MIT camera captures light at a trillion frames per second

[@kolgado69]

This is the first step to being able to take a live picture of an electron! Bravo MIT!

[@007RAJKOify]

Thats impossible. Atkeast in current day physics. taht because the nature of electron.

[@R2bEEaton]

Very good explanation lmao. The reason is that an electron is smaller than the smallest visible wavelengths of light. It's like the electron is a shell on a shore and light is a tidal wave hitting that shore. The shell is there, but it doesn't really make a difference to the wave. However, if it was a big boulder, the wave would part considerably more and make an impact on the wave.

[@AndrewWhite6969]

@@R2bEEatonElectron scanning microscopes use electrons to image viruses, as they are smaller than the smallest wavelength of visible light. Perhaps future scientists will devise a way to use subatomic particles to image electrons and such.

[@davidwalker5054]

Its hard to get your head round a bullet taking 3 years to get where light can in 3 seconds

[@scottslaughter7181]

The military can already see around corners by analyzing light waves. It's called "using a mirror."

[@gobstoppa1633]

the study of light has and is and will always be the only way we can find the answers to the big questions. since all we know is made of light, obviously we look back to the souce, "SIMPLE" im so glad these folk have made a start at least.

[@ivanjesik]

... and next step is ZOOM IN, ZOOM OUT; with higher resolution :-) :-)

[@Shaunt1]

Pretty amazing! It sorta just looks like light moving across the object rather than through space.

[@kodak513]

and another thing... to truly capture light, flash the lights in the room when the camera is rolling.

[@Nipponing]

OMFG! So this is the first video of light traveling ever captured? o.o

[@R2bEEaton]

Um no, any video is a video of light traveling.

[@okkuiper]

@@R2bEEaton k smartass

[@AndrewWhite6969]

@@R2bEEatonSmartass lmao

[@fanofkira]

@EphraimRodrigez no need to be mean about it, im just merely saying that the camera is fast at taking pictures at a trillion frames a second, and no the ISS is not a big floating trailer park to be, its a symbol of humanity going into space and exploring the unknown.

[@jiggerinokobalis609]

The nuka cola in the back lol

[@Willdudeplays]

@moliniagu1 ... Ok, you would need lots of computing power to render that all together, but we said those kinds of things years ago. I mean, think, only about 5 years ago we used floppy disks, and now we have flash drives that can store 32 gigs.

[@hsks99]

LOL in 2020!

[@fanofkira]

@EphraimRodrigez holy shit, thats 1 slow moving bullet

[@kodak513]

so can u flash a beam and snap a photo before the light reach the object. that would be cool

[@007RAJKOify]

I doubt it. they didnt show it.

[@shivani7844]

Ok thats great

[@abcdefghilihgfedcba]

holy shit…

[@rogerscottcathey]

the coke bottle was all they could afford?

[@Soccercrazyigboman]

HOLY SHIT

[@urantay]

so it's like night vision?

[@nshoot]

They've got a nuka cola from fallout 3?

[@wiilillad]

haha I just read the article earlier

[@shaunosaurus1]

This could also be used to walk into a bar in Thailand and ascertain which of the attractive patrons are really women and which are the males that identify as women Lol

[@yaaronvanderweij7854]

my pc: 3 fps is the best i can do.

[@-x-3694]

Still faster

[@mowgli123456789]

you can look in your room and figure out which materials are fabric and which are wood...? cant we do that with our eyes? haha clasic case of 'look we made something really cool !! now quick ! try and make it sound like it might have some practical use in the future...'

[@R2bEEaton]

lmao

[@jefftatro8871]

Yeah. I didn't get that part either.

[@id01_01]

i watched the video. It's not actually at 1T frames per second. It's just a bunch of replicas of the same event to get to 1 trillion fps. Why? RGB = 3 bytes, in a perfect world, one byte for each color. Optimizations can around 1/4 image size. So, 1,000,000,000 frames per second would take up around half a gigabyte per second for one pixel. The bandwidth of RAM is at max usually 20GBps. Therefore, 20/0.5 GBps = 40. The video, bottlenecked by the speed of RAM, will have to be 40 pixels in total. (Is it really a camera now?) In comparison, a SD video is 153,600 pixels in total. And even that is an optimistic estimate...

[@cobrakingofeart]

this is MIT, they could have a one of a kind, million dollar computer that can process it at a much higher speed

[@id01_01]

Even if they had a very powerful computer 1000 times the power of normal computers, it would only be 40000 pixels at max - way lower than sd

[@MotionXE]

@@id01_01 as he mentioned. more powerful computers than you think. Some random guy in the comment section claims to be smarter than the professionals who worked to build such machinery and capture all of this footage.

[@id01_01]

@@MotionXE did you read my comment or watch the video? See 0:23 - they "capture movies of many identical-looking pulses" and "computationally combine these movies", similarly to how I stated in the comment that it's not actually trillions of frames per second (but instead a composite video). Not claiming to "be smarter than" anyone, but instead that the title is misrepresenting the invention, and the invention as described by the title would be computationally infeasible with modern technology. Also, "more powerful computers exist?" do you realize that advanced technology is not magic? Even if you had 1000 channel RAM, with each stick being 10 times faster than the RAM that existed when this video came out, you would only be able to, at max, theoretically, capture an SD video, if it's magically compressed with no processing power nor latency, and you'd need to store it all in RAM too. And high def videos, as this invention produces, are exponentially larger than low-def ones. Some random guy who doesn't spend the time to watch or understand the video, nor anything about computers except for using them to play games, in the comment section insisting the misleading title is made by "professionals who worked to build such machinery" and therefore 100% true instead of some guy using a clickbait headline that misrepresents what the invention (as outlines in HIS OWN video) actually is.