Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Improving on nature ... by design ...
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1 of 19 (120150)
06-29-2004 8:00 PM


Improving on nature ... by design ...

Philips’ Fluid Lenses Bring Things into Focus (click for full article)
The Philips FluidFocus lens consists of two immiscible (non-mixing) fluids of different refractive index (optical properties), one an electrically conducting aqueous solution and the other an electrically non-conducting oil, contained in a short tube with transparent end caps. The internal surfaces of the tube wall and one of its end caps are coated with a hydrophobic (water-repellent) coating that causes the aqueous solution to form itself into a hemispherical mass at the opposite end of the tube, where it acts as a spherically curved lens.
The shape of the lens is adjusted by applying an electric field across the hydrophobic coating such that it becomes less hydrophobic — a process called ‘electrowetting’ that results from an electrically induced change in surface-tension. As a result of this change in surface-tension the aqueous solution begins to wet the sidewalls of the tube, altering the radius of curvature of the meniscus between the two fluids and hence the focal length of the lens. By increasing the applied electric field the surface of the initially convex lens can be made completely flat (no lens effect) or even concave. As a result it is possible to implement lenses that transition smoothly from being convergent to divergent and back again.
Now that is not something that nature has evolved, but it is evidence of a good design.
New style contacts soon? Telescopic eyes?
Imagine people with damaged corneas able to focus light onto the parts that are still good and see a more complete picture ... ?
Enjoy.
This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-03-2005 20:11 AM

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by contracycle, posted 07-01-2004 9:04 AM RAZD has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 3 of 19 (120188)
06-29-2004 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminNosy
06-29-2004 11:20 PM


eye design
I was kinda thinking of ID ... heh. but this is cool.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 06-29-2004 11:20 PM AdminNosy has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 6 of 19 (120205)
06-30-2004 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Nasa
06-29-2004 11:55 PM


that would depend on our ability to know it is okay to ask those that know, know what I mean?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Nasa, posted 06-29-2004 11:55 PM Nasa has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 7 of 19 (120208)
06-30-2004 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Nasa
06-29-2004 11:51 PM


Shaping the lens is done by constricting relaxing muscle around the lens, not by adding or removing liquid inside.
Not an evolved method. Has greater range available ...
Muscle action is electrical
(fixed typo, time for bed ...)
This message has been edited by RAZD, 06-29-2004 11:49 PM

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Nasa, posted 06-29-2004 11:51 PM Nasa has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Loudmouth, posted 06-30-2004 1:44 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 11 of 19 (120318)
06-30-2004 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Loudmouth
06-30-2004 1:44 AM


exchange of ions is still electrical -- the attraction of the ions is driven by the different electrical charges.
a reason I said electrical rather than electricity.
curious that current is portrayed moving in the opposite direction to the flow of electrons, because ol' Ben thought it was the movement of positive particles ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Loudmouth, posted 06-30-2004 1:44 AM Loudmouth has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Loudmouth, posted 07-01-2004 6:27 PM RAZD has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 14 of 19 (120821)
07-01-2004 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by jar
07-01-2004 9:37 AM


technology
both of these are technologies hypothesized in science fiction and not natural organic developments.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by jar, posted 07-01-2004 9:37 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 07-01-2004 12:54 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 16 of 19 (120851)
07-01-2004 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by jar
07-01-2004 12:54 PM


Re: technology vs ID
I thought this topic would be posted to ID, being about eye design and how a technological design works compared to an organic one and that a comparative organic design has not been observed.
greater range of focal ability with a techological design than exhibited in organic design -- which is intelligent?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 07-01-2004 12:54 PM jar has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 19 of 19 (123812)
07-11-2004 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Nasa
07-11-2004 7:42 PM


but who knows which god knows? know what I mean?
ps if you use the little red reply button at the bottom of a message the reply is linked to the message (and some people get an e-mail to tell them of the response). this makes debate easier.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Nasa, posted 07-11-2004 7:42 PM Nasa has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024