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.

 

Cloaking Device Proved in UK

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2006 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Okies, nobody has brought this up yet, so I will!


If I understand this correctly, this tech basically cancels the light reflecting off the "cloaked" object rendering it invisible to the human eye as we can only see certain wavelengths of light.

I think that would work…..BUT!! Not for any practical stealth it won’t. Why?

If the object itself is not reflecting light that the human eye can pick up, wouldn’t the object still be blocking un-cancelled wavelengths of light from objects behind it? Meaning you can cancel out the light reflecting off the object itself, but what happens to the light behind the object that by all logic should make it to the observers eye?

If you were standing in front of a brick wall and switched on a devise based on this theory, you would still be blocking the reflected light that my eye needs to see the wall behind you. Understand? Even though you yourself cannot be seen, you are still a solid object that does not permit the transmission of light any more than you did prior to being cloaked. So you would appear to be gone, but I would see a “gap” or a missing hole in my vision of the brick wall behind you.

Won’t work guys.

And what pray tell would you see in its place? I can’t even guess. Now in all fairness up in the sky it would not be an issue, there is enough cross reflecting light the hole would be filled although I suspect it would still look a little “off”. But imagine what it would look like with something that had a very specific object right behind it? It would be a complete absence of visual sensory information, just for that specific area. I can’t even perceive what that would look like.




posted on May, 10 2006 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Unfortunatly mate theres one small problem with that skippy, for you to see the wall there needs to be light. Your eye picks up light reflected off objects, ie how you cant see in pitch darkness. So technically there is light.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Unfortunatly mate theres one small problem with that skippy, for you to see the wall there needs to be light. Your eye picks up light reflected off objects, ie how you cant see in pitch darkness. So technically there is light.



I dont know that I have explained myself right then. The light REQUIRED for me to see that wall is being blocked by a cloaked object. What do I see in its place if the light isnt making it to my eye's?

If you stand between me and that wall, I can see you and not the wall behind you. Now, this tech doesnt make you dissapear, its just tinkers with the wavelengths of light that a human eye can detect. But you are still physically there blocking my line of sight to that wall. See? er...Understand? Cloaked or un cloaked with this theory, I would not see that part of the wall you were blocking. So what would I in fact see if you were actually cloaked? But more importantly, I would be able to see the void or anomally very clearly negating any effects of the cloak.

If the light reflecting off that wall doesnt make it to my eyes, you would effectivly be seen. Or the spot you were in would be very noticeable.

But I will admit, the more distance between something cloaked and its background, the more effective it would be.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
If I understand this correctly, this tech basically cancels the light reflecting off the "cloaked" object rendering it invisible to the human eye as we can only see certain wavelengths of light.

You don't understand it correctly. The properties are such that certain wavelength of light would become a great deal more transmitted instead of absorbed/reflected, kind of like glass. This being achieved by the objects electromagnetic properties being tuned such that it would oscillate along in that specific wavelength range.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Simon666
You don't understand it correctly. The properties are such that certain wavelength of light would become a great deal more transmitted instead of absorbed/reflected, kind of like glass. This being achieved by the objects electromagnetic properties being tuned such that it would oscillate along in that specific wavelength range.


Look, I don’t disagree that an object can "appear" invisible with this tech, but what happens to the reflected light of any object it may be blocking?

I don’t care what its doing to the wavelengths to make it disappear, the object itself is still actually there and blocking UN CLOAKED objects behind it. There will be a void in your line of sight. Nothing in this tech is altering the wavelengths of light for objects nearby not meant to be cloaked. If a cloaked object or person passed between me and a building, I would most certainly see a gap in my vision where the cloaked object is. The light coming off that building is being blocked by something I can’t see, but is really there.

This technology DOES NOT do anything to recreate what’s behind it like some other techs do. It WILL leave a void that can be noticed.



posted on May, 15 2006 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Look, I don’t disagree that an object can "appear" invisible with this tech, but what happens to the reflected light of any object it may be blocking?

The effect makes it transparent, like glass. You'd see the objects behind it. Very small absorption or reflection could still give the object away, but you'd run the equivalent chance of running into a glass door or wall for not being able to notice it. But this is all irrelevant since this technology can only be used to cloak microscopic objects and only for certain wavelengths.



new topics

 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join