|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Ian Witham wrote:
> I think someone in the group doing high-school science should be kind enough
> to conduct a little experiment for Tom.... As for me, I believe there would
> be no shadow of the flame (certainly not a purple shadow) just the shadow of
> turbulated air (but no suggestions on how to do that sorry).
I haven't checked but I don't see how a flame could have a shadow other than the
turbulated air. Fire is just energy, no? Well, the stuff burning/smoke, but in
this case just clean-burning gas and oxygen so no noticeable shadow from that.
As for the flame itself, I think if you have a real good one going there should
be a more definite, more saturated inner cone/parabola with a thin aura around
it, but depending upon what's behind it it can show up very well or almost not
at all. (And man did we have a hot one going on Wednesday!)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricy net> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |