Re: [Phys-l] optical center : real-life physics

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

"sounds good" to me

Of course it is a "point" (requires beam of no diameter), otherwise no 
movement  (because it's symmetrical) , but it will cause initial 
convergence (+ lens).

bc


alex brown wrote:

> So you're treating the lens as something that transform the light (It has a tranformation matrix) and you have found the point on the lens where the beam does not get transformed... Or atleast the transformation is that of space.  I think I understand that...
>   
>  So you then say that there should be something equivalent in an optical system this is because you can treat it as a black box with a single transformation matrix.  This single matrix is determined by the transformation matrices of its component parts.  There will be a point on the input lens which will be equivelent to when there is no optical system present at all...  Thinking in terms of matrices....  like a unit matrix with one along its matrix...
>   
>  Is this the correct way to thjink of it?...
>   
>  Thanks for the interesting post
>  ALex
>
> John Denker <jsd@av8n.com> wrote:
>  On 06/11/2007 05:24 PM, alex brown wrote:
>  
>
> > What principles did you use to find the optical centre of the lens
> >    
>
>  
cut