If you stand in a room with mirrors as the walls and floors, is the observable reflection infinite? It'd be interesting to see how a grazing animal or a far-sighted bird reacts to that phenomenon.
Pic related. I really want to build a mirror room now.
>op builds a mirror room
>enters for testing, lock door
>can't find it anymore gets locked in it forever
>>8563356
It's probably just like looking in the concave side of a shiny spoon. Jeez man, it's a mirror, not rocket science.
>>8563351
Conan solved that problem already.
>>8563386
kek
>>8563095
two mirrors parallel to each other are enough to get the "infinite reflection" thingy going.
4 mirrors if you want to be able to look in all directions in the horizontal plane.
you can literally build this thing at home
>>8563406
>4 mirrors
actually 3 mirrors are enough, then you get 3 fold symmetry.
kind of fun actually. OP watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd_HGjH7QZo
it's educational and fun and vaguely related
>>8563351
If worst came to worst, destroying the mirrors would help alleviate that problem.
>>8563095
No a mirror is not perfect. It absorbs light by a tiny amount each time it's reflected. As you can see in your pic it gets greenish the deeper you look. This is because green is absorbed a little less compared to the other wavelengths. I think fucking vsause did a video on it. Its called mirrors are green or some clickbaity thing like that.
The had such a room at the local science museum in my city. It was a little dark, not enough to obscure anything, just enough ht make it creepy. And they would play this weird ambient music too. Always scared the shit out of me as a kid. Especially when looking down.
If you stare at your face in a mirror in low light you'll hallucinate. I've heard some terrifying shit about low-light mirror boxes, too.
>>8563095
>you stand in a room with mirrors as the walls and floors, is the observable reflection infinite?
no. light needs some time to travel.
>>8563095
just remember to bring a towel
>>8564945
How many reflections deep would you have to look before you see a noticeable time-delay?
>>8565365
Define "noticeable". I think that your eyes would lack the resolution to see that point, so unless you're using something else to observe for you I think the short answer is that you wouldn't.
>>8563409
knot theory is fucking based.