What is the minimum number of physical properties of an unknown glass sample that must be known to theoretically determine its refractive index—without using ray tracing? Are there cases where this theoretical method yields a refractive index different from the actual one (as determined by ray tracing)?
Suppose we want to obtain a figure from the sum of three numbers such that a^n+b^n=c^n. If we consider n dimensions starting from n=1, we obtain:
n=1: (It's impossible to obtain a figure even if, for example, a^1+b^1=c^1.)
n=2: Possible! (Right-angled triangle).
n=3 (Impossible?) The figure would be a triangular prism, but it turns out that a^3+b^3<>c^3. That is, the sum of the volumes of the cubes built on the legs is not equal to the volume of the cube built on the hypotenuse!
n=4 ?
Why does it seem to be possible only for n=2?
Can accommodative support (AS) lenses (e.g., Essilor Eyezen, Hoya Sync III, Zeiss SmartLife Digital Rodenstok Mono Plus,..) also be useful for
a) emmetropic eyes or
b) nearsighted people who are not farsighted?
Are there websites or advanced courses (MOOCs or e-learning) that explain visual analysis methods to distinguish real photos from those generated by AI or inauthentic?
https://i.redd.it/e3ezl5gwwxxg1.gif
What method do you use to find the real angle γ, if you only know its projections?
The drawing shows a light ray in a vacuum before passing through the atmosphere, or in any case, a different medium.
