Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

This is a forum to share experiences and ideas about holography.
Locked
Dinesh

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by Dinesh »

Sorry to play Devil's Advocate, but as I recall those holograms were made on a floor with stone underneath covered by carpet with the plate leaning on the object. With two physicists working on this I feel the Honour of The Profession is at stake! There should at least be a blind test, if not a double blind. A hologram should be made on the bare steel slab and then made on a can table. If not analysis, then perhaps experimental researh! :shock:
Tony

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by Tony »

I built a 2'x2' hexcan table because I wanted a bigger table than my 1'x2' concrete slab, but I wanted to be able to move it around. The hexcan table is pretty rigid (good enough, but could be better). When I first tried it on an inner tube, it was way too bouncy. Not enough isolation from vibrations coming up throught the floor. I added 4 1'x1' patio blocks under it - and now it's fine. At least I can lift all the pieces when I go to move it! As I keep reminding folks, since I did the thermal baffling and isolation for the heat generated by my Hene laser, I have gotten consistently bright H2s.
MichaelH

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by MichaelH »

Dinesh wrote:Sorry to play Devil's Advocate, but as I recall those holograms were made on a floor with stone underneath covered by carpet with the plate leaning on the object.
Why is that a DA position? For at least the last two (or so) of the DCG holograms, that's exactly the way it happened.

For the first couple we were upstairs on a wooden floor. The table used was one made out of PVC pipe and 16ga steel.

I've got video of us working on the DCG and as soon as I finish rebuilding my editing machine I'll be working on DVDs to send out.
Dinesh

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by Dinesh »

It's the DA position because I feel it does not prove the table. I feel that Larry's question was more toward the advantage of the "can table" as opposed to just a steel slab. Yes, the can table is more flexible than a sand table and more mobile. But does it have any intrinsic advantage over many other possible tables? I felt that it was a very interesting idea as a table construction method, but was it just a gimmick or were there any real advantages over say, a stone slab which is just as mobile and flexible. I felt that we should should have at least stated there was an intrinsic advantage to cans placed in a vertical position, rather than a flash-in-the-pan idea. After 6 pages, I thought that surely someone more knowledgable than I would have stated the advantages of Al rather than, "What if we filled it full of sand", "What about water", "Maybe we could fill it half full of sand", "Hey, what about filling in the missing bits in-between the cans". It just seemed so ad hoc. If we entertain such concepts, I feel we could easily fall into a trap of doing something "clever" simply because it seems "clever". Personally, my feeling is that we then begin to cheapen holography to a state where ideas are discussed not out of intrinsic merit but out of some sort of "gimmick index". Sorry, but I thought that the idea of cans as support and isolation was a good one that melded into hype of the idea rather than the value of the idea.
Perhaps, if I may say so with the utmost trepidation, the world at large sees a bunch of geeks with "cool" concepts that do not engage the real world but rather seems to exist in a bizarre parallel plane with no relevance to ordinary folk. Maybe that's why holography doesn't seem to "make it". Too many highly intelligent people flexing their intellectual musles rather than engaging the problems and tribulations of real people.
OK, sorry, you may take this soapbox away!
Perhaps a subject for the next PCG?
BobH

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by BobH »

Dinesh has made a good point, but I wouldn't agree that the pursuit of a table construction concept "simply because it seems "clever"" is a bad thing. I prefer using a Newport type table or (more practical for the home) a Newport type breadboard (on cinder block table). I have this option because Milton Chang decided (in the '60s) that holography needed a more practical table technology than the enormous granite tables in common use at the time. He probably began by visualizing the very "aluminum can tables" being discussed here, and took it into production. Thanks Uncle Milty! :D

I'm amazed that fringes can be held stable long enough for holographic exposures at all. Every time I make a hologram, I'm simply amazed. Doing it with home-built equipment adds to the joy. Doing it with self-designed equipment adds even more. It's because I enjoy the practice of holography more than the end result (probably why I've not found commercial success with the business of holography).

So let's drink to the success of home-built tables. It's the spirit of their builders that keeps the art of holography alive!
Bruce

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by Bruce »

I surely don't speak for anyone but myself, but methinks Dinesh is just saying "time for a reality check".
BTW..... Dinesh needs a captains hat, Joy!

B.
JohnFP

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by JohnFP »

Personally, my feeling is that we then begin to cheapen holography to a state where ideas are discussed not out of intrinsic merit but out of some sort of "gimmick index".
I guess the good thing about the world is there are different points of views for everyone. Now you see, I take the "sand in the can", "water in the can", "filling in the gaps between the cans" as constructive brain-storming in which someone whom has tried the idea or has information on the proposed ideas can reply and say yes that will work better or no that will not make a difference. Most holographers, or maybe we cannot state that hobbyists that make holograms without a quantum mathematics background can even be called holographers, perform their holography on ideas but do not have the time or money to test those ideas. Some have time and not the money and vise-versa. But I think it is great that someone takes on a project like this and stimulates others into throwing in some ideas to take it to the next level, whether they are wrong or right. That what this board is all about. Dinesh, if it bothers you, why don't you do the "blind test". I am sure we would love to hear of your findings!

I for one support all types of posting, commenting, suggesting, idea generating, theory, mathematical support and even holographic philosophy. Even a holographic joke would be good. Everyone has a different point of view and a different vision for holography and all should be accepted, not necessarily correct but accepted and constructively commented on. This is not an advanced quantum physics forum, it is a PUBLIC forum for all holographers, I thought.

Dinesh, please stop trying to control the board and transform it into the way you believe it should be. The more restrictions and negative feedback you post for some with less educational background the more you will scare away the newbie, the amateur, the part timer and soon only you and a few professionals and educationals will be left to discuss things your way. We need something to lighten up here!
Dinesh

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by Dinesh »

[quote:9fa4848efb]...someone whom has tried the idea or has information on the proposed ideas can reply and say yes that will work better or no that will not make a difference.[/quote:9fa4848efb]
How will anyone know anything unless it's tested? What does "better" mean? Better than what? What does "difference" mean" Different from what?

[quote:9fa4848efb]Most holographers, or maybe we cannot state that hobbyists that make holograms without a quantum mathematics background can even be called holographers, perform their holography on ideas but do not have the time or money to test those ideas. [/quote:9fa4848efb]
Well, I've never made a hologram using QM. If a poster puts up a technical issue, then it seems to me that a technical response is appropriate. If a poster puts up an aesthetic issue, then clearly neither Quantum nor Relativistic, no Newtonian Mechanics is appropriate. However, if anyone introduces technical terms like "frequency", "mass" , "spatial frequency" etc, then I think they should expect a response in like vein. If a poster tries to sound technical with no understanding of the real technical background of holography, then why bother using these terms? Not being a chemist, I usually stay away from the highly technical discussions, on this forum, between Martin, Sergio and Jeff Blythe. I don't pretend to knowledge I don't have or vocabulary I don't quite understand. I do not think that Martin, Sergio or Jeff try to "control" the board. They're merely responding in a technical way to a technical question. If a technical question comes up, or is phrased in a technical way, then since optics and physics is my subject I answer appropriately - such as in polarisation questions, which is a technical topic. If posters misuse terms such as 's' or 'p' (technical terms, both) or 'frequency' or 'mass' or 'amplitude' or use it to sound knowledgeable then I think it's fair to reply and correct them on these terms. If you don't understand the jargon, don't use jargon. There a hundred ways to express oneself with dropping into jargon - especially technical jargon. Use of technical jargon by them who don't understand or are educated in their use is mere puffery! Don't get me wrong here. There's absolutley no harm in asking for understanding of technical issues that posters may not have the appropriate level of technical knowledge and background to understand. In the past I've answered several of these questions. But the poster has always said "I don't understand this. What's it mean?" If someone misuses jargon and confuses 'frequency' for 'amplitude', why use these words? This is not quantum mechanics.

[quote:9fa4848efb]But I think it is great that someone takes on a project like this and stimulates others into throwing in some ideas to take it to the next level, whether they are wrong or right [/quote:9fa4848efb]
I think anyone can take any idea to any level they want. I also think "right' " and "wrong" are meaningless if all you do is "thought experiments". My feeling is that if you can't seperate the dross from ideas of real value, if all ideas are equally valid, then we're into superstition and neither art nor science. We may as well stir tea leaves and read palms and call that a legitimate holographic endeavor. In both art and science, criticism is necessary. That's why we have peer reviewed journals for both art and science. That's what seperates "Holographic Perpetual Motion" types from the ideas that progress us. If thought experiments and ideas are all that are required and asking for any testing of those ideas is demonised, then the idea has no value. Critical thinking and critical analysis should be the lynchpin of a rational mind. Otherwise we're all into the Quantum Holography of the Universe as we go "Ommmm" while sitting cross legged in an ecstasy of new age one-ness.

[quote:9fa4848efb]I for one support all types of posting, commenting, suggesting, idea generating, theory, mathematical support and even holographic philosophy. Even a holographic joke would be good. Everyone has a different point of view and a different vision for holography and all should be accepted, not necessarily correct but accepted and constructively commented on. This is not an advanced quantum physics forum, it is a PUBLIC forum for all holographers, I thought.[/quote:9fa4848efb]
Let's put a transmission grating on the bottom of a rocking chair. When the sun is just right, it'll hit the grating and divert photons downwarsds towards the earth. As a result we, rocking chair and all, will take off. NASA is wasting our money! Holographic Rocket Propulsion is so much cheaper!
The sun radiates over the entire earth orbit at all times. However the earth itself only occupies a tiny area of the whole. Let's put a grating around the sun and a tracking mechanism on the earth. Then have the sun radiate only where the earth is. We'll also put up a large variable beamsplitter in geosynchronous orbit so we can control the sunlight. Perpetual summer all over the planet! Holographically Delivered to You! by Holographic Thought Experiments Inc!
Let's send a Newport table into space. Then we can make holograms of distant stars. Hubble, Schmubble! We got holograms!
Tired when you get home? In need of relaxing music? Let "Holographic Thought Experiments Inc solve all your worries! Merely place our Holo-Orchestra(TM) under any standard bulb. On saying "Alakazoom" and waving your hands in a prescribed manner, the Entire Philharmonic Orchestra of any major city of the world will play Your Choice of soothing music. Yes! The entire orchestra assembles (at a 1/10th scale) on your living room floor. You merely say "Tchaikovsky in A Major" and off they go! Added bonus! A holographic bartender will read Your mind, mix your favourite drink and be sure your glass is always full! All for $19.99 + pp!
Note that there is no Quantum Mechanics up my sleeve at any time. Sir? Yes, you sir? Would you confirm that this box is absolutely empty and contains no Quantum mechanics? Note also the wand is holographic.
JohnFP

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by JohnFP »

John, have you thought about hanging the table from four cables attached at each corner of the table to a single eye hook in the ceiling?
MichaelH

Aluminum Can Tables - what's new?

Post by MichaelH »

JohnFP wrote:John, have you thought about hanging the table from four cables attached at each corner of the table to a single eye hook in the ceiling?
That still has similar vibrational problems unless the ceiling is somehow isolated from the rest of the structure.

The vibrations coming into your area don't all travel through the floor.
Locked