WickedLasers on Channel 11 News.

[JLSE]

Also, that divergence looks absolutely typical of these lasers. It looked like exactly what I would expect.

I think most people dont know what their 445 looks like on the
'receiving' end at a few hundred+ feet away.

When aiming in a direction, you dont really notice the increase
in 'dot' size, unless you are close enough to see it.

When I lived on the P.H of the building we were in, I noticed
it more as the targets were more 1,000+ ft away. Unfortunately
we moved before the 445's came into play...

 

[Nordhavn]

Yeah, they said sunglasses once, but they said safety glasses later and it was pretty clear what they were. Also, that divergence looks absolutely typical of these lasers. It looked like exactly what I would expect.

I've videographed mine outdoors and it looks very tight compared to what was in that video. Completely different altogether. They may have had a bad one! Mine is also doing 817mW avg which seems decent compared to others I've seen.

 

[jbtm]

It's crazy...It's about time the news got ahold of one to show the dangers after so many sites and radio stations called it a "light saber toy". But do you guys think restrictions will be taken? They said "It's not even suppose to be in the USA yet we got ahold of one". You think after 'special people' see this, actions could be taken...

And yeah. Their beam looked like crap. Mine is prity tight, 1.36mRad calculated...

 

[pullbangdead]

And yeah. Their beam looked like crap. Mine is prity tight, 1.36mRad calculated...

Your arctic has 1.36mRad divergence? Can you show that calculation?

And I assume that's the slow-diverging axis, what's the fast-diverging axis as well?

 

[jbtm]

I took measurements on the wide side. Until I get home i cant get your exact numbers, but i know for sure at 20ft it was 9mm and at roughly at the host, it was 1mm. These measurements was for the long width of the beam, not the thinner side. the wide side. As stated many times, many places, I'm EXTREAMLY happy with my arctic, the divergence is WELL better than my 405 glass-lens DIY.

 

[Prototype]

He wasn't completely clear in his explanation and didn't use the most precise terminology he could have, but lasers absolutely do have a much higher power density than the sun. It's not "more powerful than the sun" in total power output in all direction, but the power density (as in power per area, W/cm^2) of the sun on the earth's surface is certainly lower than the power density achievable with a focused laser. But reporters never get technological or scientific reports right, because they're reporters, not scientists or engineers.

Of course with power density it's stronger, but they didn't mention that at all. You're right, they're reporters, but they've made it sound like it's stronger than the sun overall, not just in power density...they could do some basic fact checking at least....

 

[danefex]

I can't believe nobody has mentioned this but did you notice the reporter's laser has a ridiculous divergence like a flashlight?

That's the first thing I noticed & was thinking how much brighter it would've been at 250' where their other camera was if they had it focused for that distance. As said before, there's a lot of fail in that video despite their accuracy with the warnings about how dangerous the S3 really is.

 

[Toaster]

What is it for? The question I hear so much

 

[DrSid]

IMHO it actually is a toy .. for kids grown older (trying to avoid term adult).

 

[danefex]

What is it for? The question I hear so much

How do you answer that question? I'm just curious. I'm starting to get sick of being asked why I have to have so many dangerous lasers by the family lately... My typical smartass responses ("....why do you have to know so much about mind erasers? " or "...blinding people arouses me" OR "....it's a new way to get high & all the kids are doing it") These responses aren't flying anymore, I need some new answers. Any suggestions?

 

[Cyparagon]

He wasn't completely clear in his explanation and didn't use the most precise terminology he could have, but lasers absolutely do have a much higher power density than the sun.

Depending on who you ask, the solar irradiation is maybe 700W/m² at ground level. A laser has Power ÷ πr². If we set radius to 1.5mm (typical of a red pointer, I believe) and radiance to 700W for comparison, you'd need only:

700 = Power ÷ (π(0.0015)²)
700 × π × 0.00000225 = 4.9mW to equal the radiance of the sun.

So it's not really saying anything to claim this laser has a higher power density than the sun, because it would seem any laser above class 3a is :yabbmad: Hell, you could probably beat the sun if you're really close to a light bulb.

But it makes for a good tagline and that's all they care about. Putting things into perspective isn't lucrative for them.

 

[jbtm]

That's one nice thing. Even on a bright sunny day you can see the dot 100ft away, and it's STILL too bright for me to feel safe to look at...Its like a 10mw green at night..so i still use glasses.

 

[trever22]

this is my comment to the video

"1000 times stronger than the sun, ya MY ASS. These douchebags dont even know what they are talking about. In the video that they showed a clip of they also blow up a car (fake obviously). So now are they trying to trick us that it can blow up a car. Ya leave it to the laser enthusiast to buy, but also leave it to they to do the news reports because these people obviously dont know what they are talking about"

 

[DrSid]

I certainly do NOT recommend shining 1W 445nm into you ass. At least I hope I understand your post right :umbrella:

BTW. if you do, I hope you'll make thread about it !

 

[mfo]

this is my comment to the video

"1000 times stronger than the sun, ya MY ASS. These douchebags dont even know what they are talking about. In the video that they showed a clip of they also blow up a car (fake obviously). So now are they trying to trick us that it can blow up a car. Ya leave it to the laser enthusiast to buy, but also leave it to they to do the news reports because these people obviously dont know what they are talking about"

You obviously have no clue as to what you're talking about, pullbangdead clearly explained it in terms that anyone could understand.

He wasn't completely clear in his explanation and didn't use the most precise terminology he could have, but lasers absolutely do have a much higher power density than the sun. It's not "more powerful than the sun" in total power output in all direction, but the power density (as in power per area, W/cm^2) of the sun on the earth's surface is certainly lower than the power density achievable with a focused laser. But reporters never get technological or scientific reports right, because they're reporters, not scientists or engineers.