Just another thing, I would like to point out that what the author points out about holograms is quite misleading.
Quote:
The three-dimensionality of such images is not the only
remarkable characteristic of holograms. If a hologram of a
rose is cut in half and then illuminated by a laser, each
half will still be found to contain the entire image of the
rose.
|
Yes this is true, but each half will create a reconstruction of lower fidelity than that of the whole hologram.
In other words, holograms don't have some "magical" property that allows them to hold more information in them then their constituent parts.
Certainly there is no one to one correlation of points on the rose to points on the surface of the hologram, but that doens't really mean anything.
It would be like taking an interlaced gif.
If you take the whole file, you will get an image. But if you just take the first half of the file, you will get that same image...but at a lower resolution.
An interlaced gif, is one of those images that you may have seen on a website. A normal gif will start to load at the top, and will load down to give you the full image.
An interlaced gif will start by giving you a very pixelated version of the image, which then steadily gets clearer and clearer. A hologram is like this.
Obviously it would be silly to say that the encoding of a progressive gif has some property which allows it to encode more information than a normal gif.
There are more fallacies such as this in the article, and I will post more later. (tired!)