Slashdot Mirror


The Solar Death Ray

Ant writes the "Solar Death Ray is made of 112 mirrors mounted on a platform 4 feet wide and 6 feet tall. Each mirror is a square roughly 3.5 inches on edge. All these mirrors focus the sun to a single spot 5 feet, 6 inches from the mirror platform. A wooden fork extends from the mirror base to the area near the focus and serves as a mounting point for Solar Death Ray targets. The mirror platform is mounted to the support frame on a pivot that allows the platform to be angled. The whole system is mounted on a set of wheels. The goal of the Web site was to show the results of the targeted items when the solar death ray was used."

496 comments

  1. I've already seen it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    And Batman & Robin wasn't very good.

    1. Re:I've already seen it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a dick? Does he think we are going to get attacked by giant ants?

  2. the website is subtitled by winkydink · · Score: 5, Funny

    How I squandered my youth and why I didn't get laid.

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    1. Re:the website is subtitled by Zone-MR · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hmmm, judging by his short writeup it seems he's doing everything right.

    2. Re:the website is subtitled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just like slashdot

    3. Re:the website is subtitled by John+Seminal · · Score: 1
      How I squandered my youth and why I didn't get laid.

      Just be happy you did not lose your gonads playing with your chemistry set.

      --

      Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    4. Re:the website is subtitled by Entouchable · · Score: 1

      Hi MOST people on SlashDot.. It's something we got over years ago ;)

    5. Re:the website is subtitled by The+Bungi · · Score: 5, Funny
      I feel a disturbance in the InnoDB table - it's as if suddenly a million .sigs changed to the same exact value.

      Slashdot, we have a winner.

    6. Re:the website is subtitled by yo303 · · Score: 5, Funny
      From his imagined "finding a girlfriend" walkthrough:
      I think I need to find the "Conversation Starter" and use it in the "Social Setting," but I can't get past the troll at the entrance to "The Castle of Girls I Don't Know."
      Classic.
    7. Re:the website is subtitled by ockegheim · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've never dated a mermaid myself, so I'm wondering if they're ummm... all there. If we slashdotters all put in a couple of bucks, he'd be able to buy himself a girlfriend!

      --
      I’m old enough to remember 16K of memory being described as “whopping”
    8. Re:the website is subtitled by DjReagan · · Score: 4, Funny

      If nothing else, they'll have the smell right.

      --
      "When I grow up, I want to be a weirdo"
    9. Re:the website is subtitled by icedcool · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ahh.... see you have to kill the troll. No way around it sadly :\.

      --
      Most people aren't thought about after they're gone. "I wonder where Rob got the plutonium" is better than most get.
    10. Re:the website is subtitled by Headcase88 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Psh, just mod him down 'till he goes past your threshold. That should take care oh 'em.

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    11. Re:the website is subtitled by Silentnite · · Score: 1

      Sadly that made me think of a previous girlfriend I had.

      Unfortunately the smell was the best thing she had going for her...

      Ah, the mistakes of youth.

    12. Re:the website is subtitled by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

      You need to find the kind of mermaid that is fish on top and girl on the bottom.

    13. Re:the website is subtitled by Darby · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the downside is that you absolfreakinglutley can not use "good smelling" as a surefire way to eliminate a potential girlfriend.

    14. Re:the website is subtitled by Darby · · Score: 1

      But then you kind of have to always do her frumby.

      Of course, when she bitches about it, it's much easier to ignore "Glub Glub".

    15. Re:the website is subtitled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe those can be a suggested target for the Solar Death Ray.

    16. Re:the website is subtitled by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Either that or get your friend to 'take one for the team' and distract her...

  3. Don't /. the site by AstroDrabb · · Score: 4, Informative

    Use the Coralized link here!

    --
    If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
    it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    1. Re:Don't /. the site by cpeterso · · Score: 1


      The Coralized site is even slower than the original site?!

    2. Re:Don't /. the site by AstroDrabb · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is only slower the first time a link it hit. The Coral network will download the content and cache it and it will be much faster from then. Also, the Coral network can handle a much higher load than this guys site can. Once the /. effect takes hold, the Coral network will be much fater. Try going back to the original link in my post. I bet it comes up very fast now since it has been cached in the Coral network. ; )

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    3. Re:Don't /. the site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      You must be new here. We like doing that !

    4. Re:Don't /. the site by Stormmind · · Score: 1

      Actually, his site was finished loading before your link was even resolved. He can now put a "passed the /. test"-banner on the site.

  4. Heh by grub · · Score: 5, Funny
    From his main page:
    News:
    March 22, 2005: Holy crap! 120,000 page views today!
    Solar Death Ray Guy's next News entry should be fun.
    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:Heh by elflet · · Score: 5, Funny

      120,000 page views?! That's nothing compared to the Slashdot death ray!

    2. Re:Heh by cosinezero · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's not a moon!

    3. Re:Heh by noidentity · · Score: 5, Funny

      Here's a related article I just submitted:

      "Slashdot Death Ray is made of tens of thousands of geeks, most mounted on platforms approximately one to two feet high, and approximately 18 inches on each edge. Each geek focuses HTTP requests to a single web server at a distance ranging from tens to thousands of miles away. A web site is kept visible at all times on the geeks' computers and serves as mounting point for the URL of Slashdot Death Ray targets. The whole system is mounted on a large rock sphere. The goal of this summary is to show the results of the targeted website when the Slashdot Death Ray is used."

    4. Re:Heh by hongbits · · Score: 1

      lmao! the /. ray the most deadly web ray know to man destorying sites in a few min to hours. lol hb...

    5. Re:Heh by can56 · · Score: 1


      I think you have (accidentally?) come up with a killer Slashdot app, nodentity.

      Imagine: a 'map' button on Slashdot that lets you see where the poor wittle server is located, and where the hits are coming from. Plotted in pretty colours on a large rock sphere, of course.

      Shit ... I think a real-time display of the Slashdot effect would almost be as funny as
      the comments ;-)

    6. Re:Heh by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Funny

      and approximately 18 inches on each edge

      Or so we'd like to think.

    7. Re:Heh by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      March 23, 2005: SLASHDOT!!! More on this later....

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  5. Magnification by LiNKz · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it is pretty cool to burn something with mirrors alone, but why not throw in magnification? Or does anyone know anything that has been designed similar using magnification?

    --
    Proceed with Format (Y/N)? Y
    1. Re:Magnification by Yotsuya · · Score: 3, Informative

      Mirrors do the same as magnification, it concentrates the sun in one place.

      Anyway, it's been done before:
      http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bclee/lens .html

      --
      Claude Angers
    2. Re:Magnification by jafiwam · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well... the whole point is energy per unit area on the object.

      This is focused light via reflection, not refraction as would come from a magnifying glass or lense.

      This contraption probably wouldn't gain much by using a lense. Extra square footage of mirrors would increase it's delicious fry-it power though....

    3. Re:Magnification by dmf415 · · Score: 1

      Thats what I was wondering bout myself, i was trying to figure out if it was in fact some sort of magifying glass on the end of that contraption.

    4. Re:Magnification by temojen · · Score: 2, Informative

      The magnifying glass would have to be the same area as the sum of the areas of the facets.

    5. Re:Magnification by bratboy · · Score: 1

      What you'd want to do is put magnifying lenses in the same locations, and turn it around. Ouch.

    6. Re:Magnification by Cheeze · · Score: 1

      if you refracted the light at the focal point, with the correct refraction you could make a directed beam, and then shoot that beam at other things. It could end up being powerful enough to cook hot dogs or cement.

      disclaimer: don't shoot directed light beams at airplanes.

      /run-on sentence

      --
      Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
    7. Re:Magnification by kevcol · · Score: 1

      It could end up being powerful enough to cook hot dogs or cement.

      Mmmmmmm...

      Braised and roasted cement!

    8. Re:Magnification by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      I would also guess that a magnifying glass is more efficient. A mirror is only about 80% efficient.

    9. Re:Magnification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Actually, no, because he is using flat mirrors, not parabolic ones. This means that the light is approaching from several different agnles at several different points. In order to refract or reflect into a collimated beam, the mirrors would have to be slightly curved, or he would have to have one large mirror. A reflecting telescope has all of the equipment necessary to make such a device.

    10. Re:Magnification by Cheeze · · Score: 1

      it shouldn't matter, since the light is still focused at the same point. It wouldn't be easy to make, but a convexed lense should do what I described. It would bend the light and direct it in a focused manner back toward the source, or where every it's aimed.

      The incoming light kinda like this crappy drawing:
      http://kmr.nada.kth.se/math/pointfocus/N aive-Cross -technology/Cross-wavy-strips-1.jpg
      You should be able to craft a lense to bend the incoming light on the bottom of the lense and send it in a single beam out the top of the lense.

      I know nothing of light dynamics though, so I could be wrong.

      --
      Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
    11. Re:Magnification by TFGeditor · · Score: 1

      It's called a parabolic reflector. Although not as efficient in this guy's configuration (think of it as a shattered parabola glued back together with a few of the pieces missing), the principle is the same.

      --
      Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
  6. Solar panels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would this be a cheap way to increase the output of solar panels without putting them closer to the sun?

    1. Re:Solar panels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe there is an maximum output a solar panel can accomplish at the moment.

    2. Re:Solar panels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seem to recall seeing pictures of places that have acres of such mirrors that track the sun and focus rays/light/heat on collectors. Here are a couple links, here (middle of page) and here..

    3. Re:Solar panels? by pclminion · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, because they would get very HOT, and the efficiency goes down dramatically with increasing temperature.

    4. Re:Solar panels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No... but you *can* point it at a target that uses the heat like any other power plant.

    5. Re:Solar panels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The collectors are heat collectors though, not "solar panels".

  7. Yeah, I saw that... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

    ...on the old Atlantis movie.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  8. Now all you need... by jayloden · · Score: 1, Redundant

    ...is batman and robin and a you're a super villian!

  9. Wierd! Science? by FreeLinux · · Score: 5, Funny

    Kent! Where'd you put the giant bag of popcorn at?

    1. Re:Wierd! Science? by newbie65536 · · Score: 0, Informative

      That's not Wierd Science, it's Real Genius, genius.

      --
      Profanity is the language all programmers know best.
    2. Re:Wierd! Science? by deprecated · · Score: 1

      Weird science, genius.

  10. Ultimate Geek Toy by Zone-MR · · Score: 5, Funny

    I want to build one of these now... Except I'm in Northern England. I'd be lucky if it could melt marshmallows :p

    1. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by W3bbo · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, Tony Blair et al. (including Cherie) will be there... so you can rely on their ever-beaming big-grin smiles instead of our unpredictable weather. Hmm, in which case... set it so that the focused beam returns to the source ;)

    2. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be because it's 10 to 11 in the evening, wait until morning.

    3. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Tip it up at a higher angle.

      The sun is just about as strong in Scotland as at the equator. It's just that the angle of incidence to the ground is larger. sin 90 vs sin 30.

      This is why domestic solar can work in the UK. Put the panels on the roof at the angle which'll maximise the energy collection. Hell if you can plumb, you can make a solar panel for peanuts, e.g. http://www.bigginhill.co.uk/solar.htm

      --
      Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    4. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by MustardMan · · Score: 1

      Uh, I think it was more a joke about being cloudy and rainy all the time, but I could be wrong.

    5. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by ucblockhead · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not true. It has to go through more atmosphere if it is at a lower angle of incidence.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    6. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Hell, if you can plumb, you can make a solar panel for peanuts,]

      . . . But, why would peanuts need a solar panel?

    7. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by bluGill · · Score: 1

      Roasted in the shell, of course

    8. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      (blink)

      You've got to be kidding me. You're saying, that all those people who make a living off of solar power, didn't realize that the panels would work better if you just angled them at the sun correctly?

      Let me know when the warm tropical beaches of Scotland open up.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    9. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by hawk · · Score: 1

      >I'd be lucky if it could melt marshmallows

      Yet it may be more than sufficient if the French Army invades . . .

      hawk

    10. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by Resident+Netizen · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ultimate Geek Coffee?

      www.solarroast.com

      --
      My other sig is a Porsche!
    11. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by Darby · · Score: 1

      Yet it may be more than sufficient if the French Army invades . . .

      But wait....If they put the marshmallows on their bayonets, they'll get all dirty when they drop their rifles and where's the fun in a dirty marshmallow?!?

    12. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 1

      A very minor effect on the amount of energy getting to approx ground level at the equator vs the poles. Angle of incidence is the dominant factor by a huge margin.

      --
      Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    13. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 1

      These would be the beaches which can be angled towards the sun would they?

      --
      Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    14. Re:Ultimate Geek Toy by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      You think people would notice that some beaches...hell, some lands were dramatically warmer because of their angle?

      It's ok to admit when you're wrong, and in fact, people trust you more when you do so.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  11. The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by elflet · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's really only a "death ray" if you're really really tiny. Mythbusters did a great job of blowing the myth apart, with a much larger mirror array arranged in a proper fresnel configuration. It douldn't set fire to much of anything, even when they put gasoline on the target.

    1. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by kakos · · Score: 1, Informative

      The Mythbusters did a horrible job at busting that myth. The myth was that Archimedes had the soldiers uses their shields as mirrors to focus light on the ships. Mythbusters almost did a great job, but forgot one important thing. A shield is concave, which has the amazing property of focusing light. The Mytbusters used flat mirrors.

    2. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by bird603568 · · Score: 1

      Thats because they used a parabloic lense.

    3. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It douldn't set fire to much of anything, even when they put gasoline on the target.

      Given that the spontaneous ignition temperature of gasoline is 536 F, and the spontaneous ignition point of paper is 451 F, and that gasoline evaporates quickly (taking heat with it), all that did was cool it down.

      Besides, who is to say that they constructed the mirror array properly? It sounds like they did a bad job of it.

    4. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by b1t+r0t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ummmm, shields aren't concave, they're convex. I suppose they could be turned around, but then the handles and stuff counteract the effectiveness of the "focusing". Also, focusing only really helps at near the focal length. Beyond twice the focal length it should disperse rays that started as parallel.

      --

      --
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
    5. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by bird603568 · · Score: 1

      A shield is concave, which has the amazing property of focusing light. True only for lenses for a mirror you want a parabola if the light comes in parallel.

    6. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by bird603568 · · Score: 1

      ignore that i had them switched

    7. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by sholden · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't a concave shield suck?

      Spears and swords and stuff would instead of glancing off, as from a convex shield, be directed towards the center so the soldier gets to absorb all the kinetic energy himself.

    8. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pfft. Well, no. I've personally seen a mirror (about 2 meters across) melt holes in bricks, and set fire to 2x4s in less than a second. Your teevee isn't a good source of science info.

    9. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by b1t+r0t · · Score: 5, Informative
      Apparently it worked when it was tried in 1973 (see middle of page).

      A Greek scientist, Dr. ioannis Sakkas, curious about whether Archimedes could really have used a "burning glass" to destroy the Roman fleet in 212 BC lined up nearly 60 Greek sailors, each holding an oblong mirror tipped to catch the Sun's rays and direct them at a wooden ship 160 feet away. The ship caught fire at once.....Sakkas said after the experiment there was no doubt in his mind the great inventor could have used bronze mirrors to scuttle the Romans
      --

      --
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
    10. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by JVert · · Score: 1

      The shiny part is usually on the inside anyways so its pretty safe to assume they turn the sheilds around.

    11. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The Mythbusters did a horrible job at busting that myth. The myth was that Archimedes had the soldiers uses their shields as mirrors to focus light on the ships. Mythbusters almost did a great job, but forgot one important thing. A shield is concave, which has the amazing property of focusing light. The Mytbusters used flat mirrors.
      That depends greatly on the era and the shield, flat ones are not unheard of. Typically the concave side (of a curved shield) is where the handles are located, so it's unlikely to be held with that side towards the target anyhow.

      However, the 'busters did fail to take into account the diffence in performance between a dozen random studio hands and a couple of hundred trained militiamen.

    12. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by hankwang · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Mythbusters almost did a great job, but forgot one important thing. A shield is concave, which has the amazing property of focusing light. The Mytbusters used flat mirrors.

      If you want to burn a ship that's several hundred meters away with a reflection from the sun, it doesn't matter very much whether the mirrors have exactly the right curvature or are flat. Even a perfect curved mirror would create a perfect image of the sun the diameter of which depends on the distance between the mirror and the image. At 200 m, you could focus the sun to a 2 m diameter disc. As long as the individual reflectors are significantly smaller than 2 m, it doesn't make much of a difference.

    13. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by cft_128 · · Score: 1, Funny
      A Greek scientist, Dr. ioannis Sakkas, curious about whether Archimedes could really have used a "burning glass" to destroy the Roman fleet in 212 BC lined up nearly 60 Greek sailors, each holding an oblong mirror tipped to catch the Sun's rays and direct them at a wooden ship 160 feet away. The ship caught fire at once.....Sakkas said after the experiment there was no doubt in his mind the great inventor could have used bronze mirrors to scuttle the Romans

      Does Dr. Ioannis Sakkas work for NBC's nightline by chance?

      --

      Underloved Movies and Pub Quiz: donotquestionme.org

    14. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by sydb · · Score: 3, Funny

      In order to focus the sun's rays, fuckwit.

      --
      Yours Sincerely, Michael.
    15. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by DaveJay · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the mythbusters seem to be getting good at missing the obvious. Recently, I saw one in which two girls on the show "busted" the myth that talking to your plants helps them grow faster. How did they test? By playing RECORDINGS of people talking. Um, hello, do boom boxes emit carbon dioxide when they play? I couldn't even bear to watch the outcome.

      Coming up next: "busting" the myth that trees clean the air, by putting pictures of trees on the wall in a smoky room.

    16. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Mazem · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mythbusters is far too quick to "bust" myths that are actually true to some extent. They make a couple of (usually poorly designed) tries to replicate the circumstances, and then when their small number of tests fail they declare the myth "busted".

      This is a perfect example. Mythbusters claims to have "busted" the solar death ray myth, yet the guys in this article were successful in lighting shop rags, pairs of old jeans, boardgames, etc on fire, and have pictures to prove it.

    17. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by nrlightfoot · · Score: 3, Funny

      Like hell Archimedes didn't set ships on fire with mirrors! We're talking about a guy who built a giant mechanical arm to tip over ships in the harbor in the 3rd century BC! I think burning ships with mirrors would be easier than that!

      --
      what sig?
    18. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Getting your science education solely from Skeptical Inquirer, Mythbusters, Penn & Teller's "Bullshit", and similar sources is a bad thing.

    19. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by kd5ujz · · Score: 4, Informative

      They were testing the effects of SOUND on the plants, not the effects of breathing on them. Its obvious that if they crack open a bottle of CO2 inthe corner of the room, the plants will grow better.

      They DID show that plants that are exposed to sound grow better, and ones that are exposed to death metal grew the best.

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    20. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah and there's a guy in Africa that will take your money and show you the Coriolis Effect works in a puddle on either side of the Equator, too.

      Just because it's written doesn't make it so. Unless there was some one credible there to document the event (other than a Greek, who are known to be as nationalist as the French and of course he's going to say it worked), I don't believe it.

    21. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by hawk · · Score: 1

      >and ones that are exposed to death metal grew the bes

      Trying to escape?

      hawk

    22. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by kakos · · Score: 1

      The myth actually goes that the Greek soldiers reversed their shields and polished the insides of them to use as mirrors. As far as the focal length, I'm not sure what the focal length of an ancient greek shield is, but I'd wager it is fairly long.

    23. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by RedWizzard · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Ummmm, shields aren't concave, they're convex
      Depends what side you're looking at.
    24. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      HAHA, yes, they were probably trying to escape. They should do an experiment with some sort of Ivy.

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    25. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by lahvak · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just because these guys were unable to do it, it doesn't mean it can't be done. In fact, there are large solar ovens capable to melt glass and aluminium. In the article you point at, they say thay could only reach 280 F. I don't know what they were doing, but I have just seen a middle school science project in which the kid got 280 F using about 100 small flat hand mirrors mounted on a square piece of plywood.

      --
      AccountKiller
    26. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I recall, they actually showed that they should never, ever be asked to grow anything since their watering system broke.

      In other words, they proved that plants that get water grow better.

    27. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by skadus · · Score: 1

      I'm no scientist, but is it maybe because of the vibrations? Kinda like how drumming your fingernails stimulates their growth?

    28. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Darby · · Score: 1

      I have just seen a middle school science project in which the kid got 280 F using about 100 small flat hand mirrors mounted on a square piece of plywood.

      You really need to let your kid build his own science projects ;-)

    29. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by SidV · · Score: 1

      Ummmm Focal length is the radius of shield itself.

      Assuming they use spherical shields (which I don't think they did), if the shield is non spherical than it doesn't have a focal point, it has a focal general vicinity.

    30. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but at least the chicks looked better doing it than the FX geeks.

    31. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

      True, but to burn something you need to position those shields with precision... which would be damn near impossible if you were trying to maintain focus upon a moving vessel.

      --
      "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    32. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Alioth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, they claim to have busted the myth that the ancient Greeks set ships on fire hundreds of feet away. Setting an object on fire with a mirror three or four feet away is a vastly different feat from setting a ship on fire 100 feet away.

    33. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If It forms a fraction of a spherical surface, the focal length is the radius of curvature, not the radius of the shield. If the shield is nearly flat, the radius of curvature can be huge.

    34. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Triremes are powered by sails. I would imagine these would be fairly easy to set on fire. The guy at the web site managed to fry pants with his device, after all.

      Combine burning sails with heat from dozens or hundreds of mediterranean suns, and a frightening display of reflected sunlight on the coast. The ensuing panic would easily have taken out the ship even though it may not have sunk it.

    35. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by witte · · Score: 1

      Well, maybe they grow better on heavy metal, but i bet that playing Pink Floyd results in better THC concentration.

    36. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by UlfGabe · · Score: 1

      they said they could only confirm a temperature of 280f because it is the ignition point of paper.

      they did not have anything else to test ignition point with. they esitmated their output at 1.5 Kwatts..(about the same as a stove)

      --
      Check journal for info on Anti-TextBook, an idea by me.
    37. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by amanox · · Score: 1

      Couldn't agree more : directly from their website : "Jamie was even able to stand directly in the beam, as the mirrors simply weren't focused enough." and they conclude by calling the myth "Busted." I call that a failed experiment. If you try to (dis)prove something, at least get your set-up right.

    38. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by SidV · · Score: 1

      Yeah I should have put the radius of curvature of the shield. It was late what can I say.

      But obviously the radius of the Circumference has nothing whatsover to do with the focal length.

    39. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by elrous0 · · Score: 1
      the guys in this article were successful in lighting shop rags, pairs of old jeans, boardgames, etc on fire, and have pictures to prove it.

      The pictures don't "prove" anything. Anyone could fake a set of pictures like this with a "solar death ray" rig, a blowtorch, a camera, and a bunch of lemmings to automatically believe their bullsh*t.

      -Eric

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    40. Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny thing about the myth, though, is at least in two places in the world (one in France, one in the Mojave Desert, IIRC), they've set up installations with very large arrays of FLAT mirrors to focus the sun light onto a small enough area that has a good flux of water flowing through it at high pressure, which is then allowed to flash further on downline into high pressure steam to operate turbines, and then, electricity.

      The big advancement for the California one was to be a big upgrade to parabolic mirror segments. This was from the late 80's or so.

      From what I remember, at least for the French version, the temperature at the focus area reached 3000 deg F...

  12. Busted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't the Mythbusters bust this one awhile back?

    1. Re:Busted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they built a 400 sq ft array and it didn't do a whole lot.

  13. Finally,... by ImaLamer · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...someone puts that damn Rock and Roll music to good use!

  14. Suggest a target: by caluml · · Score: 0, Troll
    I'm not going to burn puppies or goldfish or anything like that.

    Awwww - go on!

    1. Re:Suggest a target: by caluml · · Score: 1

      Is anyone else noticing that there are a lot more people ready to jump on anything that doesn't have the "This is a joke - look, here is the smily.... :)" smily on it?

    2. Re:Suggest a target: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever notice there are a lot more retards such as yourself making idiotic jokes that are in no way even slightly funny?

  15. MythBusters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't something like this on MythBusters on Discovery Channel a while back?

    1. Re:MythBusters? by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      Wasn't something like this on MythBusters on Discovery Channel a while back?

      It sounds like something David Letterman would do.

    2. Re:MythBusters? by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes.

      The claim was that Archimedes thought up having 1000+ soldiers use their reflective bronze shields to shine sunlight on enemy ships. Thus igniting and incinerating them.

      They tried this on MythBusters and it didn't work. But they don't always do a perfect job on that show, and since armies were huge back in the day....I wouldn't be surprized if it worked.

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    3. Re:MythBusters? by ChipMonk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Maybe not igniting them directly, but...

      How about blinding the sailors on board, who then run around in a panic and knock over the pot of charcoals used for igniting the flaming arrows? Carcoals ignite the ship's deck instead, or someone's clothes, the fire spreads, voila. No more battleship.

    4. Re:MythBusters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting? This isn't plausable, or even funny. Well, maybe it could be funny if British people were running around knocking over charcoal in a farcicle manner. But Greeks or other Mediterannean types? BOOOOOOORING.

  16. From the Website by th1ckasabr1ck · · Score: 5, Funny
    "Join the fun! Suggest a target!"

    Dantooine. I mean Alderan. I don't understand the question.

    1. Re:From the Website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's no sun!

    2. Re:From the Website by grammar+fascist · · Score: 1

      Alderaan shoots first!

      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
    3. Re:From the Website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about president bush?? He would make a great target!!

    4. Re:From the Website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alderan
      Alderaan...'nuff said!

  17. Mythbusters? by decipher_saint · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Wasen't this on Mythbusters already? And proven to be possible but not practical (I don't remember the final conclusion).

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
  18. Gotta see... by bird603568 · · Score: 1

    The ace of spades, teh hootie and the blow fish tape, and his pants. IMO these are the bes ones that caught fire.

    1. Re:Gotta see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my pants caught on fire once but it was due to friction and not sunlight. sigh...

  19. Stirling Engine by Skyshadow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wonder how much juice you could generate if you were to mount a stirling engine at the end of this sucker. Seems like it'd be a lot cheaper/easier to implement than normal high efficiancy solar cells if you could work out a reasonable and reliable sun tracking system.

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:Stirling Engine by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      The only stirling engine I ever saw was precisely that: in the focus of a solar reflector. I stopped it when I walked in front of it and blocked the sun from reaching it... :)

    2. Re:Stirling Engine by Look+KG486 · · Score: 0
      I stopped it when I walked in front of it and blocked the sun from reaching it.

      Yes, but can you document this? The committee won't accept your assertion without proof.

      --

      "Play is the only way the highest intelligence of humankind can unfold." -- Joseph Chilton Pearce

    3. Re:Stirling Engine by NETHED · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't you need some sort of sick (large) heat sink to make it run?

      Discuss! This seems like a nifty idea. Mount a generator at the end, BAM, power.

      --
      --sig fault--
    4. Re:Stirling Engine by loraksus · · Score: 3, Informative
      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    5. Re:Stirling Engine by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wonder how much juice you could generate if you were to mount a stirling engine at the end of this sucker. Seems like it'd be a lot cheaper/easier to implement than normal high efficiancy solar cells if you could work out a reasonable and reliable sun tracking system.

      Here you go.

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    6. Re:Stirling Engine by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 1

      Yes...

      http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/dish-stirli ng /

      --
      Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    7. Re:Stirling Engine by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      Wonder how much juice you could generate if you were to mount a stirling engine at the end of this sucker. Seems like it'd be a lot cheaper/easier to implement than normal high efficiancy solar cells if you could work out a reasonable and reliable sun tracking system.
      Probably not as much as you might think... Putting a lot of heat in means you have to take a lot of heat of heat out, which is decidely non-trivial.
    8. Re:Stirling Engine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like these:
      http://www.eng.fsu.edu/~shih/succeed-2000/ roadmap/ solar%20power%20plant.htm

    9. Re:Stirling Engine by dbIII · · Score: 1
      Seems like it'd be a lot cheaper/easier to implement than normal high efficiancy solar cells
      Solar thermal is good on a large scale - it's just another way of making steam or splitting ammonia or whatever way you use to get something you can generate electricity with in a later stage. The big problem is it has to be big to be efficient, while solar cells are self contained and you don't really have to do any planning to increase capacity. Darkness is the other problem, hence ideas like splitting ammonia and recombining it at night to get constant power output, or extra bursts at peak times when you need it.

      A really big solar thermal plant will be an order of magnitude or more cheaper than a huge number of solar cells, but it will take time to build, requires planning, and you have to take the entire thing down at one time for maintainance instead of just a couple of panels.

    10. Re:Stirling Engine by khrtt · · Score: 1

      Sun trasking systems are similar to tracking systems used to control amature telescopes. Cheap and efficient, usually microprocessor-controlled, with a 2-axis stepper-motor drive. Or something. About $50 in parts altogether, and there should be plenty of plans available in amature telescope knowledge base. You wish I wasn't too lazy to google for it...

  20. Mythbusters by jeffChuck · · Score: 0, Redundant

    These guys seem to have had much better luck than Mythbusters. And I thought that I could trust a couple of Hollywood prop guys to do science. That's a shame, I'll never be able to look at the show the same way again.

    1. Re:Mythbusters by spicytuna · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually the Mythbusters were trying to take out a wooden boat that was a couple hundred meters (that part I'm not sure of). They wanted it to catch fire. This guy is concentrating the energy and melting stuff, not actually setting anything on fire (except the clue board). Setting fire to a wooden boat far away is a lot tougher than melting a rubber ducky.

    2. Re:Mythbusters by inertia187 · · Score: 0

      That was probably "The Most Disappointing Mythbusters Ever." It was only interesting at the end, when they destroyed it. All those mirrors crashing at once, they figured it represented a large multiple of 7 years bad luck.

      --
      A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
  21. Solar Death Ray by John+Seminal · · Score: 1
    Just don't let the fat lady sing, or she might break your Solar Death Ray.

    This toy kinda reminds me of what I used to do as a kid with a magnifying glass. It was an easy way to set leaves on fire, among other things...

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:Solar Death Ray by Look+KG486 · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but paper covers rock. I swear!

      --

      "Play is the only way the highest intelligence of humankind can unfold." -- Joseph Chilton Pearce

    2. Re:Solar Death Ray by The+Snowman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hate to be the one to point this out, but um. They haven't actually killed anything. This more accurately should be called a Solar Plastic-Melting Ray.

      No, he did kill some something: Army men. Okay, maybe they are made of plastic, but they're still men.

      --
      24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
    3. Re:Solar Death Ray by rpozz · · Score: 1

      I'm sure most of us have played the game with ants and a magnifying glass. This guy could take it a few steps further.

    4. Re:Solar Death Ray by azpenguin · · Score: 1

      Just the solution for those two ant colonies in my yard that just won't go away. Cool.

    5. Re:Solar Death Ray by mswope · · Score: 5, Funny

      I have this mental image of him trying to sneak up on the "enemy" to get that thing within 4 feet of them and then trying to get on the side of them away from the sun...
      "Behold the terrible power of the SUN! Hold still, please!"

    6. Re:Solar Death Ray by Boronx · · Score: 1

      Why doesn't he put build a second, tighter, cofocused parabola in front of it? Then he could make a narrow beam with the strength of the wide beam, and he might even be able to swivel it through a small arc to aim it.

    7. Re:Solar Death Ray by lampajoo · · Score: 1

      New target suggestion: gerbils

    8. Re:Solar Death Ray by martysdomain · · Score: 1

      the original design was to sink ships a long time ago by setting them afire, and that does kill people, they tried this on mythbusters and it didnt work to well at all

    9. Re:Solar Death Ray by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Those guys are fun to watch, but keep in mind, they can't tell the differnece between pressure and energy. (case in point: chicken gun)

      "oh there's no difference except the frozen chicken decelerates in less time and spreads out less. Busted!"

      Last i checked, F=ma, and P=F/A, so P = ma/A. increasing a and decreasing A both increase P, which is what they should've been looknig for in the first place. (so they should've shouted excitedly, "Inconclusive!")

      Argh. I really like that show, so that's probably why I just wish they'd do a better job with fact checking and general physics.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    10. Re:Solar Death Ray by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Solar Plastic-Melting Ray."

      But... polyethylene is organic!

    11. Re:Solar Death Ray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and hope they don't have reflective shields or compacts.

    12. Re:Solar Death Ray by liquidsin · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't know how this got to (Score 3, Insightful), but the genius mod responsible is my new fucking hero.

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    13. Re:Solar Death Ray by Kahlan · · Score: 1

      It could happen easily enough; pants (while being worn) have nearly caught on fire due to the Solar Death Ray.

      --
      -k-
    14. Re:Solar Death Ray by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Because the intensity would damage the mirror, perhaps?

    15. Re:Solar Death Ray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're a bunch of ignorant rednecks, interchangable with the "jackass" cast. What do you expect?

    16. Re:Solar Death Ray by Xiaran · · Score: 1

      Actually the ancient Greeks possibly used to do this. But in navel warfare. To set opposing ships on fire.

      http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/Mirrors.htm

    17. Re:Solar Death Ray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I once made something like this, but it had more mirrored surface (admittedly aluminum foil, but the heavy kind, like this guy's hat is probably made from). The big difference is that I had the sense to put a small, black, frying pan at the focusing point, install an egg, and remove the target when the optimal amount of damage was done.
      Someone please pass the toast.

    18. Re:Solar Death Ray by drigz · · Score: 1
      They may not have been alive, but he sure tried his best:

      I painted the originally beige group of soldiers black so they would melt better, then I started to call them "Black Sheep Squad." I imagined that they were a ragtag group of misfits who had countless daring adventures. Then I started to call the other side "Green's Marines," lead by Sergeant Eugene Green. Man, they were a hardy group of hardnosed soldiers. Then I remembered I was going to melt the crap out of them, so I stop giving them names and back-stories.

    19. Re:Solar Death Ray by gstoddart · · Score: 1
      I don't know how this got to (Score 3, Insightful), but the genius mod responsible is my new fucking hero

      Well, it's at 5 now, so you get a few more heroes. ;-)
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    20. Re:Solar Death Ray by PoPRawkZ · · Score: 0

      It may not have worked on mythbusters but we're talking about ancient greeks who had mass quantities of free slave labor and a lot of time on their hands.

      --
      peace,
      -Grokent
    21. Re:Solar Death Ray by Boronx · · Score: 1

      Good point. They certainly wouldn't be able to back it with wood, and they'd need a really reflective mirror.

    22. Re:Solar Death Ray by ChickenAintDone · · Score: 1

      Yes, while I feel that people in working in special effects was a good idea really, I think the show would also benefit from a regular appearing physicist, or maybe they could try and get Bill Nye on there.

    23. Re:Solar Death Ray by fbjon · · Score: 1
      "Actually the ancient Greeks possibly used to do this. But in navel warfare. To set opposing ships on fire."
      You mean...

      they used a magnifying glass to burn the fuzz in their opponents' navels, from where it would spread to the ship?

      No wonder it didn't work out so well...

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    24. Re:Solar Death Ray by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      you would probably have to restrict what wavelengths you want to use.

      I work in a laser company, and we use front coated mirrors (the coating uh on the front, instead of behind the glass) and for a particular wavelength of light. You can achieve 5 or 6 9's efficency that way (99.999%)

  22. This was posted by Kipsaysso · · Score: 1

    On Hackaday today. Check it out. http://www.hackaday.com

    --
    This is another way of starting a sig with this and ending it with that.
  23. yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah, but can it melt a linux cd?

  24. The Alan Parsons Project by AtariAmarok · · Score: 5, Funny
    "Ant writes the "Solar Death Ray is made of 112 mirrors mounted on a platform 4 feet wide and 6 feet tall...."

    Yeah, but can you mount it on the head of a friggin shark?

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:The Alan Parsons Project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean a frickking shark?

  25. Who needs a solar death ray... by kennyj449 · · Score: 4, Funny

    when you can just point Slashdot at a server?

  26. Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How does this compare to the death star?

  27. Hmm.... Popcorn anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like we'll be able to explode a whole house with popcorn.

  28. A use for AOL CDs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have often wondered what evil could be wrought by 100 people in a crowd with CDs and ill will on a sunny day..

  29. imagine.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a beowulf cluster of these death rays!

  30. An invention... by FinchWorld · · Score: 0
    ... worthy of Dr. Evil himself.

    Now wheres my 1 milleeeeeooooon dollars, and ill tempered sea bas... er sharks with lazer beams on there heads?

    --
    "I may be full of crap about this game, and I may be wrong, and that's fine." -Jack Thompson
  31. But it will never.... by tenchima · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ... fit on the friggin shark's head.

    --
    If at first you don't succeed, so much for skydiving.
  32. this all makes sense now by Neward+Rylet · · Score: 0, Redundant

    March 17, 2005: I haven't added anything new to the target gallery in a while, partially because I've been obsessed with a new game called "Girlfriend Quest."

    1. Re:this all makes sense now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see why those would be mutually exclusive...

    2. Re:this all makes sense now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then obviously you haven't beaten the girlfriend game yet.

  33. Warning! by Eryq · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't look at mirrors with remaining... er... head...

    --
    I'm a bloodsucking fiend! Look at my outfit!
  34. Gluttonous REAL GENIUS plug... by John+Seminal · · Score: 1
    Yeah, it is pretty cool to burn something with mirrors alone, but why not throw in magnification? Or does anyone know anything that has been designed similar using magnification?

    Isn't that how they got all that pop corn popping?

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:Gluttonous REAL GENIUS plug... by temojen · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, it was a laser... very intense highly colimated (parallel) light. This site is about a parabolic reflector, which makes the light converge on a small area. Lasers can target any point in line with the beam. With a parabolic reflector, the light gets weaker (less concentrated) as you move past the focus. Beyond the distance between the reflector and the focal point the light is weaker than the origional light. Of course this is a faceted reflector, so the light isn't really weaker, it's just less and less likely that any point on a plane parallel to the relector will be illuminated the further away from the focal point you are.

    2. Re:Gluttonous REAL GENIUS plug... by commodoresloat · · Score: 1
      No, it was a laser... very intense highly colimated (parallel) light

      Cool - but can it be mounted on a frickin' shark's head?

    3. Re:Gluttonous REAL GENIUS plug... by gklnx · · Score: 0

      It will be interesting if he places a ruby at the focal point.

    4. Re:Gluttonous REAL GENIUS plug... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      White light can be parallel too, and laser light need not be. It's just a function of the focusing system. If using only reflective optics, there should no difference in divergence between white light or laser light.

      With refractive optics, there is some benefit to using laser light. It is almost a single wavelength, so there is no need to compensate for chromatic abberation.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  35. Not the tetris... by Skolor · · Score: 1

    I must now go into my parents basement and build a replica, then steal the neighbor's plants for "science experiments" Of course, "staring at the sun" by offspring will be playing the entire time.

  36. Myth Busted! by MattyDK23 · · Score: 1, Informative

    This myth was busted on Discovery Channel's Mythbusters in episode 16:

    http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/ep isode/episode_03.html

    Aside from making a giant palette of mirrors (and unsucessfully attempting to ignite a small boat), they tried to no avail to be sprayed by a skunk.

    That show is classic.

    1. Re:Myth Busted! by pclminion · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why, you're absolutely right. It's a myth. This guy must have FAKED all those photos!

    2. Re:Myth Busted! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      The myth was not that this sort of rig could work, but rather that it was actually used against the Romans many centuries ago. Remember the whole discussion about politely asking the enemy ships to stay in one spot for several hours so they'd cook? :P

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    3. Re:Myth BUSTED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only the Romans had Molotov cocktails...

    4. Re:Myth BUSTED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm interesting... mod up... informative +5

    5. Re:Myth BUSTED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent up

    6. Re:Myth BUSTED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to build one of these now... Except I'm in Northern England. I'd be lucky if it could melt marshmallows

    7. Re:Myth BUSTED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quadruple the number of mirrors (not that hard for an army...) and you get the temperature high enough.

    8. Re:Myth BUSTED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent up... informative post...

    9. Re:Myth BUSTED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm, redundant ... mod back down...

  37. Beware of the Slashdot death ray! by SerialHistorian · · Score: 1

    Warning!
    The slashdot is bright. Don't look at the slashdot or you will damage your eyes. Anything that focuses the slashdot will only make it more dangerous. The Slashdot.org is dangerous. Don't build one.
    I'm surprised I haven't burnt or blinded myself yet. The fumes from molten trolls can't be good either. Don't play with flames.

    (And he thinks that 120,000 pageviews is a lot...)

    --

    --
    Vote for your hopes, not for your fears - Vote Third Party

  38. The Doom Mountain Devlopment Committee by racecarj · · Score: 1

    Looking at the picture, with paved roads and suburban atmosphere, it's interesting to note that even places like Doom Mountain are not immune to gentrification.

  39. Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 4, Interesting

    THIS is a solar death ray: 10 metres of high-precision parabolic polished aluminium. (And there are bigger ones out there in the world too.)

    I've observed there. Because it is radio astronomy, we could observe before sunset and after sunrise, but for some reason we had strict instructions to never let the sun fall on the dish. (That includes the back, but that was to do with thermal distortion of the dish, rather than frying the focus.)

    I also used my HP48SX calculator (running a terminal emulator) to command the telescope to slew. Because of this, I claim the CSO as world's the largest and most expensive peripheral for a pocket calculator.

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
  40. Larry Niven strikes again; Ringworld sunflowers. by AtariAmarok · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Larry Niven invented the "flashmob" years ago. Now, it looks like someone has come up with something similar to his Ringworld "Sunflowers", which consisted of petal-ringed mirrors which could focus on prey and turn it into ash fertilizer.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  41. Blog is hilarious! by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

    FTB...

    Given that it's winter in Seattle, it might be
    a while [before I can test this out]. I should have built a rain-powered death ray or a death ray
    powered by granola.

    --
    Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
  42. I don't understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the animation. The speed of light is different for each particle after they bounce off the mirror. How can that be achieved? Doesn't the mirror have to be one continuous parabolic mirror to achieve phase synchronization?

    1. Re:I don't understand... by gotr00t · · Score: 1

      Let's just say that they're using the ray model of light, and split the rays into dots to make it more visible.

  43. Death Star by Colin+E.+McDonald · · Score: 1

    This is how the Death Star got started.

  44. Slashdot == Hackaday? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    past 2 days slashdot has stolen stories off hackaday...

    1. Re:Slashdot == Hackaday? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what's new? Do you think Hackaday gets their stories through an exclusive? Nope. If you do enough websurfing you see stories pop up here and there. Often they'll end up on /., hackaday, or any number of other places. News and interesting stuff makes the rounds.

  45. God yes. by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 2, Informative

    Better patent that idea before someone else makes use of it.

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    1. Re:God yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, there's a couple of those sitting right across the street from Rocky Flats, (Colorado).... 'Course it helps that NREL is just a few miles south.

  46. Man, this article was so cool... by dasMeanYogurt · · Score: 1

    I hope they post it again. /just kidding

    --
    --Gentoo Baby!
  47. my target suggestion: by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    Build a copy of this solar death ray, then point them at each other. Mutually-assured destruction kicks ass!

    1. Re:my target suggestion: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the light can only come from one direction. Only one would obliterate the other.

    2. Re:my target suggestion: by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      Get a mirror.

  48. Feh, Kid's stuff by loraksus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This one is a bit bigger!

    The parabolic reflector gaves at the focal point a maximum flux of 1000 W/cm2. The experimentations takes place at the focal zone (18 m in front of the paraboloid. The range of available temperature is from 800 to 2500 C (the maximum reachable temperature is 3800 C) for a maximum thermal power of 1000 kW.
    (Did someone just say holy fucking shit?)
    Picture of the Odeillo Solar Furnace

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    1. Re:Feh, Kid's stuff by tenchima · · Score: 1

      Yes, but they rarely take it to parties.

      --
      If at first you don't succeed, so much for skydiving.
    2. Re:Feh, Kid's stuff by loraksus · · Score: 1

      Quite true, but you could make a pretty good light show using the heat and a couple of bottles of chemicals ;) Light show = party comes to it!

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    3. Re:Feh, Kid's stuff by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      but do you get to play around with it to melt toys?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  49. The Tetris Disk by phuturephunk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although I found the justification for the Hootie and the Blowfish tape hilarious, he should be flogged with a bamboo cane for burning that tetris disk. That thing was a fucking museum piece!

    1. Re:The Tetris Disk by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      This was precisely the first thought that came to mind when I saw that... what a dumbass.. no wonder he can't get a girlfriend :)

    2. Re:The Tetris Disk by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      Same here. Burning an original Tetris 5"1/4 disk is like burning an original "Uridium" C64 tape in my book.

    3. Re:The Tetris Disk by Saeger · · Score: 1

      Puh-leeeaze, the data is all that really matters (unless you obsess over the physical containers like many collectors do), and I bet there's still tens of thousands of copies out there. For one, my dad has a copy of it in the attic, along with many other abandonware apps from only two decades ago.

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    4. Re:The Tetris Disk by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

      Right...I'm sure no woman will ever forgive him for burning the Tetris disk. That one act alone is what made him perpetually single. Pale skin, glasses, trenchcoat, 20 sided die (I'm just speculating here, he is from Seattle, after all) has nothing to do with it.

    5. Re:The Tetris Disk by Thud457 · · Score: 1
      " Right...I'm sure no woman will ever forgive him for burning the Tetris disk. "

      No woman worth having.

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  50. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by John+Seminal · · Score: 3, Funny
    I also used my HP48SX calculator (running a terminal emulator) to command the telescope to slew. Because of this, I claim the CSO as world's the largest and most expensive peripheral for a pocket calculator.

    You are such a nerd. We will have to make you king of the winter carnival.

    10 metres of high-precision parabolic polished aluminium

    Why aluminum? Is it the most reflective substance on earth?

    we had strict instructions to never let the sun fall on the dish

    No matter where you point it, you are pointing it somewhere.

    And make sure to not leave it pointing in the direction of the only all-black fraternity house on campus. That could start up those nasty black versus nerd wars again. Instead, point it at the Sigma Chi house, those bastards are always burning down their own house... nobody will suspect anything.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

  51. Ants? Flamebait? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    Finally ...someone puts that damn Rock and Roll music to good use!

    I'd suggest an ant, but then PETA would be all over their case and people would mod me, uh, flamebait.

    Hmm...

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  52. "GITMO HERE I COME" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've just written to the DHS, imagine if terrorists used the Sun!!! We need to black out the sky, ONLY TERRORISTS USE SUNLIGHT!!!

    OMFG

    1. Re:"GITMO HERE I COME" by Commander+Doofus · · Score: 1

      No no, if we're stuck with trying to get a moontan and welcoming spring with moonlight savings time then the terriorists will have already won!

      --
      Want to improve your life? This guy will show you how!
    2. Re:"GITMO HERE I COME" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, at least that would solve Global Warming. :-)

  53. Wow... by MattyDK23 · · Score: 0

    A sunbeam is roughly concentrated using a set of mirrors at varying angles.

    Their "death ray" probably took a few minutes, at least, to get the results that they posted. If you're using this on a person, that's enough time for them to break out the SPF 30, rending the "death ray" useless.

  54. Solar Death Star by Whom99 · · Score: 0
    At first, I read this as Solar Death Star.

    But after RTA, I realized it only destroyed ordinary items, not rebel planets.

  55. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by loraksus · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Mu, uhh, death ray is bigger than your death ray

    The parabolic reflector gaves at the focal point a maximum flux of 1000 W/cm2. The experimentations takes place at the focal zone (18 m in front of the paraboloid. The range of available temperature is from 800 to 2500 C (the maximum reachable temperature is 3800 C) for a maximum thermal power of 1000 kW.
    Picture of the Odeillo Solar Furnace

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  56. I'd like to see... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'd like to see a beowulf cluster of those...

  57. Take it to the Nth Degree! by Delilah+Jones · · Score: 1

    What if you made one of those that was roughly 50 times the size (or N times, I guess), and put it in Death Valley, or something?

    (Ever read "The Crystal Shard")

    Then aim it into a high-powered, highly resistant solar panel.

    I suppose if something like this were mass-produced, and constructed with computerized calculations of mirror angles, we might have a highly efficient energy system!

    Or even if we made smaller solar death rays. We would need a less resistant solar panel to absorb the energy. They could be calibrated to maximize solar energy efficiency!

    Although maybe mirrors would be too expensive...perhaps some highly lustrous and cheap metal.

    Crap man, I'm starting to feel like John Travola in Phenomenon.

    Better stop.

    --
    http://augustwestproducts.i8.com
    1. Re:Take it to the Nth Degree! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's already one in the Mojave Desert... don't hear much about it.

    2. Re:Take it to the Nth Degree! by NSash · · Score: 1

      You mean like this?

      A Central Tower Power Plant is basically that, except it works by heating liquid and turning a turbine with the vapor instead of using photovoltaic cells.

    3. Re:Take it to the Nth Degree! by Delilah+Jones · · Score: 1

      Well, actually, yes.

      That WAS what I meant!

      --
      http://augustwestproducts.i8.com
    4. Re:Take it to the Nth Degree! by insula · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't want to point it at solar panels. That is inefficient. Instead, point it at a giant enclosed tub of water, boil it, and have the steam crank some turbines. Collect the evaporated water, and repeat.

    5. Re:Take it to the Nth Degree! by Delilah+Jones · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, I'm checking this out right now.

      http://www.wentworth.nsw.gov.au/solartower/faq.p hp

      It doesn't use mirrors, but a covered substrate which captures the hot air (greenhouse effect), and funnels it into a large central tower.

      The hot air (no water/steam required in this design) then moves the turbines.

      Looks pretty sweet.

      --
      http://augustwestproducts.i8.com
    6. Re:Take it to the Nth Degree! by jericho4.0 · · Score: 1
      Actually, it's much more efficient to heat something with a high heat capacity, like cesium or sodium, and then use that to heat water to steam. This way, one can still generate power at night.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
  58. ah c'mon by Itanshi · · Score: 1

    This is right out of Gundam 0083: Stardust Memories sick little minds trying to fry us like ants .

    1. Re:ah c'mon by DamienNightbane · · Score: 1

      Except that the Federation first used it on December 24th, 0079, while attacking Solomon. That's a full three years, three hundred and twenty three days before the Solar System II fired on the deorbiting colony on November 12th, 0083, during Operation Stardust.

  59. Mistake frying that Tetris disk by Look+KG486 · · Score: 0

    On 5.25" no less. That would be worth something someday. Oh well.

    --

    "Play is the only way the highest intelligence of humankind can unfold." -- Joseph Chilton Pearce

  60. Not so tiny by PxM · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Given that he was able to set a rag on fire, I'm guessing that the Mythbusters team did something incorrectly regarding the focusing of their mirrors. And your link says they used a circular configuration which is only good in limited cases since the light is focused in a line (which isn't really focus) rather than a point. This was parabolic setup which is why he was able to melt plastic and set a rose on fire.

    --
    Want a free iPod?
    Or try a free Nintendo DS, GC, PS2, Xbox. (you only need 4 referrals)
    Wired article as proof

    1. Re:Not so tiny by PxM · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ah, after some more reading, the myth itself that he did it with a circular configuration which they showed to be impossible. I guess they didn't know about parabolic reflections in those days. However, since a parabola is defined as the set of points equidistant between a point (the focus of the death ray) and a line (the infinitely far light of the sun reflecting off an imaginary flat mirror) this means that all the tangents of a parabolic curve (the flat mirrors in this case) will always cause the light source to reflect at a single point. This is why well designed radio dishes and telescopes use parabolic reflectors to concentrate the light. Reflectors also don't have the problem of different frequencies reacting differently like normal lenses.

      --
      Want a free iPod?
      Or try a free Nintendo DS, GC, PS2, Xbox. (you only need 4 referrals)
      Wired article as proof

    2. Re:Not so tiny by dmaxwell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They were attempting to replicate what Greeks could have reasonably done with the technology they had available. The myth isn't that you can use a bunch of mirrors to set things on fire. The myth is that Greeks 2500 years ago were able fire ships some distance away in a harbor. They wouldn't have been using any sort parabolic mirror and even a concave one of any reflectivity at all would be a serious stretch. The Mythbusters did a decent job of showing that the ancient Greeks probably didn't have sufficient mastery of optics to make a practical sunlight weapon.

    3. Re:Not so tiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hang on a second, if the greeks DID use a parabolic configuration, what's to say that the person recording these events knew what a parabola actually is? Isn't it entirely possible for them to have described a parabola as being "spherical" because that's the nearest shape they know of that looks sort of similar to a parabola?

      Apologies for incoherency, I'm tired.

    4. Re:Not so tiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spheres are supposed to be "perfect" for the Greeks. I wouldn't think that they would call something nonspherical a sphere. However, I don't know that much about them.

    5. Re:Not so tiny by RodgerDodger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We don't know what technology the Greeks had; we know very little about them. What we do know indicates that this was possible.

      They certainly knew geometry and optics. What they didn't know was glass. Crystal lenses have been discovered all over the Mediterranean.

      Discovering how a parabolic array (lots of flat mirrors lined up along the curve of a parabola) focuses light is something that Archimedes could have confirmed - all it takes is an inquistive mind and observation. Getting a few hundred soldiers to position shields correctly would have been fairly trivial.

      Why wouldn't it have become a popular weapon? It's not reliable enough. You need to have lots of mirrors, room to set them up in a parabolic curve, lots of bright sunlight, and a relatively slow moving target that will cross a known point at the right time. It's not easy but it would be possible.

      Consider that triremes didn't usually sail at night - an invading fleet might well have pulled up not far from the harbor for the night, with intent to sail in an hour or two after dawn.

      See:

      http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/Mirrors.htm
      http: //www.trmkt.com/902manu.html

      And google for "ancient greek lens"

      --
      "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
    6. Re:Not so tiny by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1
      myth itself that he did it with a circular configuration which they showed to be impossible.

      Maybe they started with a circular configuration, but isn't it likely that they would've adjusted to maximize the focussed intensity of all of the reflections?

      "Just make the beams cross, guys!"
      "Wait a minute...didn't you say that would make every molecule of our bodies explode outward at the speed of light?

      :-)

    7. Re:Not so tiny by colmore · · Score: 2, Informative

      I assure you that mathematicians in Archimedes' day knew all about the properties of parabolas.

      --
      In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    8. Re:Not so tiny by bluGill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A parabolic array only matters when you are trying to focus a signal. The Greeks were only interested in energy, and had no concern for phases. Therefore they don't need anything other than clear line of sight to the target for everyone. Each person just has to figure out which of the (many) bright spots is the one they control, and keep that more or less on the target. So long as the average energy reaching the target spot is enough it doesn't matter if many are not on target at any particular moment.

    9. Re:Not so tiny by EarwigTC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They've got the shields anyway, they've got the soldiers anyway. In war, you certainly might prepare a tactic that isn't 100%, especially when the additional resource investment is small.

      --
      Promote civility: mod down any post starting with 'ummm'.
    10. Re:Not so tiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 insightful

    11. Re:Not so tiny by khallow · · Score: 1
      They were attempting to replicate what Greeks could have reasonably done with the technology they had available. The myth isn't that you can use a bunch of mirrors to set things on fire. The myth is that Greeks 2500 years ago were able fire ships some distance away in a harbor. They wouldn't have been using any sort parabolic mirror and even a concave one of any reflectivity at all would be a serious stretch. The Mythbusters did a decent job of showing that the ancient Greeks probably didn't have sufficient mastery of optics to make a practical sunlight weapon.

      Actually they were attempting to replicate what Archimedes, one of the greatest minds ever, who also had the extraordinary resources of one of the wealthiest city states of that time at his disposal. Other parties have been able to duplicate these results (see b1t r0t's post). My point here is that generalizing from the "ancient Greeks" to Archimedes is a mistake. He's not some demigod of science, but he was among the most advanced scientists of his time.

      That still doesn't mean the Mythbusters are wrong here, but I see mention of at least two successful attempts versus the Mythbuster's one failure. OTOH, the historical record seems to start describing this mirror thing several centuries later. So who knows what really happened?

    12. Re:Not so tiny by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      So who knows what really happened?

      Doc Brown, duh!

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    13. Re:Not so tiny by BrynM · · Score: 1
      My point here is that generalizing from the "ancient Greeks" to Archimedes is a mistake. He's not some demigod of science, but he was among the most advanced scientists of his time.
      Heretic! You will never reach infinity! You will never be fully polygonal! It is written in the Palimpsest! Great Archimedes, please help this heathen see the power of pi!

      ;^)

      --
      US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
    14. Re:Not so tiny by p3d0 · · Score: 1
      I'm guessing that the Mythbusters team did something incorrectly regarding the focusing of their mirrors.
      Agreed. If you saw the episode, you can tell they have recurring focus problems, and seem completely mystified as to how to achieve good focus. They conclude that it was impossible.

      Then they go on to create a wooden platform with dozens of (maybe) two-foot mirrors mounted to it. However, the "spot" of sunlight they create on their target is more like six feet across. Again, focusing problems.

      The thing that occurred to me, watching that episode, is that they missed Archimedes' real invention here: the focusing device. I imagine he gave a hundred men each one reflective surface attached to some sort of sextant-like aiming device. Each man would look through some sight, lining up some spot of sunlight with the image of the target, and voila: perfect focus.

      And your link says they used a circular configuration which is only good in limited cases since the light is focused in a line (which isn't really focus) rather than a point. This was parabolic setup which is why he was able to melt plastic and set a rose on fire.
      I think you're mistaken. The "circular configuration" is just the way the mirrors looked head-on, from a viewpoint along the axis of revolution. I'm sure they knew enough to build a proper fresnel arrangement (though they failed as I described above).
      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    15. Re:Not so tiny by earthforce_1 · · Score: 1

      You would also have to have an enemy that was nice enough to invade when the sun was shining brightly, and facing the right way, so the sun's rays could be reflected onto the enemy ship. That means you were screwed if they delayed their invasion to 3:00 PM when the sun was behind your mirror. And since the focal length couldn't be changed on the fly, they had to park their invasion fleet at the correct distance from the death ray, one ship at a time.

      I think I would rather rely on the flaming oil, spears and arrows as defensive weapons.

      --
      My rights don't need management.
    16. Re:Not so tiny by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1
      Getting a few hundred soldiers to position shields correctly would have been fairly trivial.

      I think you're underestimating just how tricky that would be. Assuming you have X people aiming mirrors at a (moving?) boat, the side of the ship would look like a disco ball on crack. Not only would it be hard on the eyes, there's no way of figuring out which spot is yours. You'd be aiming blind. There's also the fact that movements are amplified; the further away you are from whatever you're aiming at, the more a small rotation of the mirror becomes a massive jump. No one has hands that steady.

    17. Re:Not so tiny by khrtt · · Score: 1

      You don't need to know geometry or optics at all to do this. All you need is a large bunch of people holding half-decent flat mirrors steadily enough, and pointing the reflections at roughly the same spot. Each reflection is roughly the brightness of the sun, asuming perfect reflectivity. If the reflectivity is less than 100%, you're gonna need more people.

      If they really do point all the reflections at the same spot, then the number_of_mirrors * reflectivity = power_amplification. If the death ray guy easily sets wood on fire with his 112 mirrors, the greeks could do that too.

      The best mirrors for the task would be flat, since with concave mirrors you could only focus light at the focal distance, and you can't control where the ships are. Flat mirrors would give the same power amplification at any distance.

      The real questions are:

      1. With Greek tech, can you really make a mirror flat enough to reflect a beam that stays parallel for at least 20-30 yards?

      2. With Greek tech, just how reflective can you make a mirror?

      Still, if those Greeks could procure some 200 really flat shields, and polish them to a high shine (after all, modern first-surface metallic mirrors are only second to dichroics, and only in narrow-spectrum applications), they could feasably have 200 guys pointing the reflected beams at one spot some 50 yards away for a long enough time to set wood on fire.

      As the experiment goes, building a replica ship was a waste of time, of course. And they probably didn't have enough mirrors. For a realistic experiment I'd just use some cheap $3 wall mirrors from home depot, and some old wood box 50 yards away. A longer distance would make it difficult to poin the beam.

    18. Re:Not so tiny by Angst+Badger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They certainly knew geometry and optics. What they didn't know was glass. Crystal lenses have been discovered all over the Mediterranean.

      Ancient Greece isn't my specialty -- that would be Egypt -- but I know that by the time the Greeks were trading with the Egyptians, blown glass artifacts start showing up, initially as imports, and later as domestic products. The Egyptians had been making cast-glass jewelry for some time before that. I rather doubt they knew how to make optical-grade glass, though. That the Greeks knew about lenses is, however, established fact.

      The Romans, on the other hand, used plate glass extensively in their windows. It only fell out of use at the end of the classic era, when the constant fighting of the middle ages made large, easily broken windows a liability for defenders.

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    19. Re:Not so tiny by Darby · · Score: 1

      Great Archimedes, please help this heathen see the power of pi!

      Archimedes didn't even like the idea of irrational numbers.
      Pi isn't even algebraic for Athena's sake.

    20. Re:Not so tiny by BrynM · · Score: 1
      Archimedes didn't even like the idea of irrational numbers. Pi isn't even algebraic for Athena's sake.
      He was quite a smart man actually. He approximated pi - which I guess is all you can really do.
      --
      US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
    21. Re:Not so tiny by Nyh · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that the Mythbusters team did something incorrectly regarding the focusing of their mirrors. And your link says they used a circular configuration which is only good in limited cases since the light is focused in a line (which isn't really focus) rather than a point. This was parabolic setup which is why he was able to melt plastic and set a rose on fire.

      The Mythbusters did all right. Their circular configuration was as circular as the mirror configuration of the Solar Death Ray. All mirrors are in concentric circles from the middle. The The National Solar Thermal Test Facility in the US has a lineair configuration of mirrors.

      What matters is whether the mirrors are focused correctly and they were (IMHO). They used a Fresnel setup for their mirrors so al mirrors are in the same plane under different angles. The big difference is the focal length of the mirror array.

      For small values there is not much difference in the curve defined by y=0.5x*x (parabola) and y=1-sqrt(1-x*x) (circle). For x smaller as 0.2 the error is less as 1%. That is, for a mirror 2 m diameter and a height difference between rim and centre of 20 cm difference in height would be 2 mm. So don't worry about the difference a parabolic and a convex mirror.

      Nyh

    22. Re:Not so tiny by x0ll0b · · Score: 1

      Archimedes didn't even like the idea of irrational numbers.

      You're thinking of Pythagoras.

    23. Re:Not so tiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They didn't have mirrors. We know because of this magestic thing called 'history' and 'archaeology'. It involved researching what ancient civilizations posessed and didn't possess. It's not like some great fucking mystery. Do you know how an encyclopedia works?

    24. Re:Not so tiny by Darby · · Score: 1

      Doh!

      Yep, you're right.

    25. Re:Not so tiny by Darby · · Score: 1

      Yeah, see the other response to my post for the explanation. Archimedes is *not* Pythagoras.

    26. Re:Not so tiny by elrous0 · · Score: 1
      Given that he was able to set a rag on fire, I'm guessing that the Mythbusters team did something incorrectly regarding the focusing of their mirrors.

      Well, either that, or his website is a con and he's playing you guys like a bunch of drums. DANCE PUPPETS!! DANCE!!!

      -Eric

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    27. Re:Not so tiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To focus the parallel rays of the sun to a single point requires a parabolic array. Whether this is built through careful calculations or trial and error doesn't matter. The result will be the same parabolic array.

      I also serious doubt the ability of 10 or 20 people (let alone 100s) being able to determine which identical spot of light is the one they control and then hold the angle long enough to heat anything at what has to be several hundred yards away. Not to mention that they then have to constantly adjust the angle for movement of the target and the sun.

    28. Re:Not so tiny by khallow · · Score: 1

      Pauca sed matura, baby.

    29. Re:Not so tiny by RodgerDodger · · Score: 1

      They had mirrors. They weren't glass - they were bronze. What's your point?

      --
      "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
  61. Ob. Simpsons by rokzy · · Score: 1, Funny

    Grampa: What the hell is that?
    Frink: Why, it's a death ray my good man, behold.
    (Frink fires death ray)
    Grampa: Hey, feels warm, kinda nice.
    Frink: Well it's just a prototype, with proper funding I'm
    confident this little baby could destroy an area the
    size of New York City.
    Grampa: But I want to help people, not kill 'em.
    Frink: Oh, well to be honest, the ray only has evil
    applications. You know my wife will be happy,
    she's hated this whole death ray thing from day
    one.

    http://www.snpp.com/guides/prof.frink.html

  62. Magnification does nothing by gnuman99 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Magnification does nothing. It is light intensity that counts. You may use a magnifier to focus the light from a larger area to a smaller area - you don't magnify it. The mirrors do the same thing.

    Proof: Take a microscope and set it to 500X. Point the objective at the sun. Do you death rays spewing from the eyepiece? (Answer: no). To find out why, read the first paragraph or ask someone that *really* knows. (Hopefully someone that took some optics (physics) or astronomy)

    1. Re:Magnification does nothing by iowannaski · · Score: 2, Interesting

      (Hopefully someone that took some optics (physics) or astronomy) ...or high school physics.

      --
      i forget
    2. Re:Magnification does nothing by EvilSporkMan · · Score: 1

      It's probably worth pointing out that you still shouldn't look through the eyepiece while pointing it at the sun. I imagine that the above procedure could do nasty things to your retina.

      --
      -insert a witty something-
    3. Re:Magnification does nothing by The+Snowman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Take a microscope and set it to 500X. Point the objective at the sun. Do you death rays spewing from the eyepiece? (Answer: no).

      A while back I was at an observatory and the guy in charge said never to point a telescope at the sun. To demonstrate, he turned the telescope (10.5" refractor) toward the sun. We could see a beam of bright light coming out the eyepiece. He put a piece of paper in the middle of the light and it ignited into flames almost instantly.

      Yes, telescopes and microscopes are not the same thing, but aren't they similar? What caused this? No, I am not a physicist, and don't know about optics and all that beyond what they taught me in college.

      --
      24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
    4. Re:Magnification does nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      flash paper

    5. Re:Magnification does nothing by tota · · Score: 1, Insightful

      actually it does, which is why you shouldn't point your telescope at the moon for you would burn your retinae within a few seconds - you have to use filters. Same goes for the sun except you'd probably burn your face before you can get your eye to the eyepiece...

      --
      TODO: 753) write sig.
    6. Re:Magnification does nothing by The_Wilschon · · Score: 3, Informative

      Exactly. In order to get the same power output from a completely magnification based setup, you'd need a magnifier with area about equal to the area of all the mirrors put together. The only really feasible way to do this is to use a fresnel lens, a normal lens would either be much too thick in the middle (because the thickness is proportional to the radius, and we're talking a pretty good sized lens) or else the focal point of the lens would be pretty far away...

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
    7. Re:Magnification does nothing by dynamol · · Score: 0

      "to use a fresnel lens, a normal lens would either be much too thick in the middle" Or a perfect parabaloid mirror...aka the solar death ray....but if it was a continuous parabaloid mirror it's total output would be much much higher...truely bringning it to solar death ray status. Hey but I am a computational chemist and have no realy clue about solar death ray's and such "child's" play....but damn it would be cool to build one...

    8. Re:Magnification does nothing by jericho4.0 · · Score: 2, Funny
      While we're on the topic, I would also like to point out you shouldn't smoke in bed, or have unprotected anal sex with people you meet in parks.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
    9. Re:Magnification does nothing by jericho4.0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      No they're not similar at all. The microscope uses lenses and refractors, while the telescope uses magic.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
    10. Re:Magnification does nothing by be-fan · · Score: 2, Informative

      What caused the ignition was that about 250watts of light was concentrated on a small spot on the paper. You would have gotten the same effect with a 10.5" parabolic mirror. Actually, if it had been a reflecting telescope, it would have used a 10.5" parabolic mirror :)

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    11. Re:Magnification does nothing by LiNKz · · Score: 1

      I still see fine out of my other remaining eye.

      On a serious note, do you have anything that documents this? I want to print it out and let my father have a read at it. He has been staring down telescopes for years at the moon or random planet, and when I tell him it will damage his eyes, he simply rants on that he is a million years old and should know better.

      --
      Proceed with Format (Y/N)? Y
    12. Re:Magnification does nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if that cigarette in bed is the post-having unprotected sex with someone I just met in a park type cigarette? Cause those are the most delicious.

    13. Re:Magnification does nothing by Silentnite · · Score: 1

      DAMN! Now you tell me. That thrice-bedamned ass-rapist in the park is at it again. And he smoked while he did it. The scoundrel.

    14. Re:Magnification does nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His mirrors are ~ 3.5" squared. The light at the focus "point" will be larger than this because the sun isn't a point source, and its rays aren't parallel. I think a magnifying lense could do quite a bit here. If it could focus the light to just 1/2 of its previous area, it would be the equivalent of doubling the number of mirrors (more or less).

    15. Re:Magnification does nothing by jwdb · · Score: 1

      The strength of your death ray relies on the number of photons you can focus onto one point. This, of course, depends on the size of your first lens or mirror, whose size determines how much light is captured.

      A telescope is generally large enough to capture sufficient photons to start a fire, whereas a microscope is simply too small, regardless of the level of magnification. The magnification of the lenses will only influence the focal length and angle of incidence, not the light strength itself.

      A quick proof: get a microscope with a broad range of magnifications and compare the smallest to the largest - you will notice a significant difference in the brightness of the image.

      Jw

    16. Re:Magnification does nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's total output

      "its".

    17. Re:Magnification does nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's total output

      "its".


      Dammit Jim he's a chemist, not a grammarian!

    18. Re:Magnification does nothing by RsG · · Score: 2, Funny

      oops

      (stubs out cigarette)

      (puts condom over telescope)

      (puts filter lense on penis)

      there, all better

      waitaminute...

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
  63. Cool device, clueless builder by Duncan3 · · Score: 1

    "He came back with a golf ball and said "Here, try this." This guy was in his forties and was wearing the orange and reflective outfit I associate with road construction, so I'm not sure why/how he had a golf ball."

    Obviously he has no idea just how FAR you can hit a golf ball on a stretch of new road ;) ...or for that matter how much those union workers get paid...

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
  64. Solar Death Ray by TimeTraveler1884 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hate to be the one to point this out, but um. They haven't actually killed anything. This more accurately should be called a Solar Plastic-Melting Ray.

  65. nice, but by edward.virtually@pob · · Score: 1

    a more useful target would be a sterling engine connected to a generator.

  66. Yesterday was a big day for him by darco · · Score: 1
    From the site:
    • So I checked the SolarDeathRay.com site statistics around
      noon today (Tuesday), and I was shocked to see that there
      had been about 80,000 page views that day.


    That was yesterday. I bet he's in for a suprise when he looks at the logs today. :)
    --
    — darco
  67. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 4, Funny

    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.

    You forgot libstdcpp.

  68. Obilgatory Comment by eomnimedia · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our Solar Death Ray overlords.

  69. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I surrender.

    Under perfect conditions, you should be able to reach the surface temperature of the sun - about 5600 C. This will be reduced by atmospheric absorption, imperfect reflectivity of your mirrors, etc.

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
  70. Please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...die now and save the world from idiot pollution.

    A message delivered on behalf of all living things

    1. Re:Please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...die now and save the world from idiot pollution.

      Insightful?! Now even I know that the moderation system really IS totally whack. Assholes!! Unless the mods are just trying to be funny.

  71. i dont wanna give anyone any ideas... by hyperstation · · Score: 1

    but what if we threw something like this together on a (pulling number out of ass) 1000x scale, put it in orbit, and pointed it at something on earth. would that work?

    1. Re:i dont wanna give anyone any ideas... by thebes · · Score: 1

      You would end up with refraction and spreading of rays as a result of the atmosphere. Otherwise, the sun would have performed the same function long ago.

    2. Re:i dont wanna give anyone any ideas... by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Well, no.

      If you bring light that was destined to spread endlessly into interstellar space toward the earth, you are delivering more energy to the earth. The earth would get hotter.

      It would take a massive area to be signifigant, however, and focussing would be disturbed by clouds and irregularities.

    3. Re:i dont wanna give anyone any ideas... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a mirror, you'd be pointing it back at the Sun.
      hahaha

  72. Didn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on mythbusters... and they're God!

  73. Fun links on Bill Beaty's Amasci page by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1
    Bill Beaty described similar ideas on his Amateur Scientist website. Looks like the Solar Death Ray guy just took it a step further.

    "Kindergarten Solar-powered Death Squad

    Take a large crowd of children out into the sunshine and give each one a 20cm square mirror. Show them how to aim all of their little spots of sunlight at the same distant object, then stand back and see what they do. Better yet, run away.

    FAST!"

    And another one here...

  74. Archimedes by NoMercy · · Score: 1

    There are historical accounts of Archimedes using a similar system, though likely much larger to set ships on fire.

  75. As seen on Slashdot ca. 2004 by Humorously_Inept · · Score: 1

    Same idea but with a big Fresnel lens: Remember?

    --

    ~Someday, I hope to be an aspiring author.
  76. Re:Larry Niven strikes again; Ringworld sunflowers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    No offense here to Larry Niven (big SF fan here) but Archimedes has prior art for them since 2200 years or so.

  77. The website death ray by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Slashdot Death Ray is made of 1 website and no mirrors of the target site mounted on a platform of linux, perl, and horribly mangled html. Each user is a square (ed. note: update to modern parlance, ie "geek"). All these mirrors focus the slashdot to a single web server. A wooden fork is stuck into the web server after it melts to signify that it is "done". The mirror platform is often asked for and often denied by CmdrTaco, who mounted his stock answer on an FAQ somewhere. The whole system is mounted on a stack of open protocols dating back to the early days of DARPA. The goal of the Web site was to show the results of the targeted items when the slashdot death ray was used."

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  78. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 1

    Thanks - you just made my day. :-).

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
  79. Maybe... by game+kid · · Score: 1

    ...they should just burn them after they sing that "I Only Wanna Be With You" song again. I can imagine them singing "I only wanna beGAHHHHH!!1!--nah, just joking, I like Hootie. Though cassettes are old enough to burn; hard drives and even CDs* just seem much better and space-efficient to me.

    *esp. when they're put in thinner cases and not those 1/2cm monstrocities.

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  80. Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by Meostro · · Score: 5, Funny

    I always wanted to round up a kindergarten class worth of children to act as my solar death squad. Here's how it would work:

    1. Give each kid their own shiny little mirror with a post-it note stuck on it to block the shiny part
    2. One at a time, have them remove the post-it, aim their mirror to reflect the sun upon some point, then re-post-it.
    3. Once everyone is aimed (30 kids or so), have them all remove their post-its at once, instantly creating a plasma-hot ball of fire at the point of focus, incinerating your enemies with the might of a kindergarten class.

    Has anyone else had this idea too, or am I the only weirdo around here?

    1. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      I think the effect would be scarier if they silently followed someone and then surrounded them and one by one took out their mirror and pointed it at them. It would make a great horror B movie.

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    2. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by Mulletproof · · Score: 3, Funny

      [i] I always wanted to round up a kindergarten class worth of children to act as my solar death squad.[/i]

      Just make sure to weed out those ADD kids. Nothing is worse than being disentigrated by your own Kindergarden Solar Death Ray Squad(TM) just because one wants to play with a bug or something.

      --
      You need a FREE iPod Nano
    3. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by Boronx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How about a board of little mirros on motor-controlled pivots. If you point the board directly at the sun, with a single command from a controlling computer you could redirect all of the mirrors to any point in your firing arc at any distance.

    4. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now we know Michael Jackson's Slashdot ID.

    5. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by Bandwidth_ · · Score: 1

      > Has anyone else had this idea too, or am I the only weirdo around here?
      Yes, Bill Beaty did years ago. I imagine you took the idea from him. Give some credit where it's due.

      "Kindergarten Solar-powered Death Squad
      Take a large crowd of children out into the sunshine and give each one a 20cm square mirror. Show them how to aim all of their little spots of sunlight at the same distant object, then stand back and see what they do. Better yet, run away. "
      - http://www.amasci.com/hoax.html

    6. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by supertsaar · · Score: 1

      I remember reading s Sci-Fi story where death sentences were carried out by standing the victim in the center of a footbal stadium and everyone in the crowd had a big mirror. Don't remember who wrote it though....smoked too much back then...

      --
      The Bigger The Headache The Bigger the Pill
    7. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by Nyrath+the+nearly+wi · · Score: 1

      Sir Arthur C. Clarke came up with something like this in his 1958 story A Slight Case of Sunstroke" . At a soccer game held near the equator, fans were supplied with a mirror under their seats. If the referee made a dishonest call, the fans would use the mirrors to vaporize him.

    8. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by Meostro · · Score: 1

      That's bizarre! I've never heard of this guy, nor seen his site, but there's the death squad in all its glory! I wonder if this has been featured on Halfbakery too?

      I like the Duck-plunge Mechanical Fountain, that could be a neat waterpark ride.

    9. Re:Kindergarten Death Squad!!! by circusboy · · Score: 1

      I wonder if you could do this at a college football game?

      you know how they used to hand out packs of colored boards for the spectators to hold up and make pretty pictures in the bleachers?

      what if you mirrored them on a nice sunny day...

      --
      -- it's ridiculous how many people misspell ridiculous... (damn, damn, damn...)
  81. Sunflower. by H01M35 · · Score: 1
    That's a fantastic idea.
    As a matter of fact these guys built something kind of like that, and seem to be producing all sorts of concepts for cheap, clean, solar energy. I think they were featured in Discover in August of 2003. (The year might be wrong though.)

    I just can't wait until they get into mass production, because the metric they seem to be using throws out traditional physical efficiency and relies on power per unit cost rather than conversion efficiencies.

    It's also been implemented on a much larger scale in molten salt power towers which iirc use high temp (200-500C) salt to make steam to turn turbines. Yes, it's a solar plant that can work at night if it has to.

    -Holmes.

  82. Focusing each mirror by Hamstij · · Score: 1
    What a cool thing to build!

    I wonder how long it took to orientate each individual mirror so that they're all focusing on the one spot.

    Not sure I'd have the patience to do that!

    1. Re:Focusing each mirror by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      Using a colored light in a room thats lowly lit, you can then see the focal point, so you do one at a time, put a sticky note on it once its ok, and then go on to the next one.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  83. Mirrors? by game+kid · · Score: 1

    Don't look at mirrors with remaining... er... head...

    Don't worry, the mirrors are fine. It's the real server that we're wor--what, the ray's mirrors? Whoops.

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  84. Metaslashdotting... by Weyoun · · Score: 3, Funny

    ERROR
    The requested URL could not be retrieved

    While trying to retrieve the URL: http://www.solardeathray.com.nyud.net:8090/

    The following error was encountered:

    * Access Denied.

    Access control configuration prevents your request from being allowed at this time. Please contact your service provider if you feel this is incorrect.

  85. Back in High School... by MAdMaxOr · · Score: 1

    My physics teacher let me borrow a 3x4ft Fresnel lens. It would focus that 12sq.ft. of incoming sunlight down to a about a square inch. It melted pennies into the concrete walkway.

    Unfortunately, I did not get to use it twice, as I set a passer-by's shoe on fire, and she complained.

    See this website for a similar story.

  86. Funny mod points, please. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although I've never used those other four libraries.

  87. MythBusters by Serff · · Score: 0

    Didn't they build this on MythBusters and it didn't work? It was a pretty cool project though. Must have taken forever to make.

  88. I would like to get a bigger one... by antdude · · Score: 1

    ... so I can use it on people who burn ants. [grin] :)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  89. Still Kids Stuff - Look at this! by Wdi · · Score: 1

    7 MW maximal thermal poer in the receiver. 7 times bigger than your tiny little French toy.

    1. Re:Still Kids Stuff - Look at this! by loraksus · · Score: 1

      OMG. Woe to the fucking birds that fly there.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    2. Re:Still Kids Stuff - Look at this! by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Yes, but not set up as an experimental stage, but as a power plant.
      thus not compareable to the article toy.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
  90. Or better yet, perhaps... by game+kid · · Score: 1
    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  91. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by tkw954 · · Score: 1
    THIS is a solar death ray: 10 metres of high-precision parabolic polished aluminium...we had strict instructions to never let the sun fall on the dish.

    Then whoever took the picture on the page you linked to never got the memo.

  92. Obviously the stupid moderators doesn't watch TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Modding the guy redundant is ridiculuos, but I guess you can't expect more from some of these moderators. I watched that episode of Mythbusters on the Discovery channel, and decipher_saint is on topic, and what he wrote was a valid comment that reflects the findings.

    Damn I'm getting tired of these random acts of modding.

  93. Dude, melt the american flag! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    send your requests to:
    burnthis@solardeathray.com

    1. Re:Dude, melt the american flag! by Mulletproof · · Score: 0, Troll

      Dude! It's like made of cloth! Kinda hard to melt! Whoa!

      --
      You need a FREE iPod Nano
  94. Your museum sucks. by douglips · · Score: 3, Informative

    What sort of lame museum exhibits things you can buy for $5 on ebay?
    Tetris the Classic PC Puzzle Video Game 5.25" 3.5"

  95. The girlfriend quest.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wanna score big on the girlfriend quest?

    1. Get a job if you don't allready have one.
    2. Don't talk about your computer with a girl, it's
    not cool.
    3. Get in shape (physically)
    4. Did I mention getting a job?
    5. Ditch the glasses and obtain some contact
    lenses.

    If you fail, there are always prostitutes, which
    are alot more inexpensive than girlfriends and
    you are guaranteed to score.

    1. Re:The girlfriend quest.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. He has one. He's brilliant.
      2. He will talk about magnetic shields for spacecraft (so much more exciting than computers!) if you coax him.
      3. He is. Works out several times a week, I believe.
      4. See #1
      5. Not applicable.

  96. What do you expect me to do, squeal? by Bun · · Score: 2, Funny

    No, Mister Duck. I expect you to die!

    --
    "Anyone that has ever gotten an idea based on any of my work and done something better with it-good for you."--J.Carmack
  97. Amatur by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Get a 12" frensel lens and try that. It can burn thru plate metal.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  98. Re:Larry Niven strikes again; Ringworld sunflowers by The+Good+Reverend · · Score: 1

    Not to ruin your "all things are influenced by Ringworld" fantasy, but the solar death ray guy(s) were directly influenced by Rob Cockerham over at cockeyed.com.

  99. The next question would be: by game+kid · · Score: 1

    Will it float?

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  100. deja vu? didn't this one get /.'d a while back? by Hurklefish · · Score: 1

    I read an article about http://www.amasci.com/amateur/mirror.htmlthis solar array quite a while ago, I thought it had been posted hear. 112 mirrors doesn't really sound like a lot.. if you covered a 4 by 8 sheet of plywood with 1 inch mirrors, you'd be able to get 4608 mirrors in your array, not allowing for clearance. if you use the same number and make the mirros 3/4 inch, you would end up with a target spot around that size at 4608 times the power of the sun. I think that would do some considerable damage.

    1. Re:deja vu? didn't this one get /.'d a while back? by IdntUnknwn · · Score: 1

      Hm, increasing the number of mirrors wouldn't increase power output, it would only make the solar array more focused. The only way to really increase power output is to increase the amount of sunlight that you are catching, which would require a larger base.

    2. Re:deja vu? didn't this one get /.'d a while back? by Treeluvinhippy · · Score: 1

      The only way to really increase power output is to increase the amount of sunlight that you are catching, which would require a larger base.

      You know, that's exactly what he proposed to do. Look at the pictures of the device and read the man's post again.

      --
      >
  101. Archimedes did this a couple of thousand years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And it was duplicated by a greek engineer in 1973.

    Once enough soldiers got their shiny copper shields aligned right, a boat would burst into flame in a few seconds.

    www.signonsandiego.com/news/features/strange/200 10 523-0523strange51.html

  102. Re:To sum it up... by symbolic · · Score: 1, Interesting


    Stuff burns when it gets real hot.

  103. Re:Larry Niven strikes again; Ringworld sunflowers by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1

    Heh. heh. heh. Actually, Archimedes beat them both too it by a long time, as the other guy pointed out. I don't know about the Cockeyed guy. I did, however, find Nigerian penpals on his site.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  104. This was done by the military on a grand scale by Veritech_Ace · · Score: 1

    An Army testing lab in Natick, MA used an enormous array of mirrors to simulate the thermal flash pulse of a thermonuclear detonation, for the purpose of testing a sunscreen that the labs were developing for GIs in a nuclear battlefield. Best part is, they tested using pigs! Sound like some loony conspiracy to you?
    Check it out.
    It's real-world stuff like this that keeps sci-fi writers going.

  105. Myth BUSTED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Supposedly the inventor Archimedes during the siege of Syracuse by the Romans used large mirrors that focused/concentrated sun light into an intense enough laser beam that it burned invading Roman ships. There was an episode of Myth Busters on this subject (Season 2 Episode 4).

    Here's what the Myth Busters guys did to test the theory:

    - The crew build half a trireme and balanced it in the water.

    - The crew built 400 sq ft mirror built from 300 individual mirrors. They were arranged in a cicle and were all focused at the same point.

    - They aimed the giant mirror such that the focal point of the indvidual mirrors was directly on the trireme.

    - They were only able to get the temperate up to 280 degrees even with all of their efforts.

    - They just couldn't get the ship to burn, so they used Molotov cocktails instead just so they could destroy something.

    Simply put, this is a myth. It is very unlikely it happened.

    Pankaj Arora
    Homepage
    Free Cursors

  106. Re:Obviously the stupid moderators doesn't watch T by weighn · · Score: 1

    maybe its been modded redundant cos the parent is mentioning the Mythbusters link for, like, the 50th time?

    --
    Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  107. Solar Hooch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not use it to distill some Corn Mash whisky and have a party... MMMMM solar hooch

  108. Definitely not new by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is a solar furnace, of which there are many in use today. The biggest one in the world is the Odeillo Solar Furnace located in Odeillo, France. The top 3 in use in the United States are at Sandia National Labs, Georgia Tech and the White Sands Missile Test Range. Awesome stuff!

    One amusing side note is that Frank Gehry's popular postmodern buildings have been noted to act as solar collectors, effectively frying people passing by on the sidewalk.

    1. Re:Definitely not new by Veritech_Ace · · Score: 2, Informative

      See my post for a great site describing the use of this weapon on more interesting specimens.

    2. Re:Definitely not new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that may be the biggest one currently in operation, but Solar One (bottom of the page) was running in barstow california in the eighties and putting out 10MW of power during full sunlight.

    3. Re:Definitely not new by lxs · · Score: 1

      yup not new. Archimedes designed something similar more than 2000 years ago as a defense against ships. This is old news even for slashdot :)

  109. Let me guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The name of the guy that invented this is Count Olaf. ;)

  110. Re:To sum it up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Maxim burns when it gets real hot, too.

  111. something of interest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    look at this death ray

    1. Re:something of interest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh yeah, how about this death ray

  112. No, not true by JoeBuck · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If the sun is at a lower angle in the sky, it goes through more atmosphere and more of the light scatters. That's why the sky is red at sunrise and sunset.

    You'd be right if there were no atmosphere.

  113. Solar Death Star by Bruce+McBruce · · Score: 1

    I can see Microsoft making a Solar Death Star and targeting the Apple HQ from outer space. Perhaps this could be a new era in OS wars?

  114. Fresnel Lenses, dammit by Clueless+Moron · · Score: 1

    They cannot be beat for simplicity: google for giant fresnel lens

  115. Do you expect me to talk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, Mr Blond, I expect you to die!

  116. Fresnel lens by p_trekkie · · Score: 1

    If by magnification you mean with a lense, by golly it has been done before..... in fact it was even mentioned on slashdot. Fresnel lenses are really useful for totally obliterating innocent inanimate objects.

    1. Re:Fresnel lens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "by golly it has been done before"

      Why, yes it has, "by golly". Tell me, is your last name Flanders?

  117. pfft! by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 1

    Gundam had this in 1979, we're already past the year 2000 giant robots will just blow it up. Whats the point?

    --
    I like muppets.
  118. How well does a Dollar burn? by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

    "The goal of the Web site was to show the results of the targeted items when the solar death ray was used."

    No, the goal of this site is to solicit money from while having fun destroying stuff. An admirable goal, mind you.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
  119. No, by temojen · · Score: 1

    They tried to build a fixed arrangement of mirrors (with a fixed focal length) ... and then aim it at a point not at the focal point. A much better test would be to make several hundred flat mirrors with a hole in the middle (signal mirrors... but bigger, to make aiming at the same point easier). Then teach several hundred volunteers how to aim a signal mirror, and tell them all to aim at the same point on a boat.

  120. I thought it was kinda amusing. by Timmy+D+Programmer · · Score: 1

    Now make a reflector on one side of the moon and cook cities!!!

    --


    (If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
    1. Re:I thought it was kinda amusing. by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and disguise it as a completely harmless power plant.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
  121. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by rebelcool · · Score: 2, Informative

    polished aluminum is used because its sub-mm but not extremely sub-mm (ie, optical).

    its been awhile, so i forget the exact formula, but basically your surface can be as rough as some fraction of the wavelength you're trying to focus. Hence, wide waves can use dirty and/or rough surfaces (such as arecibo, which is just a hole in the ground and some perforated aluminum panels) and still work just fine, even when soiled as a huge bowl in the ground is bound to become.

    --

    -

  122. Re:Larry Niven strikes again; Ringworld sunflowers by slyall · · Score: 1

    I remember reading a Sci-Fi story ( at least 30 years old) where a guy goes to a soccer game in a South American country.

    He notices the program for the game (given to everyone who attends) has a very shiny white back to it.

    Into the game the referee makes a decission against the home team. In reply the crowd all hold up their programs, focus the sun onto the ref and vaporize him.

    --
    "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.
  123. This has probably already been done... by Xaroth · · Score: 1

    But this makes me wonder how much electricity could be produced by a series of parabolic mirrors heating water to turn a turbine, and whether this would be economically worth it in areas with a great deal of sunlight.

    (And don't talk to me about google... I'm lazy this evening.)

  124. okay, but... by krunchyfrog · · Score: 1
    How much time does it take to "kill" the targets?

    Are we talking seconds, minutes, days?

    --
    printf($randomline(sigs.txt) \n "-- "$randomline(authors.txt));
    -- myself
  125. He can build a solar death ray... by nxtr · · Score: 1

    ...but he can't make a properly formatted webpage.

    1. Re:He can build a solar death ray... by Kraeloc · · Score: 1

      What did he do wrong? I see no obvious errors.

    2. Re:He can build a solar death ray... by Treeluvinhippy · · Score: 1

      Your just jealous because you can format a webpage but can't make a death ray.

      --
      >
    3. Re:He can build a solar death ray... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww .solardeathray.com%2F

  126. Mirror this, someone? by Kraeloc · · Score: 1

    Someone ought to mirror this (pardon the pun); the site is getting sluggish already and I have a feeling it'll be going down in the next 45 minutes.

  127. Re:Bronze Mirrors? by softcoder · · Score: 1

    Sounds like Archimedes and the Greeks knew enough math to make piecewise parabolic mirrors that could focus on a point.
    Did they have the technology to make reasonably flat GLASS mirrors?
    IIRC glassblowing was not known then, and it was quite hard to make flat glass panels.
    Also the legend seems unclear as to whether they were using glass mirrors or shields. Bronze shields, whether flat or curved might have much poorer reflective properties than a mirror.

  128. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by The_Wilschon · · Score: 1

    It would only fry the focus if you pointed it directly at the sun. Otherwise, the light would focus at some other point. Thermal distortion does make sense however. Pretty sweet though.

    --
    SIGSEGV caught, terminating

    wait... not that kind of sig.
  129. concentration IS magnification by justthisdude · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Finally something I can contribute to slashdot!(says the optical engineer working late): The collection of mirrors used here is actually a piecewise-flat approximation to a large magnifying mirror, and does magnify the sun, within a margin of error. Augustin Fresnel invented this concept in 1822 for use in lighthouses. http://www.lanternroom.com/misc/freslens.htm If you look at the array of mirrors used here, the outer ones curve increasingly inward, just as as if it were a sigle curved mirror that had been cut up and rearranged to fit on a flat board. Any small part of a large curved lense is approximately flat anyway. It is not generally called "magnification" because that is used to talk about enlarging images, and this type of lense, being approximate and cheap, yields pretty blurry images. Still, works great for spotlights and solar concentrators. Here is another example: http://ravenrocks.org/Mook/

    --
    "I love his boyish charm, but I hate his childishness" - Leela
  130. I don't think so! by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 2, Funny
    ...112 mirrors mounted on a platform 4 feet wide and 6 feet tall.

    There is no way that would fit on the head of a dolphin.
    So what use is it to me?

    1. Re:I don't think so! by Kraeloc · · Score: 1

      Well, the mirrors can be made as small as you like. Just makes for a smaller focal point. 150 half-centimeter diameter circular mirrors. If you were careful to align them all right, you could mount the whole thing in an 8 inch diameter cylinder. Could even stager the alignment of the mirros a bit, to make a "stretched out" focus point. I say put it about 20 feet forward maybe.

    2. Re:I don't think so! by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      Excellent.
      These will far surpass Dr. Evil 's shark based, head mounted weapons.

    3. Re:I don't think so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong part of James Bond. This one (solar-powered death ray) is from Man with the Golden Gun (I think).

  131. 1 killowatt "deathray" by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Informative

    the death ray is 4 feet mirror is 4 feet by 6 feet. It looks to have a bout 50% of its area covered with cheap mirrors, which I'll assume are about 80% refelective. that makes it about a square meter of effective reflectivity. the solar flux near the equator is about 1 kilowatt per sq meter. This is focused down to an area of about 6 inches square or about the size of a stove burner. A typical stove burner probably runs at about 1.5 KW. so basically this thing has the heat delivery of a burner. Actually a bit less since the object itself may be reflective over a large part of the spectrum. So call it maybe half a stove burner. Still plenty to fry plastic, your hand, or even start a fire.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:1 killowatt "deathray" by kesuki · · Score: 1

      So clearly donations must be made to improve the 'solar deathray' into a weapon that can truly exceed the destructive capacity of a a stove burner cranked to medium high!
      While you're busy correcting him, remind that paper ignites at 451 Degrees Fahrenheit, his page incorrectly lists the temperature as '450' degrees, as he got the 'initial' temp from an incorrectly rounded down celcius temp.
      I don't know how any geek worth his measure could have not heard of ray bradbury, or at least imdb'ed the movie.. but ah well.

    2. Re:1 killowatt "deathray" by dinadan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      i doubt that all the different materials called "paper" ignite at the same temperature...

    3. Re:1 killowatt "deathray" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much is half a Stove Burner in Burning Libraries of Congress?

    4. Re:1 killowatt "deathray" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically, 451F is the temperature at which printing paper ignites. Printing paper is composed of chemically treated wood pulp, and contains no additives, so all printing paper ignites at 451F The clay additives used to make glossy magazine paper could alter the ignition point of that type of paper, but really there aren't all that many types of paper... there is paper, and then there is paper they'be blended with clay or wax or other additives to create a 'derivative' but if the paper is derived from wood pulp, it's ignition point is 451 F

  132. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by hawk · · Score: 2, Funny
    >>[imp.cnrs.fr]

    > I surrender.

    Wait a minute; isn't this backwards?

    :)

    hawk

  133. Re:Bronze Mirrors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glassblowing was known. There were even glass slippers (ala Cinderella) found in an Etruscan necropolis which dated from about the same time as Archimedes.

    Polished bronze surfaces reflect sunlight (and heat) quite well, though they're usually not perfect mirrors. It's not really necessary to get a perfect mirror when you have a lot of them.

  134. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's exactly what I was thinking. I saw that pic, and was like, "This fucker is a lying fuck!" I'm with you. Bogus.

  135. Lens Death Ray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah I'm gonna put up my own website, except it will be about burning stuff with sunlight focused by a magnifying glass, I'll post pics too. Wooohooo.

  136. Should've optimized the rectangular space by rdmiller3 · · Score: 1

    This mirror is layed out in concentric rings for some dumb reason. He should've just done lots of solid rows of mirrors. There's no reason they have to be in circles. He'd have gotten nearly double the power out of it for the same sized board.

    1. Re:Should've optimized the rectangular space by aXis100 · · Score: 1

      With concentric rings, each band of mirrors share the same angle.

      With a solid row, you'd have to adjust the angle for every one individually. Sounds like hard work to me.

    2. Re:Should've optimized the rectangular space by rdmiller3 · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't think it'd be too hard if you'd use putty to mount the mirrors.

      It doesn't matter where the mirror is, so you might as well cram them as close together as you can. Rows and columns are best for rectangular mirrors. If you have an odd number of rows and columns, you'll get a "center" spot which will be handy for the next step. Pencil a grid onto the backboard. Drill a hole in the center spot.

      Put a ball on the end of a straight stick and mount it in the hole in the center of the backboard so you can make sure it's aimed at the sun (by centering the shadow of the stick on the backboard). The ball will be the focus.

      Glop some putty onto the back of a mirror, put it in place, and tip it so its beam hits the ball (the focus). Make sure that the shadow of the ball is centered on the base of the aiming stick before you aim each the mirror. Now cover the little mirror you just aimed with something. Tape a piece of dark paper over it or something like that which won't slip off accidentally. Now you're ready to do the next little mirror the same way, and so on until you've covered the backboard with masked mirrors.

      Take away the aiming stick and ball. Then unmask the little mirrors. There's your solar furnace!

      Oh... and one of those afterthoughts that you should probably think about beforehand... You might want to keep a short aiming stick in the middle, but maybe only half or quarter of the way to the focus. That will make it easier to set up. Also, you should keep a tarp or cloth to cover the mirrors while setting it up or when it's not in use, because even when it's not aimed at the sun the focus will be somewhere and you can't see it.

      Using this "masked mirrors" method, you could create a solar furnace nearly anywhere.

  137. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 1

    I'd guess that they wanted a publicity photo, and took appropriate precautions:

    (1) Ensure the desired dish position and sun position cause the focal point to be somewhere harmless.
    (2) Slew to desired position with shutters closed
    (3) Open shutters
    (4) Take photo
    (5) close shutters.

    However this is speculation on my part. As a visiting astronomer, if I'd tried this, I expect they would have been Not Impressed.

    The rainbow does, however suggest a certain spontineity/opportunism in the taking of the photo.

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
  138. Conversation Starter by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

    I have had INCREADIBLE success wearing the copyleft shirts.

    Don't be afraid to nerd out a bit but keep it in moderation, women like men who are into politics especially if they don't already have an oppinion (especially a contrary one) since most haven't heard of DRM or IP they'll listen to you complain for a while and think you're a friggin genius about it.

    Picking up girls the copyleft way, can't find the shirts I have 2 of the DECSS crossed out and the green one which says my shirt is illegal, girls love that :P

  139. Grumbles and questions by RM6f9 · · Score: 1

    No info on prices for a Stirling engine suitable to put in front of this toy, can't find the reference to the individual who built a backyard concentrator in a 7' satellite dish, nothing on materials for a refractory crystal capable of creating a real beam at the focal point, now my head is spinning around the idea of adding a cylinder internally mirrored from just shy of the focal point to several inches beyond it containing at its center a laser-capable crystal or substance container (Who needs expensive xenon pumping flash tubes? we've got ~3kw of sunlight!) - and no, the resulting assembly would NOT fit on the head of a shark - want mobility, buy a truck.
    But thanks for the ideas.

    --
    Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
  140. Obligatory... by saturndude · · Score: 1

    Imagine a beowulf cluster... never mind.

  141. Larger version by marcopo · · Score: 1

    The Weizmann Institude has a large scale version of this. A large lot is covered by computer controlled mirrors that can be aimes to reflect sunlight into one of three floors of an opposing building.

    Each floor has one wall that can be opened up, as a garage door, to let the sun shine in, and supposedly they can reach tempratures of several thousand degrees in a controlled space there.

    One of these doors has a large black spot on it, supposedly from not opening it on time.

    1. Re:Larger version by RZG · · Score: 1
  142. Nonimaging Optics: Why bother to 'focus' at all? by MCRocker · · Score: 1

    Since the target is so close, why bother to actually use an optical system that focuses the light? Why not just use nonimaging optics that concentrate the light at the target. Such systems can generate phenomenal temperatures, which would probably produce much more interesting results.

    --
    Signatures are a waste of bandwi (buffering...)
  143. Childhood revenge by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    "Bwaaahaaaha, Finally I nailed that ant that didn't succumb to my Cracker Jack magnifier when I was 8. Whose your Daddy now, insect breath!"

  144. I can't be the only one by u-238 · · Score: 1

    who notices this guy's web layout, solardeathray.com watermarked animated gif's, and rather lame attmept at Dave Berry style humor as an utter maddox rip?

  145. not new by JawzX · · Score: 1

    seen it before, but this stiff is always fun. There's just something cool about melting stuff with the power of the sun. Although you can get better focus and higher heat from a bug fresnel lense, this definately has style.

    Remind me to submit my UV (hydrogen) pumped cyanine dye laser if I ever finish it. Just need some more 6KV capacitors, a good vacuum pump and and a lot of Tide(TM).

  146. Blofeld Jr. by Squirrel_King · · Score: 1

    All he needs now is a tropical hideaway to stash his "goodies" and maybe a cat with a diamond collar. Henchman with metal teeth and bad case of acromegaly optional...

  147. solar furnace by baomike · · Score: 1

    This sounds a lot like a minature version of the French solar furnace.
    Since most anything French seems to be unknown in this country (US) this story would be news.

  148. Mine's Bigger and Uses Molten Sodium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stumbled accross this on a drive in the Mojave, very cool...

    http://www.ieesocal.org/review3.html

  149. Death Ray small thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone realize there is a really big one of these powering a community in Arizona? http://www.azsolarcenter.com/technology/electric.h tml

  150. not magnification. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    Telescopes have wide aperatures for two reasons. Angular resolution and light intensification. At high magnification, the light is more 'spread out' so it is *less* intense.. or would be if the aperature of the telescope was the same as your iris. It is not. The larger aperature area of the telescope can collect much more light, and this is why you must not look at the celestial object without filters. Under high enough magnification (which would probably be well beyond the diffraction limit for most telescopes) you would not need the filter anymore.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  151. 1000 kW. Pfft... That's nothing frenchman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    > for a maximum thermal power of 1000 kW.

    This one generates about 10 Megawatts and runs on molten salt.

    > [www.imp.cnrs.fr]

    Now go away before I taunt you a second time! ;-)

  152. An easier method? by SethS · · Score: 1

    It's a heck of a lot easier to get an old 4' radio dish (example) and cover it with a reflective mylar. It works GREAT! No fine-tuning mirrors - this is MUCH less work.

    I did this with kids at a small science museum - they loved it. We boiled water and lit cardbord on fire.

    --
    If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention!
  153. Wasn't this... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

    Wasn't this a Myth Busters topic. They couldn't get it to do anything.

  154. Re:Bronze Mirrors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, the slippers were FUR, not glass!

    "VAIR" is an old French word which means fur. "VERRE" is pronounced the same as "VAIR" and it means glass. It is believed that when Charles Perrault's wrote his 1697 book he confused the two words. Since that time poor Cinderella has been wearing a glass slipper.

  155. Bunk! by joeyblades · · Score: 1

    It's a hoax. A fresnel array (and what this guy built is a fresnel array not a parabola) of this size cannot generate the heat to burn anything. BTW, one of the experiments done by the Mythbusters was essentially the same thing. They explained why this approach doesn't work and their explanation was essentially correct. You can't focus a significant amount of light from flat mirrors on a focal point. Most of the radiant energy is wasted.

    1. Re:Bunk! by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      The problem with what mythbuster did is with the scale.

      The fresnel array they used have a lot of mirror that are smaller, which means they can focus quite amount of power over a short distance (easier to calibrate).

      The problem (deliberate to be more accurate to historical basis) is the fact that...
      1. Mirrors are big (myth says they use shields, hence big) small focal point.
      2. Distance is long.
      3. Target is wood, even with the presence of wax, is hard to burn.

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
    2. Re:Bunk! by joeyblades · · Score: 1

      The Mythbusters did a scale model first, approximately the size of the one from the web site, except with more reflectors, which should have made it more effective than the one at the web site. I don't know what the guy at the web site did to calibrate the angle of each of his mirrors, but the Mythbusters took great pains to get the angles just right.

  156. OT, your sig by Darby · · Score: 1

    That's funny.

    Change the B to A and you get Fry.

    C doesn't do anything.

    It's late.
    The rest of the alphabet is left as an exercize for the readership.

  157. Lunar Death Ray? by waffleman · · Score: 1
    Heh,

    When I was growing up I made a 17" Dobsonian telescope. At the time it was considered quite the light bucket. We would take it out just before dusk so that it would cool down properly for a midnight viewing. One of my buddies did the classic, "Oh let's point it at the moon," thing thinking that because it was still light out, it would be safe to look at without stopping down the aperture. Notta good idea: a few feet away his *hand* lit up like a halogen bulb and that was the end of that "bright" idea. Lucky it was only his hand.

    But this makes me wonder, the brightness of the light at the focal point would be: L[f] = L[a]*r*A[a]/A[f]

    where A[a] is the area of the aperture, A[f] is the area of the focal point, and L[a] is the brightness at the aperature, and r is the percentage of light that gets reflected.

    Now, in the article he says that the solar death ray uses 112 normal mirrors, and they're all flat, so r*A[a]/A[f] is likely to be .85*112 ~= 95, which gets him a temperature of 500 degrees C. Now, my telescope can bring the light cone down to an area of, say 1/4" diameter, and the reflective coating I use on my mirror can get 90% transmission no problem. So, r*A[a]/A[f] for my 17 inch aperture is likely to be .90*4900 ~= 4410. Ok, the moon's average albedo (measure of reflectivity) is 0.12, and the moon and the sun have the same apparent size in the sky (ie solar eclipse is close match in size). So, does that mean I should be getting 0.12*4410/95 ~= 4.5 the light intensity from my lunar death ray as he does from his solar one?

    Hey I could fry ants with the moon! Or on second thought, maybe not.

    1. Re:Lunar Death Ray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With something like 90% transmission, aiming this at the Sun isn't a bright idea. The remaining 10% will be more than enough to melt the telescope :)

  158. Electricity, cheaply, made with bathroom mirrors by theolein · · Score: 1

    It's sometimes sad that simple devices like this are not used on a large scale to generate electricity. Focusing the light on a tank of water would generate a lot of steam, and, if the steam passed through a simple closed circuit where the water could condense and flow back into the tank, you'd have a minimal maintenance generator for all those sunny days. And you could use large ones to power pumps to push water uphill into dams to generate electricty during cold months and the proverbial rainy day.

  159. Boeing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  160. Tetris on 5.25" floppy!!! by yo5oy · · Score: 1

    I could have put that to some good use, damnit!

    --
    a slut did tulsa
  161. Re:Obviously the stupid moderators doesn't watch T by decipher_saint · · Score: 1

    Actually I was only second (last I checked) and the other fellah only beat me by four minutes.

    Heaven forbid I work a job and perhaps can't hit "submit" as fast as I like whilst CTRL+TAB'ing between Firefox tabs... or wait, if this is the boss then I mean of course debugging our monolithic application for the benefit of future generations of lawyers.

    And I extend many thanks the parent AC; "moderation" on /. of late has been shoddy at best, meta-moderation be damned...

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
  162. Re:Obviously the stupid moderators doesn't watch T by kgbspy · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, the original poster was only mentioning it for the fourth time. And they posted it no more than 2 minutes after the original mention of Mythbusters.

    I agree with the grandparent - the post really didn't need to be moderated redundant. Some moderators seem to be under the delusion that just because a post is 3/4 of the way down the page that it was posted *after* all the comments above it, and somehow the poster must have submitted despite all the references that already existed.

    Read the posting times, and cut the guy some slack.

    --
    ~
    ~
    ~
    -- INSERT --
  163. Depends... by Vo0k · · Score: 1

    Actually, in a major part it depends on the mirrors. Specifically, on glass. Most of glass (at least the cheaper kind used in common mirrors) is infrared-opaque. Sure the spot will be lit brightly. So what, if all the light is in visible range, and no infrared ever gets there, dissipated in the mirrors?
    If they used mirrors i.e. from polished metal, that could work. Each such mirror can raise the temperature by a few degrees. This won't get you far beyond 100C and would hardly be able to set things ablaze, but could possibly melt a plastic bottle or explode an egg.

    --
    Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    1. Re:Depends... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      visible light heats objects just as well as IR does.there is nothing magic about IR. Just because our eyes cannot see it, doesn't affect its thermodynamic properties.

  164. Re:Magnification Info: Intensity, Physics & Op by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, light intensity (watts)/(meter^2) is what counts here. Instantaneous intensity is equal to the Poynting vector "S", if you'll remember from Physics:

    S=mu*(E)X(B) where X is the cross product, and mu (mu-knot) is a constant. So that S=mu*EBsin(theta), where theta is 90 and therefore S=mu*EB. S average is also related to the power as: (S)avg=(P)avg/A

    Also recall the equation c=E/B, and plug into the cross product above. Thus, the intensity of a light beam (be it radio waves or visible) is related to the magnetic and electric fields. It has NOTHING to do with magnification (look over focal length equations etc from geometric optics for more info). In fact, if you did experiments you would find that the intensity would actually DECREASE due to "magnification", simply because of the multiple lens elements or large element and subsequent light loss (refraction & diffraction at work).

    Electric and Magnetic fields depend on various things such as the radius of the emitter, the permittivity and permeability of free space (roughly the same as air) etc. But you won't find anything relating it to magnification.

    Now it does depend on the velocity, since S is related to c, but c is pretty much constant at 2.988x10^8 m/s anyway. The best you can do there is relate it to the material light travels through, which would decrease the intensity on a humid day by diffracting the light (due to water, which has an n value of 1.333 as compared to 1 for vacuum, or 1.000293 for air). Clouds accomplish the same thing.

    There is no known way to increase the speed of light... but hey, if you figure it out, let me know! I'll be sure to patent and copyright the information, making billions of dollars off of you. And I'm nice, I'll even give you a few million to keep you quiet :)

    Oh, and note that the (S)avg=(P)avg/A also proves that focusing and adding more mirrors both increase the intensity by adding more power, or literally more light waves into a smaller area. Nifty!

    In summary? A focusing parabolic lense would work great here, but alas! You wouldn't get the wide-area-destruction that looks so great. Instead, you'd have to slowly move a powerful beam back and forth to utterly demolish an object after multiple-long-painful-adjustments.

    More mirrors, or better yet, some kind of large spherical or parabolic mirror would help by using up all of that empty space he has between square reflectors.

    dblack

  165. I would be far more impressed if by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    he'd rigged all those mirrors to be computer controlled so that he could drive the focus spot around using a joystick...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  166. REAL Solar Death Ray by dustinbarbour · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sorta, anyway. This is a link to the UNLV Solar Project, a project playing with new ideas in solar energy such as focus the light to a specific point (roughly, of course) to increase the uptake of energy by the receptors. I drive by these bad boys everyday. UNLV Solar

  167. The Real Reason by likewowandstuff · · Score: 1

    I've always wondered why my Braun electric shavers came with little mirrors.

  168. Re:I've already read it by roseblood · · Score: 1

    Niven's Ringowrld "sunflowers" in man-made form. Cool.

    --
    There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
  169. Re:Bronze Mirrors? by Peeteriz · · Score: 1

    If it reflects twice less light, then you simply need twice as much men with mirrors..

  170. No it was by seweso · · Score: 1

    Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events (2004)

  171. GirlFriend Quest....... by bozojoe · · Score: 1

    This is a game? for real? for honest?

    --
    lick the cancle button (at least thats what our Chinese QA says)
    1. Re:GirlFriend Quest....... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks suspiciously like Kings Quest 2...

  172. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by lxs · · Score: 1

    Why aluminum? Is it the most reflective substance on earth?

    Yes. Strictly speaking, freshly applied silver is more reflective, however silver tarnishes very rapidly, and after about a week, an aluminium coated mirror is a better relector than a silver coated one.

  173. I, for one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...welcome our new solar death ray overlords. :D

  174. James Bond... by Gizmoguy · · Score: 0

    Sounds like the Icarus project off James Bond.

    --
    -- There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, And those who don't.
  175. Use for Small Industry? by torpor · · Score: 1


    I have to wonder how such tech could be being used in grid-less nations, for example, to promote industry?

    I mean, is it possible to create such a system that could be used to fire a kiln, for example, or keep a high-temperature oven maintained long enough to do glass?

    As a tech-nerd who longs to get off the grid, this sort of thinking appeals to me. How can small, light industry, be brought to the DIY scale ..

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  176. Dude! by Epsillon · · Score: 1

    I can't believe nobody has jumped on the obvious ObPost. Dude! You should burn a DELL! ;-)

    --
    Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
  177. Um... its a TV show. by tgd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At least half their experiments have been organized so poorly that they failed when its well documented something works, and that was a prime example.

    Its entertainment, not science. Don't watch it to learn anything about the reality of the "myths", watch it because its freakin' hot to see Kari bound up in the water torture episode.

    (Oops, did I just say too much?)

    1. Re:Um... its a TV show. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, dude!! I'd spank that ass!!

  178. Is it REALLY so difficult.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..to get sharks with frickin' lasers on their heads instead?

    -Dr Evil.

  179. Sounds like Energy Innovation's stuff by Trinition · · Score: 1

    Energy Innovations has a device called the Sunflower that uses a similar concept of focusing the sun's energy for heating purposes... on a sterling engine! They use it to generate electricity. They're also working on a newer model which, IIRC, is about 4 feet by 6 feet in a rectangular array (easier to orrient the mirrors, they said).

  180. cheaper version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cheaper version:

    1 old parabolic antenna
    some aluminium foil
    a stick
    sausages to grill

    glue the aluminium foil on the surface of the antenna, put the stick in the middle, put the sausage on the stick, and of course point it in the direction of the sun!

  181. 50 yards away. by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

    That is well within the range of archers and spearmen aboard the ships. I'd like to see this shown possible 400 yards out with plausible Greek tech. We aren't talking about firing a derelict. These are supposed to be ships full of armed sailers and marines.

  182. lets copy someone and pretend we're unique! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cant care less.

    they did this on the discovery channel show mythbusters not long ago.

    and did a better job of building it too.

    and proved it was a joke

  183. Flat mirrors ?... by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 1

    Just for the fun of it, would he gain much by using parabolic mirrors that would concentrate solar rays even more ?

    Of course you must be able to find a lot of cheap parabolic mirrors of the right curvature (ideally they would have slightly different curvatures, being at different distances from the target focal point, but hey that would still be better than flat mirrors).

    But still, I wonder how much power he could get from this.

    Thomas-

    1. Re:Flat mirrors ?... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      only in power concentration (per sq inch), not in total power. He could probably get it down to a sq cm. hot as a blow torch

    2. Re:Flat mirrors ?... by Retric · · Score: 1

      The idea is these mirrors are cheep and on hand. Which means that he can just add more until the focal area say the size of a pie plate gets as hot as he wants to. Yea if you wanted to make something that could say cut steel then it would be much easer with parabolic mirrors but this gets about as hot as a stovetop so it will still burn paper and plastic just fine.

  184. Science Fair project? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this was an extention to a science fair project... Maybe he lost and he thought "I'll show them. This will work!" This is way better than the project that won - "How to get a strange dog to bite you"

  185. Been there... by IdJit · · Score: 1

    ...made that...over 20 *years* ago for a high school science fair.

  186. Myth Busters as well ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    Myth Busters tried this one too to duplicate something Pythagoras (I think) was supposed to have done.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Myth Busters as well ... by David+Gould · · Score: 2, Interesting


      Myth Busters tried this one too to duplicate something Pythagoras (I think) was supposed to have done.

      Archimedes. You're talking about using mirrors to set fire to the sails of attacking ships, right?

      --
      David Gould
      main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
    2. Re:Myth Busters as well ... by KevinKnSC · · Score: 1

      That was Archimedes, defending Syracuse from a Roman fleet.

    3. Re:Myth Busters as well ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1
      Archimedes. You're talking about using mirrors to set fire to the sails of attacking ships, right?

      Doh, my bad. Yes, it's the boat one with the shields.
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  187. DeathRay + target quest + girlfriend quest by amanox · · Score: 2, Funny

    Oh Dear... I hope this does not add up ...

  188. Point at the Sun ? by witte · · Score: 1

    If we point them at the Sun itself, I wonder how much mirrors we need to blow it up ?

  189. Re:Magnification Info: Intensity, Physics & Op by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    There is no known way to increase the speed of light... but hey, if you figure it out, let me know!
    Well, that would require subzero Kelvin temperature ...
  190. I smell bullshit by mandrake*rpgdx · · Score: 1

    I remember one History's Mysteries episode where they tried to debunk if Archimedese could build a death ray in ancient Greece using mirrors. They showed that the amount of mirrors needed to make it more than just "really hot" was physically implausible.

  191. Finally! by Rufus88 · · Score: 1

    Finally! George Hamilton can get that tan he's always dreamed of.

  192. This needed to be done by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 1
    Excellent! The Solar Death Ray had to be invented.

    For another thing that needed doing, read Catapult: Harry and I Build a Siege Engine. Sorry, I don't remember the author's name.

    --
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
  193. Re:To sum it up... by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 1

    If your Maxim gets hot enough to burn, you obviously need more water in the water jacket.

    Duh.

  194. Already been done by Speljamr · · Score: 0

    I've already seen this thing attempted on Myth Busters, and it failed.

  195. Re:To sum it up... by StarRoamer · · Score: 1

    No, no, no. I'm sure he meant Maxim, the men's magazine, not Maxim, the water-cooled machinegun.

  196. Simpler solution by gr8_phk · · Score: 1

    25 years ago in middle school, my brother did a science project. He took a large umbrella and covered the inside with alluminum foil. He clamped a grate of some sort onto the handle near the focal point, set it out in the yard facing the sun, and cooked a hotdog on it. I don't think it took nearly the effort this "deathray" geek put into mounting all those mirrors....

  197. Re:Bronze Mirrors? by whopis · · Score: 1

    so now it is both glass and fur. Very Hollywood.

  198. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's this, then?

    "Romanes Eunt Domus"?

    People called Romanes they go the house?

  199. Re:To sum it up... by Clay+Pigeon+-TPF-VS- · · Score: 1

    Mein MG-08 ist wunderbar!

    --
    Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
  200. Re:Magnification Info: Intensity, Physics & Op by gnuman99 · · Score: 1
    Very insightful. From moderation, I don't think any moderators know what is a Poynting vector! Of course, that knowledge is beyond elemetry physics.

    About the light go faster than c, well, it appears to be here already http://www.aip.org/pnu/2000/split/pnu495-2.htm, although not exactly faster than c :). There is also this blurb about a negative index of refraction, which might also be interresting. http://www.aip.org/pnu/2001/split/534-2.html

  201. I wonder ... by Madwand · · Score: 1

    What the resonant frequency of those mirrors is...

  202. A matter of scale by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 1

    If you scale the whole thing up to about the size of the Buckhouse, you'll be fine.

  203. Re:Ha! You call that a solar death ray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about this? http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4026/ noord53.html

    Yeah I like the part about the dark harbors, Umm Jaah! Vee could light up dark american, I mean german harbors ven zeh nachten fell und sctoff!