55
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
55 points (89.9% liked)
Technology
34994 readers
246 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
He should drop it down to a single pixel and see how fast it goes then.
It would be close to infinite refresh rate as the electron beams wouldn't need to move. Also, the phosphors in that spot would probably burn away in a few minutes resulting in no refresh rate at all.
But for a glorious few moments you'd be in nerdvana. Worth it. Refresh rate will simply be calculated by how many electrons hit the screen per second, so not quite infinite. Bet the number is pretty high, though.
Reducing the resolution doesn’t make the beam move any less, even at 1px it would still scan and hit all the phosphors on the screen. My Viewsonic uses the entire screen regardless of resolution; if you set it to 1x1 the entire screen would be lit up. It’s not an LCD, there is no native resolution.
When you powered an old CRT down, the image would collapse to a single horizontal line, and then to a point.
I was thinking you could just cut the power to the deflecting coils.