Uncertainty Principle and Photography. see mdashf.org/2015/06/08/

Uncertainty Principle and Photography. see mdashf.org/2015/06/08/

• 1.
  September 27, 2008Manmohan Dash, Virginia Tech Uncertainty Principle A natural effect of the Quantum World
• 2.
  September 27, 2008Manmohan Dash, Virginia Tech A shot taken when the camera is focused at the grass. A shot taken when the camera is focused at the flower.
• 3.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech How do we see what we see in a camera shot !! The camera gets a bunch of photons [particulate light] or a flash of light beam, [light in wave form] To get a clear image of a spot this bunch must be registered with precision.  I.e. the spread in the energy of photons must be narrow.  The spread of the energy is the same as the “error” of the energy measurement the camera is capable of performing, the less the error the sharper the image.
• 4.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech How do we see what we see in a camera shot !! ……  Light travels at a constant speed and the small spread of the energy is same as a precise frequency of the light beam.  This is not independent of the corresponding spread in the wavelength of the light beam.  The spread or the error of the wavelength is large if the corresponding error in the frequency/energy is small.  For sharper image at a specific spot the position of the other spots is “blurred”.
• 5.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech “Sharp” in energy, “blurred” in location
• 6.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech  The image of the flower is blurred as its position along the direction “vertical to the picture (say Z)” is not known precisely. In-fact it’s a “stack” of images from different Z-locations. Since the camera has measured energy precisely it has lost the position to the extent of a wide Z.  So far so good. Only the smartest guys would immediately point out what’s “wrong” with this explanation. Their question would be the precision of energy would also mean a lack of precision for the Z position of the grass. Why is it Not blurred.
• 7.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech  In-fact this would mean the Uncertainty Principle is not valid  The answer is “Uncertainty Principle” is still valid. The grass image would have been blurred except for we have focused our camera to the grass. “So what?, does that mean focusing has over-ruling power and uncertainty principle is a joke?” NO. Focusing has provided an independent way of precise knowledge of the Z position of the grass. The camera has focused to a precise position and this knowledge is inherent in the information content of the camera. When the camera reconstructs the images from all the available photons despite of the error in the wavelength of the bunch coming from the grass we know its position clearly.
• 8.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech A principle of Nature.  We would even have discovered this effect with our naked eye, trying to focus to a distant object other objects have a blurry image. Nonetheless this is not an easy task with the eye. It doesn’t mean we are super powerful but rather our eye works like a camera/detector and our perception of vision is same as our perception of a image shot by a camera. In the case of a camera we have better optical and digital power.  In any case “Uncertainty Principle” is just there in Nature, like there is Gravity, or the sensation of warmth and cold.
• 9.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech Merging the QM and the non QM information ?  I haven’t done this experiment with a film camera or even with naked eye. This was done with a latest digital model and I don’t know its exact mechanism. I haven’t reviewed to understand how exactly, focusing gives us inherent precision about position. In any case its clear that this is independent of the camera’s other measurement. By focusing in-between the grass and flower we were going to get a blurry grass as well. Does it mean a digital camera merges both optical measurement with its digital or quantum mechanical measurement and gives us better result?? In that case can we merge another focusing component to the “camera” to get a sharper image of the flower as well??
• 10.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech Merging the QM and the non-QM information ?  If not for commercial purposes it may have implications for measurements in astronomy !!  A recently [15th Sept 2008] found “Star- Planet !!” by the Gemini telescope. Gemini adaptive optics image of 1RSX J160929.1-210524 and its likely ~8 Jupiter-mass companion (within red circle). This image is a composite of J-, H- and K-band near-infrared images. All images obtained with the Gemini Altair adaptive optics system and the Near-Infrared Imager (NIRI) on the Gemini North telescope. Photo Credit: Gemini Observatory
• 11.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech Adaptive Optics System at Gemini Observatory  Distortion in Optical image is corrected by calibration of the atmospheric effects.
• 12.
  September 27, 2008ManmohanDash, Virginia Tech Infra-red wavelength reveals more  Gemini works better at the infrared wavelength, it would be easier to study the energy-wavelength distributions.  A sophisticated energy- wavelength analysis can be incorporated by introducing an optical “correction” to Quantum Mechanical information.