There's no "blue" in blu-ray....

[Schrecken_Licht]

Found this article a few minutes ago, a brief history of the development of the laser (incidentally it's 50th anniversary will soon be upon us!) from Baylor University in Texas.
Baylor University || The Lariat Online || News

"Some colors that correspond to waves are easier to get," Olafsen said, specifically citing that blue is an easy color, hence the use of Blu-ray.

Ah, still mis-leading the public that a blu-ray laser is actually blue....anyway, apparently this university is having a commemorative laser show on March 20th, so anyone in that area may be interested in checking it out.

 

[StardustSprinkles]

Sweet. I may have to take a roadtrip!

 

[cmak]

"Some colors that correspond to waves are easier to get,"

this came from a university? gosh I hope that's not a direct quote...

peace & thanks
-cmak

 

[Benm]

Perhaps it has been placed out of context.

Blue was never an easy color to get with semiconductor lasers... right up to blu ray, people were fighting it from the other end, trying to create ever shorter wavelengths, into the orange.

I suppose its comparable to what happened with LEDs, those stopped at yellowish green for a long time, right until deep blue was developed. Difference is that LEDs managed to close the gap and cover the full visible spectrum very quickly.

 

[roddenberry]

Well with the technologies rapidly advancing, and this new "RGB laser projector" technology coming up soon, I can imagine that advancement in green and blue laser diodes will soon bring these into the "affordable" range.

But back to the blu-ray, the name sounds a hell of a lot sleeker and more captivating than violet-ray, or even HD-DVD...
- Robert

 

[Greenmechanic]

"Some colors that correspond to waves are easier to get," Olafsen said, specifically citing that blue is an easy color, hence the use of Blu-ray.
Ah, still mis-leading the public that a blu-ray laser is actually blue....anyway, apparently this university is having a commemorative laser show on March 20th, so anyone in that area may be interested in checking it out.

I think a lot of the confusion in Blu-Ray comes from the florescence of 405nm onto a white surface.
As you all know, shining it at a white surface will produce a blue "dot".
This combined with the name Blu-Ray, confuses most people who do not know the truth.
And helps sell a $10 LD for $30 on e-Bay.

Found this article a few minutes ago, a brief history of the development of the laser (incidentally it's 50th anniversary will soon be upon us!) from Baylor University in Texas.

Actually, the principal of the laser has been around longer then that.
In 1917, Albert Einstein first theorized about the process which makes lasers possible called "Stimulated Emission."
The first working "type" of laser was invented in 1954. Charles Townes and Arthur Schawlow invented the maser (microwave amplification by stimulated emission of radiation), using ammonia gas and microwave radiation. The technology is very close but does not use a visible light.

Gordon Gould was the first person to use the word "laser". There is good reason to believe that Gordon Gould made the first light laser. Gould was a doctoral student at Columbia University under Charles Townes, the inventor of the maser. Gordon Gould built his optical laser in 1958.

History lesson is over, you don't have to go home, but you can't stay here!:crackup:

 

[steve001]

Even if they whom ever they were had chosen to be accurate by naming the Blu-Ray Vio-Ray, blu-ray still has better marketing appeal.

 

[xStatiCa]

purp-ray probably wouldn't sell too many either .

 

[Asherz]

what are we gonna do when RGB laser diodes are created? There's going to be nothing too look forward too lol.

 

[StridAst]

meh wikipedia lists Gordon Gould as being involved in a long patent war over the first laser patents. Seems he submitted a patent in 1959, but the U.S. patent office denied it and awarded a patent in 1960 to Bell Labs. Resulting in a lot of lawsuits until he finally won much later. *shrug* doesn't mention him building a working laser, just mentions a patent. Granted wikipedia is far from a real encyclopedia. But it's quick, and often at least close.

 

[lasersbee]

Here are some facts that I just found to substantiate some of the above...

The first laser

and

Lasers - The History of Lasers


Jerry

 

[StridAst]

Meh, this guy Gould sued and won the first laser patent. That does give credence to the claim that he might have built one first. However if he did, then he didn't properly substantiate it and so lost out. Either way, his patent application could have been easily plagiarized by others. Whatever his status, he was most definitely someone whose work contributed to the wonderful world of lasers. After all. This hobby wouldn't be as fun if it was named "light beam thingy."

 

[lasersbee]

The internet is so full of this kind of total BS. You have to look at such a bigger picture that what comes up on a desktop screen in 30 seconds, before repeating it. C'mon guys .................

Gee....and I was agreeing with you that it was a Maser and not
a Laser as you stated... guess I'm wrong....:cryyy:

Jerry

 

[pullbangdead]

A lot of the confusion over "blue" and "Blu-Ray" also comes from the usages in scientific literature, especially when you get into other languages (like the first blue/violet laser diodes, which were all made in Japan). It's very common to see the term "blue laser diode" refer to any laser in the blue end of the spectrum in scientific literature, and the blue end of the spectrum includes violet as well. They say it's blue because it falls in the range encompassed by blue/violet/etc, and all they were trying to do was juxtapose it against all the other laser diodes out there, which were decidedly placed in the red end of the spectrum (even though they could be IR, red, or even orange).

Even take the example of Shuji Nakamura's book on the subject, entitled "The Blue Laser Diode: The Complete Story". It talks exclusively about violet diodes, the highest wavelength mentioned in the entire book is like 415nm, decidedly violet. But yet his book about violet lasers is entitled "the Blue Laser Diode". Anybody want to volunteer to correct him?

In some cases, it's pure marketing. In other cases, it's scientific vs. common language. In yet others, it's a change across language barriers. The only thing clear about it is that it's often confusing. But we all know what we all mean around here, right?

So the occasional correction for a misleading ebay seller is great so people don't get fooled. But it's often not as cut-and-dry as "they're lying!" or "they're wrong!". And as far as this being a university and "they should know better", having been involved in the process of a university press release, I can guarantee that the person who wrote it was not in any way a scientist of any kind. it's just a generic author who works in the PR office of the university getting quotes from scientists along the way.

 

[Greenmechanic]

I see by your second reference that Greenmechanic simply lifted a couple sentences from them and put them here! And THAT author is simply making an unsubstantiated claim THERE!!! The internet is so full of this kind of total BS. You have to look at such a bigger picture that what comes up on a desktop screen in 30 seconds, before repeating it. C'mon guys .................

BobH; Actually, I read several article before posting here. Most mentioned Gorden Gould's involvement with the first "laser", but because of patent problems he did not get credit.

And of course, I "lifted" this from the article.
I'm a mechanic, not a photonic historian.

But after reading several instances of GG being first, that's who I went with.
Sources:
Gordon Gould - Laser
Gordon Gould - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Inventor of the Week: Archive
Gordon Gould
Union Notables - Gordon Gould

I was just trying to diversify the post a little, with what I assumed, (and collaborated from more then one site, always) was correct info.