b*1
7 楼
3岁前都不要看,别说2个月了
m*u
8 楼
2个月?我们开始也不懂,用电脑给孩子放 baby einstein 说是启发智力的,被儿医说
了一顿,这么小的孩子看啥电视啊。儿医还说他的孩子五六岁以后也是最多每天半小时
。
了一顿,这么小的孩子看啥电视啊。儿医还说他的孩子五六岁以后也是最多每天半小时
。
s*e
9 楼
晚上和老公吵了一架,就为了这个。
他的意思是,他放的所谓的“电影”,是夸张的说法,就是youtube上的一些东西,然
后找了些黑白的图片,给宝宝看。不是我说的“动画片”。还有,他说他又时候就是把
ipad放在宝宝头边上,不是正对着眼睛。
怪我在网上胡说八道,气死我了。
他的意思是,他放的所谓的“电影”,是夸张的说法,就是youtube上的一些东西,然
后找了些黑白的图片,给宝宝看。不是我说的“动画片”。还有,他说他又时候就是把
ipad放在宝宝头边上,不是正对着眼睛。
怪我在网上胡说八道,气死我了。
S*6
11 楼
我们一直严格遵守这个常识, 不让我们几个月的宝宝看计算机屏幕. 但是我本人一直怀
疑这种禁忌的科学性:
(1) 说屏幕闪烁伤眼, 那么很多给小孩的玩具都有闪光, 而屏幕自发光也不是不可以调
节, 比如某些电子书的显示屏就没有自发光线, 也就是说没有光线发射出来;
(2) 说是让小孩子过早接触虚幻影像不好, 他们最好多接触实际物体. 这个就是时代观
念问题了. 谁说电视视频里的东西就一定是幻象呢, 难道电子传输的东西就一定不存在
, 也许未来的社会对计算机视频以及远程交流的普及对于更早接触电子屏幕的孩子更为
适应呢 ?
我有个朋友的孩子, 不到三岁, 经常看电视, 已经可以对其中人物评头论足, 很有看法
, 他也没有因此在实际生活中和别人交流有障碍, 他知道电视里的就是电视里的, 那里
的人是别的什么地方的, 不是跟前的. 因为小孩并非很难理解不在身边的人物.
【在 r****j 的大作中提到】
: 对眼睛和大脑都不好,LZ难道一点这方面的常识都没有?
疑这种禁忌的科学性:
(1) 说屏幕闪烁伤眼, 那么很多给小孩的玩具都有闪光, 而屏幕自发光也不是不可以调
节, 比如某些电子书的显示屏就没有自发光线, 也就是说没有光线发射出来;
(2) 说是让小孩子过早接触虚幻影像不好, 他们最好多接触实际物体. 这个就是时代观
念问题了. 谁说电视视频里的东西就一定是幻象呢, 难道电子传输的东西就一定不存在
, 也许未来的社会对计算机视频以及远程交流的普及对于更早接触电子屏幕的孩子更为
适应呢 ?
我有个朋友的孩子, 不到三岁, 经常看电视, 已经可以对其中人物评头论足, 很有看法
, 他也没有因此在实际生活中和别人交流有障碍, 他知道电视里的就是电视里的, 那里
的人是别的什么地方的, 不是跟前的. 因为小孩并非很难理解不在身边的人物.
【在 r****j 的大作中提到】
: 对眼睛和大脑都不好,LZ难道一点这方面的常识都没有?
p*y
12 楼
你说的这些都不是关键。电视最大的害处是让孩子的大脑养成消极被动接受信息的习惯
,影响大脑发育。
【在 S******6 的大作中提到】
: 我们一直严格遵守这个常识, 不让我们几个月的宝宝看计算机屏幕. 但是我本人一直怀
: 疑这种禁忌的科学性:
: (1) 说屏幕闪烁伤眼, 那么很多给小孩的玩具都有闪光, 而屏幕自发光也不是不可以调
: 节, 比如某些电子书的显示屏就没有自发光线, 也就是说没有光线发射出来;
: (2) 说是让小孩子过早接触虚幻影像不好, 他们最好多接触实际物体. 这个就是时代观
: 念问题了. 谁说电视视频里的东西就一定是幻象呢, 难道电子传输的东西就一定不存在
: , 也许未来的社会对计算机视频以及远程交流的普及对于更早接触电子屏幕的孩子更为
: 适应呢 ?
: 我有个朋友的孩子, 不到三岁, 经常看电视, 已经可以对其中人物评头论足, 很有看法
: , 他也没有因此在实际生活中和别人交流有障碍, 他知道电视里的就是电视里的, 那里
,影响大脑发育。
【在 S******6 的大作中提到】
: 我们一直严格遵守这个常识, 不让我们几个月的宝宝看计算机屏幕. 但是我本人一直怀
: 疑这种禁忌的科学性:
: (1) 说屏幕闪烁伤眼, 那么很多给小孩的玩具都有闪光, 而屏幕自发光也不是不可以调
: 节, 比如某些电子书的显示屏就没有自发光线, 也就是说没有光线发射出来;
: (2) 说是让小孩子过早接触虚幻影像不好, 他们最好多接触实际物体. 这个就是时代观
: 念问题了. 谁说电视视频里的东西就一定是幻象呢, 难道电子传输的东西就一定不存在
: , 也许未来的社会对计算机视频以及远程交流的普及对于更早接触电子屏幕的孩子更为
: 适应呢 ?
: 我有个朋友的孩子, 不到三岁, 经常看电视, 已经可以对其中人物评头论足, 很有看法
: , 他也没有因此在实际生活中和别人交流有障碍, 他知道电视里的就是电视里的, 那里
r*j
13 楼
如果你认为儿童玩具发出来的光和显示器是一样的,那我真是无语......
蓝光是波长为400~500nm的高能量可见光。蓝光其实是一种可以损害宝宝视力的高能量
可见光,闪光灯、浴霸、阳光等都含有蓝光。蓝光普遍存在于我们的日常生活和工作的
所有光源当中,各类现代平板显示器、TFT薄膜屏幕、LED、荧光灯、液晶显示器等各种
新型人造光源发出的可见光中都含有大量的不规则频率的短波蓝光,这些短波蓝光具有
极高能量,能够穿透晶状体直达视网膜。
光对视网膜的损害程度取决于光的波长和强度以及暴露时间长短。因紫外光和红外光通
常被角膜和晶状体吸收,因此一般不会照射到视网膜。但蓝光可以穿透晶状体到达视网
膜,对其造成光化学损害,加速黄斑区细胞的氧化。因此,蓝光被研究证实是最具有危
害性的可见光。
关于蓝光,还有一点需要引起注意的是,蓝光的最大危害性风险发生在婴幼儿时期:婴
儿出生时的晶状体相对比较清澈,在0~2岁这个年龄段,大约70%~80%的蓝光可以穿透
晶状体到达视网膜,在2~10岁这个年龄段,大约60%~70%的蓝光会照射到视网膜。新
生儿黄疸临床常用蓝光照射的方法是众所周知的,但医生一定要用黑布遮光,遮住婴儿
的眼睛,目的就是要避免蓝光损害。这是普通的常识了。
【在 S******6 的大作中提到】
: 我们一直严格遵守这个常识, 不让我们几个月的宝宝看计算机屏幕. 但是我本人一直怀
: 疑这种禁忌的科学性:
: (1) 说屏幕闪烁伤眼, 那么很多给小孩的玩具都有闪光, 而屏幕自发光也不是不可以调
: 节, 比如某些电子书的显示屏就没有自发光线, 也就是说没有光线发射出来;
: (2) 说是让小孩子过早接触虚幻影像不好, 他们最好多接触实际物体. 这个就是时代观
: 念问题了. 谁说电视视频里的东西就一定是幻象呢, 难道电子传输的东西就一定不存在
: , 也许未来的社会对计算机视频以及远程交流的普及对于更早接触电子屏幕的孩子更为
: 适应呢 ?
: 我有个朋友的孩子, 不到三岁, 经常看电视, 已经可以对其中人物评头论足, 很有看法
: , 他也没有因此在实际生活中和别人交流有障碍, 他知道电视里的就是电视里的, 那里
蓝光是波长为400~500nm的高能量可见光。蓝光其实是一种可以损害宝宝视力的高能量
可见光,闪光灯、浴霸、阳光等都含有蓝光。蓝光普遍存在于我们的日常生活和工作的
所有光源当中,各类现代平板显示器、TFT薄膜屏幕、LED、荧光灯、液晶显示器等各种
新型人造光源发出的可见光中都含有大量的不规则频率的短波蓝光,这些短波蓝光具有
极高能量,能够穿透晶状体直达视网膜。
光对视网膜的损害程度取决于光的波长和强度以及暴露时间长短。因紫外光和红外光通
常被角膜和晶状体吸收,因此一般不会照射到视网膜。但蓝光可以穿透晶状体到达视网
膜,对其造成光化学损害,加速黄斑区细胞的氧化。因此,蓝光被研究证实是最具有危
害性的可见光。
关于蓝光,还有一点需要引起注意的是,蓝光的最大危害性风险发生在婴幼儿时期:婴
儿出生时的晶状体相对比较清澈,在0~2岁这个年龄段,大约70%~80%的蓝光可以穿透
晶状体到达视网膜,在2~10岁这个年龄段,大约60%~70%的蓝光会照射到视网膜。新
生儿黄疸临床常用蓝光照射的方法是众所周知的,但医生一定要用黑布遮光,遮住婴儿
的眼睛,目的就是要避免蓝光损害。这是普通的常识了。
【在 S******6 的大作中提到】
: 我们一直严格遵守这个常识, 不让我们几个月的宝宝看计算机屏幕. 但是我本人一直怀
: 疑这种禁忌的科学性:
: (1) 说屏幕闪烁伤眼, 那么很多给小孩的玩具都有闪光, 而屏幕自发光也不是不可以调
: 节, 比如某些电子书的显示屏就没有自发光线, 也就是说没有光线发射出来;
: (2) 说是让小孩子过早接触虚幻影像不好, 他们最好多接触实际物体. 这个就是时代观
: 念问题了. 谁说电视视频里的东西就一定是幻象呢, 难道电子传输的东西就一定不存在
: , 也许未来的社会对计算机视频以及远程交流的普及对于更早接触电子屏幕的孩子更为
: 适应呢 ?
: 我有个朋友的孩子, 不到三岁, 经常看电视, 已经可以对其中人物评头论足, 很有看法
: , 他也没有因此在实际生活中和别人交流有障碍, 他知道电视里的就是电视里的, 那里
R*e
16 楼
那大家的宝宝要和国内爷爷奶奶外公外婆视频的话,怎么办?大家有严格时间控制还是
全都免了?
全都免了?
S*6
17 楼
对不起, 本人是光谱学 Ph.D., 很惊讶光谱学有这样的精彩应用.
请问, 你穿一件蓝色体恤, 你宝宝看到的蓝光是什么频率, 难道不是 400-500 nm ?
是不是家里有幼儿全家不许穿蓝衣服 ?
另外, 如果你说的这个蓝光有害正确, 那么难道不发射蓝光的屏幕就是对孩子安全的吗
? 这个实在太简单了, 你装个滤光片选择性吸收蓝光波段不就可以了. 而我先前提到
的电子书, 只有黑白, 而且自己不发光, 是不是对小孩就绝对安全了.
总之, 我觉得这个话题上以讹传讹的东西太多.
【在 r****j 的大作中提到】
: 如果你认为儿童玩具发出来的光和显示器是一样的,那我真是无语......
: 蓝光是波长为400~500nm的高能量可见光。蓝光其实是一种可以损害宝宝视力的高能量
: 可见光,闪光灯、浴霸、阳光等都含有蓝光。蓝光普遍存在于我们的日常生活和工作的
: 所有光源当中,各类现代平板显示器、TFT薄膜屏幕、LED、荧光灯、液晶显示器等各种
: 新型人造光源发出的可见光中都含有大量的不规则频率的短波蓝光,这些短波蓝光具有
: 极高能量,能够穿透晶状体直达视网膜。
: 光对视网膜的损害程度取决于光的波长和强度以及暴露时间长短。因紫外光和红外光通
: 常被角膜和晶状体吸收,因此一般不会照射到视网膜。但蓝光可以穿透晶状体到达视网
: 膜,对其造成光化学损害,加速黄斑区细胞的氧化。因此,蓝光被研究证实是最具有危
: 害性的可见光。
请问, 你穿一件蓝色体恤, 你宝宝看到的蓝光是什么频率, 难道不是 400-500 nm ?
是不是家里有幼儿全家不许穿蓝衣服 ?
另外, 如果你说的这个蓝光有害正确, 那么难道不发射蓝光的屏幕就是对孩子安全的吗
? 这个实在太简单了, 你装个滤光片选择性吸收蓝光波段不就可以了. 而我先前提到
的电子书, 只有黑白, 而且自己不发光, 是不是对小孩就绝对安全了.
总之, 我觉得这个话题上以讹传讹的东西太多.
【在 r****j 的大作中提到】
: 如果你认为儿童玩具发出来的光和显示器是一样的,那我真是无语......
: 蓝光是波长为400~500nm的高能量可见光。蓝光其实是一种可以损害宝宝视力的高能量
: 可见光,闪光灯、浴霸、阳光等都含有蓝光。蓝光普遍存在于我们的日常生活和工作的
: 所有光源当中,各类现代平板显示器、TFT薄膜屏幕、LED、荧光灯、液晶显示器等各种
: 新型人造光源发出的可见光中都含有大量的不规则频率的短波蓝光,这些短波蓝光具有
: 极高能量,能够穿透晶状体直达视网膜。
: 光对视网膜的损害程度取决于光的波长和强度以及暴露时间长短。因紫外光和红外光通
: 常被角膜和晶状体吸收,因此一般不会照射到视网膜。但蓝光可以穿透晶状体到达视网
: 膜,对其造成光化学损害,加速黄斑区细胞的氧化。因此,蓝光被研究证实是最具有危
: 害性的可见光。
S*6
20 楼
Is it OK for babies to watch TV?
by Jacob Silverman
The effect of television on children, especially on babies, is an intensely
controversial subject. Every year rafts of studies and statistics appear
about children's television habits, and some of them may seem alarming.
The average American child watches about four hours of television a day [
Source: AAP], while 20 percent of children under 2 have televisions in their
rooms. Among babies 3 months old and younger, 40 percent watch TV, with the
percentage increasing significantly for children age 2 and younger [Source:
Seattle Post-Intelligencer]. A study in 2003 found that children 6 months
to 6 years old spend an average of two hours a day dealing with "screen
media" like televisions, computers and video games [Source: CBS News]. The
study also revealed a correlation between time spent watching television and
difficulty reading.
Many of these studies have led doctors, educators and other experts to
recommend curbing a child's TV consumption. The campaign received another
shot in the arm when a study released in early August 2007 showed that baby-
oriented video programs like "Baby Einstein" and "Brainy Baby" may harm
child development. These videos, which are widely available on VHS and DVD,
contain little dialogue, instead relying on juxtaposed images that
frequently aren't related to one another or are difficult to explain. (The
study cites lava lamps as one example of an image or concept that's hard to
explain to a baby.) But the videos are tremendously popular: The "Baby
Einstein" series has earned more than $500 million in revenue [Source:
Boston Globe] and Disney purchased the company in 2001 [Source: Denver Post].
Many parents say that they use these videos like babysitters, turning on a "
Baby Einstein" DVD for their children so that mom and dad can clean up the
house, prepare dinner or take care of other chores. But the problem,
researchers say, is that these videos don't provide the benefits they claim,
and they may even do harm.
The problem lies not only in the videos' content -- little dialogue or
interactivity and rapidly changing images -- but also with how babies'
brains develop. A child's brain is very sensitive before age 2. It's still
developing neural connections and growing in size. Because of this
sensitivity, it's important for babies to have a lot of interactive
stimulation to learn and develop. The researchers contend that the videos
don't provide this stimulation.
The study, which was published in the Journal of Pediatrics, looked at 1,000
families, examining children who were 8 months to 16 months old. Thirty-two
percent of children surveyed watched the videos, 17 percent of them for at
least an hour a day. To determine how programs like "Baby Einstein" affected
development, they focused on vocabulary. On average, for every hour a day a
child watched these programs he or she knew six to eight fewer words
compared to children of the same age. Children who were 17 months to 24
months old didn't seem affected by the program in any way.
The head of the study, Frederick Zimmerman of the University of Washington,
said that "there is no clear evidence of a benefit coming from baby DVDs and
videos, and there is some suggestion of harm" [Source: Forbes].
So should all TV-viewing be forbidden for young children? On the next page,
we'll look at what else the researchers had to say and what some experts
recommend for babies watching TV.
(to be continued)
by Jacob Silverman
The effect of television on children, especially on babies, is an intensely
controversial subject. Every year rafts of studies and statistics appear
about children's television habits, and some of them may seem alarming.
The average American child watches about four hours of television a day [
Source: AAP], while 20 percent of children under 2 have televisions in their
rooms. Among babies 3 months old and younger, 40 percent watch TV, with the
percentage increasing significantly for children age 2 and younger [Source:
Seattle Post-Intelligencer]. A study in 2003 found that children 6 months
to 6 years old spend an average of two hours a day dealing with "screen
media" like televisions, computers and video games [Source: CBS News]. The
study also revealed a correlation between time spent watching television and
difficulty reading.
Many of these studies have led doctors, educators and other experts to
recommend curbing a child's TV consumption. The campaign received another
shot in the arm when a study released in early August 2007 showed that baby-
oriented video programs like "Baby Einstein" and "Brainy Baby" may harm
child development. These videos, which are widely available on VHS and DVD,
contain little dialogue, instead relying on juxtaposed images that
frequently aren't related to one another or are difficult to explain. (The
study cites lava lamps as one example of an image or concept that's hard to
explain to a baby.) But the videos are tremendously popular: The "Baby
Einstein" series has earned more than $500 million in revenue [Source:
Boston Globe] and Disney purchased the company in 2001 [Source: Denver Post].
Many parents say that they use these videos like babysitters, turning on a "
Baby Einstein" DVD for their children so that mom and dad can clean up the
house, prepare dinner or take care of other chores. But the problem,
researchers say, is that these videos don't provide the benefits they claim,
and they may even do harm.
The problem lies not only in the videos' content -- little dialogue or
interactivity and rapidly changing images -- but also with how babies'
brains develop. A child's brain is very sensitive before age 2. It's still
developing neural connections and growing in size. Because of this
sensitivity, it's important for babies to have a lot of interactive
stimulation to learn and develop. The researchers contend that the videos
don't provide this stimulation.
The study, which was published in the Journal of Pediatrics, looked at 1,000
families, examining children who were 8 months to 16 months old. Thirty-two
percent of children surveyed watched the videos, 17 percent of them for at
least an hour a day. To determine how programs like "Baby Einstein" affected
development, they focused on vocabulary. On average, for every hour a day a
child watched these programs he or she knew six to eight fewer words
compared to children of the same age. Children who were 17 months to 24
months old didn't seem affected by the program in any way.
The head of the study, Frederick Zimmerman of the University of Washington,
said that "there is no clear evidence of a benefit coming from baby DVDs and
videos, and there is some suggestion of harm" [Source: Forbes].
So should all TV-viewing be forbidden for young children? On the next page,
we'll look at what else the researchers had to say and what some experts
recommend for babies watching TV.
(to be continued)
S*6
21 楼
Recommendations for Babies and TV
One of the researchers involved with the "Baby Einstein" study said that he
would prefer that parents watch television with their children, if they
allow their children to watch TV at all. That way at least the parents would
be engaging with their children and helping them to understand unfamiliar
concepts. The creators of the "Baby Einstein" series offer the same advice [
Source: Denver Post].
But many experts contend that young children shouldn't watch any TV. The
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says that children under 2 years old
should not watch any television and that children older than 2 shouldn't
watch more than one to two hours of TV a day [Source: AAP].
In a published statement, Frederick Zimmerman and the other researchers
emphasized the consideration of time. They argue that watching television
wastes babies' "alert time," since babies sleep about 12 hours a day [Source
"baby talk" (which actually helps babies develop language) and engaging in
interactive activities that TV can't provide. Physical and social
interaction allows babies to pick up subtle cues that also help language
development. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association recommends a
variety of exercises for aiding babies' cognitive development, including
using eye contact, engaging in back-and-forth conversation, playing "finger
games" (like peek-a-boo) and reading to a child [Source: ASHA]. If they're
on their own, games like playing with blocks are beneficial.
Experts associate excessive TV watching with a variety of problems in
children, among them childhood obesity, ADHD and aggression. Some advocacy
groups also express concern about the images children see on "non-
educational" TV shows. The AAP estimates that if a child watches between
three and four hours of TV a day, he will see 8,000 murders before he starts
middle school [Source: AAP]
Some research shows that certain TV shows do help development. The
popularity and critical acclaim of "Sesame Street," which is geared towards
toddlers, is proof of that. Preschool-aged children can benefit from
educational TV. There's also a TV channel called BabyFirstTV devoted solely
to programming for babies, but it is the subject of some criticism.
BabyFirstTV runs commercial-free, educational programs that last less than
10 minutes. The company claims that while parents generally leave babies to
watch TV unattended, most of their customers watch TV with their children.
Even so, some doctors claim that that's only the lesser of two evils.
Many television-viewing habits have neither a positive nor a negative effect
. The AAP and other experts recommend that if your child is watching TV,
watch it with him. Watching together facilitates positive interactions.
Parents can explain problems with a show or things a child doesn't
understand.
Zimmerman argues that the amount of time spent watching DVDs like "Baby
Einstein" is an important factor, but more research is also needed in order
to study the long-term developmental effects of these videos. The overall
conclusion appears to be that even supposedly educational television can be
harmful to children under 2. Parent-child interaction is important at any
age, but it's even more important for babies, and that's something a screen
can't replace.
For more information about babies and TV, cognitive development and related
topics, please check out the links on the next page.
(to be continued)
One of the researchers involved with the "Baby Einstein" study said that he
would prefer that parents watch television with their children, if they
allow their children to watch TV at all. That way at least the parents would
be engaging with their children and helping them to understand unfamiliar
concepts. The creators of the "Baby Einstein" series offer the same advice [
Source: Denver Post].
But many experts contend that young children shouldn't watch any TV. The
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says that children under 2 years old
should not watch any television and that children older than 2 shouldn't
watch more than one to two hours of TV a day [Source: AAP].
In a published statement, Frederick Zimmerman and the other researchers
emphasized the consideration of time. They argue that watching television
wastes babies' "alert time," since babies sleep about 12 hours a day [Source
"baby talk" (which actually helps babies develop language) and engaging in
interactive activities that TV can't provide. Physical and social
interaction allows babies to pick up subtle cues that also help language
development. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association recommends a
variety of exercises for aiding babies' cognitive development, including
using eye contact, engaging in back-and-forth conversation, playing "finger
games" (like peek-a-boo) and reading to a child [Source: ASHA]. If they're
on their own, games like playing with blocks are beneficial.
Experts associate excessive TV watching with a variety of problems in
children, among them childhood obesity, ADHD and aggression. Some advocacy
groups also express concern about the images children see on "non-
educational" TV shows. The AAP estimates that if a child watches between
three and four hours of TV a day, he will see 8,000 murders before he starts
middle school [Source: AAP]
Some research shows that certain TV shows do help development. The
popularity and critical acclaim of "Sesame Street," which is geared towards
toddlers, is proof of that. Preschool-aged children can benefit from
educational TV. There's also a TV channel called BabyFirstTV devoted solely
to programming for babies, but it is the subject of some criticism.
BabyFirstTV runs commercial-free, educational programs that last less than
10 minutes. The company claims that while parents generally leave babies to
watch TV unattended, most of their customers watch TV with their children.
Even so, some doctors claim that that's only the lesser of two evils.
Many television-viewing habits have neither a positive nor a negative effect
. The AAP and other experts recommend that if your child is watching TV,
watch it with him. Watching together facilitates positive interactions.
Parents can explain problems with a show or things a child doesn't
understand.
Zimmerman argues that the amount of time spent watching DVDs like "Baby
Einstein" is an important factor, but more research is also needed in order
to study the long-term developmental effects of these videos. The overall
conclusion appears to be that even supposedly educational television can be
harmful to children under 2. Parent-child interaction is important at any
age, but it's even more important for babies, and that's something a screen
can't replace.
For more information about babies and TV, cognitive development and related
topics, please check out the links on the next page.
(to be continued)
r*j
23 楼
“蓝光”显示器是指以H.264编码的1080p高清格式输出偏振光信号显示器,
利用波长为405纳米的蓝色激光读写数据,并因此而得名。
光谱学 Ph.D,你觉得这根种受激放大的偏振光和无偏振现象的自然光的能量是一样的
吗?
【在 S******6 的大作中提到】
: 对不起, 本人是光谱学 Ph.D., 很惊讶光谱学有这样的精彩应用.
: 请问, 你穿一件蓝色体恤, 你宝宝看到的蓝光是什么频率, 难道不是 400-500 nm ?
: 是不是家里有幼儿全家不许穿蓝衣服 ?
: 另外, 如果你说的这个蓝光有害正确, 那么难道不发射蓝光的屏幕就是对孩子安全的吗
: ? 这个实在太简单了, 你装个滤光片选择性吸收蓝光波段不就可以了. 而我先前提到
: 的电子书, 只有黑白, 而且自己不发光, 是不是对小孩就绝对安全了.
: 总之, 我觉得这个话题上以讹传讹的东西太多.
利用波长为405纳米的蓝色激光读写数据,并因此而得名。
光谱学 Ph.D,你觉得这根种受激放大的偏振光和无偏振现象的自然光的能量是一样的
吗?
【在 S******6 的大作中提到】
: 对不起, 本人是光谱学 Ph.D., 很惊讶光谱学有这样的精彩应用.
: 请问, 你穿一件蓝色体恤, 你宝宝看到的蓝光是什么频率, 难道不是 400-500 nm ?
: 是不是家里有幼儿全家不许穿蓝衣服 ?
: 另外, 如果你说的这个蓝光有害正确, 那么难道不发射蓝光的屏幕就是对孩子安全的吗
: ? 这个实在太简单了, 你装个滤光片选择性吸收蓝光波段不就可以了. 而我先前提到
: 的电子书, 只有黑白, 而且自己不发光, 是不是对小孩就绝对安全了.
: 总之, 我觉得这个话题上以讹传讹的东西太多.
相关阅读
婴儿房什么时候会用到?大吼一声,东岸的姐妹们你们抢到面包了吗?芝加哥西北郊家庭诚征月嫂卖Kohls coupon的QuietBunny同学I539 申请费到底是多少?我岳母的材料被打回来了 (转载)到底是啥意思,中文翻成啥什么时候开始tummy time?Alhambra costco没有宝宝喝的organic whole milk了。我家6个多月的小宝脑门顶一跳一跳的,正常吗?婴儿票可以到机场再买吗?送gymboree 20% off 和$50 off enrollment吃不完的米糊怎么办[求助] 宝宝的了重病 (转载)huaren抽风了?是不是妈妈老长痘痘的是男孩,皮肤光滑的是女孩?文章被顶置,然后我删掉了,请各位谅解18个月的宝宝知道什么事情危险吗?有多少姐妹月子里需要自己做饭的,给点经验和鼓励吧想廳大家的意見按例假算的预产期和B超的预产期