808nm laser visibility

[InfinitusEquitas]

Exactly. You can´t see IR. Only the spikes in the visible part of the spectrum. But there a lot of people here beliving you can. Claiming they can see IR and giving you a bad reputation if you dissagre rather than google a bit and to admit they were wrong.

LMFAO - Strike 4.

No one says they can see IR, for some reason you just believe people are saying that. Delusional much?

NEAR IR ~700nm, is visible, 808nm is not.

Necroposting a two month old thread with no new info - Strike 5.

 

[honeyx]

LMFAO - Strike 4.

No one says they can see IR, for some reason you just believe people are saying that. Delusional much?

NEAR IR ~700nm, is visible, 808nm is not.

Necroposting a two month old thread with no new info - Strike 5.

You know. You should go to the military for your sriking. Did I say it was you? It wasn´t just you who gave me a bad reputation and commented it. So do you a favor and strike yourself a bad reputation for commenting this now.

I myself will comment this now with your own words:

All I want is for you to read what is actually written in the future instead of what of what you think is written.

And yes. When people say "most people can´t see IR light" the also imply that some people can. Either all can´t see or most. But if most, there must be a few that can see IR. Just that simple this is.

And now don´t tell me you are not pissed off. Of course you are and like to fight this out rather than discuss.

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

Actually I trained with Israeli commandos for exactly 3 hours. Drove them absolutely insane. Apparently I have too many issues with authority. So no military for me

As for the rest - 50/50 chance you were talking about me

I guess we can settle on just one strike for the necropost. You're back to 4:beer:

 

[honeyx]

Well while the cold war between the US and Russia there was also a 50/50 chance who of them will first start the 3th war. Gladly noone of them both started it so we are still here

 

[Cyparagon]

Exactly. You can´t see IR. Only the spikes in the visible part of the spectrum.

Making sht up, or just trolling?

Prove it to yourself: Look at a laser dot through a diffraction grating. If the linewidth was even a tenth of what you claim it is, you would see a line instead of a dot.

 

[honeyx]

Making sht up, or just trolling?

Prove it to yourself: Look at a laser dot through a diffraction grating. If the linewidth was even a tenth of what you claim it is, you would see a line instead of a dot.

Yes prove it yourself. A humans eye even can see in a clear moonnight. Cats eyes even in a cloudy moonnight. Now try to look through a diffraction grating at the objects like the gras in your garden that reflects the moonlight if you can see anything. A humans eye can´t see single photons. Don´t know exactly where the threeshoot is, but the few hundered or thousend photons in the spikes are to much absorbed and splitted by a defraction grating to be noticed by the humans eye afterwards.

Also. Why can´t you see weak light emmiting objects next to a strong emmiting lightsurce? It´s due to the nature of our eyes. And a focused IR Laser through a defraction grathing you would see nothing. Neither the dots from the IR nor the to much absorbed and splitted spikes in the visible area.

But even using a visible laser you won´t see the spikes through a difraction grathing. They are just to weak after passing the grathing to be noticed by our eyes. Therefore there is something like a spectral analyzer that is more sensitive than our eyes and will show you the peak of the laser and the spikes too.

And where did i say it´s a linewidth? I spoke about spikes nowhere about a linewidth. Show me please where i said something about a linewidth.

Just because you can´t see something doesn´t mean it it isn´t there. Or do you also belive all the food in your fridge disappears if you close the door and the light turns off? But how do you know the light turns off if you can´t see that?

Have here something for you: http://www.geekologie.com/2009/07/neato_human_bodies_produce_vis.php

Now lets see what a defraction grathing will show?

 

[Cyparagon]

And where did i say it´s a linewidth? I spoke about spikes nowhere about a linewidth.

The only "spikes" in a laser diode are IN its linewidth.

Have here something for you: Neato: Human Bodies Produce Visible Light - Geekologie

I've seen that before. But anomalous "biochemical reactions involving free radicals" that emit a few photons a second have NOTHING to do with laser diodes.

a focused IR Laser through a defraction grathing you would see nothing.

Well, I just tried it with an 808 pen, and you're a liar. I didn't bother taking a picture since there's quite a bit of lens flare and the camera doesn't see IR like we see IR, but I happen to have a spectrometer.

Unless you can point out to me the "spikes" in the visible spectrum... YOU, sir, need to go away.

 

[honeyx]

The only "spikes" in a laser diode are IN its linewidth.

The linewidth like you say has a width from lets say (x)nm to nm. So you want to tell me your laser isn´t emitting a single amplified wevelenght but a few amplified wevelenghts in a range from x to y? You are contradicting yourself.

I've seen that before. But anomalous "biochemical reactions involving free radicals" that emit a few photons a second have NOTHING to do with laser diodes.

Nothing? Yes you are right. Sorry for my mistake. Of course human body is emitting visible light and laserdiodes are actually waterpistols emitting H2O.

Well, I just tried it with an 808 pen, and you're a liar. I didn't bother taking a picture since there's quite a bit of lens flare and the camera doesn't see IR like we see IR, but I happen to have a spectrometer.

Unless you can point out to me the "spikes" in the visible spectrum... YOU, sir, need to go away.

http://www.laserfreak.net/forum/download/file.php?id=18411&sid=2310813c05af5ab6e4d3f2d43b20e1eahttp://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f248/Cyparagon/Spectrographs/808nmpen.png[/IMG]

Well. Everyone can claim he has a spectrometer and post an ideal curve. Just a bit annoying you don´t have an other surce, but yours.

Ok. here is a quick search at google http://optics.colorado.edu/~kelvin/classes/opticslab/Laserdiode.doc.pdf

Take a look at page3 there is a diagram with sevaral power levels. Just take a look at the buttom one measured with just 3mW output. The more power you are measuring with a spectral analyser the more you have to change the scale and the lower the little spikes are. So even if you really own a spectral analyser, you know how to select a scale where the little spikes will be reduced to a minimum and shown as just a line.

Or take a look at this one

It actually comes from this threat in an other forum www.LaserFreak.net • Thema anzeigen - Merkwürdiges Spectrum der 445nm Laserdiode

Take a closer look at the line close to the main peak. There also are little spikes. Not to mention the spike in the IR range.

So Mr. before calling me a liar and showing me your ideal curve. Give me some more accurate that dosn´t come from yourself. It´s not that hard to get an ideal curve by just changing the scale or a few other parameters and with photoshop you can even draw aliens while shopping in NewYork .

 

[Cyparagon]

So you want to tell me your laser isn´t emitting a single amplified wevelenght but a few amplified wevelenghts in a range from x to y?

Arguably, yes. But they are all so close together, it makes sense to think of it as one wavelength.

Nothing? Yes you are right.

The light given off by the body is over a huge area, amounts to only a handful of photons, and is BIOCHEMICAL. The mechanism that lasers work with is nowhere near the same.

Not to mention the spike in the IR range.

I just took one, and it's not there. It was probably picking up something else that uses IR. Laser mouse maybe.

The more power you are measuring with a spectral analyser the more you have to change the scale and the lower the little spikes are.

Those are noise. They show up even without ANY light input. If they weren't noise, they would INCREASE with scale, not decrease. Giving the sensor more light increases the SNR.

This is what mine looks like with the input blocked off with black tape. It is NOISE... unless you want to claim that electrical tapes gives off UVC. I wouldn't put it past you.

Give me some more accurate that dosn´t come from yourself.

And I suppose you think Googling and only reporting results that agree with you is more accurate.

"You use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamp post. For support rather than illumination"

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

"You use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamp post. For support rather than illumination"

:crackup: Nice quote.

 

[honeyx]

Arguably, yes. But they are all so close together, it makes sense to think of it as one wavelength.



The light given off by the body is over a huge area, amounts to only a handful of photons, and is BIOCHEMICAL. The mechanism that lasers work with is nowhere near the same.



I just took one, and it's not there. It was probably picking up something else that uses IR. Laser mouse maybe.

Those are noise. They show up even without ANY light input. If they weren't noise, they would INCREASE with scale, not decrease. Giving the sensor more light increases the SNR.

This is what mine looks like with the input blocked off with black tape. It is NOISE... unless you want to claim that electrical tapes gives off UVC. I wouldn't put it past you.

And I suppose you think Googling and only reporting results that agree with you is more accurate.

"You use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamp post. For support rather than illumination"

Yeah noise. But what kind of noise? There are two possible reasons for noise being detected. One reason is your analizer being so sensitive it notices every single photon emitted by all the atoms surrounding it (air, case...your tape) or.....the noise is producerd by your analyser itself.(Like transistors. Microcontrollers and the elekrons floating throught the logic.)

I doupt your analyser is as sensitive as the photon detectors used to prove the existence of neutrinos so it´s more common your analyser is producing the noise itself. So tell me will you hear me whisper while a tornado is passing us?

And I suppose you think Googling and only reporting results that agree with you is more accurate.

It´s for sure more accurate than only one surce. (YOURS.) There are more surces telling the opposite. So yes. I more belive a sientist who made a analisys with a more accurate aparature or the manufacturers than you.

Here another nice article http://www.optique-ingenieur.org/en/courses/OPI_ang_M02_C05/co/Contenu_33.html

Also. Maybe you should read a bit about the difference between Fabry Perot and Distributed Feedback Laserdiodes before showing us your amount of ignorance.

 

[Cyparagon]

Did you LOOK at the axis, or did you just search for Google's laser spectrum with the greatest spread?

It ranges from 0.001/1580.2775 = 632.800nm to 0.001/1580.2815 = 632.799nm

Learn how to read graphs.

Show me one source that proves that IR laser diodes emit light in the visible spectrum in amounts that we can see, then we'll talk.

 

[honeyx]

Did you even LOOK at the axis?

It ranges from 0.001/1580.2775 = 632.800nm to 0.001/1580.2815 = 632.799nm

Come back when you learn how to read graphs.

Sure i have seen it. An you still claim it´s a single wavelenght? You better learn how to read graphs and to recognize that 632.800nm is NOT 632.799nm.

Show me one source that proves that IR laser diodes emit light in the visible spectrum in amounts that we can see, then we'll talk.

And how about learning about the difference of the two types of a laserdiode?

I see still ignoring it..... Just a tip. The first one is the most common one.

 

[Trevor]

Ah yes, a 0.001nm is definitely worth arguing over.

It pains me to know that so many years of photonics research have yielded 808nm laser diodes that have spikes far lower.

But wait... you'd think that this technology would yield some cool multiline laser diodes.

Oh wait, it's just idiocy in play here. Not cool technology.

How disappointing.

-Trevor

 

[lazeristasUVISIR]

Show me one source that proves that IR laser diodes emit light in the visible spectrum in amounts that we can see, then we'll talk.

What do you mean by "visible spectrum"? Does a 808-nm laser radiate in a visible spectrum?
Yes, I see a 808-nm (IR & visible) laser. A 850-nm is out of my range. Maybe it was too weak :can:

 

[honeyx]

Ah yes, a 0.001nm is definitely worth arguing over.

It pains me to know that so many years of photonics research have yielded 808nm laser diodes that have spikes far lower.

But wait... you'd think that this technology would yield some cool multiline laser diodes.

Oh wait, it's just idiocy in play here. Not cool technology.

How disappointing.

-Trevor

You are right. 0.001nm isn´t worth arguing over. It also isn´t worth arguing over 80% of the US population is beliving Kanada is an island. Tell me why it dosn´t wounder me all who gave me a bad reputation so far are living in the US? Is this all all of your 80% can? Building guns, shooting first and then asking its an enemy or friend and making war?

Yeah. If someone disagrees with one of the 80% just shoot him till he´s death. Then there is noone who can disagree and you are right.