4 ms·
Tangent but I don’t really agree with the premise of the quote. Being cloaked wouldn’t need to imply no light enters the ship. A sufficiently advanced ship woul
by close04 2y ago
Tangent but I don’t really agree with the premise of the quote. Being cloaked wouldn’t need to imply no light enters the ship. A sufficiently advanced ship wouldn’t need to “bend” incoming light. Instead it could even absorb every single incidental photon and particle and then actively emit one with the expected behavior as if there was no object in that region of space. E.g. absorb photon on one side, emit one photon on the other side.
- mysteria 2y ago> Instead it could even absorb every single incidental photon and particle and then actively emit one with the expected behavior as if there was no object in that region of space. E.g. absorb photon on one side, emit one photon on the other side. Honestly this is how I imagined all the sci-fi cloaking devices worked from the start. The surface would basically show what it looked like on the other side and the people inside the ship could still see out normally.
- lesuorac 2y agoCould also just let in like 1e-51% of the light and now it becomes a game of who has sufficient technology to detect a ship-sized darker spot. I guess you can get a similar effect by having a garage door beam set-up where you flash a bright light and try to detect a cloaked ship passing through the "beam" by seeing them take too long to re-transmit a photon.
- actionfromafar 2y agoOr a tiny opening in the cloak where the cameras/sensors are.