Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Physicists Close in on 'Superlens'

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the i-am-bender-please-insert-light dept.

An anonymous reader writes "In Oregon, physicists have developed a material for creating a real superlens that in theory could attain a one-nanometer visual resolution. The idea is to use exotic materials to create "negative" refraction of light, which literally means steering it in the opposite direction of that found in the natural world."

15 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Anonymous Cowards close in on 'First Post!'

  2. Aww. by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Funny

    In a conventional lens, light gets bent

    Poor light. Why is everyone so mean to it? It just wants to be loved, but everyone wants it to get bent.

  3. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    In a conventional lens, light gets bent

    In Soviet Russia, light bend YOU!

  4. How would that look? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    So, if you would fill a pool with a fluid with negative refraction, and then would go swimming, how would that look to someone ouside the pool? (Beside funny and quite stupid ...)

  5. Major advance possible. by Belseth · · Score: 5, Funny
    In Oregon, physicists have developed a material for creating a real superlens that in theory could attain a one-nanometer visual resolution.

    Finally there'll be a way to read all the fine print in service contracts!

  6. As a Lisp programmer by boomgopher · · Score: 5, Funny


    As a Lisp programmer, I chuckle at the artificial distinction between light, lenses, and refraction.



    --
    Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
  7. I'm a Physics God by TheoMurpse · · Score: 4, Funny

    The idea is to use exotic materials to create "negative" refraction of light, which literally means steering it in the opposite direction of that found in the natural world.

    I have one of those! I call it a *hand quotes* mirror *hand quotes*.

  8. Damn by EBFoxbat · · Score: 2, Funny

    I just lost my 13.2 tb negative refraction DVD. Man, it was such a good Windows rebuild. Seriously though, this could be a spiffy application to optical drives... errr negative optical drives.

  9. Re:E=MC^2, yo. by kfg · · Score: 3, Funny

    feynmann explained this clearly in the (first volume?) of his lectures, i imagine everybody here has read them...

    Dude, most people here don't even read TFAs.

    KFG

  10. Re:So what is this non-natural world? by Chrispy1000000+the+2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I prefer waiting for an organism that evolves such that it's waste product is an Ferrari.

    --
    Sig
  11. New L series lens in the works? by reub2000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    So could we be seeing a new Canon L series lens being made with these?

  12. Re:So what is this non-natural world? by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's what I said. :)

    KFG

  13. Re:These would be nice! by theglassishalf · · Score: 5, Funny

    Large molecule on molecule action? Man, and I thought I had seen all the fetishes.

    -Daniel

    --
    Ownyourphone.com. Custom ringtones, cheap and easy
  14. Re:mirror by cablepokerface · · Score: 3, Funny

    mirror

    no, a lens! RTFA!

  15. Hyperbole Anyone? by E++99 · · Score: 2, Funny
    "...an extraordinary optical device that would bend light the opposite direction of that done by any natural material"

    "...literally means steering it in the opposite direction of that found in the natural world."
    The article makes it abundantly clear that this is not a natural device, but a supernatural device. They are therefore inconsistent in calling these clever people scientists, when they are clealy witch-doctors or magicians (in the Old Testament sense, not in the David Copperfield sense).