What is the theoretical maximal resolution of a mirror?
>>7943339
480p
it doesnt matter because humans can only see at 20 frames per second
2piR
>>7943339
>turn 360 degrees and walk away
about tree fiddy
>>7943339
Mirror does not consist from pixels. Light wave is reflected from the surface, so initial amount of photons are the same as is coming to the eyes directly. There is little loss, but it would be inaccurate to say that it affects to the accuracy in any meaningful way.
>>7944482
So a mirror reflects a nearly perfect image that's a lot more accurate than what an electron microscope can image, for example?
>>7944553
wait, do you think there are "small photons" and "big photons" ???
>>7944569
Of course there are big photons. That's what dark matter is made of.
>>7943339
The same res as real life
How Can Mirrors Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real
>>7944628
Dank
>>7944569
I was thinking of wavelengths.
>>7944644
Mirrors don't reflect every wavelenght the same way. It's just aluminum for regular mirrors.
>>7944596
that would work though
>>7944671
>mirrors don't absorb any light
>the air doesn't absorb any light
>>7944674
you would lose about 0.0000000000001 percent of light intensity through absorbtion considering you would use industrial grade mirrors and a really tiny package of air between the microscope and the glass plates. Which would be more than enough to reach a microscoping level of magnification.
>>7944678
>marking up numbers
>microscopic level is the same as atomic level
>>7944682
numbers are discovered retard, not made up. learn some phiolosphy
>>7944694
its the other guy. he doesnt know basic microscopology and trying to insert hypothetical problems just to say you cant see atomic levels with mirrors and a microscope
>>7944698
>I take the bait
>the other guy is dumber
well fuck me.
I know who is.
>>7944698
If it's so easy, why hasn't it been done yet?
Checkmate pagans
