Reply With Quote
That is cool...
Wouldn't a true "invisibility cloak" need to bend light around an object so it's background would be reflected back to the viewer?
OK, back to my element:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/24131...ity_cloak.html
Neat stuff. Obviously in the testing phase but this has enormous potential.University of Dallas scientists have found a way to fashion carbon nanotubes, the same material used to improve displays and solar panels, into an invisibility cloak. Scientists discovered that if they heated the tubes underwater they could create a “mirage effect” to make objects completely disappear.
That is cool...
Wouldn't a true "invisibility cloak" need to bend light around an object so it's background would be reflected back to the viewer?
Agreed. It's just a switchable mirror.
When I say the le, I thought it was going to be the method that uses cameras, then projects the image behind an object in front of it. Nice to see something different.
I'll bet some similar technology is being used to absorb or refract sonar for ships and subs.
Come on gentlemen. True to form, you didn't actually read the article did you. You just looked at the video and assumed it was a mirrored effect?
The carbon nanotube creates a mirage in the same way the beating sun on a hot summer day makes it look like the sky is part of the street. (Mirages are created by light bending in an upward concave arc as hot air rises, so when you see the sky as part of the ground, your eyes are actually sensing an image from the bent photons.)
The carbon nanotubes are essentially recreating the same effect by boiling the water around it and bending light with the resulting water vapor. As you can tell from the video above, the effect is immediate, as if somebody is turning on a light switch, and it looks as eerily perfect as a cloaking Klingon Bird of Prey.
You don't have to be insulting. I read the article but, what is described isn't exactly bending light around the object, is it? The object is being made invisible by bending light (photons), into the path of the viewer, from other sources.
I would suggest that unless those sources were identical to what was behind the object being cloaked, you would still be able to make out a form.
I wasn't trying to dis the technology, I think it's cool I was just trying to clarify what I though a true "invisibility cloak" would have to entail.
Edit: Ah, this is a different "invisible cloak" than the one I heard about a few years ago. I'll have to find the other "invisible cloak" research and post it. This is pretty neat though.
I read it too. Why do you assume I didn't?
When I said "similar," I knew this technology wasn't sufficient for sound. We keep finding new ways to use nanotubes.
Isn't my relating the idea being different from the camera and projection system more evidence I read such things?
I agree, it isn't exactly a mirror, but at the scale of nanotubes, it may as well be.
That wasn't my intent. However, that's the MO of certain individuals around here.
Yes, light is being bent around the object. The object, however, isn't directly responsible for the bending. It's the boiling of water around the nanotubes that causes the effect.
Yeah it's a little confusing I suppose. The sheets extend from the top copper bar to the bottom one. They don't conform to the area near the words. That's why the bars behind them disappear too. You're seeing whats behind the bars.
I'd guess that in a real cloak, those nanotubes would have to conform to the shape of the object being cloaked.
It's your MO WC. That's what you do. You always chime in without reading the article first. Your conclusion led me to believe that you had done nothing to change my expectations.
Not my MO, but I do sometimes. I usually say I didn't also. Are you trying to make me lose the respect I have for you over the others here?
Fair enough. Your response gave me no indication that you had read it though. It wasn't exactly an unqualified assumption on my part.
You and Yoni sure are sensitive today. Relax. Have another beer.
At any rate, I neither desire or require respect from anyone here. I think I'll be just fine without any votes of confidence from the peanut gallery.
It's all good in the 'hood. I'm getting ready to pour another glass of scotch, though.
Gonna hit the hotel bar after I'm out of here. Its been a long day indeed.It's all good in the 'hood. I'm getting ready to pour another glass of scotch, though.
Don't forget to check for rads.
Sorry, maybe so. Just so used to dealing with so many heads here. i can appreciate those who are liberal, but some are so stupid I call refer to them as lib s.
As for the beer... Just opened my first before logging on.
Either way, I think you are the only one here who understands the varied sciences better than I do. Others would disagree with my knowledge since I am poor at relating what I understand.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
