It’s due to Photonic Energy, expressed by the equation E=hf
Where E = Photonic Energy
h = Planck’s Constant
f = Wave Frequency
Or aliens. You always have to consider aliens.
What about cameras instead of mirrors?
A full size mirror (i.e. 6’) for your walk in closet will have the following disclaimer:
It is not as big as you think it is
Appear
2. seem; give the impression of being.
“she appeared not to know what was happening”
I would say that objects are exactly as far away as they appear in a normal mirror.
Well, yes, but we’re not talking about normal mirrors, here.
That’s silly because then the driver couldn’t see well out the front.
The answer is rotating driver’s seats that spin fast enough that no matter where something happens it will be directly in front of the driver within a fraction of a second, giving them time to react.
To ensure the driver sees the entire 360 degrees every tenth of a second I propose that the seat spin no slower than 600 rpm.
And periodically reverse direction so as not to bias left or right.
Plus, as every child knows, if you spin in one direction and then immediately in the other, you won’t get dizzy.
I anticipated this objection, but that issue is easy to address. After installing rear-facing seats you can just drive everywhere in reverse.
To accommodate rear seat passengers who may wish to wear hats that might impede visibility, it may also be sensible to place the rear-facing driver’s seat in the rear and switch the rear passenger seat to the front.
I think you may be onto something. Plus your system may allow you to get to the place you were previously by leaving for somewhere else.
To be more specific about the role mirrors play as you are driving, is to equate them with other forms of telemetry and instrumentation.
In an airplane, an altimeter provides the pilot with specific information as to how high above the ground he is flying, altitude.
But if the plane is really flying at lets say ten thousand feet, but with the altimeter saying he’s at fifteen thousand feet, this could be a real problem when the pilot begins the landing cycle, especially at night with minimal visual references to coroborate the altitude.
Relying on inaccurate information in this scenario could lead to a crash, with the pilot thinking he has another five thousand feet to go before touchdown.
A second example here involves a speedometer in your car. If this is not accurate, you could be driving at 50 miles per hour, with you speedometer saying you’re only driving 40 miles per hour.
So if this is a 40 mile per hour zone, and you are really doing 50, you’re at risk of a collision or a speeding ticket.
The point here is, if you are found at fault for a collision, or are written a speeding ticket, if you could prove in traffic court that the speedometer you were using to regulate speed was inaccurate, would the judge drop the charges?
So, like the altimeter and the speedometer, could you make a case that your car mirrors that you use to make driving decisions be classified as telemetry and instrumentation?
If so, that means the mirrors would have to be accurate.
Only a class action lawsuit involving everyone who has ever been found at fault for any traffic violation involving these mirrors would be able to force the car companies to completely redesign their car door mirrors to reflect reality, not illusion.
First of all, that could never be a class action case. Each member of the class would require a separate trial to determine if this alleged “defect” was the proximate cause of their injures. Plus, the amount of damage to each individual would require an individual and not a class trial. (compare getting billed an extra $1.56 every month on your phone bill, which makes for a very neat class of plaintiffs)
Second, the mirrors to reflect reality, not illusion. They are real wide angle reflections of what’s behind and to the side. The distance might be hard to judge, hence the warning.
Third, does anyone other than you believe this is a problem?
That’s right, the distance may be hard to judge, so my point is to make easy.
Then you lose field of vision. Who pays for the accidents that causes? Don’t you think the “car companies” had a reason for making the mirrors the way they do?
Nessesity is the mother of invention.
If car companies were forced to redesign the mirrors on car doors, I am sure they could figure something out.
What you’re seeing now if the result of redesign. Mirrors were not always convex. People wanted safer mirrors that reduced the blind spot.
Well, no matter what type of invention or technolgy that we can talk about, there is no such thing as a final upgrade.
Refinements and improvements on everything will continue in perpetuity.
Sure, but that says nothing about today’s mirror designs being unsafe.
I don’t know for sure if anyone has actually put this theory into practice.
I mean, I don’t know wether or not someone has actually tried a defence strategy in court trying to deflect the blame away from the driver and on to a mirror attached to the car in question.
If so, they are few and far between.
And there are probably even fewer people who have ever had any experience while driving that have brought these mirrors into question.
I think I have made a good case that it is at most possible to be confused by these mirrors.
And any type of confusion, even for a split second, behind the wheel is not a good thing.
So I agree, these mirrors are safe. There is no evidence that any drivers in any substantial numbers have brought this up. If there were, local and national news media would have done stories on it by now.
I’ll give you the last word.
I defended a case where a woman had collided with a brick wall at considerable speed in her car, and when the airbag went off she got bad friction burns on the back of her thumbs. She was otherwise pretty much uninjured.
I’m simplifying the issues a bit but basically she gave up when we put on strong evidence that if the airbags had not gone off she would have had her frickin’ head smashed in.
Life is a compromise.
You are only considering one side of the story here. Your point is technically valid but you aren’t giving any weight to the benefit of convex mirrors.
I don’t have any statistics to back this but I would be reasonably sure that more accidents would happen due to drivers being totally unaware of vehicles behind them due to narrow field of view in a flat mirror, than due to misjudging the distance due to convex mirrors. The fact that car manufacturers have reached the same conclusion and now pretty much universally use convex mirrors would suggest I am right.