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.

 

X-ray is dead. Long live T-ray.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   
In several fields, the X-ray is being replaced with the new T-ray.
The terahertz ray can penetrate just below the skin where the X-ray can not see very well. The T-ray beats the X-ray on the nanometer scale it is also useful at large distances and can be used for national security and space programs.



www.sciencedaily.com

Scientists now using 'T-ray' imaging

A new technology called "T-ray" sensing and imaging is being used by scientists in several fields in place of X-rays.

The new technology -- terahertz ray spectroscopy imaging -- penetrates only a few millimeters beneath the skin, which is an area that X-rays cannot easily image.

T-rays are based on the terahertz region of the electromagnetic spectrum that is between infrared light and microwave radiation. A particular advantage of T-rays is they can also provide spectroscopic information about the composition of chemical and biological material, and are safer for biological applications than X-ray photons that emit a million times more energy.

T-ray procedures allow sensing of objects on the nanometer scale, as well as at large distances of more than 300 feet, an essential capability for areas such as national security and space programs.

The new technology was detailed during a recent biannual national meeting of the American Chemical Society in Washington.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Perhaps the best news about this is that T-rays emit less energy and are safer to use.




posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 02:37 PM
link   
We're getting closer and closer to Star-Trek like sensors. That's an unsettling prospect...



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Hmm, this seems to be more revealing than:

www.timesonline.co.uk...

...Which upset people very much, and (as the article relates) has apparently been refused deployment in some areas.



The TSA has decided not to deploy the device at American airports until manufacturers can develop an electronic means of masking sensitive body parts.


A popular concern when this technology was originally written about on ATS was that adults and children alike would appear naked on the screen, and some people, including myself, think that is unacceptable.

Zip



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Dude: There aren't a whole boatload of people that are gonna take a look at these T-ray sheets. The doctors and people who need to do their stuff.

Ugh... Human sensitivity about body parts. It's a body part people. We know you have it! Chances are we know what one looks like. A respectable thing, human dignity, but when it gets in the way of technology that is without a doubt safer and better than preceding technologies, it should be irrelevant. It should set up shop wherever, and if people don't wanna be seen naked by a doctor who sees naked people all the time... Fine. But for the rest of us that like safer things... Y'know? You gotta put physical safeties above uncomfortabilities.



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 09:47 PM
link   
I don't remember where I read a story on this, but it was about the T-Ray, & the Oriental man who invented it, & how it will be used to scan people in the Airport, instead of the inefectual Metal Detectors.

Does anyone out there remember where this article was at...? It could've been Popular Mechanics, or Popular Science, or some other magazine, not sure.



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Honestly I had never heard of T-rays before. I went looking for more information and I found a good article on Space.com.



First Image from Revolutionary T-ray Camera; Sees through Fog, Clothing and into Deep Space

A project to develop a promising new astronomy imaging technique that can also denude a fully clothed human or see through thick fog has generated its first picture.

A so-called T-ray image of a human hand, taken through a 1/2-inch (15 millimeter) pad of paper, is the first product of the new terahertz camera. The technology is poised to revolutionize imaging in astronomy, medicine and airport security, proponents say.

 


A picture of a human hand, taken through a 1/2-inch (15 mm) pad of paper, is he first product of the new T-ray camera.
 



A fully clothed man imaged by a QinetiQ millimetric wave camera. Note the concealed gun. T-ray cameras are said to be similar but more powerful. Image used with permission.




[edit on 6/12/2005 by Umbrax]



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
We're getting closer and closer to Star-Trek like sensors. That's an unsettling prospect...


This reminds me of research one of my professors is doing. He is essentially trying to build a 'tricorder' like in star trek.

www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca...
www.innovationalberta.com...

It's not really on topic, but it just goes to show that sardion's statement is really quite true. A lot of new technology is just waiting to be invented, once we conceive of the idea (and obtain funding). This T-ray is quite revolutionary, even though it uses scientific concepts that have been known for quite some time.

Good to hear that the T-rays emit less energy, and are therefore less harmful to humans. Actually, since most people don't need x-rays very often, it is the x-ray (or T-ray!) technicians who will benefit the most from this, since their exposure rate is likely highest. Also, if they use less energy, it means it shouldn't take as much to power them, which is always a plus.

The security and other useful aspects of this tool are obvious; unfortunately, so are the privacy abuses. Hopefully this technology won't be misused... hmm, maybe I can make some T-ray glasses, like those x-ray goggles I used to see advertised in the comic books...



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
Dude: There aren't a whole boatload of people that are gonna take a look at these T-ray sheets. The doctors and people who need to do their stuff.

Y'know? You gotta put physical safeties above uncomfortabilities.


Yeah, I was speaking against such scanning at airports. Without regard to attitudes towards nudity, I am of the opinion that airplane transportation has been available sans-nude-screening for far too long for these such technologies to be "necessary" at this point.

Doctors, nurses, jail guards, and people in similar professions have legitimate reasons to work with nude people, but airport security goons, in my opinion, do not have the right or necessity to basically take my childrens' clothes off for no real reason. They didn't have the right or necessity 20 years ago and I don't see that anything has changed.

I seem to be concentrating on airport security applications, and I apologize for that, it's just on my mind.

Zip



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I would like to correct the title of your thread. The X-ray is on it's death bed, here comes the T-ray. Because the x-ray isn't gone yet, and won't be for another decade.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zipdot
...Which upset people very much, and (as the article relates) has apparently been refused deployment in some areas.

The TSA has decided not to deploy the device at American airports until manufacturers can develop an electronic means of masking sensitive body parts.

A popular concern when this technology was originally written about on ATS was that adults and children alike would appear naked on the screen, and some people, including myself, think that is unacceptable.
Zip


The problem with masking certain "areas" is that it will take approximately 5 "oh-no-seconds" for someone to figure out how to hide a weapon in a masked area. Darkpr0 seems to have it about right IMO.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Cool Umbrax.


Seems to me that together, magnetic resonance imaging and T-rays will make X-rays obsolete. 'Bout time. X-radiation is seriously dangerous and used far more often than is necessary - to the great detriment of patients.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
The problem with masking certain "areas" is that it will take approximately 5 "oh-no-seconds" for someone to figure out how to hide a weapon in a masked area. Darkpr0 seems to have it about right IMO.


What? I didn't say anything about masking anything.

Zip



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Actually, these would be used as secondary screening devices, not to replace metal detectors.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 09:13 AM
link   
would these also be able to be used for finding people in rubble like after an earthquake, or be used for mining/excavating operations

If so these two applications have the capability to save hundeds maybe thousands of people after catastrophies. Also by creating huge opputunities for the mining and archealogy industries.

God I love science and technology answer to all of lifes problems. Except morality.



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Umbrax
The T-ray beats the X-ray on the nanometer scale it is also useful at large distances and can be used for national security and space programs.

T-ray procedures allow sensing of objects on the nanometer scale, as well as at large distances of more than 300 feet, an essential capability for areas such as national security and space programs.

X-rays are actually better suited than T-rays, who have absolutely no performance whatsoever on the nanometer scale, due to the simple fact that terahertz rays have a wavelength from 1 µm - 1 mm.



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 06:30 AM
link   
man, be naked for like 2 seconds or get blown up?
Jeez



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 07:28 AM
link   
On the other hand, these T-rays will make us exercise more.

[edit on 10-12-2005 by masterp]



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Simon666
X-rays are actually better suited than T-rays, who have absolutely no performance whatsoever on the nanometer scale, due to the simple fact that terahertz rays have a wavelength from 1 µm - 1 mm.


That is not what the article says.



The new technology -- terahertz ray spectroscopy imaging -- penetrates only a few millimeters beneath the skin, which is an area that X-rays cannot easily image.



posted on Jan, 4 2006 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Umbrax
That is not what the article says.

Then the article is wrong on some accounts.



posted on Jan, 4 2006 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
We're getting closer and closer to Star-Trek like sensors. That's an unsettling prospect...

sardion2000, Why would this be unsettling to You? You don't seem to be the anti-technology type.

I think this is a great thing! So what if some people are upset that someone can see there love handles. Are people so abscessed with themselves that they fall short of what can be a benefice to mankind?
This is where WE are braking down as a society! It's all about ME and not WE!
Edited 2 times for bad typing, I need more coffee to prof read


[edit on 4-1-2006 by Mr101Hazardous]

[edit on 4-1-2006 by Mr101Hazardous]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join