I think the statement "all visible light" is the what prevents a payout based on the announcement you are pointing to. The current material works into the red band around 780 nanometers and they state that is the smallest they have gotten to so far. Visible light goes down to 400 nanometers about half the 'size' of where they are at now.

Here is the statement I was referring to:

"Now, researchers from the group of Harald Giessen at the University of Stuttgart have succeeded in manufacturing a stacked split-ring metamaterial for the optical wavelength range."

It says "optical wavelength range." That sounds like the entire range, but maybe it was inaccurate reporting.

I think what they meant was it works in the optical wavelength range, but not the entire range.

Red is in the optical wavelength range, but it doesn't span the entire range.

While I wait for my previous post to get through the 'spam' filter, I'll try to post a second one:

Has nobody noticed the improper wording of the prop? "absorbs all incident light" is not what is needed for a cloaking material. All the recent reports [1] refer to 'negative refraction' which implies transmitting the light waves, not absorbing them.

Does nobody else understand this basic high-school physics?

-NapkinG-

[1] http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2008-08/invisibility-cloak-swirls-closer-reality

So on Friday this stock jumps 2.75, a healthy leap for an older stock. Generally this means some kind of news, and as we've seen so many times before with this kind of movement, it's usually the wrong news.

In this case, a searches of the news for "metamaterial" "light absorbing" "invisible" and "nanotechnology" turned up two items (and they were reported several times). One is an Ohio State development of a solar-electric compound that utilizes the whole spectrum of visible light, and the other was Rensslaer's development of a solar-panel anti-reflective coating that transmits nearly 100% of the light that strikes it to the solar panel and traps it there.

The Rensselaer development looks promising, but it has to reach 100% (and be announced) by December 31, 2008 to satisfy the prop. The announcement of this development was this month, and the substance absorbs a measly 96.21% of the light.

Though it is a big development, it's not going to spur a payoff.

Now NapkinG, I understand your concern about the wording of the prop, but the payout line does not specifically say it has to be a "cloaking material", even though the rest of the prop talks about it. The payout line says only "This proposition will pay out if scientists develop (and announce) a metamaterial that absorbs all incident light at a wavelength that falls in the visible regime (that is, wavelengths between 400 and 700 nanometers) on or before December 31, 2008."

So all we really need for a long payout is a 100% light-absorbtive substance.

You can find the stuff about the Rensslaer development at newswise"."com/articles/view/546041/?sc=rssn (take out the quotes).

Another thread was opened for this a couple days ago under "Now you NOSEEUM. Now you do" in the General PPX Discussion.

That's where all the buzz is.

This, however, is the correct section for it.