What is happening at the subatomic level?

[ewu...@gmail.com]

Why do the headlights of a car Not appear bright/glary, meaning that they appear feeble during the day when sun is shining, but the same car and same headlights appear bright during the night when there is no sun?

Is this because of the contrast? Because during day the background is bright (since the sun is shining) but at night the background is dark, and also because the pupil of the human eye opens more at night to let in more light.

It’s just like the question, where do the stars go during the day? Well they don’t go anywhere, the sunlight washes them out.

But, the real question is, then what is happening at the sub-atomic level?
Now, without photons, no object can be visible.
It is only when photons bounce off/reflect from an object and enter our eyes, that we humans can see that object, that’s why we humans can’t see anything in a dark room since there are no photons there.
For that matter, no natural eye, whether of humans or of any other mammal or fish or bird or insect can’t see without photons. Insects and some birds can see ultraviolet light, but that’s just photons in the ultraviolet spectrum.

Since Light is composed of photons, every light beam is stream of photons, then why can’t we see the photons coming from the stars during the day?
Does this mean that the photons are interacting/intercepting/colliding, on a subatomic level?
If there was some very hi-tech camera, with a very large aperture and an unflawed & very sensitive CCD, then could it be possible that the stars would become visible during the day, because then that camera would be able to capture very faint light?

[Poutnik]

ewu...@gmail.com posted Sat, 13 Apr 2013 07:40:05 -0700 (PDT)

>
> Why do the headlights of a car Not appear bright/glary, meaning that
> they appear feeble during the day when sun is shining, but the same car
> and same headlights appear bright during the night when there is no
> sun?
>
> Is this because of the contrast? Because during day the background is
> bright (since the sun is shining) but at night the background is dark,
> and also because the pupil of the human eye opens more at night to let
> in more light.
>

This has not much to do with subatomic physics.

It is physiology of human eye,
and its huge adaptability over many orders of intesity scale.

Pupil is just beginning.
It is follow by 2 set of sensors (cones/rods) with different sensitivity
and by postprocessing of signals.


--
Poutnik

[ewu...@gmail.com]

Than you for the response,

[Poutnik]

ewu...@gmail.com posted Tue, 16 Apr 2013 07:34:08 -0700 (PDT)

>
> Than you for the response,

> But, rhe real question is, then what is happening at the sub-atomic level?

There is no need to be hypnotized by subatomic processes,
as there are explanations on biological anatomy level.

> Since Light is composed of photons, every light beam

> is stream of photons, then why can?t we see the photons

> coming from the stars during the day?

If you drop water a drop by drop on the floor, you will notice it.
That is like photons from stars during night.

If you in parallel to that let flow water form gardening pipe
you will not notice if there is extra dropping water a drop by drop.
that is like photons during the day.

If you consider the relatively magnitudes
brightest star Sirius cca -1.5
equivalent magnitude of illumination of 1 lux -14
equivalent magnitude of illumination of 10000 lux -24
equivalent magnitude of 100000 lux of day light -26.5

The ration of illumination by brightest star and by sun
is magnitude 25. Each difference of 5 is ration 1 to 100
Therefore total ratio is 1 : 10 000 000 000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_magnitude

> Does this mean that the photons
> are interacting/intercepting/colliding, on a subatomic level?

Is it clear now it has nothing to do with subatomic processes ?

> If there was some very hi-tech camera,
> with a very large aperture and an unflawed & very sensitive CCD,
> then could it be possible
> that the stars would become visible during the day,
> because then that camera would be able to capture very faint light?

Rather the sensitive sensor would get blind by day light.


--
Poutnik

[Y.Porat]

----------------------
==================
see Google
the Y Porat model - an abstract

ATB
Y.Porat
=======================================

[ewu...@gmail.com]

Thank you for response.

[ewu...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, April 21, 2013 12:35:21 PM UTC+5:30, Y.Porat wrote:

1. So the answer to my question is that in presence or in front of a brighter source of light or a bright light, the dimmer/faint light source(s) will be washed out and will Not be visible.

2. This is just like, that, when during the day the sun is shining and the stars are not visible and the stars are washed put by the sun, and at night the stars are visible.

But,
3. Since light is made up of photons, and photons do not collide/intercept/run into each other, then they(the stars – point no. 2) should be visible.

4. I can’t understand that why the stars are not visible when during the day even if they are dim/faint sources of light and the sun is a bright source of light, based on the 3rd point,based on the 3rd point. That is why I had mentioned in my earlier posts that, “If there was some very hi-tech camera, with a very large aperture and an unflawed & very sensitive CCD, then could it be possible that the stars would become visible during the day, because then that camera would be able to capture very faint light?? ”