object is moving at "normal" (e.g. significantly less than the speed of light) speeds, this approach would work for moving objects too.
- shocks 14y agoUnfortunately, you are wrong. The "video" of the pulse of light going through the bottle is actually the result of sending trillions of light pulses through the bottle, taking pictures at very precise (recorded) times and syncing them all together.
- phpnode 14y agoright but doesn't this depend on how fast you can send and receive those trillion light pulses? if that can be done in sufficiently short time, the object in motion will have only moved by a small amount, and it will look like it has been elongated in the direction of travel, like a motion blur. The above is my uninformed and optimistic speculation.
- Evbn 14y agoRight. But the point of high speed photography, like the apple bullet that is disingenuously compared in the video, is that you avoid motion blur. My 200 fps camera can take a trillionth of a second snapshot, with some, um, motion blur
- shocks 14y agoNope, because a single frame of the video is the result of many trillions of light pulses. Each time a picture is taken the exposure is so low that the image is incredibly dark. These means they must take lots more and "add them together" to produce a bright image. If the object is moving it would be impossible since every new image would have the object in a different place, and when you added them together to counteract the fact each image is so under exposed (dark) the object would be blurred.
- thong 14y agoI think this makes a great TED talk title, but this probably kicks in at some point. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
- antr 14y agoThis URL should point to the source of the video i.e. ted.com not kottke.org
- mycodebreaks 14y agoSeriously, HN is getting worse. I posted this earlier, and it didn't even make it to the homepage. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4392695 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4392695 This is a clear violation of HN guideline. HN guideline is: "Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they found on another site, submit the latter."
- NeilRShah 14y agoSo instead of talking about the content, we are all discussing the way that he posted his content. Who cares? One click, two clicks. It really doesn't effect me that much. I think all of us are talking way too much much about how much HN needs to be fixed. Almost every large thread has a reference to how HN is broken. HN may or may not be "going downhill" but if that's all we talk about... It certainly will. And I recognize the irony in this statement. :)
- shocks 14y agoBUT WHAT ABOUT HIS KARMA?! :O
- mycodebreaks 14y agoYes, Karma is important
- rorrr 14y agoAgain, it's NOT trillion frames per second. Stop spreading this bullshit. That camera takes extremely short exposures (1 trillionth of a sec), but it cannot take 1 trillion of such exposures in one second. Not even close. Not one billion, not one million (and probably not even one thousand, as there are only a few sensors that can do that).
- noselasd 14y agoThey capture data at about half a trillion "fps". Then they repeat this over and over and combine the data - as the light from just one exposure is too weak.
- rorrr 14y agoThis just shows you don't understand how their technology works. They don't capture the data at half a trillion FPS. They take very short exposures and shift the phase very precisely, which creates an illusion of 1 trillion fps.
- pubby 14y agoThe resulting video is one trillion frames per second which the title is referring to. This video shows 10,000 fps video camera which seems to be on a commercially sold camera: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcQ37OfknJ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcQ37OfknJ
- rorrr 14y ago> resulting video is one trillion frames per second No, the resulting video is 30 frames per second.