"Demosthenes" wrote in message
...

snip

but the flicker phenomenon would still occur.

I have no opinion on the issue one way or the other, but would like to
contribute a bit of mechanical knowledge of how modern film projectors work
(based on experiential as well as technical knowledge from the field). The
reason for the flicker is because the bulbs that put light on the screen are
filled with compressed xenon gas. Being a noble gas, it takes a lot of
electricity to light up the bulb-4000 watts, in fact, for an average bulb.
The electrons jump from one segment of the filament to the other, creating
an arc. As the bulbs age, pits are formed in the filaments, which causes
the arc to jump from one area to another.

Up close, the effect it is not visible, but since the light throw is upwards
of 300+ feet in large auditoriums, the small movements are magnified
immensely just as the 35mm print is magnified to 70' diagonal.

So, if you see a picture that moves, flickers, or dims and brightens
noticeably, that means that the bulb is approaching the end of its useful
life and needs to be replaced.

Hope this adds a little something!

steveo

George Hammond wrote:

[food for SpamBot's removed...]

TMG
Wake
ZenIsWhen
Schornak
Stew Dean
Tom Capizzi
Dan Skunk
Toupin
Gary Eickmeier
Dudley
Mark Martin
Midjis
Isham
JohnM
Don Freeman
hanson
Cardinal Chunder
Micheal Gray
Nosterill
Clive
Steve Ralph
Androcoles
Demosthenes
Zagan


24 and growing.


Greetings from Augsburg

Bernhard Schornak

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 01:00:42 -0700, "steveo" wrote:


"Demosthenes" wrote in message
...

snip

but the flicker phenomenon would still occur.

I have no opinion on the issue one way or the other, but would like to
contribute a bit of mechanical knowledge of how modern film projectors work
(based on experiential as well as technical knowledge from the field). The
reason for the flicker is because the bulbs that put light on the screen are
filled with compressed xenon gas. Being a noble gas, it takes a lot of
electricity to light up the bulb-4000 watts, in fact, for an average bulb.
The electrons jump from one segment of the filament to the other, creating
an arc. As the bulbs age, pits are formed in the filaments, which causes
the arc to jump from one area to another.

Up close, the effect it is not visible, but since the light throw is upwards
of 300+ feet in large auditoriums, the small movements are magnified
immensely just as the 35mm print is magnified to 70' diagonal.

So, if you see a picture that moves, flickers, or dims and brightens
noticeably, that means that the bulb is approaching the end of its useful
life and needs to be replaced.

Hope this adds a little something!

steveo


[Hammond]
Na... the legendary "flicker" (which is why movies are called
"flicks") does not come from the bulbs.

It is known that 15-16 frames/sec is the "Picture Fusion Frequency"
of the average adult (IQ=100). This is why 16 frames/sec was
the STANDARD in silent Films.

However, movie makers (as early as 1880's) discovered that this
caised an annoying 16 Hz "flicker"... even though the movies
themselves were not jittering or anything. They quicly realized
that there are TWO major biological effects in movies:

1. The Picture Fusion Frequency (PFF) which is about 15 frames/sec
and is based on the perceptual speed of the BRAIN.

2. The Flicker Fusion Frequency (FFF) which is 50-60 Hz and is
a biological charactistic of the EYE.

What they discovered is that by "double shuttering" the movie
(i.e. showing each frame twice, but still maintaining 16 fps),
they could DOUBLE the Flicker Frequency without changing the
Frame Rate.

When "talkies" came out, they had to bump the frame/rate up to 24
frames/sec to keep the sound track from warbling, and using
double shuttering that then raised the Flicker Rate to 48 Hz where it
remains to this day.

The REASON (in hindsight) that Silent Film makers discovered that
the minimum rame rate had to be 16 frames/sec, is because (as
modern Science has discovered) the human brain only operates at
a "mental speed" of 15 bits/second of information processing
speed. (see: http://www.v-weiss.de/lehrl-full.html ).
It turns out that the perceptual desicison answer to the question:
"Is the picture I'm seeing the same as the last one or different"...
requires one-bit of information processing (Yes-No), and that is
WHY the Picture Fusion Frequency of the average adult is in
fact 15 frames/sec which is the figure on which the ENTIRE
MOVIE INDUSTRY is founded, and was discovered apparently
by Thomas Edison himself.. or possibly earlier!

Interestingly, the PFF is VERY SENSITIVE to Intelligence. In fact
it has been shown (Riedel 1966) that the PFF of a 7 year old is
only 10 frames/sec, but that for a 15 year old it is 15 frames/sec..
a wopping 33% increase. This of course is because a 15 year old is
33% more intelligent that a 7 year old, just due to brain growth!

Amaxingly therefore, we now see that the MOVIE INDUSTRY has
discovered the world's first scientific proof of God... since it is
known (the Secular Trend) that average adult is only about 80%
fully grown... this means that about 20% of the ordinary motion
of the world is INVISIBLE to us... just like 33% of the world is
INVISIBLE to a 7 year old as compared to an adult.

This INVISIBLE WORLD is called "HEAVEN" in the Bible... and in
fact this INVISIBLE WORLD is the "Supernatural World" of ordinary
Religion.

Thus MOVIE FILM TECHNOLOGY has provided us with the world's
first actual SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD!

It's been sitting there right under our noses for 100 years... and
HAMMOND is the first one to notice it!

THOMAS EDISON was the first one to produce an experimental
proof of God.........How's that grab you?


========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 01:00:42 -0700, "steveo" wrote:


"Demosthenes" wrote in message
...

snip

but the flicker phenomenon would still occur.

I have no opinion on the issue one way or the other, but would like to
contribute a bit of mechanical knowledge of how modern film projectors work
(based on experiential as well as technical knowledge from the field). The
reason for the flicker is because the bulbs that put light on the screen are
filled with compressed xenon gas. Being a noble gas, it takes a lot of
electricity to light up the bulb-4000 watts, in fact, for an average bulb.
The electrons jump from one segment of the filament to the other, creating
an arc. As the bulbs age, pits are formed in the filaments, which causes
the arc to jump from one area to another.

Up close, the effect it is not visible, but since the light throw is upwards
of 300+ feet in large auditoriums, the small movements are magnified
immensely just as the 35mm print is magnified to 70' diagonal.

So, if you see a picture that moves, flickers, or dims and brightens
noticeably, that means that the bulb is approaching the end of its useful
life and needs to be replaced.

Hope this adds a little something!

steveo


[Hammond]
Na... the legendary "flicker" (which is why movies are called
"flicks") does not come from the bulbs.

It is known that 15-16 frames/sec is the "Picture Fusion Frequency"
of the average adult (IQ=100). This is why 16 frames/sec was
the STANDARD in silent Films.

However, movie makers (as early as 1880's) discovered that this
caised an annoying 16 Hz "flicker"... even though the movies
themselves were not jittering or anything. They quicly realized
that there are TWO major biological effects in movies:

1. The Picture Fusion Frequency (PFF) which is about 15 frames/sec
and is based on the perceptual speed of the BRAIN.

2. The Flicker Fusion Frequency (FFF) which is 50-60 Hz and is
a biological charactistic of the EYE.

What they discovered is that by "double shuttering" the movie
(i.e. showing each frame twice, but still maintaining 16 fps),
they could DOUBLE the Flicker Frequency without changing the
Frame Rate.

When "talkies" came out, they had to bump the frame/rate up to 24
frames/sec to keep the sound track from warbling, and using
double shuttering that then raised the Flicker Rate to 48 Hz where it
remains to this day.

The REASON (in hindsight) that Silent Film makers discovered that
the minimum rame rate had to be 16 frames/sec, is because (as
modern Science has discovered) the human brain only operates at
a "mental speed" of 15 bits/second of information processing
speed. (see: http://www.v-weiss.de/lehrl-full.html ).
It turns out that the perceptual desicison answer to the question:
"Is the picture I'm seeing the same as the last one or different"...
requires one-bit of information processing (Yes-No), and that is
WHY the Picture Fusion Frequency of the average adult is in
fact 15 frames/sec which is the figure on which the ENTIRE
MOVIE INDUSTRY is founded, and was discovered apparently
by Thomas Edison himself.. or possibly earlier!

Interestingly, the PFF is VERY SENSITIVE to Intelligence. In fact
it has been shown (Riedel 1966) that the PFF of a 7 year old is
only 10 frames/sec, but that for a 15 year old it is 15 frames/sec..
a wopping 33% increase. This of course is because a 15 year old is
33% more intelligent that a 7 year old, just due to brain growth!

Amaxingly therefore, we now see that the MOVIE INDUSTRY has
discovered the world's first scientific proof of God... since it is
known (the Secular Trend) that average adult is only about 80%
fully grown... this means that about 20% of the ordinary motion
of the world is INVISIBLE to us... just like 33% of the world is
INVISIBLE to a 7 year old as compared to an adult.

This INVISIBLE WORLD is called "HEAVEN" in the Bible... and in
fact this INVISIBLE WORLD is the "Supernatural World" of ordinary
Religion.

Thus MOVIE FILM TECHNOLOGY has provided us with the world's
first actual SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD!

It's been sitting there right under our noses for 100 years... and
HAMMOND is the first one to notice it!

THOMAS EDISON was the first one to produce an experimental
proof of God.........How's that grab you?


========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 01:00:42 -0700, "steveo" wrote:


"Demosthenes" wrote in message
...

snip

but the flicker phenomenon would still occur.

I have no opinion on the issue one way or the other, but would like to
contribute a bit of mechanical knowledge of how modern film projectors work
(based on experiential as well as technical knowledge from the field). The
reason for the flicker is because the bulbs that put light on the screen are
filled with compressed xenon gas. Being a noble gas, it takes a lot of
electricity to light up the bulb-4000 watts, in fact, for an average bulb.
The electrons jump from one segment of the filament to the other, creating
an arc. As the bulbs age, pits are formed in the filaments, which causes
the arc to jump from one area to another.

Up close, the effect it is not visible, but since the light throw is upwards
of 300+ feet in large auditoriums, the small movements are magnified
immensely just as the 35mm print is magnified to 70' diagonal.

So, if you see a picture that moves, flickers, or dims and brightens
noticeably, that means that the bulb is approaching the end of its useful
life and needs to be replaced.

Hope this adds a little something!

steveo


[Hammond]
Na... the legendary "flicker" (which is why movies are called
"flicks") does not come from the bulbs.

It is known that 15-16 frames/sec is the "Picture Fusion Frequency"
of the average adult (IQ=100). This is why 16 frames/sec was
the STANDARD in silent Films.

However, movie makers (as early as 1880's) discovered that this
caised an annoying 16 Hz "flicker"... even though the movies
themselves were not jittering or anything. They quicly realized
that there are TWO major biological effects in movies:

1. The Picture Fusion Frequency (PFF) which is about 15 frames/sec
and is based on the perceptual speed of the BRAIN.

2. The Flicker Fusion Frequency (FFF) which is 50-60 Hz and is
a biological charactistic of the EYE.

What they discovered is that by "double shuttering" the movie
(i.e. showing each frame twice, but still maintaining 16 fps),
they could DOUBLE the Flicker Frequency without changing the
Frame Rate.

When "talkies" came out, they had to bump the frame/rate up to 24
frames/sec to keep the sound track from warbling, and using
double shuttering that then raised the Flicker Rate to 48 Hz where it
remains to this day.

The REASON (in hindsight) that Silent Film makers discovered that
the minimum rame rate had to be 16 frames/sec, is because (as
modern Science has discovered) the human brain only operates at
a "mental speed" of 15 bits/second of information processing
speed. (see: http://www.v-weiss.de/lehrl-full.html ).
It turns out that the perceptual desicison answer to the question:
"Is the picture I'm seeing the same as the last one or different"...
requires one-bit of information processing (Yes-No), and that is
WHY the Picture Fusion Frequency of the average adult is in
fact 15 frames/sec which is the figure on which the ENTIRE
MOVIE INDUSTRY is founded, and was discovered apparently
by Thomas Edison himself.. or possibly earlier!

Interestingly, the PFF is VERY SENSITIVE to Intelligence. In fact
it has been shown (Riedel 1966) that the PFF of a 7 year old is
only 10 frames/sec, but that for a 15 year old it is 15 frames/sec..
a wopping 33% increase. This of course is because a 15 year old is
33% more intelligent that a 7 year old, just due to brain growth!

Amaxingly therefore, we now see that the MOVIE INDUSTRY has
discovered the world's first scientific proof of God... since it is
known (the Secular Trend) that average adult is only about 80%
fully grown... this means that about 20% of the ordinary motion
of the world is INVISIBLE to us... just like 33% of the world is
INVISIBLE to a 7 year old as compared to an adult.

This INVISIBLE WORLD is called "HEAVEN" in the Bible... and in
fact this INVISIBLE WORLD is the "Supernatural World" of ordinary
Religion.

Thus MOVIE FILM TECHNOLOGY has provided us with the world's
first actual SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD!

It's been sitting there right under our noses for 100 years... and
HAMMOND is the first one to notice it!

THOMAS EDISON was the first one to produce an experimental
proof of God.........How's that grab you?


========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
This INVISIBLE WORLD is called "HEAVEN" in the Bible... and in
fact this INVISIBLE WORLD is the "Supernatural World" of ordinary
Religion.

"ordinary religion" ????


Thus MOVIE FILM TECHNOLOGY has provided us with the world's
first actual SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD!

gibberish

It's been sitting there right under our noses for 100 years... and
HAMMOND is the first one to notice it!

egotistical nonsense.

THOMAS EDISON was the first one to produce an experimental
proof of God.........How's that grab you?


well its as crackpot as we should expect from you.

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 07:01:12 GMT, "Brian Fletcher"
wrote:

Have you read David Deuche's "Fabric Of Reality"?


[Hammond]
That's " Deutsch" not Douche.

Anyway, my impression of Deutsch is the old Polish proverb
which says:

"If you aren't powerful enough to discover a simple
theory.. then you had better look for a complicated
one."

His explaination of parallel realities and "multiverse", was far more simple
that those who try to pack all the evidence into one plane of reality.



I'm not impressed with complicated theories. I like simple
theories like "GOD=G_uv" for instance.



He is a quantum scientist who came up with similar conclusions. What I
found
interesting (and confirming as a layman) was many of his peers reject his
conclusions.


[Hammond]
That's the price you pay for the sin of having peers. As far
as I know I don't have any peers.

My view. He may refer to them as colleagues.


The conformation for me was "awareness is not directly proportional to
intellectual capacity".

BrianOfLife


[Hammond]
There is only one thing to be "aware" of and that is God... namely
the fact that no one is fully grown, and therefore no one is actually
in true reality. The person who is AWARE of that, is said to be an
"aware" person. Humility by the way, is the first sign of such an
awareness.

In the sense that God =All there is, there is always another step to take on
the eternal journey.

One moves through the relative stages of awareness, (group consciousness),
to self realisation and beyond.

The authentic self finds balance between hu-manity and hu-mility.


Anyway, congratulations for not making my killfile list on the first
shot. FYI for other's reading this list, my master killfile list now
reads:

You too :-)

BrianOfLife







TMG
Wake
ZenIsWhen
Schornak
Stew Dean
Tom Capizzi
Dan Skunk
Toupin
Gary Eickmeier
Dudley
Mark Martin
Midjis
Isham
JohnM
Don Freeman
hanson hanson.quick.net
Cardinal Chunder
Micheal Gray
Nosterill
Clive
Steve Ralph
Androcoles
Demosthenes
Zagan OSPAM



========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================

I would guess the implanting of subliminal advertising frames within a
movie has something to do with this. Was it tested on both children and
grown ups? Also, could the
eye also be responsible for this effect. After a flash of light, we continue
to see the flash for awhile. I would guess that this could be interpreted as
a form of memory. Is it different for a child than it is for a grown up?


Andre


George Hammond wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 01:00:42 -0700, "steveo" wrote:


"Demosthenes" wrote in message
...

snip

but the flicker phenomenon would still occur.

I have no opinion on the issue one way or the other, but would like to
contribute a bit of mechanical knowledge of how modern film projectors
work
(based on experiential as well as technical knowledge from the field).
The
reason for the flicker is because the bulbs that put light on the screen
are
filled with compressed xenon gas. Being a noble gas, it takes a lot of
electricity to light up the bulb-4000 watts, in fact, for an average
bulb.
The electrons jump from one segment of the filament to the other,
creating
an arc. As the bulbs age, pits are formed in the filaments, which causes
the arc to jump from one area to another.

Up close, the effect it is not visible, but since the light throw is
upwards
of 300+ feet in large auditoriums, the small movements are magnified
immensely just as the 35mm print is magnified to 70' diagonal.

So, if you see a picture that moves, flickers, or dims and brightens
noticeably, that means that the bulb is approaching the end of its useful
life and needs to be replaced.

Hope this adds a little something!

steveo


[Hammond]
Na... the legendary "flicker" (which is why movies are called
"flicks") does not come from the bulbs.

It is known that 15-16 frames/sec is the "Picture Fusion Frequency"
of the average adult (IQ=100). This is why 16 frames/sec was
the STANDARD in silent Films.

However, movie makers (as early as 1880's) discovered that this
caised an annoying 16 Hz "flicker"... even though the movies
themselves were not jittering or anything. They quicly realized
that there are TWO major biological effects in movies:

1. The Picture Fusion Frequency (PFF) which is about 15 frames/sec
and is based on the perceptual speed of the BRAIN.

2. The Flicker Fusion Frequency (FFF) which is 50-60 Hz and is
a biological charactistic of the EYE.

What they discovered is that by "double shuttering" the movie
(i.e. showing each frame twice, but still maintaining 16 fps),
they could DOUBLE the Flicker Frequency without changing the
Frame Rate.

When "talkies" came out, they had to bump the frame/rate up to 24
frames/sec to keep the sound track from warbling, and using
double shuttering that then raised the Flicker Rate to 48 Hz where it
remains to this day.

The REASON (in hindsight) that Silent Film makers discovered that
the minimum rame rate had to be 16 frames/sec, is because (as
modern Science has discovered) the human brain only operates at
a "mental speed" of 15 bits/second of information processing
speed. (see: http://www.v-weiss.de/lehrl-full.html ).
It turns out that the perceptual desicison answer to the question:
"Is the picture I'm seeing the same as the last one or different"...
requires one-bit of information processing (Yes-No), and that is
WHY the Picture Fusion Frequency of the average adult is in
fact 15 frames/sec which is the figure on which the ENTIRE
MOVIE INDUSTRY is founded, and was discovered apparently
by Thomas Edison himself.. or possibly earlier!

Interestingly, the PFF is VERY SENSITIVE to Intelligence. In fact
it has been shown (Riedel 1966) that the PFF of a 7 year old is
only 10 frames/sec, but that for a 15 year old it is 15 frames/sec..
a wopping 33% increase. This of course is because a 15 year old is
33% more intelligent that a 7 year old, just due to brain growth!

Amaxingly therefore, we now see that the MOVIE INDUSTRY has
discovered the world's first scientific proof of God... since it is
known (the Secular Trend) that average adult is only about 80%
fully grown... this means that about 20% of the ordinary motion
of the world is INVISIBLE to us... just like 33% of the world is
INVISIBLE to a 7 year old as compared to an adult.

This INVISIBLE WORLD is called "HEAVEN" in the Bible... and in
fact this INVISIBLE WORLD is the "Supernatural World" of ordinary
Religion.

Thus MOVIE FILM TECHNOLOGY has provided us with the world's
first actual SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD!

It's been sitting there right under our noses for 100 years... and
HAMMOND is the first one to notice it!

THOMAS EDISON was the first one to produce an experimental
proof of God.........How's that grab you?


========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 07:01:12 GMT, "Brian Fletcher"
wrote:

Have you read David Deuche's "Fabric Of Reality"?


[Hammond]
That's " Deutsch" not Douche.
Anyway, my impression of Deutsch is the old Polish proverb
which says:

"If you aren't powerful enough to discover a simple
theory.. then you had better look for a complicated
one."

I'm not impressed with complicated theories. I like simple
theories like "GOD=G_uv" for instance.



He is a quantum scientist who came up with similar conclusions. What I
found
interesting (and confirming as a layman) was many of his peers reject his
conclusions.


[Hammond]
That's the price you pay for the sin of having peers. As far
as I know I don't have any peers.

Sure you do ...... they're all in the insane asylums.

"steveo" wrote in message
news:LqBNe.5666$Us5.2623@fed1read02...

"Demosthenes" wrote in message
...

snip

but the flicker phenomenon would still occur.

I have no opinion on the issue one way or the other, but would like to
contribute a bit of mechanical knowledge of how modern film projectors
work (based on experiential as well as technical knowledge from the
field). The reason for the flicker is because the bulbs that put light on
the screen are filled with compressed xenon gas. Being a noble gas, it
takes a lot of electricity to light up the bulb-4000 watts, in fact, for
an average bulb. The electrons jump from one segment of the filament to
the other, creating an arc. As the bulbs age, pits are formed in the
filaments, which causes the arc to jump from one area to another.

Up close, the effect it is not visible, but since the light throw is
upwards of 300+ feet in large auditoriums, the small movements are
magnified immensely just as the 35mm print is magnified to 70' diagonal.

So, if you see a picture that moves, flickers, or dims and brightens
noticeably, that means that the bulb is approaching the end of its useful
life and needs to be replaced.

Hope this adds a little something!

steveo

Sorry Steve, but that's wrong.

There are three reasons why:
One is the fact that common bulbs CANNOT turn off an on instantaneously -
there is ALWAYS a shut down rate in which the light is still there.

That is why, in projectors as well as optical labs (I worked in the Optical
Physics lab at Westinghouse Research), a shutter is always used to control
the light.

Second - any "pitting" in the film is negligible as far as the light is
concerned - the "arcing" travels so fast, it doesn't matter.

Third - if what you say about the light and distance is correct - the
further away from the projector - the slower the movement of the characters
on the screen would appear. (making drive in movies impossible).

300 feet is nothing at 186,000 miles per second.