Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,387 Posts
Discussion Starter #1


Quote:


The device, designed by physicists at the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra, can shift nanoparticles from one end of a lab bench to the other - 150 centimetres away - using nothing more than a couple of laser beams.

If that sounds far-fetched, a quick hunt through the New Scientist story archive shows that similar technology has been with us for some time - although confined to two dimensions.

Optical tweezers rely on variation in the intensity of light within a laser beam to pull small objects into their centre. The tweezers are surprisingly strong: in 2008, one "tractor beam" was used to test the intrinsic strength of protein molecules by pulling at each end until the structure ripped in two.

But these tractor beams can simply pull tiny objects around in a two-dimensional plane. The ANU device works in three dimensions. A hollow laser beam traps objects in its core because the surrounding tube of bright light heats the air, creating an impenetrable high temperature barrier. Some of the light from the beam trickles into the dark core, however, where it can heat the exposed side of the nanoparticle and push it along the beam away from the laser.


http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/sh...in-a-thir.html

Yes... Yes I like this

Now, all we need is an implant that can enable Telekensis and we're good!
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
5,227 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by IwubAMD View Post
Thats star wars not star trek, star wars tractor beems were invisible.

Pfft, Star Wars > star trek.
 

·
MEGABYTE ME
Joined
·
2,765 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Flatliner View Post
Pfft, Star Wars > star trek.
Lemme fix that for ya Star Trek > Star Wars
I like them both though lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
677 Posts
Im tired of those two little claws on a stick I need to pick stuff up, I wanna lazer. Maybe a shark too. Sharks+lasers= Austin Powers
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
65,162 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Flatliner
View Post

Pfft, Star Wars > star trek.

Babylon 5 >> Star Wars + Star Trek

 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
5,227 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Captain318
View Post

Lemme fix that for ya Star Trek > Star Wars
I like them both though lol


Quote:


Originally Posted by DuckieHo
View Post

Babylon 5 >> Star Wars + Star Trek




Star Wars had the force, and by definition, "The Unifying Force essentially embraced space and time in its entirety while the Living Force dealt with the energy of living things" Source. I know it's wiki, but it confirms that Star Wars must, in fact, be better than Star Trek. What with embracing space and time in it's entirety and what not..

GEEK ALERT
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,387 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Quote:


Originally Posted by Flatliner
View Post

Star Wars had the force, and by definition, "The Unifying Force essentially embraced space and time in its entirety while the Living Force dealt with the energy of living things" Source. I know it's wiki, but it confirms that Star Wars must, in fact, be better than Star Trek. What with embracing space and time in it's entirety and what not..

GEEK ALERT

Sigh... all ruined with the Midichlorian count
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Star Trek > Star Wars.

I say Commander Data in person today !

Comic-con ftw.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
566 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by flatliner View Post
too late. These already existed a long time ago in a galaxy far far away.
this!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,404 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Flatliner
View Post

Star Wars had the force, and by definition, "The Unifying Force essentially embraced space and time in its entirety while the Living Force dealt with the energy of living things" Source. I know it's wiki, but it confirms that Star Wars must, in fact, be better than Star Trek. What with embracing space and time in it's entirety and what not..

GEEK ALERT

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
65,162 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Flatliner
View Post

Star Wars had the force, and by definition, "The Unifying Force essentially embraced space and time in its entirety while the Living Force dealt with the energy of living things" Source. I know it's wiki, but it confirms that Star Wars must, in fact, be better than Star Trek. What with embracing space and time in it's entirety and what not..

GEEK ALERT

Yeah... but a true geek would recognize the many many scientific flaws in Star Wars (i.e. sound effects in space). Being the case, Star Wars is a fantasy science fiction. Bablyon 5 on the other hand attempted to maintain hard science. No fancy completely made-up mumbo-jumbo. Humans used O'Neill Cylinders for star bases and space ships since they did not have artificial gravity. Fighters and ships used directional thrusters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
659 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by DuckieHo
View Post

Yeah... but a true geek would recognize the many many scientific flaws in Star Wars (i.e. sound effects in space). Being the case, Star Wars is a fantasy science fiction. Bablyon 5 on the other hand attempted to maintain hard science. No fancy completely made-up mumbo-jumbo. Humans used O'Neill Cylinders for star bases and space ships since they did not have artificial gravity. Fighters and ships used directional thrusters.


Ya but that's no fun, I'll take my fictional lightsaber. I do love Star Trek too don't get me wrong. I grew up in TNG. Ill have to take another look at Babylon 5 though. Every time I watched the show it kind of felt cheesy, kind of like Legend of the Seeker cheesy if that makes any sense.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top