Slashdot Mirror


World's Fastest Camera Shoots 10 Trillion Frames a Second (newatlas.com)

bbsguru shares a report from New Atlas: Slow-motion video has always been fun to watch, with the best rigs usually shooting on the scale of thousands of frames per second. But now the world's fastest camera, developed by researchers at Caltech and INRS, blows them out of the water, capturing the world at a mind-boggling 10 trillion frames per second -- fast enough to probe the nanoscale interactions between light and matter. For the new imaging technique, the team started with compressed ultrafast photography (CUP), a method that it is capable of 100 billion fps. That's nothing to scoff at by itself, but it's still not fast enough to really capture what's going on with ultrafast laser pulses, which occur on the scale of femtoseconds. A femtosecond, for reference, is one quadrillionth of a second.

So the team built on that technology by combining a femtosecond streak camera and a static camera, and running it through a data acquisition technique known as Radon transformation. This advanced system was dubbed T-CUP. For the first test, the camera proved its worth by capturing a single femtosecond pulse of laser light, recording 25 images that were each 400 femtoseconds apart. Through this process, the team could see the changes in the light pulse's shape, intensity and angle of inclination, in much slower motion than ever before.

62 comments

  1. Finally by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    I can prove my Canadian girlfriend is real. /s

    1. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally you can record a sex tape with more than one frame.

    2. Re: Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL

      owned

    3. Re: Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilarious!

  2. double slit experiment by Wycliffe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This would be interesting to use to record the double slit experiment and find out what is really going on.

    1. Re:double slit experiment by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the camera count as observation and result in the same pattern that's seen with the detectors that are currently used? It's an interesting idea, but I suspect that it would just capture the electrons behaving as expected without being able to provide any additional insight into what's really going on.

    2. Re:double slit experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're thinking of using the camera to record the state of the photons or electrons as they leave the slits, all you'd end up with is two distinct bars recorded on the photographic plate. If you're thinking of recording the target media itself, all you'd see is small dots accumulating into a series of bars making up an interference pattern.

    3. Re:double slit experiment by rajkiran_g · · Score: 1

      Depends on what we mean by reality!

      In the classical sense, reality is independent of observation. Not so in the realm of quantum mechanics, where observation is not possible without interaction which in turn effects the state being observed/measured.

    4. Re:double slit experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >In the classical sense, reality is independent of observation.
      That's not true, even in the classical sense: photons hitting a screen impart energy to it.
      In quantum mechanics an interaction *is* the observation, it doesn't mean "a physicist is looking at it."

    5. Re:double slit experiment by schweini · · Score: 4, Interesting

      CHeck out PBS SpaceTime's videos on the double slit experiment! Simply recording quantum things makes for very very strange outcomes:
      lhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs

    6. Re:double slit experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And before anyone takes issue with "photons" being quanta and not classical, Newton thought of light as corpuscles.

    7. Re: double slit experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Her poop comes out in sheets?

    8. Re:double slit experiment by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      record the double slit experiment and find out what is really going on.

      All of the electrons have a happy face with a tongue sicking out as they pass thru either/both/neither slits.

      Link I like #2 personally.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    9. Re: double slit experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      girls donâ(TM)t poop from their front hole

  3. Progress by Presence+Eternal · · Score: 0

    Research into the ICUP camera is still ongoing.

  4. Meh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    It doesn't do 4k.

  5. What's the resolution? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    A trillion frames at 1x1 is useless.

    That said a super high frame rate like this is awesome.

    What's the resolution though? I couldn't find it mentioned in the article.

    1. Re:What's the resolution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      This isn't definitive, but one of their previous papers shows images at 150 x 150.
      (See bottom of page 3: https://authors.library.caltech.edu/67908/11/nihms636729.pdf)

      I'm guessing that since they are looking at frickin lasers, they aren't too concerned about getting much better than that.

    2. Re:What's the resolution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The T-CUP system can capture a dynamic scene with spatial dimensions of 450 x 150 pixels and a sequence depth (i.e., number of frames per movie) of 350 frames in a single camera exposure.

  6. The reason we use exponents by petes_PoV · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A femtosecond, for reference, is one quadrillionth of a second.

    Probably one of the world's least useful explanations.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:The reason we use exponents by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      LOL

      They should have used a car analogy.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    2. Re:The reason we use exponents by GrahamJ · · Score: 2

      How many parsecs is that?

    3. Re:The reason we use exponents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      one femtosecond is how long trump thinks before he sends out his twits.

    4. Re:The reason we use exponents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure it's a lot simpler than a femtosecond.

      Try no seconds. As in no time at all.

    5. Re:The reason we use exponents by wyoung76 · · Score: 1

      https://www.britannica.com/top... Yes, quite a useless explanation.

    6. Re:The reason we use exponents by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative
      Some more intuitive descriptions:
      • In one femtosecond, light will travel 0.3 micrometers (0.0003 mm).
      • In the 400 femtoseconds between the successive image frames shot with this camera, light travels only 0.1 mm.
      • If you shot one second at 10 trillion fps, and played them back at 60 fps of YouTube video, it would take over 5000 years to watch that one second.
    7. Re:The reason we use exponents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is that the value of a "quadrillion" changes depending on which country you live in.

      The US definition is 10 ^15
      The UK definition is 10 ^26

      You made the same mistake:
      If you shot one second at 10 trillion fps, and played them back at 60 fps of YouTube video, it would take over 5000 years to watch that one second.

      A "trillion" can be either 10 ^12 or it can be 10 ^18

      In the 10 ^12 case it would take a little over 5000 years, but in the 10 ^18 case it would take far longer in the 5*10^9 year range.

      For the same exact reason it wouldn't even be proper of me to say "5 billion years" as that term differs as well, either 10^9 or 10^12

      I would say the article using "a quadrillion" is about as intuitive AND inaccurate as you using "trillion" was :P

    8. Re: The reason we use exponents by troon · · Score: 1

      The UK hasn't used long scale numbers in quite a while. I remember this being an issue as a kid in the early 1980s, but not now.

      --
      Ydco co ,df C erb-y go. a Ekrpat t.fxrapev
    9. Re:The reason we use exponents by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      Is that an American or a European quadrillion?

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    10. Re:The reason we use exponents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still longer than creimer before he makes another video no one watches...

    11. Re:The reason we use exponents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why I watch youtube at double speed.

    12. Re: The reason we use exponents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still longer than Hilary was president.

    13. Re:The reason we use exponents by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      The UK definition is 10 ^26

      I think you mean 10^24. Also, I'd rather call it the European definition (or more precisely the long scale), because I've seen both definitions used in the UK, probably via American influence.

      The European/long scale is easier to remember, because the number of zeros is 6 times the number from the name. Here, quad = 4 so we get 24. In the US scale, the logic goes as 3 + 3*quad = 15.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    14. Re: The reason we use exponents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, European quadrillions are non-migratory.

    15. Re:The reason we use exponents by epine · · Score: 1

      Google "6 inches in attoparsecs" and it replies "4.93895". In other words, not a flattering unit for the male anatomy, but useful if you want a close approximate to a decimal foot.

    16. Re:The reason we use exponents by epine · · Score: 1

      Hmm, had I been awake, I would have described that as cosmology's decimal inch.

      10 attoparsecs = 1.01236 feet

    17. Re:The reason we use exponents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1 femtosecond =10^28 Planck time units. Still a long way to go.

  7. As it passed, ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... the pulse of laser light said, "I've been framed."

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  8. The numbers are inconsistent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The headline read literally is nonsense, of course. One presumes it means "at a rate of ten frames each trillionth of a second". But the summary says one frame each 400 femtoseconds, which is only 2.5 per picosecond. Where did the remaining factor of four go?

    1. Re:The numbers are inconsistent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The apparatus can be adjusted (by varying the temporal shearing) to produce frame rates between 0.5 Tfps and 10 Tfps. The first example described was "only" 2.5 Tfps, but the paper includes a few other examples captured at various frame rates from 1 to 10 Tfps (check out the "Supplementary Movies".)

  9. 150x150 isn't enough for lasers by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    you can't even get the angry sea bass in the shot, let alone a shark.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  10. Interleaved? by Jfetjunky · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is it real time, interleaved, or synchronous sub sampling (aka aliasing aka stroboscopic effect)?

    1. Re:Interleaved? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      why the heck are you asking here?

    2. Re: Interleaved? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well at least one person may have RTFA

    3. Re: Interleaved? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Yeah.. like that happens on Slashdot.

    4. Re:Interleaved? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Synchronous, if I understand correctly. Physically, they capture two 2D images simultaneously - one "straight" and one "sheared" - then use them to digitally reconstruct a 3D spatio-temporal image.

      It's a bit like how your eyes, observing the same scene from two different angles, let you construct a three-dimensional mental image - but in this case, the third dimension is time.

  11. Time Dilation Experiment by FB36 · · Score: 0

    IMHO, an ultra-fast camera like this, maybe fast enough to clearly show/catch time dilation, due to Relativity! Imagine, 2 ultra-fast cameras taking a picture of the same event/scene (that is changing ultra-fast also), side by side! But, imagine, if, one of the cameras was in motion in that exact moment! According to Relativity, the concept/moment of "now" should/must be different for the 2 cameras in the experiment, just by a super small amount! So, the pictures taken by cameras should/must be different (moments in time)!

  12. Frame rate is high ... but by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    It took only 25 frames in total. And looks like each frame is a low res pic of about 100 x 100 pixels, as far as I can tell.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  13. For those who are curious by sconeu · · Score: 1

    1 ten trillionth of a second (100 fs or 0.1ps) is 29 microns at light speed.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:For those who are curious by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      So what's the distance between the cam and the laser beam? I mean, a cam reacts to light, and here it shows a laser pulse advancing within a few ps, but that advancing light needs also to reach the sensor (or whatever it is)...

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  14. LiFi would be great by mtaht · · Score: 1

    if we could only get LEDs to switch even 1/100th this fast. I think it's about 2ms now.

    1. Re: LiFi would be great by troon · · Score: 1

      It's a bit quicker than 2ms: that's only 500Hz, which would preclude SPDIF.

      --
      Ydco co ,df C erb-y go. a Ekrpat t.fxrapev
  15. transform, !ation by cellocgw · · Score: 1

    Just for those who don't mess with image analysis, it's the "Radon Transform," not a 'transformation'. The wikipedia article is long on equations and short on simple application, which is that it's a way to find critical image parameters like lines or edges.

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  16. First Real-World Application will be... by BeerMilkshake · · Score: 1

    We all know it will be porn somehow.

  17. Don't use misleading scales! by MS · · Score: 1

    By 10 trillion, you mean 10^13 aka 10 billion in the rest (=non-us-english) of the world, right?!?

  18. Where is my 100 yotta bytes SDCARD ? by aod7br7932 · · Score: 1

    I want one, so I can store all 10 seconds of my daughter birthday. Can someone point me to a reseller of a 100 yotta byte SDCARD?