Engineers Devise Invisibility Shield

GerritHoll points out an article in Nature according to which "researchers at the University of Pennsylvania 'say that a "plasmonic cover" could render objects "nearly invisible to an observer.' Earlier attempts at invisibility worked by colouring a screen to match its background, like a chameleon. The described technique is new, because it works by the concept of reducing light scattering. It is not a 'magic cloak,' however, because it will not work for the full range of visible light and needs to be adjusted precisely for the shape of the object. However, the concept could find an application in stealth technology."

Cloak of invisibility?

[xsfo]

What sort of armor class do you get with that?

Everybody knows

[Kiryat Malachi]

Making something invisible is easy: all you have to do is generate a Somebody Else's Problem field of sufficient size.

(Seriously, am I the only one who looked at this, saw the word 'plasmonic', and thought "Fucking Slashdot editors, its *March 1st*, not *April 1st*"?)

obligatory

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't see that one coming.

When it's reliable enough...

[ErichTheWebGuy]

... to let me sneak undetected into a ladies locker room, then we'll talk.

I already have one of these

[Anonymous Coward]

See, it hides my identity when I post on Slashdot!

Re:Bending of light

[Anonymous Coward]

...obstracle.

Obstracle = obstruction + obstacle?

Just what I was waiting for

[schestowitz]

This is awesome. Can I use this on my mother?

Sounds like someone's been tokin' the hookah

[MooseByte]

From the article: "And crucially, the effect only works when the wavelength of the light being scattered is roughly the same size as the object. So shielding from visible light would be possible only for microscopic objects."

OK. So if I have this straight... "You see that thing you can't see because it's too small? Well we just made it invisible! Please send more grant funding. And a few burritos. We're like, totally hungry dude."

Uh huh....

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Just what I was waiting for

[Anonymous Coward]

This is awesome. Can I use this on my mother?

I already used it on your mother many years ago. That's right; I'm your deadbeat dad, but you'll never catch me.

Invisible HUMAN

[page275]

Here is the technique let yourself invisible, try it yourself: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=439508 [sciforums.com]

Also...

[Create an Account]

From the article:
...it would be more like the shielding used by the Romulans in the Star Trek episode "Balance of Terror" in 1966, which hid their spaceships at the push of a button.

...it's called a "cloaking device", you insensitive clod!

Re:Everybody knows

[Burning Plastic]

You also need a large can of pink paint or something else to make the object truly abnormal before a SEP field will work properly.

Having a spaceship that looks like a small upended Italian bistro is a good start...

Re:Everybody knows

[w42w42]

Invisible hell. One more drink past that and I can fly.

captain obvious

[shannara256]

the concept could find an application in stealth technology.

Really? Invisibility could be used for tasks requiring stealth? No way, that's crazy talk.

Re:Invisibility cloaking

[ozbird]

Why do surgeons need an invisibility cloak? To hide from malpractice lawsuits?

I feel so cheated!

[serutan]

This article is like going to a movie after seeing the really great preview, and finding out that the really great preview contains every single really great moment in the movie.

Re:Invisibility cloaking

[Anonymous Coward]

How long til I can buy this stuff at Walmart?

As soon as they can find a way to make this stuff in China.

I already have one of these.

[SeaFox]

It's made me invisible to women for 10 years now.
I wish I could turn it off.

Re:I already have one of these

[mrchaotica]

I have one too!

Speaking from personal experience,

[likewowandstuff]

I'm about five-eight, and deep-seated insecurity seems to hide me from most things. Does anyone else have similar experiences?

Re:I already have one of these

[mrchaotica]

Oops.

Re:When it's reliable enough...

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess cloaking a bonener is out of the question.

You're right, it wouldn't conceal my boner, since the article stated that it had to be a small object.... Oh, never mind.

Re:Cloak of invisibility?

[WillerZ]

TFA doesn't say, but according to http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=140954 &cid=11810480 [slashdot.org], you'll already have the the +100 size (subatomic) bonus to AC.

Re:Cloak of invisibility?

[Mr. Bad Example]

> What sort of armor class do you get with that?

I'd tell you, but I can't find the fucking thing.

Re:Everybody knows

[Anonymous Coward]

Flying is a simpler problem. You just need to miss the ground.

Re:Has Anyone Seen James Bond Before

[ggvaidya]

Dear horsebutt,

You have used the phrase "copying movies" in your Slashdot post #11810495, dated March 1st. We remind you that copying movies is a dangerous and illegal activity, which can have harmful effects ranging from misguided threats of legal action from MPAA legalbots to being made to sit through Gigli. Think of all the millions of Hollywood actors living on the streets and eating out of dumpsters because of your thoughtless, violent and evil crime.

Just a gentle reminder from,
your friend,
RIAA LegalBot[tm] #1024 "Jeff"

Re:Everybody knows

[Anonymous Coward]

(Seriously, am I the only one who looked at this, saw the word 'plasmonic', and thought "Fucking Slashdot editors, its *March 1st*, not *April 1st*"?)

Actually, when April Fools first started, it was actually on March 1st. Subsequent rearranging of the calendar meant it had to be moved to April to stay in the same place in relation to the seasons.

...aww, who am I kidding? MARCH FOOLS!

Skeptical

[ggvaidya]

I won't believe this 'til I see it.

Nothing to see here...

[TommydCat]

Move along...

They have yet to solve...

[Intocabile]

the rubber-glue matrix. What use is an invisibility shield without a robust name calling defense system.

Quick! Get me Rick Moranis!

[weston]

So in other words, for you to get a nice, new cloak of invisibility you'll need to be microscopic in size

Not a problem. If you'll just step right over here to this shrinkometer....

Re:Indeed, it's pretty far from advertised...

[kyojin the clown]

so wait. if i get a red object, put it in a red room with a red light, I wont be able to see it anymore?

its amazing what scientists can do.

Re:Everybody knows

[mcc]

(Seriously, am I the only one who looked at this, saw the word 'plasmonic', and thought "Fucking Slashdot editors, its *March 1st*, not *April 1st*"?)

Correction: The Slashdot Editors have successfully convinced you it's March 1st, not April 1st.

Best! April! Fools! Joke! Ever!

Re:Indeed, it's pretty far from advertised...

[flakac]

Absolutely... if we can just get our weapons' size down to a few microns, and get (Al Quaida|Ruskies|Iraq|Iran|North Korea|Massachusetts) to limit their surveillance techniques to the proper wavelength, then this will be really breakthrough technology!

Fricking perfect

[mykdavies]

the effect only works when the wavelength of the light being scattered is roughly the same size as the object

This would make it the perfect for those awkward moments when your nanobots are being attacked by lasers (mounted on sharks?)

At Last!!!!

[zmollusc]

Now we can penetrate those pesky secure quantum communication links without a man in the middle attack! Simply by stealthifying the particles use use to determine the state of the information carrying particle.The information carier is unaware that it is being observed and its quantum packet doesn't collapse. Woot! Send me my nobel prize asap!

Re:500 Nanometer Romulan Warbirds, perhaps...

[atcurtis]

Well, that's not a problem.

I have in my InfoCom game packaging an original sealed sachet which contains a "Microscopic Space Fleet".

I just wish I knew where the Peril Sensitive sunglasses went...

Just waiting for the technology to advance

[VolatileSamu]

I have thought about this few times(when feverish or some other way mentally challenged states) and decided that our technology isn't yet suitable to accomplish this.

Basically it's quite simpple - all you have to do is route every incoming photon around the object without changing it's course.

Fabric made of nano-fibres?

Monty Python

[vistic]

hmmm...

I don't think these engineers devised any sort of "invisibility shield" ...maybe they're just really dull....

host: With me now is Mr. Thomas Walters of West Hartlepool who is totally invisible. Good evening, Mr Walters. (turns to empty chair)

walters: Over here, Hughie. (host turns to see boring, visible man)

host: Mr. Walters, are you sure you're invisible?

walters: Oh yes, most certainly.

host: Well, Mr. Walters, what's it like being invisible?

walters: Well, for a start, at the office where I work I can be sitting at my desk all day and the others totally ignore me. At home, even though we are in the same room, my wife does not speak to me for hours, people pass me by in the street without a glance in my direction, and I can walk into a room without...

host: Well, whilst we've got interesting people, we met Mr. Oliver Cavendish who...

walters: Even now you yourself, you do hardly notice me...

Re:invisible??

[monkey_jam]

nah youre wrong, they require lance Armstrong to Louis Armstrong to function

Methinks you mean Angstrom...

In other news...

[mlmurray]

Wonder Woman sued the University of Pennsylvania over Intellectual Property involving invisibility technology. No one on campus could be found for comment.

Re:obligatory

[kryten_nl]

Or, "I'll believe it, when I see it."

Re:I already have one of these

[D-Cypell]

RTFM!!!

Engineers and Invisibility

[thewiz]

Why do engineers need to develop methods of invisibility? After all, most engineers are invisible to the female half of the population anyway.

Re:When it's reliable enough...

[ikkonoishi]

You don't need a cloak of invisibility for that... just a girdle of gender changing.

Re:obligatory

[Offler]

Nothing to see here. Move along.

Re:Obvious Applications

[protonman]

Which is analogous to saying that if you can't see one molecule, you can't see a bunch of them together!

Hey wait a minute! We are invisible already!

How not to be seen (a la Monty Python)

[benhocking]

It seems like they need to watch this [orangecow.org] again. (In searching for an appropriate link, I also stumbled upon a strange amalgamation [utexas.edu] of Monty Python and JRR Tolkein. It's bloody hilarious if you know both.)

Big Deal

[lbmouse]

My tin foil hat has been rendering me invisible for years. Right now I'm wearing it naked at work.

"Hi Bob, what are you looking at?"

Yeah, yeah, yeah...

[eomnimedia]

All of this is meaningless until they discover how to create the Holocaust Cloak. What I wouldn't give for a Holocaust Cloak right about now.

Cat got your tongue?

[jchap]

I'm getting bored of the hype required to get any science/technology advances written up. It's not an invisibility cloak, you knew it before you wrote the article and I knew it before I read the article. Why does good science need to hide behind stupid banner headlines?

Also, (because I'm grumpy today), Chameleons do not change colour to blend with their background. FFS. See Wikipedia: Chameleon [wikipedia.org].

If only someone had invented a fusion reactor that ran on pure bullshit we'd all be rolling in it (so to speak).

Re:Quick! Get me Rick Moranis!

[Andy Gardner]

I think the device you mean would be a DeBigulator. Of course to return to normal size would require some kind of ReBigulator, which is an idea so patently absurd I can't even begin to comprehend it, ng'hiey!

Re:Cloak of invisibility?

[Xaroth]

<pedantic class="geek" voice="nasal">

First, it has to be a power of 2 in order to be a size-based AC modifier.

Taking the medium size class to max out at 2 meters, microscopic would be about 16 size classes below medium (since each size class has a maximum of one half the height of the one above it; I'm taking ~30 micrometers max to be "microscopic". It is, of course, a DM's call as to what, exactly, would constitute microscopic - adjust accordingly.)

This would give an AC bonus (and bonus to hit) of +32,768. Good luck finding a smith to craft armor or weapons for that size class, though.

For contrast, the parent's "+100" size bonus would roughly correlate to the +128 bonus that's actually possible, and would exist for a creature no bigger than 7.8125mm - hardly subatomic. In fact, this would be the appropriate size class for many normal insects.

Second, Invisibility grants a 50% miss chance due to total concealment, not an increase to AC.

Of course, 2.5% of the time you'll still hit it anyway (what with the whole "a 20 always hits" rule + total concealment). So, if at first you don't succeed, try, try again. I'm sure your DM would allow you to take 20 on hitting something that poses so little threat to you (assuming you weren't otherwise potentially in peril).

</pedantic>

Oh, and smile. You know it's funny.

Re:Everybody knows

[Mondoz]

Unfortunately, making an SEP truly IS Somebody Else's Problem, thus rendering the plans to the field itself invisible.

Re:Invisibility cloaking

[NanoGator]

"So how do you go about building one of these things?"

"Do you know how to build an empty box?"

Wrong Reference

[David Gould]

Come on, guys! I can't be the first to notice... Okay, I'll spell it out for you -- the correct first reaction to this story is:

How funny is it that this research is being done at the University of Pennsylvania, of all places?!

(Have none of you kids ever heard of The Philadelphia Experiment [imdb.com]?)

Re:Invisibility cloaking

[Noofus]

Could you imagine the stink it would create the first time someone says "Your Honor...its not my fault that I groped her, I didnt know where my hands were at the time because I couldnt see them!"