info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Can Someone Explain 2 Lasers but 1 Beam?
59 views
Skip to first unread message
Ron
Oct 22, 2012, 1:17:02 PM10/22/12
to
I came across this fascinating video on YouTube where a guy paralleled
two diode lasers two get a single high intensity beam. I'm curious
howi t's done. can anyone explain this to me please?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVktrhh7JUI&NR=1&feature=endscreen
Ron
two diode lasers two get a single high intensity beam. I'm curious
howi t's done. can anyone explain this to me please?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVktrhh7JUI&NR=1&feature=endscreen
Ron
Skywise
Oct 22, 2012, 4:20:37 PM10/22/12
to
Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:93fbd3a1-3531-4075-9792-
dac689...@q5g2000pbk.googlegroups.com:
That laser is technically illegal for sale or import in the USA
as it violates federal regulations according to my understanding
of the Code of Federal Regulations and my experiences with high
powered lasers.
cfr1040.10f4
Key control. Each laser system classified as a Class IIIb
or IV laser product shall incorporate a key-actuated master
control. The key shall be removable and the laser shall not
be operable when the key is removed.
cfr1040.10f5ii
Each laser system classified as a Class IIIb or IV laser
product shall incorporate an emission indicator which
provides a visible or audible signal during emission of
accessible laser radiation in excess of the accessible
emission limits of Class I, and sufficiently prior to
emission of such radiation to allow appropriate action
to avoid exposure to the laser radiation.
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?FR=
1040.10
Yes, the laser has a key, but it is obvious from the video
that the key is acting only as a main power switch and there
is an LED indicator to show 'power on'. However, actual laser
emission is initiated by pressing the button on the side of
the device which makes this button the master control.
Further, that emission is immediate upon pressing of the
button with no safety delay.
Every higher powered laser I've seen that complies with
these rules may have a normal power switch to turn on the
power supply (and perhaps a main power indicator light), but
the final laser emission is activated by the key switch
along with a specific 'laser emission' indicator light and
there is a significant delay (10+ seconds) from the turning
of that key to the emission of laser light.
My concern is that this 'handheld laser' is designed such
that if you hold down the button and then turn the key
there is NO safety delay. If the laser comes on instantly
when the switches are activated in that order, then it is
100% in violation of the rules. Further what if you press
the button immediately (less than a second) after turning
the key? No delay?
Every laser I've used that has both a power switch and a
master emission key control is designed such that even if
I turn the key to the 'emission on' position THEN flip the
main power switch, there is still a delay before laser
emission.
The point being, the manufacturer of this 'hand held laser'
is attempting to skirt the rules of laser pointers by not
calling it a laser pointer and attempting to incorporate
the required safety mechanisms for the Class IV laser that
this device obviously is. I argue that they have not.
Note, however, that these rules only apply (AFAIK) to sales
and imports. There is nothing (again, AFAIK) that says you
can't build such a laser for your own personal use privately
that violates these rules. But once you starting manufacturing
them for sale...
There are several companies that sell and/or import such
lasers into the USA that violate these rules. They have
been known to be confiscated by customs, at which point
the purchaser has no laser and probably does not get their
money back either. Caveat emptor.
Anyway, as for your question, it's hard to give an exact
answer as to how they combined two diodes without examining
the insides. But, the most likely possibility is combining
two orthogonally polarized beams through a polarizing beam
splitter cube.
Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
dac689...@q5g2000pbk.googlegroups.com:
as it violates federal regulations according to my understanding
of the Code of Federal Regulations and my experiences with high
powered lasers.
cfr1040.10f4
Key control. Each laser system classified as a Class IIIb
or IV laser product shall incorporate a key-actuated master
control. The key shall be removable and the laser shall not
be operable when the key is removed.
cfr1040.10f5ii
Each laser system classified as a Class IIIb or IV laser
product shall incorporate an emission indicator which
provides a visible or audible signal during emission of
accessible laser radiation in excess of the accessible
emission limits of Class I, and sufficiently prior to
emission of such radiation to allow appropriate action
to avoid exposure to the laser radiation.
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?FR=
1040.10
Yes, the laser has a key, but it is obvious from the video
that the key is acting only as a main power switch and there
is an LED indicator to show 'power on'. However, actual laser
emission is initiated by pressing the button on the side of
the device which makes this button the master control.
Further, that emission is immediate upon pressing of the
button with no safety delay.
Every higher powered laser I've seen that complies with
these rules may have a normal power switch to turn on the
power supply (and perhaps a main power indicator light), but
the final laser emission is activated by the key switch
along with a specific 'laser emission' indicator light and
there is a significant delay (10+ seconds) from the turning
of that key to the emission of laser light.
My concern is that this 'handheld laser' is designed such
that if you hold down the button and then turn the key
there is NO safety delay. If the laser comes on instantly
when the switches are activated in that order, then it is
100% in violation of the rules. Further what if you press
the button immediately (less than a second) after turning
the key? No delay?
Every laser I've used that has both a power switch and a
master emission key control is designed such that even if
I turn the key to the 'emission on' position THEN flip the
main power switch, there is still a delay before laser
emission.
The point being, the manufacturer of this 'hand held laser'
is attempting to skirt the rules of laser pointers by not
calling it a laser pointer and attempting to incorporate
the required safety mechanisms for the Class IV laser that
this device obviously is. I argue that they have not.
Note, however, that these rules only apply (AFAIK) to sales
and imports. There is nothing (again, AFAIK) that says you
can't build such a laser for your own personal use privately
that violates these rules. But once you starting manufacturing
them for sale...
There are several companies that sell and/or import such
lasers into the USA that violate these rules. They have
been known to be confiscated by customs, at which point
the purchaser has no laser and probably does not get their
money back either. Caveat emptor.
Anyway, as for your question, it's hard to give an exact
answer as to how they combined two diodes without examining
the insides. But, the most likely possibility is combining
two orthogonally polarized beams through a polarizing beam
splitter cube.
Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
Phil Hobbs
Oct 22, 2012, 4:48:07 PM10/22/12
to
There should be a safety delay, sure, but lots of lasers have buttons
that just interrupt the interlock. Push off, push on (after a delay).
I don't see where the key is required to be the only on/off condition.
Also, it seems that the pilot light satisfies the regs--laser emission
won't occur when the pilot light is off. It's the safety delay that's
the issue, ISTM.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net
Skywise
Oct 22, 2012, 9:08:43 PM10/22/12
to
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote in
news:1dGdnSYLncmaLBjN...@supernews.com:
> It's the safety delay that's the issue, ISTM.
Yes, that's the main sticking point. Perhaps in my effort to
be thorough and accurate I made that point less clear.
news:1dGdnSYLncmaLBjN...@supernews.com:
> It's the safety delay that's the issue, ISTM.
be thorough and accurate I made that point less clear.
Ron
Oct 22, 2012, 11:50:53 PM10/22/12
to
> Anyway, as for your question, it's hard to give an exact
> answer as to how they combined two diodes without examining
> the insides. But, the most likely possibility is combining
> two orthogonally polarized beams through a polarizing beam
> splitter cube.
Now, I kinda get it when he says ‘The beams are combined via the
'knife edging' method. Rather than overlap, they are paralleled side
by side. 445nm diodes have such a 'flat' profile. knife edging works
very well.” ‘But the part I don’t understand much at all is in the
description: “2 x A-140 Laser Diodes, 2x aspheric glass collimating
lenses and cylindrical optics for beam correction. The beam emitted in
the video is not focused down and is the parallel output--” How do
you do that with separate lenses? One in front and back of the
cylinder, or what?
Ron
Skywise
Oct 23, 2012, 1:33:37 AM10/23/12
to
Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:f20cc8a3-406f-4535-9d31-
b226d5...@vy11g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
> Uh, yeah, all the other stuff is very interesting...
Yeah, yeah.... just trying to educate. Lead a horse to water
and all that. :)
> Now, I kinda get it when he says ‘The beams are combined via the
> 'knife edging' method. Rather than overlap, they are paralleled side
> by side. 445nm diodes have such a 'flat' profile. knife edging works
> very well.” ‘But the part I don’t understand much at all is in the
> description: “2 x A-140 Laser Diodes, 2x aspheric glass collimating
> lenses and cylindrical optics for beam correction. The beam emitted in
> the video is not focused down and is the parallel output--” How do
> you do that with separate lenses? One in front and back of the
> cylinder, or what?
Each diode needs it's own set of aspheres and cyclinder optics
to turn the messy diode output into a usable beam. Since there's
two diodes in the 'device', there's "2x" of these optics as well.
These two modules even as close together as possible will still
have their beams separated by several+ millimeters, depending on
the size of the internal modules.
Then the two 'clean' output beams are combined using the 'knife-
edging method' to bring them side-by-side.
Finally, the laser is not focused to a point with a final lens.
b226d5...@vy11g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
> Uh, yeah, all the other stuff is very interesting...
and all that. :)
> Now, I kinda get it when he says ‘The beams are combined via the
> 'knife edging' method. Rather than overlap, they are paralleled side
> by side. 445nm diodes have such a 'flat' profile. knife edging works
> very well.” ‘But the part I don’t understand much at all is in the
> description: “2 x A-140 Laser Diodes, 2x aspheric glass collimating
> lenses and cylindrical optics for beam correction. The beam emitted in
> the video is not focused down and is the parallel output--” How do
> you do that with separate lenses? One in front and back of the
> cylinder, or what?
to turn the messy diode output into a usable beam. Since there's
two diodes in the 'device', there's "2x" of these optics as well.
These two modules even as close together as possible will still
have their beams separated by several+ millimeters, depending on
the size of the internal modules.
Then the two 'clean' output beams are combined using the 'knife-
edging method' to bring them side-by-side.
Finally, the laser is not focused to a point with a final lens.
Ron
Oct 23, 2012, 1:23:37 PM10/23/12
to
>
> Each diode needs it's own set of aspheres and cyclinder optics
> to turn the messy diode output into a usable beam. Since there's
> two diodes in the 'device', there's "2x" of these optics as well.
> These two modules even as close together as possible will still
> have their beams separated by several+ millimeters, depending on
> the size of the internal modules.
>
> Then the two 'clean' output beams are combined using the 'knife-
> edging method' to bring them side-by-side.
>
> Finally, the laser is not focused to a point with a final lens.
Huh... not to nitpick (much) but that brass tube is only about an inch
> Each diode needs it's own set of aspheres and cyclinder optics
> to turn the messy diode output into a usable beam. Since there's
> two diodes in the 'device', there's "2x" of these optics as well.
> These two modules even as close together as possible will still
> have their beams separated by several+ millimeters, depending on
> the size of the internal modules.
>
> Then the two 'clean' output beams are combined using the 'knife-
> edging method' to bring them side-by-side.
>
> Finally, the laser is not focused to a point with a final lens.
in diameter. Two lenses side by side in actually less than an inch
space given whatever the wall thickness? And the two beams aren't
exactly that far apart; can't be if they look like a single beam. The
guy who made the laser in his comments to someone said it was cheaper
than using a beam splitter but it was still a single beam coming out.
I'm impressed...
Ron
Skywise
Oct 23, 2012, 3:15:01 PM10/23/12
to
Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:97732fd6-43b0-48a3-8443-
f8ffaf...@p5g2000pbs.googlegroups.com:
> Huh... not to nitpick (much) but that brass tube is only about an inch
> in diameter. Two lenses side by side in actually less than an inch
> space given whatever the wall thickness?
Why not? Have you seen a keychain laser pointer? I had one that
was about 3/8" diameter on the outside of it's tube. Optics can
be made pretty darn small. Off the shelf catalog parts are down
to 5mm at least.
> And the two beams aren't
> exactly that far apart; can't be if they look like a single beam.
That's the product of the 'knife edge' method of combining the
beams. This is a separate issue from the above. This can be
done with any two lasers, be they little diode pointers or big
honkin 40W water cooled argons.
> The
> guy who made the laser in his comments to someone said it was cheaper
> than using a beam splitter but it was still a single beam coming out.
> I'm impressed...
Well, it's not a perfect single round beam. You'd only get
that with the beamsplitter method. But depending on how well
aligned the 'knife edge' optics are, and how fine the 'knife
edge' is, you can get them pretty close with minimal loss.
f8ffaf...@p5g2000pbs.googlegroups.com:
> Huh... not to nitpick (much) but that brass tube is only about an inch
> in diameter. Two lenses side by side in actually less than an inch
> space given whatever the wall thickness?
was about 3/8" diameter on the outside of it's tube. Optics can
be made pretty darn small. Off the shelf catalog parts are down
to 5mm at least.
> And the two beams aren't
> exactly that far apart; can't be if they look like a single beam.
beams. This is a separate issue from the above. This can be
done with any two lasers, be they little diode pointers or big
honkin 40W water cooled argons.
> The
> guy who made the laser in his comments to someone said it was cheaper
> than using a beam splitter but it was still a single beam coming out.
> I'm impressed...
that with the beamsplitter method. But depending on how well
aligned the 'knife edge' optics are, and how fine the 'knife
edge' is, you can get them pretty close with minimal loss.
Phil Hobbs
Oct 23, 2012, 4:32:51 PM10/23/12
to
you can find one with a nice angled edge. A chunk off a silicon wafer
with a layer of Ti:Au on it is even better, because of the 55 degree
edge chamfer from the cleave.
rll_sb
Oct 25, 2012, 6:33:42 PM10/25/12
to
I am surprised that no one mentioned conservation of brightness. There is a
patent Ref No. 6240116 describing combining laser diode arrays, but not
increasing intensity/brightness. You can read it at:
http://www.google.com/patents/US6240116
- Russ in SB
"Ron" wrote in message
news:93fbd3a1-3531-4075...@q5g2000pbk.googlegroups.com...
patent Ref No. 6240116 describing combining laser diode arrays, but not
increasing intensity/brightness. You can read it at:
http://www.google.com/patents/US6240116
- Russ in SB
"Ron" wrote in message
news:93fbd3a1-3531-4075...@q5g2000pbk.googlegroups.com...
Ron
Oct 30, 2012, 12:21:47 AM10/30/12
to
On Oct 25, 3:33 pm, "rll_sb" <rlombar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am surprised that no one mentioned conservation of brightness. There is a
> patent Ref No. 6240116 describing combining laser diode arrays, but not
> increasing intensity/brightness. You can read it at:http://www.google.com/patents/US6240116
I still have trouble accepting the idea of each laser diode having an
> I am surprised that no one mentioned conservation of brightness. There is a
> patent Ref No. 6240116 describing combining laser diode arrays, but not
> increasing intensity/brightness. You can read it at:http://www.google.com/patents/US6240116
aspheric lens and the two of them side-by-side in front of a cylinder
lens. I've seen some really bizarre things but that idea is way too
bizarre even for me.
Ron
Skywise
Oct 30, 2012, 1:49:23 AM10/30/12
to
Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:bcc3ea15-f3fd-4c6f-9fc6-
1ec439...@6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com:
> I still have trouble accepting the idea of each laser diode having an
> aspheric lens and the two of them side-by-side in front of a cylinder
> lens.
I think I know what's confusing you. Let's look again at the
description you gave us,
"2 x A-140 Laser Diodes, 2x aspheric glass collimating
lenses and cylindrical optics for beam correction."
Let me repeat that, emphasizing what you might be missing,
"2x aspheric glass collimating lenses ***AND*** cylindrical
optics for beam correction."
Very important is the word "and". This means there is also
"2x" of the "cylindrical optics" in addition to the aspheres.
Also note that it is plural, "optics". You need two cylindrical
lenses to reshape the beam from oval to round.
Each diode has it's own aspherical and two cyclindrical optics
for beam shaping, assembled as a module.
There are two of these modules.
Does this help?
1ec439...@6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com:
> I still have trouble accepting the idea of each laser diode having an
> aspheric lens and the two of them side-by-side in front of a cylinder
> lens.
description you gave us,
"2 x A-140 Laser Diodes, 2x aspheric glass collimating
lenses and cylindrical optics for beam correction."
"2x aspheric glass collimating lenses ***AND*** cylindrical
optics for beam correction."
Very important is the word "and". This means there is also
"2x" of the "cylindrical optics" in addition to the aspheres.
Also note that it is plural, "optics". You need two cylindrical
lenses to reshape the beam from oval to round.
Each diode has it's own aspherical and two cyclindrical optics
for beam shaping, assembled as a module.
There are two of these modules.
Does this help?
Ron
Oct 31, 2012, 12:26:28 PM10/31/12
to
On Oct 29, 10:49 pm, Skywise <i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:
> Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:bcc3ea15-f3fd-4c6f-9fc6-
> 1ec4392b8...@6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com:
> Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:bcc3ea15-f3fd-4c6f-9fc6-
>
> > I still have trouble accepting the idea of each laser diode having an
> > aspheric lens and the two of them side-by-side in front of a cylinder
> > lens.
>
> I think I know what's confusing you. Let's look again at the
> description you gave us,
>
> "2 x A-140 Laser Diodes, 2x aspheric glass collimating
> lenses and cylindrical optics for beam correction."
>
> Let me repeat that, emphasizing what you might be missing,
>
> "2x aspheric glass collimating lenses ***AND*** cylindrical
> optics for beam correction."
>
> Very important is the word "and". This means there is also
> "2x" of the "cylindrical optics" in addition to the aspheres.
> Also note that it is plural, "optics". You need two cylindrical
> lenses to reshape the beam from oval to round.
>
> Each diode has it's own aspherical and two cyclindrical optics
> for beam shaping, assembled as a module.
>
> There are two of these modules.
>
> Does this help?
Well, yes-- and no. Something is missing, and it's probably because
> > I still have trouble accepting the idea of each laser diode having an
> > aspheric lens and the two of them side-by-side in front of a cylinder
> > lens.
>
> I think I know what's confusing you. Let's look again at the
> description you gave us,
>
> "2 x A-140 Laser Diodes, 2x aspheric glass collimating
> lenses and cylindrical optics for beam correction."
>
> Let me repeat that, emphasizing what you might be missing,
>
> "2x aspheric glass collimating lenses ***AND*** cylindrical
> optics for beam correction."
>
> Very important is the word "and". This means there is also
> "2x" of the "cylindrical optics" in addition to the aspheres.
> Also note that it is plural, "optics". You need two cylindrical
> lenses to reshape the beam from oval to round.
>
> Each diode has it's own aspherical and two cyclindrical optics
> for beam shaping, assembled as a module.
>
> There are two of these modules.
>
> Does this help?
the guy who made the video was deliberately trying to be unclear; if
you look at his video he doesnt show anything about the lasers only
the casing. I looked at the video very carefully and it's undisputable
that the beams from each module are combined into one beam-- not side
by side beams which would be close but still visible as two beams,
round, oval, or otherwise. He says he used the knife-edge method but
two beams side by side would look like a figure eight unless there was
some way to merge them into a single beam. Or am I wrong here?
Ron
Skywise
Oct 31, 2012, 1:44:25 PM10/31/12
to
Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:a64a99b4-881c-448c-a269-
638238...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com:
> He says he used the knife-edge method but
> two beams side by side would look like a figure eight
But if you looked at the figure eight beam from the correct
orientation you wouldn't see the middle section that would
appear dimmer.
Since he was careful to show only the casing, he may have
been careful to show only a certain orientation of the
beam.
Actually, it may not have been on purpose. The orientation
is fixed to the casing, and the casing is held in a certain
way dictated by where the button is on the side. He always
holds it to the top.
The two beams are side by side, and we only see the beam
from the side, not the top.
There is a short segment that zooms into the output section
of the laser, but because it is on, everything is blown
out brightness wise so it's hard ot see any of the details.
638238...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com:
> He says he used the knife-edge method but
> two beams side by side would look like a figure eight
orientation you wouldn't see the middle section that would
appear dimmer.
Since he was careful to show only the casing, he may have
been careful to show only a certain orientation of the
beam.
Actually, it may not have been on purpose. The orientation
is fixed to the casing, and the casing is held in a certain
way dictated by where the button is on the side. He always
holds it to the top.
The two beams are side by side, and we only see the beam
from the side, not the top.
There is a short segment that zooms into the output section
of the laser, but because it is on, everything is blown
out brightness wise so it's hard ot see any of the details.
Ron
Oct 31, 2012, 6:44:40 PM10/31/12
to
On Oct 31, 10:44 am, Skywise <i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:
> Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:a64a99b4-881c-448c-a269-
> 63823893b...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com:
> Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:a64a99b4-881c-448c-a269-
>
> > He says he used the knife-edge method but
> > two beams side by side would look like a figure eight
>
> But if you looked at the figure eight beam from the correct
> orientation you wouldn't see the middle section that would
> appear dimmer.
>
> Since he was careful to show only the casing, he may have
> been careful to show only a certain orientation of the
> beam.
>
> Actually, it may not have been on purpose.
Have you ever heard of John Hutchinson and the "Hutchinson effect?" In
> > He says he used the knife-edge method but
> > two beams side by side would look like a figure eight
>
> But if you looked at the figure eight beam from the correct
> orientation you wouldn't see the middle section that would
> appear dimmer.
>
> Since he was careful to show only the casing, he may have
> been careful to show only a certain orientation of the
> beam.
>
> Actually, it may not have been on purpose.
his videos he shows a lot when it comes to the effects, but never
shows how he got them: "I used a 750 kHz Tesla coil and several radio
generators... " Nope. I have corresponded with him a few years ago
because I saw a potential in the Hutchinson effect that others didn't,
including John himself. He's a very nice guy, but he is also very
secretive, Sure, he'll explain anything in general, but ask him for
critical details and you might as well forget it. I suppose he has his
reasons-- mostly I think he's afraid somebody will do something with
his work that he can't and would get all the credit for it instead of
him. it wouldn't be the first time in science-- but anyway, he keeps
things close to his chest (which is why so many people think he's a
fraud).
I think this video guy is the same way; most people when making a
video would be glad to show all the pieces, how they put it together,
etc-- I'd gladly showed everyone who asked how I maked a sonic
screwdriver-- but some people are just a little...paranoid. The
history of science is filled with people who made great achievements
but they died with them becase such people didn't-- or couldn't--
share their results with anybody else.
Ron
_______________________________
“Data, something is only impossible until it is not!”
–– Jean- Luc Picard ––
Skywise
Oct 31, 2012, 7:05:29 PM10/31/12
to
Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:b9e1e284-4ff3-4e33-9e44-
da68fa...@s9g2000pbh.googlegroups.com:
> Have you ever heard of John Hutchinson and the "Hutchinson effect?" In
> his videos
I debunked a few of his videos many years ago. The analysis is on
my website. In the videos in question, I found the magic string
holding up the object supposedly experiencing 'antigravity'.
http://www.skywise711.com/Skeptic/Hutchison/hutchison.html
> I think this video guy is the same way
Naw. I think the laser guy is just showing off. The main point
of the video seems to be to demonstrate the power of the device
rather than to share the technology behind it. But, I only have
the video to judge by.
He's certainly no Hutchison. The laser is real, not faked.
da68fa...@s9g2000pbh.googlegroups.com:
> Have you ever heard of John Hutchinson and the "Hutchinson effect?" In
> his videos
my website. In the videos in question, I found the magic string
holding up the object supposedly experiencing 'antigravity'.
http://www.skywise711.com/Skeptic/Hutchison/hutchison.html
> I think this video guy is the same way
of the video seems to be to demonstrate the power of the device
rather than to share the technology behind it. But, I only have
the video to judge by.
He's certainly no Hutchison. The laser is real, not faked.
Ron
Nov 1, 2012, 1:32:10 AM11/1/12
to
On Oct 31, 4:05 pm, Skywise <i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:
> Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:b9e1e284-4ff3-4e33-9e44-
> da68faf47...@s9g2000pbh.googlegroups.com:
> Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:b9e1e284-4ff3-4e33-9e44-
>
> > Have you ever heard of John Hutchinson and the "Hutchinson effect?" In
> > his videos
>
> I debunked a few of his videos many years ago. The analysis is on
> my website. In the videos in question, I found the magic string
> holding up the object supposedly experiencing 'antigravity'.
>
> http://www.skywise711.com/Skeptic/Hutchison/hutchison.html
>
> > I think this video guy is the same way
>
> Naw. I think the laser guy is just showing off. The main point
> of the video seems to be to demonstrate the power of the device
> rather than to share the technology behind it. But, I only have
> the video to judge by.
>
> He's certainly no Hutchison. The laser is real, not faked.
I won't debate Hutchinson-- until someone tries to replicate his
> > Have you ever heard of John Hutchinson and the "Hutchinson effect?" In
> > his videos
>
> I debunked a few of his videos many years ago. The analysis is on
> my website. In the videos in question, I found the magic string
> holding up the object supposedly experiencing 'antigravity'.
>
> http://www.skywise711.com/Skeptic/Hutchison/hutchison.html
>
> > I think this video guy is the same way
>
> Naw. I think the laser guy is just showing off. The main point
> of the video seems to be to demonstrate the power of the device
> rather than to share the technology behind it. But, I only have
> the video to judge by.
>
> He's certainly no Hutchison. The laser is real, not faked.
experiements it's too easy to claim he's a fake. As Allen J. Hynek
once said, "As a scientist I must be mindful of the past; all too
often it has happened that matters of great value to science were over
-looked because the new phenomenon did not fit the accepted scientific
outlook of the time." The history of science is filled with so much
adolescent pettiness, it's a wonder any progres has been made over the
last 300 years.
Hmm, as for the laser, it may or may not be faked-- I don't know
because one damn thing for certain is the guy has shown us nothing by
way of construction or given any but the slightest of details so all I
have is speculation. As an engineer, I don't mind a little of it, but
when that's all there is it gives me a headache.
Ron
Skywise
Nov 1, 2012, 2:17:44 AM11/1/12
to
Ron <or...@centurylink.net> wrote in news:077507a3-840b-4d60-be7e-
4d97c6...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
> I won't debate Hutchinson-- until someone tries to replicate his
> experiements it's too easy to claim he's a fake.
I agree that there's nothing to debate. It was easy to see
the string in the video holding up the 'levitating' object.
Hence, fake.
Such people are secretive because they have something to
hide, that they're frauds.
> Hmm, as for the laser, it may or may not be faked--
Oh, it's a real laser. The only question would be the
construction (the subject of this thread) or possibly
the claimed power level. But it is a real laser. And
the claimed construction method is a valid one. So
there's not much reason (at least for me) to doubt.
4d97c6...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
> I won't debate Hutchinson-- until someone tries to replicate his
> experiements it's too easy to claim he's a fake.
the string in the video holding up the 'levitating' object.
Hence, fake.
Such people are secretive because they have something to
hide, that they're frauds.
> Hmm, as for the laser, it may or may not be faked--
construction (the subject of this thread) or possibly
the claimed power level. But it is a real laser. And
the claimed construction method is a valid one. So
there's not much reason (at least for me) to doubt.
steveb...@swva.net
Nov 27, 2012, 9:14:23 PM11/27/12
to
Message has been deleted
pyrot...@hotmail.com
May 28, 2020, 9:47:46 PM5/28/20
to
This laser was one of my first array handelds. I have since improved with very small RGB and quad array class 4's.
This particular laser had two diodes collimated individually, knife edged, then passed through cylindrical optics.
Later versions were built with a removable 4x beam expander.
0 new messages