'Optical Fiber' Made Out of Thin Air 115
Dave Knott writes: Scientists from the University of Maryland say they have turned thin air into an "optical fiber" that can transmit and amplify light signals without the need for any cables. As described in the research, this was accomplished by generating a laser with its light split into a ring of multiple beams forming a pipe. Very short and powerful pulses from the laser are used to heat the air molecules along the beam extremely quickly. Such rapid heating produces sound waves that take about a microsecond to converge to the center of the pipe, creating a high-density area surrounded by a low-density area left behind in the wake of the laser beams. The lower density region of air surrounding the center of the air waveguide has a lower refractive index, keeping the light focused, and allowing the higher-density region (with its correspondingly higher index of refraction) to act like an optical fiber. The findings, reported in the journal Optica, have applications in long range laser communications, high-resolution topographic mapping, air pollution and climate change research, and could also be used by the military to make laser weapons.
Perfect to mount (Score:5, Funny)
On top of a shark's head.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
does anybody else feel a small warm spot on their forehead?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh here we go again... At least try to use the same mounting brackets.
Re:Perfect to mount (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is this moderated funny?
Is this sad, tired old meme actually still genuinely funny in this day and age?
really?
Yes.
Re: (Score:3)
As if you've never quoted Monty Python, Star Wars, or Captain Kirk.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not original. And it's not creative. And it's certainly not funny anymore.
I agree. And yet, I recognise that this is just my opinion, and I don't expect everyone else to confirm to my sense of humour.
I read the list of applications (Score:5, Interesting)
and the only ones that looked remotely practical was the laser weapon and remote sensing requiring high power high focus.
Using lasers for freespac communications is already very practical and well solved, just look at this example
http://esc.gsfc.nasa.gov/267/2... [nasa.gov] (BTW definitely one of the better uses of NASA's budget. )
All the other mentioned applications also have off the shelf solutions that perform exceptionally well. The weapons and high power remote sensing however while listed last seem to have the most to gain. Being able to generate a waveguide in either case solves their two big problems atmospheric distortion and the need to focus large amounts of laser energy on a small point.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't be the only one getting a squee moment from the fact that we might finally have a chance to create practical laser weapons.
Re:I read the list of applications (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe if that squee is out of fear.
Re: (Score:2)
How well do freespace laser communication fare in foggy environments?
Pretty well actually (Score:3)
Pretty well actually
http://www.fastlinks-wireless.... [fastlinks-wireless.com]
http://etherealmind.com/free-s... [etherealmind.com]
They are currently in widespread use
The real question is just how much improvement would you get with the new system under inclement conditions. The other big question is how they fare against microwave links.
Re: (Score:1)
says this technique can increase the SNR by 10^4, which means you can use less reliable forms of modulation to increase your channel bandwidth. this absolutely is in no way limited to only weaponry. and what is most freespac communication if not remote sensing requiring high power high focus.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
70km LOS would require 200 foot towers at each end, it's probably going to be cheaper to run cable.
that's not too high to be honest. it would not be cheaper to dig the trench for the fiber, cross the reivers and whatever and most areas in the west already have artificial buildings higher than that, not to mention all the mountains etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Using lasers for freespac communications is already very practical and well solved, just look at this example
Yesssssh... just like computer networking, both wired and wireless, is already very practical and well-solved, so no need for anything faster than... 10Mbit, or 11Mbit, or 54Mbit, or 100Mbit, or... take your pick.
Really now, what are you smoking?
Actually you have an excellent example there. Networking/communication is much more sensitive to reliability issues than performance issues especially for long distance links. This may help you understand, ask yourself how many people who already have broadband will derive significant benefit from having the amount of available bandwidth increased by a factor of 10 ? Then ask yourself how many people would significantly benefit from having their reliability increased by a factor of 10 ?
Now you also have to
Re: (Score:2)
The paper makes it clear that this is about remote sensing, and more about getting the response back from the remote location than getting the probe beam to it.
The list of other potential uses seems to have been added by the linked article's author, who does not seem to have asked himself why, if you are sending guide beams to the destination, can't you just modulate them?
The word 'weapon' does not appear in the paper, and the researchers do not seem to have attempted to guide powerful beams by this method.
UMD Link (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a link to the press release from UMD with some links to the professor's web site.
http://cmns.umd.edu/news-events/features/2356 [umd.edu]
Ladders! (Score:1)
What a silly title ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What a silly title ... (Score:4, Informative)
Not necessarily - there are lots of situations where it's not practical to run a cable. Secure connectivity between naval vessels is a prime example, others would be for use in the space program, or cheaper data communication between buildings in a campus. Residential broadband internet would be simpler - put an optical transceiver on the roof and point it at a tower - no more digging up the garden to provide fttp.
Re: (Score:2)
Optical is already used in those scenarios for line-of-sight networking. How does engineering a wind tunnel around a laser improve the effectiveness in any of those scenarios?
Re:What a silly title ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm no expert on this technology, but from tfs, it would seem to increase bandwidth by minimizing loss over distance, allowing for longer range and faster speed.
Re: (Score:1)
Not necessarily - there are lots of situations where it's not practical to run a cable. Secure connectivity between naval vessels is a prime example, others would be for use in the space program, or cheaper data communication between buildings in a campus. Residential broadband internet would be simpler - put an optical transceiver on the roof and point it at a tower - no more digging up the garden to provide fttp.
It would work... until it rains.
Re: (Score:2)
Just increase the energy on the surrounding laser beams to evaporate any water in it's path. That way it can also double as a security measure.
But what does it do? (Score:2)
I'm puzzled as to what this does or what it's good for, exactly.
... they have turned thin air into an "optical fiber" that can transmit and amplify light signals without the need for any cables.
1. Air already transmits light signals. It's transparent.
2. They haven't mentioned anything about amplifying light signals. This would be hard.
So, they are creating a "pipe" that can transmit light... but it doesn't stop beam spread (since the beams that make up the "pipe" still have diffraction-limited beam spread), and it can't bend light around corners. So, they now have a pipe that will funnel a laser beam along the path made by other l
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:But what does it do? (Score:5, Insightful)
air is not transparent and does cause beam scattering. by creating a refractive channel like this they absolutely will reduce beam dispersion. obviously it doesn't eliminate beam spread but even a fiber channel perfectly designed for a single mode will have some diffusion so whats your point?
they may be able to increase snr by 10^4 over current technologies at 100 m. that's a serious improvement that shouldn't simply be dismissed so thoughtlessly.
Little, as far as I can tell [But what does it do? (Score:2)
air is not transparent
To the extent that air is not transparent, this doesn't work.
and does cause beam scattering.
This does not address beam scattering. If the air is scattering the laser beam, it still scatters the beam.
by creating a refractive channel like this they absolutely will reduce beam dispersion.
It would reduce beam spread... except that the beams that create the channel are not themselves channeled.
obviously it doesn't eliminate beam spread
on this we agree
but even a fiber channel perfectly designed for a single mode will have some diffusion so whats your point?
My point is that from a surface-level analysis, it doesn't do anything useful.
they may be able to increase snr by 10^4 over current technologies at 100 m. that's a serious improvement that shouldn't simply be dismissed so thoughtlessly.
Let me repeat. The beams that create the channel are not themselves channeled. So the channel itself... has the diffraction, scattering, and
Re: (Score:2)
Let me repeat. The beams that create the channel are not themselves channeled. So the channel itself... has the diffraction, scattering, and beam spread of an unchanneled beam. The net result can't be better than an unchanneled beam, because it is made out of an unchanneled beam.
Not necessarily. Since the surrounding laser pulses should spread in a more or less uniform way, the central channel of denser air should still occur as distance from the emitter increases and remain centralized in the channel. It sounds like it will make air work a little like graded index multimode fiber. The difference in density between the central channel and the surrounding air will likely fall off with distance, making the air channel less efficient, but still present out to some distance. It's n
Invention that makes beams do what they do anyway (Score:2)
So the channel itself... has the diffraction, scattering, and beam spread of an unchanneled beam.
The beams making the channel are channeled by themselves, they create filaments that self-focus the beam. Self-focusing beams in air have been pretty well established at this point and will go quite far if you have enough power because of the attenuation involved.
So, what you just said is that the beams self-channel anyway.
So, if beams self-channel, this innovation does nothing, right? It's a complicated system of multiple beams to make the beam channel, which is to say, self-focus. But you just told me "self-focusing beams in air have been pretty well established at this point."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This does more or less what an optical fiber does: It keeps light on the right path by using differences in refractive index (though I imagine the exact process is different: Optical fibers use total internal reflection, this probably just uses refraction). An optical fiber has the additional advantage of being able to go around corners, but that is not what makes it an optical fiber; the re
Re: (Score:2)
The refractive index profile is what makes it "optical" ..agreed. The part that makes it a "fiber" is it's nature of being a long fine continuous thread or filament..(which gives it the ability ti bend around corners. )
I never said it wasn't an optical channel ... I said calling it an optical fiber made of air was silly ... they
Re: (Score:2)
nice straw-man you built there
It's not a straw man, as I did not indicate that you meant that gold was not a metal. It is an analogy, and possibly a bad analogy, like your platypus-duck one.
they should have said something like "optical fiber effect replicated in thin air" ...
If only there was some way to indicate that a phrase wasn't used literally, they could have used that in the title, and then people wouldn't be think they had made air solid and made a fiber out of it.
But... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:But... (Score:5, Funny)
Our new Monster Cable Air ionizes the air around the signal ensuring maximal defrobulation of the signal flux and maximal polarization in the near infra-red spectrum, guaranteeing a smooth, minty taste.
When connect to your tube amplifier, this provides a sound which is spunkier and enhanced in the pink spectrum, causing women to swoon. Achieve smooth bass response like never before.
For only eleventy zillion dollars, you too can get the most out of your sound system. :-P
Either this stuff is real, with real benefits, or it's hype. Either way, someone will use it for marketing complete crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Just to say... (Score:1)
It's called Emperor Fiber (Score:2)
Headphone cables from thin air! (Score:1)
My phone does this, it's called "Speaker mode"
Seriously, saying "fiber optic cables from thin air" is an idiotic statement. IR remotes have been doing this for decades, and using lasers to do so has also been done for ages.
Re: (Score:1)
no, IR remotes and handheld lasers have not been using refractive channels made out of air as a waveguide to transmit pulses of light with as little noise as possible for decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps if you'd read more than the headline you'd see that this is not what IR remotes and lasers have been doing for ages, at all.
Seriously, saying "fiber optic cables from thin air" is an idiotic statement.
It's actually a pretty good summation of a very clever bit of engineering. What's your beef?
energy costs ... (Score:1)
why not just use the laser to transmit data? (Score:2)
Why not just use the first laser to transmit the data you need in the first place?
Re: (Score:2)
I assume the fibre created inside the "laser tube" will be less noisy, allowing higher bandwidth.
Receiver must be nuke proof... (Score:2)
So if I understand this correctly, the beams that form the "psudofiber" have to be intense enough to heat the surrounding air in less than a microsecond... and the signal will be pushed down the center of the pipe... so all those hoards of unholy photons that created the pipe in the first place are going to arrive at the destination a microsecond before the signal does, and they should still be nicely focused and searching for a nice electronic sensor to deposit all that energy into... Or did I miss someth
Re: (Score:2)
HP ink jet printer heads heat the ink up to temperatures 7 times hotter than the the sun. It doesn't end up burning a hole in the earth's crust though, since it only lasts 2 microseconds.
http://h20423.www2.hp.com/prog... [hp.com]
It doesn't take a lot of energy to heat something up really fast as long as it's really low mass, like air.
In fact, the quicker you heat something up the less energy is required, since there is less time for the heat to dissipate during the heating process.
Re: (Score:2)
"hoards of unholy photons" didn't tip you to the fact that I was being somewhat less than scientific about my analysis?
Real Genius (Score:1)
Observation at a distance (Score:4, Interesting)
So a movie analogy (Score:1)
Would be like the 'End' sequence in Ender's game where they use the drones to protect the gunship (or in our case the actual laser signal)
Yawn (Score:3, Informative)
Predicted the 1960's (Kerr-induced self-focusing: http://journals.aps.org/prl/ab... [aps.org] ), and it was a big part of SDI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... [nih.gov] and was again applied to space-to-ground weapons systems in 2009: http://journals.aps.org/prl/ab... [aps.org]
It was ale demonstrated at LLNL in 2009: http://www.researchgate.net/pu... [researchgate.net] and 2010: http://www.researchgate.net/pu... [researchgate.net]
What's new about this one is that they've renamed the tunnel as the desired artifact, rather than describing it in beams going down the tunnel.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This will disrupt communications using RFC1149 (Score:1)
A million pigeons cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
Re: (Score:2)
So much for the "intrinsic collision avoidance"
Re: (Score:1)
Some avian packets will be flash fried.
Application? (Score:1)
Sorry officer... (Score:2)
I was not trying to kill him, I was simply sending him a large amount of high speed data.
how about secure transmission (Score:2)
Granted, I'm just another /.-er who never RTFAs, but I do have some experience w/ FO comms and free-air transmitters (of one wavelength or another).
So consider: the channeling lasers may disperse, but they carry no information beyond the existence of the channel and possibly the source and destination. The transmitted data packets do not disperse, so what you've got is the equivalent of a phased-array transmitter with zero sidelobes.
Re: (Score:3)
I see you stopped your music education in kindergarten.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)