Slashdot Mirror


3D Animations In Mid-Air Using Plasma Balls

An anonymous reader clues us to research at Japan's National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology that has produced the ability to make animations by creating small plasma balls in mid-air. The technology doesn't use vapor or strange gases, just lasers to heat up oxygen and nitrogen molecules above the device: up to 1,000 brilliant dots per second, which makes smooth motion possible. When the tech improves it could be used for street signs or advertising.

234 comments

  1. Oblig... by band-aid-brand · · Score: 5, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our new lethally hot gas based advertisement overlords...

    1. Re:Oblig... by niceone · · Score: 1

      Can we get sharks out of the way too?

    2. Re:Oblig... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    3. Re:Oblig... by ItsLenny · · Score: 1

      tripod says, "no thank you"

      --
      ----------
      Trying to fix or change something only guarantees and perpetuates it's existence
    4. Re:Oblig... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I knew I should have copied it to my own site first.

      GIS: "Jaws 19"

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    5. Re:Oblig... by The13thSin · · Score: 1

      And yet, all I can think about... how cool this could look when big dance events start using it for visuals... Maybe Sensation 2009?

      --
      "This should be fun, and by fun, I mean a wholly depressing insight into the cognitive ability of some grown adults."
    6. Re:Oblig... by sentientbeing · · Score: 2, Funny

      You own Google?

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    7. Re:Oblig... by xouumalperxe · · Score: 1

      Copy link location, open a new browser tab/window and paste the link into the address bar. It's all about the referrer (or lack thereof :)

    8. Re:Oblig... by Hucko · · Score: 1

      I worry about you...

      --
      Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
    9. Re:Oblig... by IdleTime · · Score: 1

      No, but some really cool 3D porn!

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    10. Re:Oblig... by The13thSin · · Score: 1

      I worry about me sometimes as well...

      --
      "This should be fun, and by fun, I mean a wholly depressing insight into the cognitive ability of some grown adults."
  2. pink tentacle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm not clicking that link.

    1. Re:pink tentacle? by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

      At least not until you get home.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  3. News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lol? Article is from february last year ;o.

    1. Re:News? by Himring · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yea, I saw this, like, a year ago. It took all of 2 seconds to scroll down and find a date going back over a year and a half ago.

      Time for my first ever usage of ye ol' russian joke: On /. news breaks you!

      --
      "All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
  4. The goggles, they do nothing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Improved laser technology will enable images to be projected at greater distances and with more color, so we may soon see 3D images floating above our city skylines."

    Just be sure not to look directly at them.

    1. Re:The goggles, they do nothing! by anonymous+coward+2.0 · · Score: 1

      Yeah really now... plasma, where else do we find that... Arc welding? Note the goggles that everyone wears. I suppose there are companies who would want to burn their logo onto your retina though...

      --

      Version 2.0 New and Improved!

    2. Re:The goggles, they do nothing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Warning: Do not look directly at holographics projector with remaining eye

    3. Re:The goggles, they do nothing! by swight1701 · · Score: 1

      Video! Need lots of video of this.

      --
      - The latest in DVR video surveillance technology! www.remotesentrysystems.com
    4. Re:The goggles, they do nothing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah really now... plasma, where else do we find that... Televisions?

      Obviously they're not going to stop here and say, "I know it'll burn your eyes out, but you'll cope." They'll develop it until it's safe (enough. Then we all die of NAS.)

    5. Re:The goggles, they do nothing! by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Yeah really now... plasma, where else do we find that... Televisions

      No, not really. In a plasma display, the gas discharge is used to excite phosphors that emit light. Just having a glowing ball of gas plasma is going to throw off a *lot* of UV. Think plasma cutter, not plasma TV. Yes, I've got sunburn from using a plasma cutter without gloves.

  5. Can't wait... by Hsensei · · Score: 2, Funny

    Till the new nike or coke ad hits a planes and lights it on fire!

    --
    ~
    1. Re:Can't wait... by ILuvRamen · · Score: 1

      dude, if a fly flew through it, it would light on fire rofl. Not that planes could fly over a city anymore anyway because trillions of tiny plasma balls heating up the air would make it probably well over 150 degrees fahrenheit over cities which would lower the air pressure so much the plane would go down :P

      --
      Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
  6. Old news by Oddscurity · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's the press release it links to. Sadly both the article and the press release are from February 2006...

    --
    Indeed!
    1. Re:Old news by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think I requested it to slashdot back then too... It got rejected. I think it was replaced with some story about a cool new case mod, perhaps a minor Linux kernel upgrade.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Old news by include($dysmas) · · Score: 3, Informative

      slashdot gets it wrong again ... current story is here

      http://www.pinktentacle.com/2007/07/aist-improves- 3d-projector/

    3. Re:Old news by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I saw it at Siggraph last year. I wasn't too impressed: this stuff makes a hell of a lot of noise, the number of dots/s seems quite limited, and the safety concerns are serious. At Siggraph, they had a whole area arounf the thing cordoned off.

      This is a nice curiosity, but I can't see it going anywhere for real-world applications. Other display technologis at Siggraph (both last year and this year) are much more promising.

    4. Re:Old news by Oddscurity · · Score: 1

      Now for a case mod that includes this, then have it controlled by a minor Linux kernel update... that should satisfy everyone.

      --
      Indeed!
  7. cool but Yikes! by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Funny

    It uses high power lasers to heat the air into a "plasma" when running it has the sounds of crackles as mini explosions occur.

    Oh yeah, that's a display I want. Instead of the cat blocking the screen, the cat bursts into flames. How the heck am I going to explain that one to the wife?

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:cool but Yikes! by Bluesman · · Score: 5, Funny

      "How the heck am I going to explain that one to the wife?"

      I'd say this:

      Why do you keep talking about this cat, honey? For the millionth time, we NEVER HAD A CAT. I think you need to see a doctor.

      It's a pretty healthy way to help loved ones deal with loss.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    2. Re:cool but Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Advanced Industrial Science and Technology is also working on fireproof cats.
      Explain to her that the feline needed an upgrade anyway.

    3. Re:cool but Yikes! by megaditto · · Score: 5, Funny

      Instead of the cat blocking the screen, the cat bursts into flames. How the heck am I going to explain that one to the wife?
      Tell her that her pussy is smokin'-hot?

      sorry, sorry
      --
      Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
    4. Re:cool but Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 Informative?

      I hope that's a moderator making a joke of his own, and not a real moderation!

      Besides, that "we never had a cat" thing is one thing, but it won't work so well if someone puts a hand through the display... "for the millionth time, you always had a charred stub instead of a hand!"

    5. Re:cool but Yikes! by treeves · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Informative? You people are sick. And I mean that in a good way.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    6. Re:cool but Yikes! by tgd · · Score: 5, Funny

      Probably better than telling her that her pussy smells like burnt hair, I suppose.

    7. Re:cool but Yikes! by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or that her pussy smells like hot meat.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    8. Re:cool but Yikes! by Loligo · · Score: 4, Funny


      Remember the time it fried her cat? And then you lied and said she never had a cat? Then why'd she have the litterbox, Bluesman? Why'd she have the litterbox?

        -l

    9. Re:cool but Yikes! by Garridan · · Score: 1

      We borrowed it from the neighbor. For the tasty snacks inside.

    10. Re:cool but Yikes! by kidcharles · · Score: 1

      The sounds that would be heard are the shockwaves that arise from the rapid expansion of the superheated plasma spot. Someone in my research group here at the University of Wisconsin is making laser-produced plasma spots, we've done imaging of the pressure wave that is emitted from these kind of plasmas. What's really neat is that if you make one of these spots very close to a surface the expansion looks like a mini mushroom cloud.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    11. Re:cool but Yikes! by SchmellsAngel · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's a Bento Box for dogs.

      --
      We must repeat.
    12. Re:cool but Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why do you keep talking about this cat, honey? For the millionth time, we NEVER HAD A CAT. I think you need to see a doctor."

      I recommend a vacation on Venus.

    13. Re:cool but Yikes! by Minwee · · Score: 3, Funny

      I really think you're going to have to come up with a better explanation than that, Dr. Schrödinger.

    14. Re:cool but Yikes! by vimh42 · · Score: 1

      "Why'd she have the litterbox?"

      Some peoples habits are hard to explain.
    15. Re:cool but Yikes! by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      Heh, you should see the stuff that I think better of posting before I hit Submit.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    16. Re:cool but Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Henry, why does it smell like burning hair in here? And where's Mr. Giggles? And what's that ashy mess in the wastebasket? Is that lipstick on your coffee cup? Henry! You're not listening to me!"

      "Honey, step over there and I'll explain everything. On the line on the floor."

    17. Re:cool but Yikes! by IdleTime · · Score: 1

      I'd love to!

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    18. Re:cool but Yikes! by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      Instead of the cat blocking the screen, the cat bursts into flames. How the heck am I going to explain that one to the wife?
      "Well you see, dear, the cat was actually in a superposition of in flames and not in flames until you looked at it. So it's really your fault."
      "Um, can we have sex tonight?"
    19. Re:cool but Yikes! by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Seeing as it uses lasers strong enough to generate plasma I'd say that unless you were in the habit of wearing laser safety glasses you wouldn't be looking at much of anything anymore.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  8. heh heh heh..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You said Plasma Balls !!!!!

  9. "Street signs or advertising" by smclean · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hah, who sees an amazing technology like this and immediately begins thinking about its potential use for advertising? To me, its use in advertising seems like the only downside to this technology..

    "Guys!! I just heard that they came up with a way to project images directly in to your brain! Awesome, think of the *commercials*!! "

    --

    "'Yrch!' said Legolas, falling into his own tongue."

    1. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      think of the pr0n!!&

    2. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Guys!! I just heard that they came up with a way to project images directly in to your brain! Awesome, think of the *commercials*!! " But not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and T-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    3. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 2, Funny

      I for one can't wait until this hits advertising. The prospect of insanely expensive, bleeding-edge display tech that even my social conscience thinks I should steal excites me greatly.

    4. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by marcosdumay · · Score: 2, Funny

      That will be HOT!!

    5. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of the weapon potential of hot plasma in midair.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    6. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by pimpimpim · · Score: 1

      The commercials will probably be better than the other crap we will get to see. And more honest too, since at least they admit they are advertising.

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    7. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by badc0ffee · · Score: 1

      What about pron? That is what drives new technology. That and SPAM.

      --
      1011 1010 1101 1100 0000 1111 1111 1110 1110
    8. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was the first thing I thought of when I saw the summary. All I can say is "Bite my shiny metal ass".

    9. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by Boris_SDC · · Score: 1

      Ah well, at least the first thought isn't "how do we use it to kill people more efficiently", as is with a lot of new technology.

    10. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by viralburn · · Score: 1

      Hah, who sees an amazing technology like this and immediately begins thinking about its potential use for advertising?

      Hah, who sees an amazing technology like this and immediately begins thinking about its potential use for pr0n?
    11. Re:"Street signs or advertising" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah, who sees an amazing technology like this and immediately begins thinking about its potential use for advertising?

      Exactly, this is Slashdot, and no-one has asked if this can be weaponised by our "overlords" yet? What the hell is going on? How large are the power requirements? Can you fit this on a Humvee/APC? A range of two to three metres would be pretty good as an active defensive mechanism, or as a barrier. Also, if the plasma balls can be made to last long enough, and/or travel fast enough, then we have plasma projectiles. I'm sure that there are more possible uses, but for Slashdot to have so little mention of its possible use as a weapon is very surprising.

  10. What the hell? by east+coast · · Score: 3, Funny

    While it's at least mildly interesting I had a real problem with one of the linked sources. Not the linked source itself but the obviously photoshopped cruise liner.

    What the hell is that all about? I know that it may be able to swing this in the future but let's not get out of hand. Not to mention that my 12 year old nephew is a better photoshop hacker.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    1. Re:What the hell? by MajinBlayze · · Score: 4, Funny

      Photoshop? Don't give them that much credit; it looks like they made the picture using MS Word

      --
      "Hate is baggage. Life's too short to be pissed off all the time." Danny Vinyard -American History X
    2. Re:What the hell? by pimpimpim · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Simple psychology: by showing that they are crap in photoshopping, you are more inclined to believe the other other pics that don't look photoshopped will probably be real. Do we need to explain everything out here! ;)

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    3. Re:What the hell? by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      I know! Can't you see the look of surprise on that kid's face?

      I've more or less given up on attempting to understand Japan...

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  11. Star Wars by JoeDuncan · · Score: 5, Funny

    So am I finally going to be able to play holo-chess against a wookie?

    1. Re:Star Wars by jimstapleton · · Score: 3, Funny

      ppft, screw holo-chess, I want an authentic looking light saber!

      Actually, it probably *WILL* burn whatever it hits too!

      --
      34486853790
      Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    2. Re:Star Wars by UltraAyla · · Score: 1

      wookies are too hairy for holo-chess based upon this. Think of what a wookie on fire would act like. You're better off always letting the wookie win - before you begin play

    3. Re:Star Wars by Ranger · · Score: 1

      And you'll let the wookie win, right?

      --
      "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
    4. Re:Star Wars by freeweed · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, but he'll tear your arms out of their sockets if he loses.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    5. Re:Star Wars by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I like how you seem to be mostly concerned about your supply of adequate holo-chess equiment and not of giant furry humanoids from the planet Kashyyyk.

      --
      I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
    6. Re:Star Wars by ghostcorps · · Score: 1

      Thats not such a bad idea, they even crackle! Now if we can just squeeze that fusion generator into your phone...

      --
      axis discrepancy indicates hexagons beyond control anomaly
    7. Re:Star Wars by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      So am I finally going to be able to play holo-chess against a wookie?

      Or watch an R2 unit fart distress messages from babe princesses with cinnamin-bun hairdoos.

    8. Re:Star Wars by asCii88 · · Score: 0

      I knew I couldn't have been the first to think about a light saber.


      This is awesome.

  12. Back to the Future then? by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Funny

    So a giant holo-shark appearing in the air abouve you and then twisting above you and closing its jaws right on you can be created in the air with lasers? I need a Delorean and a 1955 sports almanac. Also I am going to a corner drug store to get some plutonium unless Mr. Fusion is in business already.

    1. Re:Back to the Future then? by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 1

      So a giant holo-shark appearing in the air abouve you and then twisting above you and closing its jaws right on you can be created in the air with lasers? Do keep in mind that when it bites you, it burns you with lasers.
    2. Re:Back to the Future then? by Casualjim · · Score: 1

      The shark still looks fake ...

  13. Street signs and advertising? I THINK NOT! by alta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Forget it, that's not the early adopters.

    It'll be used for video games and pr0n. We all know who gets tech first. The problem I see is that it heats up they air to the point that when you get too excited and attempt to touch... You loose a hand or other appendage.

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    1. Re:Street signs and advertising? I THINK NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "We all know who gets tech first."

      Yup, so the real question is what is the military going to do with little projected plasma balls...

    2. Re:Street signs and advertising? I THINK NOT! by dubbreak · · Score: 1

      It'll be used for video games..


      YES, we can finally have a true 3d version of Time Traveller!!
      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
  14. Short on Information by vertigoCiel · · Score: 1

    Sadly, the article doesn't say much about the technology of the device. Can the size of the balls of light be changed? Will colored images ever be a reality - might it be possible using a sealed chamber and changing the composition of the gas? What are the ratings of the laser diodes used in this? Would it be possible to use a laser diode from a DVD burner to construct a homebrew version of this?

    For now, it remains a nifty demonstration, and nothing more.

    1. Re:Short on Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Will colored images ever be a reality - might it be possible using a sealed chamber and changing the composition of the gas?"

      I don't see why not, red, blue, and green lasers are far from uncommon. Sure, they'd have to start off with "child-friendly" colors, but who's to tell where this will be 20-30 years from now? When they can perfect this to the point where the plasma balls are no greater than pixels are nowadays, then we'll really see something special.

    2. Re:Short on Information by griffjon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It seems that the light is coming from the plasma, not the laser, so changing colors might not work. Also, you have to have one laser per pixel. I'd imagine to have two balls, one directly above another, you'd have to be able to tilt another laser to focus its beam at that location (if that makes any sense)

      Also - the current display can make 1000 balls? meh. That's a 10px x 10px x 10px display. It's awesome, sure, but the photoshop jobs they're showing are a LONG way off; right now we're looking more at led scroller type displays.

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    3. Re:Short on Information by coliverhb · · Score: 1

      It says that they can do color, RTFA. This is old, the comments on the article appear to be from 2006. I'm sure it's much more advanced now.

    4. Re:Short on Information by vertigoCiel · · Score: 1

      I RTFA, and the only bit about color I can find is a prediction that "Improved laser technology will enable images to be projected at greater distances and with more color." Additionally, all the example images show only white light. Sounds like the color aspect is an optimistic prediction to me, not a current capability.

    5. Re:Short on Information by kidcharles · · Score: 1

      The color of the balls is the spectrum of the air plasma at the very hot temperatures that are produced by the laser. Unfortunately, this is a very rich spectrum across the entire visible range in these kind of plasmas, which would make it basically impossible to make any other color than white. You could conceivably make other colors by changing the gas to something other than air (which is primarily an oxygen/nitrogen mix), but then you aren't projecting them into the air anymore. Also you couldn't make each dot a different color because they would be made in the same gas.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    6. Re:Short on Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about cancellation through illumination of the excited gas with another laser?
      Could it tint, at least?

    7. Re:Short on Information by kidcharles · · Score: 1

      On the issue of whether you could make something like this with a DVD laser diode, forget about it. The power levels required of lasers to cause electric breakdown (plasma formation) in air are extremely high. Laser diodes are typically limited to a few hundred milliwatts, whereas lasers that are powerful enough to create plasma spots in air are in the megawatt range. They are pulsed so they don't output this power continuously, but still way beyond what laser diodes can achieve.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    8. Re:Short on Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... just like dust motes in path of a green laser looking like sparks, you'd think you could do something interesting with this plasma.

    9. Re:Short on Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For now, it remains a nifty demonstration, and nothing more." Well thats one way of putting it, but i was wondering if it was possible too....

      Put enough scanners together and make a plasma tube in the air, hang / place mirrors either side on the end and create a "room pressure" lasing cavetity?

      The implication of that kind of invention would allow the studying of lasers to a completely new unknown level (I have always wanted to be able to change the gas inside a laser in a real time fashion)....
    10. Re:Short on Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      first off, there is no mention of one laser per pixel. there is a steering mirror to move the focal point around.
      and your 10x10x10 argument is also a bit odd... why would we care to fill up a volume with pixels when all we can see with a 2-d retina is a surface?

  15. Fuck, yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    THE FUTURE HAS ARRIVED.

  16. Mirror? by Zekasu · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure this is the correct article. My PHP quota isn't that short...

    (In other words [with piggybacking], mirror please?)

  17. Lightsaber anyone? by Thansal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Make me a portable version of this and I can finally have my friken LIGHTSABER!

    --
    Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
    1. Re:Lightsaber anyone? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      Now that I think of it, ions carry electrical charge, and can be used as a "wire".

      If you could ionize a short beag, and then hook a stun gun on it, you'd ionize and electrify the beam in that it would probably knock them out.

      It would probably take a few thermocouples with a radioactive battery.

      --
    2. Re:Lightsaber anyone? by Lorkki · · Score: 1

      Not a new idea, anyway. Electrolasers are a whole class of directed-energy weapons.

    3. Re:Lightsaber anyone? by E++99 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but while you have a light saber for the first 3 feet, the lasers are still burning holes in people's flesh at 50 and 100 feet. "A more elegant weapon for a more civilized time" my butt.

    4. Re:Lightsaber anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +5... Insightful? This place scares me sometime.

  18. Siggraph by kinshadow · · Score: 1

    This tech is soooooo Siggraph 2006...

    --
    Sigpilot : I'm in the pipe, 5 by 5.
    1. Re:Siggraph by tsjaikdus · · Score: 1

      This is indeed stuff from February 2006 or before. Somewhat remarkable that in an age that so many people have access to the internet and ideas spread around the globe at more or less the speed of light, we'll sometimes still find ourselves in a sense gazing at a 30 km per hour locomotive in mid eighteenth century England.

  19. did anyone notice... by ItsLenny · · Score: 1

    that everyone on THIS PAGE is wearing goggles... what good is mid air 3D animation if you can't even look at it without eye protection?


    Also I would like to add everytime something cool comes out like this the article is all good until the bottom where they have to go and say it's good for street signs and advertising

    See also: "This enables the display to be curved around objects like street furniture - handy for advertising and other promotional purposes."
    -From the article about the LG Oil/water display

    --
    ----------
    Trying to fix or change something only guarantees and perpetuates it's existence
    1. Re:did anyone notice... by querist · · Score: 2, Informative

      If my memory serves (and this is not my area of expertise), eye protection is standard operating procedure for anything that could be considered a high-power laser. This is sort of like when they use tethers for testing things that go above the ground. It is a "safety" precaution required more by insurance companies than reality. (Such as when testing a new elevator design, a "home-built" helicopter that has already passed the FAA inspections for the current phase, etc.)

      I suspect that these people are smart enough not to look directly into the lasers. The eye protection is as much a reminder to others that you need to wear eye protection when working with lasers and a requirement from the insurance company as it is realistic protection.

      Again, the eye protection works, but I sincerely doubt that these people are dumb enough to look into the lasers.

      This is like the guy on "New Yankee Workshop" who always gives his 30+ spiel on wearing safety glasses and following all instructions in the manual. Anyone who does that much woodworking with those kinds of power tools (huge bench-based units) should already know that stuff, but for reasons that I suspect include liability concerns Mr. Abrams reminds us every week to wear our safety glasses.

      -Q

    2. Re:did anyone notice... by Dekortage · · Score: 1

      "Also I would like to add everytime something cool comes out like this the article is all good until the bottom where they have to go and say it's good for street signs and advertising"

      How else do you expect private enterprise to pay for additional development? One of the first rules of capitalism is this: if it offers no profit, it has no future. Cutting-edge technology tends to be used by either the military, the pr0n industry, or the advertising industry. The latter is the safest to mention in a public venue.

      --
      $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
    3. Re:did anyone notice... by puppet10 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Eye protection is required for high power lasers because depending on the power (and wavelength) even diffuse (non-specular) reflections off a surface can be hazardous.

      They are also important since it is possible the beam path could suddenly change from a bumped mirror or malfunctioning controller and present the beam to an eye. You couldn't close your eyes fast enough to prevent damage with a high power laser (high enough power and the eye lid won't even help obviously).

      The pain in the ass thing about laser goggles is that they make the laser you are working with invisible (if it isn't already a non-visible wavelength). Imagine if the shop glasses on the New Yankee Workshop rendered all the sharp spinning metal items non-visible - wouldn't that be a fun shop to work in?

      --
      -------- This space intentionally left blank --------
    4. Re:did anyone notice... by sjames · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I parsed that wrong, but are you saying eye protection contributes nothing to laser safety?

      Yes, they are smart enough to know they shouldn't look into a laser. However, they're probably also smart enough to realise that reflected laser light is also a problem and that one simple slipup with a screwdriver a bit of chewing gum foil, or eyeglasses falling off can have you or someone else looking directly into the beam without warning.

      That is why any area where a strong laser operates must either be set up such that no unintentional reflection can direct a beam to a human accessable space or everyone must wear safety glasses.

      You are probably correct that Norm re-iterates the safety message frequently in addition to demonstrating it in part for liability reasons, but it's stupid lawsuits rather than insurance reasons. We're living in an era where not mentioning that diving head first into the tree chipper is a bad idea can get you sued for wrongful death.

  20. Polluting? by Lazarian · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Wouldn't heating oxygen and nitrogen in air with lasers to the point of making glowing plasma also create ozone and nitric oxides? This sounds like it would be the same as having dozens of electric arcs going off in mid air.

    As much as I like the idea of being assailed with even more ads everywhere I look, this seems to be a very environmentally harmful idea. Along with harmful gases being produced by plasma discharges, it would be noisy as well, not to mention that displays like this would give off UV light as well, just like an electric arc. Bad idea.

    1. Re:Polluting? by Rogue974 · · Score: 1

      I was going to post about the same thing you said, but figured I would scan to see if anyone else thought the same thing. It will give off some not so pleasant side gasses as well as a ton of heat. Cool idea, some very definate hurdles to overcome before it is any kind of feasible, assuming they can overcome them, which considering they are making plasma, good luck. This whole thing sounds like a Dr. Evil plot. We will make a technology that generates plasma advertisements in the environment and then threaten to turn them all on at the same time and polute the atmosphere with ozone and nitrous oxides unless the world governments pay us ONE...MILLION...DOLLARS!!!!!

    2. Re:Polluting? by mikael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As long as they put the device in a sealed box, this would not be a problem. Maybe they could use neon/argon gas as they do with ordinary tubes, thus eliminating the danger of creating oxides.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    3. Re:Polluting? by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 2, Informative

      Lightning from thunderstorms do this on a grand scale every day. Probably won't be an issue outdoors, or in a confined area with ventilation.

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    4. Re:Polluting? by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's why I'm working on my Laser Retinal Projector (patent pending) which aims the lasers directly at the retina. Since the eye is sealed system, there's virtually no danger of toxic gases! What's more, it offers a high degree of privacy, and if you're forgetful it can literally etch the images into your mind for life.*

      *Limit of one etch per mind.

      WARNING: Looking directly at the Laser Retinal Projector may cause minor explosions of the eye.

    5. Re:Polluting? by feepness · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't heating oxygen and nitrogen in air with lasers to the point of making glowing plasma also create ozone and nitric oxides? This sounds like it would be the same as having dozens of electric arcs going off in mid air. Boy that almost sounds as bad as generating ions just for dubious air purification purposes. Or using nitrogen oxide as a aerosol propellant or packing gas.

      Really, crying wolf every time someone invents something hurts the cause of environmentalism.
    6. Re:Polluting? by joggle · · Score: 1

      They would then need a way of dissipating the heat. If this is in an outdoor, hot environment this may be difficult to do cost-effectively.

    7. Re:Polluting? by Lazarian · · Score: 1
      There are several forms of nitrogen oxides. Nitrous oxide is the one used for an anesthetic and foaming agent. Nitric oxides are formed from electric discharges along with ozone and are generally considered harmful when inhaled even in low concentrations. Those produced by lightning gets diluted by vast amounts of air, and eventually nitric oxides are converted to nitric acid when exposed to water and is beneficial to plants when precipitated by rain. In an urban environment these same substances can build up and cause health problems. They are a toxic component of automotive exhaust.

      Pointing out possible hazards of something is not always "crying wolf".

    8. Re:Polluting? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Another possibility being worked on that does not foul the air is to have a semi-transparent fast-spinning plate on which lasers project a 3D image based on careful timing. It is kind of the same idea, except the lasers aim at a solid target and uses reflection instead of cooking the air. The test models enclose the spinning area in plexiglass.

    9. Re:Polluting? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I forgot to mention that the plate spins horizontally, not flat like a record player. It would be more like a very innefficient fan.

    10. Re:Polluting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    11. Re:Polluting? by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      And as we all know - UV light is a horrible pollutant. Although I think - oh I dunno - the entire plant population on the planet might have other opinions.

      Ah but fuck the plants. We don't need their stinkin' o2.

    12. Re:Polluting? by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Is ozone really that much of a problem? I was under the impression it was pretty much inert... never mind that there are still places (especially down around Australia IIRC) where the ozone layer is really thin.

      The UV seems a more likely problem. The only practical solution I can see for the at is a have a glass or plastic barrier between the viewers and the display (might be necessary anyway, since you obviously wouldn't want to touch this display even accidentally) that can block the dangerous frequencies. On anything except animal flesh, most UV frequencies are relatively harmless; plants are used to high doses of it and while it tends to destroy some kinds of paints and plastics over time, we do have UV-inhibitor coatings.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    13. Re:Polluting? by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      Every ion breeze ever made probably hasn't produced as many ions as around 3 lightning bolts. I don't think we have to worry too much.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    14. Re:Polluting? by Plutonite · · Score: 1

      But if it's in a box, what good is it? Why not use a 4 screen simulated hologram? The coolness factor reduces to zero if it is contained.

    15. Re:Polluting? by darkshadow · · Score: 1

      "... and eventually nitric oxides are converted to nitric acid when exposed to water and is beneficial to plants when precipitated by rain. "

      Acid Rain?

      --
      -Darkshadow (There was a thing called Heaven; but all the same they used to drink enormous quantities of alcohol.)
    16. Re:Polluting? by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Speaking of lightning, it can be an issue outdoors if the laser somehow ionizes a path from the nearest thundercloud to close to where you're standing ;).

      --
  21. Stephen Baxter by acvh · · Score: 1

    I was wondering when Stephen Baxter's tech for those Xeelee books was going to get here.

    as an aside, I love his stuff. no one ends a universe quite like him.

  22. demoed at SIGGRAPH 2006 emerging technologies by peter303 · · Score: 1

    It was impressively loud and bright when running. For some reason they couldnt run it continuously but turned it one for a few minutes every half hour.

  23. newer article by Rovastar · · Score: 1, Informative

    Although the article linked is old (come on it would not be slashdot if not, would it) here is a link to the new article from less than month ago (that I suppose should have been linked to originally - maybe update the summary) http://www.pinktentacle.com/2007/07/aist-improves- 3d-projector/

    1. Re:newer article by StrahdVZ · · Score: 1

      The new lasers, which unleash 100-billion-watt pulses (0.1-terawatt peak output) of light every 10-trillionths of a second (100 femtoseconds), improve image smoothness and boost the resolution to 1,000 pixels per second. 100-billion-watt pulses! Holy laser beams batman!

      This thing is bad on the environment in more ways than one... imagine how much coal/oil would have to be burned to power these things in cities across the world.
    2. Re:newer article by fractoid · · Score: 1
      Well, the Almighty Oracle of Google says that given:
      • 100 billion watts of laser power
      • 100 femtosecond pulse length
      • 1000 pulses a second
      The overall output power is 10 Watts.

      Of course, that's assuming that they meant 1000 pulses of 100 femtoseconds each, per second. If they meant one pulse of unknown duration every 100 femtoseconds, then they don't give enough info to calculate the power drain.
      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  24. oh good, repression.... by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    don't be around me when you finally blow!

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  25. Brilliant...ish by Arceliar · · Score: 1

    This is a wonderful idea. After all, advertisements are never a waste of resources, and nothing says "green" like smoldering hot balls of glowing plasma that people will ignore once the awesomeness of it wears off.

    At this rate it's just a matter of time before they laser color the moon into a giant Pepsi logo.

    1. Re:Brilliant...ish by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Well, the moon clearly carries the scars of previous advertisement scribing attempts by the ancients...

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  26. Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only is this press release over a year old, they had this at SIGGRAPH '06. It flickered, wasn't that smooth, and was really, really loud. It's cool in concept, but not that impressive in reality.

  27. welcome to 2006 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  28. R2 D2 by magic_trick · · Score: 1

    Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope!

    1. Re:R2 D2 by xrayspx · · Score: 1

      Of course someone beat me to it, what was I even thinking.

  29. Very cool, but not likely to be used... by Darlok · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, first, this is sadly old news. The technology was actually exhibited at SIGGRAPH 2006 in Boston last July. It's pretty cool, but I'm not sure it would ever be put to practical use, at least in its current form.

    For one thing, it's loud! Every plasma ball makes a sizzling pop as it winks in and out of existence. Now magnify that by thousands of times as it scans out a 3D wireframe... the entire area for quite a distance surrounding fills with an ear-splitting sound of angry electric bees. There was talk of putting it on buildings to run electronic billboards in cities, but anyone within a few blocks would need ear protection to co-exist with it!

    Very cool stuff, but we're a loooong way from 3D open-air advertising.

    --
    Notice: Your mouse has been moved. Windows will now restart so this change can take effect.
  30. Some video by desideria · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's video of the projector in action here

    1. Re:Some video by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 1

      Sounds just as annoying as a Tesla coil.

      --
      The game.
    2. Re:Some video by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Which leads to this much more impressive (and probably fake) one. Does anyone know the story behind these guys?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    3. Re:Some video by HeroreV · · Score: 1

      you linked to the same video

    4. Re:Some video by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Ah crap, sorry I meant this one

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    5. Re:Some video by pontifier · · Score: 1

      After a little research, their website has this to say about the cheoptics 360:
      Is the projected image a true 3D representation? No, the image seen from all sides is the same. There is not a front, back, left and right side to the 3D projection. However, the image does appear to float in the volume of the pyramid due to the geometry of the glass. The shape of the construction makes the reflected images appear free floating and can be viewed from 360.

      --
      -John Fenley
  31. Family Guy by BionicWorm · · Score: 1

    Meow meow skin graft meow!

  32. YouTube video... by CyberSnyder · · Score: 4, Informative
  33. If I'm not mistaken... by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...plasma balls in mid-air is one of the things needed for a fusion reactor.

    --
    The game.
    1. Re:If I'm not mistaken... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Balls/spheres aren't stable enough. You have to go to higher geometries, like toroids.

    2. Re:If I'm not mistaken... by kidcharles · · Score: 1

      There are currently two major approaches in the development of fusion power. One is the traditional tokamak, a magnetized toroidal reactor, which is the concept behind ITER. The other is laser ignition / inertial confinement, which is what they are pursuing at the National Ignition Facility.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    3. Re:If I'm not mistaken... by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      True, but generating plasma with lasers isn't the problem. For one thing, these lasers wouldn't produce anywhere near enough heat/pressure (yes, pressure, as in essentially massless photons pushing atoms around) for fusion, and for another just initiating fusion doesn't make it self-sustaining. It needs to have new fuel (typically hydrogen isotopes or He3) introduced, and waste products (typically He4) removed eventually. Since the startup lasers draw a great deal of power, you don't want to run them any more than need be, which means you ideally need to be able to do the fuel exchange without restarting the reactor. Do you start to see the problems yet?

      I'm not saying it won't happen - we make a few notable landmarks every year or so - but it's a ways off yet.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    4. Re:If I'm not mistaken... by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 1

      Yes deuterium and tritium are common theoretical sustainable fuels in fusion reactions but, if the mass-energy equivalence is to be held true, the efficiency of the reaction will be inversely proportional to the mass of waste that will be produced by the reaction. Also, storing the umpteen Megawatts of energy generated in the seconds of the reaction (landmark to strive for) would allow for adequate time to remove waste and introduce new fuel by whatever means. It is not a chain reaction so why is everyone expecting it to be like good old fashioned nuclear fission?

      --
      The game.
    5. Re:If I'm not mistaken... by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Even in fusion, the actual amount of converted mass (the m in e=mc2) (sorry, Slashdot doesn't seem to like the tag) is pretty minimal... less than a percent perhaps, less than 10 percent for sure. There will be plenty of waste helium being produced, and since fusing He4 is much harder than He3 or H isotopes, that helium effectively wastes reactor energy until it is removed. Whether it would be possible to remove it without removing all the remaining fuel isotopes (and starting the reaction from scratch) I really can't say.

      It would be fun, though perhaps frustrating, to be a nuclear physicist researching fusion power.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  34. Unintended side effects by Caerdwyn · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Interesting stuff. However, I'd be concerned about unintended side effects... specifically, nitrous oxide and ozone.

    When you heat up an oxygen-nitrogen gas mix to those temperatures, you will get nitrous oxide and ozone. This is not just a problem with cool little sparky devices. Hydrogen-oxygen fuel systems (think: Saturn V) may produce only water vapor, but at such a high temperature from the exhaust, the oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere does its thing and... nothing you'd want to breathe.

    And ozone, while very nice for blocking UV rays, is a carcinogen when inhaled.

    THE WORLD WILL KILL YOU! film at eleven, Jim Cummings narration.

    That being said, I'd certainly love to see a demo. If they can somehow deal with the ozone/NO2 hazard, this could be a blast. "Help me, Obi-Wan, you're my only hope"

    --
    Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
    1. Re:Unintended side effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd also worry about stray light from the class 4 infra-red lasers after they've been focused down -- way to get sunburn/blinded! Soft X-ray emission is produced from the plasma which isn't such a great thing to be exposed to. Also, stuff might get in the way of the laser beams such as metal (giving stray laser reflections & secondary X-ray emission which can be dangerous to eyes and skin), glass (possible explosions with shards of glass everywhere &/ refraction of laser light) or humans (ow! - where's my retina?).
      Don't get me wrong- it's a way cool device but also pretty dangerous -- don't think health and safety would allow this one in the UK though!

  35. Plasma? by Cervantes · · Score: 1

    Plasma displays?

    This is very, very cool.

    And I see it ending very, very badly, for some new Darwin Award recipient.

    --
    If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    1. Re:Plasma? by jpellino · · Score: 1

      Ending badly... for the touchscreen version at any rate...

      --
      "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  36. Amazing... by nexuspal · · Score: 1

    Now the DSP technology to kill the laser a microsecond before they cat gets burned. Also will need noise cancellation technology to create noise to cancel out the sound of the popping. With these two technologies, the lasers really can create a shark inches from your face, and DSP software will kill the laser before you have a chance to physically come into contact with it...

    --
    I've read Slashdot for the last 5 years, and now I start posting... Go figure :-P
  37. Attracting lightening by Iowan41 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yeah, let's ionize the air in a column!

  38. BttF 2 by that+IT+girl · · Score: 1

    Is anyone else reminded of the scene in "2015" in Back to the Future 2? With all the advertisements very much like this? At this rate they may exist in 2015.
    As for flying Deloreans, the verdict is still out.

    --
    10 FILL MUG WITH COFFEE
    20 DRINK COFFEE
    30 GOTO 10
    1. Re:BttF 2 by penp · · Score: 1

      As for Deloreans, the verdict has long been out.

  39. Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Growing up in a mosquito infested area, I often thought that someday, an anti-mosquito laser system could be developed.

    This technology could possibly do that. If it can focus a laser on a particular spot long enough to make plasma out of air, it can zap a skeeter!

    And you thought a bug-zapper was entertaining...

  40. Pink Tentacle Website Hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Did anyone else notice this ? On the linked article source, look at the links on either side of the article:

    http://www.pinktentacle.com/2006/02/marilyn-monroe -shaped-daikon-radish/
    and
    http://www.pinktentacle.com/2006/02/frozen-waterfa ll-indicates-bumper-rice-crop-to-come/

    Way to identify the hard science mag!

  41. Actually the moon has a by geekoid · · Score: 1

    CHA..well it did, now it just says HA.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  42. Ed Wood by Viking+Coder · · Score: 1

    As Bela Lugosi said in Ed Wood:

    I'm not going near that goddamn thing!

    --
    Education is the silver bullet.
  43. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by JFitzsimmons · · Score: 1

    So something like mosquito point defense? I love it.

    --
    Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
  44. up to 1,000 brilliant dots per second by noidentity · · Score: 3, Funny

    Come on, 640 brilliant dots per second should be enough for anybody!

  45. How hot? by pescadero · · Score: 1

    So, what would happen if I stuck my hand in there? Burned, melted, exploded, what?

  46. Finally, True 3D by theolein · · Score: 1

    This is something that I thought about over the years: how to get a focal plane of sorts to exist in 3D. It seems that the obvious answer was to focus lasers on points in a gas filled volume of space. I'm pretty sure that this will, in ten or so years, finally give us working holographic displays. At the moment, I must assume that the power consumption must be very high in order to ionise the gas. Perhaps placing this system in a glass box with gasses that are more easily ionised might be cheaper? I also wonder how the problems of colour and gradiation will be solved, but I'm pretty sure they will be.

    1. Re:Finally, True 3D by tsjaikdus · · Score: 1

      Holography renders all 3D clues. Every other technique doesn't. For example, how would you hide an object behind an other one using plasma dots? Or create shadows? Therefore, I think, holography is the way to go and will eventually lead to interesting floating 3D images if the screens gets big enough. Though, some tricks are still really neat, like this one http://youtube.com/watch?v=LHj_9koofm8&mode=relate d&search= but it's still a trick, while holography (the kind of invented by Dennis Gabor) is not. Though, this one http://youtube.com/watch?v=iOKS8_QFooM is still pretty impressive too and works by focussing dots of light in front of the screen.

  47. Plasma Rifle anyone? by jdigriz · · Score: 1

    Cool, now all we need is a miniaturized magnetic accelerator to shoot the plasma balls. And a man-portable power source.

  48. Cool tech by sirdux · · Score: 1

    ... but will it do the Death star and show the weakness.....

  49. Wattage by Zero_DgZ · · Score: 1

    If one of these laser devices is powerful enough to heat air into plasma, what's going to happen to the poor sap who stands in the wrong place and catches one of the beams in the eye? I've got a 125mw visible light laser that's enough to cause eye damage instantly with exposure over a considerable range, and it's still a long ways away from creating any blooming effect (which is what this seems to describe). Seems to me this invention won't be safe for non-laboratory use no matter how you slice it.

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

      Clearly they need you on the project to think of these kinds of things no one else would think of..

  50. here's a youtube video of it in action by jollyreaper · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=He2QTpelAjE

    Kind of hard to see what they're doing at first, you might think it's just projected onto the wall, but then the camera pans around and you now see the lights against an open window. Yup, 3D. About at the level of pong right now, monochromatic voxels doing simple stuff, but you can easily extrapolate where they're going to go with it. Return of the Jedi Death Star display within 10 years? I think so. :)

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  51. Yay for Global Warming! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, hot balls of plasma used for advertising displays. That sounds like a really great idea. NOT.

  52. The cat is imaginary by spun · · Score: 1

    But then, so is the wife. The cat takes after her in that regard.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  53. These... by Kiuas · · Score: 1

    ...are not the Plasma Balls you are looking for, move along.

    --
    "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
  54. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Nossie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    not going to happen... they'd rather use the tech to pound you with advertising than actually doing something useful.

  55. Um no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we are still in the present.

    1. Re:Um no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From where I'm sitting, it looks more like you're in the past.

  56. There is alread mosquito killing tech by Colin+Smith · · Score: 0
    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:There is alread mosquito killing tech by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 1

      Hell, that is just a bug vacuum cleaner. You can get those at Wally World now.

      I am taking about a frickin' LASER! That zaps skeeters!

      Fireworks! Vaporized bugs!

      Or, a bug sucker...

  57. Joy....news from February 2006! by jriskin · · Score: 1

    Slashdot must have a huge backlog...

  58. haw haw by Tiny+Elvis · · Score: 1

    I'm reading this thread on a 3d plasma ball display so I'm getting a kick out of these replies..

  59. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 3, Funny

    Can you imagine the crazy pyrotechnics that could be achieved with this sort of thing?

    Heh... it would be fun to take one of these things and set it up near a village of primitives. You could be the face of God :P

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  60. wow! by toQDuj · · Score: 1

    That is fucking COOL!

    I never thought I'd see the light of day that we get "holographic" displays. Of course, this is not holographic, but it's everything the movies portrayed as an imaging device of the future.

    Let's hope this develops into something with high resolution, colour and a little less noise :). Although I think the latter will be challenging.

    B.

    --
    Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
  61. Plasma by certel · · Score: 1

    Good thing this article is from 2006. C'mon Slashdot...

  62. Military Applications by CruddyBuddy · · Score: 1
    What do you think the military could do with a technology like this? Especially in an urban environment where confusion and obfuscation would be to the aggressor's (our) advantage? I might think that it could be used as a type of camoflage or screening device which could be used to misinform or deceive a would-be target or observer without actually blasting them into the afterlife. This could definitely be used as a non-lethal system (burns and blindness not withstanding).

    And the noise is not necessarily a problem. Consider all of the other noise occuring in a confrontation /battle. This actually might be an advantage.

    One last thing. If the other side accidentally gets in the way of the laser without protection - so what. I know that sounds callous, but "don't ya know there's a war on"? If a relatively minor burn occurs, or some folks are blinded, well, there are worse things.

    --
    ----------
    Any problem can be made unsolvable if there are enough meetings made to discuss it.
    1. Re:Military Applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With timing software you could make it look like the tanks were shooting star wars style laser bolts, rather than tank shells. Um... Why I don't know, but it sure would look cool!

  63. Hmmm!? by ZonkerWilliam · · Score: 1

    No one seems to notice that this article is from last year...

  64. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    Actually, all it needs to do is create a glowing plasma ball out of reach and leave it there. It would be a built-in bug zapper as it attracts the bugs and zaps them both in a single package. No need to try to track and shoot the things...

  65. Whatever! by crhylove · · Score: 1

    I guess my regular balls are getting less valuable by the second!

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
  66. Tesla Coil + electric guitar = awesome by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

    Last Halloween I saw a setup with an electric guitar used to modulate (in this case turn on and off rapidly) a Tesla Coil, with the result that the bolts of electricity flying off the coil didn't just match the music, they were the music. It had a very harsh square-wave sound, but it fit perfectly with the visual display and by combining two of the coolest uses for electricity ever it reached new heights of awesome.

    They could probably do the same with this by changing the rate of the pulses. Though they'd have to get higher than 1000 bursts per second unless they're just using it for the bass track.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
    1. Re:Tesla Coil + electric guitar = awesome by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 1

      Sounds like this only cooler!

      --
      The game.
    2. Re:Tesla Coil + electric guitar = awesome by Tablizer · · Score: 1
  67. I saw this at SIGGRAPH last year... by stokes · · Score: 1

    I think I saw this demonstrated at SIGGRAPH 2006. If it wasn't specifically this, it was another, virtually identical device. I know this is first-gen, but I don't yet think it's cut out for advertising. The resolution of the device I saw was extremely low, but I presume that will improve; what's more striking is that it was horribly noisy. When operating, it produced continuous arcing, cracking and buzzing noises... a sound somewhere between the noise of a vibrating metal tray full of ball bearings and a couple dozen stun guns being fired. Given how it works, I'm not sure they can make it any quieter.

    1. Re:I saw this at SIGGRAPH last year... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I focus the pulsed laser at work, it buzzes at the frequency of the "repetition rate" of the laser, which is the number of laser pulses per second. If they move the repetition rate out of the audible range, then I bet it wouldn't crackle any more.

      Unfortunately, in many amplified laser systems, the energy of the laser pulses are higher for lower repetition rates. So, in order to get the necessary energy to make the plasma balls, it might force you into lower, audible frequencies.

  68. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    No need to try to track and shoot the things...

    If we don't actively track and kill mosquitoes with laser beams, then the terrorists have won
  69. All I have to say is... by noc007 · · Score: 1

    Fucking Cool!

  70. Not just a vacuum cleaner by CustomDesigned · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The propane tank is used to generate CO2 (queue global warming rants here). Mosquitos are attracted to CO2 because that is how they locate their prey. When they fly close enough, then the vacuum cleaner comes into play. Zapping them is no good because they don't like ozone (so the plasma ball suggested elsewhere would not attract mosquitos - it would kill lots of moths, however). To be effective in protecting your event, the CO2 generator needs to be upwind. Mosquitos follow CO2 plumes upwind toward their victims using biotech similar to lobsters (compare the concentration detected between two antenna and turn toward the stronger, the greater the difference, the greater the adjustment - simple and effective). Those downwind of the BBQ will likely head toward that instead, so put the BBQ off to one side relative to the breeze.

    1. Re:Not just a vacuum cleaner by Mathinker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You lack imagination; the original poster was assuming that another part of the system would be able to, in a large volume of space (e.g., your living room), detect and correctly classify flying insects as a mosquito, rather than merely attracting it with some kind of bait. The plasma ball would be formed on-the-fly around the mosquito, killing it.

      Frankly, I'd be nervous about having that kind of automatically controlled laser capability in my living space. Maybe you thought about that too, and assumed the poster couldn't possible mean what I think he meant....

    2. Re:Not just a vacuum cleaner by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 1

      I am not worried. As long as the controlling computer runs Vista, that is...

  71. The animation that really needs to be played... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...on this contraption is Princess Leia stooping over and pleading, "Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope".

  72. I for one... by someone1234 · · Score: 1

    wanna watch scantily clothed Leila dance in the holo movie :)

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  73. OMG! by syrrys · · Score: 0

    One day I will play space chess just like Luke and Chewy did. A long time ago...

    --
    "Patience is not a virtue, it's a waste of time."
  74. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Bluesman · · Score: 5, Funny

    I like the way you think.

    But what we really need is a way to control mosquitos so that they can swarm to form advertisements. Then we'd get the laser bug zapper for free.

    --
    If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
  75. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Doug+Neal · · Score: 1

    Growing up in a mosquito infested area, I often thought that someday, an anti-mosquito laser system could be developed. Why don't you make one? Here's a starting point. You'd be in the perfect place to do some field tests!

    Put me down for a back-order, I'll buy one.
  76. Dual Purpose by E++99 · · Score: 1

    As a bonus, once these are over our cities, the deadly laser beams will protect us from any terrorist-controlled aircraft that don't know the special route navigate through them without bursting into flames. We'll probably have fewer pigeon problems as well.

  77. That's true by Poromenos1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And space is one of the things needed for a space elevator!

    --
    Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
  78. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by EchoNiner · · Score: 1

    You mean I really wasn't alone when I thought about an anti-mosquito laser system??? This is either a coincidence or runs through the mind of every tech-oriented brain sitting around in the countryside.

  79. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Hell, you'd probably fool non-"primitives" too.

  80. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

    I remember it from a skit on Not Necessarily the News on HBO, in reference to Reagan's Star Wars defense system.

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  81. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by tantaliz3 · · Score: 1

    Yup! Just have a tiny globe sitting on a pedestal on a table, with radar tracking systems! AM-Ray! Anti-Mosquito Raygun!

    Oooo, interface to your box and all of a sudden. Booya. Whole new meaning to space invaders.

  82. Next DIY thread on Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How to turn a 100-billion-watt femtosecond-pulse laser and a MAGLite(tm) into a laser pointer that can also be used to pop balloons and scare pigeons

  83. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by glittalogik · · Score: 1

    Think of the (itchy) children!

  84. Applications for p0rn? by lightningrod220 · · Score: 1

    I had a professor in college who felt that anytime a new media would take off, it was usually thanks to pr0n. An example he gave was VHS v. Betamax. The Sony guys didn't want their precious format to be corrupted, whereas the VHS guys just let anyone use their format. If this thing has potential for advertising or any kind of media, and if p0rn grabs it and runs, it will be here to stay.

  85. Here..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 1

    In other countries, they are actually developing USEFUL stuff. Here in the United States, we just pull out Kindergarten science "experiments", give it a technical name, and call it a "...radical new development/innovation/breakthrough".

    BTW, I wonder how much money those idiots blew in creating that "new" (their words, not mine) monofin. If wasting money was a skill, we'd be geniuses.

    I wonder what the next multi-billion dollar technical "breakthrough" will be..... Lemme guess:

    "Innovative Environmentally-Freindly Future Time Distortion Device": A pure, solid titanium paddle with an ultra-elastic string tied to the center of the paddle at one end, and a "super-rubber" ball at the other. Rubber "Comfort Grips" optional. Comes with complimentary set of X-Ray Specs (Not "real" X-Ray, but they give you magic powers that let you fool everyone into thinking they are!)

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
  86. halo 3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well we don't need to wait until halo3 to finish the job,
    we can just make our own plasma guns now. a tank of liquid that acts like water gun and beam at the solution to ignite a plasma bolt.

  87. Umm, the article is 1.5 years old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who remembers this article as it was originally published in early 2006? Am I the only one noticing the date of the article?

  88. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by SEWilco · · Score: 1

    Not a mosquito zapper. Mosquito Hunter (TM). Everyone picks up a wireless controller on their way to the back yard, sit down, and fly their little glowing fighter planes around the yard. You lose points for targeting a dragonfly.

  89. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pay no attention to the geek behind the curtain!

  90. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by fractoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I always wanted to make one of these! Passive sonar to locate the bug, and then a laser tracking system to set the little bugger on fire. :) Never got past the safety aspect though - I mean, we're talking about using a laser strong enough to punch a hole in a mozzie, being aimed around the room and fired by a system that could well just decide based on a strange echo to pop you in the eye. I'll take itchy over permanent blindness, tyvm. :/

    Other ideas were the same tracking system attached to a nerf gun, an automated micro-water-jet system (think an archer fish), or even something funky with focussed sound waves and constructive interference. ;)

    --
    Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  91. YES! by sh3l1 · · Score: 1

    When the tech improves it could be used for street signs or advertising.

    YES!
    --
    Help Me! I'm trapped in the tubes! Oh noes! Here comes a internet!
  92. Singing Tesla coil by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    It would seem the frequency will have to be raised by a couple orders of magnitude to do anything beyond basic wireframes -- at that point perhaps it could be modulated in a manner similar to the Singing Tesla Coil, and provide not only the video, but the soundtrack as well? The sound would even be coming from the "surface" of the perceived object, no matter where the observer is.

    Holographic people may turn out to be untouchable in a completely different way than depicted on Star Trek.

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  93. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Plutonite · · Score: 2, Funny

    And you could initiate mating festivals by playing pr0n. Pr0n from the heavens! You know you like it..

  94. old joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doctor: "Do you smoke after sex?"
    Woman: "I don't know-- I never looked!"

  95. Youtube has everything by Smoke2Joints · · Score: 1

    a short and somewhat uninspiring clip of the display in action... no pyramids here tho. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He2QTpelAjE

  96. Ozone gives you cancer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heating air with lasers? Extremely cool, unfortunately the process creates a significant amount of ozone, which is extremely cancerogenous. Ozone is only good if it created a few kilometers from the surface ;)

  97. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by pakar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    hmm... Another thing that might work could be to have multiple sources for the energy.. (i'm no laser expert :)

    But my idea, have a system with maybe 20-30 lasers that all focus their low-power beams on a single point. 10x20mW lasers should(?) have a total effect of 200mW, but ofcourse if you hit different parts of the bug it will probably not have any effect on the bug itself... Maybe put 10 lasers in a row instead of all around the room could make it a bit easier to hit the same spot, but then again, if the system thought your eye where a mosquito... :)

  98. Call me when... by hanshotfirst · · Score: 1

    ... 3d holographic battle chess is released. Then I'll take notice. I'll still let the Wookie win.

    --
    Why, oh why, didn't I take the Blue Pill?
  99. Plasma? by jon287 · · Score: 1

    Yow! Do NOT sit too close to the tv kids!

    (Boldly using to and too two times and getting it right too! They're not gonna believe their eyes when they see it there!)

    --
    To boldly use to and too two times and get it right too! They're not gonna believe their eyes when they see it there!
  100. Re:Sharks? No. Mosquitos? YES! by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 1

    That sounds a lot like the system I imagined as a kid.

    Mosquitoes make a particular noise when they are "hunting". That is the annoying sound that keeps you awake at night. A tracking system that homes in on that whine, but with IR to avoid humans and pets, and maybe millimeter radar for fine adjustment, could work.

  101. So... by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

    we can finally cross the beams?

  102. I don't know about you, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a sudden urge for a cokie-mokie!