Prototype flat lense telescope unveiled

Page 1 of 212>
April 6th, 2017 at 11:47:35 AM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 777
Canadian firm NexOptic has unveiled it's prototype FLAT lense telescope. The prototype has the same power as a 1 meter long telescope and is clearer. Guess we didn't know everything about bending light that we thought we did. This is still an optical device not computer enhancement. It will revolutionize optics and likely make traditional curved lenses obsolete.

NexOptik Telescope
"There is no sin but ignorance" Christopher Marlow
April 7th, 2017 at 9:26:50 AM permalink
Ayecarumba
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 79
Posts: 1262
Outside of cellphone cameras, I don't see the advantage of a flat design. If want to see planets circling stars in other systems, it seems logical that curved lens and mirrors provide greater light gathering capability in less space.

How big would a flat lens have to be to provide the equivalent of a 1000x optical zoom?
April 7th, 2017 at 10:05:48 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 306
Posts: 10241
Quote: Ayecarumba
Outside of cellphone cameras, I don't see the advantage of a flat design. If want to see planets circling stars in other systems, it seems logical that curved lens and mirrors provide greater light gathering capability in less space.


The link reads like a press release, and in no part does it explain how a flat surface can concentrate light.

Astronomical telescopes don't use lenses anyway, not for concentrating light. They use mirrors (there may be lenses as part of the secondary optics dealing with focus and fine adjustments).
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
April 7th, 2017 at 10:06:16 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 661
Posts: 7571
Quote: Ayecarumba
Outside of cellphone cameras, I don't see the advantage of a flat design.


If you read the article, that is the primary focus of the technology.
April 7th, 2017 at 12:44:52 PM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 777
Quote: Ayecarumba
Outside of cellphone cameras, I don't see the advantage of a flat design. If want to see planets circling stars in other systems, it seems logical that curved lens and mirrors provide greater light gathering capability in less space.

How big would a flat lens have to be to provide the equivalent of a 1000x optical zoom?


That is what we have heard for 400 years but that small box in the picture on site I linked to out performs a 3' long telescope with less distortion.
"There is no sin but ignorance" Christopher Marlow
April 7th, 2017 at 12:49:33 PM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 777
Quote: Nareed
The link reads like a press release, and in no part does it explain how a flat surface can concentrate light.

Astronomical telescopes don't use lenses anyway, not for concentrating light. They use mirrors (there may be lenses as part of the secondary optics dealing with focus and fine adjustments).


The mirrors are curved and are in effect the lenses. The technology has been vetted and works. It seems impossible from what we have been taught. There is major interest in using them on space craft from the major reduction in size from existing technology.
"There is no sin but ignorance" Christopher Marlow
April 7th, 2017 at 1:02:42 PM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 777
Quote: Pacomartin
If you read the article, that is the primary focus of the technology.


I think their focus is much wider from having listened to interviews with the inventors. Smart phones are probably the largest market that can be developed quickly, unless the eye glass use can be developed and accepted. Eye glasses to replace those that currently have 'coke bottle' glasses is probably a no brainer. If it catches on every one of the new smart phones coming out will need to have the technology for 10's of millions of sales.

I think time will show this is a major development that will obsolete many of the current curved lense technologies.
"There is no sin but ignorance" Christopher Marlow
April 7th, 2017 at 1:17:26 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 306
Posts: 10241
Quote: kenarman
The mirrors are curved and are in effect the lenses.


Nope. A lens refracts light. a mirror reflects it. Reflection and refraction are distinctly different things.

Quote:
It seems impossible from what we have been taught.


No. I can think of ways of doing it. Plain flat pane glass refracts light. All transparent media do.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
April 7th, 2017 at 3:01:08 PM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 777
Quote: Nareed
Nope. A lens refracts light. a mirror reflects it. Reflection and refraction are distinctly different things.

You are correct Nareed but in my post I said they are in EFFECT the lenses. Lenses and mirrors both change the direction of the light.


No. I can think of ways of doing it. Plain flat pane glass refracts light. All transparent media do.[/q

Please enlighten me because I don't have a clue how it can work.
"There is no sin but ignorance" Christopher Marlow
April 7th, 2017 at 3:33:37 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 306
Posts: 10241
Quote: kenarman
You are correct Nareed but in my post I said they are in EFFECT the lenses.


Again, no. Mirrors don't produce chromatic aberrations, for example. They produce other kinds of aberrations (you can't have everything).


Quote:
Please enlighten me because I don't have a clue how it can work.


You can begin with layers with different refractive indexes, for one thing. That bends the light in a more controlled fashion. You may create crystals within the glass, or between layers of glass, they bend the light in a predictable way.

That's why the philosophy of science is relevant. One school of thought is that everything that's not forbidden is possible. Another says everything that's not forbidden is mandatory. The difference is subtle, but profound. School 1 says if, say, flat lenses are not forbidden by the laws of physics, then someone might make them. School two maintains if they are possible, then they must exist somewhere in the universe.

Anyway, thinner, flatter lenses have been a thing for, literally, many decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_lens
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
Page 1 of 212>