Physicist's 'time cloak' stops the clock

Nimphiouus

TMS Fuhrer. (Non_Poster)
Messages
1,653
Pentagon-supported physicists say they have devised a "time cloak" that briefly makes an event undetectable.

The laboratory device manipulates the flow of light in such a way that for the merest fraction of a second an event cannot be seen, according to a paper published in the science journal Nature.

It adds to experimental work in creating next-generation camouflage - a so-called invisibility cloak in which specific colours cannot be perceived by the human eye.

"Our results represent a significant step towards obtaining a complete spatio-temporal cloaking device," says the study, headed by Moti Fridman of Cornell University in New York.

The breakthrough exploits the fact that frequencies of light move at fractionally different speeds.

The so-called temporal cloak starts with a beam of green light that is passed down a fibre-optic cable.

The beam goes through a two-way lens that splits it into two frequencies - blueish light that travels relatively fast, and reddish light that is slower.

The tiny difference in speed is then accentuated by placing a transparent obstacle in front of the two beams.

Eventually a time gap opens up between the red and blue beams as they travel through the optical fibre.

The gap is tiny - just 50 picoseconds, or 50 millionths of a millionth of a second.

But it is just long enough to squeeze in a pulse of laser at a different frequency from the light passing through the system.

The red and blue light are then given the reverse treatment.

They go through another obstacle, which this time speeds up the red and slows down the blue, and come to a reverse lens that reconstitutes them as a single green light.

But the 40-picosecond burst of laser is not part of the flow of photons, and thus cannot be detected.

In a commentary, optical engineers Robert Boyd and Zhimin Shi of New York's University of Rochester, likened the experiment to a level crossing on a busy road.

When a train comes, the cars are stopped, and this causes a gap in the traffic.

When the train has passed, the stopped cars speed up until they catch up with the traffic in front of them. To the observer, the flow seems quite normal, and there is no evidence that a train has crossed the intersection.

After proving that the "cloak" is possible, the next step for the researchers is to expand the time gap by orders of magnitude, firstly to microseconds and then to milliseconds, said Boyd and Shi.

The time cloak has a potential use in boosting security in fibre-optic communications because it breaks up optical signals, lets them travel at different speeds and then reassembles them, which makes data hard to intercept.

Last year, scientists reported a step forward in so-called metamaterials that act as a cloaking of space, as opposed to time.

Metamaterials are novel compounds whose surface interacts with light at specific frequencies thanks to a tiny, nano-level structure. As a result, light flows around the object - rather like water that bends around a rock in a stream - as opposed to being absorbed by it.

Fridman's work was part-supported by the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, or DARPA, a Pentagon unit that develops futuristic technology that can have a military use. Its achievements include DARPANet, a predecessor of the internet.
 
You can not cloak 'time', only 'space', as time is not related to light in any way.
And I do not understand how it is possible to slow down light, as it is not a particle nor a wave. Speeding it up is not possible either, as the speed of light (~300.000km/s) is _not_ relative.
The only thing that differs our 'colors' is the wavelength. Blue has the shortest wavelength, while red has the longest. This does not alter their speed, it only means they get deflected/reflected slightly different. This is also why our sky is blue and turns red in dusk.
 
Panki said:
You can not cloak 'time', only 'space', as time is not related to light in any way.
And I do not understand how it is possible to slow down light, as it is not a particle nor a wave. Speeding it up is not possible either, as the speed of light (~300.000km/s) is _not_ relative.
The only thing that differs our 'colors' is the wavelength. Blue has the shortest wavelength, while red has the longest. This does not alter their speed, it only means they get deflected/reflected slightly different. This is also why our sky is blue and turns red in dusk.
Actually you are wrong. Light travels faster or slower through different objects. The speed of light aka c only applies when in the vacuum of space. Whenever there are other molecules light will slow down. For example, light in our atmosphere is ~90km/s slower then c.

The only reason that there is refraction is the fact that the light slightly changes speed. Lets take a sled. The sled is going through some normal snow. After some time it will go and hit some very high snow. It will hit this snow with an angle lower then 90 degrees. The right part of the sled will hit the snow first. This will result into that part slowing down a bit, while the left part is not yet in the snow, thus that part still goes at the first speed. Since the other side is slowing down and the other one is going faster you will get a turn. This is basically what happens with refraction. If light could not slow down there would not be any refraction at all.

Also, light is related to time. To be more precise, speed is related to time (as well as mass). The closer you get to the speed of light, the slower things will seem to go around you. Lets say you travel at half the speed of light for one week. You might have perceived it as one week and you will have become one week older, but to other people 4 weeks might have passed.
 
Impulse said:
Also, light is related to time. To be more precise, speed is related to time (as well as mass). The closer you get to the speed of light, the slower things will seem to go around you. Lets say you travel at half the speed of light for one week. You might have perceived it as one week and you will have become one week older, but to other people 4 weeks might have passed.

Isn't that because the closer you get to c the bigger your mass gets? Time is dependent on gravity and thus mass, there have been experiments with 2 atomic clocks, one on ground and one on a plane that flew high up, meaning it had less gravity. After it landed, the clocks had a slight difference.
 
Panki said:
Impulse said:
Also, light is related to time. To be more precise, speed is related to time (as well as mass). The closer you get to the speed of light, the slower things will seem to go around you. Lets say you travel at half the speed of light for one week. You might have perceived it as one week and you will have become one week older, but to other people 4 weeks might have passed.

Isn't that because the closer you get to c the bigger your mass gets? Time is dependent on gravity and thus mass, there have been experiments with 2 atomic clocks, one on ground and one on a plane that flew high up, meaning it had less gravity. After it landed, the clocks had a slight difference.
From what I know that only really applies when you are very close to the speed of light. That is also why we can't go faster then the speed of light, the faster we go, the more mass we get, the more we need to make us go faster, but the more mass we get...
The guy who has been the longest in space (801 days in total) is actually a time traveller. He is ~0.48sec younger then he should be. This happend because he was going a lot faster then everyone on earth. Time is basically relative to where you are, what the mass is of the objects around you and how fast you are going. Quantem physics, its a weird world.
 
Impulse said:
Panki said:
Impulse said:
Also, light is related to time. To be more precise, speed is related to time (as well as mass). The closer you get to the speed of light, the slower things will seem to go around you. Lets say you travel at half the speed of light for one week. You might have perceived it as one week and you will have become one week older, but to other people 4 weeks might have passed.

Isn't that because the closer you get to c the bigger your mass gets? Time is dependent on gravity and thus mass, there have been experiments with 2 atomic clocks, one on ground and one on a plane that flew high up, meaning it had less gravity. After it landed, the clocks had a slight difference.
From what I know that only really applies when you are very close to the speed of light. That is also why we can't go faster then the speed of light, the faster we go, the more mass we get, the more we need to make us go faster, but the more mass we get...
The guy who has been the longest in space (801 days in total) is actually a time traveller. He is ~0.48sec younger then he should be. This happend because he was going a lot faster then everyone on earth. Time is basically relative to where you are, what the mass is of the objects around you and how fast you are going. Quantem physics, its a weird world.

If you travel around the universe for let's say 20 years, 2000 could have passed on earth because there was no gravity on you...
And as soon as something reaches c its mass becomes infinite.
Electrons get as heavy as oranges in the LHC.
 
Panki said:
Impulse said:
Panki said:
Impulse said:
Also, light is related to time. To be more precise, speed is related to time (as well as mass). The closer you get to the speed of light, the slower things will seem to go around you. Lets say you travel at half the speed of light for one week. You might have perceived it as one week and you will have become one week older, but to other people 4 weeks might have passed.

Isn't that because the closer you get to c the bigger your mass gets? Time is dependent on gravity and thus mass, there have been experiments with 2 atomic clocks, one on ground and one on a plane that flew high up, meaning it had less gravity. After it landed, the clocks had a slight difference.
From what I know that only really applies when you are very close to the speed of light. That is also why we can't go faster then the speed of light, the faster we go, the more mass we get, the more we need to make us go faster, but the more mass we get...
The guy who has been the longest in space (801 days in total) is actually a time traveller. He is ~0.48sec younger then he should be. This happend because he was going a lot faster then everyone on earth. Time is basically relative to where you are, what the mass is of the objects around you and how fast you are going. Quantem physics, its a weird world.
If you travel around the universe for let's say 20 years, 2000 could have passed on earth because there was no gravity on you...
And as soon as something reaches c its mass becomes infinite.
Electrons get as heavy as oranges in the LHC.
If you were going really fast through the universe you that could happen, no gravity has nothing to do with it. Objects will always have a certain mass.
Besides light, nothing will even reach the speed of light. The closer they get the heavier they get, thus they slow down again.
 
Impulse said:
Panki said:
Impulse said:
Panki said:
Impulse said:
Also, light is related to time. To be more precise, speed is related to time (as well as mass). The closer you get to the speed of light, the slower things will seem to go around you. Lets say you travel at half the speed of light for one week. You might have perceived it as one week and you will have become one week older, but to other people 4 weeks might have passed.

Isn't that because the closer you get to c the bigger your mass gets? Time is dependent on gravity and thus mass, there have been experiments with 2 atomic clocks, one on ground and one on a plane that flew high up, meaning it had less gravity. After it landed, the clocks had a slight difference.
From what I know that only really applies when you are very close to the speed of light. That is also why we can't go faster then the speed of light, the faster we go, the more mass we get, the more we need to make us go faster, but the more mass we get...
The guy who has been the longest in space (801 days in total) is actually a time traveller. He is ~0.48sec younger then he should be. This happend because he was going a lot faster then everyone on earth. Time is basically relative to where you are, what the mass is of the objects around you and how fast you are going. Quantem physics, its a weird world.
If you travel around the universe for let's say 20 years, 2000 could have passed on earth because there was no gravity on you...
And as soon as something reaches c its mass becomes infinite.
Electrons get as heavy as oranges in the LHC.
If you were going really fast through the universe you that could happen, no gravity has nothing to do with it. Objects will always have a certain mass.
Besides light, nothing will even reach the speed of light. The closer they get the heavier they get, thus they slow down again.

How do you explain the clocks on the planes then?
 
You guys really need to read "A brief history of time". It goes over all of this shit, and explains it pretty awesomely.

Panki said:
You can not cloak 'time', only 'space', as time is not related to light in any way.

Actually, I'm pretty sure (If I understood Stephen Hawking correctly (Probably not)) that it is. Something called a light cone has something to do with both space-time, and light:
b3con.gif


It's hard to understand just by seeing a diagram, so again, read A brief history of time (You'll jizz all the way through it, btw :megusta:)
 
Back
Top Bottom