Slashdot Mirror


US Army To Push X-Files Tech Development

An anonymous reader writes "The US Army is ramping up the development of technology right out of the X-Files; 'making science fiction into reality' as Dr. John Parmentola — Director of their Research and Laboratory Management — puts it. The list of things currently in the works is amazing: regenerating body parts on 'nano-scaffolding,' telepathy through electronic impulses in the scalp, and self-aware virtual photorealistic soldiers that can be deployed in the battlefield through 'quantum ghost imaging.' To test these they want to use them into a massively multiplayer online games like World of Warcraft or Eve online."

37 of 139 comments (clear)

  1. Well... by Loibisch · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'll only believe it when I see it.

    *whistles the X-Files theme*

    1. Re:Well... by Smauler · · Score: 5, Funny

      To test these they want to use them into a massively multi-player online games like World of Warcraft or Eve online.

      There's no science here... they just want to play more games. I can imagine the staff meeting :

      Any ideas how we can get more time off to farm uber gear?
      No sir, all our team are working on high tech projects, sir!
      Any chance we could combine my WoW playing with these "hitec" projects, and everyone will be happy?
      Sir yes sir!

    2. Re:Well... by g0dsp33d · · Score: 4, Interesting

      TED has a decent video on the possibilities of tissue regeneration. Not to difficult to imagine more generalized use soon.

      Not sure how easy it is to turn up the gain but how hard can it be to strap a can-tenna to one of the new mind controlled video game controllers?

      CNN already uses holograms. /snicker

      --
      lol: You see no door there!
  2. Mutually exclusive? by forceman130 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How can a virtual photorealistic soldier also be self-aware?

    --
    Wow, a 7 digit ID - let that be a lesson in the perils of procrastination.
    1. Re:Mutually exclusive? by gijoel · · Score: 5, Funny

      How can a virtual photorealistic soldier also be self-aware?

      Please state the nature of your battlefield emergency.

  3. Oblig by Phrogman · · Score: 3, Funny

    I for one, would like to welcome our new Quantum Ghost Imaging Overlords...

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  4. Fringe by geekoid · · Score: 3, Funny

    X-Files is dead, it's Fringe now. Get up to speed or turn the cite over to someone up a current nerd and geek culture~
    Also
    Dr. John Parmentola is a total villain~ just look at him:
    http://www.nano-dds.com/Pics/Parmentola-Bio.pdf

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Fringe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've watched Fringe. It's garbage.

    2. Re:Fringe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Right, though I think Anna Torv is quite hot in an athletic girl-next-doory sort of way. Of course, they have her gratuitously strip and climb into a tank of water in like, the first or second episode, that's how I know she has a really hot body. And that fringe was utter garbage, granted. But I'll still watch it because, hot.

  5. robots in WOW? by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > To test these they want to use them into a massively multi-player online games like World of Warcraft or Eve online."

    Doesn't that violate the TOS?

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:robots in WOW? by cjfs · · Score: 4, Funny

      Doesn't that violate the TOS?

      I'm sure Blizzard would love to have a higher level of AI for its npcs. It would give the players something to aspire to.

    2. Re:robots in WOW? by aliquis · · Score: 2, Funny

      Blizzard don't negotiate with terrorists :D

  6. Change in administration by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe the director of DARPA typically leaves with a change in administration, and it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case in other such agencies. Then there's the whole change in funding thing that may happen.

    I know a lot of people in the defense research community are a bit nervous now. Be interesting to see what happens after January.

    1. Re:Change in administration by actionbastard · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Be interesting to see what happens after January."

      It's called February.

      --
      Sig this!
    2. Re:Change in administration by actionbastard · · Score: 2, Informative

      "...using 'January' in that context as a metonym."

      I was going for the synecdochal aspect myself.

      --
      Sig this!
  7. Project funding by cjfs · · Score: 5, Funny

    Step 1: Read theoretical physics journal
    Step 2: Claim principles could be adapted to military uses in unrealistic time frames
    Step 3: Profit!

    No ??? even needed.

    1. Re:Project funding by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Step 1: Read theoretical physics journal Step 2: Claim principles could be adapted to military uses in unrealistic time frames Step 3: Profit! No ??? even needed.

      Heh. You're modded "funny", but you're right on the money (so to speak). This is typical [grant|budget|*] fishing behavior. Nobody's department ever gets funded by saying "we think we may be able to develop and field a 15% lighter combat boot in the next 5 years". No, you get money by saying "we are on the verge of being able to make our soldiers capable of three currently humanly impossible things that would have our enemies cowering before us--- if only we had the funding..."

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  8. Re:Obama won't stand for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    He said all programs that were useless would be cut.... now.. put up or shut up Obama.

    Just FYI: Obama doesn't become president till January.

    So you know...

  9. Re:Order Up!! by lysergic.acid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    sweet, i can finally get my own holoduke. too bad there's no shrink-ray on that list.

  10. Re:!telepathy by lysergic.acid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    technology-enabled telepathy, techlepathy, or whatever you want to call it, is still manipulating objects with your mind. and there are many instances where directly transmitting commands with neural impulses would be preferable over verbal commands. for instance, if you were trying to control a UAV drone it would be far more intuitive to be able to make the plane turn via thoughts than with clumsy voice commands. you'd have a much wider range of control that's both, more natural and also quicker, than voice commands.

    i'm more disturbed by this:

    A project to erase bad memories, which will be critical in helping soldiers with psychological damage.

    --yea, that and carrying out cover ups.

  11. Quantum ghost imaging not "really" quantum? by ortholattice · · Score: 4, Informative

    Quantum ghost imaging is a real effect that is potentially useful, but there is skepticism that it's an "entangled photon" quantum effect and not just an effect that is due to the ordinary interference of light waves (which is also ultimately quantum of course but can be predicted with classical physics).

  12. It's only a matter of time... by dave562 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...before we have enough troops to deal with the situation in Afghanistan. Now, if we can only get the Taliban to watch CNN.

  13. This is a press release by Xeth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Faced with cuts in military funding by the upcoming Obama administration, this is deigned to convince people that the defense department comes up with a lot of gee-whiz things they really shouldn't let their representatives eliminate.

    --
    If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
  14. I like Ike! by dwarg · · Score: 2, Informative

    In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

    We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

    Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

    In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

    Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

    The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present

            * and is gravely to be regarded.

    Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.

    It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

  15. Re:stargate tech is better but some of it needs zp by beav007 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I always thought it was CPMs, until someone reminded me that Americans can't pronounce "Z" correctly. Then it made sense...

  16. The McGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicine by alchemist68 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Dr. Alan Russell is the Distinguished University Professor of Surgery and the Founding Director of the McGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicine at the University of Pittsburgh. He has published more than 125 articles in refereed journals, one book, and 10 book chapters. Dr. Russell holds 14 patents, with 13 additional pending patents. Dr. Russell has given more than 250 national and international invited lectures, and has received numerous prestigious awards for his contributions to research, teaching and public service. For more information on Dr. Russell and the Russell Lab, please visit his website at http://www.mirm.pitt.edu/russell/.

    I had the opportunity to attend a lecture entitled "The Hope and Hype of Regenerative Medicine" last Wednesday evening in Cambridge, MA (10/29/2008) hosted by Vertex Pharmaceuticals. This lecture was profoundly interesting and awe-inspiring. Simply amazing what can be done for people in need of replacement of internal organs: bladders have been successfully grown and implanted in 6 children, both a vagina and uterus have been replaced in in pigs, and the tip of a human finger grew back after being accidentally amputated by the propeller of a small model airplane engine. The photographs and videos were quite graphic but show the power of this new type of medical research, some based on stem cell research. Current research is directed at replacing damaged cardiac tissue and the replenishment of islet cells to the pancreas to treat diabetes.

  17. Wouldn't astronomers want this? by JoeGee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From what I read it should be possible to create images from paired photons over any distance. If we can read a photon a meter distant by observing its entangled twin, can't we just as easily do the same trick with photons from the edge of the visible universe?

    -Joe

    --

    Get off my virtual lawn, you damned virtual kids!
    1. Re:Wouldn't astronomers want this? by kvezach · · Score: 2, Informative

      While you can read off entangled states with the particles separated at any distance, you can't get any information out of them faster than c. The observation will mess up the result. You can get around that by transmitting classical information about the error in addition, but that classical transmission will be bounded by c.

      In the experiment mentioned by New Scientist, note that the setup uses an external light source. Some of the photons hit the object, while others are captured at the same time (but through a different path). The photons naturally travel at c, and synchronization is required to get the correct result.

  18. Re:stargate tech is better but some of it needs zp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Britain just has/had a different alphabet song, though really Sesame Street has been shown on English TV for so long now (since 1969) the american one has long since "won". You just learn the american song says "zee" but the correct name is "zed", and learn to blame the "dumb americans", too (gotta start indoctrinating kids with prejudices early, you know!)

    Note that and (&) used to be the last "letter" of the British English alphabet, so the old english alphabet song used to end "and per se and" (not "zee"), which was then corrupted into "ampersand" ...and then dropped from the alphabet: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ampersand

  19. X files technology eh?? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 3, Funny

    How will developing flashlights which constantly have smoke or dust in the path of the beam help the army?

  20. "X files" my butt. They're being Proxmired. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hadn't encountered "Quantum Ghost Imaging" before. (If it provides a practical system for imaging a objects without exposing that an observer exists and/or without the observer having a clear line-of-sight for ordinary optics, the military applications would be obvious.)

    But building replacement body parts and organs on nano-scaffolding is working fine in the laboratory. It's just a little engineering development and regulatory approval from deployment. The military knows how to fund and direct practical engineering development, can fast-track or sidestep regulatory approval, and has a continuing supply of people who need replacement body parts or substitutes to recover function. It makes perfect sense for the military to drive the final development and deployment of this technology, bringing their wounded back to full health rather than giving them a prosthetic and a pension.

    The military is already flying and driving vehicles and aiming and firing weapons in difficult environments using "mechanical telepathy" - magnetic sensors in a helmet detecting the fields from the currents from the firing of nerves in - guess where - the speech center (among others). (While you're strapped into a fighter plane doing a 5-G maneuver or a helicopter shaking from flack: Look at a target and/or point a finger at it. When the targeting marker in the heads-up goggles is on it, think "BANG!". Just for one example.) Meanwhile the same technology is doing a very good job of speech recognition on subvocalization. So why not use it to drive a radio to "think-talk" to another guy in the unit?

    Since at least the Vietnam era the US military has been a consumer and designer of role-playing game system products and video games, for good reason and with very good results. After noting that the soldiers who played the most on the video games in the PX were also some of the best shots, pilots, tank drivers and gunners, etc. they commissioned videogames with realistic weapon characteristics as training aids: Fun and effective, and a LOT cheaper than full-blown simulators. Role-playing game systems, meanwhile, greatly improved "war games" strategy practice and military planning, and they stay current with developments in the field (and are a major customer of some of the companies as well). Using a MMORG to do a Turing test, along with further development, on a computer-simulation of a soldier (in preparation for deploying AI weapon systems) fits right in and makes perfect sense to me.

    So it looks to me like somebody is "pulling a Proxmire" - finding some government research that SOUNDS screwy and characterizing it to make it sound as ridiculous as possible in the public press.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  21. How Does the Enemy Fight our Army on the Cheap? by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can someone please exlplain how it is that a bunch of irregulars with poorly maintained AK-47 rifles and surplus Katyusha rockets that date back to the cold war can keep us on our toes in Afghanistan when we have all of this high tech and expensive army gear? Heck, the amount that we spend to equip and train one US soldier would probably equip a whole company of Taliban. If the army wants more and better soldiers then how about doing simple things like raising base salaries for our military, improving the quality of our training programs, and taking back control of supply and logistics from Halliburton and KBR who seem to be much more interested in how much they can possibly bill the government and much less interested in actually helping our fighting men and women.

    1. Re:How Does the Enemy Fight our Army on the Cheap? by jamesh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Those guys have been fighting wars on one front or another for centuries. They are very good at it.

    2. Re:How Does the Enemy Fight our Army on the Cheap? by rainer_d · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No mod points, too bad.
      To make it more clear: they have been fighting modern asymmetric wars for a very long time.
      The people doing it now have practically grown up with it.
      Even the USSR, with all their resources (and absolutely no qualm or HRW really worrying them) couldn't defeat these people (OK, so they had Uncle Sam's help - but anyway...)
      Unfortunately, it also means that a western-style democracy is highly unlikely to work in such an environment.
      There's just no concept of a "loyal opposition" in this region.
      When you're defeated, it only means you have to try harder to overthrow your opponent next time.
      And god forbid you follow the orders he issues from the capital - your peers might think you're a wuss.

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
    3. Re:How Does the Enemy Fight our Army on the Cheap? by johannesg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Can someone please exlplain how it is that a bunch of irregulars with poorly maintained AK-47 rifles and surplus Katyusha rockets that date back to the cold war can keep us on our toes in Afghanistan when we have all of this high tech and expensive army gear?

      Does a bullet from an AK-47 kill any less than a bullet from a hi-tech rifle? Does a Katyusha rocket demolish vehicles and buildings less effectively than modern explosives? Both weapons are basically good enough, especially since the enemy is hardly interested in prolonged battles and control over territory. Their war is mostly one of symbols; have a little bombing here, kill a few people there. It means little in the grand scheme of things, but it locks their respective countries in a state of fear, something from which they ultimately hope to profit as the US inevitably will have to withdraw at some point.

      How would you win such a war? The only way, I think, is to increase the wealth of that country: give them something to lose. Maybe if all the money invested so far had instead been used to buy agricultural products from them, they would be preparing for the next crop now instead of deciding where to put the next roadside bomb. Of course, there is little profit in that for the very large industry that rides on the back of those wars...

    4. Re:How Does the Enemy Fight our Army on the Cheap? by brennz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Light infantry warfare is still fought for the most part the same as it was during Vietnam. Sure, we may have some better sensors in things like AUVs and GPS bombs, but much of the combat still devolves into M4 vs AK-47, backed up by mortar squads and artillery. Throw in landmines, IED/VBIEDs and other things that favor insurgent forces. It is unfortunate that so little of our massive Defense budget has gone towards improving the combat effectiveness of our light infantry.

  22. Combat Telepathy Problems..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 3, Funny

    Soldier 1: :::Enemy behind the wall on the left by the palm tree.:::

    Soldier 2: :::Enemy behind the wall on the left by the palm tree.:::

    Soldier 3: :::Enemy behind the wall on the left by the palm tree.:::

    Soldier 4: :::Enemy behind the wall on the left by the palm tree. Hey, wait a minute! That reminds me, the mailman and my wife were pretty friendly last time I was home...:::

    Soldier 5: :::Enemy behing the wall on the left by the palm tree:::

    Soldiers 1, 2, 3: :::WTF?! Enemy behind the wall on the left by the palm tree!:::

    Soldier 5: :::I'll bet he's got a package for her!:::

    Soldier 4: :::What's THAT supposed to mean?:::

    Soldier 6: :::Dude, your wife's bangin the mailman!:::

    Soldier 5: :::HE'S GOT AN RPG!!!:::

    Soldier 4: :::Dude, that's not funny!:::

    Soldier 5: :::NO! THE GUY BEHIND TH-.....

    Fwishhhh! BOOOOOM!

    Soldiers 1, 2, 3, 4, 6: :::Oh... *That* guy.....:::

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....