Re: [ATM] Superlens (negative refractive index)

["Jerry" <wa4guu@verizon.net>]

I haven't read the Sci Am article. I'm sure I wouldn't understand it if I
had. But I'm guessing the article was by the same guys that did the kitchen
table cold fusion with pancake mix and a breast pump a few years back.
Frankly I don't think doing it at microwave or a single wavelength is going
to work either.  I still think we are talking about a necessity of the waves
exceeding the speed of light in a vacuum else they refract the same way as
OSLO says they will. I seem to remember something about super conductors
with negative resistance...... and that would mean the lower the voltage the
higher the current.  What ever happened to superconductors?

Jerry

-----Original Message-----
From: William Lee 
No, it means the electric permitivity and the magnetic permability  
are both negative (for normal materials, they are both positive).

Bill



 Jerry wrote:

> So that means the speed of light is faster in these mediums than in a
> vacuum?
>
> We've come a long way. FAST.
>
> Jerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Lee
>
> Has anyone read the article on superlenses and metamaterials in Sci
> Am? (July 2006)  I finally read it (I'm a little behind on my
> reading) and there are some fascinating implications for negative
> refractive index mediums: resolution finer than the wavelength of the
> light.
>
> Now, they've only been able to do this in the microwave region, but
> the implications for optical astronomy are awesome.  Also, it would
> seem to imply that radio astronomy would be able to be done with
> smaller antennas and better resolution.
>
> Finally, not to be limited by diffraction!
>
> Clear Skies,
> Bill
> _______________________________________________
> ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/
>

_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/