Attacking Darius:

tlb wrote:

tlb wrote:All the weapons around the junction have targeting radar and we have no reason to suppose that the spider drive ships are invisible to radar.

penny wrote:I agree that that should be true. But only if all else is equal. All else is NOT equal IF the RMN keeps its forts energized. The power meter outside of RMN forts is spinning like crazy when the power company checks the meter. LOL

Might they be? The smart fabric says it is able to bend light. And the Michelson-Morley experiment showed us that light is a wave. Radar is a wave.*

IINM, the Navy's retired F-117 Nighthawk utilized radar resistant (absorbing) paint?

*The double-slit experiment proved light to be both a point source and a wave. Particle wave duality.

We know that there is a rotation among the forts; whether that is for maintenance or the mental health of the crew is unstated.

I am well aware of the particle-wave duality, as I did study Physics for a bit. Where do you see the statement that the fabric bends light? I only remember that it is flexible and behaves like a flat panel display.

The radar absorbing paint and the avoidance of downward facing concave surfaces serve to minimize the radar profile, but do not eliminate it.

The passage does not specifically say that it bends light. Admittedly, that is my own projection (pardon the unintentional pun). It says that it is completely transparent to light and any other form of radiation. I don't know any other method of accomplishing that feat unless it scatters (bends) the light around the object.

Of course, the smart cloth could accomplish its stealth by simply absorbing the light instead of bending it. However, in this case, that would not appear to satisfy the passage's claim of being transparent, let alone being completely transparent.

But either case would still stand up to tlb's notion that we don't know if the system would be effective against radar or lidar; which falls under the passage's umbrella of any other form of radiation.

There is no way that light can pass through stealthed objects to appear to be transparent; like when we discussed the fact that the WHJ has to be transparent to sensors to prevent occluding objects, like warships.

penny wrote:The passage does not specifically say that it bends light. Admittedly, that is my own projection (pardon the unintentional pun). It says that it is completely transparent to light and any other form of radiation. I don't know any other method of accomplishing that feat unless it scatters (bends) the light around the object.

Of course, the smart cloth could accomplish its stealth by simply absorbing the light instead of bending it. However, in this case, that would not appear to satisfy the passage's claim of being transparent, let alone being completely transparent.

But either case would still stand up to tlb's notion that we don't know if the system would be effective against radar or lidar; which falls under the passage's umbrella of any other form of radiation.

There is no way that light can pass through stealthed objects to appear to be transparent; like when we discussed the fact that the WHJ has to be transparent to sensors to prevent occluding objects, like warships.

I do not understand your confusion; from the ground it behaves as a window and a window does not bend the light around the frame to let it through. While from the sky you see whatever the fabric is programmed to show you. The smart paint on the Ghost-class scout ship was programmed to display on the front side whatever is occluded; so it would appear totally transparent, as if it were not there.

Maybe it would help if you think of it this way: the bottom surface of the fabric is a straight HD screen and each spot on the top has both an HD camera cell and an HD television cell. Each camera cell feeds directly to the HD cell beneath it, while the top HD television cells are fed the top-down view of a forest. So looking up from the ground, you would have a view of the sky; as if the fabric was not in place. Meanwhile anyone in an aircar flying over would see uninterrupted forest. Now I am sure that in actuality the process is more complex.

My recollection is that the Junction Forts were rotated in and out of service. There being no defining time frame, I thought that perhaps those which had been on-duty for X hours would be switched out for those with fresh crews. Sort of like the US ballistic missile system of silos. Crew in "in" their facility for X days and then a new crew takes over under appropriate security procedures. Only one silo out of a given (and widely scattered squadron) is in the process of change-over at any given day

On the other hand, if you have a enough crew to run- at action stations at least for a short time to fully staffed 3@ 8Hr shifts, you could keep a fort on-line a week or more before swapping places with it's relief.

The massive forts at Galton probably have that capacity with everybody including regular maintenance people on board for months or more at a time with little rotation off the fort.
Of course the power usage for forts isn't a linear progerssion so if something is three or five times even the most massive of the Manticorian forts (and may not have anything like the Manticorian automation but we don't know) then they are absolutey covered with weapons and their related systems and magazines and machine shops and commissaries and sensors and all the things you need to serve both the equipment and the size of the crews you need. How many millitary fusion power plants is the minimum for baseline operation......so much we do not know. But if it was important for RFC to drop that into Honor'w thought when observing Galton then it probably means something.

penny wrote:The passage does not specifically say that it bends light. Admittedly, that is my own projection (pardon the unintentional pun). It says that it is completely transparent to light and any other form of radiation. I don't know any other method of accomplishing that feat unless it scatters (bends) the light around the object.

Of course, the smart cloth could accomplish its stealth by simply absorbing the light instead of bending it. However, in this case, that would not appear to satisfy the passage's claim of being transparent, let alone being completely transparent.

Ah - see I'd read that like tlb had. As the smart fabric nanotechnology "just" providing the equivalent of a one-way transparent holographic camouflage netting.

From underneath it was completely transparent so it didn't interfere with your view or any signals you might send. And from all other aspect sensors (for whichever it might work against) would only see the holographic image of uninterrupted forest that it was projecting.

Unlike the stealth on the Ghosts it doesn't need to transmit what's behind it because beyond the facilities it is hiding is just the planetary surface. (Because, thanks to that forest, nothing is going to be passing by low enough to see the sides of the complex; so no need for live mirroring of the forest beyond it)

You certainly don't need to worry about the complex occluding stars, planets, stations, asteroids, ships, etc. etc.
So it doesn't need any ability to pass through signals, or visible light, from objects behind it.

tlb wrote:

penny wrote:The passage does not specifically say that it bends light. Admittedly, that is my own projection (pardon the unintentional pun). It says that it is completely transparent to light and any other form of radiation. I don't know any other method of accomplishing that feat unless it scatters (bends) the light around the object.

Of course, the smart cloth could accomplish its stealth by simply absorbing the light instead of bending it. However, in this case, that would not appear to satisfy the passage's claim of being transparent, let alone being completely transparent.

But either case would still stand up to tlb's notion that we don't know if the system would be effective against radar or lidar; which falls under the passage's umbrella of any other form of radiation.

There is no way that light can pass through stealthed objects to appear to be transparent; like when we discussed the fact that the WHJ has to be transparent to sensors to prevent occluding objects, like warships.

I do not understand your confusion; from the ground it behaves as a window and a window does not bend the light around the frame to let it through. While from the sky you see whatever the fabric is programmed to show you. The smart paint on the Ghost-class scout ship was programmed to display on the front side whatever is occluded; so it would appear totally transparent, as if it were not there.

Maybe it would help if you think of it this way: the bottom surface of the fabric is a straight HD screen and each spot on the top has both an HD camera cell and an HD television cell. Each camera cell feeds directly to the HD cell beneath it, while the top HD television cells are fed the top-down view of a forest. So looking up from the ground, you would have a view of the sky; as if the fabric was not in place. Meanwhile anyone in an aircar flying over would see uninterrupted forest. Now I am sure that in actuality the process is more complex.

Tlb, Jonathan, thanks for trying to assist my brain. Sometimes it spins its own wheels. But I am afraid I am going to need a bit more assistance.

I parsed the passage just like the two of you did. Matter of fact, my brain parsed 'one-way-mirror'. But there is a lot more that I don't understand, which I think is caused by the complexity of the material. Kudos for MAlign technology!

I can get over my brain's intuitive questioning of shadows and darkness that would be cast on the underside of the complex, caused by the complex itself. Born of my many memories of playing underneath houses built on stilts on the beach when I was a kid and of course, playing under the boardwalk. If the material projected exactly what it saw, it would be projecting a much darker contrast of what should be there. However, I don't think it'd be a problem for AI to clean up the image if I am correct.

However, my problem with this approach is the fact that the topside of the material facing the sky and displaying the chameleon-like HD image to anyone passing overhead, is absorbing light hitting it from the sky. After all, you wouldn't want it reflecting light away from it like a mirror; much like the coating put on the lenses of military grade binoculars to prevent the tell-tale sign of reflected light toward the enemy. So, how does the light-absorbing paint absorb light from the sky, but allows light to pass through it from the HD panel incorporated into it? Again, I think it is simply the complexity of the material and HV tech being able to isolate and control photons by the individual direction of travel. A filter which filters light by direction.

It would be like a black hole absorbing all light coming in but allowing some light to escape.*

* Don't go there! That is another topic.

BTW, Jonathan, the extra information about wave-particle duality was not included for those not needing it. It was for anyone else who did. When possible, I try to include information that might prevent me from spinning my wheels for several pages later on. Didn't mean to offend anyone.

penny wrote:Tlb, Jonathan, thanks for trying to assist my brain. Sometimes it spins its own wheels. But I am afraid I am going to need a bit more assistance.

I parsed the passage just like the two of you did. Matter of fact, my brain parsed 'one-way-mirror'. But there is a lot more that I don't understand, which I think is caused by the complexity of the material. Kudos for MAlign technology!

I can get over my brain's intuitive questioning of shadows and darkness that would be cast on the underside of the complex, caused by the complex itself. Born of my many memories of playing underneath houses built on stilts on the beach when I was a kid and of course, playing under the boardwalk. If the material projected exactly what it saw, it would be projecting a much darker contrast of what should be there. However, I don't think it'd be a problem for AI to clean up the image if I am correct.

However, my problem with this approach is the fact that the topside of the material facing the sky and displaying the chameleon-like HD image to anyone passing overhead, is absorbing light hitting it from the sky. After all, you wouldn't want it reflecting light away from it like a mirror; much like the coating put on the lenses of military grade binoculars to prevent the tell-tale sign of reflected light toward the enemy. So, how does the light-absorbing paint absorb light from the sky, but allows light to pass through it from the HD panel incorporated into it? Again, I think it is simply the complexity of the material and HV tech being able to isolate and control photons by the individual direction of travel. A filter which filters light by direction.

It would be like a black hole absorbing all light coming in but allowing some light to escape.*

* Don't go there! That is another topic.

I don't think the material is displaying what is under the complex - there's really no need for it to do so, it just needs to display the image of a realistic bit of forest. That doesn't require having actual forest somewhere under the smart fabric canopy to livestream.

In fact I'd assumed the complex was ground level (and basements) build in a large opening, field, meadow, in the forest. Not up on stilts like the Ewok village .


Also the material doesn't need to capture light hitting it from the sky -- those photons are the ones that pass clean through the high-tech 'one-way mirror' to reach the ground. It needs to block photons coming from below - so they don't bleed through its holographically projected forest image - whether those be lights bleeding through windows, exterior illumination, or just light reflecting off non-forest below the canopy. But how it manages that trick of letting sky light trough but preventing ground light from doing the same is nanotech handwavium

Jonathan_S wrote:

penny wrote:Tlb, Jonathan, thanks for trying to assist my brain. Sometimes it spins its own wheels. But I am afraid I am going to need a bit more assistance.

I parsed the passage just like the two of you did. Matter of fact, my brain parsed 'one-way-mirror'. But there is a lot more that I don't understand, which I think is caused by the complexity of the material. Kudos for MAlign technology!

I can get over my brain's intuitive questioning of shadows and darkness that would be cast on the underside of the complex, caused by the complex itself. Born of my many memories of playing underneath houses built on stilts on the beach when I was a kid and of course, playing under the boardwalk. If the material projected exactly what it saw, it would be projecting a much darker contrast of what should be there. However, I don't think it'd be a problem for AI to clean up the image if I am correct.

However, my problem with this approach is the fact that the topside of the material facing the sky and displaying the chameleon-like HD image to anyone passing overhead, is absorbing light hitting it from the sky. After all, you wouldn't want it reflecting light away from it like a mirror; much like the coating put on the lenses of military grade binoculars to prevent the tell-tale sign of reflected light toward the enemy. So, how does the light-absorbing paint absorb light from the sky, but allows light to pass through it from the HD panel incorporated into it? Again, I think it is simply the complexity of the material and HV tech being able to isolate and control photons by the individual direction of travel. A filter which filters light by direction.

It would be like a black hole absorbing all light coming in but allowing some light to escape.*

* Don't go there! That is another topic.

I don't think the material is displaying what is under the complex - there's really no need for it to do so, it just needs to display the image of a realistic bit of forest. That doesn't require having actual forest somewhere under the smart fabric canopy to livestream.

That is a better approach worthy of Alphas.

Jonathan_S wrote:In fact I'd assumed the complex was ground level (and basements) build in a large opening, field, meadow, in the forest. Not up on stilts like the Ewok village .

A project on stilts would significantly reduce completion time. I would tend to think it was a rushed job to prevent accidental detection. But you are probably correct.

Jonathan_S wrote:Also the material doesn't need to capture light hitting it from the sky -- those photons are the ones that pass clean through the high-tech 'one-way mirror' to reach the ground. It needs to block photons coming from below - so they don't bleed through its holographically projected forest image - whether those be lights bleeding through windows, exterior illumination, or just light reflecting off non-forest below the canopy. But how it manages that trick of letting sky light trough but preventing ground light from doing the same is nanotech handwavium

Yes, anyway you look at it implies a bit of handwavium. Especially when projecting the entire tech for use in space as a cloaking agent for warships. But I am satisfied with your and tlb's tutelage.

A project on stilts would also reduce the amount of equipment needed.

A few more words about the smart fabric compared to the smart paint.

One point in common is that both should minimize reflections, but whether that is enough to block radar is an unknown.

Major differences between the two: Most importantly the paint was designed to face a hostile environment, while the fabric is only intended for use in friendly surroundings (as soon as it became hostile with the invasion, the installation was blown up). Both need to block at least the view of what is behind the veil; but the paint needs to project a much more complicated image that can include a spectrum far beyond the visual, while the fabric can operate at ambient temperature.

Because the fabric is in a friendly environment; it is not clear if it needs to block more than the visual of what is beneath it, heat and electromagnetic signatures could be handled by features designed into the hidden buildings. A question is whether the inhabitants should be allowed to use their cell phones while sitting out on the lounge chairs enjoying the sun (or moon) and the sky.

One major problem that the paint has is parallax. Imagine for a moment that the ship occludes Betelgeuse, a red giant star; the paint has to display an image with the proper size and spectrum on the side facing the enemy. So project a line from Betelgeuse through the image in the paint toward the center of the enemy formation. The ships closest to that line will not notice anything wrong; but if some are far enough out they will see the image as being in the wrong place. Any two ships that are far enough apart can triangulate and measure an apparent distance that will be totally wrong for the star. If any ship is even farther out, so that the star is no longer occluded; then it will see both the star and its imposter. Note that this is never a problem with the fabric, because the scene that it projects is not about anything occluded.

tlb wrote:A few more words about the smart fabric compared to the smart paint.

One point in common is that both should minimize reflections, but whether that is enough to block radar is an unknown.

Major differences between the two: Most importantly the paint was designed to face a hostile environment, while the fabric is only intended for use in friendly surroundings (as soon as it became hostile with the invasion, the installation was blown up). Both need to block at least the view of what is behind the veil; but the paint needs to project a much more complicated image that can include a spectrum far beyond the visual, while the fabric can operate at ambient temperature.

Because the fabric is in a friendly environment; it is not clear if it needs to block more than the visual of what is beneath it, heat and electromagnetic signatures could be handled by features designed into the hidden buildings. A question is whether the inhabitants should be allowed to use their cell phones while sitting out on the lounge chairs enjoying the sun (or moon) and the sky.

One major problem that the paint has is parallax. Imagine for a moment that the ship occludes Betelgeuse, a red giant star; the paint has to display an image with the proper size and spectrum on the side facing the enemy. So project a line from Betelgeuse through the image in the paint toward the center of the enemy formation. The ships closest to that line will not notice anything wrong; but if some are far enough out they will see the image as being in the wrong place. Any two ships that are far enough apart can triangulate and measure an apparent distance that will be totally wrong for the star. If any ship is even farther out, so that the star is no longer occluded; then it will see both the star and its imposter. Note that this is never a problem with the fabric, because the scene that it projects is not about anything occluded.

Nice post!

Indeed. Occlusion is one reason I assumed the fabric achieved the stealth by bending the light around the object. That would solve the problem of occlusion. The relatively short distance light would have to detour would be insignificant. Incidentally, that has commonly been how many sci-fi genres handled stealth. RfC is cut from a different smart cloth. I should have known better.