Editing Talk:1308: Christmas Lights
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
I think the spectrum at the top of the tree is a specific star. The Sun. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.64|173.245.56.64]] 16:21, 26 December 2013 (UTC) | I think the spectrum at the top of the tree is a specific star. The Sun. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.64|173.245.56.64]] 16:21, 26 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
Line 34: | Line 30: | ||
I strongly disagree with the explanation's assertion that the peak in the large spectrum, the fire, is the 4.3µm CO2 emission listed in the source given. The peak in the source's spectrum is clearly outside of the near-infrared spectrum and it is just as clearly on the long wave side of the black-body peak in the chart. The comic doesn't even show these wavelengths at all. If, as it appears, that the chart in the comic is a semi-log plot, then the peak is roughly in the 1,000~1,200nm range.[[User:ExternalMonolog|ExternalMonolog]] ([[User talk:ExternalMonolog|talk]]) 01:20, 26 December 2013 (UTC)ExternalMonolog | I strongly disagree with the explanation's assertion that the peak in the large spectrum, the fire, is the 4.3µm CO2 emission listed in the source given. The peak in the source's spectrum is clearly outside of the near-infrared spectrum and it is just as clearly on the long wave side of the black-body peak in the chart. The comic doesn't even show these wavelengths at all. If, as it appears, that the chart in the comic is a semi-log plot, then the peak is roughly in the 1,000~1,200nm range.[[User:ExternalMonolog|ExternalMonolog]] ([[User talk:ExternalMonolog|talk]]) 01:20, 26 December 2013 (UTC)ExternalMonolog | ||
− | + | ;Misleading picture in link | |
− | : | + | The picture : |
− | + | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flame_detection_spectrum.JPG | |
− | |||
− | + | found in the link of the explanation is strongly misleading. | |
+ | Visible radiation ( red to violet ) is 700 to 400 nm. The | ||
− | + | example spectrum in the middle does not fit to this. | |
− | |||
− | + | Maybe some guesswork here results from that link. | |
− | + | After some "metering" with a ruler on the screen my guess | |
− | + | for the spike in the fireplace spectum now is ca. 1.5 or 2.1 µm , | |
− | + | being the first harmonic of either O-H or CO2 respectively. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.220|108.162.231.220]] 23:23, 26 December 2013 (UTC) | |
− |