26th March 2005, 12:00 PM
Yes, that's exaclty what I said lazy. Not sure what you are getting at there.
Maybe you are changing your argument?
You see, you first argued that the electrons firing from the electron gun actually "made it past" the phosphor layer and you literally SAW the electrons. I corrected this by pointing out that the electrons do NOT make it past this layer at all. Rather, they excite the phosphors and the phosphors release LIGHT, NOT electrons at all. There is no "electron signature" in the light either to let you know where it came from. The gun has a light sensor, but there is no way to tell that it was electrons that caused the phosphors to release light at all. All it sees is the light, not the electrons.
Which goes back to where this started. If the only thing the gun sees is the light, then it doesn't matter how the display goes about producing the light. It could be using an LED based front or back light system (LCD screen) or using an array of LEDs (jumbo trons) or exciting small chambers of plasma (plasma screen). Since the end product is exactly the same, light, then it doens't MATTER. The only thing that matters is that the display unit uses the line by line drawing method.
Here's the thing. The only information light can carry is wavelength. A lot of light is "brighter" and only a little light is "dimmer", but the only information an individual ray of light can carry is the wavelength. It can't and will not carry any signature indicating it "came from an electron". Now, a spectroscope does USE the spectrum of wavelengths a star or something gives off to indicate exactly what the substance that released it is made out of, but that's another thing entirely.
Again, eyes can ONLY see light. We don't actually "see" anything we ever look at, just the light that bounces off of it.
Maybe you are changing your argument?
You see, you first argued that the electrons firing from the electron gun actually "made it past" the phosphor layer and you literally SAW the electrons. I corrected this by pointing out that the electrons do NOT make it past this layer at all. Rather, they excite the phosphors and the phosphors release LIGHT, NOT electrons at all. There is no "electron signature" in the light either to let you know where it came from. The gun has a light sensor, but there is no way to tell that it was electrons that caused the phosphors to release light at all. All it sees is the light, not the electrons.
Which goes back to where this started. If the only thing the gun sees is the light, then it doesn't matter how the display goes about producing the light. It could be using an LED based front or back light system (LCD screen) or using an array of LEDs (jumbo trons) or exciting small chambers of plasma (plasma screen). Since the end product is exactly the same, light, then it doens't MATTER. The only thing that matters is that the display unit uses the line by line drawing method.
Here's the thing. The only information light can carry is wavelength. A lot of light is "brighter" and only a little light is "dimmer", but the only information an individual ray of light can carry is the wavelength. It can't and will not carry any signature indicating it "came from an electron". Now, a spectroscope does USE the spectrum of wavelengths a star or something gives off to indicate exactly what the substance that released it is made out of, but that's another thing entirely.
Again, eyes can ONLY see light. We don't actually "see" anything we ever look at, just the light that bounces off of it.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)