Light reflection without a surface

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of light reflection and whether it is possible to reflect light in space without a surface. Participants explore the nature of light, its behavior in different mediums, and the implications of projecting images without a physical surface.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that reflection inherently requires a surface, questioning the feasibility of reflecting light without one.
  • Others suggest that while light can be bent (e.g., by gravitational effects of stars or black holes), true reflection cannot occur without a surface.
  • A participant proposes a distinction between turning light around and projecting images into space, seeking clarification on the necessity of a surface for projection.
  • There is mention of light scattering in gases, but participants note this does not equate to reflection.
  • One participant references a holographic performance, questioning how such projections are achieved, leading to a discussion about the techniques used in those displays.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that traditional reflection requires a surface, but there is disagreement about the nuances of light behavior in different contexts, particularly regarding projection without a surface. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the possibility of projecting images into space.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying levels of understanding about the physics involved, and some statements reflect assumptions about the nature of light and projection techniques that are not fully explored.

poisant
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,
this is my first post so bare with me...
I was searching the internet for light reflection and all other properties of light.Since we all know light requires a surface to reflect so that we see the objects.
Can we reflect the light in space without requiring a surface?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Reflection MEANS bouncing off of a surface, so no, you can't reflect without a surface.

Do you mean, perhaps, could we in some way turn light around without it touching anything? If so, I don't think so.
 
Light can be scattered in gases (or other materials), but that is not a real reflection.

If you send light towards a black hole in the right direction, it can turn around the black hole and come back to you, which is a bit like a reflection.
 
We can BEND light (for ex.bending of light due to stars or black holes) but can not REFLECT it without a surface.
 
Well till now I got the same answer.I agree that it's impossible to turn the light around.
But come on guys!
It's not about turing light without any surface,It's about "can I project the display into space not into the walls?"
So this is my actual query.
When I project an image why I always need a surface?
 
Light will continue in the same direction until something interferes with its path. Hence the sad impossibility of a light saber
 
You need something which reflects or bends light, right.
With sufficient intensity, you might be able to use air, but you cannot use space itself (=vacuum).
 
poisant said:
...
It's not about turing light without any surface,It's about "can I project the display into space not into the walls?

Your apparent belief that the statement above is somehow NOT about reflection just shows a lack of understanding of physics.
 
@phinds i used your words.anyways i agree i suffer lack of knowledge in physics.
Do anyone know about tupac shakur' holographic peformance.how they did it?
I mean how they managed to project it?
There are many other videos as well
 
  • #10
According to this article, it was a simple 2D projection on a sheet of mylar.
 
  • #11
poisant said:
@phinds i used your words.anyways i agree i suffer lack of knowledge in physics.
Do anyone know about tupac shakur' holographic peformance.how they did it?
I mean how they managed to project it?
There are many other videos as well

mfb said:
According to this article, it was a simple 2D projection on a sheet of mylar.

In other words, don't look to videos or movies for breakthroughs in science! I am reminded of when, after a James Bond movie, in which Bond to put a little device to his lips in order to swim under water, a Royal Navy officer contacted the studio asking how long a person could stay underwater with that device.

The response: about as long as he can hold his breath!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K