It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientists Demonstrate What A Real Laser Bullet Would Look Like

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 10:29 PM
link   
This is interesting, ATS. Researchers at the University of Warsaw's Laser Centre have caught a Laser blast on film. In reality a Laser blast is too fast for a camera to catch so researchers had to use camera tricks to get their "laser"



The laser in this video is actually a composite of many, many laser shots. To capture it, an adapted camera was synchronized with laser generating pulses at a rate of approximately 10 shots per second. It was done in such a way that with every subsequent pulse the camera recorded, an image was minimally delayed from the previous one.


Pretty cool, huh ATS? How long until we have Laser guns?

io9.com...




posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

Considering the fact that a laser is light and light is fast, wouldn't your target be hit before you even realized that you pressed the trigger?

Edit: After reading the article I was able to confirm my thoughtS.



edit on 23-10-2014 by Kuroodo because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-10-2014 by Kuroodo because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 10:39 PM
link   
I don't know, OP. Kinda sad, really, imho. We take incredible technology like lasers that can do so much that's meaningful for everyone, and make more ways to kill each other, instead.

Yup. Pretty cool.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 10:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: tetra50
I don't know, OP. Kinda sad, really, imho. We take incredible technology like lasers that can do so much that's meaningful for everyone, and make more ways to kill each other, instead.

Yup. Pretty cool.


Yes, it's very unfortunate. I was so excited to learn about 3-D printing technology but then was quickly disappointed when one of the first things created to demonstrate the technology was a 3-D printed gun.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Another pointless expensive experiment, way to spend money in a recession guys.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 02:46 AM
link   
a reply to: tetra50

Uh... This laser was developed for purely scientific purposes, not as an alternative to rifle fire. The reference to a laser bullet says rather more about the headline hunting of the author of the article, than it does about the technology itself.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 02:53 AM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

Where have we seen stuff like that before?

Looks like cauldron fire to me.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 03:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: tetra50

Uh... This laser was developed for purely scientific purposes, not as an alternative to rifle fire. The reference to a laser bullet says rather more about the headline hunting of the author of the article, than it does about the technology itself.


Haha, just give 'em time Sir TrueBrit. And, ahem, who knows where all their funding comes from, eh?

Certainly a super cool science vid either way. So sci-fi with the scientist down the hall being lit up!



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 03:12 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit
well, it could be my bad, as I didn't watch the video and was thinking of other issues, admittedly, though somewhat related. But I perhaps misunderstood the context by not watching the video and only reading the OP.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 03:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
Another pointless expensive experiment, way to spend money in a recession guys.


Are you #ing kidding me? You don't see how the ability to "visualize" the output of a laser might be useful diagnostically?



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 04:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
Another pointless expensive experiment, way to spend money in a recession guys.


Are you #ing kidding me? You don't see how the ability to "visualize" the output of a laser might be useful diagnostically?


But thats not what they did. The output of that laser did not look like a laser bullet. They just took 1000's of photographs at different times and then used software to make it look like a bullet. Hence the title of this tread "Scientists Demonstrate What A Real Laser Bullet Would Look Like"


edit on 24-10-2014 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 04:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: PhoenixOD

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
Another pointless expensive experiment, way to spend money in a recession guys.


Are you #ing kidding me? You don't see how the ability to "visualize" the output of a laser might be useful diagnostically?


But thats not what they did. The output of that laser did not look like a laser bullet. They just took 1000's of photographs at different times and then used software to make it look like a bullet.


No, no, not at all.

One, there isn't any such thing as a "laser bullet" per se. Skip that. What does a "laser bullet" look like, anyway? How do you know that's not what the thing looks like? (anyway...)

What you're seeing is the output of a very fast pulsed laser. THAT is worth looking at, if you have a way to "video" the thing. At least, it's a way of looking at your laser output that you didn't have before.

(scratches head) Let me try to explain what it is you're seeing in the video.

In order to directly visualize a light pulse propagating in free space, you'd need a camera with a ridiculous frame rate. One you couldn't manage in real life. So, how DO you get a "video" of a laser pulse? Well, what these guys have is a camera with a very very fast shutter speed, and a very very finely grained very very accurate delay time for the shutter. (lots of "veries", but it's de rigueur if you want to pull this off with light)

You have to assume that the light source you're looking at is repetitive in its performance. If not, it has to change in behavior comparatively slowly over time, or you will see something faux caused by aliasing.

So, you take an image x + delta after the light source fires. Then you fire again, and now you get an image at x + delta1, a very tiny bit delayed from the firing. Then x+delta(2), delayed yet a bit more, and so on. In this way, you can build up an accurate depiction of what is actually going on as the laser pulse propagates downfield.

It's not "made up", it's actually what's happening, with the caveats of:

1) your camera's shutter speed is adequately brief
2) your shutter open and shut times are settable to a granularity that's small enough
3) your shutter duration and opening time are extremely accurate and precise, and the drift has to be quite small, and slow compared to the time required to compile the entire video sequence
4) the light source is also very accurate and precise, with the same proviso for the drift in characteristics

You do the same thing with certain types of DSO's, if you've got very repetitive waveforms you can use a much slower A-D than you'd normally need, as long as your sample and hold circuit is very very good (analogous to the shutter), by scanning your sampling point in time over the waveform.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 04:51 AM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

Rapid Prototyping, which is the precursor to 3d printing as most know it, has been around since the mid 80s. A printed gun was far from one of the first things printed. It was primary used to generate prototypes for manufacturing or one offs for very specific uses.

The 3d gun just got the most media time because omg its a gun....


Personally I think the laser blast they captured was pretty cool.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 04:53 AM
link   
So in essence we have developed the proverbial 'Pew Pew Pew' instead of the classic Sci Fi bbzzzzzooomm from the 50s and 60s.

Now, if we could get this whole Federal deficit thing worked out, that would be great.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 04:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: SLAYER69
So in essence we have developed the proverbial 'Pew Pew Pew' instead of the classic Sci Fi bbzzzzzooomm from the 50s and 60s.


The "pew pew pew" was always there, you never had a way to see it before this.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 05:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

Fair enough

In light of this latest technical development.

Just a reminder, the 'Gift Giving' season is just around the corner.


Wants, Needs this...



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 06:42 AM
link   


whats up with the ghost?



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 08:02 AM
link   
more a demonstration of a camera trick than a shiny new laser for weaponization. This can be done with a pulsed high power laser. Which are more or less off the shelf item. The cool part is the camera synchronisation, which is slightly out of sync with the laser allowing each frame to allow the light pulse (scattered here so you can see it) to be positioned further along its path.

Really neat.

And money? well it was a Polish experiment so, unless your from Poland, saying it a waste is somewhat subjective.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   
It sounds like standard off the shelf components. In my physics lab at high-school we used to mess about with the stroboscope - a xenon lamp that could blink on and off from once a minute to thousands of times per second. Turn the ceiling lights off and go disco with everything from motors, propellers to running streams of colored water.

In this set up, they have the laser zapping away, and with each zap, they take one camera shot. The two are synchronised to nanosecond precision and then they combine the frames into a movie.

It isn't a waste of resources. These items would be sitting on a shelf at the time that this movie was made. Also, academics are required to published papers giving out ideas for other people to try. That acts as inspiration for startups.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: tetra50
I don't know, OP. Kinda sad, really, imho. We take incredible technology like lasers that can do so much that's meaningful for everyone, and make more ways to kill each other, instead.

Yup. Pretty cool.
We don't HAVE do to that. It's a choice.
edit on 24-10-2014 by StoutBroux because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join