4 ms·

That's some weird semantic nitpicking. Wikimedia has a category of "photographs of the Sun": https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Photographs_of_the_Su

That's some weird semantic nitpicking. Wikimedia has a category of "photographs of the Sun": https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Photographs_of_the_Sun https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Photographs_of_t... Do you think they are not photographs of the Sun because these are not what I see if I look at the sun with my eyes? (In which case I'll see pure white then perma black, I assume.)

latexr 6mo ago
> then perma black, I assume. Probably not. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-ouch-31487662 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-ouch-31487662
- dugidugout 6mo ago
  This was a very depressing read.
- YeahThisIsMe 6mo ago
  What he explains sounds exactly like what you (or at least I) see when you close your eyes and then put pressure on them.
  - doubletwoyou 6mo ago
    The way I had it explained was trying to look out one eye while the other’s closed
- steve1977 6mo ago
  While reading I thought this is basically visual tinnitus and then the author used exactly that term. As someone with tinnitus, I can definitely understand the longing for "absolute darkness".
t-3 6mo ago
They're the same as looking at the sun with your eyes. You won't go blind looking directly for a short time. It's just best not to stare for a long time.
moralestapia 6mo ago
Lol. At work, some guy has been pushing a 2-day feature into its 5th week now, with questions like "what do you mean by (database) table?" "Is <not_a_database_table> a database table?" Etc... We have to fill-in RFDs to answer those kind of questions, so the process is massively slow and st...(expunged due to HN guidelines). So yeah, some people really love their semantics and are willing to do whatever it takes to keep it that way. [You can take a guess at where this startup will be in 2-3 years ...]
- em-bee 6mo ago
  wrong thread?
pavon 6mo ago
Sure, a photo taken in non-visible spectrum is still a photo. And stacking photos taken with different wavelength filters or sensor can also be considered a photo. For example the headline image of the spruce tips taken in a lab is photo. And based on the description of the UV camera in the paper, they did generate UV video of the tree tops. However, the linked article and associated paper don't have any such photos (or video) of the corona in the treetops. Instead the UV video was processed with a detection algorithm, and then the visible-light photos and video were annotated with graphed dots of where detections were seen. Those dots aren't a photo of the corona by any reasonable definition.
colanderman 6mo ago
Can you point me to the images of corona in the paper which I missed?

latexr 6mo ago

> then perma black, I assume. Probably not. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-ouch-31487662 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-ouch-31487662

dugidugout 6mo ago
This was a very depressing read.
YeahThisIsMe 6mo ago
What he explains sounds exactly like what you (or at least I) see when you close your eyes and then put pressure on them.
- doubletwoyou 6mo ago
  The way I had it explained was trying to look out one eye while the other’s closed
steve1977 6mo ago
While reading I thought this is basically visual tinnitus and then the author used exactly that term. As someone with tinnitus, I can definitely understand the longing for "absolute darkness".

t-3 6mo ago

They're the same as looking at the sun with your eyes. You won't go blind looking directly for a short time. It's just best not to stare for a long time.

moralestapia 6mo ago

Lol. At work, some guy has been pushing a 2-day feature into its 5th week now, with questions like "what do you mean by (database) table?" "Is <not_a_database_table> a database table?" Etc... We have to fill-in RFDs to answer those kind of questions, so the process is massively slow and st...(expunged due to HN guidelines). So yeah, some people really love their semantics and are willing to do whatever it takes to keep it that way. [You can take a guess at where this startup will be in 2-3 years ...]

em-bee 6mo ago
wrong thread?

pavon 6mo ago

Sure, a photo taken in non-visible spectrum is still a photo. And stacking photos taken with different wavelength filters or sensor can also be considered a photo. For example the headline image of the spruce tips taken in a lab is photo. And based on the description of the UV camera in the paper, they did generate UV video of the tree tops. However, the linked article and associated paper don't have any such photos (or video) of the corona in the treetops. Instead the UV video was processed with a detection algorithm, and then the visible-light photos and video were annotated with graphed dots of where detections were seen. Those dots aren't a photo of the corona by any reasonable definition.

colanderman 6mo ago

Can you point me to the images of corona in the paper which I missed?