I'm posting this as a total curiosity. I realize the materials and situations involved are purely hypothetical, so bear with me.
Imagine a glass sphere, whose inside is made of a 100% reflective material. The sphere is totally impermeable to heat or matter exchange, save for a small aperture. Through that aperture you shine a bright light, illuminating the inside of the sphere. You keep shining in light until, suddenly, you close the aperture in an instant and seal off the sphere with the light inside. What happens to the light inside the sphere?
Will the photons forever bounce around? If you crack the sphere open a day later, would there still be some form of discernible light inside?
Will the photons slowly lose energy with each collision until they disappear?
What if we're dealing with a real sphere made of real materials. What then? Is the light lost as heat?
I appreciate any answers to this odd question. Help me understand what I'm missing!
QUOTE (Onion01+Apr 24 2012, 08:18 PM)
What happens to the light inside the sphere?
Will the photons forever bounce around?
If you crack the sphere open a day later, would there still be some form of discernible light inside?
I don't see any reason why not, since we're dealing with ideal materials here, the photons would just bounce around.
There would be for a fraction of a second before the stored light escapes.
There would be for a fraction of a second before the stored light escapes.
Will the photons slowly lose energy with each collision until they disappear?
I may be wrong, but I don't believe that photons lose energy in the reflection process. If there was, the loss would be extremely small.
Real materials aren't 100% reflective, so yes, the light would be lost fairly quickly. A certain percentage of photons reflect or penetrate any given reflective surface, depending on the quality of the surface. After a few hundred bounces, most of the light would be lost.
Will the photons forever bounce around?
If you crack the sphere open a day later, would there still be some form of discernible light inside?
I don't see any reason why not, since we're dealing with ideal materials here, the photons would just bounce around.
QUOTE
If you crack the sphere open a day later, would there still be some form of discernible light inside?
There would be for a fraction of a second before the stored light escapes.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| If you crack the sphere open a day later, would there still be some form of discernible light inside? |
There would be for a fraction of a second before the stored light escapes.
Will the photons slowly lose energy with each collision until they disappear?
I may be wrong, but I don't believe that photons lose energy in the reflection process. If there was, the loss would be extremely small.
QUOTE
What if we're dealing with a real sphere made of real materials. What then? Is the light lost as heat?
Real materials aren't 100% reflective, so yes, the light would be lost fairly quickly. A certain percentage of photons reflect or penetrate any given reflective surface, depending on the quality of the surface. After a few hundred bounces, most of the light would be lost.
QUOTE (Guest+Apr 24 2012, 09:36 PM)
Ok. Can you elaborate on your initial replies? Yes/No?
If Onion01 has questions, I'll let him respond. You don't appear to have anything to contribute.
If Onion01 has questions, I'll let him respond. You don't appear to have anything to contribute.
This is just RC trolling again.
He can hardly write a sentence with using a /
He can hardly write a sentence with using a /
QUOTE (Guest+Apr 24 2012, 07:59 PM)
And you have contributed....what....exactly? Initial replies which you were asked you to elaborate on. If you cannot do so then just say so.
What do you want him to do, educate you on the entirety of physics to appease your vague and open-ended insistence?
What do you want him to do, educate you on the entirety of physics to appease your vague and open-ended insistence?
This is RC trolling.
It's already established that he can't be educated.
Besides, the initial replies need no elaboration, they're complete and concise.
rpenner, can you IP ban this troll?
[Moderator: I would, but I have just about convinced James R & co. that the Astronomy/Cosmology section on sciforums.com needs a new moderator. As long as he is posting here, he's not talking to that more professional science forum.]
It's already established that he can't be educated.
Besides, the initial replies need no elaboration, they're complete and concise.
rpenner, can you IP ban this troll?
[Moderator: I would, but I have just about convinced James R & co. that the Astronomy/Cosmology section on sciforums.com needs a new moderator. As long as he is posting here, he's not talking to that more professional science forum.]
QUOTE (Guest+Apr 24 2012, 10:09 PM)
And right there, folks, is the mantra of the so-called expert who run away from a question they can't answer properly.
Contrary to what you might think, asking vague questions gets you vague answers.
Actually, I think this instance illustrates your inability to comprehend or participate in a scientific discussion. You didn't reply to anything I said in particular, you asked a pointless question that had nothing to do with the topic.
Actually, I think this instance illustrates your inability to comprehend or participate in a scientific discussion. You didn't reply to anything I said in particular, you asked a pointless question that had nothing to do with the topic.
Blame the victim/questioner to rationalize away your own failure.
You're an idiot.
I'm really looking forward to seeing your little "sub-forum project" deleted. Seeing that here made me think twice when I first joined.
What do you want him to do, educate you on the entirety of physics to appease your vague and open-ended insistence?
And right there, folks, is the mantra of the so-called expert who run away from a question they can't answer properly. Their 'parroting' without comprehension of what the question is about does not pass, so they tell people they are ignorant etc etc. Blame the victim/questioner to rationalize away your own failure. What a Pretty Polly mantra in lieu of facing up to the question! Good luck with that legacy!
No, that was actually a question that you just hypocritically "ran away from".
Apparently being able to play pretend that you knew anything about physics was the very thin veneer on your complete barking delusion.
Who you squawking at, idiot parrot? Your 'master and protector' the tyrant blogger has deleted the record so much that you are left idiotically squawking to yourself! Sweet sweet irony, you idiot bird.
PS: Amazing how monomaniacal is the tyrannical tendency to delete and distort inconvenient records to run away from their perfidy against the victim. Truly, amazing! What kind of mind does it take to act like that and convince itself it has done nothing wrong? Incredible. Sad.
PPS: Hark! What is that squawking sound approaching? Is it a chicken? Is it a goose? No!...it's both of those rolled into one squawking parrot!....
Enter AlexG......stage right....
Behold the idiot parrot called AlexG!
PPS: I wonder how long before your master comes along to clean out your cage and remove the 'inconvenient' mindless crap you have dropped onto the bottom of your cage so so many times for all to see and smell? Wait for it....wait for it.....
PPS: He did it, he cleaned out your cage just now! What a good little trained-pet-keeper is the tyrant! Now let's see if he comes back again soon to clean out your cage again....wait for it....
You are a woman right ? Are you still at Sciforum ? Say Hi to the gang for me or you can Alex . I miss my friends there . Course a bunch of them have seemed to have left the area . Many still there though . I like to think they are friends anyway
Contrary to what you might think, asking vague questions gets you vague answers.
QUOTE
Their 'parroting' without comprehension of what the question is about does not pass, so they tell people they are ignorant etc etc.
Actually, I think this instance illustrates your inability to comprehend or participate in a scientific discussion. You didn't reply to anything I said in particular, you asked a pointless question that had nothing to do with the topic.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Their 'parroting' without comprehension of what the question is about does not pass, so they tell people they are ignorant etc etc. |
Actually, I think this instance illustrates your inability to comprehend or participate in a scientific discussion. You didn't reply to anything I said in particular, you asked a pointless question that had nothing to do with the topic.
Blame the victim/questioner to rationalize away your own failure.
You're an idiot.
QUOTE
What a Pretty Polly mantra in lieu of facing up to the question! Good luck with that legacy!
I'm really looking forward to seeing your little "sub-forum project" deleted. Seeing that here made me think twice when I first joined.
QUOTE (Guest+Apr 24 2012, 08:09 PM)
QUOTE (synthsin75 @ Apr 25 2012+ 02:00 AM)
What do you want him to do, educate you on the entirety of physics to appease your vague and open-ended insistence?
And right there, folks, is the mantra of the so-called expert who run away from a question they can't answer properly. Their 'parroting' without comprehension of what the question is about does not pass, so they tell people they are ignorant etc etc. Blame the victim/questioner to rationalize away your own failure. What a Pretty Polly mantra in lieu of facing up to the question! Good luck with that legacy!
No, that was actually a question that you just hypocritically "ran away from".
Apparently being able to play pretend that you knew anything about physics was the very thin veneer on your complete barking delusion.
QUOTE (Onion01+Apr 25 2012, 12:18 AM)
What happens to the light inside the sphere?
Will the photons forever bounce around? If you crack the sphere open a day later, would there still be some form of discernible light inside?
Will the photons slowly lose energy with each collision until they disappear?
What if we're dealing with a real sphere made of real materials. What then? Is the light lost as heat?
I love seeing this question here, because I have been pondering this same situation for a long while now. If it were possible to create a 100% reflective surface, SOOO many possibilities open up.
Anyone happen to know, off the top of their heads, what the best reflective surface achieved so far would be? It would still be nice to have access to a lab where I could build a few pieces of equipment and check a couple of personal theories.
Will the photons forever bounce around? If you crack the sphere open a day later, would there still be some form of discernible light inside?
Will the photons slowly lose energy with each collision until they disappear?
What if we're dealing with a real sphere made of real materials. What then? Is the light lost as heat?
I love seeing this question here, because I have been pondering this same situation for a long while now. If it were possible to create a 100% reflective surface, SOOO many possibilities open up.
Anyone happen to know, off the top of their heads, what the best reflective surface achieved so far would be? It would still be nice to have access to a lab where I could build a few pieces of equipment and check a couple of personal theories.
And the Whinning Bitch Troll continues.
Wow, Whinning Troll, you're really wacked.
QUOTE (A-Parrot's-Idiocy-Demonstrat+Apr 26 2012, 08:12 PM)
Who you squawking at, idiot parrot? Your 'master and protector' the tyrant blogger has deleted the record so much that you are left idiotically squawking to yourself! Sweet sweet irony, you idiot bird.
PS: Amazing how monomaniacal is the tyrannical tendency to delete and distort inconvenient records to run away from their perfidy against the victim. Truly, amazing! What kind of mind does it take to act like that and convince itself it has done nothing wrong? Incredible. Sad.
PPS: Hark! What is that squawking sound approaching? Is it a chicken? Is it a goose? No!...it's both of those rolled into one squawking parrot!....
Enter AlexG......stage right....
Behold the idiot parrot called AlexG!
PPS: I wonder how long before your master comes along to clean out your cage and remove the 'inconvenient' mindless crap you have dropped onto the bottom of your cage so so many times for all to see and smell? Wait for it....wait for it.....
PPS: He did it, he cleaned out your cage just now! What a good little trained-pet-keeper is the tyrant! Now let's see if he comes back again soon to clean out your cage again....wait for it....
You are a woman right ? Are you still at Sciforum ? Say Hi to the gang for me or you can Alex . I miss my friends there . Course a bunch of them have seemed to have left the area . Many still there though . I like to think they are friends anyway
QUOTE (Whining/WhinnyingParrot+Apr 26 2012, 08:28 PM)
You poor birdbrain. 
That's the third time you've posted "Whinning".
No such word, idiot.
It's either "Whining" or "Whinnying", idiot.
For someone who calls others 'idiot' at the drop of a hat, you certainly take the idiot cake!
Your power-masturbation-circle is "wacked", and you don't even know it. idiot.
Wow I been using that imagery. Circle jerk and the guys are reaching over to the guy next to them . They make a complete circle with out any brakes by way of hand holding and stoking "members" . Yeah the Girls like it a lot . Like Muslims and there 72 virgins kind of thing or Fundy Mormons and there plural wives. It makes them hot to think about it .
So who wants to be a Mormon like Mitt if they could have plural husbands . I know several woman who would join in a heart beat if that was the case .
That's the third time you've posted "Whinning".
No such word, idiot.
It's either "Whining" or "Whinnying", idiot.
For someone who calls others 'idiot' at the drop of a hat, you certainly take the idiot cake!
Your power-masturbation-circle is "wacked", and you don't even know it. idiot.
Wow I been using that imagery. Circle jerk and the guys are reaching over to the guy next to them . They make a complete circle with out any brakes by way of hand holding and stoking "members" . Yeah the Girls like it a lot . Like Muslims and there 72 virgins kind of thing or Fundy Mormons and there plural wives. It makes them hot to think about it .
So who wants to be a Mormon like Mitt if they could have plural husbands . I know several woman who would join in a heart beat if that was the case .
QUOTE (Guest+Apr 26 2012, 08:54 PM)
Hi Mekigal.
No, as my posting record tells, I am male, now nearly 63 yrs old. Sorry I cannot converse with you in the other sections. I have been framed and victimized by the tyrant here. Fighting back in the side-streets and by-ways of these sections open to 'guest' posts.
I wonder how long before the tyrant snakily convinces the owner to change the board's code so as to disallow ALL 'guest' post capability so that the tyrant can consolidate his stranglehold on free-science discourse and bring the poor owner into even further disrepute by association!
Reminds me of how Rupert Murdoch so easily gained the power to distort the conversation just because people were AFRAID to stand up to the snaky tyrant of his 'domain'.
I am fighting here against the assault (by the snaky tyrant of this 'domain') on the free-science conversation and common justice. This assault is from an 'insider' (and hence even more dangerous), perpetrated by the tyrant blogger here (since he wormed his way into the owner's trust, he is turning this site into a personal blog for himself and 'protected' yes-men parrots).
I consider this so important that I have temporarily suspended my posting at sciforums for the duration. Sorry I can't pass on your salutations to your friends there. Maybe the A-class idiot will do that for you.
Cheers....and....Long live free science discourse on the internet....down with the tyrant!
.
I understand freedom of information quite well and is my plight in life by exiled feelings of isolation . 63 year old male . Your feminine side is coming out . I am 54 and feeling emotional rushes . Mano pause ! Mainly reflection of what just happened in the last 54 years and howd I end up on the short side of the equation. Honesty seems to be my biggest hangup when it comes to success. I should have learn cheat by now .
Anyway I don't know if you valid grounds and you hypothesis is sketchy. I am not a Grim Reaper crony . Yeah I like the guy and all that and well I don't know how he feels about Me , but thus far I have no warn slashes . That is a good sign in my book of self. That is how it is is it not . Fill the slashes and your out of here except your guess post ?
Now I do have some reservations by calling Sciforum more professional than this place. mainly cause of my Banning though . The management could not handle the truth is how I see it . I feel bad for Frag cause he read my last posts that got Me banned. He is going to have to live through the same pain I did by being similar to me in relationships . We are close copies by localization . Real close copies . His wife is like mine just by being a citizen of the U.S. and having assess to the same library of information . We understand the same memes by media indoctrination. What I said is coming out in the media so well he has to go through the same pain as I did when I found out . It should not have been any real surprise is the thing , but it is more like a banana. Not in my back yard kind of thing.
Anyone mad about my off topic . It seemed done . The question at hand . If you got a perfect reflecting surface the light will bounce off the surface perpetually. O.K. then that is a go then ?
[Moderator: Suspended 7 days for failure to connect with rational dialogue or science.]
No, as my posting record tells, I am male, now nearly 63 yrs old. Sorry I cannot converse with you in the other sections. I have been framed and victimized by the tyrant here. Fighting back in the side-streets and by-ways of these sections open to 'guest' posts.
I wonder how long before the tyrant snakily convinces the owner to change the board's code so as to disallow ALL 'guest' post capability so that the tyrant can consolidate his stranglehold on free-science discourse and bring the poor owner into even further disrepute by association!
Reminds me of how Rupert Murdoch so easily gained the power to distort the conversation just because people were AFRAID to stand up to the snaky tyrant of his 'domain'.
I am fighting here against the assault (by the snaky tyrant of this 'domain') on the free-science conversation and common justice. This assault is from an 'insider' (and hence even more dangerous), perpetrated by the tyrant blogger here (since he wormed his way into the owner's trust, he is turning this site into a personal blog for himself and 'protected' yes-men parrots).
I consider this so important that I have temporarily suspended my posting at sciforums for the duration. Sorry I can't pass on your salutations to your friends there. Maybe the A-class idiot will do that for you.
Cheers....and....Long live free science discourse on the internet....down with the tyrant!
.
I understand freedom of information quite well and is my plight in life by exiled feelings of isolation . 63 year old male . Your feminine side is coming out . I am 54 and feeling emotional rushes . Mano pause ! Mainly reflection of what just happened in the last 54 years and howd I end up on the short side of the equation. Honesty seems to be my biggest hangup when it comes to success. I should have learn cheat by now .
Anyway I don't know if you valid grounds and you hypothesis is sketchy. I am not a Grim Reaper crony . Yeah I like the guy and all that and well I don't know how he feels about Me , but thus far I have no warn slashes . That is a good sign in my book of self. That is how it is is it not . Fill the slashes and your out of here except your guess post ?
Now I do have some reservations by calling Sciforum more professional than this place. mainly cause of my Banning though . The management could not handle the truth is how I see it . I feel bad for Frag cause he read my last posts that got Me banned. He is going to have to live through the same pain I did by being similar to me in relationships . We are close copies by localization . Real close copies . His wife is like mine just by being a citizen of the U.S. and having assess to the same library of information . We understand the same memes by media indoctrination. What I said is coming out in the media so well he has to go through the same pain as I did when I found out . It should not have been any real surprise is the thing , but it is more like a banana. Not in my back yard kind of thing.
Anyone mad about my off topic . It seemed done . The question at hand . If you got a perfect reflecting surface the light will bounce off the surface perpetually. O.K. then that is a go then ?
[Moderator: Suspended 7 days for failure to connect with rational dialogue or science.]
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.