Invisibility Cloak Created In 3-D 113
An anonymous reader writes "Scientists have created the first device to render an object invisible in three dimensions. The 'cloak,' described in the journal Science (abstract; full text requires login), hid an object from detection using light of wavelengths close to those that are visible to humans. Previous devices have been able to hide objects from light travelling in only one direction; viewed from any other angle, the object would remain visible. This is a very early but significant step towards a true invisibility cloak." The "object" hidden in this work was a bump one micrometer high. The light used was just longer than the wavelengths our eyes detect. To get a visible-light cloak, the features of the cloaking metamaterial would need to be reduced in size from 300 nm to 10 nm.
Um... (Score:4, Funny)
I don't mean to complain, but it would be nice to have a picture.
Even if the object is invisible...
Re:Um... (Score:5, Funny)
You realize that the object is only 1 micrometer, and the cloak only 300nm,
but here you go (photo) --> [ ]
Re:Um... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You realize that the object is only 1 micrometer, and the cloak only 300nm,
but here you go (photo) --> [ ]
Gasp! INVISIBLE nanobot army! Transparent goo!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
You realize that the object is only 1 micrometer, and the cloak only 300nm
That doesn't seem very effective... I mean, I'm 1.67 m tall, so if I tried to wear a 50 cm invisibility cloak I suspect my floating head and disembodied legs would attract rather a lot of attention.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't mean to complain, but it would be nice to have a picture.
ok here you go [thearchnemesis.com]
Diplomatic Nightmare (Score:5, Funny)
Oh man, wait 'till the Romulans hear about this.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah... and I'm sure we will end up signing a stupid treaty that does not allow us to use the cloak device, but let them use it at will.
it's time to put some clear boundaries between us and them... better yet a Neutral Zone.
Just my two pesos-
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Being invisible sounds ok, until you realize that with perfect invisibility you will be effective blind. That will end non military uses you had in mind.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
just leave a pinhole in the cloak and put a camera there. then wear a hud that displays the image.
If someone looks straight at you in the right direction, they might see a tiny floating black dot. Even if they do notice it, they will most likely believe its dust or something
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Or you can use a FLIR camera (Thermal). Off course, it's not good to look at naked ladies, but good enough to move around.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously to solve that problem you'd only use it for travel. You can slip into someone's room unseen and build a small support structure out of this stuff, located where the person is least likely to look. You can then wait until the person returns, slip in (if not there already) and locate yourself in the support structure, which is out of direct eyesight. There you are free to remove the cloak from your eyeballs only, or any recording devices you have, until seen by the person's peripheral vision. A
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, so you're suggesting that he goes invisible and uses thermal vision?
Where have I seen invisible things with thermal vision that go bump in the night, and how has that gone horribly, horribly wrong...?
Re: (Score:2)
I also suggest you start smoking more pot, and listening to Bob Marley (the dreadlocks will develop naturally) :)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Being invisible sounds ok, until you realize that with perfect invisibility you will be effective blind. That will end non military uses you had in mind.
Blind in the visible light spectrum, which would still leave you with sonar, radar, possibly IR and UV if the material very selectively blocks the visible light portion of the EM spectrum. Not to mention the possibility of maintaining links to remote cameras and other visual/information sources using data transmitted ion wavelengths way, way outisde the visible light spectrum.
So yes, as a Harry Potter invisibility cloak this would suck, but as a Start Trek cloak this would be awesome.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not getting a billion dollars, so I don't want the million you're offering me.
Re: (Score:1)
Oblig ... (Score:5, Funny)
MGS (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Someone in an invisibility cloak just accidentally placekicked our nuke.
Re: (Score:1)
Factor 30 (Score:4, Informative)
A factor 30 in wavelength difference is not "just longer" than visible light nor "close to" it. Still, impressive work. And surely, they'll get closer and closer. But cloaking a micrometer high bump is still a few pathways away from Klingon tech.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It never was Klingon tech (Score:2)
Actually, the way I remember it, it never was Klingon tech as such. The Klingons managed to buy the technology from the Romulans, in exchange for a heck of a lot of D-7 battlecruisers.
(Or in RL terms when they first needed a Romulan Bird Of Prey, the model wasn't ready on time, so they used a Klingon Battlecruiser and slapped on a makeshift explanation of why the Romulans are flying Klingon vessels.)
Who's sig is that again? (Score:4, Funny)
"Ha! Invisibility Cloak? I'll believe it when I see it!"
For some reason Locke comes to mind...
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that's Locke's sig.
Re: (Score:1)
You mean lock-down?
(Ducks from stones.)
What good could come from invisibility? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, invisibility is "cool", and I wouldn't mind an invisibility cloak for myself. But I can't immediately think of who would benefit the general public by having invisibility. Especially among the military, the police, criminals or terrorists (all of them sometimes interchangeable).
What practical use does invisibility have, other than as a weapon?
Re:What good could come from invisibility? (Score:4, Funny)
Sex in public places.
Re: (Score:1)
Sex in public places.
Do you really think the type of people who want an invisibility cloak actually have sex at all, let alone in public places?
Re: (Score:1)
That's the point.
Re: (Score:2)
Until you get run over by a car.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Slow down, I'm still meditating on the one hand clapping thing and I have to get to the tree falling in a forest without a witness - maybe zen I can answer you.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Pff, you obviously never had sex in public places. It’s only thrilling when you can be seen. (But aren’t. It’s the risk that makes it fun. With a cloak there is no risk, so there is no fun.
And by the way: For your purposes a tent will do. ^^
Just be sure to keep quiet.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
We have porn about sex in public places now.
With the invisibility cloak on, what would that porn look like? !
Like this, I guess:
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck getting water to refract through a crystal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It would be a good defensive item. If someone breaks into your house, hiding in an invisibility cloak would be the next best thing to getting out of the house.
It would be a hilarious prank item. Cover a sheet of plywood in an invisibility cloak and put it in front of an open doorway.
It might be useful for people who want to observe wildlife. Various sorts of camouflage work, but this may be more effective (I'm not sure if there are any animals that are very good at detecting people even in camouflage).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
the ability to watch the military or police without fear of them beating you half to death just for watching
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, invisibility is "cool", and I wouldn't mind an invisibility cloak for myself. But I can't immediately think of who would benefit the general public by having invisibility. Especially among the military, the police, criminals or terrorists (all of them sometimes interchangeable).
What practical use does invisibility have, other than as a weapon?
It could be useful to hide some things that are generally considered an eyesore... You probably wouldn't want to render the thing completely invisible from every angle, but you could greatly reduce the visual impact of the bathrooms at some scenic park for example. Or those green electrical boxes they've got scattered around town. It could make for some interesting furniture and decorating options. You could make materials transparent or translucent without actually using glass/plastic/whatever.
Re:What good could come from invisibility? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why does science need a reason? Once we have this stuff people will dream up creative aplications you or I could never have dreamed of.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. You could make your middle finger go invisible so you can flip people off without offending them.
Or you could use it to scare people, like all those Gag television shows...
And the Peeping Tom applications are ENDLESS!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Worse than just giving you cancer, it gives you invisible cancer.
Re: (Score:1)
But then they'll complain about the random piles of dead birds! Think of the Birds!
Re: (Score:2)
Privacy is a big one, making it much more difficult for someone to build up a full picture of your life. Also as a purely defensive device to get around, avoiding the fanatics trying to kill you because of something legal but controversial you said [cnn.com].
Mostly privacy, really.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Hunting. No more constructing complex deer blinds. Have the cloak flash visible light in a spectrum the deer can't see so that you don't get shot by another hunter.
Spy tech. A lot easier to hide a bug if the bug is invisible.
Visual nuisances. Don't like that telephone pole in your back yard wrecking your view of the valley? Cloak the bastard.
Military. A cloaked sniper nest's advantages are obvious. Cloak secret military installations. Cloak factories making military hardware (we've already done this, the lo
good (Score:1, Funny)
something that will be able to hide goatse.
Yo Mamma... (Score:1)
Re:Yo Mamma... (Score:4, Insightful)
... so far not even a 3d cloak could hide her!
I think you're doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
.
.
There! My new text-invisibility-cloak nearly perfectly conceals posts with awkward misspellings!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This was actually much easier than it sounds... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
It exists (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Either you're inside a wall, trapped under a fat guy, or your cloak is not working. Might I suggest a diet plan?
I'm skeptical (Score:2, Funny)
I'll believe it when I see it.
Not close, but flamebait (Score:1)
Yes but (Score:1)
Invisibility is not undetectability (Score:2)
This seems to be a fantasy riding on the broomstick of a certain young English wizard (to name a few). In the age of modern technology, one needs to not only make something "invisible" in the realm of visible wavelengths -- one also has to hide its radar signature, its infrared signature (good luck doing that if you've got any significant computing capabilities on board), its magnetic signature and presumably its mass (gravimetric) signature.
If you can't do all of those things you are only "undetectable" t
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that explains why soldiers never wear camoflage. After all, they can see you with infrared, so why not wear blaze orange?
Diplomat: "We're a peace loving democracy!" (Score:1)
*KRAKRAKRAK* *beautifully drawn head asplosion*
Aide: "Out the window! Shoot!"
(Embassy mooks fail hit roll)
Aide: "Thermoptic camouflage..."
(Cue intro)
Can someone explain? (Score:2)
Ok, they are claiming that they made an object invisible by trying to look at it with light whose wavelength is too long to resolve the object in the first place? I must be missing something here.