Sorry.....I had no intention on starting a big controversy on lasers, molecules, etc........I personally recommend if someone doesn''t know how a laser works, or is curious about helium, and neon properties, go on down to your local library and check out some books. I''ve been to a library a few times, and it seems to me they have books on most everything you would want to know. I mean.......maybe people on this form know, or maybe they''re just blowing smoke...........but I''m pretty sure if someone got a book published, it''s a pretty reliable source. So, off to the library, folks????

Be glad nobody has mentioned NeHe''s other site yet HotRod: NeXe. Should yeild some more interesting chemistry discussions... Erm.... OOPS! Me and my big mouth

Nice logo job. If you are going for the molecule image though, I think you should scrap the space ship. I guess the real reason it is in the current logo is to show off enviroment mapping and reflection. Not because it''s a space ship.

If you''re going to another logo I suggest taking a look at new technologies and somehow incorporate these in the logo like a really nice looking shaded object -> pixelshaders. You could shade / bumpmap the NeHe molecule in some very cool way.

Just my Euro 0.02



Sander Maréchal
[Lone Wolves Production][Articles][E-mail]

OK. I''ll end this debate once and for all - http://www.bell-labs.com/history/laser/laser_def.html

You might not believe my explanation, since there are too many empty spaces in it, but you will believe this detailed explanation given by the people who created the laser won''t you?

quote:

---

Original post by smarechal
Be glad nobody has mentioned NeHe''s other site yet HotRod: NeXe. Should yeild some more interesting chemistry discussions... Erm.... OOPS! Me and my big mouth

---

just an FYI:
Jeff Molofee doesnt work on NeXe, just nehe.gamedev.net
NeXe was designed to be the ''directx answer'' to nehe''s site
on openGL.

and my impression of the logos:
i liked the first one the best.. with the blur in the background-
however, im not too keen on the ''theme''.. i''ve never really
understood the connection with nehe''s design and all the spaceship stuff.
the whole molecule theme sounds a whole lot more interesting to me.

-eldee
;another space monkey;
[ Forced Evolution Studios ]

quote:

---

Original post by VXG
OK. I''ll end this debate once and for all - http://www.bell-labs.com/history/laser/laser_def.html

You might not believe my explanation, since there are too many empty spaces in it, but you will believe this detailed explanation given by the people who created the laser won''t you?

---

I''m confused. What does the explanation at that link add to what we''ve been saying? It seems more or less word for word what Yann and myself have been saying, other than that it uses a ruby laser as an example, rather than the contested NeHe laser. I note that nowhere in the explanation does it mention the ionization of the atoms, and it says that the ruby laser (which is a solid laser, mind you) is pumped by visible light rather than the whole zoo of other types you mentioned (most of which made no sense).

It''s important to note that NeHe is a mixed gas rather than a solid, and therefore electrodes are used to pump it (one can calibrate the electrical pulses more easily). This is true of carbon dioxide lasers or any other laser that is gaseous. Please explain what you were trying to prove by linking to that page.

First of all, I proved that radiation is required to produce a laser (radiation types may vary for different types of lasers, and if you still insist that there''s no radiation in a laser beam then you just don''t get it - no matter how a laser beam is started, it is forced to propagate through space by a beam of radiation). Secondly, I never linked ionization directly to a laser. I just said that ionization is required to bond two unreactive molecules together. And personally this is the first time I hear of a NeHe laser, so having heard that it is formed in a chamber filled with neon and helium, I proposed the idea that it might be formed by ionizing the neon and helium atoms, to make them bond and release photons (photons are released due to bombardment by radiation, not due to bonding). To whoever says this is wrong I''ll say "Have you tried it?". Never consider anything impossible until it has been proved to be so - a phrase I sometimes use.

Besides this debate is over. Whoever wants to know how a basic laser works go to that link. I won''t reply to any more remarks about my explanation of laser theory. If you don''t like it, ignore it. This is not a lecture about laser theory. This is a post proposing a new logo for nehe''s site. So you''ve got nothing to complain about. And if someone wants to keep on whining they can go and do it in a turned on cyclotron ;-)

quote:

---

by VXG
When an atom is bombarded by radiation it gets "excited" (this is the actual technical term for this phenomenon), which means that it is given energy and starts vibrating more violently. This excitement of the atom, however, causes it to release some energy by means of light (yes light is energy), namely by photons (which are light particles). There is a way of making photons travel in one direction (I won''t go into such details or it''ll take all day to explain). This produces the laser beam. This means that a laser beam is actually a stream of photons and radiation, travelling in one direction.

---

Well, sort of...

The orbiting electrons are excited to higher energy levels, although they cannot sustain this, so they give out an energy packet ( photon )... since the energy levels are quantized, the amount of energy is the same ( if the electrons are excited to the same energy level ), hence the frequency of the photon is the same. The trick is to get the electrons in different atoms in sync ( so they are excited and give out photons at the same time )... Hence why lasers are a single frequency - because the photons have the same energy. You are mixing up radiation and photons - electromagnetic radiation and photons are one and the same - they are simply different models for describing effects.

Death of one is a tragedy, death of a million is just a statistic.

quote:

---

Original post by VXG
First of all, I proved that radiation is required to produce a laser (radiation types may vary for different types of lasers, and if you still insist that there's no radiation in a laser beam then you just don't get it - no matter how a laser beam is started, it is forced to propagate through space by a beam of radiation).

---

I think that there's been some confusion on the radiation front. You said that "alpha, beta, and gamma radiation" can be used to excite the laser. This is patently false, as all of the above rely on atomic decay, which is neither predictable or able to stimulate an electron. However, it is possible to use electromagnetic radiation, which stimulates the electrons, and soon thereafter helium atoms drop back to the ground state, releasing photons which in turn cause the neon atoms to return to ground state and release photons of their own. This light is (of course) radiation, and I never said otherwise, but I did say that this radiation within the laser wouldn't cause ionization. This brings us to the second point.

quote:

---

Original post by VXG
Secondly, I never linked ionization directly to a laser. I just said that ionization is required to bond two unreactive molecules together. And personally this is the first time I hear of a NeHe laser, so having heard that it is formed in a chamber filled with neon and helium, I proposed the idea that it might be formed by ionizing the neon and helium atoms, to make them bond and release photons (photons are released due to bombardment by radiation, not due to bonding).

---

More accurately, this is what you said:

quote:

---

A NeHe laser can be considered to be produced by ionization (this one's for Mordoch Bob) because the two elements are forced to interact with each other by a blast of radiation. The NeHe laser CAN be started by a flash of light too, but light has much less energy than conventional radiation - alpha, beta, gamma - and it will be more difficult to get atoms excited by a flash of light, so using ionizing radiation, which has the most energy, is the most convenient way of starting up the laser, but because it carries extremely high amounts of energy compared to light, not only will it start the laser, but it will also ionize the neon and helium gas in its path, causing them to bond. Got that?

---

In effect, you're saying that the pumping process causes the ionization of the neon and helium, which while making my point about the laser light not causing ionization moot, is also quite wrong. While alpha, beta, and gamma radiation would cause ionization, they are not used for pumping (see above), and furthermore the pumping process can't cause ionization for it to be successful, as it relies on the electrons staying within the atom's orbitals. Lasing and ionization do not mix, so "proposing" that the laser works by ionizing the gas within is simply wrong.

quote:

---

Original post by VXG
To whoever says this is wrong I'll say "Have you tried it?". Never consider anything impossible until it has been proved to be so - a phrase I sometimes use.

---

I'm sorry, I can't really credit this, because I don't have to prove a thing. The theory behind lasers is proven by the fact that we have CD players, fiber optics, and a whole host of other things out there. The "I might be right because no one's proved me wrong" argument is the last resort of someone who is wrong, and because you're the only one who seems to have this particular conception of the inner workings of a laser, the onus is on you to prove your point. Everyone else has disagreed with your posts, and pointed out the flaws in your thinking. I would suggest that instead of making "proposals" on how a thing might work when you've never heard of it before, you go and do a Google search.

quote:

---

Original post by VXG
Besides this debate is over. Whoever wants to know how a basic laser works go to that link.

---

You're welcome to continue on in your particular mindset, but something about scientific misconceptions just gets to me, so I really would suggest that you follow your own advice.



------------------------------------------------
The wind shear alone from a pink golfball can take the head off a 90-pound midget from 300 yards.

-Six String Samurai

[edited by - Mordoch Bob on June 6, 2002 7:27:26 PM]

Ok.............back to the topic.........Logos. I was really really tired the other night, trying to reinstall some stuff on another hard drive, and i accidentally deleted everything on my main hard drive, so I''ve spent the last couple of days recovering from that. But, I''ll be working on a new logo soon to see what I can come up with. If anyone wants to help me out a bit, just tell me.

Just a note: vertical text should be rotated anti-clockwise on such images, not the other way round.

---
Keep it simple, stupid