Darth Sirius Posted March 1, 2005 Posted March 1, 2005 This is a quote from todays newspaper: A star trek-style shield that could make objects seem invisible is being proposed by scientists.They say a cover made from waves of electrons or "plasmons" may cancel out light bouncing off the object, hiding it from view. Although only a plan, the idea is said not to violate any laws of physics. The scheme is the brainchild of two Pennsylvania electronic engineers. A physicist said last night: "It is an interesting concept." Now I dont usually pay heed to newspapers, but it was an interesting enough subject as to draw my attention and subsequently make me post. So thoughts?
213374U Posted March 1, 2005 Posted March 1, 2005 Well, if it can indeed prevent photons from bouncing off an object it could effectively hide an object... against a black background. Otherwise, the silhouette would still be shaped in black. A predator-style invisibilty would involve something more than just absorbing photons. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
Laozi Posted March 1, 2005 Posted March 1, 2005 I hear pretty soon they're going to have magic too People laugh when I say that I think a jellyfish is one of the most beautiful things in the world. What they don't understand is, I mean a jellyfish with long, blond hair.
taks Posted March 1, 2005 Posted March 1, 2005 stealth technology already employs similar methods but with EM scattering and absorptive materials. the stealth fighter has a radar cross-section of a duck (or smaller)... taks comrade taks... just because.
Oerwinde Posted March 1, 2005 Posted March 1, 2005 Wasn't there some video of some japanese guys a couple years ago that had some sort of optic camoflage, everything had a bit of a green tint to it but it was pretty neat. Or was that just a hoax? The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity.
Kaftan Barlast Posted March 1, 2005 Posted March 1, 2005 it could give "blacklighting" a whole new meaning. DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
Gorth Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 They might as well wear a black sheet for all the good it's going to do them. The problem with "invisibility" is the recreation of what is behind you without any refraction factor to simulate the effect of transparancy “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
Oerwinde Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 http://projects.star.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/proje...EDIA/xv/oc.html The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity.
kumquatq3 Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 Wasn't there some video of some japanese guys a couple years ago that had some sort of optic camoflage, everything had a bit of a green tint to it but it was pretty neat. Or was that just a hoax? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nope, it was reality, but it was very impractical set up. Cameras and what not.
Child of Flame Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 I'm thinking if someone could microengineer enough cameras and that new paper thin display stuff I've seen in the works, and then blend them together they could make a Predator style invisibility cloak. I'm also thinking that even by the time they got it microengineered it'd be pretty damn bulky.
jaguars4ever Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 I'm thinking if someone could microengineer enough cameras and that new paper thin display stuff I've seen in the works, and then blend them together they could make a Predator style invisibility cloak. I'm also thinking that even by the time they got it microengineered it'd be pretty damn bulky. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Still, I'd wear it. MUHAHAHA! Err...I mean ---> ::Phew::
Child of Flame Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 I'm thinking if someone could microengineer enough cameras and that new paper thin display stuff I've seen in the works, and then blend them together they could make a Predator style invisibility cloak. I'm also thinking that even by the time they got it microengineered it'd be pretty damn bulky. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Still, I'd wear it. MUHAHAHA! Err...I mean ---> ::Phew:: <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'd rather have Sam Fisher's Shadownet gear. More maneuverability and you get style points.
Kaftan Barlast Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 Invisibility cloak, bah. Id much rather have power armour. DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
Darth Sirius Posted March 2, 2005 Author Posted March 2, 2005 They might as well wear a black sheet for all the good it's going to do them. The problem with "invisibility" is the recreation of what is behind you without any refraction factor to simulate the effect of transparancy <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But if the light didnt bounce off it, wouldnt it just go straight through, and solve that problem?
Rosbjerg Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 the only way to achieve pure invisibility is by bending light around you .. problem is that you won't be able to see anything! since no light will reach you.. the best option would be some kind of material which can duplicate real textures .. so that you blend in with your surrondings, but that will still look a little wierd something like this: Fortune favors the bald.
Kaftan Barlast Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 Better with diversion and disguise. This picture show the elite camoflage skills by expertly trained swedish terrorist sneaking on unsuspecting counterterrorist. Because he is behind tree, he can not be seen. Simple but brilliant. DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
213374U Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 I like the CT's hairdo. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
oherror Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 I hear pretty soon they're going to have magic too <{POST_SNAPBACK}> technology is magic....
oherror Posted March 2, 2005 Posted March 2, 2005 Invisibility cloak, bah. Id much rather have power armour. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> you and me both...i'd like mine to look like fallout tactics style...mmmm...powerarmor
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now