Talk:Caustic (optics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of Mid importance within physics. | |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
This page could use a review by someone who knows more about this than I do.--Srleffler 02:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New image
I'm not sure about that new image. It's very nice, but Wikipedia:Profanity seems to say that images that may be objectionable should be used "if and only if their omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternatives are available." While the image is clearly relevant in that it shows optical caustics, I'm not sure one can argue that its omission would weaken the article, or that no equally suitable images of caustics are available (there being such an image on the article already). Wikipedia is not censored, but that doesn't mean that everything is always appropriate and encyclopedic. --Srleffler 19:33, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Gone. HighInBC 21:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Name
Such concentration of light, especially sunlight, can burn—hence the name. Something about the ethymology? --Abdull 12:27, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. The word caustic comes from Greek καυστός, burnt, via the Latin causticus, burning. The article presumes readers are at least familiar with the much more common use of the term caustic to refer to aggressive chemicals like acids that can "burn" exposed skin.--Srleffler 16:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cardiod or Nephroid?
- See also: User talk:Pne#Cardioid vs. Nephroid
Wolfram says [1] "The cardioid is a degenerate case of the limaçon. It is also a 1-cusped epicycloid (with r==r) and is the catacaustic formed by rays originating at a point on the circumference of a circle and reflected by the circle." But User:Pne changed it to Nephroid. Which is correct? Both, depending on where the light comes from? Dicklyon 17:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- Collett's book claims the locus is a cardioid. Of course it wouldn't be the first error I've found in that book. (Reference on my user page.) Nevertheless, if Pne feels this is correct, he/she needs to provide a reference. Otherwise, it's original research.--Srleffler 03:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- The operative bit in the quote you gave is 'rays originating at a point on the circumference of a circle'. Parallel rays instead produce a nephroid; rays from a source in between infinity and the circumference of the circle produce something in between a cardioid and a nephroid. So, by my understanding, the answer to your question 'Both, depending on where the light comes from?' is 'Yes'. See this Mathworld page, for example. -- pne (talk) 18:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
