http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/ The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:25:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-184246 tootall1121 Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:54:31 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-184246 It doesn't really matter if this achieved or not. Once it is, somebody else will come up with a way to defeat it. It doesn’t really matter if this achieved or not. Once it is, somebody else will come up with a way to defeat it.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-184244 skeptic Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:45:12 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-184244 A bit of critical thinking is in order. From popular mechanics: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4277607.html?nav=RSS20 So let's assume all the technical challenges are met (they aren't). The metamaterials work over the full visible spectrum (they don't), it's flexible enough to wear (it's not), it doesn't get dirty after five minutes (it would), and it works whether you're moving or sitting still, up close or far away (you get it). Let's pretend that metamaterials have been honed to perfection and that they are available for sale at a very low cost. Now let's take a ride on the Skeptic Express. First stop: Blending into the visible spectrum doesn't really make you invisible. You'd still be plain as day in other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. Specifically, infrared emissions would make you an easy find for anybody with an infrared camera, as well as for deadly, heat-sensing pit vipers (such a nuisance). And that's just passive detection. You'd be even more visible to active detectors [...] Before you get too worried that some sweaty U.S. Army guy is lurking over your shoulder clad in the Predator's blurry battle armor (the military did fund part of the new research), remember this: So far the most cutting-edge research can only cloak tiny objects, under laboratory conditions, and on a limited range of wavelengths. You're safe, for now, along with the privacy of cheerleading squads the world over. Thank heavens. A bit of critical thinking is in order. From popular mechanics:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4277607.html?nav=RSS20
So let’s assume all the technical challenges are met (they aren’t). The metamaterials work over the full visible spectrum (they don’t), it’s flexible enough to wear (it’s not), it doesn’t get dirty after five minutes (it would), and it works whether you’re moving or sitting still, up close or far away (you get it). Let’s pretend that metamaterials have been honed to perfection and that they are available for sale at a very low cost. Now let’s take a ride on the Skeptic Express.
First stop: Blending into the visible spectrum doesn’t really make you invisible. You’d still be plain as day in other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. Specifically, infrared emissions would make you an easy find for anybody with an infrared camera, as well as for deadly, heat-sensing pit vipers (such a nuisance). And that’s just passive detection. You’d be even more visible to active detectors […]
Before you get too worried that some sweaty U.S. Army guy is lurking over your shoulder clad in the Predator’s blurry battle armor (the military did fund part of the new research), remember this: So far the most cutting-edge research can only cloak tiny objects, under laboratory conditions, and on a limited range of wavelengths. You’re safe, for now, along with the privacy of cheerleading squads the world over. Thank heavens.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-184243 app3 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 23:47:34 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-184243 For simple applications that only had to fool, say, civilians, one idea would be to project an image of what is behind the 'cloaked' object onto its surface. For simple applications that only had to fool, say, civilians, one idea would be to project an image of what is behind the ‘cloaked’ object onto its surface.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-184242 coolhand77 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:34:14 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-184242 FLIR is all the rage, and in truth, all you have to do is stick a receiver antenna outside the "cloak" to receive sensor data from your AWACs. Either that, or you set it up so that only your sensors are uncloaked. It would still reduce a majority of your Radar Crossection, and make you look like a collection of flying "noise" around a center of...nothing. There was actually a sci-fi book called "A Mote in God's Eye" where the spacecraft used an "energy shield" with similar properties. Their solution was to stick probes and wiskers outside the field. Sure, they could "burn off" your sensors, but the ship underneath would be protected, and you had backup "wiskers" you could deploy...and deploying an antenna outside a cloak like that is alot smaller than seeing a whole freaking airplane, even if the plane is stealthed. FLIR is all the rage, and in truth, all you have to do is stick a receiver antenna outside the “cloak” to receive sensor data from your AWACs. Either that, or you set it up so that only your sensors are uncloaked. It would still reduce a majority of your Radar Crossection, and make you look like a collection of flying “noise” around a center of…nothing.
There was actually a sci-fi book called “A Mote in God’s Eye” where the spacecraft used an “energy shield” with similar properties. Their solution was to stick probes and wiskers outside the field. Sure, they could “burn off” your sensors, but the ship underneath would be protected, and you had backup “wiskers” you could deploy…and deploying an antenna outside a cloak like that is alot smaller than seeing a whole freaking airplane, even if the plane is stealthed.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-184241 Pantera Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:23:23 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-184241 It seems like this would be more useful for a new generation of stealth aircraft, since radar waves would just go around the aircraft and not get bounced back. Of course, then the stealthed aircraft wouldn't be able to use radar. Interesting. It seems like this would be more useful for a new generation of stealth aircraft, since radar waves would just go around the aircraft and not get bounced back. Of course, then the stealthed aircraft wouldn’t be able to use radar. Interesting.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-184240 josh betts Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:12:33 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-184240 "Hang on. Wouldn't this render microwave and laser weapons useless? It'd just bend the uber-powerful beam straight around you and presumably you would not feel any ill effects" Excellent point. I've been following this for awhile and this is never mentioned. Also, what happens when you emit infrared radiation? “Hang on. Wouldn’t this render microwave and laser weapons useless? It’d just bend the uber-powerful beam straight around you and presumably you would not feel any ill effects“
Excellent point. I’ve been following this for awhile and this is never mentioned.
Also, what happens when you emit infrared radiation?

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-184239 night Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:13:55 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-184239 "And if you made something invisible to the human eye, it would be impossible without some kind of other sensor for whoever's behind the object to see anything since you're robbing him of light." Took me a minute to figure out what this meant. Basically, inside the cloak it would be pitch black as all the light is being bent around you. I wonder if that might actually be useful somehow. Anyone think of any applications that require absolute darkness? “And if you made something invisible to the human eye, it would be impossible without some kind of other sensor for whoever’s behind the object to see anything since you’re robbing him of light.“
Took me a minute to figure out what this meant. Basically, inside the cloak it would be pitch black as all the light is being bent around you. I wonder if that might actually be useful somehow. Anyone think of any applications that require absolute darkness?

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-75462 night Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:07:56 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-75462 Hang on. Wouldn't this render microwave and laser weapons useless? It'd just bend the uber-powerful beam straight around you and presumably you would not feel any ill effects. Bummer for the chap standing behind you though... Hang on. Wouldn’t this render microwave and laser weapons useless? It’d just bend the uber-powerful beam straight around you and presumably you would not feel any ill effects.
Bummer for the chap standing behind you though…

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-75461 stephen russell Wed, 20 Aug 2008 02:39:34 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-75461 Where do we invest? Many apps: Security Law enforcement Prison security Intelligence "armoring" VIP cars. "stealth" AF1? & more $$$$$$$$$ Where do we invest?
Many apps:
Security
Law enforcement
Prison security
Intelligence
“armoring” VIP cars.
“stealth” AF1?
& more
$$$$$$$$$

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/08/19/invisibility-and-the-super-lens/#comment-184238 ohwilleke Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:20:23 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4029#comment-184238 If the stuff is expensive to make, the ideal early application might be a micro-UAV. If the stuff is expensive to make, the ideal early application might be a micro-UAV.

]]>