Bond's invisible car could become reality

[carl stromberg]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080811/t ... b2fc3.html

Invisibility cloak now within sight: scientists

The age-old fantasy of rendering objects invisible took a sharp step toward reality Sunday when scientists said they had created a material that can bend visible light in three dimensions.

(Advertisement)
For now the vanishing act takes place on a nanoscale, measured in billionths of a metre.

But there is no fundamental reason why the same principles cannot be scaled up one day to make invisibility cloaks big enough to hide a person, a tank or even a tanker, the scientists say.

The groundbreaking experiments, led by Xiang Zhang at the University of California at Berkeley and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, were reported simultaneously in the British journal Nature and the US-based journal Science.

Recent advances have created other so-called metamaterials, artificially engineered structures with optical properties that bend light in unnatural ways.

But previous attempts had two severe limitations.

One was that they only worked on the microwave range of the light spectrum, bending wavelengths much too long to be visible to the human eye.

The second was that -- up to now -- it only worked on thin, two-dimensional systems.

The new material, by contrast, produces what is known as the "negative refractive index" needed to make an invisibility cloak within a visible light spectrum and in three dimensions.

Negative refraction -- or "left-handed" -- materials deflect light in a way which is contrary to the normal "right-handed" rules of electromagnetism.

The light travels in the opposite direction that it normally would when passing from one material to another, such as from air through water or glass.

One possible application would be the construction of special lenses for optical microscopes that could focus on things as tiny as molecules.

But the holy grail of metamaterials has become the kind of invisibility shield that has fire the human imagination from H.G. Wells' "Invisible Man" to the adventures of Harry Potter.

The military, which funded the research, is especially keen to develop materials that could usher in an entire new generation of stealth technology.

The metamaterial developed by Zhang and his colleagues has a multi-layered fishnet structure composed of alternating layers of silver and magnesium fluoride, which is transparent over an extremely wide range of light wavelengths.

"In the case of invisibility cloaks or shields, the material would need to curve light waves completely around the object like a river flowing around a rock," Zhang said, according to the Sunday Times.

"An observer looking at the cloaked object would then see light from behind it, making it seem to disappear."

[Captain Nash]

It doesn't really matter.
DAD is still...

[carl stromberg]

It doesn't really matter.
DAD is still...

That's what you are common as!

[FormerBondFan]

This should be interesting.

[stockslivevan]

It doesn't really matter.
DAD is still...

Word Benny, word.

[Kristatos]

It doesn't really matter.
DAD is still...

But it does remove the objection that invisible cars are too science-fictiony for Bond.

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

It doesn't really matter.
DAD is still...

But it does remove the objection that invisible cars are too science-fictiony for Bond.

These Daniel Craig as Bond fans need to have a conference to come up with some new arguments.

[Captain Nash]

It doesn't really matter.
DAD is still...

But it does remove the objection that invisible cars are too science-fictiony for Bond.

I guess you could take that logic.
But you could also say that it came six years after the film, so is still far to over the top.
I don't care what anyone says or comes up with. The 'vanish' is the worst Bond car / gadget of all time. It will always be that way, even when we're all driving around in the new Ford Invisble in twenty years time.
I think my biggest problem with it, is it's an Aston Martin. It should be shown off for all its splendour. It made Bond to kiddie friendlym, when he's better when he's young adult friendly. If that makes sense.

[The Sweeney]

These Daniel Craig as Bond fans need to have a conference to come up with some new arguments.

As opposed to the sparkling brand new DCINB arguments that get recycled every 2 days -

Too blonde, too short, too ugly.......too blonde, too short, too ugly........too blonde, too short, too ugly.................etc. etc.

[The Sweeney]

I guess you could take that logic.
But you could also say that it came six years after the film, so is still far to over the top.
I don't care what anyone says or comes up with. The 'vanish' is the worst Bond car / gadget of all time. It will always be that way, even when we're all driving around in the new Ford Invisble in twenty years time.
I think my biggest problem with it, is it's an Aston Martin. It should be shown off for all its splendour. It made Bond to kiddie friendlym, when he's better when he's young adult friendly. If that makes sense.

To be honest, the invisible car itself isn't the main problem. I could have lived with the concept, had it been executed differently. Had it appeared in a more realistic type Bond film (LTK/CR), and portrayed in a more realistic fashion, I probably wouldn't have had that much of an issue with it.

But as it is, thrown in the mix with all the other garbage DAD had to offer, it belongs right at home among the stinking dung heap!!

[Kristatos]

To be honest, the invisible car itself isn't the main problem. I could have lived with the concept, had it been executed differently. Had it appeared in a more realistic type Bond film (LTK/CR), and portrayed in a more realistic fashion, I probably wouldn't have had that much of an issue with it.

But as it is, thrown in the mix with all the other garbage DAD had to offer, it belongs right at home among the stinking dung heap!!

Yup, I can see that, even though I didn't hate DAD as much as you did.

[Dr. No]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080811/t ... b2fc3.html

Invisibility cloak now within sight: scientists

The age-old fantasy of rendering objects invisible took a sharp step toward reality Sunday when scientists said they had created a material that can bend visible light in three dimensions.

(Advertisement)
For now the vanishing act takes place on a nanoscale, measured in billionths of a metre.

But there is no fundamental reason why the same principles cannot be scaled up one day to make invisibility cloaks big enough to hide a person, a tank or even a tanker, the scientists say.

The groundbreaking experiments, led by Xiang Zhang at the University of California at Berkeley and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, were reported simultaneously in the British journal Nature and the US-based journal Science.

Recent advances have created other so-called metamaterials, artificially engineered structures with optical properties that bend light in unnatural ways.

But previous attempts had two severe limitations.

One was that they only worked on the microwave range of the light spectrum, bending wavelengths much too long to be visible to the human eye.

The second was that -- up to now -- it only worked on thin, two-dimensional systems.

The new material, by contrast, produces what is known as the "negative refractive index" needed to make an invisibility cloak within a visible light spectrum and in three dimensions.

Negative refraction -- or "left-handed" -- materials deflect light in a way which is contrary to the normal "right-handed" rules of electromagnetism.

The light travels in the opposite direction that it normally would when passing from one material to another, such as from air through water or glass.

One possible application would be the construction of special lenses for optical microscopes that could focus on things as tiny as molecules.

But the holy grail of metamaterials has become the kind of invisibility shield that has fire the human imagination from H.G. Wells' "Invisible Man" to the adventures of Harry Potter.

The military, which funded the research, is especially keen to develop materials that could usher in an entire new generation of stealth technology.

The metamaterial developed by Zhang and his colleagues has a multi-layered fishnet structure composed of alternating layers of silver and magnesium fluoride, which is transparent over an extremely wide range of light wavelengths.

"In the case of invisibility cloaks or shields, the material would need to curve light waves completely around the object like a river flowing around a rock," Zhang said, according to the Sunday Times.

"An observer looking at the cloaked object would then see light from behind it, making it seem to disappear."

It wasnt taht farfetched in 2002, this is only a new group trying to get people interested in it.
Scientist going out excitedly talking about the possibilities in 02

[Dr. No]

These Daniel Craig as Bond fans need to have a conference to come up with some new arguments.

As opposed to the sparkling brand new DCINB arguments that get recycled every 2 days -

Too blonde, too short, too ugly.......too blonde, too short, too ugly........too blonde, too short, too ugly.................etc. etc.

Hmmm,
Way to over generalize there

You've been here how long and dont know the rainbow of diversity that make up our merry band.
There are hundreds of reasons to not like CR besides Craig. IMHO


http://n007.thegoldeneye.com/two_views_ ... oyale.html probably one of the best, most authoritative reviews of CR. Speaks for a lot of us here.

[Mr. Big]

This article explains the invisibity cloak - http://www.ee.duke.edu/~drsmith/cloaking.html It's similar to the invisibity cloak used by the Predator.

[Terry]

http://n007.thegoldeneye.com/two_views_ ... oyale.html probably one of the best, most authoritative reviews of CR. Speaks for a lot of us here.

One of the funniest and best written reviews of CR period.

[The Sweeney]

Hmmm,
Way to over generalize there

You've been here how long and dont know the rainbow of diversity that make up our merry band.
There are hundreds of reasons to not like CR besides Craig. IMHO

I know there are. It was just a sarcastic response to the post regarding looking for new arguments for DAD (which there are countless).....