Macroscopic invisibility cloaking of visible light : Nature Communications : Nature Pub... - 3 views
-
LeopoldS on 02 Feb 11and all this without magic metamaterials ...
- ...1 more comment...
-
Luzi Bergamin on 02 Feb 11It's funny to see how people get more and more humble in the desperate attempt to save their stupid ideas... At the beginning was the brave and bold aim to cloak something in free space (in a sphere or a cylinder). This requires inhomogeneous, anisotropic, magnetic materials; hopeless!! So one reduces to one polarization, now we have inhomogenous, anisotropic materials; still hopeless! At this point one downgraded the pretension: instead of cloaking in free space, we make a "carpet cloak" and hide an object behind an invisible dent in a mirror. But if that shall be continuous, we still need inhomogeneity and this is very hard. So now instead of a dent we take a cone and then it is claimed to work ... for ONE polarization. But of course the cloak can't work at all incident angles... irony of fate: everything is now made from birefringent media, the antithesis of what the metamaterials dogma was at the beginning!
-
jmlloren on 04 Feb 11Hi Luzi, can you please send me the paper. We are writing a project based on sulfates and carbonates, and all this BS sounds great for the introduction (The authors used Calcite as birefringent material)