14 ms·

I don't understand why the article keeps saying it's more transparent than glass if it's mounted to glass. That's like wearing spandex under your parka to stay

I don't understand why the article keeps saying it's more transparent than glass if it's mounted to glass. That's like wearing spandex under your parka to stay cool. I suspect there's something more coherent in the paper. Cool material though.

nonamousnoose 2y ago
"These mini-pyramids scatter 73% of the light that hits them, which gives the material that frosted look. But despite that, it’s surprisingly more transparent to light than regular glass – 95% transmittance compared to the usual 91% of most glass. The team says that makes for a more comfortable lighting not just for people, but plants as well." Clearly, because they're qualifying its frosting effect - it's frosted, which inhibits the passage of vision, but counterintuitively, it does not stop the transmittance of light, so it doesn't darken a room.
- wantsanagent 2y ago
  The parent's point is that it cannot increase the transmissivity of the material it's mounted to even if it is highly transmissive, thus in combination the composite will not be more transparent/transmissive than glass.
  - Brian_K_White 2y ago
    It will obviously deliver more total light if the structutred surface gathers more light than the flat surface. If that's what's going on then it's no more mysterious than the difference between a cloudy day and a sunny day shining through the same pane of plain glass. When there is more light on one side, there is more light on the other side. And that does seem to be the mechanism actually. Other commenters have pointed out this article just isn't very good and the original source never says transparent and does descibe explicitly that the surface is simply gathering more light by allowing less of it to reflect away. Light that would have reflected away is instead redirected inwards.
    - wantsanagent 2y ago
      "Gathering more light" is generally proportional to its planar surface. In the case of a surface film the potential increase in projected planar area is minuscule. If you imagine an incident ray, to have a material "gather more light", that ray needs to intersect the material whereas without that material it would miss the surface. By adding some amount of height the film may cause some rays to intersect the surface that wouldn't have (primarily around the edges) but that's going to be very very small. In general its a safe assumption that any material of the same projected planar area you put in front of another material will reduce the total transmisivity of the system.
CarVac 2y ago
Normal glass reflects light (about 4%) at each air-glass interface. This material acts like an antireflective coating, reducing the reflection at the interfaces.
err4nt 2y ago
Perhaps compare this film on glass to other frosted glass methods which likely reduce the transmitted light far more.

nonamousnoose 2y ago

"These mini-pyramids scatter 73% of the light that hits them, which gives the material that frosted look. But despite that, it’s surprisingly more transparent to light than regular glass – 95% transmittance compared to the usual 91% of most glass. The team says that makes for a more comfortable lighting not just for people, but plants as well." Clearly, because they're qualifying its frosting effect - it's frosted, which inhibits the passage of vision, but counterintuitively, it does not stop the transmittance of light, so it doesn't darken a room.

wantsanagent 2y ago
The parent's point is that it cannot increase the transmissivity of the material it's mounted to even if it is highly transmissive, thus in combination the composite will not be more transparent/transmissive than glass.
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  It will obviously deliver more total light if the structutred surface gathers more light than the flat surface. If that's what's going on then it's no more mysterious than the difference between a cloudy day and a sunny day shining through the same pane of plain glass. When there is more light on one side, there is more light on the other side. And that does seem to be the mechanism actually. Other commenters have pointed out this article just isn't very good and the original source never says transparent and does descibe explicitly that the surface is simply gathering more light by allowing less of it to reflect away. Light that would have reflected away is instead redirected inwards.
  - wantsanagent 2y ago
    "Gathering more light" is generally proportional to its planar surface. In the case of a surface film the potential increase in projected planar area is minuscule. If you imagine an incident ray, to have a material "gather more light", that ray needs to intersect the material whereas without that material it would miss the surface. By adding some amount of height the film may cause some rays to intersect the surface that wouldn't have (primarily around the edges) but that's going to be very very small. In general its a safe assumption that any material of the same projected planar area you put in front of another material will reduce the total transmisivity of the system.

CarVac 2y ago

Normal glass reflects light (about 4%) at each air-glass interface. This material acts like an antireflective coating, reducing the reflection at the interfaces.

err4nt 2y ago

Perhaps compare this film on glass to other frosted glass methods which likely reduce the transmitted light far more.