Comments on: First 3D ghost images from a single pixel

By: stevo

stevo — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:45:26 +0000

And it will be.

By: Ralph Dratman

Ralph Dratman — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 04:19:30 +0000

Could a 3-D printer print a copy of itself? For that to happen, the printer must be able to print not only its own physical support system and its mechanical parts, but also its electronics. To do so almost certainly requires the use of conductive wires and semiconducting devices (eg., transistors) made from polymers.

Even better would be a copying machine that could make a smaller version of itself. Then maybe Feynman’s challenge would finally be met.

By: tim the realist

tim the realist — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 01:51:41 +0000

At a compression of 100 to 1 pixels (5M to 50K) there must be significant loss of fidelity.

By: Ralph Dratman

Ralph Dratman — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:04:40 +0000

The “one pixel” approach to the explanation did not add anything to my understanding. For better comprehension, I recommend the Wikipedia article “LADAR”.

By: Jes

Jes — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:27:24 +0000

Well, it could be put to worse uses.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:52:48 +0000

Sounds like a hologram to me.

By: Gorden Russell

Gorden Russell — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:37:18 +0000

Think, grasshopper, think. One day this will lead to giving you the holo-deck of the Starship Enterprise.

And long before that, it could be joined to that elegant 3D printer so that you could walk up to the printer and pose for a bust in only 10 nanoseconds. But then paparazzi would use it to spy on Kate Middleton while she is sunbathing in Spain and then print up busts of her bust.

By: Editor

Editor — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:05:35 +0000

Thanks, added sentence at bottom on remote sensing uses.

By: Luke

Luke — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 13:51:54 +0000

Applications???