Were they left visually impaired?
Thanks Laurel. I'm referring to its final, unsuccesful flight.
Related posts:
Search For:
Recommended
- Do people still take binoculars to sporting events?
- Lenspen LENHTPE Hunterpro Elite Kit For Binoculars And Spotting Scopes
- 40x-1600x Binocular Microscope + Mech Stage + PC Camera
- Brunton NRA 10 X 42 Binocular
- Astounding Hunting Binocular: Alpen Shasta Ridge 386SR 8.5x50 Video
- Arm Stag
- Waterproof Long
- Bushnell Car Window Mount
- NCAA Kansas State Wildcats High Powered Compact Binoculars
- Nude Beach Borders
Categories
Tags
8x42 10x25, 10x42 10x50 angle astronomy Barska best binocular binoculars Black bushnell camera carson case compact Digital episode good high hunting lens leupold microscope night nikon onlywire optics pair photography Porro Prism Riflescope roof scope Series shopping Sindhuram spotting telescope telescopes video vision waterproof zoomArchives
- February 2012 (40)
- January 2012 (101)
- December 2011 (146)
- November 2011 (157)
- October 2011 (212)
- September 2011 (182)
- August 2011 (194)
- July 2011 (213)
- June 2011 (272)
- May 2011 (369)
- April 2011 (497)
- March 2011 (375)
- February 2011 (156)
- January 2011 (249)
- December 2010 (250)
- November 2010 (247)
- October 2010 (387)
- September 2010 (517)
- August 2010 (232)
- July 2010 (78)
- June 2010 (88)
- May 2010 (87)
- April 2010 (89)
- March 2010 (89)
- February 2010 (84)
- January 2010 (90)
- December 2009 (103)
- November 2009 (85)
- October 2009 (84)
- September 2009 (73)
- August 2009 (74)
- July 2009 (51)
- June 2009 (42)
- May 2009 (41)
- April 2009 (36)
- March 2009 (33)
Twitter
No.
Why would they be? The explosion was bright, but no where near bright enough to harm one’s eyes.
Doubt it, the challenger made a large explosion but it didn’t make the sun’s equivalent of light. Besides, those watching the challenger explode through binoculars would simply remove the binoculars when they noticed the Challenger exploded.
They just got a better look at it.
You seem to have a thing about binoculars.
Some people were watching it through small telescopes, others through giant zoom lenses. None of them reported any vision problems.
The potential for harm comes from the light-gathering power.
The average pupil opening (for a human eye) is taken as being 1/4 of an inch (or 7 mm) for calculation purposes.
A 7 x 50 binocular has an aperture of 50 mm (per barrel). The light gathering power varies as the square of the aperture: (50/7)^2 = 51
Thus each eye receives 51 times more light when looking through a 7 x 50 binocular.
When looking through a 6-inch telescope (150 mm), the ratio becomes (150/7)^2 = 460 times. And these observers were not harmed. That is what leads me to conclude that observers with binoculars were also not harmed.
But they were in shock.
—
The brightness of the explosion (in terms of watts per square metre of luminosity) was not much more than the intensity of the “flame” shooting out of the rockets at take-off. After all, it is the same kind of “explosion”, except that the Challenger explosion was less controlled than the normal outcast of a normally-working rocket.
More energy was released in a unit of time, but it was released in all directions, so the overall intensity was not much higher.
You might want to clarify which Challenger flight you mean; you seem to be referring to the STS-51L disaster, but Challenger had nine successful flights before that one.