GrimDude wrote:
> 
> Nathan,
> 
>   I posted that I liked the keyword quanta, but I thought I would pass along
> a few other ideas. :)
> 
>   The following are listed in no particular order. If I have their meaning
> wrong it is due to ignorance and age. It's been at least five years since I
> read anything of Quantum Mechanics, Properties of Light, etc.
> 
> discrete (discretion) - makes more sense given the nature of the variable
> saturation  - hey, self-evident
> Planck - Not precise, but appropriate nonetheless
> energy - kind of like discrete (more energy = more space)
> intensity - appropriate given your formula in place (probably most
> appropriate)
> 
>   Forgive me. I spent a sleepless night and this just wouldn't leave my
> thoughts.
> 
> GrimDude
> vos### [at] arkansasnet

 I too suggested intensity as an approprate term but I think that
I would lead to even more confusion. Too many people are going
to associate the term with the brightness level of light, and the
return of brightness from the photons, as a result of adjustemnting
this parameter. While it is true that there will be a difference
in the over all intensity of the light returned by adjusting this
it is a bit misleading as to thr why it does this. It isn't
implicit that the density or the photon pattern is increased
or decread by paramter as well as other terms might.

Saturation is good if not a bit lengthy, discreate a bit too vague,
energy too misleading, and no way am I going to walk (with) the
planck.

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message