Invisible Cloaks, Translucent Walls 414
jd writes "The University of Tokyo has developed the illusion of invisibility, under the name of 'Optical Camouflage.' The system is remarkably simple - you have a mix of light-sensitive and light-emitting devices attached to an adapted reflective surface. The devices are hooked to a computer, which simply projects on each side whatever is on the opposite side. The result is more of a translucent look, than real invisibility, but the potential is there. The inventer's next objective is to make walls that are invisible, using the same technology. Project a real outside image onto an interior wall without windows. This almost sounds more frightening than the cloak, since there's no reason why the sensors would have to be placed outside. Imagine a world where PHBs can turn their office wall into a window onto any cube. Zero privacy. The technology is great, but the potential for abuse is definitely there." Update: 06/15 00:20 GMT by T : You may remember we mentioned this project when it was cloak-only.
Future of armed infantry (Score:2, Interesting)
Now if only there was a way to get around the infrared as well.
No. not really (Score:5, Interesting)
Because light's reflecting off of the coat itself. Plus, the shape of the cloak is not symetrical. I just don't see how it even works. Sure, I could imagine something like a sheet of paper partially working.
As for see-thru wall, it's probably a lot easier then this guy wants it to be...
Just make the wall itself clear. Then use an lcd-like mechanism to act as a 'shutter', allowing the outside light in. Note that each 'pixel' could be quite large (several inches).
In other words, when the wall's off, it's opaque. When current's applied to a section, the liquid inside the wall becomes clear and the wall is see-through. Not sure if the technology's there yet, though....
Two vids of it in action... (Score:1, Interesting)
http://projects.star.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/projects/M
Line The Interrior Blind-Spots in Cars (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Future of armed infantry (Score:5, Interesting)
The IR thing is more of a problem. Heck, we already have an excellent visible light stealth system. It's called DARK. All night vision systems track IR since it's generally around in abundence at night.
You are also still a target on Radar, and probably Lidar as the system still reflects or absorbs high amplitude pulses of light differently that the background.
You also run into interesting problems with lighting. If someone shines a spotlight on you, your shadow would still be dark, so you would stand out as a dark spot.
There are undoubtedly computational ways around all that, but after a while your number cruncher is going to be more of an emmission signature than whatever you are hiding.
Hoax (Score:2, Interesting)
Otherwise, how would a block in front of you [u-tokyo.ac.jp] show the static background behind you.
Or more ludicrously, how would a block in front of you show your skeleton? Especially when the skeleton doesn't move with your motions?
Please, we've had bluescreen technology for decades. And we've even upgraded to greenscreen.
Re:this research is flawed... (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, I thought of this many years ago, to have a cube that can sit on the shelf, but it can be opened so you can hide something in it. In plain sight, but not visible.
Ghost in the Shell (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:DUPE! (kinda, sorta) (Score:3, Interesting)
Welding helmets (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Future of armed infantry (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, the image would also have to be grabbed from different angles... so we're talking a load of optics and processing and projecting. But I imagine it could be done in the next 25 years if someone wanted it badly enough.
Cheers.
one more minor detail they failed to mention... (Score:4, Interesting)
This means it's not really possible to cloak something that's in front of a changing backdrop, at least not with this implementation of the technology.
Comment removed (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:On mah blog (Score:3, Interesting)
It's getting absolutely ridiculous. NOTHING NEW HAS COME OUT! JUST SOME STUPID FUCKING MOCKUPS!
give me a break
invisibility vs less visibility (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:invisibility vs less visibility (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Future of armed infantry (Score:3, Interesting)
Another example is how in Battlefield: 1942, NOBODY and I mean NOBODY flies with the cockpit on if they know how to turn it off.
I fancy myself a pretty good pilot in that game, but its amazing how much you start to suck when the server has cockpit mode locked.
Now, of course what would make this be less drastic would be if you had the ability to mouselook inside the cockpit 360 degrees around you and 180 above you, because obviously in a real plane cockpit, you can look around and aren't stuck with a fixed forward view or a toggled back view.
There's really something to be said for smoothly mouselooking around a cockpit versus toggling views with the joystick hat.