Secret of invisibility unravelled by US researchers
Will Godfrey
Duh #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

So if they manage to bend light equally at all frequencies exactly the right amount (Yeah, right) they will then have a teensy weensy problem. Not only will nobody be able to see them, but they, themselves will be in total darkness.
Jon Tocker
Of course... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

The stealthed troops are easy to not see in the pic but did anyone else notice the Hobbit wearing Sauron's ring, Harry Potter in his cloak, the Predator and the invisible man are also not visible in the pic - not to mention the Klingon Bird of Prey you cannot see hovering over the field.
Once again, El Reg surpasses all othe media outlets with this ground-breaking photo...
IGMC - it's the one hanging on the apparently empty peg...
Tim
No such material occurs naturally #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

How do you know just because you haven't seen them does not mean they are not there.
Dale Morgan
im confused #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT
how do they make the stuff visible to construct it into something? the article gives the impression that the material bends light around it, so its invivislbe from the start, no way of making it visible.
Mycho
America, sure. #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT
Given the name of the prof there is no way any other nation could get their hands on this tech.
Pete
Been done before #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT
This was first done many years ago. unfortunately the scientist who invented it, put the prototype down somewhere and now can't find it.
Dominic Kua
How convenient... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

Just as G.W. is seen hanging around the women's beach volleyball area, a sudden breakthrough in invisibility occurs.
Military's probably had this for 10 years, he is CiC after all, putting tax dollars to a purpose at least half the electorate would approve of is surely a first?
Anonymous Coward
In that picture, that tank looks suspicously like ... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Eyes #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT
Assuming you were cloaked head to toe in invisibility material could you see or would there need to be eye holes and wouldn't that give you away.
The Aussie Paradox
FAKE! #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

That picture is a fake! I can see where the troops have been photoshopped out!
/Mines the invisible one.
Joe
WOOHOO! #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

Metal Gear Paintball!!
Also, does this mean paint and dyes will be a restricted weapon on the battlefield?
Adam Foxton
Love the photo #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

I wonder if there'd be a blur as you moved or if it'd be absolutely transparent?
Also, does it work both close-up and further away (as the convergence / divergence of the images both eyes see changes)
Does it work all the way around the object, or could it be defeated by the tactic known as "stepping to the left and looking for a suspicious vertical line"?
Can it work with really intense light, or will it be defeated by a half decent laser diode?
Does it work with all visible spectrum light, or can it just make you invisible if all the surrounding light is of a certain wavelength?
Just a few questions, but they seem like the sort of things an "invisibility" system would fall down on...
Emo
Hmm #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

Can't see any foot prints or tracks, photo must be a fake!
Anonymous Coward
but #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT
Does it work if you throw paint on it?
Steve
April 1st 2009 already? #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:15 GMT

You cannae bend the laws of physics, Captain!
Anonymous Coward
Who turned out the lights? #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:16 GMT
The problem with invisibility suits, you have to leave your eyeballs exposed, or else you're blind due to the lack of visible light getting in.
Michael Cox
"No such material occurs naturally..." #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:16 GMT

... or at least not that we've seen yet.
Mine's the one on the empty coat peg with the faintly detectable shimmer
Eric Olson
One question, though... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:16 GMT
If the light is being bent around you, how the heck are you supposed to see where you're going? I suppose if you had electronic means to view with, like radar, sonar, etc, that were not bent, but then you could still be detected by mundane means, and where is the high tech advancement in that?
Geoff Mackenzie
This must be a joke #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:16 GMT

I can see them in the picture. They were also on my bus the other day.
Fozzy
<title needed> #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:16 GMT

Wouldn't poking the eyes out of the observer achieve the same results?
Frank
re. Nonsense #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:16 GMT

"Of course, that last bit's complete nonsense."
Ahhhh, but is it?
Andy Worth
I am invisible!! #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 07:16 GMT
As once said in Mystery Men.....
"Shoveler: So, let me get this straight. You do have the ability to become invisible?
Invisible Boy: Yes.
Shoveler: But you can't give us a demonstration?
Invisible Boy: No. I can only become invisible when no-one's watching.
Shoveler: So, you're only invisible to yourself?
Invisible Boy: Oh, no. If I look at myself, I become visible again.
Furious: So...you can only become invisible when absolutely nobody is watching you?
Invisible Boy: Yes."
Paul
Shape and relative motion #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

Would the object doing the cloaking have to be spherical?
Would there be a focal length inside which its distortion would be noticeable, like the eddies behind a rock in a stream which makes the presence of the rock known for a short distance downstream?
Also a moving (and extremely fast) camera would be able to spot them as the light would be slowed up by having to travel a: further and b: through a material so distant objects would blur. Admittedly it would be an almost unbelievably fast (optical processing, not movement) camera, but we are talking about invisibility shields here.
Paris as her knickers are already made of this meta-material.
Anonymous Coward
Didn't we see this story last year? #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

I'm sure we did.
Now, as then, my comment is that even if you make the tanks, trucks and squaddies invisible, how are you going to make the exhausts, tracks, bent foliage and noise go away? And while squillions are spent on this technology, better weapons and light-weight body armour might be just as effective and much, much cheaper.
Of course, if you apply it to Black Helicopters (TM), you just might have something.
Mike Hocker
Who Needs Glass #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

when you have metamaterials at optical wavelengths. Just flow the outside scenery through an itty bitty hole in the wall, and keep the high thermal resistance wall in between.
Be able to save great gobs of energy that way, none of this Luddite thermally leaky glass rubbish.
Bruce
I have one of those cloaking devices #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

But I can't find it.
Mine's the one on the 'empty looking' hanger, I think...
Mike
How Not To Be Seen? #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

That tree in the photo is a rather obvious hiding place. If that's the secret to invisibility, they had better improve...
Mark Roome
I am sure #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

David Copperfield did something clever like this a few years ago, making a number of things invisible?
Can't they just clone him and shove him into whatever it is they want to make invisible?
Simon
IIRC from earlier efforts #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

0) You can't see out of it.
1) It'll be more of an Invisibility Container
As understand it, a perfect example of such a container (for you couldn't really wear or drive it) would be undetectable in (a portion of) the EM spectrum at whatever velocity it was moving.
alec horley
News Flash - 2007 #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT
Stand by for the upcoming news flash when this gets developed:
"4 killed in tank accident.
4 British soldiers were lost today as a tank ran them over. The squad, from the amoured 3rd infantry, 'the invisibles', got run over by their support tank during a routine invisible armour training excercise ..."
A Baird
Slight flaw: #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

Is this material going to be IRR and somehow body heat dispersing / insulating?
Tom
Acoustical version please #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT
so we dont get this hysterical braying every time one of their nation does something complicated like chewing gum and walking at the same time.
Michael H.F. Wilkinson
How about refraction? #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

I'm all with Adam Foxton. I really wonder if it is possible to coat an object in something which warps light PERFECTLY around it so as to become invisble. Given the difficulties in getting perfection in ordinary optics (even apochromatic lenses are just corrected for three wavelenghts, not all) I very much doubt we could make stuff which perfectly blends you into the background, in all wavelengths, from all angles.
I would bet there would eb some refraction effects which make the wearer similar to some sort of lens which would certainly distort the scene behind it to some extent. You might be well camouflaged, but not invisible.
Adrian
Do as they always do in the movies #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT
Chuck talc powder over the battle field and look for the footprints/tracks
GameCoder
Scalability? #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

Are the boffins doing this research actually saying that these meta materials can in theory be used on large scale objects like tanks and people? Or are they hinting that, and just riding the wave of cash flowing from the military top brass, who seem more and more to be influenced by childhood sci-fi? I'm not a physicist, but my gut instinct is that someone is being economical with the truth. The analogy with light and a flowing fluid is flawed. I'd guess at the very best this system would when working results in some kind of adaptive camouflage. I don't think its going to allow me stand unnoticed in Paris' bathroom.
Robin A. Flood
My disappearing socks #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT
Every washing machine ever made already has this feature. Put two socks in, run a cycle - short or long, doesn't matter - look inside tub and only one sock is visible.
John Sanders
Fantastic! #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

Can I use it at the office to avoid detection by stupid managers?
David Wiernicki
Correct me if I'm wrong... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:53 GMT

...but isn't current research in this area limited to very small objects (ie, several molecules in size)?
Seems too good to be true if it can do big stuff.
Anonymous Coward
i can see waldo #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:55 GMT

Also my house from here
Steven Raith
FAO Berkely/DARPA #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:55 GMT

At least I assume Darpa would have had a hand in this, what with their freaky-tech background.
Message begins:
Video evidence or STFU
Message ends.
Steven R
Alex Gollner
Most handy for blind soldiers... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:55 GMT
...as no light can enter the 'cloak' to those rendered invisible. The blind will be the best invisible assassins (unless they're played by Ben Affleck in the movie).
(Paris, because she's already got an invisible coat)
Uwe Dippel
Maybe hidden behind the tree? #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:55 GMT
Finally, the Pythons once again laid the groundwork
Charles Manning
It exists! #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:55 GMT
What they're not telling us is that this stuff has existed for many years and so have flying cars. They paint flying cars with this stuff which is why we never see them!
I remember 20 years ago people making similar predictions about superconductors. Before Y2K we were going to have superconductor power lines so that the power lines would be lossless (ummm except for the huge amount of energy needed to keep them cold).
So the whitecoats manage to make a small item disappear in a well controlled environment and we have "soon there will be invisible soldiers and battleships".
Even very viable technologies take a long time to get to fruition so I can't see (pun if you wish) invisibility happening any time soon.
Steven Knox
BBoT? #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:55 GMT

A few questions:
If you bend all the light around you, how do you see where you're going?
Does painting the object pink first help?
How closely does the material resemble a towel?
Steve Sherlock
Pondering... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 08:55 GMT
"No such material occurs naturally and it's only very recently that molecular engineering has advanced sufficiently to give scientists the opportunity to create them."
How can they be so sure? Surely if it did exist naturally, they couldn't see it?
Tom
This will backfire... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 09:42 GMT
The US seem to be quite happy to attack their allies vehicles even if they are properly marked!
But can you imagine the carnage when they try and fire at the enemy through their own invisible troops.
And another thing - how would you find them after you got out for a slash?
Sam
Python again #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 09:42 GMT
"How to recognize different types of tree
from quite a long way away...number one, the Larch. The Larch."
(I know it isn't a larch, but someone's already done how not to be seen.)
Mike Crawshaw
@ Robin A. Flood "My Disappearing Socks" #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 09:42 GMT

"Every washing machine ever made already has this feature. Put two socks in, run a cycle - short or long, doesn't matter - look inside tub and only one sock is visible."
Doesn't work that way here. I put in one pair of socks, I get out 2 socks - each from completely different pairs. I blame the extra-dimensional portal in the back of my washer, but take solace in knowing that a version of myself in another dimension is having the same trouble...
PS Invisibility is easy. Every time my boss comes towards me carrying a piece of paper, I disappear from sight immediately...
Glyph
invisibility is nice but... #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 10:39 GMT

I'll take all the other stuff a superlens can do, and his group is working on those as well. I find it odd they announced in this manner, unless I misunderstand the discovery, this is a material with a negative refraction index in the visible wavelengths. This same technology is what they are planning on using to boost optical media sizes through the roof, and drop lithography die sizes down to the silicon limit. It trumps the diffraction limit or so I've read.
@Charles Manning: yes it took them 20 yrs but Canada and NY both now have superconducting power lines yes?
Steen Hive
Useful #
Posted Monday 11th August 2008 10:39 GMT

Maybe they'll give some to the Brits - give them a sporting chance of not getting shot in the back.