Why are the blue and violent ends of the spectrum so shit?
>>7724484
something to do with frequency or something I guess
shit man I don't know
Because their size compliments the size of our biological doodads.
Wibbly wobbly good, tear to shreds bad.
>>7724498
Does it also have something to due with ridiculous amount of energy due to short wavelength?
>>7724484
it's just high enough energy to promote electrons and break bonds (ionizing radiation)
it penetrates our cells and strikes our DNA, causing base pairs to change their shape as bonds are broken and reform, which messes up the replication of DNA -> mutations
>>7724528
I don't know what you're talking about specifically.
I'm just being extremely simplistic and was sort of talking about light detecting cells.
Size has plenty to do with it, e.g. radio waves will pass through you and not fuck shit up, light will bounce off your ass, and gamma will fuck your molecules to shit.
But there are many other factors that require giant books and bored professors to properly explain.
>>7724484
If you want some basic image of what's going on find a picture following the wavelength scale to the scale of objects, biological components, molecules, atoms and subatomic components. A quick google search will net plenty and you'll see how it can penetrate what.
If you want a proper explanation you'll have to learn all about ionisation, how atoms work and interact with parts of the em spectrum, and a whole lot of shit that will take months to go through.
>>7724484
imo that chart was made by bunch of pussies
BRING ON THE GAMMARAYS!
>hulkface.jpg
>>7724596
So there are about ten thousand degrees celsius of heat inside the visible spectrum?
>>7724638
Huh?
That's indicating temperature that emits it. Like gamma are emitted during nuclear fission or from like plasma which gets kind of toasty.
Everything that emits energy emits electromagnetic radiation.
>>7724638
Oh wait I get what you mean.
That doesn't look right but it gets up there.
Take for example red flames (around 1400 degrees) are less hot than light blue flames (a few hundred degrees hotter.
Onwards there are hotter oxygen using flames that are are white blue around 5000 degrees.
Then you have lightning over 29,000 degrees, it's white then bluish color is for other reasons, but you can guess what kinds of em radiation it emits.
>>7724677
If blue fire is hottest, and infrared measures heat, then would blue fire look redder than red fire on infrared?
>>7725182
Well that's not real color we see on monitors, we don't have receptors for infrared, it could be splurpler than the splurplest.
Anyway white is hottest or receptors can report about, containing all the colors. The sun emits white light, since it has all the colors and loses them in the atmosphere.
>>7725182
Idiot. Infrared doesn't "measure heat" you fucking retard.
Objects emit light. The hotter they are, the shorter the wavelength.
At room temperature you get infrared wavelengths.
That's all.
We use "infrared cameras" because that's what most stuff emits at the temperatures we're most familiar with.
If you heat an object up, the wavelength gets shorter until it enters the VISIBLE spectrum.
Examples are red hot iron and fires.
They emit visible light.
Keep going and stuff will mostly emit in the UV, Xray or gamma spectrum, but they'll still look blue/violet, not invisible.
Why?
Because the wavelengths emitted is a big curve, the slope goes up from red to blue and peaks in UV or something.
The highest part of the slope visible to our eyes is violet, so it gets a violet color.
>>7725217
Not him, but a layperson may simply be ignorant of black bodies and the finer parts of the EM spectrum.
imagine if your prof shit on you whenever you asked a question in lecture.
