Even if I have my numbers wrong - 20 degrees in the order of centimetres (which is even more ridiculous), what you and I perceive by touch as a straight line, would appear completely different from a light perspective.
If you are "not" suggesting the changes I understand to be what you are insinuating - what on earth ARE you insinuating then?
I don't know how to properly explain what I am insinuating because I do not know which part of what I said gave you the impression that you have. If you let me know how you came to the conclusion that I am advocating a bend of 45 degrees over the range of a few nanometres, I can better point out your error.
As far as I understand it, you are suggesting a bend of light in fibre optics of the order in this image:
For starters, let me point out, it is ME, that has gone out of my way to draw something that you refuse to, just to try and grasp you ridiculous conceptions. Secondly, I apologise for the quality of drawing, it was a quick representation, and you should understand the idea behind it if this is really what you believe.
If this is not what you mean, then you seriously need to take the time to sit down and draw how you think fibre optics work with bending light in your mind in Microsoft Paint. This is exactly what I have done above, and I'm getting sick of your strange avoidance of drawing what you are insinuating.
If this REALLY isn't what you mean - then the way bending light would progress through a fibre optic would mean that the critical incidence angle of the optic would be achieved and all data would be lost. End of story.
Poll