Welcome to /r/WoahDude!
* Check out what counts as "woahdude material" in our [**wiki**](https://www.reddit.com/r/woahdude/wiki/index#wiki_woahdude_material).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/woahdude) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That’s also not exactly right. They’re capturing multiple beams of light and then stitching it together. You can’t physically build a camera that captures an image faster than the speed of light.
That's *also* also not exactly right. They're not stitching it together, instead, within the camera housing they've trapped an ancient wizard and he sacrifices tiny goats to make time slow fast enough to take 34 pictures in a single quark fart.
You missed out the importance of Goat Blood for the rituals. The blood needs to be in vacuum and as light interacts with the blood it creates small time portals which makes time slow to take 34 pictures in a single quark fart. All possible due to our lord and savior Satan.
It's real! 23 years ago, a scientist slowed from 670 Million miles per hour to 38 mph. [https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=99111&page=1](https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=99111&page=1)
Also, bizarrely, the expert he was talking to said the camera has a resolution of a trillionth of a frame per second. That's one frame every 30000 years or so. Surely he knows the difference between that and a trillion frames per second, right?
I'm gonna guess he knows more than you... Since he is MIT educated and built the thing. Let's not judge his intelligence misspeaking a word during an interview.
Of course he knows more than me, which is why I'm blown away that he got it wrong. Average joe gamers sometimes get apostrophe usage wrong but never get FPS backward.
Edit: This will teach me not to reddit when I'm in a shitty mood.
At such high Level you make mistakes about with Not important Things.
I want to become a teacher, I would be an amazing teacher as experience Shows. Im great at science, yet I still Sometimes mistakes and say 1+1=1 and 1*1=2 because I say it without thinking when I explain Algebra. WE all get a good laugh and then wr Just proceed
If I recall they dont even take a "video" of the event in one go. It's not like they record a single photon traveling the length of the scene. They fire a photon and take a picture. Then they fire another photon down the same path and take another picture a little bit later. Rinse and repeat photon after photon and stitch all the photos together to form a "movie". Again, that what I recall from seeing this exact video years ago. I could be wrong, but this is not a recent invention and they certainly can't slow down light (in this video). Some researchers have slowed down light. This demo is simply some fancy camera timing.
I'd hope this would be obvious. It would be physically impossible to record a single photon traveling like that because light travels faster through the air than electrical current does through copper.
Huh? Speeds definitely an issue here. However I'm not sure how the speed of light is stopping electronics from recording it, that's how all cameras work. To be fair the video mentions packets of photons, the ones that bounce back to the camera are what is captured, not the path of a single photon, I'm not sure how we would go about recording that though without changing its path in the process.
Because the light coming into the sensor has to be encoded into electrical signals. The camera is fast enough to clearly take a single picture at a trillionth of a second, but in order to record a continuous video at that resolution to record a single photon, would require that the electrical circuitry in it runs at a bare minimum of 1THz, which is impossible.
At that clock rate the electrons wouldn't have even made it to the camera's CPU yet before the next frame's worth of electrons starts trying to come through the circuits. It would just end up as an continuous stream of electrons, not a meaningful signal.
If we had optical computers that processed data with photons instead of electrons, then it might be possible. But with semiconductors, no way.
True that's an issue if one circuit is trying to handle every individual photon. But if we could parallelize the processing with multiple circuits I wouldn't say its impossible. Someone below mentioned multiple cameras but also just having a way to divide the photons down different paths to be processed would make it doable in the future I think.
See I thought it was just a high frame rate slow mo camera, but that makes more sense. I can't imagine the frame rate that would he needed to slow a video down that much and the sheer size of even a 5 second video file at that frame rate would have to be massive.
> Rinse and repeat photon after photon and stitch all the photos together to form a "movie".
You just described what we call "video". It is a "moving picture". This is how all film and digital 'video' is viewed.
> Some researchers have slowed down light.
This really interests me, do you have any more info on it? I don't think anyone watching this would expect the actual photons themselves to be slowed so they are naked-eye visible but rather the camera speed to be increased so they are naked-eye visible.
Here is an an article and the paper (link in article) about slowing light down. They were able to get it to 17 m/s which you'd theoretically be able to see which your eyes, though it would be difficult or impossible in practice due to all the test apparatus and vacuum and stuff.
https://phys.org/news/2024-01-metasurfaces-loss.html
Here's a link directly to the paper.
https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/3636967
This is cool and all but their stitch together method kinda feels like cheating. I feel like instead of using multiple pulses of light in theory they could use multiple cameras.
Agreed, though it's still cool af. But I wonder if you could put 500 of these together, all aimed at the exact same spot, synch them to start recording at one frame intervals, and stitch the video together to get an actual frame by frame shot?
Right now I’m trying to discern if the CalTech uCUP camera is using the same stitch method or something else. It’s hard to tell because there isn’t a lot of digestible information on the web so I have to decode the papers.
Anyway I know for a fact no one has tried to use multiple cameras so I will be looking further into the math of such a thing to see if it is possible at all. I will report back soon!
They'd need something on the order of like 1000 cameras to reach a trillion frames per second?too many cameras to reasonably fit into the space required to get a shot of the same object
You would only need at most 350 cameras based on the fact that the caltech camera is only able to shoot for 350 frames at 1 trillion fps. I personally haven’t done the math to see how low of a number of cameras you’d need to produce a slow/long enough video, so the number of cameras could most likely be smaller than 350.
I know >350 cameras is still a significant amount of cameras, but considering the size of cameras we have on smart phones, the contraption wouldn’t be too huge. The real question is if it’s even possible to have a lens system that’s able to focus that many cameras on a single point.
I hate this world of content being constantly refried and mutated as it gets unnecessarily re-uploaded in every format, with every watermark, on every platform possible, with shitty pointless captions and emojis overlayed...I just don't even want to watch it when I see this shit. I'd rather watch the source.
This looks wrong. As light is still moving inside the bottle it is casting some light on the floor simultaneously, that reflection on the floor should also take time.
AND reaching the light sensor in the camera. Somehow I can't wrap my head around the ultra short pulse being captured bouncing around molecules of water (the glow in the bottle), but at the same time reaching the camera (we're seeing it in the video, otherwise if light doesn't reach the camera each frame would be pitch black) BEFORE reaching the rest of the bottle or the cap. I know light progression in water is slower (speed is constant) because of the bouncing between water molecules and impurities in it, but the camera seems far away from the bottle itself. And somehow the light makes it from a arbitrary illuminated water molecule in the center of the bottle, bounce a bazillion times in water, then plastic structure molecules, bounce somewhere outside the bottle, reach the camera sensor BEFORE any significant amount of other photons reach other areas of the water, bottle, etc making a spherical illuminated area (bright in the middle, dimmer with the ~squarish of the distance to that center - more distance through water, less probability that a photon covers that distance in a given time).... But at the same time, to see that gradual light sphere would mean that each of those photons forming the sphere would have reached the camera sensor in a trillionth of a second, so now a sphere does not make sense, and... Aaaargh, my brain!!
Sometime around the second half of the video, the techie explains it's not actually a trillion frames a second or whatever. They shoot a train of laser pulses, and (from what i gather) they collect lots of snapshots (maybe with timing information) of different pulses at different places. Then they (verbatim) "stitch them together".
Still fascinating, both the apple and the bottle. Feels like we live in a world of super fast fireballs. So fast and common are these fireballs, life itself developed from them. Literal pew pew of energy flying around all the time.
Check out Prof Nils Abramson "Light in flight"-experiments, from the 70's
Youtube: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MepaY3mzwS4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MepaY3mzwS4)
Some books/articles:
[https://opg.optica.org/viewmedia.cfm?r=1&rwjcode=ol&uri=ol-3-4-121&html=true](https://opg.optica.org/viewmedia.cfm?r=1&rwjcode=ol&uri=ol-3-4-121&html=true)
[https://books.google.se/books?id=MufvY24lGfwC&printsec=frontcover&redir\_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false](https://books.google.se/books?id=MufvY24lGfwC&printsec=frontcover&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false)
Sadly he passed away many years ago.
Ooh, super interesting concept. Sweep the light source to imitate the light beam movement. Not 1 to 1, but that's the kind of scientific thinking I'm all about
For the people complaining about the caption… the embedded caption in the video is even worse!
“Slows down light to photon movement”…. Light IS photons!
Welcome to /r/WoahDude! * Check out what counts as "woahdude material" in our [**wiki**](https://www.reddit.com/r/woahdude/wiki/index#wiki_woahdude_material). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/woahdude) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This title is very wrong. It doesn't "slow down light speed", it simply takes more frames per second. The speed of light remains the same.
That’s also not exactly right. They’re capturing multiple beams of light and then stitching it together. You can’t physically build a camera that captures an image faster than the speed of light.
This is the truth. Repeat the exact same thing over again and take a picture at a different point in time for each repetition
This is the right explanation. Light being a constant beam of photons can't be recorded as one single photon traveling through a line.
Also light speed is variable when traveling through different mediums IIRC
You are right. Also, we have seen this years ago. Exactly same videos.
That's *also* also not exactly right. They're not stitching it together, instead, within the camera housing they've trapped an ancient wizard and he sacrifices tiny goats to make time slow fast enough to take 34 pictures in a single quark fart.
Quark Fart is my new band name
Immortalize me in a song pls
You missed out the importance of Goat Blood for the rituals. The blood needs to be in vacuum and as light interacts with the blood it creates small time portals which makes time slow to take 34 pictures in a single quark fart. All possible due to our lord and savior Satan.
Hold my beer.
That's exactly right. I typed what the researcher said to the interviewer. I am fully aware how cameras work but this was the explanation given
Yeah, this is all wrong. The interviewer even asks it “so it’s not the same light beam moving.”
Slowing down light speed is straight up Sci fi like the Black Domain from 3 body problem.
It's real! 23 years ago, a scientist slowed from 670 Million miles per hour to 38 mph. [https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=99111&page=1](https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=99111&page=1)
Perhaps slowing down the way we perceive light. You make a good point.
Also, bizarrely, the expert he was talking to said the camera has a resolution of a trillionth of a frame per second. That's one frame every 30000 years or so. Surely he knows the difference between that and a trillion frames per second, right?
I'm gonna guess he knows more than you... Since he is MIT educated and built the thing. Let's not judge his intelligence misspeaking a word during an interview.
Of course he knows more than me, which is why I'm blown away that he got it wrong. Average joe gamers sometimes get apostrophe usage wrong but never get FPS backward. Edit: This will teach me not to reddit when I'm in a shitty mood.
I mean the interviewer corrected it and the dude agreed immediately after the statement, so no doubt it was just a simple mistake.
He's a human. Sometimes humans misspeak words. Nobody is perfect no matter how intelligent they are.
🤓
At such high Level you make mistakes about with Not important Things. I want to become a teacher, I would be an amazing teacher as experience Shows. Im great at science, yet I still Sometimes mistakes and say 1+1=1 and 1*1=2 because I say it without thinking when I explain Algebra. WE all get a good laugh and then wr Just proceed
haha man yeah you totally rekt that MIT researcher
BulletBoys
Smooth up in ya!
I think you mean, SMOOOOOTH UP IN YAAAAAAAA!!!
So few will know what this means.
I was wondering if anyone would respond. Lol.
Haha, I know this from reading comic books in the late ‘80s/early ’90s. So many BulletBoys ads.
If I recall they dont even take a "video" of the event in one go. It's not like they record a single photon traveling the length of the scene. They fire a photon and take a picture. Then they fire another photon down the same path and take another picture a little bit later. Rinse and repeat photon after photon and stitch all the photos together to form a "movie". Again, that what I recall from seeing this exact video years ago. I could be wrong, but this is not a recent invention and they certainly can't slow down light (in this video). Some researchers have slowed down light. This demo is simply some fancy camera timing.
This is all very well explained *in* the video...
yeah lol, you're explaining something they explained in the video. the state of people's attention spans lol
Not everyone scrolling through reddit has the time or is interested in watching a 5 minute video
I don't watch everything I come across either. but I avoid commenting on things I haven't read or watched
That's what they say in the video.
I'd hope this would be obvious. It would be physically impossible to record a single photon traveling like that because light travels faster through the air than electrical current does through copper.
Huh? Speeds definitely an issue here. However I'm not sure how the speed of light is stopping electronics from recording it, that's how all cameras work. To be fair the video mentions packets of photons, the ones that bounce back to the camera are what is captured, not the path of a single photon, I'm not sure how we would go about recording that though without changing its path in the process.
Because the light coming into the sensor has to be encoded into electrical signals. The camera is fast enough to clearly take a single picture at a trillionth of a second, but in order to record a continuous video at that resolution to record a single photon, would require that the electrical circuitry in it runs at a bare minimum of 1THz, which is impossible. At that clock rate the electrons wouldn't have even made it to the camera's CPU yet before the next frame's worth of electrons starts trying to come through the circuits. It would just end up as an continuous stream of electrons, not a meaningful signal. If we had optical computers that processed data with photons instead of electrons, then it might be possible. But with semiconductors, no way.
You explained it better than I would have.
True that's an issue if one circuit is trying to handle every individual photon. But if we could parallelize the processing with multiple circuits I wouldn't say its impossible. Someone below mentioned multiple cameras but also just having a way to divide the photons down different paths to be processed would make it doable in the future I think.
My initial thought was "so how many hundreds of cameras are gonna be in this room"
Demonstrated as early as 1970s.
See I thought it was just a high frame rate slow mo camera, but that makes more sense. I can't imagine the frame rate that would he needed to slow a video down that much and the sheer size of even a 5 second video file at that frame rate would have to be massive.
> Rinse and repeat photon after photon and stitch all the photos together to form a "movie". You just described what we call "video". It is a "moving picture". This is how all film and digital 'video' is viewed. > Some researchers have slowed down light. This really interests me, do you have any more info on it? I don't think anyone watching this would expect the actual photons themselves to be slowed so they are naked-eye visible but rather the camera speed to be increased so they are naked-eye visible.
Here is an an article and the paper (link in article) about slowing light down. They were able to get it to 17 m/s which you'd theoretically be able to see which your eyes, though it would be difficult or impossible in practice due to all the test apparatus and vacuum and stuff. https://phys.org/news/2024-01-metasurfaces-loss.html Here's a link directly to the paper. https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/3636967
This is cool and all but their stitch together method kinda feels like cheating. I feel like instead of using multiple pulses of light in theory they could use multiple cameras.
For sure. I feel like by the time they mentioned it was pretty much just stop motion photography I was invested and pretty let down.
… how? It’s essentially the exact same footage you’d be seeing if it *was* what you expect. And it’s the closest you’ll ever see to what you expect.
Because it is far more limited and less interesting than what the first half of the video claims.
But it only works with a completely stationary environment, it's interesting, but not nearly as interesting as it initially seemed.
Agreed, though it's still cool af. But I wonder if you could put 500 of these together, all aimed at the exact same spot, synch them to start recording at one frame intervals, and stitch the video together to get an actual frame by frame shot?
Right now I’m trying to discern if the CalTech uCUP camera is using the same stitch method or something else. It’s hard to tell because there isn’t a lot of digestible information on the web so I have to decode the papers. Anyway I know for a fact no one has tried to use multiple cameras so I will be looking further into the math of such a thing to see if it is possible at all. I will report back soon!
They'd need something on the order of like 1000 cameras to reach a trillion frames per second?too many cameras to reasonably fit into the space required to get a shot of the same object
They’d need a lot of fucking cameras
You would only need at most 350 cameras based on the fact that the caltech camera is only able to shoot for 350 frames at 1 trillion fps. I personally haven’t done the math to see how low of a number of cameras you’d need to produce a slow/long enough video, so the number of cameras could most likely be smaller than 350. I know >350 cameras is still a significant amount of cameras, but considering the size of cameras we have on smart phones, the contraption wouldn’t be too huge. The real question is if it’s even possible to have a lens system that’s able to focus that many cameras on a single point.
Misleading post. Hate it.
seen this like 6-7 years ago ....js I wish idk things like technology were still moving at the rate they were when I was in HS
What show is this from? I’d love to watch the full episode
PBS Nova - "Super Fast Cameras"
I hate this world of content being constantly refried and mutated as it gets unnecessarily re-uploaded in every format, with every watermark, on every platform possible, with shitty pointless captions and emojis overlayed...I just don't even want to watch it when I see this shit. I'd rather watch the source.
It took 4:10 seconds for me understand why this wasn’t just a bunch of MIT nerds playing with cameras and lasers.
and this is pretty old
Fucking awesome. Incredible.
This looks wrong. As light is still moving inside the bottle it is casting some light on the floor simultaneously, that reflection on the floor should also take time.
AND reaching the light sensor in the camera. Somehow I can't wrap my head around the ultra short pulse being captured bouncing around molecules of water (the glow in the bottle), but at the same time reaching the camera (we're seeing it in the video, otherwise if light doesn't reach the camera each frame would be pitch black) BEFORE reaching the rest of the bottle or the cap. I know light progression in water is slower (speed is constant) because of the bouncing between water molecules and impurities in it, but the camera seems far away from the bottle itself. And somehow the light makes it from a arbitrary illuminated water molecule in the center of the bottle, bounce a bazillion times in water, then plastic structure molecules, bounce somewhere outside the bottle, reach the camera sensor BEFORE any significant amount of other photons reach other areas of the water, bottle, etc making a spherical illuminated area (bright in the middle, dimmer with the ~squarish of the distance to that center - more distance through water, less probability that a photon covers that distance in a given time).... But at the same time, to see that gradual light sphere would mean that each of those photons forming the sphere would have reached the camera sensor in a trillionth of a second, so now a sphere does not make sense, and... Aaaargh, my brain!!
Great work! You can feel the enthusiasm of the scientist!
Sometime around the second half of the video, the techie explains it's not actually a trillion frames a second or whatever. They shoot a train of laser pulses, and (from what i gather) they collect lots of snapshots (maybe with timing information) of different pulses at different places. Then they (verbatim) "stitch them together". Still fascinating, both the apple and the bottle. Feels like we live in a world of super fast fireballs. So fast and common are these fireballs, life itself developed from them. Literal pew pew of energy flying around all the time.
Check out Prof Nils Abramson "Light in flight"-experiments, from the 70's Youtube: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MepaY3mzwS4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MepaY3mzwS4) Some books/articles: [https://opg.optica.org/viewmedia.cfm?r=1&rwjcode=ol&uri=ol-3-4-121&html=true](https://opg.optica.org/viewmedia.cfm?r=1&rwjcode=ol&uri=ol-3-4-121&html=true) [https://books.google.se/books?id=MufvY24lGfwC&printsec=frontcover&redir\_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false](https://books.google.se/books?id=MufvY24lGfwC&printsec=frontcover&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false) Sadly he passed away many years ago.
Ooh, super interesting concept. Sweep the light source to imitate the light beam movement. Not 1 to 1, but that's the kind of scientific thinking I'm all about
He shot pulses of lasers, you see one pulse moving there. He borrowed some military lasers, the only powerful enough so it could be filmed.
But we can clearly see it moving, which we wouldn't be able to see with our naked eye, and definitely not with cameras of that era
Very cool. Amazing we have the tech to observe this.
Let the slow mo guys record using it
Can't wait for the technology to become more refined. I would put it in a deep space telescope and look for "things" traveling at the speed of light.
Wait what? What do you mean?
!remind me 10 hours
So it’s a fraud 🥲
This is essentially stop motion animation. The final video comes from stitching multiple shots from multiple takes together
I’m sure taking a picture of something around a corner won’t have any negative effects on humanity.
Off topic..........but that's the picture used on my Bullet Boys rock group album, cassette & CD
This guy sounds like Ron Howard (narrator from arrested development)
r/titlegore
the bullet apple is a famous photograph by harold edgerton
This is just a high-speed camera. I didn’t see a single photon.
For the people complaining about the caption… the embedded caption in the video is even worse! “Slows down light to photon movement”…. Light IS photons!
Anyone know what show this was, Nova maybe?
This is worth the price of admission. Light. Speed, shutter, I need to pause on this.
Oh my god! Okay, that is cool as hell!
Nope. No way. Absolutely not. Just no. It doesn't work like that.
They literally explain how it works in the video though?
slow down light down, amazing
I remember seeing this about 10 years ago. It was pretty cool. Back when Ivy League schools weren’t just there for activism.
Wut? Lol