It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


"Invisibility Cloak" May Be Better Than First Thought

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 11:57 PM

The theorists who first created the mathematics that describe the behavior of the recently announced "invisibility cloak" have revealed a new analysis that may extend the current cloak's powers, enabling it to hide even actively radiating objects like a flashlight or cell phone.

Maxwell's equations said that a simple copper disk like the one Smith used could be cloaked without a problem, but anything that emitted electromagnetic waves--a cell phone, a digital watch, or even a simple electric device like a flashlight--caused the behavior of the cloaking device to go seriously awry. The mathematics predicts that the size of the electromagnetic fields go to infinity at the surface of the cloaked region, possibly wrecking the invisibility.

Greenleaf's team determined that a more complicated phenomenon arises when using Maxwell's equations, leading to a "blow up" (an unexpected infinite behavior) of the electromagnetic fields. They determined that by inserting conductive linings, whose properties depend on the specific geometry of the cloak, this problem can be resolved. Alternatively, covering both the inside and outside surfaces of the cloaked region with carefully matched materials can also be used to bypass this problem.


Alright, to simplify this, if I understand it correctly, a problem with
the equations was found that stated that with the addition of electro-
magnetic energy within the cloaked area would cause disruptions
and male the cloak useless.
However they devised a way to modify it so that this does'nt happ-
en, even with the electro-magnetic energy present within the
cloaked area.

This whole thing is extremely cool to me, perhaps one day it will be
like Star Trek and we'll have ships that can literally cloak themselves.

Comments, Opinions, Corrections?

[edit on 12/30/2006 by iori_komei]

posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 12:19 AM
I think you have it right, fluxuations in or by the electrons causes disturbances in the transfer between layers. So, EM shielding needs to be added, makes sence.


posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 07:22 AM
umm~~ where can i find out information on this invisibility cloak? i've done a search and i don't think it's one of those~

posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 08:19 PM
Here's a link to the PhysOrg article on the invisibility cloak
when it was first anounced.


posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 08:27 PM
Here is the obligatory youtube link.

posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 08:46 PM
Just last week I was sitting about with my father, and he was joking about how technology had changed so quick..
He had a mouse upside down on the desk, and he was rolling the ball around with his pointer finger asking me '' why the hell wont it go where it wants ''

I can surely see my childeren sitting around one day, laughing going
'' my father got his first cloaking device, couldnt use it either... stupid idiot''

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 04:11 AM
I sure hope that one day I could get my hands on one of those. It has always intrigued me to be invisible. I really like to think about all the things I would do if I could walk around everywhere and noone could see me...

On the other hand, Thermal sensors could probably still detect you, so you couldn't sneek in to top secret places etc.

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 04:33 AM
I'm much more excited about the prospects of making human spacecraft "invisible" to dangerous radiation.


log in