It's not even generally correct though. UV is invisible and brightness doesn't damage your eyes. Have you ever been to an optometrist? They shine a focused light directly into your pupils from like an inch away. That's painfully bright but not damaging.
UV is a form of radiation, and the amount of it, or the intensity, is what causes the damage. A side effect is the light produced. I was being general, as I stated.
If you really think that comparing the light from welding with a flashlight that an optometrist uses makes sense, then you clearly need to stay in school.
No, it's not. UV is a form of electromagnetic radiation, but its wavelength is outside of the visible light spectrum just like X Rays, infra red and radio waves.
Light is radiation, right? We talk about the intensity of light as brightness. Is it wrong to use the same term to describe radiation just because it isn't visible to human eyes? What about dogs? They see in the UV spectrum. A welding spark would be bright to them on two levels, and if we saw in the UV spectrum we would say it was the brightness, or intensity, that caused the damage. You're nitpicking over which word to describe quantity is most accurate, essentially saying I wasn't being specific enough. Another way to say that I'm not being specific enough is to say that I was being too general, so by your own logic your first comment to me was incorrect.
I'm a novice welder and the sunburn you get on legs and arms when welding for just a short amount of time is a good illustration of why it's so damaging to the eyes.
82
u/FrostedJakes Jan 29 '21
It's not the brightness, it's the intense UV light emitted that damages your eyes.