Quantum Stealth

[ThiagoMartell]

So... invisibility (http://soldiersystems.net/tag/quantum-stealth/).
It's either a very elaborate hoax or it's really close to actually being a thing. That sounds big, doesn't it?

[memnarch]

So... invisibility (http://soldiersystems.net/tag/quantum-stealth/).
It's either a very elaborate hoax or it's really close to actually being a thing. That sounds big, doesn't it?

I'm guessing it's a hoax. Especially since there's other companies trying get the same result and haven't quite gotten there (http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow/story/306035/5-serious-attempts-to-build-an-invisibility-cloak).

[ThiagoMartell]

I'm guessing it's a hoax. Especially since there's other companies trying get the same result and haven't quite gotten there (http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow/story/306035/5-serious-attempts-to-build-an-invisibility-cloak).

But have you checked out how many people are confirming what they say?

[Tebryn]

But have you checked out how many people are confirming what they say?

Who are these people and why should we take their word for it? What are their credentials.

[ThiagoMartell]

Who are these people and why should we take their word for it? What are their credentials.

Google it and see, it's quite impressive.

[invinible]

True invisibility comes with a whole host of problems with with a compete inability to see without having to sacrifice some of that invisibility to have even the slightest hope of seeing.

A specialized stealth is the way to go with an auto defence system that hurts those that gets within range to be able to have any hope of seeing the user.

[Tebryn]

Google it and see, it's quite impressive.

I really don't think I have to. Look at the second picture they have in that link. Where is the ladies legs? You can see them in the first picture but they're not there in the second and the patch of fabric covering her body doesn't extend past her stomach. How does that happen exactly?

[Sholos]

I really don't think I have to. Look at the second picture they have in that link. Where is the ladies legs? You can see them in the first picture but they're not there in the second and the patch of fabric covering her body doesn't extend past her stomach. How does that happen exactly?

Actually, that's a result of good old-fashioned camouflage. Take another look at the picture. Her legs are there; she's just wearing forest camo pants.

[Tebryn]

Actually, that's a result of good old-fashioned camouflage. Take another look at the picture. Her legs are there; she's just wearing forest camo pants.

Ah, so they are. Just proving that even in a sub-standard shopped photo the real stuff still fools the eye.

[ThiagoMartell]

I really don't think I have to. Look at the second picture they have in that link. Where is the ladies legs? You can see them in the first picture but they're not there in the second and the patch of fabric covering her body doesn't extend past her stomach. How does that happen exactly?

What other people said... Also, the pictures are mock-ups. It even says so in the article.

[Slipperychicken]

We've already got ways to remain unseen, most of which already involve "wear the same color as the background and hold still". This doesn't seem like much of a game-changer to me. Granted, I am a civilian who hasn't so much as fired a gun, so what do I know?


Even if it is big, conventional warfare still cowers in the shadow of nuclear weapons (it needs to be controlled/restricted when nuclear states are involved, lest anyone get scared enough to launch). So I don't see even a "perfect" invisibility having much impact on a global scale.

[ThiagoMartell]

We've already got ways to remain unseen, most of which already involve "wear the same color as the background and hold still". This doesn't seem like much of a game-changer to me. Granted, I am a civilian who hasn't so much as fired a gun, so what do I know?


Even if it is big, conventional warfare still cowers in the shadow of nuclear weapons (it needs to be controlled/restricted when nuclear states are involved, lest anyone get scared enough to launch). So I don't see even a "perfect" invisibility having much impact on a global scale.
It seems quite good for espionage but then again I know nothing about espionage.

[Anarion]

Even if it is big, conventional warfare still cowers in the shadow of nuclear weapons (it needs to be controlled/restricted when nuclear states are involved, lest anyone get scared enough to launch). So I don't see even a "perfect" invisibility having much impact on a global scale.

Sadly untrue, to Alfred Nobel's lasting regret. Nukes mean it won't turn into an all out war anymore, but they don't mean that people aren't getting killed on the ground all over the place.

Anyway, I think the importance of this thing hinges a lot on how it works when someone is moving. If it only works when you're standing still, it's a minimal upgrade from just wearing good camo. If it can blend while moving then it has the potential to change how special forces conduct operations.

[Jimorian]

The only word that the U.S. and Canadian militaries are interested in this comes from the company itself. And none of the people who write about it have personally seen it in action. The original articles came out 18 months ago, and all the new articles in the past few days repeat the same information and use the same mockups.

Yeah, this is a PR stunt. It looks like the company does legitimate business with standard camouflage patterns, but if they really were onto something with this level of breakthrough, they wouldn't need to try pumping up interest in the press if they had the kinds of show-and-tell sessions with the military that they claim.

[Heliomance]

Also there is no way within physics that a flat sheet - called out as a passive system - could manage that sort of selective invisibility. You could get a similar effect with a camera behind them and the sheet being a video screen, but that would impress no-one.

[GnomeFighter]

Thats not true. Infact it has already been done for some wavelengths.Work is being done on meta materials might be able to do it, but just not yet.

[Ravens_cry]

Thats not true. Infact it has already been done for some wavelengths.Work is being done on meta materials might be able to do it, but just not yet.
We can do it on a microwave level by bending the EM radiation around the target using yes, meta-materials, but there is a whole host of problems for getting it to work on the visible wavelengths. A flat sheet that bent light around itself would show the girl on the other side, no?
I call hoax. Even if it's an active camouflage* system and she has a camera mounted on her back, there is very little quantum about that besides the workings of a charge coupled device.
*which it explicitly is not supposed to be.

[Heliomance]

Thats not true. Infact it has already been done for some wavelengths.Work is being done on meta materials might be able to do it, but just not yet.

I'm aware of the basics of invisibility research. A flat sheet like that could not produce that effect. It's theoretically possible to have an enclosed shape in which everything inside it is invisible, and that's what's being worked on. A flat sheet that will detect and reove the image of a person but leave everything else? Only possible with computer-powered active camouflage, and I don't think visual object recognition algorithms are that good yet either.

[Das Platyvark]

Even as a hoax, how exactly is this "quantum"?

[Lensman]

Even as a hoax, how exactly is this "quantum"?

A quantum step is the smallest possible step forward.

Or to put it another way - it's not the great advance it claims to be.

[Ravens_cry]

A quantum step is the smallest possible step forward.

Or to put it another way - it's not the great advance it claims to be.
The point about a quantum change as a metaphor, at least originally, is not that it is a great change, but that it is seemingly out of the blue, referring to how electrons change orbits, basically teleporting, and other cases of quantum 'spooky action at a distance'.
That being said, this is <expletive redacted/> . They are either lying how it is supposed to work, or grossly exaggerating, at best, what is been done.