cloaking deviceFollow

Did it go to Florida? I hear they have a good retirement plan for overworked Left-Brains...should have flyers or something, for that. Make a lot of good money on a business like that. "Left Brains R' Us"? "We Buy/Sell Used Left Brains"?...I dunno, I'm certian you could find a catchy jingle for something like that though.

say again?

I actually hear that a lot. funny



Edited, Thu May 11 23:52:21 2006 by Kelvyquayo

Just blame me. That's what everyone else does. But seriously, now I'm out of pixie-stick. Gotta go find another pixie and shake it violentally for more....where's my net...

Ah I have to confess, it's been a neat thing to look into, but I need some sleep for graduation tommorow.

Peace.

Next MMO I'm going to play is STO....

You really want to know how to be invisible?
1. Get some black paint.
2. Get some black cloths.
3. Put on the black cloths
4. Cover your skin with the black paint.
5. Run around at night.

So far it seems almost completely impossible to "speed up light", because the speed of light (in a vaccuum) is ~3.0 x 10 ^ 8. However, since we're talking about velocities, you CAN say the velocity of light can be negative as compared to the velocity of normal light. For reflective surfaces, light goes one direction and goes out the opposite direction, effectively having a negative velocity.

The only way you can see an object is for light to bouce off've it and come back to your eyes. Now...MAYBE if light bounces off an object in the exact opposite wave pattern as it went TO the object, the light would never get to a person's eyes, and thus you'd never have an image of the object, although I believe you'd have a "blank spot" in your field of vision, because that object WOULD be completely blocking all the light to objects directly behind it (from your perspective). So whereas you might not be able to make out what the object is, you'd know an object was there...

This is all off the top've my head.

Wait, I thought this was a Star Trek thread...

For what it's worth, a material with a (by convention) negative IOR simply means that light shone into it bends away from the normal of the surface rather than across the normal.

Then again, I go by the definition of the index of refraction as the scaling factor for the sine of the angle of a light ray at the interface between two materials (so more of an optics-from-math standpoint than a physics standpoint).

This is where the whole "negative IOR" thing as a convention comes from, anyway.

Alright..