bernard cleyet <firstname.lastname@example.org>UnsubscribeTo:email@example.comCc:Bob Holmstrom,Bryan Mumford
Mon, Oct 11 at 4:14 AM
Anyone with access?
I can’t believe it, You-all are so poor you won’t pay the $12 or $20 necessary to view more than the abstract?
Because I recently inherited over a million dollars from my dead wife, (Don’t ask me about grief, except I’ll volunteer it’s given me dangerously high blood pressure.) I spent the money. After skimming the Wiley fine print, I decided that I wasn’t in violation if I posted in a non-profit way. Besides there’s fair use also. So it’s here:
However, I’m still in poverty mode, so I paid the minimum, i.e., only a 24 hour view. Their app. may be sophisticated enough for it to disappear tomorrow.
bc …. skimmed the article, and apparently it is quite complete in explanation of the interference effects.
Bernard,I am indeed sorry for your loss; a fate to which we are all directed. I am grateful for the full text of your cite. (I will be so ungrateful as to observe that a citation to a work behind a pay-wall amounts to advertizing copy for a technical publisher)
I examined the paper carefully. I noticed that at the half way point, the authors had confirmed that a shiny steel coin does indeed progress from light straw to blue, by degrees, when placed on a hot-plate at 423K . The next page was to account for the reason why the color progression was ordered in that way. I found this explanation disappointing. Their model supposed there could be several circuits of the CIE color horse-shoe, limited possibly by magnetite's progression to blackness by increasing absorption. I can credit them with confirming that optical index does indeed increase at increasing light frequencies; and that the magnetite layer thickness does increase at increased dwell times. The numeric relation between these properties was not quite clear to me however.