TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Most of us are working in offices with fluorescent lights, running on AC
current. In the US, that means the lights are actually flashing at 60hz,
(too fast for your eye to detect, but flashing) The monitor on the computer
is also running off the AC current, and (interlaced or non-interlaced) it's
also flashing at (US) 60hz. Even if the power source for both is in phase,
it's impossible for the flashes to reach your eye in phase. (You'd have to
have the distances between light, monitor, and eye set to a ratio accurate
within one wavelength of light, and -I- can't hold my head that still.)
*************************
This may partially explain why I prefer to have to lights out in my office
while I work--regardless of how dark it is. I keep a little incandescent
light trained on my desk. Interestingly, the window light only bothers me
when it reflects on my screen, but not when it "generally" lights up the
room. I can work for much longer times without the flourescents flickering...
The programmers like it that way, too. However, I have been cautioned by
(definite) non-experts that this is ultimately bad for my vision. (It is
true that I now need glasses for distance, but I'm gettin' older, and other
factors have surely contributed to the hardening of my corneas.) Anyone
with any proof on the subject?
