Slashdot Mirror


Blast-Proof Fabric Resists Multiple Explosions

An anonymous reader tips a Gizmodo story on a fabric whose properties are counterintuitive, to say the least of it. "Zetix is a fabric so strong it will resist multiple car bomb blasts without breaking. It absorbs and disperses the energy from explosions... it can be used in body armor, window covering, military tents, and hurricane defenses... [and] it can be used as medical sutures that won't damage body tissue. All of this is thanks to a property that apparently defies the laws of physics: helical-auxetics, objects that actually get fatter the more you stretch them. The concept makes my head want to explode, but when you see it in action it actually makes sense."

250 comments

  1. Mind the label by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Funny

    and] it can be used as medical sutures that won't damage body tissue.

    Sutures necessary from the failure of the cloth?

    Read the label "Resists, not Proof!"
    "D'oh!"
    "At least we can use the remainder of your suit to stitch you up!"

    The concept makes my head want to explode, but when you see it in action it actually makes sense.

    You should wear a hat made of this material, if not for you, than for those around you.

    "I wear fashions from Yves St. Rongbad, in case anything around me asplode!"

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Mind the label by crakbone · · Score: 4, Funny

      Now how do we get clothes and backpacks made out of this stuff to suicide bombers?

    2. Re:Mind the label by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or some tighty-whities for my flatulent brother-in-law.

    3. Re:Mind the label by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once ThinkGeek gets shirts made out of this then I wont have to wear my vest anymore. Its not really parinoia if they.... OMG get away!! /hide

    4. Re:Mind the label by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They describe the material as adamantiumastic. Is it April 1st already?

    5. Re:Mind the label by SQLGuru · · Score: 1

      This material is self-sizing (which explains all of the future-worlds where everyone wears the same thing).....the bigger you get (stretching the cloth), the more it expands (so that it fits).

      Maybe that's why all women are a size "6".

      Layne

    6. Re:Mind the label by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      Tighty whities? My first thought when I saw this was: "Countdown to helical-auxetic penis enlargement spam 10... 9..."

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    7. Re:Mind the label by Gilmoure · · Score: 3, Funny

      Women aren't any fun unless they're at least a size 12.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    8. Re:Mind the label by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Mod... INSIGHTFUL.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    9. Re:Mind the label by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      You should wear a hat made of this material, if not for you, than for those around you.

      I couldn't help but think of Jagi, from Fist of the North Star. He's the bad guy who Kenshiro hit with his Your-Head-Asplode punch, and he had to wear a metal harness bolted to his head to contain the pressure even years later. I bet this would be a boon for him!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    10. Re:Mind the label by nobodymk2 · · Score: 1

      Someone forgot to make the SELF_DESTRUCT code deal KILL damage to the suicide unit! (A reference to some comments in XML code for games)

    11. Re:Mind the label by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes, the rationalization of someone rejected by normal-sized slim women. You'll NEVER get me away from my 5'9 120 lbs triathlete girl! You can keep your heifers! How someone can't appreciate a slim waist, a flat tummy and physical fitness is mind boggling.

    12. Re:Mind the label by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Dude, I was skinny (6', 115 lbs). Had a few skinny girlfriends over the years. Truthfully, it's who the person is that makes them a turn on but when it comes to just catching my eye, a nice, curvy chick with long dark hair and glasses will win out over any blond bikini model looking chick with ribs showing!

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    13. Re:Mind the label by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Dude, you were a corpse. No woman wanted you, that's all. A skinny freak like you with some big bitch is hilarious!


      "a nice, curvy chick"
      Do you think my girlfriend has no curves? That's double-think and borderline insanity. My GF has a super narrow waist and a bubble butt. Face it, you're rationalizing.

    14. Re:Mind the label by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put it inside a car door to make it bomb proof and light weight. It would probably also be more resistant to accident body damage and/or driver fatality.

    15. Re:Mind the label by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah hah i get it: Slashdot & Girlfriend; oh the irony!

  2. Head Explosion Imminent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The concept makes my head want to explode... I see. For the safety of those around you, might I interest you in a turban constructed of helical-auxetic material?
    1. Re:Head Explosion Imminent by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 1

      now if only we can get all suicide bombers to wear this material over the bomb vest....

  3. No miracles, no defying the laws of physics by Besna · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We should look at it for what it is. For one thing, this won't do anything for bullets (or swords). Another defensive tool, which is a great thing. Offense has been winning out way too much in the race.

    1. Re:No miracles, no defying the laws of physics by s.bots · · Score: 1

      But they always said that "defense wins championships"!

    2. Re:No miracles, no defying the laws of physics by Kingrames · · Score: 1

      DUH.

      It doesn't matter how many people die of unnatural causes, you'll always be able to claim that.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    3. Re:No miracles, no defying the laws of physics by CharlieG · · Score: 1

      Offense almost always leads. Defense is a reaction. "the ain't a oyster that a starfish can't drill"

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    4. Re:No miracles, no defying the laws of physics by Cassander · · Score: 1

      Offense has been winning out way too much in the race.

      Sadly, the second law of thermodynamics pretty much guarantees that the offense side will always have the upper hand.

      --
      Knowledge != Intelligence
    5. Re:No miracles, no defying the laws of physics by BlueStraggler · · Score: 3, Interesting

      this won't do anything for bullets (or swords)

      Good news for pirates, then!

      More seriously, I think it will work for bullets, since bullets burst fabrics by stretching them to the point of failure (and bullet-proof fabrics like Kevlar work by having a high tensile strength). The only question becomes how far does the bullet have to stretch the fabric until the strength rises enough to stop it? More than a couple of inches, and the bullet is into your internal organs anyway, so you have to reduce the looseness and flexibility of the fabric to prevent that from happening. The most obvious way to do that is the same way you do it for conventional bullet-proof vests: by adding hard plates or other rigid materials into the vest. The difference here is you might be able to use light materials that are themselves not bullet-proof (eg. wood, foam). The bullet could puncture these materials easily, but in dragging the material into the resulting bullet hole, the stretch factor would rise very rapidly and the fabric would suddenly become very strong.

    6. Re:No miracles, no defying the laws of physics by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Good point. If that were the case, you could have a vest constructed entirely of styrofoam, or even just a rigid network of plastic tubes. The weight savings (and improvement in ventilation) over modern armour would be invaluable, even if the bulk were slightly increased. This is deffinitely something to keep an eye on.

    7. Re:No miracles, no defying the laws of physics by Jarjarthejedi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Okay, raise your hand if you think the concept of Styrofoam armor that actually stops bullets is pure awesome.

      *Raises Hand*

      --
      There are two kinds of fool One says 'This is old therefore good' Another says 'This is new therefore better'- Dean Ing
  4. Fat pants by FalconZero · · Score: 4, Funny

    According the material on the companies web site (auxetix) one of the applications is for a fabric that changes colour as it's stretched (specifically for cargo webbing). But one application which would be much cooler (and useful for a fair portion of the slashdot crowd) is pants made out of this stuff - They'd change colour to tell you when you've eaten too many pies.

    --
    Windows in 6 Bytes (IA-32) : 90 90 90 90 CD 19
    1. Re:Fat pants by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny

      They'd change colour to tell you when you've eaten too many pies.

      At last! We could find who has eaten all the pies .. the fat bastard.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Fat pants by N8F8 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or seen a girl you find attractive.

      --
      "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
    3. Re:Fat pants by nyekulturniy · · Score: 0

      The bastard in the black?

      --
      Nyekulturniy... Proudly confusing readers and editors since 1981!
    4. Re:Fat pants by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      Or you were surrounded by attractive women. No thanks. I like to keep my stiffy a secret sometimes.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    5. Re:Fat pants by cs668 · · Score: 1

      Or when your dick gets hard!!! That would actually be fun color changing condoms.

    6. Re:Fat pants by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or next year's MacBooks.

      Think about who you're talking to.

    7. Re:Fat pants by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 0

      Why on earch would I want that?! I already have a WIFE that tells me that (without my asking her to mind you) already!!

      I vote no to nagging pants!

    8. Re:Fat pants by jacksonj04 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As any fool doth know, the condom goes on the erect penis, not on a flaccid one!

      This has been a public service announcement.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    9. Re:Fat pants by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      The bastard in the black?

      Imagine eating so many pies you look like him!

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    10. Re:Fat pants by wattrlz · · Score: 1

      .. or the fat bastard could finally clear his name by noting the pants color of the unassuming skinny bastard covered in crumbs.

    11. Re:Fat pants by SgtSnorkel · · Score: 1


      Bah! Pants are for the weak!

    12. Re:Fat pants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Porous condoms are my favorite!

    13. Re:Fat pants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      This has been a pubic service announcement.

      There: fixed!

    14. Re:Fat pants by jacksonj04 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was sorely tempted, I honestly was.

      Also: Informative? I thought it was basic knowledge!

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    15. Re:Fat pants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It should be modded "interesting".

      This is slashdot. Most of us have no need for condoms.

      And the day we ever get the chance, it might be the only chance in our lives to spread our genes :).

    16. Re:Fat pants by aproposofwhat · · Score: 1
      What's on the menu, fat fucker?

      :P

      --
      One swallow does not a fellatrix make
    17. Re:Fat pants by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 1

      Ok what the fuck - a base 1 score (unmoderated post) that was modded OVERRATED?! Fuck you moderator!

  5. Energy dissipation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So how is the energy dissipated? Since energy is force times distance, how much force needs to be applied, or how much displacement of the fabric is needed to dissipate this energy?

    Just as a physicist, this idea doesn't pass the smell test. Never mind a ballistics expert or materials scientist...

    1. Re:Energy dissipation by ecklesweb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Saw another kind of body armor on TV called Dragon Skin that's made of interlinked disks that also claim to spread the impact. Took armor piercing rifle rounds without penetration. They put a dummy wearing it on top of a fragmentation grenade and blew it up with no penetration through the vest. Crazy stuff.

    2. Re:Energy dissipation by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing. It's convenient when it's stretched across a frame like they show on the website, but as clothing it just won't stretch that much.

      I like the idea of hospital tents and such being made of this stuff though. It's the perfect application, assuming the frame doesn't warp and collapse under the pressure of flexing fabrics.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    3. Re:Energy dissipation by ecklesweb · · Score: 4, Informative

      Oh yeah, video of the dragon skin grenade test here

    4. Re:Energy dissipation by mangu · · Score: 1

      So how is the energy dissipated?


      I'm guessing that it's by gas flow between the threads. Stretching the material opens gaps uniformly over the stretched area, the bigger the pressure the wider the gaps are. Other fabrics do not open like that, or at least not as uniformly, so they tear when the pressure builds up.

    5. Re:Energy dissipation by gurps_npc · · Score: 5, Informative
      Some people here simply do not understand how armor works. So they think "this thing won't protect you, because it doesn't stop the energy/pressure, it just doesn't break".

      Armor is not just a single layer of stuff, it is multiple layers. Yes, this stuff by itself is not worth much as armor, but layer it on top of other thigns, and you got something special.

      Each layer stops something else. This layer does not break, so it stops penetration. Make a cell structure of this, fill it with something else, like say SAND, and that pressure wave you were so worried about becomes contained. Two layers of a cell structure like this, with sand in between them, and the entire explosive kinetic energy is contained, converted to heat, deflect out, or otherwise dealt with.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    6. Re:Energy dissipation by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      ....converted to heat....

      Yes, that is exactly what explosions need more of, heat. Surely that will help protect us more. So rather than being filled with holes, we can be cooked instead.

      Yes yes, I know insulate the thing... I am just being a jerk.

      Though like any armour, protection at the cost of mobility, and what ratio are you realistically looking at to be effective.

    7. Re:Energy dissipation by pclminion · · Score: 2, Informative

      Force times distance is WORK, not energy. Can you explain the energy of a photon in terms of "force times distance?" Nope.

      What matters in this application isn't energy, but momentum. If the fabric could dissipate ALL the kinetic energy of an explosion/bullet as heat, that would be remarkable but not enough. You can't "dissipate" momentum, regardless of what crazy cool materials you come up with.

      In the case of a blast shield covering a window, the strength of the fabric against tearing will allow it to transfer the momentum of the explosive blast to the structure of the building instead of allowing it to blow in through the window. But that only works because the fabric is anchored to the building. Wearing such a fabric will prevent debris from penetrating your body but it will not protect you from the concussive force of an explosion or the raw momentum of a bullet.

      People have died from internal injuries after being shot while wearing a bullet proof vest. The bullet was "stopped" in a sense, in that it didn't actually ENTER the victim's body but the momentum still kills.

    8. Re:Energy dissipation by Spacepup · · Score: 2, Informative

      These materials seem to behave in similar ways as olivene (and some pyroxene's). The chemical bonds bend in certain ways when force is applied in a prefered direction.

      And remember, energy dissapation is the sum of all those bonds moving in response to the force applied. A few hundred billion bonds, just moving a tiny bit each, adds up to a lot of energy.

      Have a tissue, I think your nose must be stuffy.

    9. Re:Energy dissipation by pclminion · · Score: 1

      Who cares if you dissipate the energy. Tell me how you're going to dissipate the momentum. It simply can't be done. Advanced materials can spread momentum out, reducing the pressure of an impact but they CAN NOT reduce the total FORCE of an impact. Unless parts of the armor physical blow away, separate, and fly off carrying bits of momentum with them, you are still going to feel the entire force of impact. I'm not saying these materials are pointless by any means, but it is a basic fact that momentum CAN NOT be "blocked" and you still have do deal with it. No magic armor will protect you against being hit by a locomotive.

    10. Re:Energy dissipation by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      I'm certainly not an expert on damage to the human body, but I imagine getting tossed a 2, 3, or 10 yards backwards from a small improvised explosive device is preferable to having most of you remain in one place and having some or all of a limb go sailing away.

      You're still toast if a train hits you, but I imagine your survivability from lesser impacts goes way up.

    11. Re:Energy dissipation by randyest · · Score: 1

      Why do we need to "dissipate" momentum? Momentum is proportional to mass and velocity. Bullets and fragments from grenades tend to have much less mass than the persons or vehicles they hit. So the velocity change of the target will be minimal and, even if not, who cares? So what if I go flying ten feet or whatever? Sure beats being punctured or ripped into pieces.

      --
      everything in moderation
    12. Re:Energy dissipation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      converted to heat

      OK, so you end up encased in glass. Now what?

    13. Re:Energy dissipation by JohnsonJohnson · · Score: 1

      Force times distance is WORK, not energy.

      They are the same thing, (hint what are the units of work)

      Can you explain the energy of a photon in terms of "force times distance?"

      Sure the energy in a photon is equal to the change in momentum imparted to another object times the distance the object traveled while changing momentum. Hard to measure physically but hardly difficult to describe. A simpler description though is that the energy of the photon is the change in energy it produces in an object it is absorbed by. Its momentum is equal to the change in momentum produced in a object it reflects off.

      You can't "dissipate" momentum, regardless of what crazy cool materials you come up with.

      What is that supposed to mean? An object with no momentum has no energy, an object with momentum has kinetic energy so changes in energy are also changes in momentum and vice versa. Actually in special relativity the two are explicitly the same: there's only the energy-momentum four vector which is analogous to the kinematic displacement vector four vector. This removes any confusion about energy and momentum being somehow separate considerations.

    14. Re:Energy dissipation by TheCRAIGGERS · · Score: 1

      With enough mattresses stacked, you can survive anything.

    15. Re:Energy dissipation by HiThere · · Score: 1

      People have been talking about clothes, so I don't think a layer of sand is a good choice.

      How about:
      1) outer layer of kelvar netting (prevent punctures, cuts, etc.)
      2) second layer of "this stuff"
      3) third layer of foam
      4) fourth layer of ?? canvas? kelvar?
      5) fifth layer of spacers. dead air, mainly, with just enough stuff the loft the other layers.
      5.5) Possibly need a layer to spread the impression of the pillars of the spacer stuff, but probably not. (Just make the smaller and more frequent.)
      6) inner layer of something that feels decent against the skin.

      Note that for this to be wearable each layer would need to be fairly thin. But it's armor, so not too thin (or, possibly, multiple layers of this sandwich in different orientations).

      Part of the goal is that the armor should breathe. If it can't, nobody will be able to wear it (unless is comes with it's own air conditioner/air circulation system).

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    16. Re:Energy dissipation by Atragon · · Score: 1

      Each layer stops something else. This layer does not break, so it stops penetration. Make a cell structure of this, fill it with something else, like say SAND, and that pressure wave you were so worried about becomes contained. Two layers of a cell structure like this, with sand in between them, and the entire explosive kinetic energy is contained, converted to heat, deflect out, or otherwise dealt with.

      So, something like a sandbag in other words?

    17. Re:Energy dissipation by Don853 · · Score: 3, Informative

      A 160 grain bullet fired from a 30 caliber rifle at 3000 fps (those are rough numbers, and on the high side) has the same momentum as a 175lb man traveling at .4 fps. Momentum is not an issue.

    18. Re:Energy dissipation by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      What is that supposed to mean? An object with no momentum has no energy, an object with momentum has kinetic energy so changes in energy are also changes in momentum and vice versa. Actually in special relativity the two are explicitly the same: there's only the energy-momentum four vector which is analogous to the kinematic displacement vector four vector. This removes any confusion about energy and momentum being somehow separate considerations.

      It means that, due to conservation of momentum, it is impossible to completely dissipate the kinetic energy and prevent the body within the armor from experiencing the force of the blast. In some ways you do have to consider them separately, because they are different quantities that are conserved in different ways.

      The incoming shrapnel and blast wave (air) have kinetic energy and thus momentum. Energy is a scalar and is conserved, but can change forms. It can be spread out as heat energy in a material, for example. Momentum is a vector which is conserved, and can't be converted into some other form like energy can. So when the blast wave hits the person wearing the armor, the momentum vector of the incoming wave must match the total momentum vectors of the wave + person system after impact. A good deal of that momentum would by necessity be transfered to the person, and that delta-p would mean delta-E.

      The good thing for the person is that thanks to momentum being linear in velocity and kinetic energy being quadratic, and the light air traveling very quickly, the kinetic energy transfered due to conservation of momentum wouldn't be nearly as large as the total kinetic energy of the blast wave. At least relatively. What this would probably mean in practice is that this armor would do a good job of protecting you from a blast and shrapnel that occurred nearby, but if you were literally laying on the bomb when it exploded you'd be tossed in the air and killed even if the armor didn't fail. That's not a very realistic expectation of body armor anyway, though.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    19. Re:Energy dissipation by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 4, Interesting

      OK, now imagine it stretched over titanium-frame or carbon-nanotube-frame body armor. The trick is to create some tension on the material and some distance between it and the body. You need a frame that can take the stresses of the material and the impacts, and combine that with the stopping power of the material.

      Personally though, I'd rather see something like this used in car parts (bumpers, convertible roofs, tires, etc).

    20. Re:Energy dissipation by tholomyes · · Score: 1

      7.) Final layer: Profit!

      --
      When did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? -C. Palahniuk
    21. Re:Energy dissipation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, the pressure that is applied to the flesh from the bullet is much much higher than the pressure exerted from the man. That's why the 175 lb man doesn't break the skin (unless he's Bubba and has a club).

    22. Re:Energy dissipation by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Thats incredible.

      I'd have thought that a grenade going off underneath something thats not apparently very heavy and which doesn't get shredded by the explosion would have been thrown up into the air a bit.

      But it doesn't; the dummy in the vest just sort of wobbles about a bit when the grenade goes off. In fact it hardly moves.

      So I ask you, was that a *real* live grenade or some kind of down-graded grenade?

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    23. Re:Energy dissipation by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Shock waves are an issue however. I used to stick bits of iron powder into a solid mass 1 inch diameter by 0.5 inch thick by firing very lightweight projectiles (PVC plastic) at it at mach 1. If the shock wave is not prevented from getting there living tissue would become mush even with low momentum impacts.

    24. Re:Energy dissipation by Lunzo · · Score: 1

      That will never work. You forgot the most important layer: ??????

    25. Re:Energy dissipation by whitehatlurker · · Score: 1
      You're not trying to say that you're a physicist are you?

      The idea isn't to dissipate energy. The article indicates this. The idea is to have a fabric which does not fail (tear, rupture, break) under the blast. The energy from the blast is converted to elastic strain energy in the fabric, the "force times distance" part you mention. When the blast is over, the fabric releases the strain energy as kinetic energy, displacing air and potentially any debris that collected on the fabric. Dissipation would mean a process like plastic deformation or fabric tearing or friction.

      While the constitutive relationship (FYI) of the fabric would be of interest, it's not essential to understanding this.

      --
      .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
    26. Re:Energy dissipation by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      They put something heavy on top to weigh it down, no?

    27. Re:Energy dissipation by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      Oh no, the Imperial seems to be winning! Let's see can Metric match that, I very much doubt it.

      A: "10 gram bullet travelling 1km/s has same momentum as 100kg man travelling 0.1m/s".

      http://ofb.net/~jlm/oracle/oracle.365.10

      Sorry :-)

    28. Re:Energy dissipation by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      They put something heavy on top to weigh it down, no?

      It didn't look very heavy to me. Looked more as if it was to hold it in place so that the dummy wouldn't fall off of the grenade.

      I know nothing about the explosive force produced by a grenade though so maybe they don't actually pack the sort of punch that would send someone flying through the air like I imagine.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  6. Silly putty by techpawn · · Score: 1

    objects that actually get fatter the more you stretch them. The concept makes my head want to explode, but when you see it in action it actually makes sense.
    what like a cartoon character on silly putty? They get fatter as I stretch it...
    --
    Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
  7. Luckily.. by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 3, Funny

    The concept makes my head want to explode
    ..we now know how to prevent that.
    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  8. Car bomb blast? by Huntr · · Score: 1

    Is this a new measuring unit, a la Libraries of Congress? Or are we to assume all car bomb blasts are equal?

    The fabric sounds great, but there's not much in those citations other than the basic mechanics of the material.

    1. Re:Car bomb blast? by Nevermine · · Score: 1

      It seems the assumption is that they are measured in multiples.

    2. Re:Car bomb blast? by Huntr · · Score: 1

      Certainly. But, the OKC bombing was only 1 "car." Could this fabric, in sufficient quantities or w/e is necessary, withstand a force equal to a U-Haul full of fertilizer?

      I don't mean to sound negative, though. This is really interesting from a nuts n' bolts point of view and would be great if it could help save some lives. I'd just like to know more about it.

    3. Re:Car bomb blast? by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 1

      I imagine if the fabric was woven into the entire structure of the building, between all floors, in all the walls etc, I suspect the dmg could have been greatly reduced by a bomb of that size. Maybe it could even act as insulation, that would help reduce building costs by using 1 substance instead of multiple substances between walls and such.

      --
      I came, I conquered, I coredumped
  9. Is there an SI-unit? by Nevermine · · Score: 1

    What is the SI-unit for car bomb explosion?

    1. Re:Is there an SI-unit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Corleones?

    2. Re:Is there an SI-unit? by athakur999 · · Score: 4, Funny

      It is based on the amount of reward you are promised in the afterlife for using the car bomb. A "standard" car blast has a strength of 7 dekavirgins.

      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    3. Re:Is there an SI-unit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Corleones for the win.

    4. Re:Is there an SI-unit? by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

      Too bad you're AC. That's brilliant.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    5. Re:Is there an SI-unit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      More revisionist metric nonsense.

      The "standard" car blast is called the akar. One akar is equal to six fekar, and one fekar is equal to twelve virgins. These are long standing traditional measures which are much more natural when planning real attacks, by the way... some of us actually do stuff instead of just talking about it. By all rights, even when using your annoying metric system, a "standard" car blast would be 7.2 of your dekavirgins. However the Car Bomb Unit Naming Institute is overrun by weak-willed idiots who have never blown themselves up to smite their enemy in their lives, and have chosen to spit on the face of this holy tradition by rounding the number to a more "convenient" value. As if any of these guys has ever worn an explosive belt or carried a dead-man's switch. It makes me sick, I tell you.

    6. Re:Is there an SI-unit? by nobodymk2 · · Score: 1

      I suppose if there are kilotons and megatons you could measure it in megagrams and gigagrams. But then again who wants to use TNT anymore?

    7. Re:Is there an SI-unit? by vegiVamp · · Score: 1


      Why does nobody ever bother to ask the virgin's age and sex before blowing themselves up ? Potential for quite a few nasty surprises, there...

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
  10. Who read... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Zetix is a fabric so strong it will resist multiple car bomb blasts without bricking.

  11. I'm confused. by Gigiya · · Score: 5, Funny
    From TFA:

    The fabrics can ... be deployed in containment systems, military tents, ballistic mosquito nets and body armor, a $2 billionpret-a-porter market.
    What?
    1. Re:I'm confused. by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      It's just the countermeasure against the Ballistic Mosquito Gun 3000...

      ...nothing to see here, move along!

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    2. Re:I'm confused. by Yetihehe · · Score: 1

      In hot humid climates mosquitos often go ballistic to pierce through nets. Often first mosquito doesn't survive it, but it is to preserve the whole species.

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
    3. Re:I'm confused. by Bob-taro · · Score: 1

      I feel generous today so I googled it for you:

      • "pret - a - porter" means "off the shelf" clothing, as opposed to custom made. It looks like they forgot to space between the words. "pret-a-porter" was in italics, but (since this IS slashdot) you may have been using lynx or w3m and not seen that. If you have a graphical browser, the pictures are very helpful at understanding the fabric structure.
      • I don't know what a "ballistic mosquito net" is, but a "ballistic net" is a net that can be "shot" at something. I'm wondering if this is some military term that has nothing to do with mosquitoes.
      --
      Prov 9:8 Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
    4. Re:I'm confused. by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      They have Ballistic Mosquitoes in Thailand-- they are the ones that carry Dengue Fever.

      They are about the size of a 747, and you can clearly see their tail numbers. Well, almost.

      (Aedes aegypti)

    5. Re:I'm confused. by jdgeorge · · Score: 1

      The fabrics can ... be deployed in containment systems, military tents, ballistic mosquito nets and body armor, a $2 billionpret-a-porter market.
      What?

      I think Roy Spire would suggest this caution is justified.
    6. Re:I'm confused. by cephyn · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's to protect against ICBMs - you know, Inter-Continental Ballistic Mosquitoes. All the major superpowers have them.

      What's so confusing about that?

      --
      Moo.
    7. Re:I'm confused. by wattrlz · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that just thought of a mosquito net that could stop bullets? Say you're holed up overnight in an old cinderblock house with louvered windows and bars on the doors somewhere the tropics. Now you can kill two birds with one stone keeping out mosquitoes and stray rifle rounds at the same time ensuring a restful and secure night's sleep. If someone hasn't already, I'm so patenting that.

    8. Re:I'm confused. by jagdish · · Score: 1

      Mosquito hunting is a very popular sport. The wings of a fully grown male mosquito can in fact fetch anything up to point eight of a penny on the open market.

    9. Re:I'm confused. by jandoedel · · Score: 1

      So it's useful for hunting mosquito's?
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0O9p8GCM1Q

    10. Re:I'm confused. by couchslug · · Score: 1

      The idea isn't absurd.
      Tents and mosquito netting that stop shrapnel yet allow ventilation would be very useful. Tent and fabric shelters are popular because they compact well for transport and cover many square meters when erected. If a rocket or mortar goes off in tent city, shrapnel-retarding fabrics could save lives.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    11. Re:I'm confused. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need mosquito netting in some places in the world, so if you can get one that also has ballistic properties, then you can have better prepared military troops in jungles.

      Captcha: wincing : how appropriate :)

    12. Re:I'm confused. by jonadab · · Score: 1

      Ballistic mosquito nets are designed to protect against not just ordinary, calmly-rational mosquitos, but also against mosquitos that are going all ballistic on you. Which they tend to do when they have you severely outnumbered, because they're afraid you won't have enough blood to go around.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  12. They decided to name it Zetix since by Provocateur · · Score: 4, Funny

    'iddqd' was unpronounceable and make it less marketable except to some Eastern Bloc countries

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    1. Re:They decided to name it Zetix since by JeepFanatic · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The predecessor for that was known as "ilm" but it robbed you of all your points whenever it was used.

    2. Re:They decided to name it Zetix since by enos · · Score: 1

      Q in Slavic languages tends to appear only in words of foreign origin.

      --
      boldly going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse
    3. Re:They decided to name it Zetix since by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Would that mean that it can protect against a BFG9K?

    4. Re:They decided to name it Zetix since by ringm000 · · Score: 1

      Moreover, in some Slavic languages Q just never appears, as this letter does not exist in Cyrillic alphabet.

  13. won't protect the contents by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
    Just because the material doesn't break or tear, doen't mean that whatever is inside it won't. If you make body armour from it, you could still get your head blown off. Likewise if you make a tent from it, any explosion outside could still damage or kill anyone inside, simply because the material is flexible and will bend when hit by shrapnel.

    The best thing to do with it would be to make bags that you can use to contain an explosive device rather than try to protect people with it.

    Afterthought: if it's so tough, how do you machine it?

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:won't protect the contents by ChronoReverse · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With scissors I'd presume. Slow moving sharp edges should cut through this easily.

      Hopefully bullets and shrapnel, being fast moving, won't.

    2. Re:won't protect the contents by LiENUS · · Score: 1

      Afterthought: if it's so tough, how do you machine it?

      It's not actually all that though, just good at absorbing energy thats already pretty dispersed

    3. Re:won't protect the contents by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 1

      Just don't ever fire a lasgun at it.

    4. Re:won't protect the contents by a+whoabot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "The slow blade penetrates the shield."

    5. Re:won't protect the contents by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      In a world of slow-moving shield-fighters, the man with the lasgun is king.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    6. Re:won't protect the contents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "if it's so tough, how do you machine it?"

      Most of these materials protect against impact by stretching. They do not stop one from cutting them.

      This also means the sharper the shrapnel the more likely the material will fail. Basic physics.

    7. Re:won't protect the contents by Boomer_Zz · · Score: 1

      You could use it to redirect a shaped charge more efficiently too, making a more powerful explosive.

    8. Re:won't protect the contents by idontgno · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In a world of slow-moving shield-fighters, the man with the lasgun is dead, along with anyone within a several-kilometer radius. Pseudo-atomic fusion detonations are bad that way.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    9. Re:won't protect the contents by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      If you're holding the lasgun, the guy with the shield doesn't have the option of assuming you won't go through with it.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    10. Re:won't protect the contents by TheLink · · Score: 1

      The stupid man with the lasgun is dead. The smart man launching the lasgun "mortar/missile" at the shields would be laughing his head off at vaporized stupid shield fighters. Those shields would be useless as shields if people in those books actually used their brains.

      The book was a good read but was a bit of a stretch.

      Getting back to topic - books are auxetic too the more you stretch them the thicker they get :).

      --
    11. Re:won't protect the contents by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Use the lasgun as the bullet and fire that "bullet" from very far away or from behind something that can withstand the resulting explosion.

      --
    12. Re:won't protect the contents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The fast blade penetrates the flesh. "

      FIXED

  14. Hmph by moogied · · Score: 0, Troll
    I fail to see any practical use of this.

    Bomb Proof, Bullet Proof, Nuke proof, alien proof, hatred proof, etc etc.

    Why don't these companies try and make something that just injects intilligence into the idiots creating these situations where it's required.

    --
    So basically, -1 troll/offtopic is really slashdots way of saying "I hate that you thought of something before me."
    1. Re:Hmph by mcspoo · · Score: 1

      Because sometimes bravery is required from your fellow man, yes? Bravery sometimes requires you place yourself in harms way for the good of others. Didn't you listen to Spock? if we can provide brave men, women, dogs, cat, goldfish, and mosquitoes with better equipment to protect them when forced to engage in an exercise of bravery, well... I'm all for that.

    2. Re:Hmph by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Why don't these companies try and make something that just injects intilligence into the idiots creating these situations where it's required. Are you sure they didn't? I can see the story now...
      PharmCo Exec 1: Why aren't our new smart pills getting rid of all the idiots?
      PharmCo Exec 2: Maybe we shouldn't have put them in idiot-proof packaging...
      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    3. Re:Hmph by owlstead · · Score: 1

      They did, but the testers kept getting shot when they started to do field testing.

    4. Re:Hmph by psychicsword · · Score: 0, Troll

      We are developing things that may help you out in that situation, It is call stem cell research, too bad those same idiots are preventing its development.

  15. Who's gonna by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    be the first to be called hot pants for wearing this stuff?

  16. You've clearly never heard of... by ackthpt · · Score: 1

    ballistic mosquito nets

    You've clearly never read Dave Barry and his reference to armor-piercing stealth mosquitoes.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  17. I can't help but wonder... by ricebowl · · Score: 1

    ...that now we have a material to help reduce casualties from explosive force, bullets and shrapnel, how long will it be 'til our own agencies devise means to negate its defensive potential in order to increase the potential damage inflicted on the opposing force.

    1. Re:I can't help but wonder... by DocturKnowles · · Score: 1

      GRRRRR! This is NOT a type of armor. It will NOT protect against anything except compressed air. Not even Kevlar can stop the shrapnel from a bomb because shrapnel tends to have sharp edges that slice through Kevlar as if it were cotton. All they'd have to do is put a couple of razor blades in the charge and this "advance"...isn't. And truth be told: there is not a personal armor in existance that will protect against the sheer force of an explosion. Kevlar is flexible. DragonScales are flexible. A metal box may retain its shape but it would be like placing a crystal cup in a shoe box and shaking it around. That box may be fine. Do you expect the cup to be?

    2. Re:I can't help but wonder... by pete.com · · Score: 1, Informative

      Funny, I was hit with shrapnel while wearing Kevlar and am still breathing. If I had not been wearing it i would never have survived. The secret to armor is layers, it may get through the first few layers but it isn't going to slice through the whole suit. The flexibility actually helps to protect you by dispersing the energy across a larger area than the surface of the object striking you. Your cup / box analogy is the stupidest example you could have thought of. How about adding a form fitting cushion around the cup and then hitting it. The box and cushion will absorb a lot of energy (by flexing) before the cup breaks.

    3. Re:I can't help but wonder... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Funny, I was hit with shrapnel while wearing Kevlar and am still breathing.

      My grandfather got hit with shrapnel to the kidney without wearing any kind of armor whatsoever, and he's still breathing. In fact he's been hit with pretty much everything imaginable, even a wrecking ball - yes, the kind used to know down buildings - to the head, and is still breathing. Lucky me, I inherited tought genes ;).

      The secret to armor is layers, it may get through the first few layers but it isn't going to slice through the whole suit.

      While this is true, it is also irrelevant. The summary talks about car bomb blasts, which in turn (at least to me) imply civilians. Car bomb goes off right under you, at which point you'd need so many layers of armor that it would restrict your movement a lot, and there's no way people are wearing that in their everyday lifes. And of course a soldier needs freedom of movement too, on top of which I'd imagine that wearing lots of layers of armor and performing constant physical action would lead to overheating pretty soon.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    4. Re:I can't help but wonder... by Boogaroo · · Score: 1

      This may not be useful for your everyday Joe on the street, but it'll probably be used as another layer for the Nomex bomb suits they already wear while disarming a bomb.

    5. Re:I can't help but wonder... by spikedvodka · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This may not be useful for your everyday Joe on the street, but it'll probably be used as another layer for the Nomex bomb suits they already wear while disarming a bomb. You mean those suits that all they're good for is to make the remains more identifiable...

      If you're sitting on top of a bomb when it goes off, I don't care what you're wearing... you're toast. If I have to disarm a bomb... I'm either going to succeed, fail & buy the farm, or know I'm going to fail, and walk away. don't give me a suit that keeps me from running if I have to, give me my dykes, a voltmeter, a pair of good running shoes, and a black T-Shirt with big yellow letters:
      Bomd Squad Technician - If you see me running, try to catch up!
      --
      I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    6. Re:I can't help but wonder... by TheLink · · Score: 1

      I'll cover the bomb with a huge multilayered armored tent made of this fabric (and other stuff) and then blow up the bomb (or disarm/document it with a robot).

      If you can stop people from breaking into a car without triggering an alarm, you can stop people from disarming a car bomb without the bomb going off.

      --
  18. Re:everything made (up) by man fails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You were made by man....there u also phail.

    And if u phail ur statement phails...and if it phails then all man creations dont phail... then u dont....oh shit...

  19. Bomb proof vests? by dada21 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If we leave people alone, we don't have to worry about bomb proof vests.

    I see tremendous opportunity in a peaceful market for this product: paintball vests, snowboarding and motorcycling clothing, maybe even using it in some kind of car bumper to reduce damage or absorb impact, especially if it could expand sideways during a collision.

    I'd also like a blanket so when my cat goes psycho and jumps on the bed, she's repelled with great force.

    1. Re:Bomb proof vests? by chiph · · Score: 1

      If we leave people alone, we don't have to worry about bomb proof vests.

      And if they won't leave you alone?

      Remember, they have free will too.

      Chip H.
    2. Re:Bomb proof vests? by tkdtaylor · · Score: 1

      I'd also like a blanket so when my cat goes psycho and jumps on the bed, she's repelled with great force.
      That right there almost covered my screen in coffee.Too bad there's no +5 funny and insightful
  20. Why, I also have something that gets fatter by iamacat · · Score: 0, Redundant

    when stretched. At least now I am assured of a proper prothesis should it become damaged.

  21. I claim prior art by spun · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is hardly new. I've had a something that gets fatter the more you stretch it for as long as I can remember.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:I claim prior art by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "I've had a something that gets fatter the more you stretch it for as long as I can remember."

      But I'm guessing your partner doesn't see the end result as a bomb blast - more like a squib.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    2. Re:I claim prior art by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0

      So it turns out that this so-called news has been...ehm, fabricated?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:I claim prior art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is hardly new. I've had a something that gets fatter the more you stretch it for as long as I can remember. Man-boobs don't count. ;)
    4. Re:I claim prior art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cannot patent a body part and the fabric does not need porn to function.

    5. Re:I claim prior art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, some people DO manage to get hard-ons without having porn involved. Its just a smaller demographic on slashdot.

    6. Re:I claim prior art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, if only you could put that to some sort of practical use. One that won't get you slapped by the women you demonstrate it to, though.

  22. Garbage by spleen_blender · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "All of this is thanks to a property that apparently defies the laws of physics"

    These kind of statements are so frustrating to me...

    1. Re:Garbage by StickyWidget · · Score: 1
      *snicker*

      Good point, if it "apparently" defies the laws of physics, then it DOES defy the laws of physics. I guess the writer should have said something like "All of this is thanks to a property that appears like it defies the laws of physics, but doesn't."

      ~Sticky
      /Grammar Nazi
      //Withheld my Karma Bonus, my post doesn't deserve it.

    2. Re:Garbage by volsung · · Score: 1

      Yes, this phrase is almost always used when the writer actually means that a result "defies my intuition about the physical world" which is not the same as "defies the laws of physics." If our physical intuition always matched the actual behavior of the universe, then it would not have taken us hundreds of years to figure out the things we now know.

      Observations which do not match up with our best understanding of the universe do happen (and are how we improve science), but they are not nearly as frequent as the articles which use this phrase. :)

    3. Re:Garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Laws of physics != Law of nature.

    4. Re:Garbage by syphax · · Score: 1


      I agree. Their explanation shows that they are just taking advantage of differences in stiffness between fiber materials. Kind of like differences in thermal expansion allow a bimetallic strip to bend with temperature. It's one of those ideas that is so simple you are left wondering "why didn't I think of that?"

      --
      Simple Unexpected Concrete Credible Emotional Stories
    5. Re:Garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 Pedantry, -1 Unhelpful

    6. Re:Garbage by kwerle · · Score: 1

      Huh. I find it is usually used when describing something that is rigged.

    7. Re:Garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, cork has that property as well. It's why they work.

    8. Re:Garbage by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Although I agree with you in that these materials obey the laws of physics in a very obvious sort of way (analogous to an accordion), we *have* made discoveries that do indeed contradict our current understanding of Physics (at the time, of course...)

      The double-slit experiment *certainly* disobeyed the laws of physics as they were known before the development of quantum theory. There was absolutely no way to even vaguely explain the results using classical physics.

      If you went up to Isaac Newton, and stated the Hesienberg Uncertainty principle to him, he'd probably write you off as being delusional as well.... the fact that one cannot simultaneously observe the momentum and location of a particle (to a certain degree) is downright counterintuitive.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    9. Re:Garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hyped buzzwords and phrases like "Defies the laws of physics" are why /. is losing popularity. It just makes /. sound haughty.

    10. Re:Garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel your pain. We both know, the fact is that helical auxetic substances follow the laws of physics to the letter.

    11. Re:Garbage by Andrew+Cady · · Score: 1

      Apparent \Ap*par"ent\, a. [F. apparent, L. apparens, -entis, p. pr. of apparere. See {Appear}.]

      3. Appearing to the eye or mind (distinguished from, but not necessarily opposed to, true or real); seeming; as the apparent motion or diameter of the sun.

  23. Brand name "Mithril" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just something we're kicking around at the office. It has a nice "ring" to it, don't you think?

  24. if this were a towel by joeytmann · · Score: 3, Funny

    I would never leave home without it.

    --
    Insert funny smart-ass comment here.
    1. Re:if this were a towel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if this were a towel... I would never leave home without it.
      Oh c'mon...you're posting on Slashdot. You rarely leave home except when your mom makes you, and you can't remember where she keeps the clean towels anyways.
    2. Re:if this were a towel by joeytmann · · Score: 1

      Obviously you didn't get the joke/reference to a very popular Slashdot subject.

      --
      Insert funny smart-ass comment here.
  25. Sheets by dr-suess-fan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The sheets in my bed are pretty strong too. Withstands countless dutch-ovens despite the protests of my wife.

  26. This will not stop all damage however by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Fabric can resist damage - but the concussion waves (especially lethal in water explosions) will still cause damage.

    As an example, there are current studies on the link between multiple concussive explosion attacks on soldiers - a higher proportion of US soldiers in Iraq may in fact develop Parkinsonian diseases as a result of multiple exposures to blasts from car bombs and other similar attacks.

    So, this will help with shrapnel and some damage, but will not solve the total risk factor.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:This will not stop all damage however by smchris · · Score: 1

      Yeah, like the British car reviewers who ran one of those Euro two-seaters into a concrete barrier at 70 mph by remote control. "See, the cage is intact! Of course, your organs would be liquified."

      If we're wrong, it could be good news for organ banks. Still doesn't do much for the head and neck I imagine.

    2. Re:This will not stop all damage however by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      That doesn't change the fact that I'd still rather have this stuff than not. It's not a magic bullet, but it's still freakin' cool, and covers a lot of stuff. Do you also drink sewer water since the water from your sink isn't guaranteed to be perfectly safe?

    3. Re:This will not stop all damage however by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      If given the choice between hot steel inside my rib cage and Parkinson's disease?

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    4. Re:This will not stop all damage however by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Look, I used to be a combat field engineer myself. I've probably been exposed to a lot of blasts to a level where I'm myself at risk from Parkinson's disease ... but I was trying to say that while this may help, it does not reduce all risks from explosion, especially the concussive wave and other impacts (e.g. most people don't remember to open their mouths during explosions and have higher damage as a result).

      But, sure, it's a help.

      And there are pills for water, by the way.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    5. Re:This will not stop all damage however by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      a higher proportion of US soldiers in Iraq may in fact develop Parkinsonian diseases as a result of multiple exposures to blasts from car bombs and other similar attacks.

      Oh goodie. So not only is the war itself more difficult for us to see the effects of at home (yes it's on tv but that's abstract, in times past you knew there was a war on because, e.g., your car dealership had no cars to sell because all the factories were making warplanes and other such every-day effects), it's also going to be harder to see the effects of the war on the returning vets.

      That said, I'm all for our soldiers experiencing concussion damage versus being dismembered. And in contradiction to what I just said, there are plenty of visibly maimed soldiers returning from this war to remind us that it was in fact real. ;_;

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    6. Re:This will not stop all damage however by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      That said, I'm all for our soldiers experiencing concussion damage versus being dismembered. And in contradiction to what I just said, there are plenty of visibly maimed soldiers returning from this war to remind us that it was in fact real. ;_;

      I agree. I see them every week or two when I'm at the VA hospital. And, as a former soldier, I probably know more of them than most people do - a few of my friends are partially disabled from Iraq or Afghanistan service.

      It's an improvement. But it does not reduce all the impacts.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  27. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally, I can have an outfit that is safe from Dell laptops and LG Cell Phones!

  28. Habla usted Taco Bell by zappepcs · · Score: 1

    Explosion proof underwear with the Taco Bell dog on the back? Or is that just me thinking odd?

  29. Video of Auxetic material by jupitersspot · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nice video showing and explaining the phenomenon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdkYuLsT7Sc

    1. Re:Video of Auxetic material by Thirdsin · · Score: 1

      Now, if i watch this video... Is it giving me "correct" information? or is it another one of those "youtube misinformation" vidoes!!!

      --
      No words of wisedom here.
  30. Wow - a refreshing reminder by psbrogna · · Score: 1

    I tend to forget that the "Known Universe" is a subset of the Universe & it's "laws." This materials work, and things like electron tunneling, hypersonic fluid dynamics, etc., serve as an effective reminder.

  31. Chinese Finger Traps? by darthservo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just letting my mind wander - were a Chinese Finger Trap made from this material, would it let go of your fingers as you applied tension?

    --

    Prove it.

  32. clarification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i.e. wears out, breaks. that would include man'kind'. not necessarily as a race ('made' by the creators), although we seem determined to cause that too.

  33. Looking forward to civilian applications of this.. by ndykman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd be thrilled to have a motorcycle jacket and armour made better by this stuff.

  34. Then the PR blurb is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (big suprise!) because they are talking about using it on windows (window breaks, or you have 1/2 inch of padding and this thing, which isn't "this thing" as they imply.

    If you've got 10m of air between you and a frag grenade, a good duffle coat will protect you. We don't call it "grnade resistant duffle coat". This is just a puncture proof (to some level) material you can use to retain the physical integrity of whatever buffer you are using between you and the shrapnel.

    And that's a whole different idea.

  35. How about by Besna · · Score: 1

    Likelihood of survival, given only one choice? Gun versus vest. One guy with a bat--probably the gun. Lots of guys with guns--the vest.

  36. "Defies the laws of physics" by cephyn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I really hate that saying. It makes it sound like physics is a religion, where scientists have decided "that's how things work, and that's that" - which is ridiculous. If something "defies" physics, then the laws of physics change to accommodate reality. That's how science works - it comes about based on observation.

    Nothing can defy the laws of physics - because physics describes how things work.

    --
    Moo.
    1. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      The summary should have said "appears to defy" instead of "apparently defies".

    2. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by wattrlz · · Score: 1

      I think TFA meant it in a more figurative tone. Kinda like how one of those nifty magnetic floating globes, " seemingly defies the laws of physics [because it's apparently unaffected by gravity]" even though its operation is based on well known physical principles you could describe in five minutes.

    3. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by zenpickle · · Score: 1

      I suppose it should have. On the other hand I had no trouble figuring out what they meant. This is no sloppier than most of what we read.

    4. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      Physics describes how things //should// work.

    5. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Chuck Norris can defy the laws of physics.

      Also, he can slam revolving doors, lead a horse to water, AND make it drink, and eat Captain Crunch cereal without hurting the roof of his mouth.

    6. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by value_added · · Score: 1

      Physics describes how things //should// work.

      Now you're trying to defy logic.

    7. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by H0NGK0NGPH00EY · · Score: 1

      Which is precisely why I refer to them as the "suggestions of physics."

      --
      Do not read this sig.
    8. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Oh man, that is so funny! Chuck Norris made so many tough guy movies and shows, and he is a real life martial artist. I can see where it would be fun to just exaggerate his abilities beyond what's realistic, to the point of comic absurdity.

      Gosh, we need to get on this. Maybe create some big lists of overstatements about Chuck Norris' superhuman abilities and amazing feats. We could post them all over the web. I think this might really catch on!

      I have to try this. Let's see here... Chuck Norris is so strong, he could pick up a car with his little finger. Chuck Norris can eat just one. Chuck Norris once belched, and he caused like an earthquake or something. Chuck Norris doesn't use milk on his cereal, he uses raw meat.

      Ok, those aren't the best, but you get the idea. They should be funny and absurd, and definitely should feature Chuck Norris doing things he couldn't do in real life. (Except Chuck Norris can do things in real life that Chuck Norris can't do in real life... get it?) LOL

      I can't wait to see where this new form of comedy takes us!

    9. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by steelfood · · Score: 1

      The laws of physics can be defied. So-called laws are concrete, immutable statements. If a statement is wrong or has an exception case and no other explanation exists that would also be consistent with the existing law, then the law has been defied, and it must be changed to accomodate the new observation.

      However, physics (and all other sciences) itself cannot be defied. Nor do the laws of physics constitute the entirety physics. They are only phemenon that, based on our observations, hold true at every level in every situation.

      Nonetheless, I'm not quite sure which law has been defied in this case...

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    10. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 1

      Jesus, I wish people would do this for Steve Ballmer chair jokes... and pretty much any other joke that is funny the first few times but gets REALLY FUCKING OLD after more than that.

      Maybe then we might see some funnies, rather than "CHUCK NORRISS STOPP TIEM"/"STEVE BALLMER FROW CHAYER"/"CAN I HASS SHIT JOEK NOW" all the friggin time.

    11. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      I like your post, but re-reading it with the Simpson's Comic Book Store guy's voice in my head made it three times as funny.

      Try it, you'll see.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    12. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Physics itself is dynamic. If it is found to be contrary to the observed phenomenon then it must be changed. A Law of Physics is something so uniform in it's application to the observed properties of our reality that we grant it the status of a "Law". Very insightful observation.

      I would take it further saying that there are not even "Laws" of physics, but only highly repeatable tests that conform to a theory. I believe that even gravity itself is only a theory about an observable property of our reality that is held to be true for as long as humanity has existed or can observe past phenomenon (astrology and astrophysics). That does not mean it is true everywhere at all points in time.

      In my own humble example you can take 4 sentient beings that experience a collective reality at 4 different speeds. Introduce a strobe light and you have:

      1) The Law of Darkness. It was dark in the beginning, it is dark now, as it shall always be so. This being lives in a cycle of darkness.
      2) The Law of Light. It was light in the beginning, it is light now, as it shall always be so. This being lives in a cycle of light.
      3) The Law of the Great Cycle. The light chases the darkness, the darkness chases the light. The Great Cycle is evident in all of our lives. This being lives during multiple cycles of the strobe.

      The 4th being perceives reality in a way that the cycles blend into a single observation. Much like 30 fps can fool a human into believing that they are seeing a moving picture, this being cannot tell that there is a cycle at all, and their Law would be exactly the same as the Law of Light.

      All 4 beings are correct, even though their perceptions are not complete. Their realities leave out some information that could completely define their "Total Reality"

      Although their "Laws" will conform to their observations for the lifetime of their species, none of them are %100 correct. Until we actually perceive all of existence at the same time (a closed system), we can never truly declare laws that can govern interactions between known phenomenon.

      We can only be reasonably certain of a result based on prior observation (99.99999999....%). Much like my girlfriend giving me a universe's worth of shit when I leave the toilet seat up and she falls in at 2am. Now I think that observable property of our relationship will last longer then gravity.......

    13. Re:"Defies the laws of physics" by Andrew+Cady · · Score: 1

      The two are only alternative forms of the same root word...

  37. laws of physics by Jookey · · Score: 1

    This does not defy the laws of physics. Poisson's ratio varys between .5 and -1. Outside of those bounds and you violate conservation of energy.

    http://silver.neep.wisc.edu/~lakes/PoissonIntro.html

  38. But... How many Courics by belloc1 · · Score: 0

    If they made underwear out of this, I wonder how many Courics it could hold.

    1. Re:But... How many Courics by statemachine · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry. You've made a reference to South Park, which shows your (mental?) old age. To be hip and cool with the current /. crowd, you need to refer to xkcd or penny arcade online comic strips. Dilbert is also too old-school as it describes a work environment that is foreign to the new crop. Even understanding and correctly using "all your base" is falling out of fashion. Please spout nonsensical lines from obscure sources without further explanation. You are not guaranteed a Funny mod, but you will hide your age and fit right in.

      The cake is a lie!

    2. Re:But... How many Courics by Headw1nd · · Score: 2, Funny

      Penny Arcade? Whatever, gramps.

    3. Re:But... How many Courics by statemachine · · Score: 1

      Get off my thread!

  39. you just proved your own stupidity by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    a few things your intellect hasn't realized yet:

    1. menace comes from smart and ill-intentioned people as well as just dumb people
    2. that tools of war are used by men engaging the defense from those with bad intentions just as much as it is used by those with bad intentions

    thought experiment for you: a lunatic comes into town with a samurai sword and starts slashing people. reference recent news from omaha nnebraska if you think this scenario is not a constant danger throughout human existence

    1. in society #1, the people calmly stand there, explaining to him, much in your line of thought, of the stupidity of what he is doing. shortly before their jugulars are slashed. the whole town is wiped out. also wiped out with them, is the philosophy of nonviolence

    2. in society #2, as soon as the guy raises his sword, a common townsfolk raises his sword, and the only blood spilled is that of the lunatic. the philosophy of prudent use of arms survives

    interestingly enough, the philosophy of nonviolence results in more bloodletting and death (scenario #1). paradoxical, but true

    darwinistically speaking, nonviolence is a path to extinction. it sounds really nice, but in the reality of human nature and how human nature plays out, you must, UNFORTUNATELY (see, no warmongering here) have constant use of arms close by, to guard from those with bad intent. you will never stop the creation of people with bad intent in this world. if you respect free will, you respect that every once in awhile, someone somewhere will make a horrible choice, and you must guard against that. i suppose you could disallow free will. that's a certain path to nonviolence: a superfascist state. is that superior in your mind than a free but armed society?

    peace in this world is not maintained by an absence of armament, peace in this world is maintained by a balance of armament, a constant tension, a potential that is released to restore the balance of peace when an imbalance in fair action occurs by bad intentioned individuals in public settings

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:you just proved your own stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All screwed up logic. Non-violence doesnt mean that you cont protect yourself. As a person, non-violence means that you display compassion and good will for others, which is good for any society.

    2. Re:you just proved your own stupidity by demallien2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your reasoning is simplistic in the extreme - you forgot to take into account the opposing scenario:

      In Society 1, a guy gets drunk in a bar, gets agro, and starts taking a swing at his neighbours. They sit on him until he quietens down.

      In Society 2, a guy gets drunk in a bar, gets agro, reaches for his sword, and starts hacking people up until someone manages to finds where they have stashed their own sword to retaliate. Several people die.

      I would submit that this scenario is way more likely than your nutcase with a samurai sword scenario... To back up my assertion, I invite you to consider how well the US fares in terms of number of deaths caused by firearms, compared to countries that seriously restrict access to firearms. That's the real world result of your theory.

    3. Re:you just proved your own stupidity by Frantactical+Fruke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...reference recent news from omaha nnebraska if you think this scenario is not a constant danger throughout human existence...


      The news media only report what is sensational and untypical. And yet the world is full of people who think the news describe the world as it is. You might just as well base your world view on the Guinness Book of World Records.

      Most people throughout history have lived their lives in peace, untouched by violence. I know I have. We don't get mentioned in history or in the news, because we are boring. Violence is the exception, not the rule of human existence. Otherwise, we would still be apes squabbling in caves. You don't build roads or factories with samurai swords or bombs.

      Running amok in the way you describe is originally a Malaysian tradition. A guy loses too much face, snaps, runs around with a knife and the crowd beats him to death. It's a manly way of committing suicide. Recently, these attacks have ended nearly completely in Malaysia: Today, amok-runners get restrained, arrested and sentenced to life in prison - which they apparently don't regard as a cool way to go. Using lethal force on a suicidal maniac means giving him the easy way out.

    4. Re:you just proved your own stupidity by gpuk · · Score: 1

      Just as an aside, I lived in Malaysia for over 5 years and so have an interest in all things Malaysian. Do you have a link or reference where I can read more on the origins of this behaviour? I'm not disputing your claim - just genuinely interested.

    5. Re:you just proved your own stupidity by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "Using lethal force on a suicidal maniac means giving him the easy way out."
      I would rather the Omaha shooter had been given the easy way out, then have those going about their business getting shot.
      Certainly even better would have been if that young man had been caught and arrested so he could have gotten proper treatment and punishment.

      You are correct, most people go through there lives without experiences direct violence, but that doesn't counter the poster argument.

      Oh, and people running amok would kill other people.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:you just proved your own stupidity by Frantactical+Fruke · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I just typed "amok" into Wikipedia. I don't recall where I read of it originally. Looking back at it, that statement about ending amok-running has a scent of colonial superciliousness, which makes it somewhat suspect.

    7. Re:you just proved your own stupidity by Frantactical+Fruke · · Score: 1

      Right now, our way of treating these attacks is fundamentally flawed. By making these shootings global headline news and making the murderers global stars through in-depth articles and documentaries about them, we are encouraging every sidelined lonely little freak to do that to feed his hunger for attention. There should be a rule that these pathetic twerps are never named and always relegated to the back pages. Every day, somewhere on Earth, hundreds of husbands beat their wives to death and tens of thousands beat them into hospital and still women mostly do not feel that marrying is too dangerous. Instead, they fear amok runners, terrorists and rapists in the park, since those get the headlines.

      Amok runners are more irrelevant than falling roof tiles, which kill far more people during any year.

  40. How well will it resist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..getting all gross from masturbating with it?

  41. Re: civilian applications by An+anonymous+Frank · · Score: 1

    Should this be used as safety-wear, like in a full-body suit, then what about the need to *cut-in* to treat an injury or to remove someone from a wreckage (à la jaws-of-life)?

  42. Wow. Perhaps now the Mormons can make by multiplexo · · Score: 1

    their Magic Mormon Underwear out of it thus giving them even higher levels of protection against that which is unholy!

    --
    cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
    1. Re:Wow. Perhaps now the Mormons can make by daddyrief · · Score: 1

      Wow. That was like a train wreck. You want to look away, but just can't. The end was kind of humorous though.

      --
      "Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies." -Thomas Jefferson
  43. Bear proof suit by pranyi · · Score: 1

    I wonder whether if could be used to make a lighter bear proof suit... http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1637-bearproof-suit-to-be-put-to-the-test.html

  44. This would make a great tank cozy by Talinom · · Score: 1

    I can just see it now. Tanks with turbans. Tent bunkers. The list is endless.

    --
    "Giving money and power to governments is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P.J. O'Rourke
  45. Correction.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    For one thing, this won't do anything for bullets (or ninjas).

    Why just go halfway?

    --
    Quack, quack.
  46. Sorry, wrong link.. by msimm · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think you mean this video.

    --
    Quack, quack.
  47. News for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the shrapnel isn't photonic.

  48. Re:Looking forward to civilian applications of thi by NiteShaed · · Score: 3, Funny

    If your motorcycles explode on a regular basis, you may want to reconsider servicing them yourself......

    --
    Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
  49. I don't think it means... by WED+Fan · · Score: 1

    It's clear that some of you never do your own laundry:

    This material is self-sizing (which explains all of the future-worlds where everyone wears the same thing).....the bigger you get (stretching the cloth), the more it expands (so that it fits).

    From About:

    Definition: Sizing is used to make ironing garments [easier]. Sizing is also designed to create shape and dirt resistance. Sizing and Fabric Finishes come in a spray form.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
  50. Guard explosions in my PANTS... by UltimaL337Star · · Score: 1

    Will this prevent STD's?

  51. how fucking cheap is our government? by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    hmm, yes we see that you got blown up, but we still can't replace your flak vest. You'll just have to hope you don't get blown up twice!

    This is dangerous. It's like playing russian roulette with someone's life.

    Great that it withstands multiple explosions, but people don't. How many explosions are you expecting to be in?

    Isn't withstanding one explosion good enough? After the first one, should you really be in a position to get blown up again?

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
    1. Re:how fucking cheap is our government? by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      What if the soldier cannot get back to a place to change his vest? Last summer I ate 4 RPG's before I even got to the next change of socks. That was in a 14 day period where the only restocking we got were airdropped canned tuna and bullets.

      And surprise, yes, governments are cheap. Armored vests are expensive. There isn't exactly a pile of spares just waiting for you to turn your used one in.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    2. Re:how fucking cheap is our government? by joto · · Score: 1

      Great that it withstands multiple explosions, but people don't. How many explosions are you expecting to be in? Isn't withstanding one explosion good enough? After the first one, should you really be in a position to get blown up again?
      I'm sure the fabric will come with a warning label, containing text such as: "WARNING: Explosions are dangerous. Zetix fabrics will normally be able to offer limited protection of equipment from one or more explosions if used according to instructions supplied by Auxetix Inc, but we advice people to stay at a safe distance. Do not use explosives without proper training and certification. There is no warranty on this product. Auxetix Inc can not take responsibility for any damage that occurs as a result of manufacturing faults or wrong use."
    3. Re:how fucking cheap is our government? by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

      what you're doing is far different from what US soldiers are doing.

      You're getting blown up in your own back yard. That's different, You're defending your home.

      US Soldiers are purposely being put in harms way without the appropriate vests.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    4. Re:how fucking cheap is our government? by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      That is a matter of opinion, even if I do happen to share your opinion. The fact remains that there is a time period between the first [ bullet || rpg || grenade || mortar ] and the second. The opportunity to acquire a replacement vest often often does not fall within that time period, be it seconds or hours or even weeks.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  52. Their ONLY reason is to help us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it is, I take it they won't be patenting their results, yes?

    If not, then all we're doing is deciding not to waste time and energy on a "cure" that is too expensive for us to buy.

  53. Cool by iminplaya · · Score: 1

    Does it resist tasers? That's something we need these days.

    --
    What?
  54. Yeah - good thinking by Foolicious · · Score: 1

    Great that it withstands multiple explosions, but people don't. How many explosions are you expecting to be in? Isn't withstanding one explosion good enough? After the first one, should you really be in a position to get blown up again? Yeah - you're totally right. Because after an initial explosion, there'd never EVER be any subsequent explosions before you have time to replace the armor, right?
    --
    Please don't use "umm" or "err" or "erm".
  55. re auxitics by cinnamon+colbert · · Score: 1

    this supposedly novel property , which can be obtained with the right sort of weaving

    reminds me of a story about a famous mathemetician, who after watching his wife knit, goes and thinks for a while, and comes back and says to her, I have mathematically deduced anothe way of knitting....it's called perling dear .. moral is, I bet lots of weavers have known about this for a long time,

  56. Empty Benefit by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

    "Zetix is a fabric so strong it will resist multiple car bomb blasts without breaking."

    Unfortunately the hydraulic shock from the blast, entering primarily through places that can't be covered so you can breathe, will make the wearer into a "hairy bag of strawberry ice cream" (Catch 22). But at least the armor will be intact for the next poor sod to pick it up and put it on.

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    1. Re:Empty Benefit by Auz · · Score: 1

      I'd guess the car bomb blast resistability and the body armour are separate uses.

      --
      =DIVIDE BY CUCUMBER ERROR: REINSTALL UNIVERSE AND REBOOT=
  57. optical illusion by coach-death · · Score: 1

    If you look closely at the pictures associated with the story (and rtfa), and provided on the company website you see something interesting. The fibers don't actually get wider, as they claim, they stay the same size when stretched (measure from top to bottom of the pieces of fabric in the pictures). However, due to the nature of the co-wound materials, pores open up within the fabric, which they claim allows the air associated with blasts to pass through, while preventing shrapnel/debris from passing. They talk about seat-belts etc getting wider, but they show no examples of this behavior.

  58. Probably wouldn't work by j_w_d · · Score: 1

    You want air to circulate through the net. Shoot at something that open and the results are awful. The bullet shreds as it passes through the screen openings and acts like a shotgun load, or at least .22 cal. snake shot.

    --
    ------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
  59. you need displacement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To remove momentum. No deformartion and the whole has to move. Distortion of the material will be passed on to the next layer.
    You.
    Unless you have more armour underneath, which is missed by the PR blurb and makes this

    a. less of a miracle
    b. thicker

  60. sometime in the 24th century by superwiz · · Score: 2, Funny

    Drapes up, captain?

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  61. I wonder... by hoppo · · Score: 1

    If this is the same principle used by inertial dampeners on Federation starships.

  62. Re:FatTY pants by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    "No, uh, I just spilled paint on my lap. Although yes, I *am* quite happy to see you, Ms. Kidman."

    --
    -Styopa
  63. Re:everything made (up) by man fails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    especially gods and assorted other boogeymen of the night.

  64. Society #3 by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Society #3 has done a good job locking up the lunatics as well as policing the borders to make sure "insane" societies don't attack. Because weapons of mass destruction are difficult to get, the few insane individuals who aren't treated or locked up can do little damage. Rates of death from violent means far below that of natural causes, such as cancer, accidents, and heart disease. This allows the society to out compete the neighboring violet countries, due to extended lifespans, greater time for education, and the rule of law allowing for peaceful dispute mediation.

    Looking around, it seems that more and more countries are moving in this direction. I haven't known anyone who died from violent assault, but I've known lots of people who have died of cancer. I know no one who regularly carries a weapon around. The unfortunate part is that this type of society seems to go a bit counter to human nature. Fortunately people are pretty flexible and continue to evolve at a surprisingly fast rate.

  65. Re:Looking forward to civilian applications of thi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd be thrilled to have a motorcycle jacket and armour made better by this stuff.


    Dunno. Imagine you get bounced from your ride and somewhat turned around. You're sliding backwards on your ass, with your legs dragging behind you. The resulting tension causes the pants to expand, sliding off you hips, leaving you to ride the asphalt on your own never before exposed to the sun ass skin. Erroding it right down to the bone.

    Fortunately, you won't have to suffer the embarrassment of ass pimples, cellulitis and the like.
  66. So the chemical bonds are like a shoelace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the chemical bonds are like a shoelace that gets wider as it gets more worn?

  67. Disperses the engergy where?? by madbawa · · Score: 1

    IF the fabric absorbs the energy, it has to get rid of it in some way. Assuming a person is wearing a suit made of this fabric, the energy of the explosion will be passed on to the wearer in which case, the guy/gal will explode inside or melt inside while wearing the damn suit. If not, it will have to be radiated as heat in which case also, the wearer will suffer massive burns.

  68. ... does NOT defy the laws pf physics .... by Snoboo · · Score: 1

    I don't know how this material is going to dissipate the engery, but a negative Poisson's ratio (and thus the reason for something getter fatter the more you strech it) is allowed in certain cases (example: isotropic material - the allowed Poisson's ratio goes from -1 to +0.5; materials with a Poisson's ratio > 0 are common, but materials with a Poisson's ratio 0 are well known e.g. certain foams) and this is not news.

  69. Cork does it by Richard+Kirk · · Score: 1
    Cork has a negative Poisson's ratio. The cells have the same 'Bow tie' shape. I want to make a corkscrew with a tightening screw thread. This should compress the cork, making it narrower, so it comes out more easily.

    Use cork! People are stopping using corks in bottles, and so the Portugese are grubbing up gork groves thousands of years old, and getting EEC grants to plant yuckky stuff like oilseed rape instead. If you can find a neat use for the stuff, you would be saving a bit of history too.

  70. Why you shouldn't read slashdot at work. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    -------
    It is based on the amount of reward you are promised in the afterlife for using the car bomb. A "standard" car blast has a strength of 7 dekavirgins.
    -----
    More revisionist metric nonsense.

    The "standard" car blast is called the akar. One akar is equal to six fekar, and one fekar is equal to twelve virgins. These are long standing traditional measures which are much more natural when planning real attacks, by the way... some of us actually do stuff instead of just talking about it. By all rights, even when using your annoying metric system, a "standard" car blast would be 7.2 of your dekavirgins. However the Car Bomb Unit Naming Institute is overrun by weak-willed idiots who have never blown themselves up to smite their enemy in their lives, and have chosen to spit on the face of this holy tradition by rounding the number to a more "convenient" value. As if any of these guys has ever worn an explosive belt or carried a dead-man's switch. It makes me sick, I tell you.
    -----
    Zetix is a fabric so strong it will resist multiple car bomb blasts without bricking.
    -----
    From TFA:

            The fabrics can ... be deployed in containment systems, military tents, ballistic mosquito nets and body armor, a $2 billionpret-a-porter market.

    What?
    ----------

    Great, first my boss catches me viewing a page with explosions and armed penguins on it, and now I'm going to piss myself in my seat, which I'm rolling around in, and it's past the "I'm just reading the news in the morning" grace hour, plus I've recently been held up in my work by delayed software releases and people using a lifetime's worth of vacation days at once. You guys are so gonna get me fired.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  71. Cow Teats to the rescue by kneemoe · · Score: 1
    --
    My Sig Sucks
  72. Let raw power do the job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big deal those terrorist occupiers still need to absorb over 10 kilowatts of heat and pressure. Penetration or no penetration raw power will do the job.