NOW DRDO TO MAKE Invisible Planes using pre Mahabharata sage Bharadwaj's formulae

[janon]

LOL at you knowledge of physics. Things "made of black" do not absorb light. Things APPEAR black when it absorbs light.

Absorbing light DOES make something invisible. Actually a perfectly black object will be truly "invisible". It will appear like a blob of Nothing. Even a naturally back object becomes invisible in the night or in shadows.

Light is also ElectroMagnetic waves, so a "dark matter" will very well absorb EM waves, as it does for light. That is where the research is heading.

That's wrong. A perfectly black object in a place where there is light will be visible - because that spot alone will be black. To be invisible, there has to be zero absorption and zero reflection.

A black mark on a white paper is visible, and will be even if it is perfectly black - because it will appear different from the surrounding. Similarly, a black cube held in front of you will be peceived by your eyes, even if it is perfectly black, ie, absorbing ever photon that falls on it.

Dark matter and black holes are invisible because they are in deep space, and the surroundings are not illuminated.

(In all this, I am speaking about visibility to the human eye.)

 

[Prajapati]

That's wrong. A perfectly black object in a place where there is light will be visible - because that spot alone will be black. To be invisible, there has to be zero absorption and zero reflection.

A black mark on a white paper is visible, and will be even if it is perfectly black - because it will appear different from the surrounding. Similarly, a black cube held in front of you will be peceived by your eyes, even if it is perfectly black, ie, absorbing ever photon that falls on it.

Dark matter and black holes are invisible because they are in deep space, and the surroundings are not illuminated.

(In all this, I am speaking about visibility to the human eye.)

I can give you a long explanation, but I guess this will suffice,

BBC News - Carbon nanotube 'space camouflage' coating invented

UNIV OF MICHIGAN SCIENTISTS INVENT 'PERFECT BLACK' COATING MADE WITH CARBON NANOTUBES THAT MAKES THINGS INVISIBLE - PBT Consulting

New Super-Black Material Absorbs 99 Percent of All Light That Dares to Strike It | Popular Science

DRDO Research are along similar lines.

 

[janon]

I can give you a long explanation, but I guess this will suffice,

BBC News - Carbon nanotube 'space camouflage' coating invented

UNIV OF MICHIGAN SCIENTISTS INVENT 'PERFECT BLACK' COATING MADE WITH CARBON NANOTUBES THAT MAKES THINGS INVISIBLE - PBT Consulting

New Super-Black Material Absorbs 99 Percent of All Light That Dares to Strike It | Popular Science

DRDO Research are along similar lines.

The Umich link is about invisibility to radars. I clearly mentioned in my post that I am talking about invisibility to the human eye. The difference has been explained in a previous post. (Radars produce their own radiation and search for its reflection, whereas the human eye relies on ambient light.)

The BBC link is about invisibility in deep space, where there is no ambient light. The military applications mentioned are also assuming similar sensors - not that it would be invisible to human eyes.

The last link is also about space applications.

In short, a perfectly black object in front of you will not be invisible - your eyes can perceive its existence (ie, it is visible) because it can distinguish it from the surrounding. A perfectly transparent object will be invisible, because light would simply pass through it as if there was no object there.

 

[Prajapati]

The Umich link is about invisibility to radars. I clearly mentioned in my post that I am talking about invisibility to the human eye. The difference has been explained in a previous post. (Radars produce their own radiation and search for its reflection, whereas the human eye relies on ambient light.)

The BBC link is about invisibility in deep space, where there is no ambient light. The military applications mentioned are also assuming similar sensors - not that it would be invisible to human eyes.

The last link is also about space applications.

In short, a perfectly black object in front of you will not be invisible - your eyes can perceive its existence (ie, it is visible) because it can distinguish it from the surrounding. A perfectly transparent object will be invisible, because light would simply pass through it as if there was no object there.

LOL. Are you for real ?

....A very black carbon nanotube coating renders objects into silhouettes and could form the basis of a future stealth device. Like a cloak of invisibility, the material makes things disappear completely when viewed against a black background.

"The most exciting thing is that it makes any 3-D object look like a shadow," said researcher Haofei Shi at the University of Michigan. "You know something is there but you don't know what it is."

The effect works even under direct light and from multiple viewing angles, showcasing the first perfect light-absorbing coating, Shi said. Capable of swallowing a broad spectrum of light, the paper-like material has potential for roomy stealth airplanes and sun-gulping solar cells.

"You can wear a coat made of this material and you will look like a flat sheet of black paper," said co-researcher Jay Guo at the University of Michigan. "They cannot perceive any 3-D aspects of the person in the coat … ...

Nano Paint Could Make Airplanes Invisible to Radar | MIT Technology Review

A new nanostructured coating could be used to make paints for stealth aircraft that can’t be seen at night and that are undetectable by radar at any time of day. The coating, made of carbon nanotubes, can be used to cloak an object in utter darkness, making it indistinguishable from the night sky.

Carbon nanotubes have many superlative properties, including excellent strength and electrical conductivity. They are also the blackest known material. The long straws of pure carbon, each just a few nanometers in diameter, absorb a broad spectrum of light—from radio waves through visible light through the ultraviolet—almost perfectly. Researchers are taking advantage of this perfect absorbance in highly sensitive imaging sensors and other prototype devices.....

 

[janon]

The most exciting thing is that it makes any 3-D object look like a shadow," said researcher Haofei Shi at the University of Michigan. "You know something is there but you don't know what it is."

That is precisely what I said. I choose my words very carefully. Here it is again:

a perfectly black object in front of you will not be invisible - your eyes can perceive its existence (ie, it is visible) because it can distinguish it from the surrounding.

I said the eye can perceive its existence, which is what the researcher is saying as well - "You know something is there but you don't know what it is."

If the eye can perceive that something is there, then it is not invisible. Unidentifyable, but not invisible. On the other hand, an object that does not absorb or reflect any light, will be truly invisible.


The rest of the post is again talking about invisibility to radars, not to human eyes. To repeat, a perfectly black object in ambient light can be detected by the eye. But an object that absorbs all radiation cannot be detected by a radar, because a radar banks on the radiation it emits to be reflected back by the object, to "see" it.

 

[Prajapati]

That is precisely what I said. I choose my words very carefully. Here it is again:

I said the eye can perceive its existence, which is what the researcher is saying as well - "You know something is there but you don't know what it is."

If the eye can perceive that something is there, then it is not invisible. Unidentifyable, but not invisible. On the other hand, an object that does not absorb or reflect any light, will be truly invisible.

This is not a debating society to split hair over what you said. I am more interested in countering negative propaganda against DRDO and GoI.

In any case, if the eye cannot make out the object in front of it then its as good as being invisible. Will calling it "camouflage" make it easier for you ?

 

[janon]

This is not a debating society to split hair over what you said. I am more interested in countering negative propaganda against DRDO and GoI.

In any case, if the eye cannot make out the object in front of it then its as good as being invisible. Will calling it "camouflage" make it easier for you ?

My words don't need any splitting of hair over them, because my words were crystal clear. Your inability to read properly is the only issue.

The first post of yours that I responded to was not about DRDO, you were insulting another member for a perfectly valid comment he made about black objects not being invisible. You told him "LOL at your knowledge of physics." But he was right, and you were wrong. You also said that a perfectly black object would be "truly invisible", which means that you were indeed talking about invisibility, not about unidentifyability. Your statement was just plain wrong. Perfectly black objects will not be "truly invisible". A perfectly black cube will be detected by the eyes.

I am not interested in debating you either - I am only writing this because I don't like scientifically inaccurate statements misleading others.

 

[Prajapati]

My words don't need any splitting of hair over them, because my words were crystal clear. Your inability to read properly is the only issue.

The first post of yours that I responded to was not about DRDO, you were insulting another member for a perfectly valid comment he made about black objects not being invisible. You told him "LOL at your knowledge of physics." But he was right, and you were wrong.

I LOL'ed at you both because both of you were wrong.

 

[janon]

I LOL'ed at you both because both of you were wrong.

Except that we weren't. You were. Anyway I have modified the previous post to inform you that I am not interested in a stupid argument over this. I have made the scientific explanation clear. That's what matters to me, not pointlessly arguing with lord manvan just because he cannot admit a mistake.

 

[Prajapati]

Except that we weren't. You were. Anyway I have modified the previous post to inform you that I am not interested in a stupid argument over this. I have made the scientific explanation clear. That's what matters to me, not pointlessly arguing with lord manvan just because he cannot admit a mistake.

Rest assured, IF and when I make a mistake, I will admit to it. Let us wait till then.

 

[s.k]

modi is also making invisible toilets

 

[Prajapati]

modi is also making invisible toilets

There are plans to make your Indus River invisible too ............... so no more water in your toilets, at least for the few who have toilets.

 

[OTTOMAN]

TEJA and ARJUNK are already two success stories of invisible technology of DRDO.

modi is also making invisible toilets

This one failed to miss the radar, but apparently no one knows.. what to do with it.

 

[s.k]

There are plans to make your Indus River invisible too ............... so no more water in your toilets, at least for the few who have toilets.

we have toilets and we will start producing/using tissue papers apni khair manao, next week dordo will publish new formula and that will be invisible ancient toilets

 

[trident2010]

why dont they make him invisible will be good for the whole region ...........

Lol ... funny to see pakistanis bringing Modi in this thread too.

Itna jyada to doodh bhi nahi phatata jitni Modi ne inki phaad di ...