Slashdot Mirror


'Invisibility Cloak' Created Using Crystals

Zothecula writes "The quest to build a working 'invisibility cloak' generally focuses on the use of metamaterials – artificially engineered materials with a negative refractive index that have already been used to render microscopic objects invisible in specific wavelengths of light. Now, using naturally occurring crystals rather than metamaterials, two research teams working independently have demonstrated technology that can cloak larger objects in the broad range of wavelengths visible to the human eye. PDFs of the two similarly named research papers are available through arXiv.org."

98 comments

  1. Another day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Another invisibility cloak article on Slashdot.

    1. Re:Another day... by bobbinspenguin · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've not seen the others

    2. Re:Another day... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, it's not that bad; we only get them every other day.

    3. Re:Another day... by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      The tend to show up once or twice a month.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    4. Re:Another day... by avronius · · Score: 1

      Whoosh!

    5. Re:Another day... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      look for heat distortion in the air. they are not 100% invisible.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    6. Re:Another day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, man! Don't you see the intended pun?

    7. Re:Another day... by geegel · · Score: 1

      Erm... No, I really don't.

      --
      right...
    8. Re:Another day... by shia84 · · Score: 2

      I never really understood what is with this invisibility cloak obsession anyway. It's not like research like depicted in the article enables true invisibility... it only filters a comparatively small band, so no (radar+infrared+visible light) invisible planes, tanks etc. Also, no project so far has shown even the hint of the possibility to have angle independant cloaking. So that's no inivisible soldiers either, unless they don' t turn and all enemies are looking at them from one narrow perspective.

    9. Re:Another day... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      But all those geek Creds lost about how they had a pink object that was invisible.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    10. Re:Another day... by nametaken · · Score: 1

      Yeah seriously, is it Friday already? People seem to just keep reinventing the invisibility cloak, and then losing their prototype.

      By now you'd think we'd be tripping on stacks of the damn things.

    11. Re:Another day... by Decessus · · Score: 1

      Would they be useful for small team reconnaissance missions perhaps a Marine sniper team or something similar?

  2. This is great, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When can I wear this into the women's changing room?

  3. right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "for the first time, the cloaking area is rendered at a size that is big enough for the observer to ‘see’ the invisible object with the naked eye"

    If you can see it that means it's NOT working.

    1. Re:right... by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 1

      See what?

      I have actually seen this working the the University of Birmingham. It's impressive, but it's small.

      A video I saw on my local BBC news the other week too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12338447

  4. Calcite? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a 3"-on-a-side parallelepiped of this stuff when I was four. Now they're telling me it can be used to make things invisible, and they're just now figuring it out? Wacky.

  5. One cheat code down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now to work on "God Mode"

    1. Re:One cheat code down by MRe_nl · · Score: 1

      One mission down.
      Now find the Targoid mothership.

      --
      "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    2. Re:One cheat code down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right on commander!

    3. Re:One cheat code down by Maritz · · Score: 1

      I'll have no clipping please. Sorted the invisibility with 'idbeholdi'

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  6. I dunno by Dyinobal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From reading the article I get mostly that it's done all with Mirrors and prisms essentially. Maybe someone else can point out what's so exciting about this?

    1. Re:I dunno by Shikaku · · Score: 3, Funny

      I can't point out what's so exciting because I can't see it, duh!

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

      From reading the article I get mostly that it's done all with Mirrors and prisms essentially.

      It is actually slightly more sophisticated than that. They use the birefraction properties of calcite to bend the light rays in such a way that the exiting light has the exact same position and direction as if there were no wedge at the bottom. A simple mirror/prism assembly can not do this. It will either shift the beam or tilt it slightly.

      The reason you see the wedge in the picture is because of lousy polishing. The tip of the wedge is not perfectly sharp.

    3. Re:I dunno by thomst · · Score: 1

      From reading the article I get mostly that it's done all with Mirrors and prisms essentially. Maybe someone else can point out what's so exciting about this?

      My DOG, man! Can't you see the fantastic possibilities that will open up once they start adding SMOKE to those mirrors?

      --
      Check out my novel.
    4. Re:I dunno by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An S.E.P or 'Somebody Else's Problem field' is a cheap, easy, and staggeringly useful way of safely protecting something from unwanted eyes.

    5. Re:I dunno by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Because they did it with only mirrors, no smoke was involved.

  7. Won't do you any good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If the refraction of the light prevents you from being seen, it will prevent you from seeing as well.

    1. Re:Won't do you any good by RussellSHarris · · Score: 1

      Key phrase: as well.

      I don't need to see all that well - a pinhole-sized camera would rival most of the lower-quality videos you'd find online, while still being relatively invisble. And the sound quality should be pretty good too...

    2. Re:Won't do you any good by omnichad · · Score: 1

      If you have the pinhole camera, why do you need to be there too?

    3. Re:Won't do you any good by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      If the refraction of the light prevents you from being seen, it will prevent you from seeing as well.

      Key phrase: as well.

      I don't need to see all that well - a pinhole-sized camera would rival most of the lower-quality videos you'd find online, while still being relatively invisble. And the sound quality should be pretty good too...

      "as well" == "also" == "too"

    4. Re:Won't do you any good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RusselSHarris is right.

      A tiny imperfection in the invisibility would be enough to let you see clearly. Your pupils are a very small part of your total surface area.

      (Damn it! Would I really stoop this low?)

    5. Re:Won't do you any good by RussellSHarris · · Score: 1

      "as well" == "also" == "too"

      I knew that, of course, but I wasn't about to let it stop me from making my point.

    6. Re:Won't do you any good by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      ...but who needs sight when you have hands?

  8. Invisible? by symes · · Score: 1

    Nothing to see here, move along...

  9. To quote somebody smarter than me by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

    "I'll believe it when I see it."

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    1. Re:To quote somebody smarter than me by Dolvid · · Score: 1

      To quote somebody smarter than somebody smarter than you: "I'll believe it when I don't see it."

  10. Not convinced. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it work when the background isn't a solid color?

    1. Re:Not convinced. by Issarlk · · Score: 1

      My though exactly. The background is a convenient solid green.

  11. Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hold on, I almost forgot to insert the crystals.

  12. This thread is worthless without pics by jfengel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Here's one:

    1. Re:This thread is worthless without pics by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      I see what you did there.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:This thread is worthless without pics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't

    3. Re:This thread is worthless without pics by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Then it's working.

    4. Re:This thread is worthless without pics by paintballer1087 · · Score: 1

      I see what you did there.

      I don't.

    5. Re:This thread is worthless without pics by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Nice, that beats the shit out of using asterisks. Check it out, I copied and pasted your post from above and then put my password underneath:

      hunter2 beyotches!!!

  13. Hmmm by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 0

    Invisibility cloak? BS - I'll believe it when I see it!

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  14. Stupid harry potter. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 3, Funny

    screw the invisibility cloak! Give me Stealth Camouflage!

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    1. Re:Stupid harry potter. by end15 · · Score: 1

      Screw the invisibility cloak, give me a girdle of giant strength!

      --
      All glory to the Hypnotoad!
  15. How does this affect me? by Locke2005 · · Score: 2

    Are we any closer to our goal of being able to sneak into women's locker rooms undetected?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:How does this affect me? by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      Are we any closer to our goal of being able to sneak into women's locker rooms undetected?

      You already can .. all it requires is a minor sex change operation. Unless of course you already are female.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    2. Re:How does this affect me? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

      Are we any closer to our goal of being able to sneak into women's locker rooms undetected?

      You already can .. all it requires is a minor sex change operation. Unless of course you already are female.

      A: He is on slashdot, of course he is male.
      B: Minor?

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    3. Re:How does this affect me? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      I suspect I'd need to do something about my adam's apple, bald head, beard, chest and back hair as well. I even have hairy toes -- I suspect I'm part hobbit.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  16. Life Imitates Art by mdielmann · · Score: 1

    This is so Inspector Gadget...

    --
    Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  17. Magicians by eepok · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who's thinking that this technology will most quickly adapted for stage magician acts?

    1. Re:Magicians by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      Probably. Magicians rely on much simpler effects than this. Most magic tricks have stupidly simple gimmicks.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:Magicians by amRadioHed · · Score: 2

      True. In most cases redirecting people's attention is easier then photons.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    3. Re:Magicians by eepok · · Score: 2

      Well, some magic tricks are stupidly simple, yes. But others are extremely intricate and involve great deals of engineering and foresight. I'll use this as a simple example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ewef620ptj4

      Given the money involved in big acts, I still wouldn't be surprised.

  18. "CRYSTALS were integral!" by Sparks23 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else think of "Doctor Dinosaur" from Atomic Robo when reading this article?

    http://www.nuklearpower.com/2009/07/24/free-comic-book-day-2009/

    --
    --Rachel
  19. Crystals of Dihydrogen monoxide by rossdee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Around here at this time of year naturally occuring crystals can cause objects to disappear., especially in high winds. In some cases even after the wind has subsided, things can remain hidden by being covered with a layer of these 6 sided crystals. There are 2 solutions, wait until the temperature increases and the crystals melt, or to use a shovel....

    1. Re:Crystals of Dihydrogen monoxide by SnarfQuest · · Score: 0

      You can't use DHMO!!! It's been declared illegal in several states!! That stuff have been found in CANCER cells!! Hundres of people die of DHMO overdose every year!!! Did I include enough exclamation points yet!!!!

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  20. magic by buback · · Score: 1

    This is the same type of 'invisibility' preformed by magicians: i.e. mirrors.

    Did somebody actually get a grant for this work?

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

      Probably, not like the optics of calcite weren't figured out over a hundred years ago. But we forget sometimes.

  21. Another day, anther invisibility cloak story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One day, when they finally crack this technology, we will miss the constant false alarms on /.

  22. Re:Picture? by MikeDirnt69 · · Score: 1

    If an Invisible Cloak falls in the woods and no one around see it, does it make a sound?

    --
    Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br
  23. Hmmmmm by senorpoco · · Score: 1

    Didn't David Copperfield make an elephant disappear the same way?

  24. Much better by mangu · · Score: 1

    Tile the outer wall of the women's changing room with calcite. That will render the wall invisible from the outside so you will be able to look in.

  25. Disinformation? by grikdog · · Score: 1

    My initial reaction was Bunk! Disclosing the details of a technology so obviously useful to DoD would border on treason. There seems to be room to speculate the PR is disinformation.

    --
    ``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
    1. Re:Disinformation? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You sir, are an idiot.

      I don't know what world you think you live in, but the DoD doesn't go around imprisoning people for treason because they talk about something they invent. Unless they are under contract not to do so, and even then it wouldn't be treason.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Disinformation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also the US military pretty much does all it's fighting at night when the ability to hide from the unaided eye isn't all that uncommon. So you know... limited practical applications for the DoD.

    3. Re:Disinformation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or if the item that a person invents even remotely has the potential to rub shoulders with anything the DOD considers important.

    4. Re:Disinformation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not to mention that hiding small objects with calcite crystals (when the crystals are still visible, and it only works with polarized light) is hardly a matter of national security!

    5. Re:Disinformation? by grikdog · · Score: 1

      "You sir, are an idiot."

      It's possible. Thanks for pointing.

      --
      ``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
  26. Maybe I'm missing something, but I think by degeneratemonkey · · Score: 1

    this isn't an invisibility cloak; it's high school physics.

    1. Re:Maybe I'm missing something, but I think by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      The high school physics isn't missing. It's only hidden by an invisibility cloak.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  27. calm down, everyone, it's just calcite... by Hakubi_Washu · · Score: 1

    No, really, once you get over that fact that calcite has been known for its double refraction property for literally hundreds of years, and every child ever to get its hands on a lump of it trying to make it show weird shit, you'll realize that these people have figured out how to make stuff disappear when you look at it from exactly the right angle... Yawn. The calcite remains visible, obviously, BTW.

    1. Re:calm down, everyone, it's just calcite... by sonicattack · · Score: 1

      Of course, this is not the same as Calcic Image Misplacement, another neat feature of calcium:

      (skip to 2:45)
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRL9IVvuNl8

  28. That was incredibly unimpressive by joeyblades · · Score: 2

    OK. I guess that's one way of defining invisible.

    So I can't see the pink material... I can still see the wedge of reflective material covering it. By this definition, I could throw a blanket over it and - 'poof' - it's invisible...

    1. Re:That was incredibly unimpressive by ShiftyOne · · Score: 1

      A blanket wont work. It has to be reflective and distort the image a little. Try a mirror from the 1700's.

    2. Re:That was incredibly unimpressive by lewiscr · · Score: 2

      Once you paint it pink, just set up a SEP field.

  29. I, for one, would like to.. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    I, for one, would like to welcome our over lords, but I can't see them. So they must be wearing this invisibility crystals!

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  30. Yet no one has refuted this article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Negative index of refraction violates the second law of thermodynamics:

    http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstract.cfm?uri=oe-16-23-19152

    1. Re:Yet no one has refuted this article by Lazareth · · Score: 2

      Total and COMPLETE negative refraction is impossible. Masking a selection of wavelengths is not. This is about fooling the human eye, not 'true' stealth tech which indeed violates the second law of thermodynamics.

  31. Pshaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll believe it when I see it.

  32. This is AWESOME! by RapmasterT · · Score: 1

    a real invisibility cloak..and all it took was redefining the terms "invisibility", and "cloak". Hell if I knew it was that easy, I'd have invented one years ago.

  33. Already done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't Erik the Viking do this with a simple bit of cloth?

    Nothing new to see here.

  34. Prior art ! by alexhs · · Score: 2

    I could throw a blanket over it and - 'poof' - it's invisible...

    But there are two thousand years of prior art on that technology...
    Here, invisible women.

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
  35. Caution! by mangu · · Score: 1

    'Relatively' invisible may not be good enough. In this book the main character was invisible except for his retinas. H. G. Wells had thought it out, if light didn't interact at all with his eyes he would be blind.

    There was a moment when he was discovered because someone noticed those two tiny spots moving around.

    1. Re:Caution! by RussellSHarris · · Score: 1

      I'd be content enough to only see infrared light while I was "invisible" - as a bonus I hear it passes through lightweight cotton fabric pretty well.

  36. Only one thing to add... by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

    "I solemly swear I am up to no good."

  37. My Time Machine by degeneratemonkey · · Score: 1

    Guys, GUYS. I invented a time machine. It's an ingenious device that can be programmed to generate loud, audible signals at a specific point in time. All you have to do is program the device with a time set in the future, and then fall asleep. When you wake up - presumably via aural stimulation from my invention - you will be in the FUTURE!

    Suck it, Einstein.

  38. enough with the stupid cloaking stories. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Attention Slashdot:

    Please stop posting these stupid damn stories. The first time was interesting, but 50 stories later I do not care if some dude can surround a ping pong ball with crystals/copper tubes/gremlins etc and make it invisible at 2.4506 Ghz in a flat plane.

  39. Re:Picture? by sortius_nod · · Score: 1

    no idea why you got downranked, I laughed... just no mod points to unfuck your rank.

  40. Can I has? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can I has Prism Tanks?

  41. Did you know that if you put a crystal glass into by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a jar of alcohol, it becomes invisible? I saw this in the Crystal Skull of Doom (it's not just some Indiana Jones thing only) documentary at topdocumentaryfilms.com which shows it being done, pretty cool too. It's just about up there with watching a "super-liquid" and how it behaves, imo at least, and at a fraction of the cost! And, no wise-asses - this isn't about drinking fucking booze either, for those of you about to make some snide crack about it because you've tipped 1/2 a case of the magical liquids with it being Saturday nite and all.

  42. not just crystals by Filip22012005 · · Score: 1

    150 crystals AND 150 gas.

    --
    When the policeman of the tie, rule you violate, hello punishment of the kitty?
  43. METH! by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Yes invisibility crystals... Excellent!

  44. ONE THING DOWN two more to go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now all we need is the power wand, and the stone who magically brings people back to life