Candy Questions in tech

Which light beam has the higher color temperature:

  • Medium Lavender

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters


Senior Team Emeritus
Premium Member
I'll start off the question of the day. Hopefully it can get engineered into a format that will work better. Others should feel free to add such as I call them candy questions - used to have a bucket on my desk. Answer a question, get a piece of candy.
I voted green. Should I post why I think so, or maybe not, so it won't influence other people's votes?

And of course, like a fool I voted without fully reading the question :roll: which I just now really noticed.
I thought we were voting for which has lower temperature, so I wish now I could change my vote to lavendar, which has the higher temperature.

Oh, just ignore me until my brain gets back from Tahiti :wink:
It's a work in progress to see how something like this might work. Perhaps with your point it would be best to vote on it, than go to the results screen to enable you to pass by it and give your comments on why you voted or later get the real answer without infuencing other's people's votes which would be a concern.

But there would also need to be a way to get to the results without having to vote again each time you wanted to view comments. Getting complex isn't it?
Just wondering, but isn't lavender the correct choice?
It is closer to blue which is closer to natural sunlight, hence higher Kelvin temp.
I'd have to guess that this has something to do with frequency of the light that it being output. With violet and red being at both ends of the visable spectrum. Violet has a higher light frequency. Since gamma rays which are very hazardous are further twords the violet side, it would be a vote for the Levender, since it is closer to that end, having a higher temperature. However on the other side of the spectrum is the microwave section which is very hot and used for cooking. Which would give the green a vote. My final decision would however be the green. Based on my weird logic that blacklight is mainly outputting UV light and is cool. Also in a doctor x-ray machine would use gamma radiation which is the farthest on that side of the spectrum and it also seems to be cool. My vote then would lie in that hotter temperatures lie in the other side of the spectrum with the green color. I'm not sure if that paragraph is followable or if I'm correct at all but please tell me if i am.

Consider on a filiament lamp, what temperature the is the filament burning at while providing the light of the spectrum between red and blue and centered upon a certain color temperature as opposed to another source of light.

If in a simple sense of light output, a standard incandescent lamp burns at about 2,8K and a halogen lamp in "replentishing the filament burned off" burns at about 3,2K, The color temperature a filament lamp no matter what's repressing it just burning up including xenon as a repression gas is slightly over 3,5K. That's the amount of heat this piece of steel will burn at when it mets it's flow point in becoming liquid and breaking. Temperature in direct ratio to while it burns and turns to liquid or gas, how much light it's giving off.

What effect do these figures have in how hot the lamp is burning? Given the spectrum of color is very much related to color temperature of the white light in how red or blue it appears, what is hotter a more crisp even bluer white light, or one say on a dimmer that just has an amber glow to it? What effect does "amber shift" have on how hot that filament is burning at when dimmed as opposed to it's normal operating color temperature?

Think frequency of light - it's related to color temperature and in providing it heat how hot that thing is burning - incandessing to produce the light.

The more energetic the frequency, the larger the heat in reality due to effects of it on the surface. The slower the frequency, the less the skin effective heat, and more penetrating the heat. IR will destroy or wash out paintings. UV light will penetrate the skin and cause the inside of the skin to burn up and cause a tan within the skin. While a tan can be related to a burn, it's different that sun-burn from that of a burn from a fire. Note also that the color spectrum and light is a circle in that you can get a first degree burn both from fire/heat/IR such as in a heat lamp warming a hamburger and from the UV-B & UV-C from the sun or a arc source lamp. Difference is that the UV for the most part is slower in wavelength and more penetrating verses heat/fire damage is more on the surface initially than penetrates.

When you sun-burn, you first tan from inside out, than burn. When you get burned due to heat, you first get burned and the more it burns away at the surface the deeper the burn.

The microwave oven is at error in that it's not really heating anything, just penetrating a surface like an X-ray, but too slow other than to bounce off that surface. In a X-Ray, it's a sort of negative image of what's blocked. In a microwave, it's a question of energy from light sent into a slab of meat, it being slow enough that it will penetrate, but it still being blocked and not powerful enough to reflect back as an X-Ray would. Given this, the energy beamed into the slab of meat heats up due to the energy - but not heat persay your oven has on the surface of that same slab of meat. In the same respect, a dimmed lamp in being more amber might seem hotter, but in reality it is not, nor in recieving less voltage is the filament working as hard in resisting the current flow to the wattage or resistance of the lamp's capacity. Less current equals less light thus dimming, less current also means the filament is burning. (It really is but a match - only one repressing burning up completely while optimized for production of light while doing so.)

Think of AM verses FM radio waves. The AM often will bounce along the ground in getting out further because it's slower. The FM at a higher frequency gets blocked more easily. Neither have harmful effects to people as opposed to UV rays, X-Rays and Gamma Rays because the frequency tends to bounce and reflect but not penetrate as opposed to those that do penetrate. That's internal heating once blocked or energized but not surface burning.

Think heat from the oven as hot, as compared to a microwave that heats from the inside by way of beamed in energy but would not on the surface be hot. Your egg heats from the inside out. The styrophone cup stays cool enough not to melt. This shows that it's not heat persay, only slow waveform energy making the molicues vibrate from inside out when sufficient in quantity. A certain amount of UV is present in all visible light, yet you don't get a tan from incandescent sources. On the other hand, the talent constantly goes under the hot lights.

The black light lamp proper is interesting in that it's blocking all visible light but the UV output of the arc source. You of course can't see this but phosphors get heated by the low wave transmissions and react in heating and incandess themselves.

A Black Light Blue lamp - most common on the other hand is blocking all visible light also except for light coming out in the both UV and blue spectrum of the beam of light. If you look at a color spectrum chart you will note that there is a large difference in color between UV and blue. Blue being more close to infra-red than UV in the spectrum. This form of lamp than is blocking all but light on both ends of the spectrum. Given true UV light is cool, and blue is warm both warm and cool, it might be interesting to test which between true black light and black light blue gets a surface warmer in surface temperature. We add the blue in so that we can see and direct the beam of light that's otherwise invisible. That blue seems cooler is only optical illusing or stage convention in it's narrow wave length having less a lingering or penetrating to heat the surface effect.

Blue while hotter will be cooler than because it's less penetrating and heating the surface due to narrow wavelengths that don't penetrate well, and looks dark, but on the other hand is in reality more hot in color temperature or wavelength power thus heat.

Hope it helps this long and circular discussion. Ever note that Infra-Red, while red in coolness seemingly is once under it hotter than a nice cool blue beam of light? Very circular and confusing, but also remember that the longer you stand under the more red hot color, the hotter you get - just as with a microwave oven stood under. Still Infra Red as opposed to red burns the surface, slower wavelengths are slow enough to penetrate the surface and add energy to what ever blocks it.

UV is cooler. UV-A is safe, but from B to C, the slower the wavelength, the more damage it will do to you by internal heating of what is blocking it's penetration. This energy is not heat persay, it's instead so slow that it's energy is retained internally and deeply in penetration until stopped by the surface that it's hitting. That surface once stopping the penetration of energy gets super heated itself. The beam of light itself is not heat, what it's effecting instead gets heated up due to surplus energy. That absorbing the energy than in becoming hot - blue in color is than hot, but the UV-beam is cool.

So in re-focusing, Which light beam has the higher color temperature, much less in reality is a hotter beam of light?
Interesting comment about the different types of UV light. I recall reading/hearing of a recent study that found that UV-A actually does cause skin damage and may in fact contribute to skin cancer. There has been a lot of research into the use of tanning beds and I think that it may have been in relation to sun beds. However, I would have to confirm this.

I'll try to see if I can find the information again. Like a lot of things, it seems that what we thought was harmless maybe/is actually harmful. Like asbestos (seen again in a recent post). Whilst some that were thought to be safe, then proved to be harmful are now being used again in a different setting. For example, Thalidomide, which is actually being successfully used to treat some forms of Myeloma, was originally taken off the market some years ago as it caused horrific birth defects.

Sometimes the more you know, the more you know that you don’t know.
I would suggest maybe having the question of the day, week, or whatever on the main page on the right where there is a poll question currently and after the voting has closed, a post is created with the results and place for people to discuss their thoughts and results.
I vote green.

Green is blue and yellow

Lav is blue and red

Blues cancel, yellow beats red

Do I get a piece of candy?

If yes, don't send it FedEx, they were late one every delivery for Peter Pan. Rigging 2 days late, laser 1 day late, gloves 1 day late, harnesses 2 days late, sound board 4 days late, and that one was supposed to be overnighted.
Foxinabox10 said:
I would suggest maybe having the question of the day, week, or whatever on the main page on the right where there is a poll question currently and after the voting has closed, a post is created with the results and place for people to discuss their thoughts and results.

Yes such an idea could work. So when do you start posting weekly such a question? Much less given the response to this one, what at best ten out of 1,388 will even vote an answer?

My intent was to post a daily question. Already have somewhere over 600 ready to go at all skill levels.

On the other hand look at the responses to such posts.

As to sending you candy, first you have to get the answer correct before you can expect a reward. Did you get your answer correct?

Second, last person I sent swag to (and a huge amount of it) never even said thanks, or Yep I got it, or Now this promissed reward and the extras were cool. For me in personally paying for the shipping, though swag is free and the effort is also, I as all others find the rewards part of something earned questionable in sending you a reward. Sure for a major question but for some stuff like a keystone or corner block all should know, no form of reward.

Should you find a dormant qustion and want the answer, E-Mail or post response to the poster or ask in response for it's answer after some time not active.

I'd say this one has been dormant.

I think that if the CQIT/QOTD were integrated into the main GUI it would recieve more responses.
Huh? :?
yeah, i second the "huh?"
How's this:'

Kelvin (K) the color temperature as a light source is defined in comparison with a “black body radiator” and plotted on what is known as the “Planckian curve.” The higher the temperature of this “black body radiator” the greater the blue component in the spectrum and the smaller the red component.
Wikipedia is extremely useful for when you want more than the simple definition of a word.

Users who are viewing this thread