SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Could ghost imaging spy satellite be a game changer for Chinese military?
China is developing a new type of spy satellite using ghost imaging technology that could change the game of military cat and mouse within a decade, according to scientists involved in the project.
Existing camouflage techniques – from simple smoke bombs used to hide tanks or soldiers on battlefields to the hi-tech radar absorption materials on a stealth aircraft or warship – would be of no use against ghost imaging, physics experts said.
Quantum ghost imaging can achieve unprecedented sensitivity by detecting not just the extremely small amount of light straying off a dim target, but also its interactions with other light in the surrounding environment to obtain more information than traditional methods.
A satellite equipped with the new quantum sensor would be able to identify and track targets that are currently invisible from space, such as stealth bombers taking off at night, according to researchers.
The U.S. Air Force and NASA have also researched this technology.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday November 29 2017, @01:37AM (3 children)
I did RTFA (sorry), but I don't' get how they get to claim to see everything through everything, in front of everything or against everything.
If they do, great. But if it's really impossible to defeat, and they know they opponents know about it, then they should be a bit more precise about why it works.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Prune on Wednesday November 29 2017, @03:27AM (2 children)
How it works is described at the most obvious place, had you bothered to check: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_imaging [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday November 29 2017, @01:15PM
"A simple example clarifies the basic principle of origami. Imagine making a small gondola using a single sheet of paper."
Sturgeon was right.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday November 29 2017, @05:35PM
Two problems:
- "Hey this great tech will be so much better than everything else, but let's not explain to you how it works" journalism is bad. I don't expect a journalist to define a car before using the word. But if they are talking about a new tech, they should describe it.
- Wiki and other sources describe the "split the entangled photons beam and measure the difference" technique, which requires a detector behind the object, and seemingly identical paths for both beams. What happens to entangled photons through hundreds of kilometers of atmosphere, and bouncing off target black objects, maybe to come back up hundreds of km to receptors? Why does that work at all?