From: tenentelui@gmail.com   
      
   Em domingo, 25 de novembro de 2018 00:06:28 UTC-2, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)    
   escreveu:   
   > On 11/24/18 6:24 PM, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:   
   > > On Sat, 24 Nov 2018 15:01:45 -0800 (PST), lui wolff   
   > >  wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> When dealing with a visible light telescope, if the angular resolution   
   can't resolve the target size as 1 pixel, it's out of range, right?   
   > >   
   > > Wrong. Pixels aren't one photon wide, they're not just lit or dark. They   
   > > will collect photons over time and that is integrated to show the   
   > > signal.   
   > >   
   > > Sensitivity to different EM spectrum ranges is variable, depending on   
   > > our ability (and interest) in developing sensors. So there isn't a   
   > > universal equation for this part of your spreadsheet, it's very   
   > > dependent on technology. Sea Wasp (not sure if he watches here) might   
   > > have more info on this, it's his field.   
   > >   
   >   
   >   
   > 	Well, there's a lot of people more knowledgeable than me in this. BUT...   
   >   
   > 	You're basically correct. Obviously the subtended angle of your target   
   > is ONE element. But another very obvious one is the INTENSITY of the   
   > target. If you have someone fire a perfectly collimated laser with a   
   > spot size of 1/10th your pixel size, you'll still get a pixel activation   
   > if that laser dumps in enough photons. SO a really really intense source   
   > of heat/light will activate one (or more) of your pixels even if its   
   > subtended arc is technically smaller than your receiver.   
   >   
   > 	Imagine it like being in a very dark, almost infinitely long cave and   
   > someone shining a light at the end of it. You will be able to see the   
   > light MUCH farther away than you could have resolved the light's emitter.   
   >   
   > 	With Infrared sensors, it's rather different depending on the   
   > technology. The most common, microbolometers, work very differently than   
   > standard optical imaging sensors (CMOS, usually).   
   >   
   > 	Noise floor is another major issue. There's others.   
   >   
   >   
   > 	You can make up for lack of resolution on your sensor in other ways,   
   > too. Multiple exposures of the same target taken from properly   
   > co-registered locations can be processed to effectively extract more   
   > detail than any individual picture would yield.   
   >   
      
   Thanks!   
   I'll try to implement the intensity detection threshold in the visible light   
   sensors first, then I'll learn IR.   
   Thanks anyway for taking your time to help a law student learn EM lol   
      
   Cheers!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)