The kaleidoscope : $b its history, theory and construction. With its application to the fine and useful arts — John Shaqi
The kaleidoscope : $b its history, theory and construction. With its application to the fine and useful artsBrewster, David
Science
The kaleidoscope : $b its history, theory and construction. With its application to the fine and useful arts
Brewster, David
Kaleidoscopes
We have already seen, that, in order to possess perfect symmetry, an
object must consist of two parts in complete contact, one of which is
an inverted image of the other. But in order that an object possessing
perfect symmetry may appear perfectly symmetrical, four conditions
are required. The two halves of the object must be so placed with
respect to the eye of the observer, that no part of the one half shall
conceal any part of the other; that whatever parts of the one half
are seen, the corresponding parts of the other must also be seen;
and that the corresponding parts of both halves, and both halves
themselves, must subtend the same angle at the eye. When we stand
before a looking-glass, and hold out one hand so as to touch it, the
hand will be found to conceal various parts of its image; and, in
some positions of the eye, the whole image will be concealed, so that
a symmetrical picture cannot possibly be formed by the union of the
two. If the eye is placed so obliquely to the looking-glass, that the
hand no longer interferes with its image, it will still be seen, that
parts of the hand which are not directly visible, are visible in its
reflected image, and therefore that a symmetrical picture cannot be
created by the union of two parts apparently dissimilar. If the eye of
the observer is placed near his hand, so that he can see distinctly
both the hand and its image, the angular magnitude of his hand is much
greater than that of its image; and therefore, when the two are united,
they cannot form a symmetrical object. This will be better understood
from Fig. 15. When the eye is placed at ε, the object =M N O P= is
obviously nearer than its image _m n o p_, and must therefore appear
larger; and this difference in their apparent magnitudes will increase
as the eye rises above the plane of the mirror =A E=. As the eye
approaches to =E=, the distances of the object and its image approach
to an equality; and when the eye is at =E=, the object =M N O P=, and
its image _m n o p_, are situated at exactly the same distance from the
eye, and therefore have the same angular magnitude. Hence it follows,
that when they are united, they will form a perfectly symmetrical
combination.
[Illustration: FIG. 15.]
When the eye is placed in the plane of both the mirrors, the field of
view arising from the multiplication of the sector =A O B=, Fig. 14,
will be perfectly circular; but as the eye rises above the plane of
both the mirrors, this circle will become a sort of ellipse, becoming
more and more eccentric as the eye comes in front of the mirrors, or
rises in the direction =E ε=. If the observer were infinitely distant,
these figures would be correct ellipses; but as the eye, particularly
when the mirrors are broad, must be nearly twice as far from the last
reflected sector as from the sector seen by direct vision, the field
of view, and consequently every pattern which it contains, must be
distorted and destitute of beauty, from this cause alone.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account