New CCD concept

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Charles Douglas Wehner, Feb 29, 2004.

  1. Charles Douglas Wehner, Feb 29, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Nibbler Guest

    > I am sorry Charles, but your web page has all the signs of
    > a true crack put.
    >
    > 1. The inventions are based upon theories by Einstein.
    > 2. There are at least 3 (in this case 7!) new fantastic solutions
    > never seen before.
    > 3. The inventor wants to put it all in the public domain for all
    > to take advantage of.
    > 4. The inventor has a hard time getting accepted and a story about
    > that - in this case he has even been tortured.
    >
    >
    > /Roland


    Comming up next... proof that big brother is watching you through your TVs
    and monitors... stay tuned. Don't touch that dial. We'll know.
     
    Nibbler, Feb 29, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. (Charles Douglas Wehner) wrote in
    news::

    > Those interested in the future of image sensor design are invited to
    > go to
    >
    > http://www.wehner.org/electro/einstein/
    >
    > Charles Douglas Wehner


    I am sorry Charles, but your web page has all the signs of
    a true crack put.

    1. The inventions are based upon theories by Einstein.
    2. There are at least 3 (in this case 7!) new fantastic solutions
    never seen before.
    3. The inventor wants to put it all in the public domain for all
    to take advantage of.
    4. The inventor has a hard time getting accepted and a story about
    that - in this case he has even been tortured.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Feb 29, 2004
    #3
  4. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Mark Herring Guest

    On 29 Feb 2004 09:13:14 -0800, (Charles
    Douglas Wehner) wrote:

    >Those interested in the future of image sensor design are invited to go to
    >
    >http://www.wehner.org/electro/einstein/
    >
    >Charles Douglas Wehner


    This is the absolute worst kind of technical writing: endless
    rambling with the point never being quite clear.

    And the misuse of words: A sigmoid curve??? Look up sigmoid in you
    Funk and Wagnalls and you'll see it has little to do with sensors.

    My friends, what we have here is a nut case.
    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
     
    Mark Herring, Mar 1, 2004
    #4
  5. Roland Karlsson <> wrote in message news:<Xns949EDA85AA8C1klotjohan@130.133.1.4>...
    >
    > I am sorry Charles, but your web page has all the signs of
    > a true crack put.
    >


    I did not write this for YOU - you are obviously a SCHIZO-CERAMIC .

    That is to say, a CRACKPOT.

    Crack put, indeed!

    I am a professional technical author and design engineer with over 40
    years experience.

    This is for TECHNICALLY QUALIFIED people.

    Your opinions, and those of the other graffitti-"artists" of the
    Internet, are totally UNPRODUCTIVE.

    Charles Douglas Wehner

    http://www.wehner.org/electro/einstein/
     
    Charles Douglas Wehner, Mar 1, 2004
    #5
  6. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Mark Herring Guest

    Well, Charles;

    I am technically qualified (35 years designing analog and digtal
    cameras for space missions), and I will tell you that your article is
    abysmal. You have some of the worst rambling I have ever seen---plus
    some plain technical nonsense. I could never firgure out what your
    point was, and got tired of reading.

    I think it would be useful to put a precis at the beginning to tell us
    what the point is----could you post a 50 word summary?

    On 1 Mar 2004 04:09:06 -0800, (Charles
    Douglas Wehner) wrote:

    >Roland Karlsson <> wrote in message news:<Xns949EDA85AA8C1klotjohan@130.133.1.4>...
    >>
    >> I am sorry Charles, but your web page has all the signs of
    >> a true crack put.
    >>

    >
    >I did not write this for YOU - you are obviously a SCHIZO-CERAMIC .
    >
    >That is to say, a CRACKPOT.
    >
    >Crack put, indeed!
    >
    >I am a professional technical author and design engineer with over 40
    >years experience.
    >
    >This is for TECHNICALLY QUALIFIED people.
    >
    >Your opinions, and those of the other graffitti-"artists" of the
    >Internet, are totally UNPRODUCTIVE.
    >
    >Charles Douglas Wehner
    >
    >http://www.wehner.org/electro/einstein/


    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
     
    Mark Herring, Mar 1, 2004
    #6
  7. (Charles Douglas Wehner) wrote in
    news::

    > I did not write this for YOU - you are obviously a SCHIZO-CERAMIC .
    >
    > That is to say, a CRACKPOT.
    >
    > Crack put, indeed!
    >
    > I am a professional technical author and design engineer with over 40
    > years experience.
    >
    > This is for TECHNICALLY QUALIFIED people.
    >
    > Your opinions, and those of the other graffitti-"artists" of the
    > Internet, are totally UNPRODUCTIVE.
    >
    > Charles Douglas Wehner
    >
    > http://www.wehner.org/electro/einstein/


    Another typical crackot sign is use of CAPITAL letters
    when wanting to STRESS things.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Mar 1, 2004
    #7
  8. "Charles Douglas Wehner" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Those interested in the future of image sensor design are invited to go to
    >
    > http://www.wehner.org/electro/einstein/
    >
    > Charles Douglas Wehner


    Many of these ideas have been around for a while. There is no discussion of
    the problems of each method. What looks good on paper often won't work in
    actuality.

    There is a saying among engineers. "The devil is in the details."
     
    Marvin Margoshes, Mar 1, 2004
    #8
  9. "Marvin Margoshes" <> wrote in message

    > Many of these ideas have been around for a while.


    Einstein's photoelectric effect has been around since 1905.
    It was NEVER applied to an image sensor.

    > There is no discussion of
    > the problems of each method. What looks good on paper often won't work in
    > actuality.


    I have been in electronics for over 40 years. Nothing I ever conceived
    failed to work. My particular field was photoelectrics. In your
    forebodings, you reveal the inhibition that stops YOU being an
    achiever.

    "Each method" suggests that you simply do not understand the text.
    There is only ONE method - the photoelectric method. However, it has
    to be shown how black-and-white and colour image-sensors are made.
    "Each option" is a way of altering the behaviour of the fundamental
    design, for sequential colour, for simultaneous colour and so on.

    Field-effect transistors DO work, not only on paper. Most of the
    technology is combinations of FETs.

    The problem of finding a low work-function was mentioned. However,
    there are solutions out there - I suggested the caesium/rubidium on
    oxidised silver known at the time of WW2. There are more modern
    coatings. I pointed out that the quest is for a heatproof coating, if
    the sensor is to be robust.

    So I did cover the key problems.

    The FOVEON Corporation in America was faced with vastly greater
    problems and overcame them - simply because they did not invent the
    photoelectric CCD. I did.

    So Foveon simply slogged away making three layers, and using
    ion-implantation forcing cerain minerals into the chip to alter its
    colour-response. This was blue-sky research. Yet they succeeded in
    making the SILICON TRIPACK.

    My own design is a single layer, where the metal photocells (of a kind
    I was dealing with forty years ago) cover the chip. Those metal
    photocells can "see" different colours because of Einstein's
    photoelectric effect.

    I don't think the Nobel Prize Committee were wrong in giving Einstein
    this prize.

    >
    > There is a saying among engineers. "The devil is in the details."


    I have known very, very many engineers. The competent ones, like
    myself, simply rolled up their sleeves and dealt with problems
    one-by-one. NONE was superstitious. NONE believed in the devil.

    Perhaps in your circles, such things as belief in the devil seem
    wise.....

    There is more than enough information on the page for a qualified,
    experienced and competent engineer to make a photoelectric CCD.

    Charles Douglas Wehner
     
    Charles Douglas Wehner, Mar 2, 2004
    #9
  10. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Mark Herring Guest

    On 2 Mar 2004 04:18:07 -0800, (Charles
    Douglas Wehner) wrote:

    ......snipped lots.........
    >wise.....
    >
    >There is more than enough information on the page for a qualified,
    >experienced and competent engineer to make a photoelectric CCD.
    >
    >Charles Douglas Wehner


    Charles;

    There's an awful lot of words here...... Can you provide the precis I
    requested, including what the key point is of the "Photoelectric CCD".
    To illustrate what I am asking, here is an example for the Foveon:

    Foveon Sensor Concept--Summary:

    In most consumer digital cameras, a conventional CCD--typically an
    interline transfer--is used in conjunction with a filter array in
    which a repeating pattern of color filters is laid down on the sensor.
    In this architecture, luminance information is supplied by every
    pixel, but specific color information is supplied by a subset. Thus
    the color resolution is lower thatn the luminance resolution.

    The Foveon architecture addresses this issue by dividing each pixel
    into three color samples arranged vertically in the Silicon sensor.
    The spectral tranmission properties of Silicon are used to provide the
    color discrimination.
    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
     
    Mark Herring, Mar 2, 2004
    #10
  11. (Charles Douglas Wehner) wrote in
    news::

    > I have been in electronics for over 40 years. Nothing I ever conceived
    > failed to work.


    So ... why do you not have a working prototype of the sensor?
    It would be very convincing.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Mar 2, 2004
    #11
  12. Roland Karlsson <> wrote in message news:<Xns94A0D29773DBEklotjohan@130.133.1.4>...
    > (Charles Douglas Wehner) wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > > I have been in electronics for over 40 years. Nothing I ever conceived
    > > failed to work.

    >
    > So ... why do you not have a working prototype of the sensor?
    > It would be very convincing.
    >
    >
    > /Roland


    The MALICE of this and previous posts speaks volumes for the state of
    your mind.

    I am not the slave of graffitti-children like yourself.

    When you are older, you will learn the truth of the maxim "There is no
    such things as a free lunch". So you do not get to live as a
    couch-potato, demanding that people serve YOU. What arrogance, to
    suppose that they will obey you!

    Everything was fully explained for those competent to understand.

    Future CCDs with metal photocells will arrive, simply because the
    Japanese and others are afraid that Foveon, with their "Silicon
    Tripack" will corner the market. CCD makers will see in this design a
    cheap way of competing - after all, I have put the design into the
    public domain.

    As explained, I am a refugee in Europe, and do not have a "Clean Room"
    in my vest pocket. I had to publish because after the demolition of my
    home and the theft of all my belongings I am in no position to
    continue my work. This way, the knowledge is not wasted.

    My "clientèle" are academics and universities. About thirty percent of
    my visitors are universities and academic institutions. The Koreans
    and Japanese have already been looking in.

    I therefore use the Internet as a means to communicate UNIQUE
    knowledge to those who NEED it. However, I am also troubled by
    non-productive babblers who cannot resist the temptation to comment
    maliciously on subjects they cannot understand.

    Manufacturers will do some tests, and then start production.

    To use one of my own phrases, it is a "SELF-FULFILLING PROPHESY". That
    is a term I used years ago in another context, and it became a
    worldwide cliché.

    Manufacturers who do not get involved in this will lose out. That is
    why the new CCD will come even without my exerting myself.

    Charles Douglas Wehner
     
    Charles Douglas Wehner, Mar 3, 2004
    #12
  13. Mark Herring <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > Well, Charles;
    >
    > I am technically qualified



    > digtal



    > I could never firgure out


    Liar, liar, pants on fire!

    Graffitti children pretending to be technically qualified engineers
    should first go to school.

    BAD SPELLING is just one clue.

    Charles Douglas Wehner
     
    Charles Douglas Wehner, Mar 3, 2004
    #13
  14. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Mark Herring Guest

    On 3 Mar 2004 04:35:43 -0800, (Charles
    Douglas Wehner) wrote:

    >Mark Herring <> wrote in message news:<>...
    >> Well, Charles;
    >>
    >> I am technically qualified

    >
    >
    >> digtal

    >
    >
    >> I could never firgure out

    >
    >Liar, liar, pants on fire!
    >
    >Graffitti children pretending to be technically qualified engineers
    >should first go to school.
    >
    >BAD SPELLING is just one clue.
    >
    >Charles Douglas Wehner


    Those are typos

    One more time, Charles......

    Can you provide a short summary of what your "photoelectric CCD" is?
    No one wants to read long rambles.
    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
     
    Mark Herring, Mar 3, 2004
    #14
  15. (Charles Douglas Wehner) wrote in
    news::

    > The MALICE of this and previous posts speaks volumes for the state of
    > your mind.
    >


    OK - maybe I shall just move away quietly and just PLONK you.
    You are sick you know? Are you also dangerous?


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Mar 3, 2004
    #15
  16. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Nibbler Guest

    I don't get what he's looking for, An
    Angel Investor / Venture Capitalist, whom bases in investment strategies on
    information Glean on Usenet @ rec.photo.digital? (or anywhere on Usenet for
    that matter?); Rather than a published or other more substantial forum?
    Sure, Can I invest through paypal now, right? You need to do a *lot* better.
    No goals, no plan, no itinerary, a theory with no manufacturing process...
    And here? Really? Surely you jest.
     
    Nibbler, Mar 3, 2004
    #16
  17. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Nibbler Guest

    "Charles Douglas Wehner" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Marvin Margoshes" <> wrote in message
    >
    > > Many of these ideas have been around for a while.

    >
    > Einstein's photoelectric effect has been around since 1905.
    > It was NEVER applied to an image sensor.
    >
    > > There is no discussion of
    > > the problems of each method. What looks good on paper often won't work

    in
    > > actuality.

    >
    > I have been in electronics for over 40 years. Nothing I ever conceived
    > failed to work.



    Eventually, you surely mean? With enough money and time, anything can be
    made to work. Or have you only concieved simple things? I guess all the code
    you write works perfectly the first time as well? Right... Or do you mean,
    you are an idea guy. Others make your dreams work, but you were right in
    thinking they could? It was your conception, right? (Sorry, worked for
    people like that)



    >My particular field was photoelectrics. In your
    > forebodings, you reveal the inhibition that stops YOU being an
    > achiever.
    >
    > "Each method" suggests that you simply do not understand the text.
    > There is only ONE method - the photoelectric method. However, it has
    > to be shown how black-and-white and colour image-sensors are made.
    > "Each option" is a way of altering the behaviour of the fundamental
    > design, for sequential colour, for simultaneous colour and so on.


    according to circuit theory. you have *no* idea how this will function when
    assembled as an array. Heck, you can't even relaibly predict capactiive /
    inductive effects in a PCB for *new* redical designs... and you say you know
    this will work made this way and theses will be the specs. BS. nothnig but.
    you don't even have a simulator modle for christs sake, you are pulling
    numgers based on the design of other seperate non-inergaated
    "sus-assemblies"

    >
    > Field-effect transistors DO work, not only on paper. Most of the
    > technology is combinations of FETs.
    >
    > The problem of finding a low work-function was mentioned. However,
    > there are solutions out there - I suggested the caesium/rubidium on
    > oxidised silver known at the time of WW2. There are more modern
    > coatings. I pointed out that the quest is for a heatproof coating, if
    > the sensor is to be robust.


    yup, and you already know these unkowns will function together. amazing.

    >
    > So I did cover the key problems.
    >
    > The FOVEON Corporation in America was faced with vastly greater
    > problems and overcame them - simply because they did not invent the
    > photoelectric CCD. I did.



    And had a much more complete design and modleing before they ever funded
    research.

    >
    > So Foveon simply slogged away making three layers, and using
    > ion-implantation forcing cerain minerals into the chip to alter its
    > colour-response. This was blue-sky research. Yet they succeeded in
    > making the SILICON TRIPACK.
    >
    > My own design is a single layer, where the metal photocells (of a kind
    > I was dealing with forty years ago) cover the chip. Those metal
    > photocells can "see" different colours because of Einstein's
    > photoelectric effect.
    >
    > I don't think the Nobel Prize Committee were wrong in giving Einstein
    > this prize.



    an effect and application are two entirely different things.


    >
    > >
    > > There is a saying among engineers. "The devil is in the details."

    >
    > I have known very, very many engineers. The competent ones, like
    > myself, simply rolled up their sleeves and dealt with problems
    > one-by-one. NONE was superstitious. NONE believed in the devil.
    >
    > Perhaps in your circles, such things as belief in the devil seem
    > wise.....
    >
    > There is more than enough information on the page for a qualified,
    > experienced and competent engineer to make a photoelectric CCD.
    >
    > Charles Douglas Wehner



    if he designed it himself... cells would need to be made, tested, parameters
    adjusted, new cells, larger arrays... you act like you have the plans proven
    and ready to go, but even say concept in the thread subject. I mean no
    offence, but you have a looong way to go before anyone will take you as
    serious as you are hoping. (or expecting)
     
    Nibbler, Mar 3, 2004
    #17
  18. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Nibbler Guest

    "Mark Herring" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 3 Mar 2004 04:35:43 -0800, (Charles
    > Douglas Wehner) wrote:
    >
    > >Mark Herring <> wrote in message

    news:<>...
    > >> Well, Charles;
    > >>
    > >> I am technically qualified

    > >
    > >
    > >> digtal

    > >
    > >
    > >> I could never firgure out

    > >
    > >Liar, liar, pants on fire!
    > >
    > >Graffitti children pretending to be technically qualified engineers
    > >should first go to school.
    > >
    > >BAD SPELLING is just one clue.


    I though we spoke our own language? isn't it the opposite except for math?
    we like facts and hard rules... english only has exceptions ;-)



    > >
    > >Charles Douglas Wehner

    >
    > Those are typos
    >
    > One more time, Charles......
    >
    > Can you provide a short summary of what your "photoelectric CCD" is?
    > No one wants to read long rambles.
    > **************************
    > Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    > Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    >
     
    Nibbler, Mar 3, 2004
    #18
  19. On 2 Mar 2004 04:18:07 -0800, in rec.photo.digital you wrote:

    >There is more than enough information on the page for a qualified,
    >experienced and competent engineer to make a photoelectric CCD.


    Yes, but since this is a photography group we are primarily qualified,
    experienced and competent *photographers*, some of which have a
    secondary interest in the underlying tech. We've also had to endure
    numerous vituperative flame wars, trolls and posts about revolutionary
    new camera tech. Given the above I don't think it's unreasonable to
    expect a little skepticism, do you?

    I *did* study electronics and IC fabrication, albeit some time ago and
    before my career went in different directions, but based on the quick
    skim through of your web page there are several areas I have a problem
    with. Maybe they are resolved elsewhere on the page, or maybe left as
    problems to be solved such as where you mention stretching and folding
    optical fibres as being "simply something that has to be tried". I'm
    with Mark Herring; if you want some credibility I think a summary in
    layperson's terms of the device and what remains as undemonstrated
    theory would go a long way.

    >I have known very, very many engineers. The competent ones, like
    >myself, simply rolled up their sleeves and dealt with problems
    >one-by-one. NONE was superstitious. NONE believed in the devil.


    Perhaps, however quite a few cosmologists and physicists are on record
    as believing in God, far more than you would expect for the two fields
    that would seem to have the most conflict with the concept. That
    includes Albert Einstein, whom you seem to hold in such high esteem.

    Andy
     
    Andy Blanchard, Mar 3, 2004
    #19
  20. Charles Douglas Wehner

    Nibbler Guest

    "Charles Douglas Wehner" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Roland Karlsson <> wrote in message

    news:<Xns94A0D29773DBEklotjohan@130.133.1.4>...
    > > (Charles Douglas Wehner) wrote in
    > > news::
    > >
    > > > I have been in electronics for over 40 years. Nothing I ever conceived
    > > > failed to work.

    > >
    > > So ... why do you not have a working prototype of the sensor?
    > > It would be very convincing.
    > >
    > >
    > > /Roland

    >
    > The MALICE of this and previous posts speaks volumes for the state of
    > your mind.
    >
    > I am not the slave of graffitti-children like yourself.
    >
    > When you are older, you will learn the truth of the maxim "There is no
    > such things as a free lunch". So you do not get to live as a
    > couch-potato, demanding that people serve YOU. What arrogance, to
    > suppose that they will obey you!
    >
    > Everything was fully explained for those competent to understand.



    enough that an engineer that already knew of the effect could make one. so
    what's your point? What do you want? someone to go make one for you? Geeze.



    >
    > Future CCDs with metal photocells will arrive, simply because the
    > Japanese and others are afraid that Foveon, with their "Silicon
    > Tripack" will corner the market.




    and because progress continues...




    CCD makers will see in this design a
    > cheap way of competing - after all, I have put the design into the
    > public domain.


    yup, you did all the work for them. they could start making the tomorrow.

    >
    > As explained, I am a refugee in Europe, and do not have a "Clean Room"
    > in my vest pocket.


    who does?

    I had to publish because after the demolition of my
    > home and the theft of all my belongings I am in no position to
    > continue my work. This way, the knowledge is not wasted.


    So you were sitting on this before?

    >
    > My "clientèle" are academics and universities. About thirty percent of
    > my visitors are universities and academic institutions. The Koreans
    > and Japanese have already been looking in.
    >
    > I therefore use the Internet as a means to communicate UNIQUE
    > knowledge



    you say this was effect was discovered ages ago... now unique?



    to those who NEED it. However, I am also troubled by
    > non-productive babblers who cannot resist the temptation to comment
    > maliciously on subjects they cannot understand.
    >
    > Manufacturers will do some tests, and then start production.



    you don't have a schematic any more detailed (actually less so) than what
    you could find in an entry level book on ic design, making an array out of
    known devices utilizing known effects. You predict behavior based on
    seperate devices. Have a theory, call it a design... People have no clue as
    to what you are trying to achieve. then you say they babble and comment
    maliciously and say they do not understand.



    >
    > To use one of my own phrases, it is a "SELF-FULFILLING PROPHESY". That
    > is a term I used years ago in another context, and it became a
    > worldwide cliché.



    you invented that, too?


    >
    > Manufacturers who do not get involved in this will lose out.


    if it works well, whoever makes it, rest assured, others will follow....

    > That is
    > why the new CCD will come even without my exerting myself.
    >
    > Charles Douglas Wehner


    of course. did you think progress would stop without you or anyone else? you
    think without this the CCD is the end of the line? I just don't get what you
    are expecting. everyone here to pat you on the back and put our orders in?
    evaluate your *spec*? finish it for you? concepts are a dime a dozen on
    Usenet.
     
    Nibbler, Mar 3, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. A New Concept in Style

    , Jul 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    408
  2. A New Concept in Style

    , Jul 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    417
  3. DC

    Re: A New Concept in Style *spam*

    DC, Jul 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    412
  4. Miguel Gonzalez

    Tech Ques: About 1-ccd, 3-ccd, sensor filters, etc

    Miguel Gonzalez, Jun 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,262
    Dave Haynie
    Jun 6, 2004
  5. Bruce
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    1,011
    John Turco
    Aug 16, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page