The Lazy Laser Physicist












12
















You have a setup like in the image above. But it seems like detector A does some weird things. You should better check it with detector B. What is the minimum number of mirrors you have to move (translate and rotate arbitrarily) to bring the laser beam onto detector B?




  • Please leave the mirrors which are used to direct the laser to detector A as they are, because if it turns out detector A is not broken you want to switch back to it. I mean it's quite well shielded from stray light compared to detector B.

  • The thick black lines are walls. Please don't burn any holes in them.

  • The mirrors all look the same. They have only one side (blue) with reflective coating.

  • The grey grid is only for orientation.

  • The detectors work for any angle of incidence.

  • Make sure that the beam actually hits the detector, not only stray light.

  • And don't look into the laser beam.










share|improve this question





























    12
















    You have a setup like in the image above. But it seems like detector A does some weird things. You should better check it with detector B. What is the minimum number of mirrors you have to move (translate and rotate arbitrarily) to bring the laser beam onto detector B?




    • Please leave the mirrors which are used to direct the laser to detector A as they are, because if it turns out detector A is not broken you want to switch back to it. I mean it's quite well shielded from stray light compared to detector B.

    • The thick black lines are walls. Please don't burn any holes in them.

    • The mirrors all look the same. They have only one side (blue) with reflective coating.

    • The grey grid is only for orientation.

    • The detectors work for any angle of incidence.

    • Make sure that the beam actually hits the detector, not only stray light.

    • And don't look into the laser beam.










    share|improve this question



























      12












      12








      12


      0







      You have a setup like in the image above. But it seems like detector A does some weird things. You should better check it with detector B. What is the minimum number of mirrors you have to move (translate and rotate arbitrarily) to bring the laser beam onto detector B?




      • Please leave the mirrors which are used to direct the laser to detector A as they are, because if it turns out detector A is not broken you want to switch back to it. I mean it's quite well shielded from stray light compared to detector B.

      • The thick black lines are walls. Please don't burn any holes in them.

      • The mirrors all look the same. They have only one side (blue) with reflective coating.

      • The grey grid is only for orientation.

      • The detectors work for any angle of incidence.

      • Make sure that the beam actually hits the detector, not only stray light.

      • And don't look into the laser beam.










      share|improve this question

















      You have a setup like in the image above. But it seems like detector A does some weird things. You should better check it with detector B. What is the minimum number of mirrors you have to move (translate and rotate arbitrarily) to bring the laser beam onto detector B?




      • Please leave the mirrors which are used to direct the laser to detector A as they are, because if it turns out detector A is not broken you want to switch back to it. I mean it's quite well shielded from stray light compared to detector B.

      • The thick black lines are walls. Please don't burn any holes in them.

      • The mirrors all look the same. They have only one side (blue) with reflective coating.

      • The grey grid is only for orientation.

      • The detectors work for any angle of incidence.

      • Make sure that the beam actually hits the detector, not only stray light.

      • And don't look into the laser beam.







      visual geometry physics






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited yesterday

























      asked yesterday









      A. P.

      3,40511144




      3,40511144






















          7 Answers
          7






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          20














          Assuming only 45 degree mirrors,




          We are going to need two moves, and there are several ways to do it.




          But since the detectors are omnidirectional, we can do better:



          First, take a look at the two mirrors nearest detector B. Mark the position B' as the location of the detector B as seen through the nearest mirror. Then, mark position B'', which is B' as seen through the second mirror. From that point, draw a straight line to the center of the third mirror in the rightmost column.



          Notice that the line moves 1 square sideways in 6 vertical squares. It also passes through another mirror in between. Pick up this mirror, we'll use it when we figure out where to place it.



          Now, reflecting at the mirror, continue the line 6 squares to the left, during which time it moves 1 square up, because of the reflected angle. What joy, we are at a spot through which the original beam passes, so we can move the mirror we picked up here. We must place the mirror at an angle that is exactly half of the desired beam deflection (which is $text{arctan}(1/6) approx 9.5°$), or about 4.7 degrees, in order to hit the detector.



          Like so:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer























          • Nice explanation! rot13(Gurer vf ng yrnfg bar zber fvzvyne fbyhgvba, gurersber V jvyy jnvg fbzr gvzr orsber V npprcg gur nafjre jvgu gur uvturfg fpber.)
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • This would be my intended answer, but yours is equally good.
            – A. P.
            yesterday



















          17














          I think you can do it with two moves: one translation and one rotation:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.














          • 3




            I prefer this answer because we can keep mirrors at 45 degree diagonals and it has the same number of moves as Bass's answer. And in real life, hitting the laser sensor at an angle means you might not be transmitting 100% of the laser beam, which we don't have to worry about here.
            – person27
            yesterday












          • @person27 if you read through the question carefully, you'll notice that this answer uses two moves, while my answer uses one. Also, the question clearly states that the detectors work at any angle of incidence. All that being said, I think this is nicer than any of the 2-move solutions I could find, so +1 in any case.
            – Bass
            17 mins ago





















          13














          Bass' answer is perfectly valid, but I just wanted to share another answer that works in the same way:




          One can solve it moving only one mirror.







          share|improve this answer





















          • That's really interesting. I didn't catch anything in the question saying no arbitary rotations, etc.
            – Adrian Zhang
            yesterday






          • 2




            For a general solution, you could replace detector B with a powerful light bulb, and then pick up the mirrors one by one. Wherever a spot gets illuminated by both the laser and the bulb, that's a possible spot for the picked up mirror.
            – Bass
            yesterday



















          10














          A lazy laser physicist would balk at the extra calculations they'd have to do if any of the mirrors aren't oriented exactly at 45 degrees (to horizontal). They are not actually allowed to adjust the newly positioned mirrors on a trial and error basis (to lazily escape the calculations) because (a) they'll burn a hole or more in the walls and (b) perhaps someone will accidentally look into an unstable laser beam.

          The solutions (including the one by the OP) which use mirrors at angles other than 45 degrees are smart (respect!!!) but not really suitable for use by lazy people.

          Since it appears that two is the minimum number of mirrors to move, our lazy scientist would prefer one of the easiest solutions (both on their hands and brains) which should be the ones involving simple translation (with no rotation) assuming the setup allows them to do it easily enough.



          One such solution would be:




          enter image description here
          The arrow marks show the translation to be done; the green line is the new laser beam.

          Please excuse the shabby and not-to-scale drawing, if any.




          With the assumption of easy reversibility of translations (so that we can go back to the original configuration easily), we can take it a step further and use just one movement:




          enter image description here
          The translation can be reversed to reach detector A. In effect this movement can be toggled to use detector A or B as required.







          share|improve this answer























          • While you're right that moving the mirror in your second solution is the easiest solution, it violates the instructions on the puzzle, requiring that you leave the mirrors that reflect to A alone.
            – Andrew
            45 mins ago



















          4














          With some minor fidgeting, I'm pretty confident a setup like this can work well. Just move any unused mirror into the blue spot as shown:




          idk







          share|improve this answer

















          • 3




            Creative idea, but unfortunately mirrors are not that creative. Keeping the reflected angle the same as the incident angle, the beam has the same direction after being reflected from two parallel or orthogonal mirrors. So the downwards tendency after the inserted mirror should be the same two mirrors later.
            – A. P.
            yesterday



















          3














          Possibly you could




          do it with one mirror




          if you




          can position the mirror pointed to by the blue arrow as show below in blue in front of the mirror used by detector A and reflect directly to the detector (Thanks Dr Xorile)




          Shown here




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer























          • But here you changed one of the mirrors that are used to direct the beam onto detector A.
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • sorry @A.P. .i'll clear up what i meant.... rot13(chg n qvssrerag zveebe va sebag bs gur bar hfrq sbe qrgrpgbe N)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • Ok that would solve the aforementioned problem. But what I don't like about this solution is that you only direct stray light into detector B, not the whole beam. I will make this point clear in the question.
            – A. P.
            yesterday






          • 1




            @A.P. I'm not sure what you mean. Why would it be stray light? if they are perfect mirrors, you will get the whole beam. What i'm not sure about is if there is a gap big enough to hit the second mirror by detector B at the right angle, but thats what I'm trying! i suggest using a low power laser to check :)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • The "oblique reflection" made me think that you mean stray light. Can you show your solution with less wrinkeled beams and a real-size mirror? Because I actually tried my best to avoid exactly this solution.
            – A. P.
            yesterday



















          3














          I found a solution with 2 mirrors:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer





















          • As a lazy physicist who hates aligning mirrors, I'd remove the 2 mirrors vertically below B, and shift the one mirror from below A to the right.
            – The Photon
            19 hours ago











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "559"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f78008%2fthe-lazy-laser-physicist%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          7 Answers
          7






          active

          oldest

          votes








          7 Answers
          7






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          20














          Assuming only 45 degree mirrors,




          We are going to need two moves, and there are several ways to do it.




          But since the detectors are omnidirectional, we can do better:



          First, take a look at the two mirrors nearest detector B. Mark the position B' as the location of the detector B as seen through the nearest mirror. Then, mark position B'', which is B' as seen through the second mirror. From that point, draw a straight line to the center of the third mirror in the rightmost column.



          Notice that the line moves 1 square sideways in 6 vertical squares. It also passes through another mirror in between. Pick up this mirror, we'll use it when we figure out where to place it.



          Now, reflecting at the mirror, continue the line 6 squares to the left, during which time it moves 1 square up, because of the reflected angle. What joy, we are at a spot through which the original beam passes, so we can move the mirror we picked up here. We must place the mirror at an angle that is exactly half of the desired beam deflection (which is $text{arctan}(1/6) approx 9.5°$), or about 4.7 degrees, in order to hit the detector.



          Like so:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer























          • Nice explanation! rot13(Gurer vf ng yrnfg bar zber fvzvyne fbyhgvba, gurersber V jvyy jnvg fbzr gvzr orsber V npprcg gur nafjre jvgu gur uvturfg fpber.)
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • This would be my intended answer, but yours is equally good.
            – A. P.
            yesterday
















          20














          Assuming only 45 degree mirrors,




          We are going to need two moves, and there are several ways to do it.




          But since the detectors are omnidirectional, we can do better:



          First, take a look at the two mirrors nearest detector B. Mark the position B' as the location of the detector B as seen through the nearest mirror. Then, mark position B'', which is B' as seen through the second mirror. From that point, draw a straight line to the center of the third mirror in the rightmost column.



          Notice that the line moves 1 square sideways in 6 vertical squares. It also passes through another mirror in between. Pick up this mirror, we'll use it when we figure out where to place it.



          Now, reflecting at the mirror, continue the line 6 squares to the left, during which time it moves 1 square up, because of the reflected angle. What joy, we are at a spot through which the original beam passes, so we can move the mirror we picked up here. We must place the mirror at an angle that is exactly half of the desired beam deflection (which is $text{arctan}(1/6) approx 9.5°$), or about 4.7 degrees, in order to hit the detector.



          Like so:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer























          • Nice explanation! rot13(Gurer vf ng yrnfg bar zber fvzvyne fbyhgvba, gurersber V jvyy jnvg fbzr gvzr orsber V npprcg gur nafjre jvgu gur uvturfg fpber.)
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • This would be my intended answer, but yours is equally good.
            – A. P.
            yesterday














          20












          20








          20






          Assuming only 45 degree mirrors,




          We are going to need two moves, and there are several ways to do it.




          But since the detectors are omnidirectional, we can do better:



          First, take a look at the two mirrors nearest detector B. Mark the position B' as the location of the detector B as seen through the nearest mirror. Then, mark position B'', which is B' as seen through the second mirror. From that point, draw a straight line to the center of the third mirror in the rightmost column.



          Notice that the line moves 1 square sideways in 6 vertical squares. It also passes through another mirror in between. Pick up this mirror, we'll use it when we figure out where to place it.



          Now, reflecting at the mirror, continue the line 6 squares to the left, during which time it moves 1 square up, because of the reflected angle. What joy, we are at a spot through which the original beam passes, so we can move the mirror we picked up here. We must place the mirror at an angle that is exactly half of the desired beam deflection (which is $text{arctan}(1/6) approx 9.5°$), or about 4.7 degrees, in order to hit the detector.



          Like so:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer














          Assuming only 45 degree mirrors,




          We are going to need two moves, and there are several ways to do it.




          But since the detectors are omnidirectional, we can do better:



          First, take a look at the two mirrors nearest detector B. Mark the position B' as the location of the detector B as seen through the nearest mirror. Then, mark position B'', which is B' as seen through the second mirror. From that point, draw a straight line to the center of the third mirror in the rightmost column.



          Notice that the line moves 1 square sideways in 6 vertical squares. It also passes through another mirror in between. Pick up this mirror, we'll use it when we figure out where to place it.



          Now, reflecting at the mirror, continue the line 6 squares to the left, during which time it moves 1 square up, because of the reflected angle. What joy, we are at a spot through which the original beam passes, so we can move the mirror we picked up here. We must place the mirror at an angle that is exactly half of the desired beam deflection (which is $text{arctan}(1/6) approx 9.5°$), or about 4.7 degrees, in order to hit the detector.



          Like so:




          enter image description here








          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited yesterday

























          answered yesterday









          Bass

          27.3k465169




          27.3k465169












          • Nice explanation! rot13(Gurer vf ng yrnfg bar zber fvzvyne fbyhgvba, gurersber V jvyy jnvg fbzr gvzr orsber V npprcg gur nafjre jvgu gur uvturfg fpber.)
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • This would be my intended answer, but yours is equally good.
            – A. P.
            yesterday


















          • Nice explanation! rot13(Gurer vf ng yrnfg bar zber fvzvyne fbyhgvba, gurersber V jvyy jnvg fbzr gvzr orsber V npprcg gur nafjre jvgu gur uvturfg fpber.)
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • This would be my intended answer, but yours is equally good.
            – A. P.
            yesterday
















          Nice explanation! rot13(Gurer vf ng yrnfg bar zber fvzvyne fbyhgvba, gurersber V jvyy jnvg fbzr gvzr orsber V npprcg gur nafjre jvgu gur uvturfg fpber.)
          – A. P.
          yesterday




          Nice explanation! rot13(Gurer vf ng yrnfg bar zber fvzvyne fbyhgvba, gurersber V jvyy jnvg fbzr gvzr orsber V npprcg gur nafjre jvgu gur uvturfg fpber.)
          – A. P.
          yesterday












          This would be my intended answer, but yours is equally good.
          – A. P.
          yesterday




          This would be my intended answer, but yours is equally good.
          – A. P.
          yesterday











          17














          I think you can do it with two moves: one translation and one rotation:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.














          • 3




            I prefer this answer because we can keep mirrors at 45 degree diagonals and it has the same number of moves as Bass's answer. And in real life, hitting the laser sensor at an angle means you might not be transmitting 100% of the laser beam, which we don't have to worry about here.
            – person27
            yesterday












          • @person27 if you read through the question carefully, you'll notice that this answer uses two moves, while my answer uses one. Also, the question clearly states that the detectors work at any angle of incidence. All that being said, I think this is nicer than any of the 2-move solutions I could find, so +1 in any case.
            – Bass
            17 mins ago


















          17














          I think you can do it with two moves: one translation and one rotation:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.














          • 3




            I prefer this answer because we can keep mirrors at 45 degree diagonals and it has the same number of moves as Bass's answer. And in real life, hitting the laser sensor at an angle means you might not be transmitting 100% of the laser beam, which we don't have to worry about here.
            – person27
            yesterday












          • @person27 if you read through the question carefully, you'll notice that this answer uses two moves, while my answer uses one. Also, the question clearly states that the detectors work at any angle of incidence. All that being said, I think this is nicer than any of the 2-move solutions I could find, so +1 in any case.
            – Bass
            17 mins ago
















          17












          17








          17






          I think you can do it with two moves: one translation and one rotation:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          I think you can do it with two moves: one translation and one rotation:




          enter image description here








          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer






          New contributor




          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          answered yesterday









          l.bee

          1713




          1713




          New contributor




          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





          New contributor





          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          l.bee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.








          • 3




            I prefer this answer because we can keep mirrors at 45 degree diagonals and it has the same number of moves as Bass's answer. And in real life, hitting the laser sensor at an angle means you might not be transmitting 100% of the laser beam, which we don't have to worry about here.
            – person27
            yesterday












          • @person27 if you read through the question carefully, you'll notice that this answer uses two moves, while my answer uses one. Also, the question clearly states that the detectors work at any angle of incidence. All that being said, I think this is nicer than any of the 2-move solutions I could find, so +1 in any case.
            – Bass
            17 mins ago
















          • 3




            I prefer this answer because we can keep mirrors at 45 degree diagonals and it has the same number of moves as Bass's answer. And in real life, hitting the laser sensor at an angle means you might not be transmitting 100% of the laser beam, which we don't have to worry about here.
            – person27
            yesterday












          • @person27 if you read through the question carefully, you'll notice that this answer uses two moves, while my answer uses one. Also, the question clearly states that the detectors work at any angle of incidence. All that being said, I think this is nicer than any of the 2-move solutions I could find, so +1 in any case.
            – Bass
            17 mins ago










          3




          3




          I prefer this answer because we can keep mirrors at 45 degree diagonals and it has the same number of moves as Bass's answer. And in real life, hitting the laser sensor at an angle means you might not be transmitting 100% of the laser beam, which we don't have to worry about here.
          – person27
          yesterday






          I prefer this answer because we can keep mirrors at 45 degree diagonals and it has the same number of moves as Bass's answer. And in real life, hitting the laser sensor at an angle means you might not be transmitting 100% of the laser beam, which we don't have to worry about here.
          – person27
          yesterday














          @person27 if you read through the question carefully, you'll notice that this answer uses two moves, while my answer uses one. Also, the question clearly states that the detectors work at any angle of incidence. All that being said, I think this is nicer than any of the 2-move solutions I could find, so +1 in any case.
          – Bass
          17 mins ago






          @person27 if you read through the question carefully, you'll notice that this answer uses two moves, while my answer uses one. Also, the question clearly states that the detectors work at any angle of incidence. All that being said, I think this is nicer than any of the 2-move solutions I could find, so +1 in any case.
          – Bass
          17 mins ago













          13














          Bass' answer is perfectly valid, but I just wanted to share another answer that works in the same way:




          One can solve it moving only one mirror.







          share|improve this answer





















          • That's really interesting. I didn't catch anything in the question saying no arbitary rotations, etc.
            – Adrian Zhang
            yesterday






          • 2




            For a general solution, you could replace detector B with a powerful light bulb, and then pick up the mirrors one by one. Wherever a spot gets illuminated by both the laser and the bulb, that's a possible spot for the picked up mirror.
            – Bass
            yesterday
















          13














          Bass' answer is perfectly valid, but I just wanted to share another answer that works in the same way:




          One can solve it moving only one mirror.







          share|improve this answer





















          • That's really interesting. I didn't catch anything in the question saying no arbitary rotations, etc.
            – Adrian Zhang
            yesterday






          • 2




            For a general solution, you could replace detector B with a powerful light bulb, and then pick up the mirrors one by one. Wherever a spot gets illuminated by both the laser and the bulb, that's a possible spot for the picked up mirror.
            – Bass
            yesterday














          13












          13








          13






          Bass' answer is perfectly valid, but I just wanted to share another answer that works in the same way:




          One can solve it moving only one mirror.







          share|improve this answer












          Bass' answer is perfectly valid, but I just wanted to share another answer that works in the same way:




          One can solve it moving only one mirror.








          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          A. P.

          3,40511144




          3,40511144












          • That's really interesting. I didn't catch anything in the question saying no arbitary rotations, etc.
            – Adrian Zhang
            yesterday






          • 2




            For a general solution, you could replace detector B with a powerful light bulb, and then pick up the mirrors one by one. Wherever a spot gets illuminated by both the laser and the bulb, that's a possible spot for the picked up mirror.
            – Bass
            yesterday


















          • That's really interesting. I didn't catch anything in the question saying no arbitary rotations, etc.
            – Adrian Zhang
            yesterday






          • 2




            For a general solution, you could replace detector B with a powerful light bulb, and then pick up the mirrors one by one. Wherever a spot gets illuminated by both the laser and the bulb, that's a possible spot for the picked up mirror.
            – Bass
            yesterday
















          That's really interesting. I didn't catch anything in the question saying no arbitary rotations, etc.
          – Adrian Zhang
          yesterday




          That's really interesting. I didn't catch anything in the question saying no arbitary rotations, etc.
          – Adrian Zhang
          yesterday




          2




          2




          For a general solution, you could replace detector B with a powerful light bulb, and then pick up the mirrors one by one. Wherever a spot gets illuminated by both the laser and the bulb, that's a possible spot for the picked up mirror.
          – Bass
          yesterday




          For a general solution, you could replace detector B with a powerful light bulb, and then pick up the mirrors one by one. Wherever a spot gets illuminated by both the laser and the bulb, that's a possible spot for the picked up mirror.
          – Bass
          yesterday











          10














          A lazy laser physicist would balk at the extra calculations they'd have to do if any of the mirrors aren't oriented exactly at 45 degrees (to horizontal). They are not actually allowed to adjust the newly positioned mirrors on a trial and error basis (to lazily escape the calculations) because (a) they'll burn a hole or more in the walls and (b) perhaps someone will accidentally look into an unstable laser beam.

          The solutions (including the one by the OP) which use mirrors at angles other than 45 degrees are smart (respect!!!) but not really suitable for use by lazy people.

          Since it appears that two is the minimum number of mirrors to move, our lazy scientist would prefer one of the easiest solutions (both on their hands and brains) which should be the ones involving simple translation (with no rotation) assuming the setup allows them to do it easily enough.



          One such solution would be:




          enter image description here
          The arrow marks show the translation to be done; the green line is the new laser beam.

          Please excuse the shabby and not-to-scale drawing, if any.




          With the assumption of easy reversibility of translations (so that we can go back to the original configuration easily), we can take it a step further and use just one movement:




          enter image description here
          The translation can be reversed to reach detector A. In effect this movement can be toggled to use detector A or B as required.







          share|improve this answer























          • While you're right that moving the mirror in your second solution is the easiest solution, it violates the instructions on the puzzle, requiring that you leave the mirrors that reflect to A alone.
            – Andrew
            45 mins ago
















          10














          A lazy laser physicist would balk at the extra calculations they'd have to do if any of the mirrors aren't oriented exactly at 45 degrees (to horizontal). They are not actually allowed to adjust the newly positioned mirrors on a trial and error basis (to lazily escape the calculations) because (a) they'll burn a hole or more in the walls and (b) perhaps someone will accidentally look into an unstable laser beam.

          The solutions (including the one by the OP) which use mirrors at angles other than 45 degrees are smart (respect!!!) but not really suitable for use by lazy people.

          Since it appears that two is the minimum number of mirrors to move, our lazy scientist would prefer one of the easiest solutions (both on their hands and brains) which should be the ones involving simple translation (with no rotation) assuming the setup allows them to do it easily enough.



          One such solution would be:




          enter image description here
          The arrow marks show the translation to be done; the green line is the new laser beam.

          Please excuse the shabby and not-to-scale drawing, if any.




          With the assumption of easy reversibility of translations (so that we can go back to the original configuration easily), we can take it a step further and use just one movement:




          enter image description here
          The translation can be reversed to reach detector A. In effect this movement can be toggled to use detector A or B as required.







          share|improve this answer























          • While you're right that moving the mirror in your second solution is the easiest solution, it violates the instructions on the puzzle, requiring that you leave the mirrors that reflect to A alone.
            – Andrew
            45 mins ago














          10












          10








          10






          A lazy laser physicist would balk at the extra calculations they'd have to do if any of the mirrors aren't oriented exactly at 45 degrees (to horizontal). They are not actually allowed to adjust the newly positioned mirrors on a trial and error basis (to lazily escape the calculations) because (a) they'll burn a hole or more in the walls and (b) perhaps someone will accidentally look into an unstable laser beam.

          The solutions (including the one by the OP) which use mirrors at angles other than 45 degrees are smart (respect!!!) but not really suitable for use by lazy people.

          Since it appears that two is the minimum number of mirrors to move, our lazy scientist would prefer one of the easiest solutions (both on their hands and brains) which should be the ones involving simple translation (with no rotation) assuming the setup allows them to do it easily enough.



          One such solution would be:




          enter image description here
          The arrow marks show the translation to be done; the green line is the new laser beam.

          Please excuse the shabby and not-to-scale drawing, if any.




          With the assumption of easy reversibility of translations (so that we can go back to the original configuration easily), we can take it a step further and use just one movement:




          enter image description here
          The translation can be reversed to reach detector A. In effect this movement can be toggled to use detector A or B as required.







          share|improve this answer














          A lazy laser physicist would balk at the extra calculations they'd have to do if any of the mirrors aren't oriented exactly at 45 degrees (to horizontal). They are not actually allowed to adjust the newly positioned mirrors on a trial and error basis (to lazily escape the calculations) because (a) they'll burn a hole or more in the walls and (b) perhaps someone will accidentally look into an unstable laser beam.

          The solutions (including the one by the OP) which use mirrors at angles other than 45 degrees are smart (respect!!!) but not really suitable for use by lazy people.

          Since it appears that two is the minimum number of mirrors to move, our lazy scientist would prefer one of the easiest solutions (both on their hands and brains) which should be the ones involving simple translation (with no rotation) assuming the setup allows them to do it easily enough.



          One such solution would be:




          enter image description here
          The arrow marks show the translation to be done; the green line is the new laser beam.

          Please excuse the shabby and not-to-scale drawing, if any.




          With the assumption of easy reversibility of translations (so that we can go back to the original configuration easily), we can take it a step further and use just one movement:




          enter image description here
          The translation can be reversed to reach detector A. In effect this movement can be toggled to use detector A or B as required.








          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited yesterday

























          answered yesterday









          alwayslearning

          36518




          36518












          • While you're right that moving the mirror in your second solution is the easiest solution, it violates the instructions on the puzzle, requiring that you leave the mirrors that reflect to A alone.
            – Andrew
            45 mins ago


















          • While you're right that moving the mirror in your second solution is the easiest solution, it violates the instructions on the puzzle, requiring that you leave the mirrors that reflect to A alone.
            – Andrew
            45 mins ago
















          While you're right that moving the mirror in your second solution is the easiest solution, it violates the instructions on the puzzle, requiring that you leave the mirrors that reflect to A alone.
          – Andrew
          45 mins ago




          While you're right that moving the mirror in your second solution is the easiest solution, it violates the instructions on the puzzle, requiring that you leave the mirrors that reflect to A alone.
          – Andrew
          45 mins ago











          4














          With some minor fidgeting, I'm pretty confident a setup like this can work well. Just move any unused mirror into the blue spot as shown:




          idk







          share|improve this answer

















          • 3




            Creative idea, but unfortunately mirrors are not that creative. Keeping the reflected angle the same as the incident angle, the beam has the same direction after being reflected from two parallel or orthogonal mirrors. So the downwards tendency after the inserted mirror should be the same two mirrors later.
            – A. P.
            yesterday
















          4














          With some minor fidgeting, I'm pretty confident a setup like this can work well. Just move any unused mirror into the blue spot as shown:




          idk







          share|improve this answer

















          • 3




            Creative idea, but unfortunately mirrors are not that creative. Keeping the reflected angle the same as the incident angle, the beam has the same direction after being reflected from two parallel or orthogonal mirrors. So the downwards tendency after the inserted mirror should be the same two mirrors later.
            – A. P.
            yesterday














          4












          4








          4






          With some minor fidgeting, I'm pretty confident a setup like this can work well. Just move any unused mirror into the blue spot as shown:




          idk







          share|improve this answer












          With some minor fidgeting, I'm pretty confident a setup like this can work well. Just move any unused mirror into the blue spot as shown:




          idk








          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          greenturtle3141

          5,24311952




          5,24311952








          • 3




            Creative idea, but unfortunately mirrors are not that creative. Keeping the reflected angle the same as the incident angle, the beam has the same direction after being reflected from two parallel or orthogonal mirrors. So the downwards tendency after the inserted mirror should be the same two mirrors later.
            – A. P.
            yesterday














          • 3




            Creative idea, but unfortunately mirrors are not that creative. Keeping the reflected angle the same as the incident angle, the beam has the same direction after being reflected from two parallel or orthogonal mirrors. So the downwards tendency after the inserted mirror should be the same two mirrors later.
            – A. P.
            yesterday








          3




          3




          Creative idea, but unfortunately mirrors are not that creative. Keeping the reflected angle the same as the incident angle, the beam has the same direction after being reflected from two parallel or orthogonal mirrors. So the downwards tendency after the inserted mirror should be the same two mirrors later.
          – A. P.
          yesterday




          Creative idea, but unfortunately mirrors are not that creative. Keeping the reflected angle the same as the incident angle, the beam has the same direction after being reflected from two parallel or orthogonal mirrors. So the downwards tendency after the inserted mirror should be the same two mirrors later.
          – A. P.
          yesterday











          3














          Possibly you could




          do it with one mirror




          if you




          can position the mirror pointed to by the blue arrow as show below in blue in front of the mirror used by detector A and reflect directly to the detector (Thanks Dr Xorile)




          Shown here




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer























          • But here you changed one of the mirrors that are used to direct the beam onto detector A.
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • sorry @A.P. .i'll clear up what i meant.... rot13(chg n qvssrerag zveebe va sebag bs gur bar hfrq sbe qrgrpgbe N)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • Ok that would solve the aforementioned problem. But what I don't like about this solution is that you only direct stray light into detector B, not the whole beam. I will make this point clear in the question.
            – A. P.
            yesterday






          • 1




            @A.P. I'm not sure what you mean. Why would it be stray light? if they are perfect mirrors, you will get the whole beam. What i'm not sure about is if there is a gap big enough to hit the second mirror by detector B at the right angle, but thats what I'm trying! i suggest using a low power laser to check :)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • The "oblique reflection" made me think that you mean stray light. Can you show your solution with less wrinkeled beams and a real-size mirror? Because I actually tried my best to avoid exactly this solution.
            – A. P.
            yesterday
















          3














          Possibly you could




          do it with one mirror




          if you




          can position the mirror pointed to by the blue arrow as show below in blue in front of the mirror used by detector A and reflect directly to the detector (Thanks Dr Xorile)




          Shown here




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer























          • But here you changed one of the mirrors that are used to direct the beam onto detector A.
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • sorry @A.P. .i'll clear up what i meant.... rot13(chg n qvssrerag zveebe va sebag bs gur bar hfrq sbe qrgrpgbe N)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • Ok that would solve the aforementioned problem. But what I don't like about this solution is that you only direct stray light into detector B, not the whole beam. I will make this point clear in the question.
            – A. P.
            yesterday






          • 1




            @A.P. I'm not sure what you mean. Why would it be stray light? if they are perfect mirrors, you will get the whole beam. What i'm not sure about is if there is a gap big enough to hit the second mirror by detector B at the right angle, but thats what I'm trying! i suggest using a low power laser to check :)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • The "oblique reflection" made me think that you mean stray light. Can you show your solution with less wrinkeled beams and a real-size mirror? Because I actually tried my best to avoid exactly this solution.
            – A. P.
            yesterday














          3












          3








          3






          Possibly you could




          do it with one mirror




          if you




          can position the mirror pointed to by the blue arrow as show below in blue in front of the mirror used by detector A and reflect directly to the detector (Thanks Dr Xorile)




          Shown here




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer














          Possibly you could




          do it with one mirror




          if you




          can position the mirror pointed to by the blue arrow as show below in blue in front of the mirror used by detector A and reflect directly to the detector (Thanks Dr Xorile)




          Shown here




          enter image description here








          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited yesterday

























          answered yesterday









          SteveV

          5,4452629




          5,4452629












          • But here you changed one of the mirrors that are used to direct the beam onto detector A.
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • sorry @A.P. .i'll clear up what i meant.... rot13(chg n qvssrerag zveebe va sebag bs gur bar hfrq sbe qrgrpgbe N)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • Ok that would solve the aforementioned problem. But what I don't like about this solution is that you only direct stray light into detector B, not the whole beam. I will make this point clear in the question.
            – A. P.
            yesterday






          • 1




            @A.P. I'm not sure what you mean. Why would it be stray light? if they are perfect mirrors, you will get the whole beam. What i'm not sure about is if there is a gap big enough to hit the second mirror by detector B at the right angle, but thats what I'm trying! i suggest using a low power laser to check :)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • The "oblique reflection" made me think that you mean stray light. Can you show your solution with less wrinkeled beams and a real-size mirror? Because I actually tried my best to avoid exactly this solution.
            – A. P.
            yesterday


















          • But here you changed one of the mirrors that are used to direct the beam onto detector A.
            – A. P.
            yesterday










          • sorry @A.P. .i'll clear up what i meant.... rot13(chg n qvssrerag zveebe va sebag bs gur bar hfrq sbe qrgrpgbe N)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • Ok that would solve the aforementioned problem. But what I don't like about this solution is that you only direct stray light into detector B, not the whole beam. I will make this point clear in the question.
            – A. P.
            yesterday






          • 1




            @A.P. I'm not sure what you mean. Why would it be stray light? if they are perfect mirrors, you will get the whole beam. What i'm not sure about is if there is a gap big enough to hit the second mirror by detector B at the right angle, but thats what I'm trying! i suggest using a low power laser to check :)
            – SteveV
            yesterday










          • The "oblique reflection" made me think that you mean stray light. Can you show your solution with less wrinkeled beams and a real-size mirror? Because I actually tried my best to avoid exactly this solution.
            – A. P.
            yesterday
















          But here you changed one of the mirrors that are used to direct the beam onto detector A.
          – A. P.
          yesterday




          But here you changed one of the mirrors that are used to direct the beam onto detector A.
          – A. P.
          yesterday












          sorry @A.P. .i'll clear up what i meant.... rot13(chg n qvssrerag zveebe va sebag bs gur bar hfrq sbe qrgrpgbe N)
          – SteveV
          yesterday




          sorry @A.P. .i'll clear up what i meant.... rot13(chg n qvssrerag zveebe va sebag bs gur bar hfrq sbe qrgrpgbe N)
          – SteveV
          yesterday












          Ok that would solve the aforementioned problem. But what I don't like about this solution is that you only direct stray light into detector B, not the whole beam. I will make this point clear in the question.
          – A. P.
          yesterday




          Ok that would solve the aforementioned problem. But what I don't like about this solution is that you only direct stray light into detector B, not the whole beam. I will make this point clear in the question.
          – A. P.
          yesterday




          1




          1




          @A.P. I'm not sure what you mean. Why would it be stray light? if they are perfect mirrors, you will get the whole beam. What i'm not sure about is if there is a gap big enough to hit the second mirror by detector B at the right angle, but thats what I'm trying! i suggest using a low power laser to check :)
          – SteveV
          yesterday




          @A.P. I'm not sure what you mean. Why would it be stray light? if they are perfect mirrors, you will get the whole beam. What i'm not sure about is if there is a gap big enough to hit the second mirror by detector B at the right angle, but thats what I'm trying! i suggest using a low power laser to check :)
          – SteveV
          yesterday












          The "oblique reflection" made me think that you mean stray light. Can you show your solution with less wrinkeled beams and a real-size mirror? Because I actually tried my best to avoid exactly this solution.
          – A. P.
          yesterday




          The "oblique reflection" made me think that you mean stray light. Can you show your solution with less wrinkeled beams and a real-size mirror? Because I actually tried my best to avoid exactly this solution.
          – A. P.
          yesterday











          3














          I found a solution with 2 mirrors:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer





















          • As a lazy physicist who hates aligning mirrors, I'd remove the 2 mirrors vertically below B, and shift the one mirror from below A to the right.
            – The Photon
            19 hours ago
















          3














          I found a solution with 2 mirrors:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer





















          • As a lazy physicist who hates aligning mirrors, I'd remove the 2 mirrors vertically below B, and shift the one mirror from below A to the right.
            – The Photon
            19 hours ago














          3












          3








          3






          I found a solution with 2 mirrors:




          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer












          I found a solution with 2 mirrors:




          enter image description here








          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          Display name

          860216




          860216












          • As a lazy physicist who hates aligning mirrors, I'd remove the 2 mirrors vertically below B, and shift the one mirror from below A to the right.
            – The Photon
            19 hours ago


















          • As a lazy physicist who hates aligning mirrors, I'd remove the 2 mirrors vertically below B, and shift the one mirror from below A to the right.
            – The Photon
            19 hours ago
















          As a lazy physicist who hates aligning mirrors, I'd remove the 2 mirrors vertically below B, and shift the one mirror from below A to the right.
          – The Photon
          19 hours ago




          As a lazy physicist who hates aligning mirrors, I'd remove the 2 mirrors vertically below B, and shift the one mirror from below A to the right.
          – The Photon
          19 hours ago


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Puzzling Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f78008%2fthe-lazy-laser-physicist%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          CARDNET

          Boot-repair Failure: Unable to locate package grub-common:i386

          濃尾地震