Slashdot Mirror
Chemical "Infofuses" Communicate Without Electricity
Al writes "Researchers at Harvard and Tufts University have developed a way to send coded messages without using electricity. David Walt, professor of chemistry at Tufts, and Harvard's George Whitesides have developed 'infofuses' that can transmit information simply by burning. The fuses — metallic salts depositing on a nitrocellulose strand — emit pulses of infrared and visible light of different colors whose sequence encodes information. They were developed in response to a call from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency for technologies to allow soldiers stranded without a power source to communicate. In the first demonstration of the idea, they used the infofuses to transmit the message look mom no electricity." Currently the researchers are "trying to figure out a way to dynamically encode a message on the fly in the field without specialized equipment."
There's plenty of ways already documented. For this, we needed DARPA?
I wonder how much DARPA paid for this innovative research into centuries-old techniques.
Smoke signals... in color.
Morse code... without electricity.
In order to communicate effectively without electricity, it makes sense to look back to the time before electricity.
As for coding-messages-on-the-fly for the flare o' many colors, what kind of data density are they looking for? Wafers of colored fuel could be dropped into a tube that is then sealed for burning.
Or, they could just figure out a way to send morse code with a flare... maybe some kind of retractable hood to be used as an interrupt?
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
DARPA researchers discover messages can be transmitted using nothing more than a simple mirror.
One if by land, two if by sea
"Love heals scars love left." -- Henry Rollins
cause, you know...sending smoke signals when stranded in enemy territory is really going to help you....
"Our goal each year should be to increase the number of goals we set for ourselves!"
Aren't smoke signals and flashing light based communication inferior to electricity? How would you encode a message into a fuse without the use of some electrical device? Wouldn't that mean they have to be pre-determined messages before put into the field? I'm sure I'm just not understanding the full symantics of how these things work. I mean, I thought the whole "Fire the Green Flares!" thing has worked pretty well when people don't have a radio.
Step 1, smoke a cigarette under a poncho. Step 2, light an "infofuse". Step 3, get shot in the face.
My Drill Sargent demonstrated how easy it is to spot someone smoking in the dark.
Is a crank-powered radio really out of the question? I mean, it would even work during the day.
-Peter
I'm sure enemy forces would love to see this technology used by their adversaries. Instant "come-get-me-with-your-guns" attention.
just talk to one another? I can communicate by talking and listening without needing electricity (unless you count synapse firings).
Oh, I see the article says "greater than 2 km." The US Navy still uses semaphores, and a (non-electric) lantern could be used for nighttime signaling. Duh. Where's my million dollar research grant?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
in the end, why would a hand cranked flashlight not be better. maybe one of the shake up ones.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
How about an inexpensive crank flashlight with a morse code key engraved on it?
On the upside, not only would you not need matches, but you could use it as a flashlight.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
DARPA keeps reinventing the wheel. Isn't it simpler to use a portable hand cranked generator to power a normal radio using spread spectrum communications? Using spread spectrum gives reasonable safety level and hand cranked generator is power source which works as long as you have hands. This solution is so obvious, that it amazes me why DARPA would even think of something else.
So it only transmits 2 km, and presumably someone has to be looking in the right direction to receive your signal, and you need some kind of special equipment to encode a long message. This just looks like the wrong approach. It seems to me there's always a trade-off between distance, information transmitted, and signal power (a rough restating of Shannon/Hartley). I don't know how far flares can be seen, but that's already a chemical means of sending a short message a limited distance.
One thing that might be interesting, the ability to produce a powerful radio signal by some chemical means. You wouldn't be able to transmit much information beyond say "help!", but if you had a satellite in geo-stationary orbit looking for these signals (and somehow triangulating the position) that might solve the "has to be someone looking" problem. Whether there are chemical reactions that produce radio signals, I have no idea.
AccountKiller
When they want to send a message, they hatch an egg, and then tie the message to one of the chicken's legs before sending it flying back to base (I forgot to say they are also issued a catapult)
Probably no less plausible an approach than these "infofuses".
Squirrel!
Hmm. Infrared and visible-light pulses. No electricity. Needs to have a message encoded on-the-fly in the field. That sounds an awful lot like a small lantern with an oil wick or candle burning in it and a shutter to conceal or reveal the light/heat source at will. We could even use Morse code. All you'd need is an ignition source to light the lamp. Matches would work, or steel-and-flint to light a small piece of tinder scavenged from the surroundings.
To all the morons who didn't RTFA, infofuses send infrared light, e.g. not visible to the naked eye. Please stop suggesting this is as stupid as sending a smoke signal in enemy territory.
What I find idiotic though, is that they're going to all this effort to create a technology which requires you to carry around lots of extra dead weight of salt and the equipment to communicate with it.
They could just simply invent an electronic signaling device that is powered by the kinetic or electric energy generated by your body. Especially since these soldiers do a lot of long hikes with heavy packs on their backs, the amount of energy generated would be substantial. A piezoelectric doodad in the sole of their boots recharging a couple of rechargeable AA batteries would do. The technology to pull this off has been around for a long time and it is really cheap and easy.
My congrats go to the DoD for coming up with a solution that costs a couple million per soldier, when I just handed them a solution that costs a few dollars per soldier and took me less than a minute to think up. Way to innovate.
On the bright side they came up with a technology that I'm sure will find its way into the private sector at some point and be useful somewhere, somehow.
Said message could be sent with a single flash, if that's the only message they might send. The question is how many other possible messages they could have sent. For example, if they sent this as 7-bit ASCII, it'd be more impressive, though some kind of Huffman encoding would be most appropriate.
It's not much more than a new version of signal mirrors, heliograph, signal fires, etc. Even a minor power source (such as a hand operated generator) would allow a radio to outperform infofuses.
The only reason I see for this item, is when you are someplace electricity doesn't work. Of course, then the sensor package used to read the infofuse signal would need power also, and be within 1.5km/0.9 miles. Guess it's not really that good in an EMP field.
Of course, what about the gear to encode the message?
They are trying to make it simpler and smaller, but it doesn't sound like it's going to be an easy piece of gear to run without electricity. Of course, the troops could be sent out with a packet of pre-recorded messages. Or maybe just extra batteries for their radios...
Maybe I'm being a little hypercritical, but it seems as if they are trying to solve a non-existent problem with an overcomplicated solution.
(Kind of like trying to move the 15' from your parking space to the mailbox when you don't have your car keys but think you can hotwire the car with a screwdriver... Just walk over there stupid!)
Here's another idea, give the troopies binoculars and semaphore flags. Of course they'd then have to be trained in semaphore, but it's technology that's available and works without electricity, even after your choice of nuclear apocalypse or alien invasion.
Which would you rather add to your pack? A pound of flammable material, or a half-pound radio/battery with a half-pound hand-cranked generator?
hahaha
This is the military.
Scratch out 'cheap' and/or 'inexpensive'.
Personally, something small like a lighter might be better than matches (get wet, quite susceptible to weather, don't last long [individually]) or a hand-powered flashlight (a lot bulkier).
Now, the flashlight certainly would have more uses in general, but it's all about tradeoffs, as there is a physical limit to how much crap a person can carry in the field.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
>Currently the researchers are "trying to figure out a way to dynamically encode a message on the fly in >the field without specialized equipment."
What about semaphore flags, signal lanterns, smoke signals, mirrors, shouting real loud etc?
> In the first demonstration of the idea, they used the infofuses to transmit the message look mom no electricity.
In other news, researchers developed a communication device for combat engineering. The first message they transmitted was "look mom no hands".
"In order to communicate effectively without electricity, it makes sense to look back to the time before electricity."
Even now there are still railways that give their trains every signal with mechanical means.
P.S. Not to mention, even the most sophisticated aircraft gets hand signals at the very end before you get out.
After glancing at the article, this idea came to mind: For field use, a sort of Vertical Typewriter in three pieces. The "writer" itself would be a vertical tube with little pushers filled with an amount of powder. Attaching to this tube at the bottom would be the message holder, where the bits of powder would rest. The third piece would be a tamper to tighten the whole thing up so it doesn't spill out. The message holders would have to be strong enough to hold the compressed power, but be "inconsequential" enough to burn with little to no light output of interest, or just have the reader calibrated to subtract what it itself puts out. Powder amount Vs letter frequencies and numbers aside, it seems like it would work.
My congrats go to the DoD for coming up with a solution that costs a couple million per soldier, when I just handed them a solution that costs a few dollars per soldier and took me less than a minute to think up. Way to innovate.
Look, this is a DARPA funded project. So it might seem like they are stupid for not thinking of obvious solutions like yours, but they're simply not allowed to under DoD rules. The AR in DARPA stands for Advanced Research. DFORPA is the DoD agency you're looking for (the O stands for Obvious). They don't give much in the way of grants, so you may be smarter than the DoD, but those Harvard and Tufts researchers are the real geniuses here. :)
The enemies of Democracy are
This doesn't seem like a significant improvement over, say, carrying a pencil or marker, some paper, and a flare. Write message on paper, strike flare, hold up paper, and hope the good guys have a pair of binoculars handy and happen to notice you.
It seems like if you got into a situation where you couldn't use electronics but were close enough for someone else to see you and you didn't care if the enemy sees you, either, the set of messages would be pretty small. Probably mostly along the lines of, "OH SHIT! SEND TANK!"
Hexy - a strategy game for iPhone/iPod Touch
You only need to have one preset message:
"Enemy advancing on current position."
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm pretty sure this signal could be jammed with a few wet branches and a match...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Including pyrotechnical devices not completely unlike the one in TFA. As a last resort/backup method, train crews can lay things called torpedoes on the track. They explode when a train runs over them giving the engineer a warning that there's danger ahead. Most railroads have a distinctive pattern they use when setting the torpedoes to avoid false signals from backfires, firecrackers etc.
This ain't rocket surgery.
Ahmed, where is the stranded soldier hiding? And what the hell is that colored flashing light on the side of this hill?
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
too bad they went extinct. i guess all those filthy hippies and poets were right after all.
The only application where infofuses would actually outperform other forms of communication I can come up with is the transmission of a message from a location other than where the sender is located with little complication. Simply attach a normal long delay fuse to an infofuse atop a high structure such that it will light the infofuse at a predetermined time when someone will be looking. Essentially a data drop-off point. I can imagine several espionage scenarios where this could be useful. It would be much more difficult and noticeable to rig a lantern, semaphore, or radio system to do the same thing. It also beats dropping off a one-time pad encrypted note in that the receiver of the message is not required to be in physical contact with the message. In addition there's the prospect of signal interception or discovery. With some mechanical lantern or semaphore system the apparatus would likely have to remain after the message was sent, allowing for the possibility of reverse engineering the device to determine what message was sent. Once an infofuse burns up the best you can do is determine what signals were sent but not in what order.
How many people responding have actually performed tactical miltary maneuvers in the field? Because, if you haven't, it would explain a lot of the silly comments of the kind, "...someone has to be looking in the right direction...blah...blah...blah..."
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
Pope | No Pope.
Have gnu, will travel.
but not by the government using the threat of force to extort payments from taxpayers.
When is the last time you mailed a check to fund research?
http://www.midlandradio.com/Two-Way-Radio.BS3/XT511MO
So lets say they've got all the other objections to this technology ironed out, like "why not a hand-cranked radio, or flashlight".
Currently the researchers are "trying to figure out a way to dynamically encode a message on the fly in the field without specialized equipment."
Simple. You hang this fuse up in a tree (or something) by both ends and then light one marked point along its length corresponding to some prearranged signal.
Have gnu, will travel.
Semaphore works at that range without the need do exactingly arrange a sequence of chemicals (let alone have some sort of -- presumably -- electricity-powered detector and processor on the other end to interpret the burning. It even scales up nicely: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore_line
Tritium. There, solved the energy source problem for you.
Electronic signals can be jammed. Electronics can be duded with a pulse. Batteries run down, and charging systems can be interfered with.
I envision a system that's fairly passive, such as a landmine or tripwire that would trigger with a specific message. This trigger could remain in place unattended and without maintenance for months or years, until activated. It then sends out a location, type of alert, and priority. It's picked up by a UAV, satellite, or other system, and relayed. Enclosing the light from unwanted directions makes it harder for the enemy to detect. Non-visible spectrum is even better.
Just my two cents. Hmm, there's someone at the Doo$%^
We have discovered the sparkler!
zosxavius photography
I think that's kinda the point - that it's something that would be hard to detect compared to traditional radio, for the same reason that laser speed traps are harder to detect than radar speed traps. This would be a very brief flash, presumably fairly directional, that would only be detectable by someone who was explicitly looking for it.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
IR does not make the flare invisible. IR scopes have been around since WWII and are readily available and dirt cheap now. What is visible to the good guys will be visible to the bad guys - and all the bad guys need to know is where you have found cover.
Couldn't you have 10 minute fuse before the coloured flare/IR signal starts burning? i.e. you could set it up with requested pickup coordinates, stake the flare down in some open ground and move away from the immediate area. A searching enemy would only know where you were 10 minutes ago (admittedly, in a life and death search 10 minutes is a bit close for comfort)
These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.