Capturing Light Leaving Its Source: Is it Possible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ABHoT
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Source
AI Thread Summary
Capturing light as it leaves its source is fundamentally impossible because light must hit a detector to be recorded, making speed irrelevant. A camera functions as a light detector, and even high-speed photography cannot resolve the movement of light pulses effectively. While it may be possible to observe light scattering off particles in the air, this does not equate to filming light in transit. The discussion highlights that the scale of light travel makes capturing it in motion impractical, even with advanced technology. Ultimately, the concept of filming light traveling requires a shift in understanding the nature of light and detection.
ABHoT
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Will it ever be possible to use a high enough speed 'camera' to film light leaving a source?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
No, because light is only detected when it actually hits a detector. Speed is irrelevant.
 
What else than light, is a camera filming ?

Actually a camera IS a detector for light. :wink:
 
Last edited:
Do you mean high enough speed as in the "speed" of a camera? That is, how quickly the picture taking action is?

And actually yah, as russ said, it's irrelevant, the light has to hit the detector/film before it can be detected.
 
I believe you may be able to see a pulse if the laser light is directed away from you and is scattered off dust...but I'm not sure what you'd see since the laser would move as much forward as the scattered light moved towards you at the same time. My guess is that you can't make a shutter move fast enough to resolve anything like this (even at 10,000fps, the light pulse would move 30km between each frame).
 
So don't use a shutter... Or perhaps more to the point: what activates the shutter - a light sensor...?
 
Matterwave said:
I believe you may be able to see a pulse if the laser light is directed away from you and is scattered off dust...but I'm not sure what you'd see
See http://128.183.240.121/apod/ap060125.html".
Here, a shutter time of some weeks would be enough for a sharp picture. Size does matter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, since they are very very far away and produce very large shockwaves, we can see this using slow shutter speed since even though the light has moved millions of km in the time between pictures, millions of km on that scale isn't too large. I thought the OP wanted to see something like a laser shooting out of a laser pointer though...
 
Thanks. I was originally thinking of a sphere of light leaving a light bulb. I guess if it was dark and the air was full of dust and you could get that many frames. :\
I understand a bit better now.
 
  • #10
I think I need to drop the seeing is believing when it comes to light and stop imagining filming it traveling for it to still be so.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
72
Views
3K
Replies
54
Views
7K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top