Lockheed Martin Patents "Quantum Radar". Science Fiction Or Rocket Science?

wahrheit

Philosopher
W
Joined
Mar 11, 2005
Messages
5,485
Just found this article in The Guardian:

US defence contractor looks for quantum leap in radar research

...
Now the US military is taking its war on terror where even Albert Einstein feared to tread - into the baffling world of quantum mechanics. Lockheed Martin, a main US defence contractor, thinks it can exploit research on the fringes of theoretical physics to build the ultimate radar, which could see through anything, from buildings to solid earth.

The company has designed and patented a scanner based on the principle of quantum entanglement - a far out concept, even by the weird standards of the quantum world. It says the device could penetrate any type of defence, to identify hidden weapons and roadside bombs from hundreds of miles away.
Click to expand...
Source, full article

I am not an expert in quantum physics. Is this patent (or idea) nothing but science fiction, or might a radar like this be reality in the near future?
 
<Professor Farnsworth>

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it. That's what being a scientist is all about.

</Professor Farnsworth>

Sorry, not much help there is it?
I've just been waiting to use that one.
Hmm, I think I may have a new signature...
 
Looks like bunk to me. It proposes to use entanglement in a way that that does no agree with what I know of entanglement.

The article says that what hapens to one particle 'out there' will hapen to the entangled partner left in the lab. That's not right.
 
They've actually been awarded the patent, or have they merely applied? The article says a European patent which is something I'm not familiar with. In the U.S., even though you don't have to prove it works, you at least have to have some semblance of how the thing would work in principle and how the thing would be designed and/or constructed. Various claims must be described and itemized to show how your invention is different from prior art. You can't just say, "My invention is a quantum entanglement radar thingamawhatsiz," and get a patent based on that. Also, you can't patent the science, only the technology. I'd love to read the patent itself to see what they are actually claiming.

ETA: I agree with Molinaro. What are you going to do, keep the partner particles in storage in the lab until the first set gets to where you sent them? It doesn't quite work that way. I think someone at Lockheed has been watching What the Bleep Do We Know a few too many times.
 
Last edited:
Psi Baba said:
They've actually been awarded the patent, or have they merely applied? The article says a European patent which is something I'm not familiar with. In the U.S., even though you don't have to prove it works, you at least have to have some semblance of how the thing would work in principle and how the thing would be designed and/or constructed. Various claims must be described and itemized to show how your invention is different from prior art. You can't just say, "My invention is a quantum entanglement radar thingamawhatsiz," and get a patent based on that. Also, you can't patent the science, only the technology. I'd love to read the patent itself to see what they are actually claiming.
Click to expand...

You seem to be wrong given the number of mind control devices and perpetual motion machines patented.
 
From the article, it looks like it's just a European Application so far. Published 2007-02-07, and they're published prior to issue (and usually prior to examination), so it hasn't issued yet. Click around on that page, and you can find the text and a pdf of the application.

In looking at other patent sites (which you have to pay for, so no links, sorry) this a publication without a search report, so it hasn't even been looked at by anyone yet.

Also, there don't seem to be any equivalents to this application in other countries, although they may show up a bit later.
 
Molinaro said:
The article says that what hapens to one particle 'out there' will hapen to the entangled partner left in the lab. That's not right.
Click to expand...

Exactly. That's the part which made me think of science fiction, too.


Psi Baba said:
They've actually been awarded the patent, or have they merely applied? The article says a European patent which is something I'm not familiar with.
Click to expand...


The other article I read (in German language) says they applied for the patent and finishes with the sentence:

Wenn es denn jemals ein Quantenradar geben sollte, hat es Lockheed Martin jedenfall schon einmal patentiert.

While it is unsure if such a quantum radar will ever exist, Lockheed Martin has already patented it, anyway.
Click to expand...
 
They're probably trying to get a jump on the rights in case someone does actually figure out how to do it some time in the future.
 
The backroom boffins at Soapy Solutions Research long ago perfected Neutrino Radar(TM), which can see through anything.

It suggests there's actually nothing out there.

(Except scattered neutron stars and the odd goldmine full of cleaning fluid.)
 
Soapy Sam said:
The backroom boffins at Soapy Solutions Research long ago perfected Neutrino Radar(TM), which can see through anything.

It suggests there's actually nothing out there.

(Except scattered neutron stars and the odd goldmine full of cleaning fluid.)
Click to expand...

The cleaning fluid is not particularly opaque to neutrino's it just reacts in a detectable way.

All you need a a few light years of lead and you will shut that down right away.
 
hgc said:
They're probably trying to get a jump on the rights in case someone does actually figure out how to do it some time in the future.
Click to expand...

Don't you actually have to figure out how to do it, in order to get the rights?
 
Soapy Sam said:
The backroom boffins at Soapy Solutions Research long ago perfected Neutrino Radar(TM), which can see through anything.

It suggests there's actually nothing out there.
Click to expand...
:D :D :D

As to the thread title, it's all bollocks, innit? Publicity-stunt, anyone?

They're going to entangle photons of different wavelengths, presumably by some cascade of entanglements, and then ... what now? Hard to imagine it being much use in Sadr City or on the road to Baghdad Airport.
 
And how do they propose to have the entanglement/superposition last more than an instant in the open? As soon as the particles are observed even by NATURE, the superposition collapses and the entanglement is then a moot point.
 
Patents are often taken out far in advance of any useful application (if any ever emerges). It's done to get a lock on the intellectual property for future revenue purposes.
 
ponderingturtle said:
You seem to be wrong given the number of mind control devices and perpetual motion machines patented.
Click to expand...
As I said, you don't have to prove that it works, only give a reasonable (or convincing) explanation of how you think it would or should work. People who come up with perpetual motion machines often provide very detailed and convoluted explanations of how their devices work, and often in ways which dance around the fact that it is perpetual motion. Occasionally one slips through.
 
Most of that article is utter garbage from the Guardian and bears no relation to either reality or the patent. The important part is hidden near the end.
"Entangled radar waves can combine one or more particles with a relatively high frequency for resolution, with one or more particles at a lower frequency for more effective propagation."
Click to expand...
It is not, as they imply, somehow entagling their machine with whatever they are looking at, it is simply manipulating the radio waves they send out to get a clearer image. This is much more realistic, although still probably won't work. As the final comment says -
Brian Cox, a physicist at Manchester University, has discussed the patent with colleagues. "The consensus at Manchester is that this is just not right,"
Click to expand...

It is also interesting that they have constant references to "the US military" and "US defense contractors". This has nothing to do with the US military or government, it is simply Lockheed-Martin, who also happen to do some contracts for the military. This is like saying that the government is responsible for the cleanliness of a local gym just because the same company has the contract to clean them. Just because a company has some contracts with a government does not mean everything they do is part of government work.
 
Lockheed Martin, a main US defence contractor, thinks it can exploit research on the fringes of theoretical physics to build the ultimate radar, which could see through anything, from buildings to solid earth.
Click to expand...

why use this device for evil when there's so many women's locker rooms in the world? :)
 
robinson said:
Isn't that just wrong somehow?
Click to expand...

Not really - if they pay for the basic research and/or the salaries of the people involved in proposing the idea, they're entitled to protect whatever investment they've made on the concept.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom