Slashdot Mirror


Reflectivity Reaches a New Low

sporkme writes "A new nanocoating material developed by a team of researchers from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute has the lowest level of reflectivity ever seen ... or not seen in this case. The amount of light reflected by the composite of silica nanorods and aluminum nitride is almost the same amount reflected by air. From the article: 'Schubert and his coworkers have created a material with a refractive index of 1.05, which is extremely close to the refractive index of air and the lowest ever reported. Window glass, for comparison, has a refractive index of about 1.45. Using a technique called oblique angle deposition, the researchers deposited silica nanorods at an angle of precisely 45 degrees on top of a thin film of aluminum nitride, which is a semiconducting material used in advanced light-emitting diodes (LEDs). From the side, the films look much like the cross section of a piece of lawn turf with the blades slightly flattened.' Suggested applications include increased efficiency in solar cells, more energy-efficient lighting and advances in quantum mechanics."

166 comments

  1. Hey check out my new low reflective phone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    oh crap where did it go?

    1. Re:Hey check out my new low reflective phone! by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ooooh! Shiny! Wait... awwwww...

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  2. And what everyone was really thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Even more birds hitting windows!

    1. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by ACS+Solver · · Score: 3, Funny

      Speaking of windows. Vista has "glass" style Aero. Now Windows Vienna will have a new "nanocoating" style, even less reflective than Vista!

    2. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think you mean:

      • Even more bugs hitting windows!
    3. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't know what the big deal is... Wonder Woman has had this stuff for years.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    4. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      "Now Windows Vienna will have a new "nanocoating" style, even less reflective than Vista!"

      That's nothing; my old pre-OS X Mac already has that feature.

    5. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by Zonk+(troll) · · Score: 4, Funny

      (Wonder woman is flying through the sky in a sitting position)

      Superman: So, I see you're flying the invisible plane.

      Wonder Woman: Oooh, um...er...this is...kinda embarrassing. You see...I'm actually, in the lavatory of the invisible plane.

      Superman: Oh...so, you mean...right now, you're...

      Wonder Woman: Yeah.

      (Wonder Woman stands up and walks forwards, sitting down again and gripping the invisible steering wheel)

      Superman: So...I noticed you didn't wash your hands in the invisible sink...

      --
      "The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
      End The FED. -
    6. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by amRadioHed · · Score: 4, Informative

      Give credit where credit's due man, that's taken from a Family Guy episode.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    7. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by ross.w · · Score: 1

      At least they won't attack their reflection aand crap all over the balcony in the process.

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
    8. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      hardly, it's all based off the old joke:

      "Superman is flying over the countryside and notices Wonder Woman lying naked in the field, so he flies down and pleasures her. After finishing he rolls over, lights up a cigarette, and asks, 'was it good for you?' to which Wonder Woman replies, 'It was great, but I'm not sure the Invisible Man will ever walk again.'"

    9. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      I know a (substantially funnier) variant which goes pretty much like this.

      Superman is flying over Metropolis and notices Wonder Woman lying naked on the rooftop of a building. Using his super-speed he fornicates her super-fast for her not to notice and flies away. Right then, Wonder Woman asks "what the hell was that?", to which the Invisible Man replies "No idea, but that did hurt my ass!".

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    10. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you get to claim the basis being this joke because superman and wonderwoman are involved? Because there are no other similarities at all...

      Of course, you're probably one of those "back in my day" jackasses.

    11. Re:And what everyone was really thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I didn't get it from Family Guy - just a random thought. Not surprised it's out there though.

      Thought of it because it happens a lot at work - kinda strange to see the images of pigeon faces on the glass...

  3. Nothing to see here... by messerman · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...move along.

    1. Re:Nothing to see here... by StarfishOne · · Score: 2, Funny

      It must have taken a long time of reflecting to write that post ;)

    2. Re:Nothing to see here... by numbski · · Score: 1

      It's odd no one seems to have picked up on the posibility of invisibility (or near-invisibility as it were). When light doesn't get refected back, our eyes can't see things. Am I right? In the dark it would be nearly impossible to tell an item of this material is there, other than by context (ie, light reflects from surrounding items, but not the item in question...)

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    3. Re:Nothing to see here... by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Informative

      "The sky reflects back blue, but there's this strangely dark spot moving against it... shoot it!" Just because it doesn't reflect light doesn't mean that it also doesn't block light. In the dark, it'd be very hard to see an object, but it would be the strange completely black spot against the backlight if you ever saw it silhouetted against a light source. It'd be awesome if they could use this as an anti-glare coating on binoculars or something, though.

    4. Re:Nothing to see here... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I didn't see where they were talking about different kinds of light. A lot of time when they talk about reflectivity, they are also concerned with ifrared and other part of the light spectrum like radar waves and all.

      And yes, I agree, not reflecting light is only part of the invisibility problem. The other part is getting light to pass through or around an object making it apear as if the object isn't there. However, In the case of search lights in the night sky or maybe infra red heat vision and maybe radar, The coating could make an object look theoreticly invisisble. But thats only because it isn't silhouetted.

      There were rumors that passive radar recievers could be set up and watch the black hole being created by US stealth aircraft. They were basicly invisible to radar because they either didn't reflect it or absorbed the waves hitting it. I guess some AU scientist/government workers could monitor US spyplanes using this to a point of determing their course direction and making some educated guesses on their targets. I'm not sure if this could help like other black metals have in the past.

    5. Re:Nothing to see here... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "It's odd no one seems to have picked up on the posibility of invisibility (or near-invisibility as it were)... In the dark it would be nearly impossible to tell an item of this material is there, other than by context (ie, light reflects from surrounding items, but not the item in question...)"

      We picked up on the possibility, but got way ahead of you before we posted.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  4. The material has a variable refractive index. by spun · · Score: 5, Informative

    They made several layers with increasing refractive indices, so the RI of the outermost coating is close to air while that of the innermost coating is close to the material it coats. What's cool about this is that it cuts reflexion across the EM spectrum, it doesn't just trade off reflectivity in one part of the spectrum for that in another, like previous anti-reflective coatings have done. Unfortunately, it isn't transparent so it won't work as a coating for glass.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:The material has a variable refractive index. by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      But it will make a great coating for my stealth car... let's see the LIDAR catch me now!

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:The material has a variable refractive index. by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

      How about coating for optical fiber?

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
    3. Re:The material has a variable refractive index. by tyen · · Score: 1

      Hm, so theoretically using this technique, could we build material that reflects away all EM except a narrow arbitrary range we define while it absorbs the EM spectrum that falls on both sides of that range? I haven't been able to get to the paper in Nature Photonics yet, and I didn't pick up the "several layers with increasing RI" part from the physorg article, but your post is the first description I've read of how they were able to capture such a huge swathe of the EM spectrum. The physorg article also led me to wonder if the material was visible light spectrum only, or just EM in general; but if your description is accurate I could see non-visible light parts of the spectrum addressed by the material as well.

  5. Transparent Aluminum? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Funny

    Would this constitute "Transparent Aluminum?

    typed on "Keyboard, how quaint"

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    1. Re:Transparent Aluminum? by Tackhead · · Score: 3, Funny
      > Would this constitute "Transparent Aluminum?
      >
      >typed on "Keyboard, how quaint"

      Naw, that ship was at least visible. How about something like that ship over there. I mean that... is really bad for the eyes... I mean you can hardly make out its shape... light just seems to fall into it!

      And the UI... I mean, it's the wild color scheme that freaks me. Every time you try to operate on of these weird black controls that are labelled in black on a black background, a little black light lights up black to let you know you've done it. And then it crashes into the sun! What kind of UI is this, Windows Aero?

    2. Re:Transparent Aluminum? by plantman-the-womb-st · · Score: 1

      I suppose you just expect I'll stay behind and operate the linux webserver. Typical.

      --
      Say bad words about my book, in cold oatmeal, or I shall sue!
    3. Re:Transparent Aluminum? by zcat_NZ · · Score: 1

      That's what you get when you steal Disaster Area's stunt ship...

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    4. Re:Transparent Aluminum? by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

      No, this would.

      --
      If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    5. Re:Transparent Aluminum? by xrayspx · · Score: 1

      I think you gotta think more Hotblack Desiato (from Disaster Area). Just because it doesn't reflect light doesn't mean you can see through it, that's why in the picture it looks black. Imagine a ship made all of this stuff, the instruments, guages, everything.

    6. Re:Transparent Aluminum? by yellowalienbaby · · Score: 1

      oo you git. I was gonna post 'What was the name of that damn band?'

      hah. DA rules! or.. did, anyhow. GRHS
      I bet he would have hated the iphone

      --
      Darwin Hawking Blackmore
    7. Re:Transparent Aluminum? by GeeksHaveFeelings · · Score: 1
  6. Refractivity? Or Reflectivity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huh?

    1. Re:Refractivity? Or Reflectivity? by pclminion · · Score: 5, Informative

      Refraction and reflection are closely related. Light reflects when it strikes a discontinuity in index of refraction. If the IOR is made to vary smoothly, on the other hand, light will not reflect. And that's exactly what they seem to have done here.

    2. Re:Refractivity? Or Reflectivity? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      So, if I painted my car with the stuff, it would make it immune to lidar and maybe even radar speed guns?

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    3. Re:Refractivity? Or Reflectivity? by sxtxixtxcxh · · Score: 0

      actually, i think coating your car in this wouldn't do any good. it's not like your car will automatically go invisible, the material below this nanocoating will still reflect light, right back through the coating.

      what you would need is something that has a HIGHER reflectivity index, and angle them all crazy-like, reflecting it all over the place before sending it back, so the laser ends up getting several mixed signals.

      --
      for a minute there, i lost myself...
    4. Re:Refractivity? Or Reflectivity? by fizzup · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is reflection at a dielectric boundary. A dielectric is something that is not a metal, like glass. If you focus your eyes on a window, you can see a reflection of yourself because air and glass are dielectrics with different indices of refraction.

      The amplitude of the reflected light wave for light that strikes perpendicular to the dielectric boundary is (n1 - n2)/(n1 + n2) - the "n's" are indices of refraction. For a boundary between air and this stuff, the reflection is (1.05 - 1.0) / (1.05 + 1.0) = (0.05/2.05) = 1/41. Compare with glass, with an index of 1.4: (1.4 - 1.0) / (1.4 + 1.0) = 0.4/2.4 = 1/6. (The difference in intensity is the square of this, though, which diminishes the difference.)

      The equation for non-normal incident light is more complicated*, but even light that is a long way off normal incidence reflects by about the same amount. It's only when you start approaching 90 degrees off normal that a dielectric boundary starts reflecting lots of light. Try it with a large window pane: you have to get your head right up there and view something with a glancing reflection to see it clearly.

      They're saying that they can coat a semiconductor, like an LED or a photovoltaic cell, with this stuff. Then about (1/6 - 1/41) more light either strikes the PV, or leaves the clear stuff that surrounds the LED.

      This will not work as well as a magnesium fluoride coating for lenses, though. That kind of antireflective coating relies on destructive interference with the reflected light from the two dielectric boundaries, which is why they only work at a certain wavelength.

      * Google "reflected light at a dielectric boundary" for the gory details.

    5. Re:Refractivity? Or Reflectivity? by skelly33 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Perhaps you can clarify something that I haven't seen mentioned yet (?)

      I believe that there are three things that can happen when radiation encounters an object:

      a) Reflect
      b) Absorb
      c) Pass through

      In the case of "solar power", it strikes me that there is another application aside from PhotoVoltaic that could benefit from lower reflectivity, and that is solar thermal. I would think that surfaces designed to absorb solar thermal energy, such as solar water heaters, or solar concentrating power systems, that reduced reflectivity would mean greater absorbtion of solar thermal energy, and thus improved overall solar thermal efficiency ...

    6. Re:Refractivity? Or Reflectivity? by mink · · Score: 1

      So cover my car in diffraction grating first?

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
    7. Re:Refractivity? Or Reflectivity? by fizzup · · Score: 1

      Sorry, took a while to answer. I think most solar thermal plants use a funny kind of black body.

      It's double-walled can with a liquid thermal mass between the walls, like molten salt. In one end of the can, there is an opening that is small compared to the dimensions of the can. The walls of the can are somewhat absorptive, but the bulk of the absorptivity of the device comes from multiple reflections once light gets inside.

      Light from the sun is reflected from a number of mirrors on the ground, which form an indistinct image of the sun at the opening of the can suspended in the air. There's no "screen" to project the image on, so the light passes through the hole, strikes the inner wall and is partly absorbed, partly reflected. The reflected ray strikes another wall, and the process is repeated until the ray finally gets back out the hole in the can.

      The hole in the end of the can behaves like a really black disk. If the inside of the can is 20% reflective, and the light reflects five times on average, then the escaping light is (0.2)^5 = 0.00032 as strong as the incident light. That's really black.

  7. Oh crap.... by nebaz · · Score: 1

    So where did I put that new "low reflectivity" bottle of vodka? I can't seem to find it.

    --
    Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
    1. Re:Oh crap.... by nuzak · · Score: 1

      Look for the column of vodka hanging in mid-air.

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    2. Re:Oh crap.... by BSAtHome · · Score: 1

      Look for the dark spot; not to be confused with the lack of memory after consumption.

    3. Re:Oh crap.... by zcat_NZ · · Score: 3, Funny

      "absolut transparency" ?

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    4. Re:Oh crap.... by BillX · · Score: 1

      Soviet russia.

      --
      Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
  8. Finally by Real+World+Stuff · · Score: 2, Funny

    A substance the matches the deep cold black hearts of the Vista activation process designers.

    --
    If we don't fight for ourselves no one will.
  9. spiffy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    good news: we have a material which reflects no light whatsoever- now if only we could remember where the damn thing is...

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

      Expect everything at Microsoft to be coated with it. This will prevent people from seeing a reflection of the chair that's being thrown at them.

  10. For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How does reducing reflection increase the efficiency of LEDs? This stuff absorbs light. It seems to me like it would only be able to make things darker, not lighter. I'm willing to accept I just don't get it... but what is it that I don't get?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Informative
      I did not read either the summary or the fine article, from what I heard on NPR, this coating improves the signal to noise ratio of communications. Sort of like talking in an anechoic chamber versus a room with highly sound reflective walls with booming echos.

      This is how I would explain it. All these reflections are really echos of light. And when a pulse of light is fired along the fiber, it gets reflected at many interfaces, travel backward, gets reflected again and travels forward etc. Thus the single transmitted pulse arrives as multiple pulses of varying strengths and varying time differences. When a series of pulses are fired, at somepoint the echos completely overwhelm the signal. The anechoic coating will help communication, stealth aircraft etc. It might find applications in improving solar cell efficiency. But might not make your light bulb any brighter.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    2. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by DemonThing · · Score: 1

      From what I understand this coating doesn't absorb light; it's a transparent material that simply reflects less, and therefore transmits more.

    3. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think about this, almost all light sources are encased in something. Glass, plastic, etc. If you reduce reflection from the encasing material then you increase output. ie. more light passes through the surface instead of being reflected.

      "Clear" glass is not 100% transparent, it reflects some amount of light (especially in the UV range). This stuff reflects much less than glass.

    4. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by XenoRyet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the trick is that it's transparent, and non-reflective in the sense that nearly all the light goes through it unimpeded. As opposed to it being opaque, and non-reflective in the sense that all light gets absorbed.

      --
      If forums teach us anything, it is that logic and critical thinking should be required courses in the public schools.
    5. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by shawnce · · Score: 1

      Reducing reflection doesn't mean that the material absorbs more light... it just reflects less. Glass for example reflects some amount of the light (visible) that hits it while allow a majority of the rest pass thru it.

    6. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Presumably they can use it to create a better package material. It is 'less dark' than anything else, so it lets more light out.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LED#Physical_function

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by K-Man · · Score: 1

      The efficiency of an LED die is limited by how many photons actually get out of the material and into the open air (if they don't, they reflect internally and turn into heat). Many of the recent improvements in LED efficiency have come about through better light transmission, which requires a careful transition from the high-index-of-refraction die to low-index-of-refraction air.

      --
      ---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
    8. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by brianben · · Score: 1

      Light absorption is a reversible process... and materials that absorb light very well also emit light very well. In fact, to first order, the emissivity and the absorptivity (is that a word?) are exactly equal. That may seem counterintuitive but think of it this way: a material like carbon black, which has tons of surface area, is great at absorbing light and heat (infrared light). If you heat it up to red-hot, that same large surface area is emitting light like crazy (where crazy == efficient).

    9. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by randomblast · · Score: 1

      Have you ever tried to have a conversation in an anechoic chamber?

      Too little reverberation is a bad thing. So is too much. The ideal RT60 (time for the reverberations to decay to 60dB less than the incident sound) is around 2 seconds.

      And real physical reverberations (echoes) never mask (overwhelm) the original signal. Re. Frictional Losses.

      --
      ...these aren't my real teeth.
    10. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      The anechoic coating will help communication, stealth aircraft etc.
      Being stealthy involves reflecting back just enough to not be suspicious. Too much or too little and it's obvious that something of interest is there.

      Military contractors came up against this problem when designing stealth missiles that were supposed to skim the waves. Radar reflects off the waves & creates a certain amount of noise, but the first batch of missiles reflected nothing... which showed up as a moving black spot on the radar.

      Ditto for stealth boats.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    11. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1
      Think about this, almost all light sources are encased in something

      Well yes, the Sun has it's photosphere, let's start with that...um, the campfire is problematic. Actinic chemical reactions; test tube? Um, unless it's that unregistered lump of ammonium hydride I see over there. Cesium dropped into sea water? That's a light source.... golly, you're right though, I'm just having fun ...

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    12. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      I have not heard of problems of holding conversations in anehoic chamber, but that just show how little I know about it. I am not surprised though, human hearing is not something that evolved to handle anechoic chambers!

      Too much of echo is the more serious problem. Not just in optical frequencies, even in plain and simple electronics. Many wireless communication devices stop working indoors due to multiple echos.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    13. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by onemorechip · · Score: 1
      The name for that is Kirchoff's Law of Thermal Radiation. A similar principal applies to antennas: an antenna's transmission and reception efficiency and lobe patterns are the same.

      However, I'm sure that's not what applies here. When light from an LED passes through a medium, some energy is absorbed, but the energy input is in a very narrow spectrum, while the energy output owing to the heating of the medium is in a broad spectrum (and at low temperatures, insignificant as far as the visible spectrum is concerned). Not really useful for improving the light transmissivity.

      Instead, think of a high-quality camera or telescope lens that has an antireflective coating. Some of the light hitting the interface between glass and air will reflect back into the glass. It will bounce around between the two sides of the glass and emerge again with a phase difference from the original light, causing interference. But if there is a coating on the glass, it hits the glass/coating interface, then the coating/air interface. Two separate reflections interfere, and if the coating thickness is right, cancel out. Note that, if absorption is insignificant, the transmitted energy is equal to the incident energy minus the reflected energy, so reducing the reflection in this way means more light gets through. Good lenses have multiple coatings of varying thicknesses so that a broad range of wavelengths gets the benefit.

      --
      But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
    14. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by njh · · Score: 1

      Every time light moves from one refractive index to another some light is reflected:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_equations

      This coating moves the light more smoothly from air's RI (1) to say window glasses (1.45) and avoids the reflections.

      LEDs are made from an optically dense material (plastic) and lose a portion of their light due to internal reflection and reabsorption in the plastic or on the internal structure. I don't think it is the main source of inefficiency of LEDs though.

    15. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't quite believe that you're the first poster to see the REAL application of this material. Optical coatings. This actually seems to build on a technology that Nikon already use, namely their "nano-crystal coating". If this new coating is able to be successfully included in commercial lens manufacture, we can look forward to even higher performance optics.

    16. Re:For Energy-Efficient LIGHTING? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Being stealthy involves reflecting back just enough to not be suspicious. Too much or too little and it's obvious that something of interest is there.

      That wouldn't apply to aircraft though. There isn't something blocked by the airplane that reflects a radar signal. You wouldn't be able to identify the difference between the non-reflective air vs. the non-reflective aircraft using a normal radar.

      In theory, you could set up something where the radar emitter is on the opposite side of the aircraft from the detector, but your emitter, the plane, and your detector would have to line up pretty well for this to work.

  11. Thats great by bherman · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Now can they work on getting their (RPI) name out beyond the East Coast?
    My degree is worthless when no one here (Chicago) has ever heard of the school!


    except hockey players.

    --
    Error: Sig not found.
    1. Re:Thats great by EinZweiDrei · · Score: 1

      Don't forget radio aficianados. WRPI is one of the best college stations I've had the privilege of hearing.

      --
      Perhaps life really is full of possibilities.
    2. Re:Thats great by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      FWIW I know who RPI is and I'm in California.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    3. Re:Thats great by Palshife · · Score: 1

      Don't look now, but I think that's what they're trying to do ;)

      Matt Hitchens, Comp Sci, '02

      --
      Attention deficit disorder is a complicated issue, spanning several major... HEY LET'S GO RIDE BIKES!
    4. Re:Thats great by bloodyghol · · Score: 1

      Wow, at least Her Highness Shirley Ann Jackson is spending my tuition money on something. You never know, one day we might come up with something cool. Finding people that know about RPI is tough, but you will find clusters of engineers here and there that hail from the 'tute. However, it's becoming better recognized being a "new ivy" and all. Our undergrad applications doubled this past year. Woohoo. GO RED!

    5. Re:Thats great by waterwingz · · Score: 0

      seems to me that if they are an engineering or science based company and they don't know about RPI then you probably don't want to work there ?

      --
      . waterwingz
  12. Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can do better with a can of black spray paint... not just low reflectivity, no reflectivity.

    Brought to you by the captcha "tangibly".

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

      Even flat black spray paint has a reflectivity index above 1.0.

    2. Re:Meh by Technician · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can do better with a can of black spray paint... not just low reflectivity, no reflectivity.

      Umm the reflectivity of black paint is listed here..

      Look about halfway down the page at table 2. Black paint is listed.

      http://www.concretethinker.com/Papers.aspx?DocId=7 4

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
  13. Ninjas by N.+P.+Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant
    I, for one, welcome our new "ninjas coated in this stuff" overlords.

    But only at night.

    1. Re:Ninjas by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 1

      You welcome naked ninjas? I guess we're bringing back the old Irish fighting style.

    2. Re:Ninjas by TheDreadSlashdotterD · · Score: 1

      Dude, ninja had this stuff long ago. That's why no one's seen them for hundreds of years.

      --
      I have nothing to say.
  14. stealth by wizardforce · · Score: 1

    I wonder if they thought about doing this with radar instead of light- even sneakier stealth planes

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  15. Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you leave one of these in direct sunlight, it gets really, really hot!

  16. Oh my... by keeboo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Reflectivity Reaches a New Low

    Just when you started to think it couldn't get worse...

  17. Good way to avoid speeding tickets by pyite69 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    How much would it cost to cover your car with this?

  18. Link to abstract by kmac06 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's a link to the abstract. Don't think you can get the full article without some sort of subscription.

    Anti-reflection coatings are nothing new. Their used all the time in optics. What's new about this acts as a broadband anti-reflection coating. If this can be transferred to commercial production it would have a huge impact on optical equipment.

  19. What I first thought by EraserMouseMan · · Score: 1

    Stealth coating. If I could coat my car with this stuff . . .

    Who needs Fuzz Busters!

    1. Re:What I first thought by Bad+D.N.A. · · Score: 1

      I wonder how well this would work in zero G in a Vac?

      I can see coating the surfaces of a spacecraft (thermal blankets, booms, dish, etc...) that are near the field of view of instruments sensitive to light (as many are). Glint poses a serious problem for many instruments and this could help mitigate the problem

      I wonder how long it outgasses?

      --
      "Truth is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations"
  20. Extremely useful by lordvalrole · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Probably extremely useful to military purposes. (ie. stealth sort of stuff)

    1. Re:Extremely useful by macron1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, or increased efficiency in solar cells, more energy-efficient lighting and advances in quantum mechanics

  21. What I first thought also by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 1

    was stealth coating for fighter jets

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
    1. Re:What I first thought also by evilkiksass · · Score: 1

      so the enemy would see the inside parts instead of the outside of the plane?

    2. Re:What I first thought also by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      stealth fighters are a joke. They are 100% visible when mobile phone towers are used as a detection method. It's a backup system, or potential one they tried in the colonies a few years back.

  22. Use for this stuff by ksd1337 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think they should coat television and computer monitor screens with this material. This will help to see the image being displayed, since there will not be any glare to obscure the image.

    1. Re:Use for this stuff by maxume · · Score: 1

      Whatever is under it would retain its own properties; a coating of this stuff would be 'less there' than any other coatings.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Use for this stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, yeah that might work if it was transparent. LOL

      Read, learn, etc.

  23. Strength at thickness? by phorm · · Score: 1

    How strong is this stuff at greater thicknesses? Could it be used for better windows (less breakable, more transparent)?

    There are plenty of applications for high-strength high-transparency (which I'm assuming is a product of lower reflectivity) materials. Heck, if they're strong enough then depending on the cost there's a decent market for them just in the vehicle-window market (especially planes, jets, submarines, ships, etc).

    1. Re:Strength at thickness? by triffid_98 · · Score: 1
      Greater thickness==less transparency, just like for window glass, or air for that matter. Another important factor is what part of the spectrum gets reflected. A good example is plexiglass, it does an outstanding job of filtering UV, which is great if that was what you wanted, but very bad if you were planning on using these things for say, solar cells.

      ow strong is this stuff at greater thicknesses? Could it be used for better windows (less breakable, more transparent)?
    2. Re:Strength at thickness? by phorm · · Score: 1

      Of course, I somewhat figured on that assumption. However, how is it comparable to other similarly used materials. For example, at the thickness of a window pane, how does it compared in transparency and strength? Ditto for other useful applications.

  24. Wavelengths & military applications by MobyDisk · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The technique allows the researchers to strongly reduce or even eliminate reflection at all wavelengths and incoming angles of light, I'm amazed the article doesn't mention military applications. What do they use on stealth planes now?
    1. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by jordan314 · · Score: 0

      Well if you had a plane made out of this low-reflectivity substance, wouldn't you still see motors, wires, weapons, gas tanks, wheels, machinery, and pilots floating through the air?

    2. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      I'm amazed the article doesn't mention military applications. What do they use on stealth planes now? They use a radar absorbing material, and a shape designed to refract radar mostly up and away from the ground.

      this material would do bupkus for Stealth. Radar would pass through, bounce off whatever else they make the plane out of, and then bounce right back to the receiver.

    3. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by berj · · Score: 1

      Isn't radar just radio waves? which in turn are just low frequency light? If this new material retains these properties at radio wavelengths then it would work, no?

    4. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    5. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "If this new material retains these properties at radio wavelengths then it would work, no?"

      Yes. It will work in the very exact maner it works hiding a liquor bottle within a transparent bag.

    6. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you people daft? The material _absorbs_ light! That doesn't mean it is invisible! It means it is black! Sheesh!

    7. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You obviously know bupkus about Radar. Radar is light. This stuff abosorbs light.

    8. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "Are you people daft? The material _absorbs_ light! That doesn't mean it is invisible! It means it is black!"

      That's not true. The point it is not that it absorbs light; it is that it doesn't *reflect* light. While a method not to reflect light is being black, it is not the only one: a transparent thing doesn't reflect light either. And since this material's refractive index is compared to that of glass or even thin air, you can go figure.

    9. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting perspective! You are right that article does not use the word absorb, but it implies that the object absorbs light. Otherwise, it would not appear dark in the picture, it would not be useful in solar cells, and it would not be useful as a source of black body radiation.

    10. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Isn't radar just radio waves? which in turn are just low frequency light? If this new material retains these properties at radio wavelengths then it would work, no?

      No. This material is non-reflexive, not light-absorbing.

      Radar works by shining the equivalent of a bright light out in space, and watching for anything that shines back. Stealth works by not shining. A block of this material would also not shine, but the components that let the plane fly would shine rather brightly.

    11. Re:Wavelengths & military applications by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "You are right that article does not use the word absorb, but it implies that the object absorbs light."

      So, after all, you made me read the article. What's the good of Slashdot then?

      But, after reading it, I must say no: it doesn't imply at any moment the new material absorbs light in any significant manner.

      "Otherwise, it would not appear dark in the picture"

      I think you mean the picture where it appears with some other objects. If you look at it carefully, the other objects are brilliant because the light they reflect, like a glass seen at an angle; when something doesn't emit/reflect/refract light in your direction what color do you think it's seen, no matter if it's transparent or not?

      "it would not be useful in solar cells"

      As the article clearly states, its usefulness in solar cells or leds is as a new "optical coating"; and it's a more efficient coating because it doesn't reflect any light but do transmit almost all light (either from a diode inside to the environment, so the diode is brightest, or from the environment to the functional parts of a solar cell in the inside so "The new coating could increase the amount of light reaching the active region of a solar cell"). Do you remember how do we call an object that efficently transmits light? Transparent, that is.

      "and it would not be useful as a source of black body radiation."

      It does nothing to be with a body being transparent or opaque. Every single mass in Universe will emit radiation at a rate that depends solely on its absolute temperature disregarding *all* other physical properties of the object (from a black hole to a massive supernova). A non-reflecting body makes a perfect experimental black body not because it's black (on its common acception which implies not only being black, but being opaque too) but because its light emissions due to temperature won't be "contaminated" by reflections of other elements' radiation laying around (the measure chamber itself, for instance): they'll truly be their own "black body" radiations and only them -and this applies equally well to an opaque body and to a perfectly transparent one.

  25. I won't believe it... by TheCoop1984 · · Score: 1

    until I see it

    --
    95% of all computer errors occur between chair and keyboard (TM)
  26. At last... by kbox · · Score: 1

    ..An expensive alternative to painting something black.

  27. Refraction matters to cinephiles! by Progman3K · · Score: 1

    I use titanium dioxide enriched paint (white) as a topcoat on my projector screen.
    I wonder if the basecoat were of this material and the topcoat tiny (20 micron?) glass beads, would it give good results?
    I figure since the beads are round and the back of the display has no reflectivity, the light from the projector wouldn't bounce back and blind you like if you were to use a mirror because the back doesn't reflect...

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
    1. Re:Refraction matters to cinephiles! by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Sans the new material, what you've described is a "lambertian" screen. Which despite its name is only approximately lambertian. Still it's quite useful for calibrating optics. (and would be very useful for your projector screen if it weren't so darned expensive.)

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:Refraction matters to cinephiles! by sweetbaboo · · Score: 1

      If you're looking for a quality highly lambertian diffuse white coating for your projector screen, you should check out Labsphere's diffuse white coatings. It reflects 98% of light and lacks the artificial brightness created through the fluorescence of the titanium dioxide. http://www.labsphere.com/productdetail.aspx?id=504

  28. Correct me if I am wrong... by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

    ... isn't the illusion of water on the road a product of light reflecting off of the air?

    --

    "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  29. scumbags by minus_273 · · Score: 1

    "Reflectivity Reaches a New Low"

    Those scumbags. Worse than the RIAA and MS combined!

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
  30. announcement! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    I hereby nominate this nanocoating material for 'employee of the month'! (everyone has to win at least once)

    1. Re:announcement! by SageMusings · · Score: 1

      "I hereby nominate this nanocoating material for 'employee of the month'! (everyone has to win at least once)"

      Then why have I been skipped twice?

      --
      -- Posted from my parent's basement
  31. Nanotech... by ameline · · Score: 1

    I've always thought that nanotech was the new black -- now they're gone and proven me right :-)

    Of course, given that it's not descended from West African slaves, is it really black?

    http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Colbert_question s_Obamas_blackness_0209.html :-)

    --
    Ian Ameline
  32. Precisely 45 degrees by DrSkwid · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    How is that different from 45 degrees ?

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    1. Re:Precisely 45 degrees by geekoid · · Score: 1

      it's Precise man PRECISE.

      There are 10 types of people, those who don't have a life and put binary tricks in there sig, and 9 other enjoying the many suprises of life.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  33. Great for a manager by failedlogic · · Score: 1, Informative

    I am a manager at a large company. My employees always compliment me on how much they appreciate my open door policy. They can always walk in and ask me questions. Frankly, they're starting to annoy me! I can hardly get any work done.... I've only been able to play to level 2 of Tetris today and its a Friday!

    What is the possibility of making a transparent door with this new material? My open door policy will still remain in effect. But my door will always remain closed. I think I will like my job again when I hear them whisper, "He used to be a great guy, but dealing with him now is like hitting a brick wall!".

  34. Well.... by kaizenfury7 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Me at a night club in the corner sipping my Jolt with my penguin shirt has even lower reflectivity. No one even knows I'm there. And that's with a _clean_ shirt even.

    1. Re:Well.... by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Troll? WTF? Well, I appreciated your self deprecating humor/honesty.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    2. Re:Well.... by HBI · · Score: 1

      It was too much painful truth for the moderator.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  35. Sorry, wrong: by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... isn't the illusion of water on the road a product of light reflecting off of the air?

    No.

    It's caused by the curvature of light refracted by the difference in refractive index between the hot air near the sun-heated surface and the cooler air above it. The light bends back up without "touching" the underlying surface.

    You only get a little bend. This is why you need a very hot surface to get enough of a bend to be visible at all. It's also why you only get it at large distances, where the line of sight is nearly parallel to the ground.

    It looks like water because you look at the ground and see a a region of like of the sky's color, shimmering due to convection current - generated patches of uneven refractive index in the air rather than surface ripples.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Sorry, wrong: by hotdiggitydawg · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...or, it's caused by actual water on the road.

    2. Re:Sorry, wrong: by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      ... isn't the illusion of water on the road a product of light reflecting off of the air?

      No. ... It's caused by the curvature of light refracted ... ...or, it's caused by actual water on the road.


      1960s: "Reality is an illusion!"
      2000s: "Illusion is reality!"

      "History doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme." B-)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  36. My God, it's full of stars! by Srdjant · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    We can use this to make machines that have proportions of 1 by 4 by 9.

    1. Re:My God, it's full of stars! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moderators need to read some fucking sci-fi already.

  37. Better use, anti-glare coating on TVs and monitors by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 0, Redundant

    And I bet a LOT of TV companies would be very willing to pay a great deal of money for this.

    --
    We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
  38. Actually, I was thinking... by vought · · Score: 3, Funny

    "My ex must have had a mirror made of this shit!"

  39. note to radar operators by enos · · Score: 2, Funny

    look for bomber-sized gaps in background radiation

    --
    boldly going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse
  40. Re Snipper can avoid being spotted! by chrislusf · · Score: 1

    In Hollywood, snippers are often discovered by their gun-mounted scope front glass! This can save it.

    1. Re:Re Snipper can avoid being spotted! by Suriken · · Score: 1

      I'm sure edward scissorhands will be happy to hear. Though I never knew he used a gun

      --
      My Mommy says smoking kills. Oh, is your Mommy a doctor? No. A scientific researcher of some kind? No. Well then sh
  41. fun subject by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 2, Funny

    Reflectivity Reaches a New Low

    Eh, until reflectivity wakes up in a dumpster with a dead hooker, not knowing how it got there or what happened the night before, I think it could get lower.

    --
    Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
  42. First thing they did by gummyb34r · · Score: 1

    First thing they did (apart from searching for the sample for an hour or two) marked it with a wide
    fatty red stripe.

  43. It's like, how much more black could this be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the answer is none. None more black.

  44. new products from thinkgeek by garlicbready · · Score: 1

    I think we can come up with a few more interesting uses for this stuff

    set up some invisible walls on the pavement, fun with the neighbours
    (good one for the students)

    want to start your own cult?
    How about walking across a transparent platform in mid air or just above water made of this stuff
    Jesus eat your heart out

    Now you too can have an invisible aeroplane just like wonderwoman

    How about donning a superman outfit, fit a platform to the roof of your car
    and see how many accidents you can cause, when onlookers see a real life superhero flying down the street

    worried about weapons of mass destruction appearing on the news?
    new and improved (mostly) invisible nukes, watch out for that healthy green glow

    want a flying / hovering car of the future, how about invisible wheels?
    (watch out for those pot holes)

    I wonder if 2 way mirrors would be less noticible from the mirror side, using this stuff
    since you could probably increase the amount of reflective mirror material on one side while maintaing the same level of brightness from the other side
      because of the decreased reflectivity maybe

  45. That's not what I was thinking... by greenguy · · Score: 1

    I saw the Einstein logo and read the headline as "Relativity reaches an newe low." I was very confused -- when did relativity become variable?

    --
    What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
  46. Speedtrap evasion by Radon360 · · Score: 1

    Try painting your car with this stuff, drive past a cop shooting LIDAR, and see if you get pulled over.

    FWIW, police officers are trained to aim the LIDAR at your front license plate for best results, as the retroreflective surface provides the best return. However, this can be tricky with a moving target Of course, anything that provides a sufficient reflection will usually work.

  47. Re:How to tell an engineer from a scientist by Technician · · Score: 1

    First thing they did (apart from searching for the sample for an hour or two) marked it with a wide
    fatty red stripe.


    The engineer put on the stripe.

    The scientist noticed it was easy to find if it was set on a sheet of white paper.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  48. This should lead to... by tuxlove · · Score: 1

    ... a whole new era in bird-killing window technology. We'll never go hungry.

  49. I hope it comes in a Nikon AI-P mount... by denttford · · Score: 1

    'Cause I love non-visible light photography - but quartz lenses are a fortune - if you can find one.

    --

    Leben Sie jetzt die Fragen.
  50. Go RPI... I think. by wuputah · · Score: 1

    Wow, my alma mater is actually on slashdot, doing something possibly useful. It is unfortunate, though, that while the school has been pushing big on research its undergraduate studies are still not improving (I still interact with undergraduatesfrom the school daily).

    --
    Brought to you by the numbers π, e, and 0x1B.
  51. The Nazis where looking for this kind of stuff by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    The Nazis back in WW2 where doing all kinds of obscure military research. On of them being the search for the 'ultimate black' that would not reflect any light whatsoever and enable soldiers to appear as non-dimensional shadows. They didn't get very far iirc.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:The Nazis where looking for this kind of stuff by macron1 · · Score: 1

      Goodwin's law has thus been invoked

    2. Re:The Nazis where looking for this kind of stuff by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 1

      No it hasn't. No comparison to the Nazi's has yet been made.

      --
      Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
    3. Re:The Nazis where looking for this kind of stuff by macron1 · · Score: 1

      OK fine. It was a poor attempt at a joke, but at least now i have verification of the necessity to explain a "joke" being inversely proportional to its hilarity. i will go now.

  52. I'd never heard of RPI until a couple of years ago, but I'm very impressed with the school. I've met a couple of top-notch engineers from there, and the science coming out of RPI seems outstanding.

  53. Terribly sorry. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    Now when you lose your marbles, they'll stay lost!


    -FL

  54. When I first saw this story. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    Aided by the Slashdot Einstein icon next to the story, I thought the title read, "Relativity reaches a new low," --and I eagerly read forth to discover what the heck kind of story could come with a heading like that.

    I was rather disappointed. Though I still like being able to say that it will now be so much harder to recover if you happen to lose your marbles.


    -FL

  55. Reflectivity Hits a New Low? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's this? Nanocoating? Oh. When I read the headline I was assuming it was a story about President Bush..

  56. The Inanimate Objects Party says: by Elfich47 · · Score: 1

    Soze says this can mean only one thing: STEALTH WHALES!

    --
    Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
  57. Let's give a cheer for old Rensselaer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    E to the X dy/dx
    E to the X dx
    Cosine, secant tangent, sine
    3.14159, square root, cube root, log of pi,
    Dis-integrate th'em RPI!

    http://cheerleaders.union.rpi.edu/squad.html

    Let's give a cheer for Old Rensselaer,
    You bring the whiskey, I'll bring the beer!
    Send the freshmen out for gin,
    And don't let a sober sophomore in!
    We never stumble, we never fall,
    We sober up on pure alcohol!
    When we yell, we YELL LIKE HELL
    For the glory of Rensselaer!

    1. Re:Let's give a cheer for old Rensselaer by Red+Herring · · Score: 1

      And it's RPI, galdamnit.

      Sacrifice the Chicken.

      --
      #include "standard_disclaimer.h"
  58. Hotblack will take 500 gallons... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1
    From the TFA: A material that reflects no light is known as an ideal "black body." No such material has been available to scientists, until now.

    Hotblack Desiato will love this for his new stunt ship! After he's revived from spending a year dead - for tax purposes...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  59. Just one question by Phyvo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just one question.

    "Black body radiation. The development could also advance fundamental science. A material that reflects no light is known as an ideal 'black body.' No such material has been available to scientists, until now. Researchers could use an ideal black body to shed light on quantum mechanics, the much-touted theory from physics that explains the inherent 'weirdness' of the atomic realm."

    HOW CAN YOU USE AN IDEAL BLACK BODY TO SHED LIGHT?

  60. can i get enough by ralph1 · · Score: 0

    to put on my cars plate f them photos.

  61. Great stuff... by Moe+Napoli · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now I can finally get around to painting all those faux holes like Wile E. Coyote.

  62. Perfect application by lordofthechia · · Score: 1

    This should be used to make bicycles and bicycle clothing in areas with a high population problem.

    --
    Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
  63. Impedance of free air is 377 ohms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So this coating is impedance-matched to free air at visible frequencies?

  64. Another example of creative recycling by infocalypse1 · · Score: 1

    do a search on gradient antireflective films. This was done in the 1980s and used extensively for very high energy laser optics by several labs. By either reacting glass surfaces, or by coating the surfaces with nanoparticles, one can readily produce surfaces with essentially no reflectance (0.01%) over the entire visible spectrum. What is produced is a porosity gradient whose index varies from 1.0 at the surface to that of the bulk material. Since there is no clear interface, reflectance is broadband. At one government lab, meter-sized optics were treated. I remember that one visiting congressman ran into one of the windows because it was, functionally, invisible. These technologies never saw broad acceptance because porous surfaces react with the environment, and reflectance increases (requires periodic cleaning). Sigh, it seems that scholarship is dead...

  65. crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    New Low-reflective material offers hope for the ugly, one slashdot visitor is quoted: "When i used to look in mirrors they would break, but now i dont have to see myself and the mirror doesnt break!, its amazing!"

  66. Thickness? by triso · · Score: 1

    How thick is this stuff shown in the picture?

  67. I want this... by Elsan · · Score: 1

    I want this for my glasses! This means I'll see even better!