Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Imaging System Could Make America's Stealth Technology Obsolete
Business Insider ^ | Dec. 18, 2012, 10:33 AM | Robert Johnson

Posted on 12/18/2012 9:39:41 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

The stealth technology of America's fifth-generation jet fighters, the F-22 and the F-35, could be obsolete after a new discovery from the University of Rochester in New York.

One main goal of fifth-generation aircrafts is to slip through skies over enemy lines without being targeted. It's not invisible, but elusive, and digitally feisty.

The F-35's lineup of electronic tools, work toward that end, by using a variety of sophisticated and devastating radar defeating moves. Combined with internal weapons storage, special composite skin, and reduced angles of design, the fighter does all it can to work past the weaknesses in today's aircraft detection. Lockheed Martin designers, however, did not plan for this University of Rochester research.

The U of R doesn't look to use a radar wave but instead a quantum image gleaned through a string of photons that boomerang out and back, telling operators everything they've seen. This process can't be jammed, confused, or eluded and rather than get absorbed, reflected, or even restructured to look like something else the photons supposedly report back with only the facts.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: defense; f35lightningii; military; quantumimaging
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

1 posted on 12/18/2012 9:39:47 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

No doubt the Chinese have already stolen the technology.


2 posted on 12/18/2012 9:41:58 AM PST by MeganC (Our forefathers would be shooting by now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Good, since klinton and bathhouse barry gave all our technology to our enemies.


3 posted on 12/18/2012 9:42:29 AM PST by longfellow (Bill Maher, the 21st hijacker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

What say you, aviation experts and fighter pilots?


4 posted on 12/18/2012 9:43:59 AM PST by A Navy Vet (An Oath is Forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
“This process can’t be jammed, confused, or eluded”

I’m sure that was said of radar, initially.

5 posted on 12/18/2012 9:44:29 AM PST by ryan71 (Water, food and ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ryan71

6 posted on 12/18/2012 9:47:27 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Sounds like radar with photons instead of RF waves.
7 posted on 12/18/2012 9:48:12 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum ("The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the state." - Cornelius Tacitus, Roman Senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
but instead a quantum image gleaned through a string of photons that boomerang out and back, telling operators everything they've seen

At the level of description given, this is the same thing as radar.

8 posted on 12/18/2012 9:49:00 AM PST by FredZarguna (If there's one thing he has a lot of, it's a lack of humility.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Link from the article:

Unjammable aircraft detection using quantum mechanics

**********************************EXCERPT****************************************

Researchers from the University of Rochester in New York have demonstrated an aircraft detection system that is unjammable.

By using polarized photons to detect and image objects, any attempt to modify the photons will alter its quantum properties. The system can then detect the altered quantum state of the photons.

9 posted on 12/18/2012 9:49:00 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ((The Global Warming Hoax was a Criminal Act....where is Al Gore?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
RF waves are photons.
10 posted on 12/18/2012 9:51:37 AM PST by FredZarguna (If there's one thing he has a lot of, it's a lack of humility.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna; E. Pluribus Unum; Marine_Uncle; TigersEye; justa-hairyape; NormsRevenge

See #9,....still pretty sketchy detail.


11 posted on 12/18/2012 9:51:58 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ((The Global Warming Hoax was a Criminal Act....where is Al Gore?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

Is that from Spaceballs?


12 posted on 12/18/2012 9:54:00 AM PST by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

No need to steal it, with obama at the helm. His Technology Outsource to China Czar is working 24/7.


13 posted on 12/18/2012 9:54:26 AM PST by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

When they aren’t waves.


14 posted on 12/18/2012 9:56:02 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum ("The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the state." - Cornelius Tacitus, Roman Senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

Raspberry...


15 posted on 12/18/2012 9:57:16 AM PST by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Yeah, I saw your post.

In as much as there are only four quantum numbers that differentiate a particular photon -- and without more details -- this seems pretty easy to defeat. My guess is they want to be at the head of the line for research money when seuqestration begins, and this is a typical BI story: short on details and wrong on facts.

16 posted on 12/18/2012 9:59:42 AM PST by FredZarguna (If there's one thing he has a lot of, it's a lack of humility.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
can't be jammed, confused, or eluded and rather than get absorbed, reflected, or...???

Quantum entanglement is the only thing I can think of, since photons certainly CAN be absorbed, reflected and jammed. But entangled pairs would (conceivably, I'm no physicist) accurately report back regardless of what happened to their mates -- if you can tease the information out of them.

My question is WTH are they releasing this information and not locking those researchers up somewhere in the lab of their dreams?

17 posted on 12/18/2012 10:01:06 AM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
When they aren’t waves.

Nope. Incorrect.

Photons are what they are, and they always are what they are.

Under certain conditions their state vector can collapse into experimentally measurable property (eigenstate of an observable) that can be described as "wavelike behavior." Under other conditions, the state vector collapses on measurement into eigenstates that imply particle like behavior.

But in either case, they're always photons.

18 posted on 12/18/2012 10:05:28 AM PST by FredZarguna (Wavefunction = loosely, and incorrectly, state vector.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

Nope. Photons are particles given off by molecules that are stimulated particularly. Time for a Physics 101 thread!


19 posted on 12/18/2012 10:09:24 AM PST by gr8eman (Ron Swanson for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Based on my limited layman's science: Photons are quantum sized light particles with no mass that behave both as particles and waves. As light they travel in straight trajectories unless influenced by a massive gravitational field (the "boomerang" remark in the article particularly caught my eye). And like radar, if they hit a reflective surface it seems to make sense they would bounce back at light speed and be detectable.

But I am not really sure why they could not be "absorbed" by a dark surface coating on whatever you're trying to protect from detection. No return ... no comparison of elements of the beam when it left, with what the same quantum nuggets look like when they get back.

This sounds like something that could work in a lab under very strictly controlled conditions but might be years away from functioning in the real world. In the meantime, if it screws up our stealth tech it screws up everybody else's as well.

20 posted on 12/18/2012 10:15:19 AM PST by katana (Just my opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
My guess is that the answer to your question is that this is a purely theoretical explanation with some proof-of-concept work behind it, so they're releasing the "information" to scare up money.

First, given the hints, it's probably an entanglement scheme. Second, the entangled pairs could "report" to each other, but they have only one thing to report: their polarization state. [You can't really entangle the other few quantum numbers of a photon, since they're continuous.] Third, large numbers of entangled photons aren't especially easy to produce and isolate. Sounds like the first feelers of a request for proposal. Maybe the Chinese will fund it.

21 posted on 12/18/2012 10:21:56 AM PST by FredZarguna (Wavefunction = loosely, and incorrectly, state vector.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

Well, I’m not an aviation expert of fighter pilot, but I have decades of experience in radar.

This, apparently is an imaging system presents an image to one aspect angle of the scene directly behind it. Take a picture of everything on your left side and present that picture to the right side. Anyone on the right side sees what’s on your left side. I have a close friend that was a PM at DARPA and he opined at some meeting this very concept. He was visited thereafter by a couple of investigators wanting to know where he got the information.

My guess is that this is optical only and it doesn’t work in the RF region (i.e., radar bands). Furthermore, I’d say this is only effective optically for a very narrow aspect angle of views.


22 posted on 12/18/2012 10:22:58 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: katana

See #16.


23 posted on 12/18/2012 10:23:01 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ((The Global Warming Hoax was a Criminal Act....where is Al Gore?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: gr8eman
Nope.

It's been almost thiry years since I taught Physics 101 to undergrads, but I don't need a refresher. You do.

Photons are the basic quantum mechanical particles of all electromagnetic radiation. They don't have to be "stimulated particularly."

24 posted on 12/18/2012 10:24:45 AM PST by FredZarguna (Wavefunction = loosely, and incorrectly, state vector.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: gr8eman

An article on photons:

http://physics.about.com/od/lightoptics/f/photon.htm


25 posted on 12/18/2012 10:26:07 AM PST by Rocky (Obama is pure evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: gr8eman
Time for a Physics 101 thread!

I knew this discussion was going to degenerate into a bunch of "physics" sooner or later! :(

26 posted on 12/18/2012 10:26:55 AM PST by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

This is pretty fundamental physics-based research that is presumably not funded by any classified DoD programs. Can’t really be going around and retroactively jailing people for simply having ideas.

Anyway, from reading this, what it seems to be is fundamentally a theoretically possibile way to defeat a specific type of jamming, Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM) I know just enough about Electronic Warfare to be dangerous, but what DRFM does isn’t block or “fuzz” a radar, it generates multiple fake targets that move just like the real target and that can’t be distinguished from the real target.

Any actual “Old Crows” would probably have a better explanation.


27 posted on 12/18/2012 10:27:28 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Uses a laser. That makes it a bit difficult to cover larger areas of the sky. And, depending on the laser, it can be blocked by clouds, etc.

https://www.technologyreview.com/sites/default/files/images/Quantum%20imaging.png


28 posted on 12/18/2012 10:31:41 AM PST by Little Ray (Get back to work. Your urban masters need their EBTs refilled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

100% totally correct, thank you. Anyone who has had a physics 101 class, and was paying attention, ought to know that. Unbelievable!


29 posted on 12/18/2012 10:32:59 AM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

The Business Insider article is indeed godawful.

The MIT article is, obviously, much better:

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/508826/quantum-imaging-technique-heralds-unjammable-aircraft-detection/

And of course the actual scientific paper is better than that:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1212.2605v1.pdf

The Business Insider idiot fundamentally misunderstood pretty much everything about the research; it basically has NOTHING TO DO with defeatubg “passive” stealth (shaping and materials to reduce a radar return) which is the key to the B-2, F-22, F-35, etc. All it concerns is defeating one particular type of “active” jamming, which is what non-stealthy aircraft, missiles, etc. often employ.


30 posted on 12/18/2012 10:33:12 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

And of course, metamaterials are just over the horizon!


31 posted on 12/18/2012 10:38:14 AM PST by sonofagun (Some think my cynicism grows with age. I like to think of it as wisdom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

To give any credence to an article that proclaims this is “unjammable” is folly. Anything one man can envision, eventually can be realized by another man. It’s like saying you have discovered everything there is to know about this process and have foreseen anything the enemy can think of. It’s ego-maniacal at the minimum. I do understand, I think their preliminary basis for this, as it was posited some time back that photons could also be used for communication and their quantum state would make it known to everyone if it had been tampered with, or even an attempt was made at tampering. It is theoretically possible, but in reality, someone will eventually crack the code, so to speak.

It sounds like some researchers are creating their own PR to maintain some funding or to acquire a new source of funding.


32 posted on 12/18/2012 10:40:44 AM PST by krogers58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

Thanks.


33 posted on 12/18/2012 10:46:43 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ((The Global Warming Hoax was a Criminal Act....where is Al Gore?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MeganC
"No doubt the Chinese have already stolen the technology."

How do you know it wasn't Chinese students that discovered it? ;-)

34 posted on 12/18/2012 11:04:37 AM PST by Average Al
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gr8eman; FredZarguna

Sorry pal. I think you’re thinking of lasers, which indeed emit photons. But that is not the only source of photons, not by a long shot.

The radar “waves” emitted and detected by radar antennas are themselves a type of photon. Every kind of electromagnetic radiation is composed of photons.


35 posted on 12/18/2012 11:07:24 AM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: gr8eman; FredZarguna

Sorry pal. I think you’re thinking of lasers, which indeed emit photons. But that is not the only source of photons, not by a long shot.

The radar “waves” emitted and detected by radar antennas are themselves a type of photon. Every kind of electromagnetic radiation is composed of photons.


36 posted on 12/18/2012 11:07:25 AM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: katana
It all changes when you look at entanglement ~ theoretically you can split a photo pair (they're always paired) and bing one of the pair off to somewhere else and simply watch the one nearer to see whas' hoppen!

There've been some stories about pairing up more than 2 photons ~ so that might be what this is about. It's all too secret for anybody to talk about except in the most hush hush tones, and then only limited to what you would find in a textbook.

Sure, this would beat the devil out of radar ~ and, best news possible, say you can pair 100,000,000 photons, and zip zap them past the aircraft skin and simply evaporate the pilot or other control system ~ somebody will come up with grant money for that!

37 posted on 12/18/2012 11:20:36 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: EEGator
Is that from Spaceballs?

Yep, the radar was jammed.

38 posted on 12/18/2012 11:41:46 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
I hope you're joking. Otherwise...

BTW, quantum entanglement is absolutely useless for sending information. When you have particles with unknown polarization, looking at one collapses the wavefunction so that the polarization of the other is now quantized. That might be useful... if you knew the polarizations to expect! But the wavefunction collapses in a random fashion (i.e. a percentage of the time it will be polarized one way, and a percentage of the time it will be another, etc.).

Sending a "signal" (whatever your "signal" purports to be) requires that the sender and the sendee both know what to expect (i.e. that the signal is non-random in nature).

For example, let's say you have a machine capable of producing photons that will collapse into entangled states (call them A and B), meaning that if one photon is A, the other must be B. Each time you produce a pair, each photon can be either A or B (and behaves in such a manner that you cannot tell without direct observation... that's the essence and inescapable reality of quantum superposition). When you directly observe the first photon and discover it is an A, then the second becomes a B. However, since you have no way of knowing what either is until you look (thereby causing the collapse and "ending" the entanglement), you have no way of sending a signal with them (because you have no way to modulate whether the particle collapses to an A or B). All you get on either end is a series of random As and Bs.

In other words, quantum entanglement might have a great deal of impact on the the question of Locality, but it has absolutely no use in information transfer.

39 posted on 12/18/2012 11:52:17 AM PST by Charles H. (The_r0nin) (Hwaet! Lar bith maest hord, sothlice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

LIDAR = LIght Detection And Ranging

Battlestar Galactica


40 posted on 12/18/2012 12:17:45 PM PST by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

I don’t see how this will work. The same process they rely on to detect changes in the photons should change the photons as well. How could they then tell if the properties changed before they tried to measure them, or because they tried to measure them?


41 posted on 12/18/2012 12:28:10 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Charles H. (The_r0nin)
In other words, quantum entanglement might have a great deal of impact on the the question of Locality, but it has absolutely no use in information transfer.

This is what I was taught when I learned Bell's Theorem in graduate school. However, in the last few years this claim has become controversial.

My understanding (and I was a condensed matter theorist and not an expert on quantum ontology or high energy physics by any means) is that current thinking is that certain kinds of purely quantum information can be transmitted at superluminal velocities.

The rather strong requirement that "information" (one assumes somehow rigorously and suitably defined) cannot be transmitted superluminally, has been replaced with the weaker requirement that whatever effects might be transmitted that could convey deterministic information must be Lorentz Invariant. [In other words, there is no reference frame in which deterministic state information could be seen to be travelling backwards in time.]

The weaker requirement is clearly necessary, or we have far bigger problems in the universe than nolocality; and to my knowledge it is the only one that people concerned with the conceptual philosophy of QM have ever insisted on.

42 posted on 12/18/2012 1:29:32 PM PST by FredZarguna (Wavefunction = loosely, and incorrectly, state vector.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Charles H. (The_r0nin)

of course it does ~ you know at a minimum if A got there ~


43 posted on 12/18/2012 1:33:00 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
...the photons supposedly report back with only the facts.

Just the facts, ma'am. Just the facts.

44 posted on 12/18/2012 1:38:05 PM PST by TigersEye (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Thank you. IBD is probably not the place to find a story which explains something like this clearly or even entirely correctly so your comment is very “illuminating”.


45 posted on 12/18/2012 1:40:38 PM PST by katana (Just my opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Photons are created in pairs during pair production, but unless there's some new physics that I didn't learn they're not always created in pairs. (There is no baryon number/lepton number that needs to be conserved...) The other conservation constraints (momentum, angular momentum, energy, whatever) don't require an additional photon. They can be conserved by changing the quantum numbers of the emitting or absorbing particle or guage.
46 posted on 12/18/2012 1:43:52 PM PST by FredZarguna (Wavefunction = loosely, and incorrectly, state vector.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Charles H. (The_r0nin)

Yes, exactly! This is why I’m stumped as to how this is supposed to work. They know the polarization of the photons they sent out, okay, I can see how they could know that. However, how can they know whether the polarization has changed when the photons come back? If they try to measure it, they may be changing the polarization just by the act of observation.


47 posted on 12/18/2012 1:57:53 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
RE: "still pretty sketchy detail."
And it may remain that way. I can't add to what already has been discussed.
48 posted on 12/18/2012 2:12:09 PM PST by Marine_Uncle (I'm going John Galt.... But. Honor must be earned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

That’s not really transmitting any useful information though. If you know the distance between the sender and receiver, and the nature of the intervening medium, then you already know when the photon arrives, by simple arithmetic.

Besides, quantum teleportation is not really about sending the photon somewhere; it only comes into play once the photons are already in place in two locations. You only send the entangled photon a single time, and after that, you can perform the operations to achieve the quantum teleportation.

Once they’re in place, you could then tell if someone performed an operation on the other photon, but that’s the only superluminal information you might be able to get. You couldn’t tell specifically what operation was performed unless there are accompanying subluminal transmissions to provide you with the missing information you need.


49 posted on 12/18/2012 2:17:56 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

“Not there” types of technologies spot stealth and have for several decades.


50 posted on 12/18/2012 2:19:30 PM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson