'Antimagnet' Cloak Hides Objects From Magnetic Fields

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'Antimagnet' Cloak Hides Objects From Magnetic Fields

Posted by Soulskill on Friday March 23, 2012 @02:57AM from the don't-let-ian-mckellan-get-his-hands-on-this dept.

ananyo writes "Researchers have made a cloak that can hide objects from static magnetic fields, realizing a theoretical prediction they made last year. This 'antimagnet' could have medical applications, but could also be used to subvert airport security. The cloak's interior is lined with turns of tape made from a high-temperature superconductor. Superconductors repel magnetic fields, so any magnetic field enclosed within a superconductor would be undetectable from outside. But the superconductor itself would still perturb an external magnetic field, so the researchers coated its external side with an ordinary ferromagnet. The superconductor tries to repel external field lines, whereas the ferromagnet tries to draw them in — together, the two layers cancel each other out (abstract)."

87 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Airport security? by hpa · 2012-03-23 03:02 · Score: 5, Funny

"Hey, mind if I take in this superconductor cooler through the checkpoint?"
1. Re:Airport security? by Brad1138 · 2012-03-23 03:05 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Don't assume airport security adheres to any sort of logic...
  
  --
  If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
2. Re:Airport security? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:07 · Score: 0
  
  Quick.. increase TSA spending... Those anti-antimagnet-cloacking detectors need to be in all the airports ASAP....
  
  Even if they are just fake or don't do anything at all.
3. Re:Airport security? by tylerni7 · 2012-03-23 03:08 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  No look, this is perfect. We convince DHS that the terrorists are trying to develop room temperature superconductors to subvert metal detectors and security checkpoints.
  
  Then, clearly the solution is for DHS to start giving obscene amounts of money to physicists in the USA to develop the technology first! It's pretty much a win-win-win situation.
4. Re:Airport security? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:09 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Amazing isn't it? Rea searchers make a breakthrough in practical physics, and all anyone can think about is terrorists!
  
  Be afraid people! There could be one under your bed right now!
5. Re:Airport security? by Samantha+Wright · 2012-03-23 03:25 · Score: 1
  
  Alternatively, they may just put all of the related researchers under surveillance, which seems like the more natural thing to do for them. The physicists aren't their friends, after all; they're just ordinary citizens.
  
  --
  Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
6. Re:Airport security? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:26 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  There's a red under every bed.
7. Re:Airport security? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-03-23 03:28 · Score: 1
  
  Do they make liquid nitrogen storage dewars of less than three ounces?
  
  If so, I don't think that there is anything about cryogens(so long as they aren't compressed, compressed gas cylinders not Specifically Approved have been on the list for at least a decade before the security theatre opened in earnest).
  
  If that dewar contains more than three ounces of liquid, though, you'd better touch your toes and think of Freedom while I get the exam glove.
8. Re:Airport security? by drkich · 2012-03-23 03:31 · Score: 2
  
  It's called strip search, the anti-magnet detector
  
  --
  Mid-Eastern Pennsylvania Gaming Convention
9. Re:Airport security? by Malties · 2012-03-23 03:41 · Score: 2
  
  "Oh that cloud of smoke coming from under my trenchcoat? That's nothing"
10. Re:Airport security? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 04:01 · Score: 0
  
  And hear I thought the TSA was just there to be a pain in everyone's a**. I mean, they don't do anything useful.
11. Re:Airport security? by jo_ham · 2012-03-23 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  I would not take a dewar of any cryogenic liquid onto an aircraft - I don't even ride in the lift with them. That said, a small volume wouldn't pose all that much of an asphyxiation hazard. I carry LN2 around in a cheap thermos bought at the grocery store and you can keep it liquid that way for hours.
12. Re:Airport security? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 04:35 · Score: 0
  
  If there is a terrorist under my bed right now then he must be hoping they'll drag him off to Gitmo soon - at least there the air is fresh.
13. Re:Airport security? by schlachter · 2012-03-23 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  same think happened with nuclear tech.
  
  --
  My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
14. Re:Airport security? by docilespelunker · 2012-03-23 04:55 · Score: 1
  
  Here here. I like this thinking:O)
  
  I hear terrorists are working on fusion, hangover free beer and hoverboards too...
15. Re:Airport security? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 04:59 · Score: 0
  
  That said, a small volume wouldn't pose all that much of an asphyxiation hazard.
  If the oxygen displacement doesn't get you...
16. Re:Airport security? by Grave · 2012-03-23 05:19 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, but you're thinking with a level head here--that's now how these decisions get made. DHS does not exist to solve a problem via positive improvements. It exists to solve a problem via control, invasive action, and denial of freedom. That's much easier to do than to be inclusive, pro-active, and innovative. Unfortunately, it's also not nearly as effective, either. In the long run, it's a losing battle. DHS/TSA function the same way as the RIAA/MPAA - fighting the battle in the wrong way, wasting money and time on controls that are far too easily defeated by cheaper, simpler methods. They will continue to do this until the cost either becomes unbearable (which, given the already insane money being spent, is unlikely), or until the public stops putting up with it and engages in civil disobedience.
17. Re:Airport security? by jo_ham · 2012-03-23 05:22 · Score: 1
  
  Of course, it is vented :p
  (also, Derek's site is a common read among me and my friends!)
18. Re:Airport security? by Botia · 2012-03-23 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  It's not the terrorists that scare me. It's the security checkpoints at the airports. They do any and all things to you and have the backing of the government.
19. Re:Airport security? by Ihmhi · 2012-03-23 05:51 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Besides, it's much easier to bypass airport security. Just be rich.
  What, poor people can't get in through the rich lines? Well, a Fortune 500 CEO flying on a private jet surely has assistants, security, and other personnel, and he'll be damned if some "airport security" will hold up his tee time in Cabo!
  I wonder how long it will take for someone to exploit this particular attack vector.
  
  --
  Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
20. Re:Airport security? by fluffy99 · 2012-03-23 06:08 · Score: 1
  
  "Hey, mind if I take in this superconductor cooler through the checkpoint?"
  Meanwhile the guy with the ceramic knife in his pocket and the plastic explosives in his underwear walk through without garnering any attention at all.
21. Re:Airport security? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  If the oxygen displacement doesn't get you...
  The joys of first year grad students, just off the boat from the PRC...
22. Re:Airport security? by izomiac · 2012-03-23 10:10 · Score: 1
  
  You could likely cool your high temperature superconductor to nearly absolute zero (thus over a hundred kelvin of leeway), then encase it in aerogel or some similarly powerful insulator (vacuum?). This setup should last long enough for mobile applications of this technology.
  
  Of course, if you have the resources and knowledge to implement this, just build a death ray and shoot down the plane. I don't have any idea why people keep thinking of ridiculous ways around TSA agents and security theater checkpoints. What's next, evading the Wal-Mart greeter?
23. Re:Airport security? by bryan1945 · 2012-03-23 20:30 · Score: 1
  
  "If that dewar contains more than three ounces of liquid, though, you'd better touch your toes and think of Freedom while I get the exam glove."
  Why would I be touching my toes while you are getting rectally probed? Is this like a wrestling tag team match?
  
  --
  Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
MRI by nschubach · 2012-03-23 03:02 · Score: 3, Interesting

If I understand correctly, they should be able to envelope something like an MRI so that you don't have to worry about metal bits carried into the room?

--
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
1. Re:MRI by AdrianKemp · 2012-03-23 03:09 · Score: 2
  
  Well, yes but no.
  You only need half of the equation (the superconductor) to do that. You don't care about "cloaking" anything when trying to dissipate the MRI field, you just get rid of it.
  As far as I know (and admittedly, when it comes to MRI machines that isn't a great deal) there isn't any real technical hurdle regarding removing it's magnetic field. It would be annoying (keeping even a high temperature super conductor cool), expensive, and a lot harder than just telling everyone to empty their pockets.
2. Re:MRI by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:10 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  It renders the object invisible to static magnetic fields. MRI utilizes rapidly changing magnetic fields to encode position. This is still a problem.
3. Re:MRI by lurker1997 · 2012-03-23 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  What you are talking about are called gradients in MRI. There is also an RF magnetic field used for MR excitation. The gradients and the RF are not the reason you have to empty your pockets, it is the static field, which is orders of magnitude larger, and has the potential to dangerously accelerate metal objects towards the magent. In the absense of the static field, it would be no problem for bystanders / people around the magnet to have metal. Patients should make known any metal they have on their body, eg. implants because this metal can be influenced by the static field and heated through eddy current effects from the RF field. The patient has to immersed in the static field for the MRI to work, so of course magnetic field cloaking would be irrelevant for them anyway.
Subvert airport security? by TheLink · 2012-03-23 03:04 · Score: 2

You could use a zillion things to subvert airport security.

Or use a private plane. Those stars don't seem to have trouble loading up private planes with all sorts of stuff.
--
- Too many replies beneath your current threshold
1. Re:Subvert airport security? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  Or pay ("bribe") TSA $100 and you can walk on buy.... very cheap for drug smuggling...
No problem for airport security by marcosdumay · 2012-03-23 03:07 · Score: 2, Interesting

Since metal detectors use electromagnetic waves (call those non-static magnetic fields if you want), instead of magnetic fields, that cloak wouldn't be a problem at all. Well, ok, it would cloak its interior, like any piece of conductor would. It would also trigger the alarm itself, like any piece of conductor.
But now, why are people so concerned about airport security anyway? The invention has no relation to it.

--
Rethinking email
1. Re:No problem for airport security by jdgeorge · 2012-03-23 03:27 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  But now, why are people so concerned about airport security anyway? The invention has no relation to it.
  They're not really concerned with airport security. Slashdotters desperately crave upward moderation. Posting a clever remark related to a popular meme is the easiest way to satisfy that desire.
2. Re:No problem for airport security by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:34 · Score: 1
  
  We aren't - but since some **** put it in the summary (may be the submitter, probably an editor), it makes it fair game to talk about. I'm sure we all cringed when reading the summary and had a bunch of pointed disparagements towards the submitter / editor run through our heads. I know I did.
3. Re:No problem for airport security by Ginger+Unicorn · 2012-03-23 04:26 · Score: 1
  
  I see what you did there
  
  --
  (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
4. Re:No problem for airport security by JustAnotherIdiot · 2012-03-23 04:40 · Score: 2
  
  FTFA:
  
  This 'antimagnet' could have medical applications, but might also subvert airport security.
  First paragraph, at least read that far dude.
  
  --
  What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
5. Re:No problem for airport security by jdgeorge · 2012-03-23 07:08 · Score: 1
  
  Sigh. Yes, I got upwardly moderated, perhaps demonstrating my point. I guess in this case, the implied meme was "Slashdotters are desperate" for something.
  My point was that I think people aren't REALLY as thoughtless as a lot of the tinfoil hat responses seem to indicate; they're just milking the anti-airport-security-theater thing.
6. Re:No problem for airport security by jdgeorge · 2012-03-23 07:09 · Score: 1
  
  And by "implied", I seem to mean "explicit". I need a nap.
Tinfoil hat replacement by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:08 · Score: 5, Funny

Finally, a tinfoil hat replacement. Everyone knows that some aliens use magnets and not EM waves.
1. Re:Tinfoil hat replacement by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 04:47 · Score: 2
  
  It it really a tin foil hat replacement?
  The reason I ask is that some have been misled to believe that aluminum foil works just as well. But those of us who use actual tin foil hats know that aluminum foil doesn't work.
  "They" can penetrate aluminum foil with their mind control rays so "they" worked to drive down the price of aluminum foil while making real tin foil more expensive. This was done in conjunction with a "grass roots" whisper campaign selling the virtues of aluminum foil as blocking their mind control rays. Once the unaware switch to non-protecting aluminum foil from the fully protecting tin foil, the first thing "they" do is make the wearer believe that the aluminum foil is effective. And over time their campaign gains traction as fewer and fewer of us wear real tin foil hats.
  Is this yet another attempt to get people away from the safety of real tin foil hat protection? Personally, I'm not taking the chance and will stick with my tin foil hat.
Magneto... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:10 · Score: 1

will not be pleased.
High temperature superconductor, misleading by mark-t · 2012-03-23 03:14 · Score: 4, Informative

Because it's not "high temperature" in any sense that would be understood by the term.
It's called high temperature because it's significantly hotter than temperatures where superconductivity occurs in ordinary metals (around 30K). But even the highest temperature at which superconductivity has ever been observed is still freakin' cold... over a hundred degrees below 0
Until room temperature superconductivity is discovered (an enormous breakthrough in physics that would have countless applications), nothing's getting by airport security with this mechanism.

--
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
1. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:27 · Score: 0
  
  This ain't Facebook, you can just say, "It's a relative term."
2. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:41 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Nice way to take a comment out of context. OP stated:
  
  nothing's getting by airport security with this mechanism
  
  Not, 'nothing's getting by airport security'. (bolding mine)
  Take something out of context and suddenly it has vastly different meaning. You probably already knew this, and were seeking a cheap upmod.
3. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by theshowmecanuck · 2012-03-23 03:48 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  That was my first thought. But this might end up being a good prod to get true high temperature superconductor research a super boost. One of the main methods used to detect submarines in the military are magnetic anomaly detectors usually attached to a plane or helicopter. The aircraft don't even need to dip them in the water, just fly over and look for magnetic anomalies (granted the sub needs to be fairly close... but I'm not sure if the military tells anyone what counts as really close). So the crux is that if this will help hide their subs, DARPA and the military might be inclined to shovel piles of money into high temperature superconductors. Although I'm sure they have financed this in the past, this direct applications of stealth for submarines could help with an improved cash flow (or maybe this project is financed this way already.... ?). mmmmm blah blah blah ... profit! Or something like that.
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
4. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:49 · Score: 0
  
  But you're wrong.
  It is high-temperature in comparison to the normal levels of superconductivity.
  Nobody said high means room-temperature or whatever weird-ass stretch of the term you are trying to pull.
  It is only misleading to morons who misuse the term and try to apply "high" to fixed values.
5. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by mark-t · 2012-03-23 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  Or people who don't actually understand that the term is relative to the normal temperature levels of superconductivity, and not relative to what a person without any knowledge of it would normally think when they hear the words "high temperature".
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
6. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 05:18 · Score: 0
  
  Seriously? Given the things that are getting past airport security *now*, you don't think you could get something past using this mechanism? 12" razor blades, knives, and *guns* get through airport security which uses x-ray machines and metal detectors! This is just another example of something that would slip through undetected.
7. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by AdrianKemp · 2012-03-23 05:52 · Score: 1
  
  Don't worry, the military is already lots interested in superconductors that work at room temperature.
  More money would help, more money is more eyes on the problem. But frankly the superconductor field is kind of waiting for it's Einstein if you will. We fundamentally lack understanding about some key things and more than likely it's only going to be solved when somebody has the eureka moment.
8. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 09:46 · Score: 0
  
  Or maybe we shouldn't expect the include the lowest common denominator, they're going to think it's all magic anyway. Realistically, anyone who has a want or need to know about superconductivity can certainly figure out that "high temperature" in the context is a relative term. As part of a widely used lexicon amongst those who deal with superconductors, why should it change?
9. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by mark-t · 2012-03-23 17:54 · Score: 1
  
  All of those things are concealable, because they can fit in your pocket. A cooling unit that can keep a superconductor below 110K is not going to be particularly tiny.
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
10. Re:High temperature superconductor, misleading by martas · 2012-03-24 04:10 · Score: 1
  
  Here's hoping. I would also imagine that the military are already funding superconductor research for other applications, e.g. railguns (superconductors would help there, right?)
  
  --
  weinersmith
STP? by Monoman · 2012-03-23 03:21 · Score: 1

"lined with turns of tape" makes the network geek in me picture this as STP.

--
Keep the Classic Slashdot.
Protect magnetic storage? by danaris · 2012-03-23 03:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

So...is this something that could someday be used to protect magnetic storage media from accidental (or even deliberate) exposure to magnetic fields?
Dan Aris

--
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
1. Re:Protect magnetic storage? by Clueless+Moron · 2012-03-23 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  Well it could, but it's overkill. The big deal about this thing is that it doesn't distort any magnetic field it's in, making it effectively "invisible" from the magnetic field
  If you just want to protect something from a magnetic field and you don't care who knows it, just contain it in something like mu-metal
2. Re:Protect magnetic storage? by Zadaz · 2012-03-23 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  What magnetic storage media are you talking about? The strongest magnets in your house are inside of your hard drives.
  Are you talking about floppies, Zip disks, audio tape, or VHS? Because if you haven't noticed those things don't really exist any more.
  The only magnetic storage that is still in use that is vulnerable to magnetic fields is your credit card stripe, and even those are obsolete in most of the world.
3. Re:Protect magnetic storage? by The+Raven · 2012-03-23 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  We can already do this, by surrounding something with a superconducting cage. This has been known (and done) for decades. The newsworthy portion of this item is that their bubble is also undetectable.
  
  --
  "I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
conductors repel magnetic fields by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:34 · Score: 0

really?
1. Re:conductors repel magnetic fields by Khashishi · 2012-03-23 04:22 · Score: 1
  
  you forgot a key part--superconductor.
Time to update the old jokes by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:34 · Score: 0

A guy walks into an airport with a superconductor...
WTF, can't even get the security theatre right... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-03-23 03:35 · Score: 1

Honestly, I don't doubt that this will turn out to have 'security' uses, it just seems like dicking around with aircraft isn't going to be one of them...

Magnetometers of substantial sophistication have been in use since at least WWII for naval detection and fuzing applications. Surely somebody is already writing up the proposal for a submarine and/or torpedo with a superconductor layer that can be cooled on demand to provide full magnetic field stealth...
This solves what? New? by rickb928 · 2012-03-23 03:36 · Score: 1

Didn;t we use Mu-Metal to do this in the old days? just shape it like a laptop battery and apoligize for the stupid design.

--
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Airport security? Really??? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 03:36 · Score: 1

Great work, slashdot! Way to add controversy to what would otherwise be a completely ordinary, scientific article. Oh noes! Quick, the government is going to ban super conductors!!!
The terrorists have won. by Habberhead · 2012-03-23 03:40 · Score: 2

Why is it that we have come to a point where the first thing we think of for a cool new technology application like this is "could be used to subvert airport security"??
I am sick and disgusted of where we have arrived.
I want off.
1. Re:The terrorists have won. by INeededALogin · 2012-03-23 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  Why is it that we have come to a point where the first thing we think of for a cool new technology application like this is "could be used to subvert airport security"??
  Deep down we are all enemies of the state. Even France realizes it.
Over my head 3 lines in .... by Al+in+SoCal · 2012-03-23 03:52 · Score: 1

Should have studied more in physics ...
1. Re:Over my head 3 lines in .... by RDW · 2012-03-23 05:57 · Score: 2
  
  Should have studied more in physics ...
  Excellent! You are eminently qualified to invest in my company, which harnesses this technology to generate power from a workable perpetual motion machine!:
  http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm#cheng
Submarines by tsotha · 2012-03-23 04:20 · Score: 3, Interesting

This could be a big deal in submarine warfare if they can get the temperature up. With the advent of AIP, navies are having to rely on second-string technologies like Magnetic Anomaly Detectors.
Re:WTF, can't even get the security theatre right. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 04:32 · Score: 0

Just look for the iceberg going in the opposite direction to the ocean currents and surface wind velocity.
Re:This solves what? New? by 50000BTU_barbecue · 2012-03-23 04:45 · Score: 3, Informative

I was about to mention mumetal, but its claim to fame is very high permeability. It doesn't repel magnetic fields, it Shamwows them. I suppose if the mumetal is saturated from the inside, then it doesn't hide the object from an external field. Although it takes a lot to saturate properly treated mumetal.
Old man story time. My Tektronix 547 CRT oscilloscope has its CRT encased in a mumetal shield. I got a powerful magnet and put it on the side of the case, the trace didn't budge at all. Great stuff. Of course, mumetal loses its properites if it's dinged, deformed or otherwise mechanically abused.

--
Mostly random stuff.
'high temp' superconductors by pswPhD · 2012-03-23 04:52 · Score: 2

Currently, high temperature superconductors work up to around 100K- which is about -170C. So currently you would need a liquid nitrogen cylinder to contain the cloak and keep it cold enough. Then you would need to hide that in some other way. somehow I don't think that is likely. Room temperature superconductors are some way off- they know how low temperature (few kelvin) superconductors work, but are not sure how the high temperature conductors work- so researchers are not sure how to improve on the current designs.
one ring to rule them all by schlachter · 2012-03-23 04:54 · Score: 1

it's where you put your precious...my precious....

--
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
So could you use this 4 kids eating buckyballs? by way2trivial · 2012-03-23 04:55 · Score: 0

If a child swallows two buckyballs they have gotten stuck against different parts of the intestinal tract.
this causes problems...
a single passes no problem. could you use this (or some other magnetic field I suppose) to negate the attraction between two or more magnets long enough to let them pass as well?

--
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
1. Re:So could you use this 4 kids eating buckyballs? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 05:37 · Score: 0
  
  Not without surgically applying the device (including cooling mechanism for the 'high-temp' superconductor) around the all but one of the swallowed magnets, but at that point you may as well just remove the things.
Re:This solves what? New? by rickb928 · 2012-03-23 05:17 · Score: 1

Since real oscilloscopes have wheels on the carts, shielding is crucial. Turning your scope sideways would move the trace.

--
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
So it starts... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 05:54 · Score: 0

Great now it's only a matter of time before we are all stripping naked, getting in hospital gowns and being sedated for a flight to visit grandma in Florida with our luggage being delivered via unmanned flight. Really, I mean it it's the only way to ensure "Safety". And when the price of flying skyrockets because of this the government will have what it really wants. Less flyers. Welcome Comrade to the Dystopian States of America please present your papers.
Liquid nitrogen airport security epic fail ... by JoeGee · 2012-03-23 06:06 · Score: 2

Terrorist Jim: Bob, we will have you wear the antimagnet cloaking suit. All we have to do is have you walk into a restroom right before you go through the scanner, open this forty gallon Thermos container and pour the liquid nitrogen all over yourself.
You'll walk to airport security and pass through the security check with no problems.
Day of the terrorist strike.
Bob enters the airport dragging a heavy carry-on suitcase. His suit is disproportionately large compared to his body, and seems quite stiff. He moves with great difficulty.
He takes his luggage into the airport restroom and enters a bathroom stall. Witnesses report a hissing noise and a strange fog coming from under the stall door. There's a splashing noise, followed by a sizzling sound and a loud wail. Bob flings open the bathroom stall to reveal his suit, bathed in vapor. Steam rises from his exposed cracked skin. He takes two steps and falls to the floor, writhing in pain, as parts of his suit shatter and skin sloughs from his hands.
Terrorist Jim (upon seeing the news reports): So next time, we strap a small refrigeration unit to Sam's back ...

--

Get off my virtual lawn, you damned virtual kids!
Perpetual motion/ free energy advocates rejoice by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 06:13 · Score: 0

Cranks seeking free energy by manipulating magnetism will have fun with this. See, for example, www.steorn.com
DC Fields by residents_parking · 2012-03-23 06:55 · Score: 1

I was going to say what about DC fields then I remembered - there's no such thing as DC, it's just very slow AC.
This may become important in 25-50 years by Solandri · 2012-03-23 07:01 · Score: 1

A friend and I were discussing the ramifications of superconducting racetracks for low-friction transportation. One of the problems he brought up was how to deal with intersections. Quantum levitation locks your maglev car into a certain orientation relative to a magnetic field. But at an intersection the magnetic field changes. Either you stop levitating, or your car comes to a screeching halt as if it had hit a brick wall.

Something which can shield from static magnetic fields would allow two magnetic tracks to cross (at slightly different heights) without interference. So you could build an intersection.
cancels the magnetic field eh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 10:39 · Score: 0

so, does this make the "Perpetual motion machine" posible.....
do it ---> Troll me up!
Not just the rich by mcrbids · 2012-03-23 10:50 · Score: 3, Interesting

Anybody who has their own plane pretty much does whatever they want. I've landed my plane at large airports (EG: Oakland, CA) with extensive security lines for commercial flights, and driven my car out to the plane in order to load it. The only credentials I need are the keys to a plane and maybe a driver's license.
I've landed my private plane at big airports in order to hook up with commercial flights, and it's truly absurd to land, walk in off the tarmac, be personally greeted at the private aviation side of the airport, and then take a shuttle to be treated like a potential criminal in a cattle stock yard. This affords me very little respect for the TSA.
You don't need to be a Fortune 500 CEO to have a private plane, the actual cost to own (especially for a time share aka "flight club") can be similar in cost to owning a recent model car.

--
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-26 11:56 · Score: 0

Any relation to this cloak? http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adma.201104012/abstract