Difference between revisions of "infrared and ultraviolet"

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Text replace - "jbocre: ([L-Z])" to "$1")
m (Text replace - "jbocre: ([a-z])" to "$1")
 
Line 9: Line 9:
  
 
* x-rays
 
* x-rays
** The name "x-ray" is purely conventional. I don't have any better idea than ''xy. zei gusni''. ''mi'e [[jbocre: jezrax|jezrax]]''
+
** The name "x-ray" is purely conventional. I don't have any better idea than ''xy. zei gusni''. ''mi'e [[jezrax|jezrax]]''
  
 
(You really have to use ''boxna'' (pleeeeease no "red" or "violet" calques!):
 
(You really have to use ''boxna'' (pleeeeease no "red" or "violet" calques!):
Line 18: Line 18:
  
 
* Why is it a calque to say something involving "red" or "violet"? If I describe infrared as "beyond-red light" (bancu xunre gusni), isn't it correct?
 
* Why is it a calque to say something involving "red" or "violet"? If I describe infrared as "beyond-red light" (bancu xunre gusni), isn't it correct?
** I like ''bacyxungu'i'' and ''bacyblagu'i''. They're a little vague but seem clear enough for everyday use. Scientists will definitely prefer ''boxna'' when being technical. ''mi'e [[jbocre: jezrax|jezrax]]''
+
** I like ''bacyxungu'i'' and ''bacyblagu'i''. They're a little vague but seem clear enough for everyday use. Scientists will definitely prefer ''boxna'' when being technical. ''mi'e [[jezrax|jezrax]]''
  
* Incidentally, your tanru doesn't work (''gusni xe boxna barda dukse'' is a kind of ''dukse'' - not something excessive, but the excess itself) and if you can come up with a seljvajvo place structure for ''gusxembonbradu'e'', more power to you. --[[jbocre: rab.spir|rab.spir]]
+
* Incidentally, your tanru doesn't work (''gusni xe boxna barda dukse'' is a kind of ''dukse'' - not something excessive, but the excess itself) and if you can come up with a seljvajvo place structure for ''gusxembonbradu'e'', more power to you. --[[rab.spir|rab.spir]]
  
 
...but wouldn't it be a good use for our MEX
 
...but wouldn't it be a good use for our MEX
Line 32: Line 32:
  
 
** So why do you talk about 7.4 of a ten-millionth of a meter rather than 740 billionths? I think using nm for wavelengths of light around the visible range is well established. (My real quibble is with the non-power-of-10^3 used here: 10^-7 seems like an illogical base when 10^-9 or 10^-6 will do -- and require only one prefix rather than two.) That would then become ''su'evonono navytre'' and ''su'ozevono navytre'', respectively. mi'e filip
 
** So why do you talk about 7.4 of a ten-millionth of a meter rather than 740 billionths? I think using nm for wavelengths of light around the visible range is well established. (My real quibble is with the non-power-of-10^3 used here: 10^-7 seems like an illogical base when 10^-9 or 10^-6 will do -- and require only one prefix rather than two.) That would then become ''su'evonono navytre'' and ''su'ozevono navytre'', respectively. mi'e filip
* Are you looking at the same ''[[gimste|gimste]]'' I am? Mine gives wavelength ''velbo'a'', frequency ''xelbo'a'', so you want ''fo'' not ''fu''. ''mi'e [[jbocre: jezrax|jezrax]]''
+
* Are you looking at the same ''[[gimste|gimste]]'' I am? Mine gives wavelength ''velbo'a'', frequency ''xelbo'a'', so you want ''fo'' not ''fu''. ''mi'e [[jezrax|jezrax]]''

Latest revision as of 16:16, 23 March 2014

It's easy to talk about visible light, or about radio, or about the electromagnetic spectrum as a whole, but what about the other major regions of the spectrum?

  • infrared
    • A first try: le me'i xunre se dirce or, by extension, mecyxunseldi'e -- RobinLeePowell
      • Um. I translate that as "less red radiation". Not "less-than-red radiation", which would require the me'i to describe a property of xunre somehow - a red light that diminishes in brightness would emit le me'i xunre se dirce.
  • ultraviolet
  • x-rays
    • The name "x-ray" is purely conventional. I don't have any better idea than xy. zei gusni. mi'e jezrax

(You really have to use boxna (pleeeeease no "red" or "violet" calques!):

gusni xe boxna barda (cmalu) se dukse fi lenu viska narkakne or just

gusxembonbra(cma)du'e for short...

  • Why is it a calque to say something involving "red" or "violet"? If I describe infrared as "beyond-red light" (bancu xunre gusni), isn't it correct?
    • I like bacyxungu'i and bacyblagu'i. They're a little vague but seem clear enough for everyday use. Scientists will definitely prefer boxna when being technical. mi'e jezrax
  • Incidentally, your tanru doesn't work (gusni xe boxna barda dukse is a kind of dukse - not something excessive, but the excess itself) and if you can come up with a seljvajvo place structure for gusxembonbradu'e, more power to you. --rab.spir

...but wouldn't it be a good use for our MEX

notation if we were to specify the actual range of wavelengths that define these

terms? e.g.

  • near UV boxna fu su'evo decmiktre
  • infrared boxna fu su'ozepivo decmiktre (though i am used to using Angstroms, it seems silly to talk about 4000 or 7400 of a ten-billionth of a meter in Lojban)
    • So why do you talk about 7.4 of a ten-millionth of a meter rather than 740 billionths? I think using nm for wavelengths of light around the visible range is well established. (My real quibble is with the non-power-of-10^3 used here: 10^-7 seems like an illogical base when 10^-9 or 10^-6 will do -- and require only one prefix rather than two.) That would then become su'evonono navytre and su'ozevono navytre, respectively. mi'e filip
  • Are you looking at the same gimste I am? Mine gives wavelength velbo'a, frequency xelbo'a, so you want fo not fu. mi'e jezrax