Planetside Software Forums

Support => Terragen Support => Topic started by: Seth on May 17, 2009, 04:50:15 pm

Title: Index of refraction
Post by: Seth on May 17, 2009, 04:50:15 pm
i have some problem, when i put a value below 1, everything goes black... is that logical ?
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: neuspadrin on May 17, 2009, 06:36:43 pm
Yes, the index of refraction of vacuum is 1.

Anything below it is.... Nothing...


*gasp*
physics 2 taught me something!

also, did a quick google to confirm (afterall i got a c in physics 2 ;))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_refractive_indices seemed to prove it, also can give you a few common important ones so you can get it close to real of what you are making.
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: Cyber-Angel on May 17, 2009, 09:02:02 pm
The thing about nothingness is, is that it is an impossible state form both the philosophic and scientific points of view; basically nothingness is the complete absence of every thing and that includes quantum and higher states that are theoretically possible. A vacuum., though it can not be seen directly exists because you acknowledge its there, even a theoretical featureless pure white void would be some thing.

The state of nothingness and the comparable state of non-existence are by and large impossible for the human brain to comprehend, just because some thing cannot been seen dose not preclude its existence; by the nature of QED if you say there is "Nothing There" then you must have seen some thing so nothing been some thing means that nothingness cannot by its own nature exist.

Just some observations:  ;D

Regards to you

Cyber-Angel         
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: Seth on May 18, 2009, 01:36:44 am
but isn't gold index of refraction equals to 0.47 ? and silver to 0.180 ?
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: Klas on May 18, 2009, 03:22:58 am
I found this list:
http://www.robinwood.com/Catalog/Technical/Gen3DTuts/Gen3DPages/RefractionIndexList.html
and silver is 1.35, but you are right, gold: 0.47. Strange.
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: Seth on May 18, 2009, 10:46:17 am
here is the list I use : http://www.techno-science.net/?onglet=glossaire&definition=2946
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: neuspadrin on May 18, 2009, 02:53:26 pm
hmm... puzzling...

I would ask my professor but no longer at school so can't really.
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: buzzzzz1 on May 18, 2009, 03:51:32 pm
Quote from: Klas on May 18, 2009, 03:22:58 am
I found this list:
http://www.robinwood.com/Catalog/Technical/Gen3DTuts/Gen3DPages/RefractionIndexList.html
and silver is 1.35, but you are right, gold: 0.47. Strange.


Thanks, I recognize the Whiskey and the White Rum. Seen those reflections in my glass many times.  ;)
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: Mohawk20 on May 18, 2009, 04:57:27 pm
I think we have a little mix up here. The refraction of gold is reflectiveness, which can obviously be below 1 because there is always something to reflect.
The values of water and air and glass are actually values with which the light is let through, in stead of bounced back. When letting light trough, if the value was wrong, the light would bend so much it was reflected in stead of passing through, resulting in no light passing trough, or blackness.


Just my logic though, no proof of this at all  ???
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: neuspadrin on May 18, 2009, 05:03:19 pm
Thats what I was thinking was possibly happening but I couldn't be sure.

After all refraction is what happens to light once it passes through something.  its hard to pass through gold no?  So does the refraction become a reflection? but if its like that what happens to real reflection as those work differently.
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: Matt on May 19, 2009, 11:48:01 am
Quote from: Klas on May 18, 2009, 03:22:58 am
I found this list:
http://www.robinwood.com/Catalog/Technical/Gen3DTuts/Gen3DPages/RefractionIndexList.html
and silver is 1.35, but you are right, gold: 0.47. Strange.


That must be an error. It's probably supposed to say 1.47. It's funny how this error seems to have been copied to many different tables though.

Matt
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: neuspadrin on May 19, 2009, 12:26:45 pm
Yeh thats the one thing that threw me, it seems listed anywhere I can find as .47 instead of 1.47. but 1.47 makes way more sense.
Title: Re: Index of refraction
Post by: Seth on May 19, 2009, 01:01:38 pm
thank you ^^