- #1
ahmedhassan72
- 55
- 0
Please, I must have some misunderstanding ,why I see farther objects smaller although there are reflected photons??!
Why farther objects appears smaller?
- Thread starter ahmedhassan72
- Start date
- #2
Doc Al
Mentor
- 45,566
- 2,348
Because they subtend a smaller angle.
- #3
ahmedhassan72
- 55
- 0
I don't understand I have a thread about angles but I can't clarify my idea and what subtended angle... Please see my post about light ..Thanks
- #4
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 42,895
- 981
Imagine two lines going from your eyes to a distant hill, one to the base of the hill, the other to the top of the hill. Trees of the same height along the way will take a greater part of that angle as they are closer to you because the angle opens up farther away from you. Since they all project to you eye along those lines, the closer ones will appear larger.
- #5
Lojzek
- 249
- 1
It is also necessary to know how the eye works: it has a lens with adjustable curvature. When we try to observe object, the curvature is automaticly set to focus all rays coming from the same point to the same point on the retina (the back of the eye with light detecting cells). So all light from one point is focused to one point. All light from another point will be focused to another point. If the angle between source points is greater, then they will focus further apart. So the apparent size of the object depends on the angle between it's most distant points, which decreases with distance.
- #6
jk4
things "appear" smaller from far away because of what Lojzek said, it's the curvature of the eye. If your eyes were flat then you would see something to be the same size 100ft away as you would right in front of you, which wouldn't work very well.
look at my attatched image. and I appologize for my poor drawing skills.
Anyway, you'll see that a curved eye or lens creates an angle and you see everything within it, but we see in 2D because, if you look at the top image and trace the lines backwards, you'll see that everything fits into the same area on the eye. So, things farther away appear smaller than if you were to move them closer because they would take up more room in your "field of vision".
if our eyes were flat resembling the bottom image (and you only had 1 eye) you would have literally zero depth perception, and couldn't even tell if something was moving closer or farther away. Everything would appear zoomed in very close.
look at my attatched image. and I appologize for my poor drawing skills.
Anyway, you'll see that a curved eye or lens creates an angle and you see everything within it, but we see in 2D because, if you look at the top image and trace the lines backwards, you'll see that everything fits into the same area on the eye. So, things farther away appear smaller than if you were to move them closer because they would take up more room in your "field of vision".
if our eyes were flat resembling the bottom image (and you only had 1 eye) you would have literally zero depth perception, and couldn't even tell if something was moving closer or farther away. Everything would appear zoomed in very close.
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
- #7
mikelepore
- 550
- 2
I don't understand why the properties of the human eye were mentioned here when it's also true for a photograph. Suppose a photograph shows two circles side by side and they appear to have the same diameter -- however the circle on the left is the moon at a distance of about 380,000 km, and the circle on the right is a pea at a distance of about 2 m. I thought Doc Al's answer said it all (although I didn't know about that nice word "subtend").
- #8
ahmedhassan72
- 55
- 0
The photograph,the eye,...How and when far objects appears as near ones without respect to distance?!
that's all...
thanks..
that's all...
thanks..
- #9
Doc Al
Mentor
- 45,566
- 2,348
Have you not been reading the responses? What don't you understand?
- #10
ahmedhassan72
- 55
- 0
Yes I read and understood,my question is can we make something that recognizes every thing at certain image size irrespectable to how far are objects..? thanks...
- #11
Doc Al
Mentor
- 45,566
- 2,348
What do you mean by "make something"? Are you concerned with a mathematical issue? A physical issue?
If two objects subtend the same angle, they will "look" the same size. Where's the mystery?
If two objects subtend the same angle, they will "look" the same size. Where's the mystery?
- #12
nuby
- 336
- 0
My guess is:
Because your eyes can only absorb so many photons. The closer you are to the object the more photons from the object will hit the rods in your eyes, making the object appear bigger.
Because your eyes can only absorb so many photons. The closer you are to the object the more photons from the object will hit the rods in your eyes, making the object appear bigger.
- #13
cristo
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
- 8,144
- 75
nuby said:
Have you read the other answers given higher up in the thread?
- #14
russ_watters
Mentor
- 23,523
- 10,916
For that, I use a telescope, a camera, and a printer.ahmedhassan72 said:
- #15
wysard
- 172
- 0
Doc Al said:
Pithy.
Did I mention that you are one of my hero's Doc?
OP. Smaller angles mean less photons. It's the reason that looking at the night sky and seeing a million suns far off doesn't instantly blind and incinerate you as seeing the same million suns as close say as ours...
To make something that would recognize something regardless of distance as you intimated. For example recognizing an enemy spacecraft at 30 miles or 30,000 miles is a question of resolution. If you can scan the 30 mile craft with a million points and recognize the same outline with one thousand points then the answer is yes. (I know I'm ignoring other occluding factors like say, atmosphere, debris, moisture, temperature etc. but this is a ballpark kinda answer)
- #16
russ_watters
Mentor
- 23,523
- 10,916
While generally true (exception: lasers), this has nothing whatsoever to do with why objects further away appear smaller.wysard said:
- #17
scoobydoo
- 11
- 0
I'm not sure about how to answer your question but i have a feeling the previous post has don't just that but have you noticed sometimes from the same vantage point looking at the same thing on different days the object can look slightly bigger or closer or smaller and further away. From my balcony on some days the buildings in the distance seem closer than normal, maybe has something to do with the atmosphere or because I am using my binoculars I am not sure lol but seriously sometimes they do appear closer. anyone shed any light on this?? perhaps its something to do with my eyes??
- #18
wysard
- 172
- 0
Sorry Russ. You are absolutely right. Put the cart before the horse I did.
I was considering less reflected photons, and angle subtended by sources, not the general solution.
(sign on laser exhibit: Do not peer into barrel of laser with remaining eye.)
I was considering less reflected photons, and angle subtended by sources, not the general solution.
(sign on laser exhibit: Do not peer into barrel of laser with remaining eye.)
- #19
jlorda
- 28
- 0
Why does the moon look bigger some times when it first comes up over the horizon?
- #20
nuby
- 336
- 0
(random guess) As the photons from the moon "fly" over the earth, the Earth's gravity pulls more photons to the Earth's surface, and to your eyes .. making the object appear bigger.
- #21
Doc Al
Mentor
- 45,566
- 2,348
Please don't just make things up.nuby said:
- #22
ahmedhassan72
- 55
- 0
I think that there must be a scientist that explained this phenomena...so who is he to see what he had done?
- #23
sir_manning
- 66
- 0
The reason the moon appears bigger on the horizon is psychological - it is not actually magnified. Do a google image search for the "Ponzo illusion" to see a similar effect.
- #24
nuby
- 336
- 0
Doc Al said:
That was just my guess, as I said. Feel free to stat some facts, or take a look at <crackpot link deleted>.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_illusion has some good information.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #25
ahmedhassan72
- 55
- 0
ok all in all can I deduce that at certain conditions it can be that farther objects and near ones appear the same size...
- #26
nuby
- 336
- 0
Sorry I posted that link about the suppression of creativity in physics. I honestly didn't think that was "Linking to obviously "crank" or "crackpot" sites is prohibited."
And you pretty much proved my point by deleting it, Thanks Doc Al.
And you pretty much proved my point by deleting it, Thanks Doc Al.
Last edited:
- #27
Doc Al
Mentor
- 45,566
- 2,348
You seem to define "creativity" in physics as just making up any old nonsense without regard for evidence. That was most definitely a clearcut "crackpot" site, but I'm not surprised that you don't know the difference.nuby said:
If you don't like our rules, you are free to leave. We wouldn't want to inhibit your "creativity".
- #28
nuby
- 336
- 0
open-mindedness, creativity, whichever you prefer...
Guess what comes before evidence?
Thats, right... An idea! I may not be smart enough to crank out complex equations proving something might be possible, but I can suggest semi-logical concepts that don't hurt anyone.
But if you feel threatened by my simple ideas, I can stop posting.. no problem. I don't want to irritate senior PF guys such as yourself.
PM me if you have anything else to say, we shouldn't even be posting here.
Guess what comes before evidence?
Thats, right... An idea! I may not be smart enough to crank out complex equations proving something might be possible, but I can suggest semi-logical concepts that don't hurt anyone.
But if you feel threatened by my simple ideas, I can stop posting.. no problem. I don't want to irritate senior PF guys such as yourself.
PM me if you have anything else to say, we shouldn't even be posting here.
- #29
russ_watters
Mentor
- 23,523
- 10,916
No, nuby, you're wrong. Ideas do not come before evidence. You need to look into the scientific method. You're also wrong about us feeling threatened by you. The very idea is just plain silly. You have a pretty straightforward choice here: follow the rules you agreed to when you signed-up or stop posting here.
This question has been answered and is so disturbingly straightforward that I am having trouble believing how much trouble some appear to be having with it. As such, there is nothing more to be gained by this discussion (other than to say to reread what has already been posted), so I'm locking the thread
This question has been answered and is so disturbingly straightforward that I am having trouble believing how much trouble some appear to be having with it. As such, there is nothing more to be gained by this discussion (other than to say to reread what has already been posted), so I'm locking the thread