Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Invisibility Tech Demo Tomorrow In NYC

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the everything-that-happens-in-new-york-is-true dept.

The Military 86

Velcroman1 writes "Invisibility cloaks and deflector shields, once a staple of popular science-fiction, are now the real deal, researchers say. But here on Earth, top researchers have been battling too, not over the fate of the empire but over whose tech will someday shield U.S. ships. Fractal Antenna Systems came out swinging Wednesday over a 'perfected' invisibility cloak by researchers at Duke and Imperial College. Company CEO and inventor Nathan Cohen issued a scathingly critical press release throwing very visible zingers — and claiming he invented it first. '[Their tech] makes you more, not less, visible,' Cohen said. The company says a patent-pending deflector shield built off a variant of the technology can divert electromagnetic radiation around an object — and they plan to show it off Friday in New York City, at the Radio Club of America."

cancel ×

86 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ok I'l say it. (5, Funny)

3seas (184403) | about 2 years ago | (#41996011)

If it works you won't see it.

Re:Ok I'l say it. (1)

Cryacin (657549) | about 2 years ago | (#41996169)

Yeah, I don't see a market for this.

Re:Ok I'l say it. (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#41996395)

There will be nothing to see here and people will move along.

Re:Ok I'l say it. (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#41996429)

Until they bump into it.

Re:Ok I'l say it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996417)

Its very simuar to my time travel demonstration. I'll be one upping them with the demonstration of the miraculous device...
Yesterday!

Re:Ok I'l say it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996745)

You could also go back in time and correct the typos in your post before you post it!

Re:Ok I'l say it. (3, Funny)

icebike (68054) | about 2 years ago | (#41997047)

Pictures, or it didn't happen.

Oh, wait...

Re:Ok I'l say it. (1)

Nostromo21 (1947840) | about 2 years ago | (#41998735)

There are a lot of pics online of people wearing invisible suits - just Google it dude.

Re:Ok I'l say it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42003625)

And here is the cloak! http://www.nanowerk.com/news2/newsid=27480.php

Pegasus (2)

Russ1642 (1087959) | about 2 years ago | (#41996023)

Now we can finally catch up with Romulan technology.

Re:Pegasus (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#41996457)

Now we can finally catch up with Romulan technology.

Yeah, the ivisibility cloak is awesome, but people will still spot you by the big generator you're pulling along behind you.

Re:Pegasus (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#41996831)

Also, to quote Family Guy, "It smells like Fred Flintstone's ass in here!"

Re:Pegasus (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41997381)

Nope, we will be able to actually fire weapon while clocked.

Re:Pegasus (1)

a_hanso (1891616) | about 2 years ago | (#41998953)

Or, on the eve of the demo, the lead scientist takes it to phase 2 human trials without authorization and ends up killing the entire team [imdb.com] .

Not worth it (4, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 2 years ago | (#41996051)

I went to their last demo, and I didn't see anything!

Picture of the device in action (3, Funny)

darth_MALL (657218) | about 2 years ago | (#41996107)

Here is a picture of the device in action:













As you can see it is remarkably improved over previous versions.

Re:Picture of the device in action (1)

Cryacin (657549) | about 2 years ago | (#41996229)

I must be seeing things.

Re:Picture of the device in action (-1, Troll)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#41996423)

I think Mitt Romney already perfected the invisibility cloak - people saw right through him.

And yet many chose not to - Slashdot's Believe it or Don't!

Re:Picture of the device in action (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996749)

Funny, I thought the same thing about Obama.

Re:Picture of the device in action (1)

Nostromo21 (1947840) | about 2 years ago | (#41998747)

No, no, guys, one is a whiteout (like the above pic), the other a blackout. But neither is invisible really, just depends on your background :).

I won't believe it till I see it (1)

Lord_of_the_nerf (895604) | about 2 years ago | (#41996155)

Or don't.

Obligatory (5, Funny)

Bomazi (1875554) | about 2 years ago | (#41996157)

Pics or it didn't happen.

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996315)

video or it doesn't work well.

Re:Obligatory (1)

Nostromo21 (1947840) | about 2 years ago | (#41998751)

If you can include tactile AND olfactory feedback, that'd be grand!

Re:Obligatory (1)

zentigger (203922) | about 2 years ago | (#41996677)

I didn't happen...yet.

Re:Obligatory (1)

drkim (1559875) | about 2 years ago | (#41998885)

Pics or it didn't happen.

No pics or it didn't happen.

FTFY

Wrong location (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996161)

This demo is supposed to happen in Philadelphia.

Re:Wrong location (1)

ccanucs (2529272) | about 2 years ago | (#42008023)

How do you know that it didn't ? ;-)

It isn't real until ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996167)

I can weave one into my superhero cloak.

Re:It isn't real until ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996241)

You can. It's called a fucking Faraday cage.

Re:It isn't real until ..... (4, Insightful)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 2 years ago | (#41996297)

You can. It's called a fucking Faraday cage.

Haha, right, because a Faraday cage won't show up like a blinding spotlight on radar or anything. That's like saying a building makes you invisible because you can't see someone inside. Sure, I guess in a sense that's correct, but you can still see the damned building.

Re:It isn't real until ..... (5, Funny)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 2 years ago | (#41996739)

"Captain, I can't find the enemy destroyer anywhere! There's nothing but a big faraday cage moving at approximately the speed of a destroyer in the middle of the ocean!"

"Damnit! Where could they be?!"

Re:It isn't real until ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41997099)

How this might work:

If you have a big, relatively unmanouverable platform with lots of power available (e.g. a destroyer) being sought by a small manouverable platform with relatively little power available (e.g. a sea-skimming missile), then your smart strategy is to take advantage of your extra power to drive the problem to the point where the smaller platform literally 'can't compute'. If this technique allows you to do that, it will be worthwhile, even if you won't really be invisible to another platform of equivalent size and power. It's a much better strategy than last-ditch defence using short-ranged missiles and guns.

Re:It isn't real until ..... (1)

Reverand Dave (1959652) | about 2 years ago | (#41997185)

I lol'd at this Kudos to you sir.

Re:It isn't real until ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41998419)

Ahh, so that must be what those Borg cubes actually are!

Re:It isn't real until ..... (2)

Bomazi (1875554) | about 2 years ago | (#41997775)

But if you put a camera behind the building looking away from it and connect it to a large screen in front of the building then someone located in front of the screen won't see the building.

My understanding is that these devices work similarly. They don't block radiation, but bend it.

Inevitably, it had to be said (2, Funny)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | about 2 years ago | (#41996179)

I'll believe it when I don't see it.

Move along, move along, nothing to see here.

Seeing is NOT believing.

Pay No Attention to The Man behind The Invisibility Cloak.

Re:Inevitably, it had to be said (0)

sconeu (64226) | about 2 years ago | (#41996343)

No, it's "*NOT* seeing is believing"

Re:Inevitably, it had to be said (2)

mrbester (200927) | about 2 years ago | (#41997107)

That's the cornerstone of faith.

Re:Inevitably, it had to be said (0)

forkazoo (138186) | about 2 years ago | (#41996837)

Well, whatever happens, I think we can be confident that we won't see anything all that interesting at t the demo.

Invisibility cloak or ninja? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996257)

It's hardly a cloak if you're using a ninja as your subject.

Re:Invisibility cloak or ninja? (1)

Nostromo21 (1947840) | about 2 years ago | (#41998773)

Kudos to beating me & being first to mention ninjas dude! ;)

From TFWS (4, Informative)

OzPeter (195038) | about 2 years ago | (#41996293)

There are a couple of videos on the Fractal Antennas website Fractal Antenna: Whats New [fractenna.com] . Looks like they have something for microwaves. But when they start talking about how this could be scaled up from microwaves to visible light I start to get a bit skeptical.

Re:From TFWS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996559)

LOL at the video of the kid hiding in the big paper tube! OMG WHERE DID HE GO??!?

Re:From TFWS (1)

Hentes (2461350) | about 2 years ago | (#41996963)

As far as I understand it these metamaterials are built out of circuits that have to be about 1/10 of the target wavelength. We already have 32nm semiconductors so it shouldn't be that hard. Getting it to work in 3D, on the other hand, isn't going to be easy.

Re:From TFWS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41997333)

Cohen is a jerk who spends most of his time suing his competition - look into what has happened between him and Fractus....

Sorry (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996313)

I'll be in New York that day, but I'm not going to see this.

I was going to get a frosty, but my keys were invi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996317)

n/t

FYI... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996319)

This thread is getting a lot more responses & comments than you can see.

Re:FYI... (1)

Nostromo21 (1947840) | about 2 years ago | (#41998787)

Hey, even if they can pull the wool over everyone's eyes & the emperor does in fact have some clothes...I can't see a market for this. Except maybe invisiporn.

Hardly new technolgy... (1)

KrazyDave (2559307) | about 2 years ago | (#41996321)

Wonder Woman has had her invisible jet for 50 years... the only shame is that her outfit wasn't also invisible.

Re:Hardly new technolgy... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#41996373)

Wonder Woman has had her invisible jet for 50 years... the only shame is that her outfit wasn't also invisible.

Those amazons, what astounding science and industry they must possess. If they ever reveal their hidden location they'd absolutely clobber Apple in the phone market.

Re:Hardly new technolgy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996679)

You can clearly see the location of their amazonian island on apple maps.

Re:Hardly new technolgy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996981)

Science, ya. Plus I'll bet she has giant, dark areolae like Marion Cotillard and Merideth Baxter Birney!

Invisibility... (0)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#41996357)

I just can't see that.

meh (1)

CosaNostra Pizza Inc (1299163) | about 2 years ago | (#41996397)

That's not so impressive. I'm invisible too. I know this because people always ignore me.

Oxymoron (1)

srussia (884021) | about 2 years ago | (#41996401)

FTFS:They plan to show it off

LIke an auction of priceless artifacts.

I had a demonstration yesterday (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 2 years ago | (#41996413)

and sure enough, they /were/ under the couch all the time.

BS, BS, BS... (2)

Paracelcus (151056) | about 2 years ago | (#41996583)

When you can bend light in vacant 3 dimensional space with EM fields so as to conceal large moving objects you can bet your ass that we'll
never hear a thing about it
 

Re:BS, BS, BS... (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41997413)

of course we will, don't be stupid.

I mean you are being mind numbingly short sighted and stupid. IQ 70 Stupid.
What good is such a device if you don't tell people you have it?
Seriously, the 'We might have a warship off you coast..and maybe we don't.
maybe there is a platoon of soldiers walking up to your base of operations right now, or..maybe not.

Re:BS, BS, BS... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41999425)

Yes, yes. . . This is correct, but doesn't prove the OP wrong. If they had this tech, you wouldn't hear about it. They DON'T have this tech, which is why they WANT people to think they do. If they did, there's NO WAY it would be unclassified/public, so any other country could just copy it.

Yes but... (2)

kellybc (2697785) | about 2 years ago | (#41996605)

Isn't it simpler to just generate an SEP field instead?

Takes a Star Trek approach to detect as well. (2)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 2 years ago | (#41996697)

Changing the resonance frequency of the scanners (radar) will detect it.

quote:
“If you move half a degree in angle, it stops working.
If you move half a percent in bandwidth, it stops working.
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/11/14/deflector-shield-and-invisibility-cloak-wars/ [foxnews.com]

Re:Takes a Star Trek approach to detect as well. (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#41996931)

Sensitive doppler testing should detect a deviation in wave peaks and valleys due to the additional physical distance traveled.

In fact, I'll bet that tech already exists and could be readily adapted.

Re:Takes a Star Trek approach to detect as well. (2)

mrbester (200927) | about 2 years ago | (#41997119)

Not if they rotate the shield harmonics.

mod) 0p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41996701)

recent article put go of the minutiae exploited that. A In adition, log on Then the

Warning Ladies! (1)

Rixel (131146) | about 2 years ago | (#41996857)

It would be a good idea to avoid using the bathrooms....for obvious reasons.

Re:Warning Ladies! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41997223)

Invisible toilets?

I'm sceptical (1)

ocean_soul (1019086) | about 2 years ago | (#41996861)

I am very skeptical to any such announcements. I would like it better if every one would keep the exited reporting for after the demo. Especially /., which considers itself to be well educated on scientific and technological matters.
As a physicist (PhD) working on radio science in relation to astrophysics I have seen a lot of people proposing a lot of awesome inventions, that never worked...

Predator Alien, or Predator Drone??? (2)

IonOtter (629215) | about 2 years ago | (#41996927)

I went through the website, and it is not really for the lay-person of the Internet.

From what I read and watched, we have not gotten to the point where we can make a human being "invisible" to the point where the visible light spectrum is affected.

However, with regards to electromagnetic spectrum, such as radar, microwave and other methods of scanning, searching or detection? Wow. The shielded objects simply are not there. Not a "hole in the air" sort of not there, I'm talking "does not exist in that portion of space/time" kind of there.

This will move the whole radar detection game into obsolescence, and we'll be back to using human observers, or using different spectrum devices to detect the air turbulence from the cloaked object's passing.

Revoke somebody's science writing license (4, Interesting)

jfengel (409917) | about 2 years ago | (#41997055)

It's not "perfect". It has the nifty property that it doesn't reflect anything. But it only works from one angle, and for one frequency (and a microwave frequency at that). It's not even "perfect" at eliminating reflection, just much better than previous ones.

It's a clever but minor advance blown entirely out of proportion because some jackass attached the word "perfect" to it. Everybody who repeated it needs to have their science writing license revoked.

Re:Revoke somebody's science writing license (2)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41997397)

Perfect is correct.
It perfectly invisible to that frequency and that position. Previously it wasn't perfectly invisible under the parameters.

You need to understand science and accurate speech before trying to pull peoples science cards.

Re:Revoke somebody's science writing license (1)

jfengel (409917) | about 2 years ago | (#41999223)

The headline doesn't say "perfect under these parameters". It says "perfect". And we're getting a followup article about a demonstration, so that everybody can go see the "perfect" invisibility cloak, in which nobody outside of a few materials scientists would be interested if it weren't for that misleading application of the word "perfect".

And I was talking about pulling "science writing cards", not "science" cards. The scientists are doing admirable work here. It's some science writers pushing fluff who are not.

Re:Revoke somebody's science writing license (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41997679)

... it only works from one angle, and for one frequency (and a microwave frequency at that)...

Does this mean that you'll have to wear your microwave glasses in order not to see the jelly bean they intend to hide from the former employees of MCI?

Even if it did work perfectly, from all angles and completely suppressed reflections, it would still require an inordinately large power source to hide a single macadamia nut from your pet chimpanzee who could find it by smell alone, anyway.

And if they scale it up, the only people who will want it are the multimillionaire geeks who cling the fantasy of invisible stalking the cute girls they can't figure out how to talk to.

Been there, done that (1)

CapOblivious2010 (1731402) | about 2 years ago | (#41997139)

They already did this demo in Atlanta. It was absolutely amazing, you couldn't see a thing - not the machine, or the scientists, or the wires, or anything! It's like they weren't even there!

Now you see me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41997169)

Would be hilarious if they pull this off by blinding everyone in the room

EMR holes can be seen (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41997437)

If they create an EMR shield to make something invisible then I forsee the following issues:
- how does said thing communicate with something outside that zone or is it "invisibility" and a cone of silence?
- if they scatter all EMR then you can scan for the "hole" by having a sender and receiver on either side of it as a shadow would effectively be created

Scattering EMR is not the same as invisibility - that requires the thing to become transparent.

that's nothing (1)

ffflala (793437) | about 2 years ago | (#41997691)

I've been holding an invisibility demo in the downtown area of a major city for over a week straight now, and nobody's noticed yet. It's going great!

EZ mode..detection (1)

fonitrus (1763632) | about 2 years ago | (#41998437)

every anti stealth detector ship should have an aviary full of seaguls and release them for detection.
just follow the seagulls and you will find the stealth ship. if you build it with chips they will come :) :)

Nathan Cohen is killing Wikipedia (2)

evilviper (135110) | about 2 years ago | (#41998697)

Nathan Cohen and Fractal Antenna Systems have been on a crusade to corrupt Wikipedia. They have been paying multiple editors who have been systematically making advertising edits to multiple Wikipedia articles, all coming from IPs that map to the vicinity of Fractal Antenna Systems' headquarters in MA. They remove any reference to competitors (eg. Fractus) and any references that disagree that fractal antennas are the be-all end-all. The bulk of the corruption is on the fractal antenna article, but Nathan Cohen's name has been tossed in to several other pages... Notable people from XYZ, notable graduates from university XYZ, etc,

See the talk page on Fractal Antennas for all the details:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fractal_antenna#Obvious_bias_in_article [wikipedia.org]

ewww (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41998763)

someone really posted a link from Fox news?

Not that hard (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41999481)

Instead of all they physics, can't you just plant a set of TV's on the side of whatever you are trying to hide, with cameras embedded in them. Cameras from one side of whatever display on the tv's on the other side (and vice versa). (Repeat for top/bottom and front/rear). Its not exactly perfect, but you get closely matching colors and motion, and 'seeing it' is a bitch.

Hello Ninjas (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41999869)

With a working invisibility cloak I can see the whole nature of warfare changing dramatically.

All you need is a small force of "ninjas" using this technology who will assasinate (and keep assasinating) the other sides leaders. All they'd need to do is something like getting into the targets food preparation area to administer a bit of Polonium 210. Job done.

Of course you'd still need an army just in case the other side want to reenact the Somme etc. but on the whole this should make it a lot safer for us disinterested civilians (one "leader" is pretty much as bad any other with the notable exception of the Idi Amins, Saddam Husseins, Stalins etc. of the world ;)

So... did the demo ever happen? (1)

buanzo (542591) | about 2 years ago | (#42072783)

So, what happened with this?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>