The stereoscope : $b its history, theory, and construction, with its application to the fine and useful arts and to education — John Shaqi
The stereoscope : $b its history, theory, and construction, with its application to the fine and useful arts and to educationBrewster, David
History
The stereoscope : $b its history, theory, and construction, with its application to the fine and useful arts and to education
Brewster, David
Stereoscope
We have already seen, in the history of the stereoscope, that in
the binocular vision of objects, each eye sees a different picture
of the same object. In order to prove this, we require only to look
attentively at our own hand held up before us, and observe how some
parts of it disappear upon closing each eye. This experiment proves, at
the same time, in opposition to the opinion of Baptista Porta, Tacquet,
and others, that we always see two pictures of the same object combined
in one. In confirmation of this fact, we have only to push aside one
eye, and observe the image which belongs to it separate from the other,
and again unite with it when the pressure is removed.
It might have been supposed that an object seen by both eyes would be
seen twice as brightly as with one, on the same principle as the light
of two candles combined is twice as bright as the light of one. That
this is not the case has been long known, and Dr. Jurin has proved
by experiments, which we have carefully repeated and found correct,
that the brightness of objects seen with two eyes is only ¹/₁₃th part
greater than when they are seen with one eye.[32] The cause of this
is well known. When both eyes are used, the pupils of each contract
so as to admit the proper quantity of light; but the moment we shut
the right eye, the pupil of the left dilates to nearly twice its size,
to compensate for the loss of light arising from the shutting of the
other.[33]
[32] Smith’s _Opticks_, vol. ii., Remarks, p. 107. Harris makes the
difference ¹/₁₀th or ¹/₁₁th; _Optics_, p. 117.
[33] This variation of the pupil is mentioned by Bacon.
[Illustration: FIG. 6.]
This beautiful provision to supply the proper quantity of light when
we can use only one eye, answers a still more important purpose, which
has escaped the notice of optical writers. In binocular vision, as we
have just seen, certain parts of objects are seen with both eyes, and
certain parts only with one; so that, if the parts seen with both eyes
were twice as bright, or even much brighter than the parts seen with
one, the object would appear spotted, from the different brightness of
its parts. In Fig. 6, for example, (see p. 14,) the areas BFI and CGI,
the former of which is seen only by the left eye, D, and the latter
only by the right eye, E, and the corresponding areas on the other side
of the sphere, would be only half as bright as the portion FIGH, seen
with both eyes, and the sphere would have a singular appearance.
It has long been, and still is, a vexed question among philosophers,
how we see objects single with two eyes. Baptista Porta, Tacquet, and
others, got over the difficulty by denying the fact, and maintaining
that we use only one eye, while other philosophers of distinguished
eminence have adopted explanations still more groundless. The law of
visible direction supplies us with the true explanation.
[Illustration: FIG. 7.]
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