Why does convex mirror has a wider field of view than plane mirror?
149736
A conver mirror is diverging in nature.Ligh rays incident at its extreme corners gets diverged following laws of reflection.Hence if we draw the diagram we can clearly understand that the reflected rays follow a wider path.While in case of a plane mirror the divergence is not so large.The credit to this can be given to the cuvature in convex mirror
36159
As mechanical engineer this is out of my normal field but felt you deserved an answer of some sort.\n\n"Because of diffraction effects caused by slits or apertures in optical measurement systems, the radiation energy which is directed towards a particular region on a sample will be spread over a larger area than desirable. By employing an apodizing filter in the radiation path in such system, diffraction tails of the system will be reduced. The apodizing filter preferably has a pattern of alternating high transmittance areas and substantially opaque areas where the locally averaged transmittance function is an apodizing function. In the preferred embodiment, the locally averaged transmittance function varies smoothly and monotonically from the periphery to the center of the filter"\n\nI see the theory here, also found on on using an apodizing mirror to stabalise images in a telescope\n\n"I built and used an apodizing screen for my 6" f/8 scope many years \nago. I made it by layering several layers of window screen, each one \nwith a circular cutout of different diameter. The result was an aperture \nmask with a step-wise approximation to a smooth apodizing function. It \nwas claimed to improve contrast for planetary viewing. Anyway, my \nexperience was that it seemed to make the image more stable but if it \nimproved contrast, I couldn't see it. If you do this on-axis, the \ndownside is that your diagonal mirror will now become more of a factor \nin the contrast equation. The bottom line is I wouldn't recommend it."\n\nAlso "An excellent reference for all sorts of technical techniques is\n>"Procedures in Experimental Physics" (also printed under the title\n>"Physical Laboratory Practice") by John Strong.  I don't recall the\n>publisher, but it came out in the 30's.  The bad news it that it's been\n>out of print for decades (and some SOB stole the copy I got from my\n>father!); the good news is that an outfit called Lindsay is reprinting it\n>in paperback.  (Don't have their name/address here in the office; I'll try\n>to remember to look it up tonight.)\n>\n>                            Dr. Kurt Hillig\n\nEvery ATM should have a copy of this great book. Lots of stuff on\nmirror making, figuring, special laps,making flats, prism ,etc.\nThere is nice modifed Draper machine ( upper disk also powered)\nand a homemade diamond cutting wheel to cut small glass blocks.\n( I would like to build this one someday ) A great section on\nkinematical mechanical construction. Yeah this a mid 30,s book but the \ninfo\nstill can be used. No I don't work for Lindsay Publications,<G>\n\nBob Pfaff\n\n\n This book, in paperback form, can be ordered from\n      http://www.amazon.com, on the Web. It can also be ordered\n      through your local bookstore. Amazon prices it at $23.95, and\n      provides the following information:\n\n      Published by Lindsey Publications\n      Publication date: June 1986\n      ISBN: 0917914562"\n\nSorry couldn't find any really decent expplanations, but at least you've got a starting point.
613561
Image in a plane mirror will be at the back sidekof the mirror at a distace equal to the distance in which the object is infront of the mirror.\n\nHence the answer is 15 mm.
77085
Because it is refracting light that is coming from all around. When you see a rainbow produced by a prism it looks straight but if you were able to enlarge it enough it would be round.
1122883
A white object spreads the light into many directions. A mirror doesn't, it instead keeps the light focused, which is why we can see our images.
567526
The same reason why a pinhole camera works.  As light passes therough the pinhole, it refracts and is focused.
214453
No matter how big or small a telescope is, photons of light still have to touch the 'scope mirror in order to be seen and/or photographed.\n\nIt's interesting, though, to realize that with these big telescopes we're seeing extremely distant objects as though we'd been physically transported thousands of light years closer to them. For example, if you're looking through a 20-power telescope at some galaxy that's 10,000 light years away from Earth, the view through the telescope is as if you're only 500 light years away.\n\nGod is spelled B-I-G B-A-N-G\nPBrax@netscape.com
1169826
The prism will have higher reflectivity and lower scatter compared to an aluminized or silvered mirror. Also, there is no coating to degrade.\n\nPrisms are less desirable in fast (<f/8) systems because they introduce spherical aberration. For these applications a high quality dielectric mirror is best.
183575
(1)mirrors reflect light because it has a shiny and reflective metal behind it.\n(2)camera lenses
459285
Photos capture an image of light.  And mirrors essentially reflect photons. We know that photons, particles of light, have wave/particle properties and when they are reflected off of an object, they are affected by the surface of the object of mirror. Look at your self on both side of a spoon.  The concave part, the one that is curved in, should have an upside down version of you, and on the otherside, convex, you will have an elongated version of yourself.  \nIf you look at the queston from a quantum phsyics perspective.  Every time you look in the mirror, you will see a different you. This is because you are actually seeing different light reflecting off a different surface.  \nI really dont know much about cameras, but thank God for photo shop.  Mirrors are a bad invention in my opinion.  People get caught up in having to maintain an external image that the rest of the world sees, when in reality the image of ourselves that we should really work on is the one inside our heads.  Anyways, I hope I answered your question to some extent.
409083
It has nothing to do with the two halves of the lens anyway. The way I can explain it is spherical abberation, i.e due to the difference in the foci for the edge of the lens and the middle of the lens. But that would form a blurred image and not two images.
326074
Braxton Paul has two out of the three reasons.\n\nOne has to do with frames of reference.  There are objects on the horizon to which the Sun or Moon can be compared.  Try holding your finger up against the Moon when it is rising or setting vs. when it is overhead.  \n\nAnother as to do with the nature of the atmosphere, which makes the Sun or Moon look larger when their light passes through more of it.  \n\nBut Carl Sagan discussed an experiment carried out in a darkened planetarium dome, where it was demonstrated that even without reference objects, we tend to perceive objects at the horizon as larger than objects overhead.  We have no explanation for why this is so.
439932
There is less for your eye to see, therefore, it has a better ability to foucus. The same thing is with concave/convex lenes if you want to look into it.
343774
I think this is because we see everything inside a virtual cone (actually 2 cones one for each eye, but assuming one for simplicity) ... \nLight enters our eyes (tip of the cone) from each direction which fall into our field of view or cone of view, just like it happens in a camera... when an object moves away it moves towards the open or wider side of the cone so it appears smaller as compared to its previous position (think with respect to the cone)... \nThis would not be the case if we had a plane vision (like when all the rays which entered our eyes were parallel to each other, but for that to happen the eyes would have to be very wide and flat, like in a flat bed scanner)...\nHope this answers your question...
268357
option 4. coz a telescope helps us see images of gigantic objects, so a diminished image wrt object forms. also, the final image formed is upside down(though it is virtual) coz the ist image formed is real and inverted.\ntrust me, i just gave my phyics board exams.
970064
if you want the field of view to be larger use the LPO (Low power objective) and if you want the specimen appears bigger use the HPO  (High Power Objective)
288946
a double convex lens will magnify, i can't remember which ones reduce size, but i'm guessing some sort of concave lens, and lenses REFRACT light, while mirrors REFLECT light.