SNAP! Or crap?: Invisibility Cloak Yahoo Headline

[]V[]essenjah · Post by **[]V[]essenjah** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:20 am

Just curious, I read this today:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061019/ap_ ... visibility

So, what do you guys think? Snap or crap?

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:35 am

it's a very interesting scientific result, but does not yet imply that it could ever be done with a broad spectrum (such as the visible spectrum)

In other words, it MIGHT lead to something actually useful someday, but there is no reason to think that it necessarily will. In it's current form, it's really really cool, and not very useful.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:00 am

It's the same basic idea from Star Trek -- bend the electromagnetic rays around the shape so they don't bounce off. It's definitely an infant technology, though. So far, it only works over a limited spectrum -- you might be able to \"cloak\" something from radar but it would be visible to the eye, or you could cloak it from normal light but it would be visible to radar, or whatever. It also requires a large set of machinery to go along with it -- like, the size of a small house.

I'd imagine there's also power loss involved in bending those rays, so strong enough rays could overwhelm the cloaking field and pierce through. You might be able to cloak from ground radar, but an AEW&C might see right through it.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:57 pm

I seem to recall this being in the news about a years ago? Good to see that they are making serious progress.

good read. Thx Messenjah.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:01 pm

Lothar wrote:I'd imagine there's also power loss involved in bending those rays, so strong enough rays could overwhelm the cloaking field and pierce through. You might be able to cloak from ground radar, but an AEW&C might see right through it.

It's a passive technique, so power shouldn't really matter, unless your EM source is strong enough to melt the thing!

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:22 pm

I believe this is working off the same idea as those cameras that could see through clothing a few years back. Since fabric is smaller then the wavelength that the cameras used they could see through. This is also why the cloaking device is unlikely to work in visible light, since it would require the elements that make it up be in the nanometer scale.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:08 pm

This is just for cloaking against microwaves. I don't know that you could \"overwhelm\" it. I imagine the amount of concentraited (?) microwave radiation required to do that would be a bit frightening. at a distance, I wonder if that would be possible. If you wre close to a radar source perhaps. .. But then I AM guessing.

[]V[]essenjah · Post by **[]V[]essenjah** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 4:46 pm

Yeah, but I find it interesting. Remember, a computer as complicated as a calculator used to be the size of a room or small house if I remember correctly.

Look where we are now.

Wouldn't it be easily trackable by heat though?