Slashdot Mirror
Invisibility Tech Demo Tomorrow In NYC
Velcroman1 writes "Invisibility cloaks and deflector shields, once a staple of popular science-fiction, are now the real deal, researchers say. But here on Earth, top researchers have been battling too, not over the fate of the empire but over whose tech will someday shield U.S. ships. Fractal Antenna Systems came out swinging Wednesday over a 'perfected' invisibility cloak by researchers at Duke and Imperial College. Company CEO and inventor Nathan Cohen issued a scathingly critical press release throwing very visible zingers — and claiming he invented it first. '[Their tech] makes you more, not less, visible,' Cohen said. The company says a patent-pending deflector shield built off a variant of the technology can divert electromagnetic radiation around an object — and they plan to show it off Friday in New York City, at the Radio Club of America."
If it works you won't see it.
Now we can finally catch up with Romulan technology.
I went to their last demo, and I didn't see anything!
Here is a picture of the device in action:
As you can see it is remarkably improved over previous versions.
Pics or it didn't happen.
I'll believe it when I don't see it.
Move along, move along, nothing to see here.
Seeing is NOT believing.
Pay No Attention to The Man behind The Invisibility Cloak.
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
It's hardly a cloak if you're using a ninja as your subject.
There are a couple of videos on the Fractal Antennas website Fractal Antenna: Whats New. Looks like they have something for microwaves. But when they start talking about how this could be scaled up from microwaves to visible light I start to get a bit skeptical.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
You can. It's called a fucking Faraday cage.
Haha, right, because a Faraday cage won't show up like a blinding spotlight on radar or anything. That's like saying a building makes you invisible because you can't see someone inside. Sure, I guess in a sense that's correct, but you can still see the damned building.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
When you can bend light in vacant 3 dimensional space with EM fields so as to conceal large moving objects you can bet your ass that we'll
never hear a thing about it
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
Isn't it simpler to just generate an SEP field instead?
Changing the resonance frequency of the scanners (radar) will detect it.
quote:
“If you move half a degree in angle, it stops working.
If you move half a percent in bandwidth, it stops working.
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/11/14/deflector-shield-and-invisibility-cloak-wars/
"Captain, I can't find the enemy destroyer anywhere! There's nothing but a big faraday cage moving at approximately the speed of a destroyer in the middle of the ocean!"
"Damnit! Where could they be?!"
The enemies of Democracy are
I went through the website, and it is not really for the lay-person of the Internet.
From what I read and watched, we have not gotten to the point where we can make a human being "invisible" to the point where the visible light spectrum is affected.
However, with regards to electromagnetic spectrum, such as radar, microwave and other methods of scanning, searching or detection? Wow. The shielded objects simply are not there. Not a "hole in the air" sort of not there, I'm talking "does not exist in that portion of space/time" kind of there.
This will move the whole radar detection game into obsolescence, and we'll be back to using human observers, or using different spectrum devices to detect the air turbulence from the cloaked object's passing.
[End Of Line]
It's not "perfect". It has the nifty property that it doesn't reflect anything. But it only works from one angle, and for one frequency (and a microwave frequency at that). It's not even "perfect" at eliminating reflection, just much better than previous ones.
It's a clever but minor advance blown entirely out of proportion because some jackass attached the word "perfect" to it. Everybody who repeated it needs to have their science writing license revoked.
But if you put a camera behind the building looking away from it and connect it to a large screen in front of the building then someone located in front of the screen won't see the building.
My understanding is that these devices work similarly. They don't block radiation, but bend it.
Nathan Cohen and Fractal Antenna Systems have been on a crusade to corrupt Wikipedia. They have been paying multiple editors who have been systematically making advertising edits to multiple Wikipedia articles, all coming from IPs that map to the vicinity of Fractal Antenna Systems' headquarters in MA. They remove any reference to competitors (eg. Fractus) and any references that disagree that fractal antennas are the be-all end-all. The bulk of the corruption is on the fractal antenna article, but Nathan Cohen's name has been tossed in to several other pages... Notable people from XYZ, notable graduates from university XYZ, etc,
See the talk page on Fractal Antennas for all the details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fractal_antenna#Obvious_bias_in_article
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
You can. It's called a fucking Faraday cage.
No, actually, it's a PMC surface formed out of a dielectric slab.
Tech details here:
http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nmat3476-s1.pdf