can someone make the converstion for me 1W = ???mW I don't fully understand this, thanks.
Good Luck, Fat Boy
thanks, that what I though but also thought that CAN"T be true. I probably should not have ordered this now that I realize its full power. I got to say I hope this shut this down. It is a little scary.
Good Luck, Fat Boy
Nova's site notes that the 1W laser can inscribe wood; definitely something one of you early adopters should test. Some other ideas aside from cutting a block of dry ice:
- See if it can boil water in a shot glass
- See if it can bore into and disable an inflated car tire
- Point it at a glow-in-the-dark object nearly long enough to burn it, then measure how long it glows
I'm also wondering about low-orbit applications; if, on a clear night, you pointed this laser at the International Space Station (~200 miles away, but only ~70 miles contain air), would they be able to see it? Is this the moment any common person can buy a single light source visible from space?
Wicked Lasers' website has been updated with new warnings and requirements for purchase. I wouldn't be surprised if they are worried about the fallout.
Wicked Lasers Supplementary Class 4 Buyer Requirements
- Customers of Class 4 lasers are required to digitally sign a Laser Hazard Acknowledgment form stating they understand the proper handling, use and risks associated with such products
- Customers of Class 4 lasers are required to provide government-issued photo ID for age verification purposes
- Customers of Class 4 lasers are required to completely read and electronically acknowledge nine disclaimer passages
- Customers of Class 4 lasers are required to be shipped at least one pair of certified laser safety goggles that meets minimum O.D. required for safe operation
Edit: 0.000000508 watts per square foot works out to about that energy divided among 40,000 1.5mm-size sources due to the die size. So you'd be looking at, from the ISS, a 1.5mm object with a surface brightness of: 5.08*10^-7 divided by 40000 times 100 (lumens per watt) lumens. That's really tiny, something like a billionth of a lumen. Maybe I'm taking the math too far? It would be a very dim, striking blue point.
Last edited by AnAppleSnail; 06-18-2010 at 12:38 PM.
Note: I could be doing the maths wrong.
I have an 885mW laser I made from a 12X blu-ray drive.
It burns you, but if you sweep it across your skin at a little more than an inch per second, you won't really feel it much more than a warmth. It's when you stop moving that it quickly burns. If you set it on a table, it will burn your hand from 25 feet away if you stop in the beam.
These 445nm Casio diodes can be driven at much more than a watt. So far they have been tested at 1.5W and more. I have one showing up tomorrow.
if this is really 1 watt and not an other underpowered piece of crap from wicked lasers i'm definitely getting one.
Looks like NOVA lasers is making one too!! their product is usually much better and OVERpowered!
other forums are reporting a 200 dollar pricetag as well!
Last edited by Advil; 06-18-2010 at 02:28 PM.
it's still being developed i think? not sure
So you're cutting the laser intensity to one 38.6 billionth of its intensity, and it's probably at a size that your eyes just can't see unless it's rather brighter than the background. I suppose we'll hear from NASA soon enough, right?
I call complete BS.
Burn flesh? No.
Burn bugs? No.
Burn or pop a car tire? No.
Boil a shot glass of water? No.
Pop a balloon? Black only, motionless, projecting the beam at exactly the same spot for a minute, maybe.
Cause blindness? Can't any $5 department store laser do that, or for that matter a cheap flashlight held to the eye? Isn't it just a function of how long it takes?
I found myself wondering how powerful the lasers are that are used for lunar ranging. Answer: 2.3 W. They are very careful with the laser: http://www.physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/basics.html
So 2.5 W spread over the area of a 3.5 m telescope is "almost eye-safe".Is it safe?
It's all fun and games until someone shoots an eye out! Working with a powerful laser demands some attention to safety. We follow strict safety guidelines when working around the laser, wearing protective glasses that only admit one ten-millionth of any laser light hitting them to pass through. But once we have expanded the beam to fill the 3.5 meter telescope aperture, it is far less dangerous—almost eye-safe, in fact (far too weak to cause damage to anything but eyes or sensitive detectors). Nonetheless, we are diligent about not hitting aircraft, which, more than creating an eye-hazard would potentially startle pilots. Some have reacted in horror when we tell them that we are shooting a laser at the moon. "Why would you want to destroy the moon?" Rest assured that 2.3 watts of laser power spread over a 2 kilometer patch on the moon is nothing compared to the sun's 1380 watts per square meter. Not even enough to tickle.
No, a torch does not always mean flames.
LED Driver List - now database driven and with new search features.
Andy want. Andy want bad.
"There is darkness round but I see only light."
Certainly someone could dig up this figure , I couldn't find it right away.
Power over Distance - a primer on "burning things at miles away".
Now read this.
You cannot burn objects at miles away, or even hundreds of meters away, with any hand-held laser module; including any laser pointer from Wicked Lasers.
Beam Diameter: 1.5mm @ aperture
Beam Divergence: <1.5mRad
These are pretty typical values for any hand held laser module or pointer. Some may claim as low as 1.2 or 0.9 mRad, but this is typically a lie.
mRad? you ask.
Your beam starts off as 1.5 millimeters "thick" (diameter) when it exits the business end. However, as soon as you start walking even a short distance away from the laser, your target will notice that the beam gets much much wider and subsequently much less powerful. If you're the one holding the laser, you really can't tell the beam (dot) is growing in size.
After each meter, your beam at 1.5 mRad will expand another 1.5 mm in diameter. So after 1 meter distance, your beam is now 3mm thick... after 2 meters, 4.5mm thick... after 100 meters, 151.5mm thick (that is 1/2 foot)... after 200 meters it will become a full 12 inches. Airplanes fly at a cruising altitude of 30,000 ft, or about 9000 meters. By the time your beam reaches an airplane, it is 44 feet or 13.5 meters in diameter.
Naturally, the strength of the beam is much weaker when it's spread out over such a great area.
After 1 meter beam density is only 1/2 as powerful. after 2 meters the beam density is 1/3 as powerful... after 99 meters it's 1/100th as powerful... after 9000 meters, it's 1/9001th as powerful.
1 Watt of energy over 1.5 mm might burn the skin at a close distance, but after 100 meters that same 1.5 mm area is only as strong as a 10 mW laser. After 1000 meters, it's barely 1 mW, and after 9000 it's about 1/10th as powerful as a dollar store laser.
The only thing you're going to burn from 100 meters away is your popularity.
BTW. compared to the visibility of a 532nm green laser for a Dark Adapt eye, a 445nm blue laser is almost exactly 1/3 apparent brightness.
People are asking if this 1W blue laser will be good for pointing at stars. It is about as bright as a 333 mW green laser.
Last edited by Raccoon; 06-19-2010 at 02:36 AM.
he who would give up essential liberty, to purchase temporary safety, deserves neither liberty nor safety. ★ b. franklin
The specs on Wicked Lasers for this laser says:
Output Power: <1W
That reads, "Output power: less than one watt." That's a useless spec. Every portable laser currently made is less than 1W. Considering Wicked Lasers has a history of exaggerating the output power of their products, I'm very interested to see exactly what one of these 445nm lasers measures on an accurate power meter.
If these 445nm diodes can currently be sourced for ~$33 per by cannibalizing a projector, then I suspect they will be available direct from China for less than half that price before the end of the year, and complete "1W" 445nm lasers will be on the market for under $50. At that point, everybody who wants one will have one (or five). This could mean bad things for laser hobbyists, if the power output is anywhere near what people are claiming. Time will tell.
Sure, and the laser can't burn through steel like a hot knife through butter. We may as well be scared of 5 gallon buckets. Do you have any idea how many children drown in buckets each year? 200m? Ha! Buckets are everywhere and anyone can buy them, even in huge quantities, with no government oversight at all. No permits required for filling them with water either.An arc welder cannot blind someone from 200m away.
These hyped up articles are playing to fears of this product being misused. If they would have left it alone it would have been a much smaller group of mostly enthusiasts who were even aware the product exists. Now they're giving it free global advertising and emphasizing its potential to be misused. That is just an example of poor judgment on the journalists' part if they were really concerned about the public safety angle but what's worse is the hype is wildly inaccurate and they attribute things to the laser that it just can't do. Of coursing getting the facts all wrong is nothing new and it's bad enough that at this point you can't honestly consider the mainstream media to be a credible source of information.Can you state the danger of this "wild hype"? Where is the danger? What right do you risk loosing? Again, I'll restate my belief that no one has a legitimate use for a laser of this power without also being able to apply for a special needs permit.
The other thing you said, about what right we risk losing, well that shows me you have a misunderstanding of how freedom works in the US. Our heritage of freedom flows from, among other things, our Constitution that acts as a white list on government powers. By default its our birthright as Americans to do what we please as long as it doesn't harm others unless for some exceptional reason legal restrictions have been put in place through specific due process. Yes, we do have a right to own powerful lasers and it would fall under not only this general principle but also the Tenth Amendment which reads,
The federal government hasn't been given any legitimate special powers to control access to lasers and wisely so. An argument could be made that a given state or community could examine the issue and choose to restrict access to lasers. A total ban would go right out the window as soon as we're talking about a weapons grade laser which would be protected under the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. The military and law enforcement community have shown interest in lasers as weapons which according to supreme court case law strengthens the claim of lasers as protected arms and if this particular laser is actually as capable of blinding as the hype suggests than it would seem that it could indeed fall into the category of arms. Not exactly my top pick in personal armament but the more powerful and portable the laser gets the more likely possession is a protected right under our highest law.The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
It is your right under the First Amendment to loudly and publicly object to the availability of these lasers. While I disagree with your position I do believe it is important for you to exercise your right if for no other reason than all angles on any subject should be considered if we're going to have our society operate on any principle resembling reason. It's even your right to pursue a change in the law to prohibit the laser but it will have to be done in good faith through due process to be legitimate as the United States of America is a Republic and therefore our law is not subject to mob rule. That's also a good thing as it protects the little guys from the whims of the big guys.
Personally I don't think things should have come to the point we need to discuss stuff like this. The laser is neat but not for everybody, just like my lathe which could easily take your arm off if you made just one mistake. Or a five gallon bucket. The debate itself was inevitable though. Firearms, which have been well established as a legally protected class of weapon here in the US, are at heart an ancient technology dating back about 7 centuries. Some would and could argue much older. It was inevitable that just as guns eventually replaced the bow and arrow that directed energy weapons or other exotic technologies would eventually replace the firearm. That replacement is a good thing because eventually it will give rise to the proverbial phaser set on stun which I believe most of us would prefer to use for self defense once they are available, affordable and reliable. I don't know that this product will spur the debate on energy weapons in any significant way but it is a harbinger of things to come.
Edit: maybe it would be a good idea to change that part of your post, in case someone reads it and think they can start pointing their 1W laser at aircraft without startling the pilots
Last edited by Isak Hawk; 06-19-2010 at 02:26 AM.
Indeed. Someone else just pointed out the decimal error to me, so I corrected that statement.
My biggest point of the airplane rant is how these accounts of pilots being "struck in the eye by a laser beam" are inconsistent, and how several are fascinatingly science-fiction in nature.
"green dot in the cockpit that almost hit me in the eye"
"pilot hit in the left eye, co-pilot had to take over"
"seeing an eye doctor"
Seriously now. A 44 foot diameter "beam" isn't going to hit someone in the left eye, or miss the co-pilot.
Cockpits are not dark. Pilots cannot see outside below the horizon. Planes practically fly themselves (as if pilots are searching for dangerous obstacles to avoid?).
There have been some 300 documented incidences claims the FAA. And I'm not buying it.
Last edited by Raccoon; 06-19-2010 at 02:47 AM.
he who would give up essential liberty, to purchase temporary safety, deserves neither liberty nor safety. ★ b. franklin
I think most of those incidents happened during landing/takeoff. During that time they are manually flying the airplane and I think they turn off the light in the cockpit to see the landing strip better (at night).
Anyway, I just think pointing lasers at aircraft is a really bad idea (even if the danger should turn out to be blown way out of proportion).