That's what was used thirty years ago on an episode of the "Mission:Impossible" series. A rear-projection screen was lowered behind a plate-glass window, with a picture of the nearby bank vault projected on the screen. This hid the actual vault from passerby so the team could open it.
This could be done around a vehicle, with a screen using the same vertical ridges used in children's move-to-animate images. This presents different vertical slices of images in different directions, so different viewpoints would be visible from different directions. Project images from several cameras, using projectors in line with the prism material (or cover the tank with flat screens with prism-covered screens). At a glance, observers would see clumps of trees and scattered bushes where expected -- closer looks would reveal discontinuities and movement would trigger the circuitry around the edge of the eye with flickering movement similar to windblown branches.
But as your tank pops out from behind the trees and the two enemies see each other, you'd like to have two seconds to aim your guns before they decide that they're seeing something...and you hope the infantry you're aiming at isn't surrounding a tank which you haven't seen yet.
(I did not propose painting the tank with reflective material because that tends to reflect directly back at the projector -- that's why roadside reflective paint works so well, because those beads send most of the light from your car right back toward the car. You'd need reflective material which is more selective, and we can assume the experts in the military have already been working on that for twenty years... or paint the tank with reflector and surround it with a half-silvered or polarized mirror which the projector beam can be reflected from.)
It's simpler than that. If you look at descriptions of new surveillance drones, you'll note that they include optical camouflage. They simply have downward-pointing lights which are the same brightness as the sky above. Brightness is more important than color (using blue lights is left as an exercise for the reader) -- ground observers will no longer see a black dot cruising around.
There also are pictures someplace showing a couple of soldiers with a vehicle on a ridge -- turning on the floodlights on the side of the vehicle blots them out, and they're no longer simple silhouette targets.
When are we going to see the day when adolescent males can buy a camouflage suit to sneak into the girls locker room?
I can sell you one right now. How much can you afford? Payment in advance, no refunds.
If someone is able to project images into eyes, we can skip all the intermediate steps and camo equipment and just project the image of the original scene in those eyes so they can't see any part of reality. In Star Trek, it would be "using a holographic projector to hide an area".
Yes, that inference of the ancestor from comparisons does make sense. So the common ancestor was more surfacelike than extremophilelike (and I suppose there would be some number of antidisestablishmentarianist extremophilelikes, similar to modern liberal lawyers).
Whether a Greenhouse Effect is a threat depends upon whether we're going to die due to a lack of carbon in 500,000 years. Look up calculations on the "carbon cycle" and see how much carbon gets locked up in the sea floor compared to the amount elsewhere. Ignore the calculations which use "we know the system is in balance, therefore we find this number by subtracting all the other sinks". They have to show why there is a balance rather than assume it.
There must be a way of testing this hypothesis. Perhaps isotopically?
Yup. Look at one of Thomas Gold's articles, linked to in the Slashdot story, go to the bottom for a link up to his page with several of his papers. Several papers there show such tests.
The news is about geologists learning more about biology in their rocks. Slashdot is more interested in news items than in a report which summarizes the recent research in a field -- K5 tends to have more of that. Web searches of those researchers easily finds several publications about their work, with a lot of it from the early '90s. (The web is not a library, do a literature search if you really want a lot of material)
It's science which has been compressed by the journalism of fitting in a single sentence so as to keep the summary brief. If you read the source reports it does refer to the water inside the compressed material.
Basins that lack source rocks are barren; in his model they should contain hydrocarbons
There obviously are rocks which block upward flow. My 300-foot water well isn't producing oil; how deeply were those basins drilled? "Every deep hole that has been drilled into the crystalline basement, by several Soviet deep drilling programs, by the German on-going deep drilling efforts, by the deep drilling into the Swedish granite, has shown the presence of hydrocarbons at depth."
Natural gas deposits at the "... deeper levels, which must be expected to have maintained the much more abundant gas,... have been found to be very productive."
He ignores plate tectonics
Note "Figure 3", a petroleum and tectonic map of SE Asia. This is within a section "Horizontal and Vertical Patterns of Hydrocarbon Fields" which points out "a larger scale phenomenon than... the geology of the outer crust." He's well aware of tectonics, and is pointing out that the Middle East, where several tectonic plates meet, show oil similarities over the entire region which aren't explained by burial and rotting of small areas of material...in rocks of many different ages.
his references are often 50 years out of date.
I see 6 references before 1960 in that paper's list of over 40 references; what does "often 50 years" mean?
The "rotted material" theory of oil is also old, from 1757.
If you want new text, look at this week's tabloids at the supermarket. If you want truth then you find it where it exists.
And as for oil fields not refilling, look at Wall Street Journal, page one, April 16, 1999, "Odd Reservoir Off Louisiana Prods
Oil Experts to Seek a Deeper Meaning", where 3-D seismic technology showed a deep fault gushing oil into the Eugene Island 330 field, which was producing 4,000 barrels per day and is now producing 13,000.
Is a 50-inch monitor I can Scotch-tape to my wall.
I'd prefer one which does not require use of the transparent adhesive tape which is sold by 3M under the "Scotch" trademark.
Because I avoid forced use of products.
So I'll use any of the other 50-inch monitors - with sixty rolls of duct tape I can hold up anything. By stacking them...
...and how long life survives in the hellish environment caused by exploding stars, rotating radiation beams, open fusion generators zooming near others... Just in the last few years we've measured X-ray blasts that were stopped only by this three hundred miles of air. The sources were very far, and a closer source wouldn't have let us be discussing this now.
I mean does anyone seriously think that all that oil in the ground came from prehistoric vegetation??
A lot of geologists think so. I spoke with one recently. I don't know how many hydrocarbon geologists think so (would you expect all marine biologists to know as much about squids as an expert in squids knows?). If you glance at the meetings in this week's American Geophysical Union conference you can see there are several studies of deep life -- and those few (few who spoke, not necessarily a minority) researchers have a lot of published work on it. It looks like this research is rather basic, so it seems like a new field...but hydrocarbons have had a lot of focused study for decades.
I did use the phrase "of an ocean", not "in an ocean" for that reason. Maybe I should have used "like an ocean" ("...and fruit flies like a banana"). It's hard to make a submission fit in the accepted length.
Yes, it shows that life as we know it can exist in those environments. These environments are far outside the extremes of the temperate Earth's surface, and several nearby planets do have similar environments. So it is more likely that even life as we know it could survive in places such as deep within Mars. Other kinds of life might survive in even more extreme environments (well, "extreme" compared to Italy).
costs..drilling up all that rock
Drill up? We don't have to dig up the rock. Just need a lot of hot water, nutrients, and a way to loosen microbes from whatever it clings to. Like pumping down water and air and harvesting what floats up (or just air.. we'll grow aerobic bacteria). The obvious solution is to make a large cavity and drop some pipes in -- look up what is created by an underground nuclear explosion.
The issue of the rock being ancient is not that the individual microbes are ancient, just that the researchers think the rock was not contaminated, the microbes had plenty of time to be growing there, and they've survived without using up their food source.
This means that although these bacteria dwell deep beneath the earth, and may very well out-mass all terrestrial life, they are DESCENDED from shallow-water dwelling organisms, just like we are. Life could adapt and survive beneath the crust of IO, but that does NOT mean that it could ARISE there.
Why do you think deep bacteria are descended from shallow-water organisms? You're not aware that the oldest traces of life are of oxygen-hating microbes? We didn't get the poisonous oxygen atmosphere until that accident with the nasty plants. Safely deep inside a warm rock provides a safe and stable environment for millions of years -- sounds like a good place for a fragile life form to begin.
Yes, the high-pressure experiment was merely to test survivability, not growth. They reproduced after returning to normal pressure. The bacteria 2 miles down in rock were not under pressure as great -- the mine shafts aren't smashed shut, the humans survived in the shafts, and the microbes are living in gaps within the rocks. The rocks (and incompressible water) are what are supporting the pressure of the rock above.
Also... a rock thrown into space by a bigger rock smashing into a planet might have microbes inside. The inside of the rock would probably freeze in space...until it lands someplace else.
You're confusing thermal vent life with that within rock. This report says this deep-rock microbe was living in hot sea water and eating hydrogen. Gold's proposal is that there are a lot of hot hydro-carbon digesters, so that's not a surprise.
And if we want more aerobic-breathing bacteria... just pump air as far down as we can and let it trickle up. There's A LOT of volume between the surface and "2 miles down". But we'll add another mile to the surface with the environmental impact statement.
(Do we cook something that lives in hot water, or make chilled dishes?)
he gets buried alive, a routine he has been doing for 20 years now. Although you do have to admit that this guy is a perfect future candidate for the Darwin award....
I don't know.. he's not doing something right.
He's been trying for 20 years to bury himself -- I think a Darwin Award candidate would have gotten it right within a few times. A "perfect" candidate would have gotten it right after a few failures; success on the first try is less impressive.
... had been obtained off our company website for the purpose of the message
Maybe your webmaster could add someplace in the company site something like the
Spam-X script. It slowly feeds garbage addresses to a spambot. There are similar scripts....and there are relevant webrings, so spambots can wander among sites which might use such scripts.
Slashdot Mirror
This could be done around a vehicle, with a screen using the same vertical ridges used in children's move-to-animate images. This presents different vertical slices of images in different directions, so different viewpoints would be visible from different directions. Project images from several cameras, using projectors in line with the prism material (or cover the tank with flat screens with prism-covered screens). At a glance, observers would see clumps of trees and scattered bushes where expected -- closer looks would reveal discontinuities and movement would trigger the circuitry around the edge of the eye with flickering movement similar to windblown branches.
But as your tank pops out from behind the trees and the two enemies see each other, you'd like to have two seconds to aim your guns before they decide that they're seeing something...and you hope the infantry you're aiming at isn't surrounding a tank which you haven't seen yet.
(I did not propose painting the tank with reflective material because that tends to reflect directly back at the projector -- that's why roadside reflective paint works so well, because those beads send most of the light from your car right back toward the car. You'd need reflective material which is more selective, and we can assume the experts in the military have already been working on that for twenty years... or paint the tank with reflector and surround it with a half-silvered or polarized mirror which the projector beam can be reflected from.)
There also are pictures someplace showing a couple of soldiers with a vehicle on a ridge -- turning on the floodlights on the side of the vehicle blots them out, and they're no longer simple silhouette targets.
When are we going to see the day when adolescent males can buy a camouflage suit to sneak into the girls locker room? I can sell you one right now. How much can you afford? Payment in advance, no refunds.
If someone is able to project images into eyes, we can skip all the intermediate steps and camo equipment and just project the image of the original scene in those eyes so they can't see any part of reality. In Star Trek, it would be "using a holographic projector to hide an area".
Yes, that inference of the ancestor from comparisons does make sense. So the common ancestor was more surfacelike than extremophilelike (and I suppose there would be some number of antidisestablishmentarianist extremophilelikes, similar to modern liberal lawyers).
Nah, they said it's going gold. Can't burn gold. :-)
I look forward to seeing how the special effects which can make dinosaurs run will work in making Max Mad again.
The genetic tree shows whether the common ancestor originated in shallow water or a deep location?
Does the phrase "all your eggs in one basket" mean anything to you?
Whether a Greenhouse Effect is a threat depends upon whether we're going to die due to a lack of carbon in 500,000 years. Look up calculations on the "carbon cycle" and see how much carbon gets locked up in the sea floor compared to the amount elsewhere. Ignore the calculations which use "we know the system is in balance, therefore we find this number by subtracting all the other sinks". They have to show why there is a balance rather than assume it.
Yup. Look at one of Thomas Gold's articles, linked to in the Slashdot story, go to the bottom for a link up to his page with several of his papers. Several papers there show such tests.
The news is about geologists learning more about biology in their rocks. Slashdot is more interested in news items than in a report which summarizes the recent research in a field -- K5 tends to have more of that. Web searches of those researchers easily finds several publications about their work, with a lot of it from the early '90s. (The web is not a library, do a literature search if you really want a lot of material)
It's science which has been compressed by the journalism of fitting in a single sentence so as to keep the summary brief. If you read the source reports it does refer to the water inside the compressed material.
Basins that lack source rocks are barren; in his model they should contain hydrocarbons ... have been found to be very productive."
There obviously are rocks which block upward flow. My 300-foot water well isn't producing oil; how deeply were those basins drilled? "Every deep hole that has been drilled into the crystalline basement, by several Soviet deep drilling programs, by the German on-going deep drilling efforts, by the deep drilling into the Swedish granite, has shown the presence of hydrocarbons at depth."
Natural gas deposits at the "... deeper levels, which must be expected to have maintained the much more abundant gas,
He ignores plate tectonics ... the geology of the outer crust." He's well aware of tectonics, and is pointing out that the Middle East, where several tectonic plates meet, show oil similarities over the entire region which aren't explained by burial and rotting of small areas of material...in rocks of many different ages.
Note "Figure 3", a petroleum and tectonic map of SE Asia. This is within a section "Horizontal and Vertical Patterns of Hydrocarbon Fields" which points out "a larger scale phenomenon than
his references are often 50 years out of date.
I see 6 references before 1960 in that paper's list of over 40 references; what does "often 50 years" mean?
The "rotted material" theory of oil is also old, from 1757.
If you want new text, look at this week's tabloids at the supermarket. If you want truth then you find it where it exists.
And as for oil fields not refilling, look at Wall Street Journal, page one, April 16, 1999, "Odd Reservoir Off Louisiana Prods Oil Experts to Seek a Deeper Meaning", where 3-D seismic technology showed a deep fault gushing oil into the Eugene Island 330 field, which was producing 4,000 barrels per day and is now producing 13,000.
I'd prefer one which does not require use of the transparent adhesive tape which is sold by 3M under the "Scotch" trademark.
Because I avoid forced use of products.
So I'll use any of the other 50-inch monitors - with sixty rolls of duct tape I can hold up anything. By stacking them...
...and how long life survives in the hellish environment caused by exploding stars, rotating radiation beams, open fusion generators zooming near others... Just in the last few years we've measured X-ray blasts that were stopped only by this three hundred miles of air. The sources were very far, and a closer source wouldn't have let us be discussing this now.
A lot of geologists think so. I spoke with one recently. I don't know how many hydrocarbon geologists think so (would you expect all marine biologists to know as much about squids as an expert in squids knows?). If you glance at the meetings in this week's American Geophysical Union conference you can see there are several studies of deep life -- and those few (few who spoke, not necessarily a minority) researchers have a lot of published work on it. It looks like this research is rather basic, so it seems like a new field...but hydrocarbons have had a lot of focused study for decades.
I did use the phrase "of an ocean", not "in an ocean" for that reason. Maybe I should have used "like an ocean" ("...and fruit flies like a banana"). It's hard to make a submission fit in the accepted length.
Yes, it shows that life as we know it can exist in those environments. These environments are far outside the extremes of the temperate Earth's surface, and several nearby planets do have similar environments. So it is more likely that even life as we know it could survive in places such as deep within Mars. Other kinds of life might survive in even more extreme environments (well, "extreme" compared to Italy).
Drill up? We don't have to dig up the rock. Just need a lot of hot water, nutrients, and a way to loosen microbes from whatever it clings to. Like pumping down water and air and harvesting what floats up (or just air.. we'll grow aerobic bacteria). The obvious solution is to make a large cavity and drop some pipes in -- look up what is created by an underground nuclear explosion.
The issue of the rock being ancient is not that the individual microbes are ancient, just that the researchers think the rock was not contaminated, the microbes had plenty of time to be growing there, and they've survived without using up their food source.
This means that although these bacteria dwell deep beneath the earth, and may very well out-mass all terrestrial life, they are DESCENDED from shallow-water dwelling organisms, just like we are. Life could adapt and survive beneath the crust of IO, but that does NOT mean that it could ARISE there.
Why do you think deep bacteria are descended from shallow-water organisms? You're not aware that the oldest traces of life are of oxygen-hating microbes? We didn't get the poisonous oxygen atmosphere until that accident with the nasty plants. Safely deep inside a warm rock provides a safe and stable environment for millions of years -- sounds like a good place for a fragile life form to begin.
Yes, the high-pressure experiment was merely to test survivability, not growth. They reproduced after returning to normal pressure. The bacteria 2 miles down in rock were not under pressure as great -- the mine shafts aren't smashed shut, the humans survived in the shafts, and the microbes are living in gaps within the rocks. The rocks (and incompressible water) are what are supporting the pressure of the rock above.
Also... a rock thrown into space by a bigger rock smashing into a planet might have microbes inside. The inside of the rock would probably freeze in space...until it lands someplace else.
And if we want more aerobic-breathing bacteria ... just pump air as far down as we can and let it trickle up. There's A LOT of volume between the surface and "2 miles down". But we'll add another mile to the surface with the environmental impact statement.
(Do we cook something that lives in hot water, or make chilled dishes?)
Although you do have to admit that this guy is a perfect future candidate for the Darwin award....
I don't know.. he's not doing something right.
He's been trying for 20 years to bury himself -- I think a Darwin Award candidate would have gotten it right within a few times. A "perfect" candidate would have gotten it right after a few failures; success on the first try is less impressive.
Maybe your webmaster could add someplace in the company site something like the Spam-X script. It slowly feeds garbage addresses to a spambot. There are similar scripts. ...and there are relevant webrings, so spambots can wander among sites which might use such scripts.
Commercial and Free:
L4SB July 2002 table