'Spacetime cloak' to make events invisible"

wow, just ... wow.

www.abc.net.au...

"A safecracker would be able, for a brief time, to enter a scene, open the safe, remove its contents, close the door and exit the scene, while the record of a surveillance camera apparently showed that the safe door was closed all the time," according to their paper.

if an event occurs outside the spacetime view, does it make any sound?

this is the most crazy thing i have read. and even after rereading 3 or 4 times, i still cant fathom exactly what is being said!

any physics dudes wanna pipe in on this? optics masters?

backyard brainiacs?

Whats with all this time shifting/photon bending/past not set in stone talk thats been going on as of late. Kinda makes me wonder whats going to arrive on the scene very soon. Thanks for the post

I haven't been able to find the abstract, but here's an article that explains a little more:

physicsworld.com...

In practice, the device would need two transparent walls to act as the tunnel, or space-time cloak. As an object enters the cloak to perform its action, the rear wall would compress light waves passing through from a source behind. Once the object completes its action and leaves the cloak, however, the front wall would stretch the light waves passing through so that they would merge seamlessly with those outside, whose profile had not been altered.

...All of this, however, relies on someone being able to make the device – and in particular the walls that compress or stretch light waves. McCall admits a perfect implementation "is certainly beyond current technology"...

haha. they say it could be used for practical jokes.. thats why we conceive and implement such technology, just to screw around with people... haha

good find though

reply to post by okamitengu


MILLION DOLLAR IDEA FOR NEXT GENERATION HOLOGRAPHIC DISPLAY?

The original post reference mentioned dynamic variation of refractive index ...

This morning, I noticed how a false double image reflection of multi-colored LED holiday lights appeared to be outside my window. (Perhaps because of reflection and interference of a narrow frequency off front and back panes of glass?) My eye motion caused the false images to move relative to each other as if they were real objects behind the window. The lights would wink out if the sightline was above or below a certain plane. Maybe a multi-layered pane sandwich, or material whose refractive index could be digitally manipulated could produce a display with 3D scenes inside!

This could probably lead to a patentable idea, but in the new age I think we should just share ideas and everybody could enjoy prosperity.

I have been wondering about paired and triad UFOs?/ image artifacts -- lights that appear in many space, moon, and solar UV images. Perhaps multi objects are really just one object projecting numerous illusory copies.

So, to be invisible, project a polarized cloud and use field to direct light scattering?

Technically, the concept is not new, but to bring this in to the world of practical application is a great feat. I suppose the idea of using the example of a safecracker is really just a general reference in a context that the average person might understand. I also believe it to be a great example of how so many example of this technology have been portrayed in sci-fi movies and shows that the general disposition of the public would be the equivalent of "So." or "thThat's cool."

So, although the technology to achieve the feat could be new, the desensitizing of such science has been quite successful.

Actually, if i were to design a toy powered by my 750Megabyte Human Genome in a bee brain as a program incapsulated by titanium and powered by lemon drops i would turn you all into gyroscopia automatonica incarnate...Jesus Christ once said this,...IAMTHEGATE!

Actually, if i were to design a toy powered by my 750Megabyte Human Genome in a bee brain as a program incapsulated by titanium and powered by lemon drops i would turn you all into gyroscopia automatonica incarnate...Jesus Christ once said this,...IAMTHEGATE!

reply to post by okamitengu


That's easily the worst written article on the subject I have ever seen, and I've seen quite a few cringe-worthy ones.

I think ABC Australia must be recruiting from the BBC - they also rarely get science based articles correct.

to be honest i rarely see any science articles on there (;

usually 3 days after i read about it here.

ATS is the Shizzle for the Nizzle.

beats any MSm to the punch every time