Online Encyclopedia

Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.

ILLUMINATION

Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V14, Page 321 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: del.icio.us del.icio.us it!

ILLUMINATION , in See also:

optics, the intensity of the See also:light falling upon a See also:surface. The measurement of the illumination is termed See also:photometry (q.v.). The fundamental See also:law of illumination is that if the See also:medium be transparent the intensity of illumination which a luminous point can produce on a surface directly exposed to it is inversely as the square of the distance. The word trans-See also:parent implies that no light is absorbed or stopped. Whatever, therefore, leaves the source of light must in See also:succession pass through each of a See also:series of spherical surfaces described See also:round the source as centre. The same amount of light falls perpendicularly on all these surfaces in succession. The amount received in a given See also:time by a unit of surface on each is therefore inversely as the number of such See also:units in each. But the surfaces of See also:spheres are as the squares of their radii,—whence the proposition. (We assume here that the velocity of light is See also:constant, and that the source gives out its light uniformly.) When the rays fall otherwise than perpendicularly on the surface, the illumination produced is proportional to the cosine of the See also:angle of obliquity; for the See also:area seen under a given spherical angle increases as the secant of the obliquity, the distance remaining the same. As a corollary to this we have the further proposition that the apparent brightness of a luminous surface (seen through a transparent homogeneous medium) is the same at all distances. The word brightness is here taken as a measure of the amount of light falling on the See also:pupil per unit of spherical angle subtended by the luminous surface. The spherical angle subtended by any small surface whose See also:plane is at right angles to the See also:line of sight is inversely as the square of the distance.

So also is the light received from it. Hence the brightness is the same at all distances. The word brightness is often used (even scientifically) in another sense from that just defined. Thus we speak of a See also:

bright See also:star, of the question—When is See also:Venus at its brightest? &c. Strictly, such expressions are not defensible except for See also:sources of light which (like a star) have no apparent surface, so that we cannot tell from what amount of spherical angle their light appears to come. In that See also:case the spherical angle is, for want of knowledge, assumed to be the same for all, and therefore the brightness of each is now estimated in terms of the whole quantity of light we receive from it. The See also:function of a See also:telescope is to increase the " apparent magnitude " of distant See also:objects; it does not increase the " apparent brightness." If we put out of See also:account the loss of light by reflection at See also:glass surfaces (or by imperfect reflection at metallic surfaces) and by absorption, and suppose that the magnifying See also:power does not exceed the ratio of the See also:aperture of the See also:object-glass to that of the pupil, under which See also:condition the pupil will be filled with light, we may say that the " apparent brightness " is absolutely unchanged by the use of a telescope. In this statement, however, two reservations must be admitted. If the object under examination, like a fixed star, have no sensible apparent magnitude, the conception of " apparent brightness " is altogether inapplicable, and we are concerned only with the See also:total quantity of light reaching the See also:eye. Again, it is found that the visibility of an object seen against a See also:black background depends not only upon the " apparent brightness " but also upon the apparent magnitude. If two or three crosses of different sizes be cut out of the same piece of See also:white See also:paper, and be erected against a black background on the further See also:side of a nearly dark See also:room, the smaller ones become invisible in a light still sufficient to show the larger.

Under these circumstances a suitable telescope may of course bring also the smaller objects into view. The explanation is probably to be sought in imperfect See also:

action of the See also:lens of the eye when the pupil is dilated to the utmost. See also:Lord See also:Rayleigh found that in a nearly dark room he became distinctly See also:short-sighted, a defect of which there is no trace whatever in a moderate light. If this view be correct, the brightness of the See also:image on the retina is really less in the case of a small than in the case of a large object, although the so-called apparent brightnesses may be the same. However this may be, the utility of a See also:night-glass is beyond dispute. The See also:general law that (apart from the accidental losses mentioned above) the " apparent brightness " depends only upon the area of the pupil filled with light, though often See also:ill under-stood, has been established for a See also:long time, as the following See also:quotation from See also:Smith's Optics (See also:Cambridge, 1738), p. 113, will show:— " Since the magnitude of the pupil is subject to be varied by various degrees of light, let NO be its semi-See also:diameter when the object PL is viewed by the naked eye from the distance OP; and upon a plane that touches the eye at 0, let OK be the semi-diameter of the greatest area, visible through all the glasses to another eye at P, to be found as PL was; or, which is the same thing, let OK be the semi-diameter of the greatest area inlightened by a See also:pencil of rays flowing from P through all the glasses; and when this area is not less than the area of the pupil, the point P will appear just as bright through all the glasses as it would do if they were removed; but if the inlightened area be less than the area of the pupil, the point P will appear less bright through the glasses than if they were removed in the same proportion as the inlightened area is less than the pupil. And these proportions of apparent brightness would be accurate if all the incident rays were transmitted through the glasses to the eye, or if only an insensible See also:part of them were stopt." A very important fact connected with our See also:present subject is: The brightness of a self-luminous surface does not depend upon its inclination to the line of sight. Thus a red-hot See also:ball of See also:iron, See also:free from scales of See also:oxide, &c., appears See also:flat in the dark; so, also, the See also:sun, seen through mist, appears as a flat disk. This fact, however, depends ultimately upon the second law of See also:thermodynamics (see See also:RADIATION). It may be .stated, however, in another See also:form, in which its connexion with what precedes is more obvious—The amount of radiation, in any direction, from a luminous surface is proportional to the cosine of the obliquity. The flow of light (if we may so See also:call it) in straight lines from the luminous point, with constant velocity, leads, as we have seen, to the expression nr 2 (where r is the distance from the luminous point) for the quantity of light which passes through unit of surface perpendicular to the See also:ray in unit of time, µ being a quantity indicating the See also:rate at which light is emitted by the source.

This represents the illumination of the surface on which it falls. The flow through unit of surface whose normal is inclined at an angle 0 to the ray is of course µr--2 See also:

cos 0, again representing the illumination. These are precisely the expressions for the See also:gravitation force exerted by a particle of See also:mass µ on a unit of See also:matter at distance r, and for its resolved part in a given direction. Hence we may employ an expression V 2:w-1 , which is exactly analogous to the gravitation or electric potential, for the purpose of calculating the effect due to any number of See also:separate sources of light. And the fundamental proposition in potentials, viz. that, if n be the See also:external normal at any point of a closed surface, the integral fJ(dV/dn)dS, taken over the whole surface, has the value-47rµo, where po is the sum of the values of n for each source lying within the surface, follows almost intuitively from the See also:mere See also:consideration of what it means as regards light. For every source external to the closed surface sends in light which goes out again. But the light from an See also:internal source goes wholly out; and the amount per second from each unit source is 47r, the total area of the unit See also:sphere surrounding the source. It is well to observe, however, that the See also:analogy is not quite See also:complete. To make it so, all the sources must See also:lie on the same side of the surface whose illumination we are dealing with. This is due to the fact that, in See also:order that a surface may be illuminated at all, it must be capable of scattering light, i.e. it must be to some extent opaque. Hence the illumination depends mainly upon those sources which are on the same side as that from which it is regarded. Though this See also:process bears some resemblance to the See also:heat analogy employed by Lord See also:Kelvin (See also:Sir W.

See also:

Thomson) for investigations in statical See also:electricity and to Clerk See also:Maxwell's See also:device of an incompressible fluid without mass, it is by no means identical with them. Each method deals with a substance, real or imaginary, which flows in conical streams from a source so that the same amount of it passes per second through every See also:section of the See also:cone. But in the present process the velocity is constant and the See also:density variable, while in the others the density is virtually constant and the velocity variable. There is a curious See also:reciprocity in formulae such as we have just given. For instance, it is easily seen that the light received from a uniformly illuminated surface is represented by ffr'- cos MS. As we have seen that this integral vanishes for a closed surface which has no source inside, its value is the same for all shells of equal See also:uniform brightness whose edges lie on the same cone.

End of Article: ILLUMINATION

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML.
Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.

Links to articles and home page are always encouraged.

[back]
ILLUMINATING
[next]
ILLUSTRATION