transmissivity

For starters: * transmissivity of an LCD panel is pretty bad (10%-25% transmissivity?).

In Mexico, there is so much light, that you don’t need the high light transmissivity of glass.

The transmissivity is too high in that image, I agree btw.

Adjustable transmissivity glass is a reality but not yet practical enough for it to be ubiquitous.

Would probably kill the T-stop value when full open due to less than perfect transmissivity though..

If opacity/transmissivity is modeled like it works in real life, given this example, it follows that it wouldn't be additive.

A single mutation that decreases transmissivity (anywhere between 0-100%) presumably loses out to the regular variant.

Short-wave transmissivity of typical single-pane glass is 88% [0] at a 0-degree angle of incidence.

Data from Israel suggests that the vaccine reduces transmissivity by 70 or so per cent.

And there's no way to balance the transmissivity of the lenses and the overlayed images without getting crummier visuals than a screen.

What intuition should a layperson have to suggest that obviously opacity/transmissivity is multiplicative?

Summing the product of insolation, area, and transmissivity together, we get 5.438 kW entering the greenhouse.

And while I'm not a virologist, it doesn't seem far-fetched that "breeds higher viral loads more quickly" would be correlated not only with transmissivity, but also with "kills more".

Even gene-linked desirable traits in one species may not correspond to that trait in another, particularly when your metrics are things like "transmissivity" and "lethality" and not "I need slightly more peas per pod".

I don’t know why you’re being downvoted; for sure, one issue that I see skipped over is what we called “competence” — HIV is incompetent, whereas flu is competent: regardless of transmissivity (Re), you can ask how easily a virus infects.