1
The Roundtable / Re: Titanic tourist sub goes missing
« Last post by 230RN on Today at 06:57:36 AM »I figured the indices for salt water and regular old "glass" were close enough to make it hard to find fragments, viz. the marble in (assumedly tap) water as a demonstration.
IIRC Optical glass has a very high refractive index for lens purposes. I vaguely recall that "optical" glass had lead in it and the lenses were advertised as containing lead. I also recall that lead lenses were soft and easily scratched.
A lot of the assumed visibility would depend on the angle of incidence of the illumination. Down there in the depths, the surveillance device would probably have the lighting close to the viewing lens, so reflections would be pretty much at a minimum except for the angles around the breakage lines, if any. Sidelighting would make the searched-for glass fragments more visible.
Anyhow, my musey little brain had to laugh at the submarine's window being submerged in miles and miles of glycerin.
Terry, 230RN
IIRC Optical glass has a very high refractive index for lens purposes. I vaguely recall that "optical" glass had lead in it and the lenses were advertised as containing lead. I also recall that lead lenses were soft and easily scratched.
A lot of the assumed visibility would depend on the angle of incidence of the illumination. Down there in the depths, the surveillance device would probably have the lighting close to the viewing lens, so reflections would be pretty much at a minimum except for the angles around the breakage lines, if any. Sidelighting would make the searched-for glass fragments more visible.
Anyhow, my musey little brain had to laugh at the submarine's window being submerged in miles and miles of glycerin.
Terry, 230RN