Slashdot Mirror
Quantum Cloaking Makes Molecules Invisible
KentuckyFC writes "An international team of physicists has applied the ideas of cloaking to the quantum world and worked out how to hide quantum objects such as molecules. In the quantum world, seeing is equivalent to detecting a quantum object. In the case of molecules, that means looking for the terahertz radiation they produce when they vibrate (abstract). By designing a 'quantum corral,' an elliptical nanostructures that absorbs terahertz waves at a precise frequency, the team says it is possible to hide molecules that emit at exactly that frequency. They say their quantum corral would be ideally suited to detecting molecules of specific species while ignoring others. And that may mean a new generation of molecular detectors on the horizon."
By designing a 'quantum corral,' an elliptical nanostructures that absorbs terahertz waves at a precise frequency
Sounds sort of like how the human ear works.
Last week they announced the first laser cannon, now we're working on the base technology for tricorders? Maybe startrek IS an accurate timeline.
Of course, now we'll look for the "corral" matrix that surround it instead of the molecule itself. It's certainly interesting, but I don't see a practical application for this just yet. Perhaps an improvement in optics that allows for high energy photons (ie, lasers) to pass through a lens without melting it? Maybe someone who knows more about physics can chime in here?
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Now I can finally lose my stuff in the fabric of reality... not just underneath the front seat of my car.
The theoreticians seem have thrown down a considerable challenge here. Designing and building will likely be very different things. Makes most of the stuff fabricated so far seem almost macro-scale.
Isn't it a bit naughty to include star-trek tags on a real-science piece (even if it IS distinctly theoretical)?
"suited to detecting molecules of specific species"
Don't they mean specimens?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
In the quantum world, seeing is equivalent to detecting a quantum object. In the case of molecules, that means looking for the terahertz radiation they produce when they vibrate (abstract). By designing a 'quantum corral,' an elliptical nanostructures that absorbs terahertz waves at a precise frequency, the team says it is possible to hide molecules that emit at exactly that frequency. They say their quantum corral would be ideally suited to detecting molecules of specific species while ignoring others. And that may mean a new generation of molecular detectors on the horizon."
That's what I've been saying all along!
I thought Schroedinger and Heissenberg already figured that one out...
Well, if we ever get nanobots that can detect cancer cells, we could (in theory) detect irregularities in the frequencies emitted by unhealthy(cancer) cells in the body. I have no idea whatsoever if that's even viable (it might be that cancer cells still give off the same frequency) but it's a thought nonetheless.
"By designing a 'quantum corral,' an elliptical nanostructures that absorbs terahertz waves at a precise frequency, the team says it is possible to hide molecules that emit at exactly that frequency."
-No shit. You can hide objects by thowing something that absorbs the radiation emitted by them. I can hide an LED by keeping it in my shed, with the shed's construction material absorbing the light and heat emitted by the LED.
Basically, the nanostructure they built is nothing more than a filter that filters out terahertz wavelengths, like a red colored filter blocks out wavelengths in that frequency range.
Not a "breakthrough" by any means, but interesting in that they developed a substance that can filter out terahertz wavelengths.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
I know almost nothing about quantum mechanics, so correct me if I'm wrong. On this scale, isn't observation interaction? Would preventing observation also prevent interaction with what is inside the cloak? How would the cloak behave if you tried to detect what's in it with a laser (or something)?
Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
What's the state of a cloaked quantum molecule? You can't observe it...
This drab technology is no more amazing than the "cloaking" technology that hides copper in infrared. Its ridiculous technology like this that becomes tomorrow's practical application, somehow somewhere.
Who the hell would have thought shooting light in a beam would be so useful?
is the engineering. I recently attended a talk where the speaker presented a theoretical way to completely cloak a large object (i.e. person, car, etc.). It was possible to completely prevent detection within a reasonable range of the visible spectrum. (I don't think it's been published yet, or I'd post a link.) The assumption was that the object was surrounded by a material in which you had complete control of the metric space properties, i.e. the propagation coefficient of light at each point. Now there's a challenge for the engineers...
Does having a witty signature really indicate normality?
why does cynical in me thinks the first use they are going to give this technology is some kind of molecular DRM, so for example expensive drugs cant be properly copied.
". . .like a red colored filter blocks out wavelengths in that frequency range."
From what I remember from high school physics class, a red filter blocks out *everything except for* light in the red frequency ranges. That is, it allows red to pass, but blocks green, blue, yellow, etc.
What presence or bearing could we suppose such a discovery might/might not have as regards the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and the applicable research being done in situ?
There is nothing to FEAR but NOTHING itself; and I fear there is a whole lot of nothing going on. --scorpivs
Putting something where it can't be seen is not the same as making it invisible. Making it unable to be seen at a particular frequency does not mean it can't interact with something else, for instance gravitationally with the 'corral'. That would make it detected.
If the above were not so, all your friends who didn't happen to be within eyesight would be invisible. Nothing wrong with that as long as you're willing to accept the notion that just because your friends are invisible doesn't mean they're imaginary.
At best, in complete isolation, the molecule would be both visible and invisible. It would be in Schroedinger's cat box.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Although, the shed example is likely to work, you came up with a better idea even eariler. The first words of your response are "No Shit". Too bad you included the word 'No'. Shit, it seems, could easily block out the light as well as a shed. And, I should add, its much cheaper.
And based on your response, Shit, is what the scientists are full of.
Dog molecules detects YOU!
No, that was hideously visible. If it were invisible, that would be creepy, but seeing that guy's very much opaque intestines is worse.
You thought sharks with lasers are gonna be awesome?
How about INVISIBLE sharks lasers?
Nothing that small has a cloaking device.
Bond's got his work cut out for him now.
Maybe I'm conflating two different areas of "quantum" here, but here goes.
:
At the quantum level of physics, if you observe something, the very act of observing will cause the quantum state to collapse, meaning you can't directly observe what ever it is you are trying to observe !?
If you can create a filter that effectively only allows you to observe things that can pass through that filter, doesn't that mean that a quantum objects state can now be defined without direct observation ? The filter has already defined what may be observed, so any results acquired through that filter must be equivalent to what you defined as the filter. More positive hits ?
The only way my tiny mind can demonstrate this is something like
If you are in a room, with the door locked and the lights out, you do not need to observe the door opening to detect that it has opened, and to thereby infer that a person has opened it, and further that that person has a key to the door.
If all the mad supergeniuses trying to get the word p3n*s through my email filter would turn their attention to this instead, we'd be cloaking whole planets by now. ... and solved AIDS
and cancer.
and boredom.
i could go on...
Maybe that's how all that dark matter is hiding.
Normally I ascribe all life to intelligent design, but in your case I'll make an exception.
I just love scanning for lire forms!
Life forms!
You tiny little life forms!
You precious little life forms!
Where are you?
I want my Cowboyneal
On the principle that any good science will be used for evil purposes I postulate that this will lead to a new generation of undetectable performance enhancing drugs.
You wouldn't want to waste this capability doing useful research, would you?