Canadian camouflage company claims to have created perfect invisibility cloak(extremetech.com)
extremetech.com
Canadian camouflage company claims to have created perfect invisibility cloak
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/143353-canadian-camouflage-company-claims-to-have-created-perfect-invisibility-cloak-us-military-soon-to-be-invisible?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=canadian-camouflage-company-claims-to-have-created-perfect-invisibility-cloak-us-military-soon-to-be-invisible
8 comments
Not that I'm saying said technology works, but it could be something like this:
http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/content-awa...
Although I would assume the range of cover of the cloak would have to be much larger than shown in the image and it is hit-or-miss in Photoshop when using that feature.
Plus, why would the cloak, if it works as described, cast a shadow?
Edit: Ah, I see now. On the actual site they admit mockups. But why not make the mockups more accurate by reducing the shadow in Photoshop as they claim the cloak only casts 5% of the resulting shadow. But if it casts even that little of a shadow would the cloak not show that on the visible side? Wouldn't the cloak stand out by being slightly darker than the surrounding area?
http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/content-awa...
Although I would assume the range of cover of the cloak would have to be much larger than shown in the image and it is hit-or-miss in Photoshop when using that feature.
Plus, why would the cloak, if it works as described, cast a shadow?
Edit: Ah, I see now. On the actual site they admit mockups. But why not make the mockups more accurate by reducing the shadow in Photoshop as they claim the cloak only casts 5% of the resulting shadow. But if it casts even that little of a shadow would the cloak not show that on the visible side? Wouldn't the cloak stand out by being slightly darker than the surrounding area?
Well it's obviously a mock up but let's say there's actually a layer under the person as well. So let's say light activates the material on one side which is connected by a smartfiber to an opposite point on the bottom. The color of the surroundings on the bottom are then sent back to the first point via the smartfiber which then emits the color.
An incredibly miniaturized version of the famous Mercedes commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWtcz9PMFHo
It doesn't sound like anything that's remotely cost effective today so I'd guess it's all hyperbole at this point as other commenters have said.
An incredibly miniaturized version of the famous Mercedes commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWtcz9PMFHo
It doesn't sound like anything that's remotely cost effective today so I'd guess it's all hyperbole at this point as other commenters have said.
I have to ask: Are there voting blocks on HN?
As usual, the information inside of the extremetech article is a POS when compared to the linkbait headline. So looking at the submitter, I see exactly one comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=Libertatea
From that one comment, I'd take a guess that Libertea is not a native english speaker (or at least, speller.) So then you take a look at the other submissions, and they're pretty generic: http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=Libertatea
So maybe the poster, who has been on HN for all of 39 days, chose an article of penetrating insight as reported by extremetech, but it sure smells fishy.
As usual, the information inside of the extremetech article is a POS when compared to the linkbait headline. So looking at the submitter, I see exactly one comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=Libertatea
From that one comment, I'd take a guess that Libertea is not a native english speaker (or at least, speller.) So then you take a look at the other submissions, and they're pretty generic: http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=Libertatea
So maybe the poster, who has been on HN for all of 39 days, chose an article of penetrating insight as reported by extremetech, but it sure smells fishy.
Just for fun here are two charts.
(http://imgur.com/a/rUClo)
One chart shows the domains that have been posted by that user.
The other shows which users are posting that domain.
I'd agree that extremetech is a lousy lousy source.
(http://imgur.com/a/rUClo)
One chart shows the domains that have been posted by that user.
The other shows which users are posting that domain.
I'd agree that extremetech is a lousy lousy source.
Today's update to their Quantum Stealth page adds some credibility:
http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/index.html
"With close to 5,000 worldwide news stories on our Invisibility Cloak over the last 4 days, we want to show one of the best stories so far. The reporter contacted the Canadian Military for confirmation that we had met them (CANSOFCOM) and demonstrated the technology. He also contacted Colin Worth, CEO of Cornerstone Protection Agency (Mr. Worth is a recently retired 26 year RCMP Officer) who accompanied Guy Cramer, President/CEO of Hyperstealth to the Canadian Military and RCMP meetings and William (Bill) Jarvis, Principle of the 132 Group (Mr. Jarvis is a recently retired 19 year Navy SEAL) who accompanied Guy to the U.S. military command meetings. Both Mr. Worth and Mr. Jarvis confirm the meetings and claims about the technology. Maple Ridge News: Is there an invisible cloak?"
http://www.mapleridgenews.com/news/183440961.html
Also, according to their site, Hyperstealth has their camouflage on 2M military uniforms and 3K military vehicles. If they have an ongoing business and reputation is important in military procurement, why would they risk fraud?
http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/index.html
"With close to 5,000 worldwide news stories on our Invisibility Cloak over the last 4 days, we want to show one of the best stories so far. The reporter contacted the Canadian Military for confirmation that we had met them (CANSOFCOM) and demonstrated the technology. He also contacted Colin Worth, CEO of Cornerstone Protection Agency (Mr. Worth is a recently retired 26 year RCMP Officer) who accompanied Guy Cramer, President/CEO of Hyperstealth to the Canadian Military and RCMP meetings and William (Bill) Jarvis, Principle of the 132 Group (Mr. Jarvis is a recently retired 19 year Navy SEAL) who accompanied Guy to the U.S. military command meetings. Both Mr. Worth and Mr. Jarvis confirm the meetings and claims about the technology. Maple Ridge News: Is there an invisible cloak?"
http://www.mapleridgenews.com/news/183440961.html
Also, according to their site, Hyperstealth has their camouflage on 2M military uniforms and 3K military vehicles. If they have an ongoing business and reputation is important in military procurement, why would they risk fraud?
I see nothing in that article that lends credibility to this.
He doesn't want to show the cloak actually working but mockups are fine. If the mockups are accurate then how is that different than showing an actual photograph of the cloak working?
The information needs to be secure, but hey, here's a list of people who've seen it working. Also, by the way, this is how it works.
Two sources to verify the technology weren't able to be contacted. Not that there was no comment or response, they couldn't be contacted.
No names of who exactly in the U.S military has seen the cloak working to verify their judgement of the technology.
One name from the Canadian military who has seen the cloak, but the Canadians are going to pass for now and might revisit it in the future.
The cloak has to be designed for each application, which means it's use is likely highly limited.
So, is this completed and ready-to-go technology that needs funding for mass production or is that he needs funding to clean up a handful of potential problems before it is ready for field use?
Sorry, I must see it in action to believe it works as described and is actually useful.
He doesn't want to show the cloak actually working but mockups are fine. If the mockups are accurate then how is that different than showing an actual photograph of the cloak working?
The information needs to be secure, but hey, here's a list of people who've seen it working. Also, by the way, this is how it works.
Two sources to verify the technology weren't able to be contacted. Not that there was no comment or response, they couldn't be contacted.
No names of who exactly in the U.S military has seen the cloak working to verify their judgement of the technology.
One name from the Canadian military who has seen the cloak, but the Canadians are going to pass for now and might revisit it in the future.
The cloak has to be designed for each application, which means it's use is likely highly limited.
So, is this completed and ready-to-go technology that needs funding for mass production or is that he needs funding to clean up a handful of potential problems before it is ready for field use?
Sorry, I must see it in action to believe it works as described and is actually useful.
I have no idea if HyperStealth actually has some kind of prototype product, but the photos being circulated by ExtremeTech, and in the embedded CNN video, are dubious at best.
What we "see" is just visible light reflected off of objects. If the blanket were "bending light" around a subject, the blanket would have to create some sort of light envelope, around which light would be passed to background objects, then reflected back to the viewer. Some of the scenarios presented in the photos would violate this principle.
Take the first photo for example:
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/hypers...
Circling back to this concept of a "light envelope". The concealed person would have to ramain within this envelope in order to be concealed, otherwise, their light would be reflected back to the viewer, just like the background. In this photo, two things are a problem:
1) The edges of the blanket taper inward toward the concealed person so that there is no "extra" material beyond the concealed person. That would have to place the person outside any possible "envelope" behind the material.
2) The material casts a dark shadow. If the material were really bending light around the concealed person, the area behind the blanket (with the exception of the envelope area) would be well lit by the light that was bent around the concealed area.
To understand what I mean by an "envelope", have a look at the last photo:
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/HBC-Qu...
If you were looking from the top down, the envelope would (probably) be a (roughly) triangular prism shaped area in the middle of the blanket where the person is standing. I would consider this photo plausible, but remain highly skeptical. However, the presence of the obvious fakes really discredits the claimant in this case.
What we "see" is just visible light reflected off of objects. If the blanket were "bending light" around a subject, the blanket would have to create some sort of light envelope, around which light would be passed to background objects, then reflected back to the viewer. Some of the scenarios presented in the photos would violate this principle.
Take the first photo for example:
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/hypers...
Circling back to this concept of a "light envelope". The concealed person would have to ramain within this envelope in order to be concealed, otherwise, their light would be reflected back to the viewer, just like the background. In this photo, two things are a problem:
1) The edges of the blanket taper inward toward the concealed person so that there is no "extra" material beyond the concealed person. That would have to place the person outside any possible "envelope" behind the material.
2) The material casts a dark shadow. If the material were really bending light around the concealed person, the area behind the blanket (with the exception of the envelope area) would be well lit by the light that was bent around the concealed area.
To understand what I mean by an "envelope", have a look at the last photo:
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/HBC-Qu...
If you were looking from the top down, the envelope would (probably) be a (roughly) triangular prism shaped area in the middle of the blanket where the person is standing. I would consider this photo plausible, but remain highly skeptical. However, the presence of the obvious fakes really discredits the claimant in this case.
There is a mock-up caption under originally posted photo:
"This is mock-up of our "Quantum Stealth" (Light Bending) material with my assistant behind it. No cameras and no projectors are used. These photos are to show the Media the concept, for security issues we can not show the actual technology. With the real material - you would only see about 5% of the shadow on her and the ground as we've determined a 95% reduction of shadow in testing."
http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/index.html
"This is mock-up of our "Quantum Stealth" (Light Bending) material with my assistant behind it. No cameras and no projectors are used. These photos are to show the Media the concept, for security issues we can not show the actual technology. With the real material - you would only see about 5% of the shadow on her and the ground as we've determined a 95% reduction of shadow in testing."
http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/index.html
So, why not make the mock-up image reflect that statement?
So I stand up and hold it in front of me ... how does it know how far back the light should be bent? It could be bent in front of me ... the same goes for lying on the ground.
Also, if it is dark under the blanket then it must be one way ... if it is one way it would be dark underneath so it would show darkness even if it could detect the level it should be showing between the person lying down and the earth beneath them.
Also, if it is dark under the blanket then it must be one way ... if it is one way it would be dark underneath so it would show darkness even if it could detect the level it should be showing between the person lying down and the earth beneath them.
there was an article on HyperStealth in Wired earlier this year, that at least pointed out that the presented image is a mockup
http://www.wired.com/design/2012/06/how-hyperstealths-algori...
http://www.wired.com/design/2012/06/how-hyperstealths-algori...
It's vaporware - and Photoshop
In this picture they have someone underneath the 'invisibility blanket' which they claim bends light around the person being concealed. How would the invisibility shield know what is beneath the person if the person is laying on the ground?
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/hypers...