Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Light dispersion conceptual waves.gif

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Light dispersion conceptual waves.gif, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2009 at 18:47:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Info created and uploaded by Kieff - nominated by Diti →Diti the penguin — 18:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support If someone succeeds in creating a bigger version of this animation… Nevertheless, I see the smoothness and usefulness of this animation (remember that the 2 Mpx limit is because of prints, and we cannot print animations) as a strong mitigating reason. →Diti the penguin — 18:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak  Oppose While the animation itself is beautiful, and definitely big enough, I don't like the way waves are used here with the intention of illustrating the wave nature of light. The illustration gives the impression that light waves are much like water waves, and somehow "run along the ray of light", which is false (and because the truth is very complex indeed, the wavyness should probably be left out entirely). As this is a scientific illustration, IMO this misrepresentation is reason enough for opposing. -- JovanCormac 11:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I think the wwaves are being used to show that it's the different frequencies that cause the split - which is important information. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True, but imagine a still frame from the animation. It contains the very same information. The only info the animation adds to that still frame is the way the waves move - and it is precisely there where it goes wrong. -- JovanCormac 15:31, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - Agree with JovanCormac that the animation transmits a wrong interpretation of the refraction of the different wavelengths and of the nature of light -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral I think the opposers arguing that the animation conveys a wrong interpretation of how refraction works is somewhat missing the point in the purpose/scope of this animation. An animation displaying the full wave-particle duality, the detailed processes leading to dispersion in a reactive medium illustrating is not the scope here, but to portray the wave nature of light in a refractive medium. The file page description also explains this quite thoroughly. So the ambition here is more aimed at primary/high-school level and not a high level quantum-electrodynamic explanation. In fact it is such that in a macroscopic view of the problem it can be considered as a raytracing problem. However, there are certain aspects of the animation, which I think should be clarified to make it clearer. First of all there are six colors shown and the refractive index and dispersion of the prism is relatively low meaning that the separation between the colors is not so large. This means that the animation gets rather busy when the colors split out. This also means that only a careful observer will notice that the wavelength inside the prism for a given color is actually shorter than in the surrounding vacuum. The shorter wavelength is an important aspect of understanding the origin of the refraction (that light travels slower in the prism leading to a shorter wavelength). If the refractive index of the prism was set to a larger value with higher dispersion, the waves would split more out and the wavelength inside the prism would get even shorter. Also reducing the number of colors from six to, say four or five would also reduce the "clutter" in the animation and make it more illustrative. --Slaunger (talk) 20:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - Why not replace the waves with particles of different colours? That would make the whole thing more clear --Alvesgaspar (talk) 01:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Two+two=4 (talk) 03:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per JC and Alvesgaspar. --Dschwen (talk) 14:25, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Ks0stm (T•C) 20:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --kaʁstn 10:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 16:23, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per others. Lycaon (talk) 09:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support The Dark Side of the Moon animated. I like it. --Lošmi (talk) 17:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 12:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC) Sorry, late vote. Lycaon (talk) 09:54, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Yann (talk) 12:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Light dispersion conceptual.gif, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION 

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Yann (talk) 12:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Light_dispersion_conceptual_waves.gif&oldid=28466619"