Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Super-Black Is the New Black (theatlantic.com)

Posted by msmash on from the unravelling-mysteries dept.

Feathers on birds of paradise contain light-trapping nanotechnology that makes some of the deepest blacks in the world, a new study has found. From a report: Blackbirds, it turns out, aren't actually all that black. Their feathers absorb most of the visible light that hits them, but still reflect between 3 and 5 percent of it. For really black plumage, you need to travel to Papua New Guinea and track down the birds of paradise. Although these birds are best known for their gaudy, kaleidoscopic colors, some species also have profoundly black feathers. The feathers ruthlessly swallow light and, with it, all hints of edge or contour. By analyzing museum specimens, Dakota McCoy, from Harvard University, has discovered exactly how the birds achieving such deep blacks. It's all in their feathers' microscopic structure.

A typical bird feather has a central shaft called a rachis. Thin branches, or barbs, sprout from the rachis, and even thinner branches -- barbules -- sprout from the barbs. The whole arrangement is flat, with the rachis, barbs, and barbules all lying on the same plane. The super-black feathers of birds of paradise, meanwhile, look very different. Their barbules, instead of lying flat, curve upward. And instead of being smooth cylinders, they are studded in minuscule spikes. These unique structures excel at capturing light. When light hits a normal feather, it finds a series of horizontal surfaces, and can easily bounce off. But when light hits a super-black feather, it finds a tangled mess of mostly vertical surfaces. Instead of being reflected away, it bounces repeatedly between the barbules and their spikes. With each bounce, a little more of it gets absorbed. Light loses itself within the feathers. McCoy and her colleagues, including Teresa Feo from the National Museum of Natural History, showed that this light-trapping nanotechnology can absorb up to 99.95 percent of incoming light.

101 comments

  1. Orange is the new White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    I don't mind that he's a traitor, because Moscow Donald is an uneducated racist just like me.

    1. Re:Orange is the new White by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      Black Birds Matter?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Orange is the new White by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Black Birds Matter?

      I've always thought they do.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    3. Re: Orange is the new White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      None of you retards have thought about how the bird dissipates the energy. What happens when the bird is in full sunlight at noon?. Does that bird then blow a jet of hot air out of its ass?

    4. Re: Orange is the new White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They explode. Like popcorn.

      You've never watched a blackbird on a sunny afternoon?

    5. Re: Orange is the new White by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      None of you retards have thought about how the bird dissipates the energy. What happens when the bird is in full sunlight at noon?

      Why would you want answers from people you think of as retards?

    6. Re: Orange is the new White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Black holes have a lot of matter!

    7. Re: Orange is the new White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought there was an butterfly that was the deepest black (centre is black, wingtips black)

    8. Re: Orange is the new White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.nature.com/news/2004/040128/full/news040126-4.html

      Not the butterfly I meant (have one at home) but still this is nothing new!

      My specimen has a black body + centre and and lighter blue color at the edges.

      Don't have the name but you can watch one fly in the Top Gear special in Bolivia somewhere in the beginning when they are at the bank of the river for those who are really bored ;-)

      The really tiny hairs absorb all light which makes it ultrablack.

      This should be implemented on high res screens to get some proper contrast ratio's!

  2. Solar cells anyone by SirTreveyan · · Score: 1

    Is this something we could apply solar cells/panels to boost efficiency?

    --

    SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0

    0 rows returned

    1. Re: Solar cells anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      I wish someone would black out your posting

    2. Re:Solar cells anyone by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Informative

      People have tried.

      https://phys.org/news/2006-06-...

      Silicon surfaces rendered black by pits and bumps only nanometers or billionths of a meter large could in the future help make solar power cells more efficient.

      Flat silicon surfaces are normally highly reflective. Scientists want to minimize reflection as much as possible when it comes to solar power cells made of silicon, because the more light they reflect, the less they convert to electricity. Often, anti-reflective coatings are used, which reduce the amount of average reflection in the wavelengths of light solar power cells use by 85 percent to 92 percent.

      The novel treatment developed by researchers at the Technical University of Munich can cut the surface reflection silicon experiences by 95 percent to 98 percent across the wavelengths of light solar power cells use, making them black.

      "The results are really good when it comes to preventing reflection. It is still speculative as to how much this can boost the efficiency of solar cells. I am optimistic that for traditional designs of solar cells, it could give a 15 to 20 percent improvement with respect to their present efficiency. The performance of some solar cells with novel design could be improved even more dramatically. However, I think we will need a bit of time to show this," said researcher Svetoslav Koynov, a physicist.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:Solar cells anyone by lazarus · · Score: 1

      I think it would have more applications to passive solar (heating) panels. The more light you absorb the more heat you capture.

      --
      I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
    4. Re:Solar cells anyone by Solandri · · Score: 1
      That's basically what Solyndra tried (and failed). It's got two basic problems:
      • While the efficiency per square meter of sunlight goes up, the efficiency per square meter of solar panel goes down. So it ends up being more expensive than flat solar panels per unit of energy collected (lower cost efficiency). That extra up-front cost may be worth it on a constrained space such as solar panels aboard a sailboat. But if you've got lots of open land that you can't afford to completely cover with panels in the first place, flat panels are better.
      • The sunlight which isn't absorbed by the photovoltaics in the panel isn't just reflected to be absorbed by more PV. Some of it is absorbed by the non-PV portions of the molecular structure like the protective glass layer on top of the PV layer (heating the array up). So the above case (higher efficiency per square meter of sunlight) is only the ideal case. In most practical implementations (like in Solyndra's case), it actually ends up being lower efficiency per square meter of sunlight due to the sunlight on average hitting the panel surfaces at a more oblique angle than a flat panel (the light has to travel a greater distance through the glass, so more is absorbed by it). This loss is compounded for each time the light reflects.

      Black feathers don't have this problem because you don't care what happens to the sunlight you're absorbing, only that it's all absorbed. You're not trying to direct the light at specific molecules within your structure like you are with PV panels. It would however work for thermal solar installations. All you care about in those is converting the sunlight into heat, and thus maximizing net absorption.

    5. Re:Solar cells anyone by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 2

      Heck, even if the efficiency doesn't go up much, it would be great to be able to cut the glare from reflections to minimize issues to air traffic etc. That's always been one of my larger concerns about blanketing large areas with panels.

    6. Re:Solar cells anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Solar cell efficiency is an almost meaningless metric. Cost (Wp/m^2) is still the longpole.

    7. Re:Solar cells anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could be useful for radar absorbent materials on spy planes. Being a nanostructure you could rely on laminar flow to avoid disrupting the aerodynamic characterisics.

    8. Re:Solar cells anyone by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Well but you can optimize that in a variety of ways by increasing efficiency and hence Wp/m^2. Or you could optimize the cell so it works better in low light conditions. Or you could have a cell with low efficiency but really cheap cells.

      E.g. people have suggested thin film cells that you could spray onto large areas of glass and build really large array that was almost as cheap as normal passive glass.

      And of course there some applications - solar powered watches or calculators or satellites where you're size or weight limited but don't care about cost.

      It's all worth investigating.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    9. Re:Solar cells anyone by swillden · · Score: 1

      OTOH, any light that is neither reflected nor converted to electricity will heat the panel, and efficiency decreases as panel temperature increases. So ideally it's best to reflect all light that isn't converted.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    10. Re:Solar cells anyone by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Or you could do stacked junction cells which absorb the whole lot.

      https://www.sciencedaily.com/r...

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    11. Re:Solar cells anyone by scatbomb · · Score: 1

      Potassium hydroxide texturing is standard for silicon solar, nothing new. Reflection at the semiconductor level is already 2%, so there is no possible way that better anti-reflection coating alone would improve efficiency by "15-20%" as the physicist in this article seems to think.

    12. Re:Solar cells anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead of cutting reflection, the below research on 2013 aimed to trap light completely below the surface (of all frequencies)

      https://www.technologyreview.com/s/510016/how-light-trapping-surfaces-will-boost-solar-cell-efficiency/

    13. Re:Solar cells anyone by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      I think using nano structures in solar cells was one of the things Jesus was alluding to when he told us to 'Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these'. The lilies do not toil spin or so because they use nano structures to harvest solar energy efficiently.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    14. Re:Solar cells anyone by sudon't · · Score: 1

      ...it would be great...

      Unless Anish Kapoor buys the rights and won’t let anyone else use it.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    15. Re:Solar cells anyone by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      High quality camera lenses have been using nano-coatings for several years. Each manufacturer has its own secret process. It's reasonable to assume that the concept "anti-reflection coating for solar cells" is both too general and too-long established to be properly patented. A specific patent would only cover one nano-coating process, and other processes would be possible.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  3. Black-Out Blinds by deadwill69 · · Score: 1

    Blinds and curtains to keep the light out. I bet they would have an incredible insulating factor also.

    1. Re:Black-Out Blinds by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but blinds and curtains don't contain "nanotechnology." Bird feathers do, apparently. See, this is why I come to slashdot, I am always learning something new here...

    2. Re:Black-Out Blinds by deadwill69 · · Score: 1

      And you don't think somebody might not use this new discovery to do such a thing?

    3. Re:Black-Out Blinds by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Birds make the very best nano-engineers... and they work for next to nothing! Just keep a pile of loose garbage next to their desks and they're happy.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:Black-Out Blinds by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Blinds and curtains to keep the light out. I bet they would have an incredible insulating factor also.

      The blacker something is, the more energy it radiates in the near infrared. So I'm going to say that they wouldn't improve the insulating factor. In fact, if you exposed the black side, they would reduce it.

      Blackout cloth already blacks out the light sufficiently that the limiting factor is how well you can seal around the edges of your curtains. Exposing the black side would fix this problem, but cause the other problem. The hot outer side of the curtain would heat up the air between the curtain and the glass.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Black-Out Blinds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have I been a bird this entire time?

    6. Re:Black-Out Blinds by hey! · · Score: 1

      Lining of optical devices to reduce internal reflections.

      I once took a cheap 90mm refractor and took all the steps I could to eliminate internal reflections. It made a huge difference in contrast, for example on images of Jupiter.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    7. Re:Black-Out Blinds by deadwill69 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like it would make for a nice set to use in the winter. At least on those days the sun comes through.

    8. Re:Black-Out Blinds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The hot outer side of the curtain would heat up the air between the curtain and the glass.

      Which, for some of us in Northern climates where is gets Really Fucking Cold might find helpful as it diminishes the heat loss between the air/window into the room.

      Or some kind of skylight which let you have something underneath which gave radiant heat in the house.

      I see lots of applications for being able to translate light into heat. Or at least, places where it would be awfully nice to try. The last few weeks of polar vortex have definitely made some of us acutely aware of what extreme cold really is, and I know I've experienced -40 ... and at that temperature Celcius and Fahrenheit are the same so it doesn't matter where you're from.

      On those days, you get bright sunshine which leaves no insulation in the clouds, and freezing temps. So any form of light/heat transformation is welcome.

      The blacker something is, the more energy it radiates in the near infrared

      But, now that you phrase it that way, and having seen a couple of documentaries on animal vision .... suddenly one wonders, are the birds this is meant to attract seeing black and being attracted to it? Or are they seeing "OMG, he sparkles in the near infrared" and responding to that?

      So often we perceive these things in terms of our own vision and senses, but often in the animal kingdom they're seeing something entirely different. But maybe the target audience isn't seeing "black", but glowing.

    9. Re:Black-Out Blinds by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If you're trying to keep light out then the goal is to reflect it away. The problem with black is it absorbs and thus makes a really horrible insulator.

      Ever notice the inside of your beer cooler is not black?

    10. Re:Black-Out Blinds by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      On those days, you get bright sunshine which leaves no insulation in the clouds, and freezing temps. So any form of light/heat transformation is welcome.

      I remember reading a howto on passive solar heat for one's home by adding a vent near the floor and the ceiling, and adding a glassed-in black strip on the outside of your home. If you don't want heat, you close the vents. You'd probably need the top vent to switch between outside and inside to avoid heat building up there when it wasn't in use, during the summer.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:Black-Out Blinds by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Some fabrics do contain nanotechnology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanofabrics

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  4. Odd choice of words. by nyet · · Score: 1

    "Technology"? Really?

    1. Re:Odd choice of words. by deadwill69 · · Score: 1

      I think this might fall under science if that's what you're implying:
      https://science.slashdot.org/

    2. Re:Odd choice of words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um yes, technology! Those birds are more innovative and disruptive than anything that has come out of Silicon Valley in the last 30 years.

      And the company that's willing to spend the $$$$ on basic R&D to figure out exactly how they do it and how to replicate it to apply it to solar cells or some other thing that requires absorbing visible light will do very well for themselves in the long run.

      Expect some putz in Silly Valley to start some startup and paint something black and call it black bird technology and get a valuation of a hundred BILLION dollars for his "innovative disruptive innovation".

      I'm gonna party like it's 1999 again, baby!

    3. Re:Odd choice of words. by nyet · · Score: 1

      Then every single thing in the universe contains "nanotechnology".

      Dumb.

    4. Re:Odd choice of words. by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      Dinosaur technology, literally.

    5. Re: Odd choice of words. by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      No, the problem is that bird feathers are not technology, let alone nanotech. Spewing buzzwords in total ignorance to sound "cool" does not make for a useful news for nerds site. Technology is the practical application of knowledge to make things. Animal organs and tissues are not technology.

    6. Re:Odd choice of words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it isn't technology because it isn't intentionally made.

      Should some company manage to artificially replicate it, then what is produced is technology, but the natural bird feather sure as hell aren't.

  5. Vantablack by fluffernutter · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Vantablack has already been invented, move on!

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:Vantablack by networkBoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      actually I wonder if this might count as prior art to open the tech to other manufacturers...

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    2. Re:Vantablack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vantablack has already been invented, move on!

      #SuperBlackLightMatters

    3. Re:Vantablack by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Vantablack has already been invented, move on!

      Vantablack absorbs 99.965% of visible light. Which is admittedly better, but to think that these birds have been able to absorb 99.95% of visible light with these feathers for so long is still pretty damn impressive. Especially since it's taken this long do understand why. It's truly impressive how many things we have and can learn from a material science perspective just by looking at what nature has already figured out seemingly at random.

    4. Re:Vantablack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason it has taken this long to "understand why" is because the answer was obvious. There is only one mechanism to absorb light and not reflect it.

    5. Re:Vantablack by impossiblefork · · Score: 1

      Also, you wouldn't want to wear Vantablack clothes due to the danger of breathing in the carbon nanotubes.

    6. Re:Vantablack by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Also, you wouldn't want to wear Vantablack clothes due to the danger of breathing in the carbon nanotubes.

      And people would try to sit on you in a movie theater.

    7. Re:Vantablack by flink · · Score: 4, Informative

      Vantablack has already been invented, move on!

      Vantablack has to be grown at 400 C in a furnace, while birds manufacture their feathers somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 C. Far more materials are amiable to being subjected to bird temperatures than Vantablack temperatures. Vantablack surfaces also have to be protected from accidental touching or abrasion, something that bird feathers don't have the luxury of.

      Overall, I think there is probably still quite a bit we can learn from birds. Also, they're just neat.

    8. Re:Vantablack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not fond of their habit of pooping on my car.

    9. Re:Vantablack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, naturally-occuring structures are not prior art for patent claims. Why would you think they would be?

    10. Re:Vantablack by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      actually I wonder if this might count as prior art to open the tech to other manufacturers...

      Nature doesn't count as prior tech, but if this discovery leads to other people being able to make a similar product, then there will be competition and everyone will win.

      The name [Vantablack] comes from the term[s] "Vertically Aligned NanoTube Arrays". If you used nanotubes which were aligned in some other fashion, you probably wouldn't interfere with Vantablack's patents, if any. I'm not aware of any actual patents on Vantablack; WP also says that Vertically aligned nanotube arrays are sold by several firms, including NanoLab, Santa Barbara Infrared and others. I don't even see a patent on the process! There are several patents on the use of Vantablack, but that is not the same thing.

      Is Vantablack actually patented? Or is it just a trade secret?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:Vantablack by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Because they can serve as inspiration to anyone? And because it's not invention if you're copying nature? And because patents are supposed to motivate inventors to publish their inventions, but there's no sense in publishing "I did this and that thing that you could have already seen in nature before I locked you out of doing the same yourself"?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    12. Re:Vantablack by NettiWelho · · Score: 1

      No, naturally-occuring structures are not prior art for patent claims. Why would you think they would be?

      Because otherwise a business company would be able to patent your genome and cease and desist you from dividing your cells illegally and have the government terminate you.

    13. Re:Vantablack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Giggity.

    14. Re: Vantablack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, which one is manufactured and which is grown?

      How can I trust you if you mess that up?
      You're just fucking with us right?

    15. Re:Vantablack by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      The obvious answer is, "It depends."

      If the patent only covers the shape of the surface, then you would have a reasonable argument that the patent would be invalid. I don't think it would technically be considered prior art, instead being evidence that the patent describes something that isn't patentable subject matter (something in nature).

      More likely, though, is that the patent would have to be more specific than just the shape anyway. The patent may describe the exact arrangement of the specific material, in which case using a different material would avoid infringement, or the patent may be about the process used to manufacture the material.

    16. Re:Vantablack by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      You know, I'm not actually sure now that I think about it. I'm just so damn cynical I assumed that it had patents on it.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    17. Re:Vantablack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because no one invented them therefore no one should get a patent on them. But, if someone invents a method to manufacture similar to what is naturally occurring then patenting the manuf technique should be ok.

    18. Re: Vantablack by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Let's see, collision with another photon to produce a matter antimatter pair? Falling into a black hole? Redshift to zero frequency via expansion of space? I forgot, what was the other way?

    19. Re:Vantablack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Overall, I think there is probably still quite a bit we can learn from birds. Also, they're just meat.

      There. FTFY.

    20. Re:Vantablack by IHateFatCashews · · Score: -1

      Cousin! It's bad enough that you fuck the neighbors' goats. But a horse is going too far! http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2018/01/irivington_man_appears_in_cour.html

  6. Desiato will be happy by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

    Hopefully in a few years someone can finally build that spaceship for Disaster Area's concert.

  7. Increase efficiency of solar cells? by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    This gave me an idea: Could you grow silicon crystals in a 3-dimensional pattern that would do what these feathers do? If you could wouldn't you be able to create extremely efficient solar cells?

    1. Re:Increase efficiency of solar cells? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  8. It's like, how much more black could it get? by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Funny

    And the answer is none. None more black.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:It's like, how much more black could it get? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      And the other standard joke: They've invented fuligin!

    2. Re:It's like, how much more black could it get? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you trying to say there, Willis?

    3. Re:It's like, how much more black could it get? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, I only clicked on this comment section to search for this correct answer.

    4. Re:It's like, how much more black could it get? by Hieronymus+Howard · · Score: 1

      "this light-trapping nanotechnology can absorb up to 99.95 percent of incoming light"

      So the answer is 0.05% more black ;)

      *awaits a special 'bird-feather black' edition of Smell The Glove*

  9. Feathers and technology? by bmimatt · · Score: 1

    "Feathers contain nanotechnology"... Interesting, who developed that tech and put it on birds? Inquiring minds need to know.

    1. Re: Feathers and technology? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      God. Duh.

    2. Re:Feathers and technology? by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      The Masters of Nanotechnology. Though Zor perfected it within a Matrix that regenerated protoculture via seeds of the Flower of Life.

  10. Oblig Spinal Tap reference: by Master+Moose · · Score: 1

    “It's like, how much more black could this be? And the answer is none — none more black.”

    --
    . . .gone when the morning comes
  11. Absorbed? by QuadEddie · · Score: 1

    Can someone explain how the light gets 'absorbed'? Does it turn into heat? I'm interested in what happens to the photon as it's getting bounced around in the feather.

    1. Re:Absorbed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      generally speaking, yes, it gets turned into heat
      altho it can also be used to do useful chemical work such as vitamin D synthesis in many animals including birds, or photosynthesis, creating stored energy

    2. Re:Absorbed? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      It gets converted into electricity, which is the bird's primary energy source.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re:Absorbed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can someone explain how the light gets 'absorbed'?

      Each time it encounters matter, there's an opportunity for the photon to interact in a way that absorbs its energy. This requires that the material has a resonant mode that matches the energy of the photon, so it can exactly absorb all of the photon's energy; if not, the photon won't interact (i.e., will pass through or get reflected). When a photon is absorbed, its energy is converted into electromagnetic energy in the material (e.g., exciting an electron to a higher-energy state or moving atoms in a molecule apart; this transition must exactly match the energy from the photon). Then that energy eventually gets converted into motion, which is heat (electron goes flying through a material, bumping into atoms and setting them vibrating, or excited atoms move back together and begin vibrating). If the photon bounces around more times, there are more opportunities for it to interact with the material in just the right way to get absorbed. There's a little info on this here: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-exactly-does-light-tr/

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

      Obviously it gets converted into nanotechnology.

  12. Racist Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Blackbirds, it turns out, aren't actually all that black.

    How dare you? If a bird wants to self identify as being black, who the hell are you to say that they aren't?

    This is just another attempt by the old ivory gull patriarchy to further marginalize an historically oppressed species and deny their cultural identity.

    I can't believe that there wasn't a trigger warning on this post. Don't you know that /. needs to be a safe space, free from the tyranny of archaic ways of thought and ideas and words that are by definition violent?

    1. Re:Racist Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      racists gonna race

    2. Re:Racist Article by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      How dare you? If a bird wants to self identify as being black, who the hell are you to say that they aren't?

      Raven Dove-lazal.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Racist Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blackbirds, it turns out, aren't actually all that black.

      How dare you? If a bird wants to self identify as being black, who the hell are you to say that they aren't?

      How dare you! The proper term is afro-american. You should be calling it the afro-american-Papa New Guinean bird of paradise, you insensitive clod!

  13. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  14. Ruby Rhod by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Super Green

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  15. Hotblack Desiato will want this ... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    ... for Disaster Area's next stunt ship.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  16. Wow such an absgtract article.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Did u come up with this before or after you were done choking on some (censored).
    Still trying to understand how this is /. and not your pubic library..

    help me or us to understand how this could be considered Nat-Geo and not /.
    and yes the Title is intentionally misspelled from the mind, numbing stupidity conveyed by this article..

    Choke on it MsMash, Oh wait I'm really veeury sorry, perhaps you already have, or are..
    best wishes clearing that out so you can try to resume a "normal" life.

  17. How black? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    Blacker than the blackest black, times infinity.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  18. how about that hair stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about Toppik the stuff for balding individuals, comes in a spray can.. seems to be a similiar molecular structure as outlined in the commercial.. Right??
    Hmm verry interesting

  19. think outside the box by Killer99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This sounds to me like a VERY good idea for Stealth Tech... of course the size and material would need to be tailored for the wavelengths involved but it's all EM energy....

  20. I want a ninja suit made out of this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because.

  21. Put it on my Jet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This could be the next generation of stealth.

  22. Kanye already covered this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://youtu.be/0Axzxe1a78E?t=2m4s

  23. and hank hill is super white! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and hank hill is super white!

    1. Re:and hank hill is super white! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awesome joke creimer!

  24. Make this into a a paint... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then paint a whole room with it. Whoa!

    How about the Really Black House?

  25. Do-it-yourself planetarium... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paint a room and install rgb leds all over the floor walls and ceiling.

  26. dead black birds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great, now they're all dead because everyone will want one. There are some things you just don't talk about.