[HN Gopher] A mirror that reverses how light travels in time
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A mirror that reverses how light travels in time
        
       Author : mfiguiere
       Score  : 90 points
       Date   : 2023-03-22 14:17 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | wheaties wrote:
       | This is how the effects of Magnetorheological fluids work with
       | sound and vibrational damping. Glad to see they have figured out
       | a corrolary with EM waves.
        
       | timwis wrote:
       | Sounds really interesting, but I'm struggling to imagine the
       | implications of this. Can anyone expound on it?
        
         | kiviuq wrote:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAy39ErqV34
        
       | 1attice wrote:
       | Usage suggestion: can we please call this material a 'turnstile'?
       | 
       | "All I have for you is a gesture, in combination with a word.
       | Tenet. Use it carefully. It'll open the right doors, but some of
       | the wrong ones, too."
        
         | cwillu wrote:
         | That movie lost me when I realized someone had to pour the
         | concrete with the bullet and bullet hole and cracks already in
         | it, but the same doesn't happen when the bullet comes out of
         | human flesh.
         | 
         | I'm imagining the horrifying disease a child must have been
         | born with, that legitimately cured by putting a time-reversed
         | gun to its body and pulling the trigger.
        
           | 1attice wrote:
           | I quite enjoyed the film, but you're absolutely correct: it
           | falls apart when you think about it too clearly.
           | 
           | All the same, it got folks thinking enough about physics (and
           | time!) to notice that it falls apart! That's powerful.
           | 
           | Sort of like how ChatGPT's confident hallucinations make
           | everyone read everything more carefully. It's not the
           | intended outcome, but I value it.
        
       | karmakaze wrote:
       | I thought we already had phase-conjugate mirrors for EM? Is this
       | not the case? "Real Genius" (1985) mentions a tracking system
       | using one.
       | 
       | Or rather how is this different than a phase-conjugate mirror?
        
       | greenhearth wrote:
       | The phenomenon in the article still seems like a kind of
       | reflection, but I wonder if a time crystal with quantum size
       | facets would mess with light's actual space/time dynamics.
        
       | tomxor wrote:
       | The title is very click batey.
       | 
       | It doesn't reverse how light travels in time, it just reverses
       | light in terms of the order of photons, as in "Last in First out"
       | instead of "First in First out". The concept is quite natural to
       | grasp. The article makes it harder to understand than necessary
       | by making it sound like science fiction.
       | 
       | The "reflector" is actually a medium that encompass the entire
       | signal being reversed... in the same way that you would need to
       | buffer the entire segment of a signal in memory before reversing
       | it (you can't send what you haven't yet received), you would also
       | need the entire segment of light to be travelling through the
       | medium at the same time in order to reverse it. This is why their
       | experiment involves such long sections of material.
       | 
       | It's an interesting and useful phenomenon, effectively being able
       | to instantly change a material's properties to reverse the
       | direction of photons currently passing through it, which probably
       | has good application in signal processing performance (it would
       | be comparable to hardware signal processing using electrical
       | components). But "time" is not reversed; the _direction_ of
       | photon 's currently traversing a medium is dynamically reversed,
       | but unlike a reflective _surface_ , a reflective _medium_ could
       | change the direction of multiple photons simultaneously instead
       | of one at a time, which affects the order of that segment..
        
         | retrocryptid wrote:
         | I think you misunderstand. What's being described is a Phase
         | Conjugate Mirror (PCM) -- Think of it as a mirror where the
         | angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection, but without
         | being translated into the opposite quadrant.
         | 
         | It does not "buffer" signals incident upon it, but reflects it
         | along a path that it took to get to the PCM. So it's the same
         | path through space that you would get if you reversed time from
         | the moment the signal hit the mirror.
         | 
         | I'm sure that was clear as mud, here's a wikipedia link:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_optics#Optical_phase...
        
           | tomxor wrote:
           | I did interpret it as effectively reflecting along the same
           | path, I was using "buffer" in a more abstract sense to
           | compare how it would be processed digitally. But I don't
           | doubt I've misunderstood something, my description of photons
           | traversing the medium is probably what sounds physically
           | inaccurate, I'm no expert in photonics and don't really know
           | what a PCM is.
           | 
           | As someone who does, are you able to corroborate whether the
           | effect differs abstractly from what I described in terms of
           | reversing the signal, as in a LIFO? Because this was my gripe
           | with the article, the way the concept was explained makes it
           | sounds like something more than it is.
        
           | nielsbot wrote:
           | So the photons re-trace their steps instead of continuing
           | forward. I think the picture of the tiger seen through the
           | distorion of a glass bottle on the linked page explains it
           | pretty well. But I'm a layperson.
        
             | fnordpiglet wrote:
             | No I don't think that's right:
             | 
             | When a light wave enters the new time interface and the
             | device changes its optical properties, the signal keeps
             | moving forward in space. However, the signal gets reversed
             | --if it were a spoken word, it would sound as if it were
             | getting played backwards. In contrast, with a conventional
             | reflection, a light or sound wave would travel back at its
             | source but mostly look or sound the same as it did before
             | the reflection.
             | 
             | -- They continue forward, but they behave in the reverse
             | with respect to time alone.
        
           | anonymousiam wrote:
           | Also referred to as a "corner cube":
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corner_reflector
        
         | iamerroragent wrote:
         | So instead of:
         | 
         | light: --123-> :Wall
         | 
         | light: <-321-- :Wall
         | 
         | it is:
         | 
         | light: --123-> :Wall
         | 
         | light: <-123-- :Wall
         | 
         | ?
        
           | fnordpiglet wrote:
           | No:
           | 
           | When a light wave enters the new time interface and the
           | device changes its optical properties, the signal keeps
           | moving forward in space. However, the signal gets reversed--
           | if it were a spoken word, it would sound as if it were
           | getting played backwards. In contrast, with a conventional
           | reflection, a light or sound wave would travel back at its
           | source but mostly look or sound the same as it did before the
           | reflection.
           | 
           | --
           | 
           | So it's Light -123-> wall -321->
           | 
           | Where wall isn't a wall but a time mirror.
        
             | iamerroragent wrote:
             | Thank you!
        
         | nobodyandproud wrote:
         | So photons would effectively be reflected back in a LIFO manner
         | rather than FIFO?
         | 
         | If so, thank you for the translation.
        
           | tomxor wrote:
           | Yes, exactly, I came to the same realisation that was an
           | appropriate label and made an edit to describe it as such. In
           | fact comparing it to FIFO as you have makes even more sense
           | so I've edited it again.
           | 
           | Surface reflections are FIFO, because there is no medium, no
           | "storage"; This novel medium based reflection is LIFO, based
           | upon whatever is traversing the medium at the time of the
           | change to the medium.
           | 
           | It's not magic, but it's an interesting way to achieve this
           | in pure photonics, without first converting to something more
           | manageable like electronics... it also doesn't require
           | discrete memory like electronics, it's kind of analogue
           | processing but with a buffer? but can only support analogue
           | processing.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | fnordpiglet wrote:
         | I think it's right. The mirror takes f(x,y,z,t) and maps it to
         | f(x,y,z-t), thus reversing it in the time dimension but not
         | space. It doesn't make it go backwards through time, it just
         | reverses lights behavior with respect to time.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | nonrandomstring wrote:
       | I discovered this effect in mirrors in bright hotel bathrooms.
       | They somehow distort time by inacurately making me look older.
       | They need to fix that.
        
       | chrisshroba wrote:
       | The analogy of "if it was a spoken word, it would sound as if it
       | was getting played backwards" was helpful, but I'm still
       | struggling to understand what's happening here. Thinking of the
       | audio analogy, I could imagine implementing that as a buffer you
       | record into, and after some amount of time, you play back the
       | buffer in reverse. Is that what's going on here?
        
         | Shared404 wrote:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35263734 helped explain it
         | for me.
        
       | achr2 wrote:
       | It's hard to read between the aggrandized lines, but it appears
       | that this is a discrete phenomenon based on precisely switched
       | gates/reflectors. It's super interesting but not exactly science
       | fiction.
       | 
       | Imagine your signal looks like _A_B_C_ where each letter
       | represents a discrete subpacket. The reflectors look like
       | _1_2_3_. As long as those gates are timed to turn on precisely
       | between the subpackets, the reflected signal would be the reverse
       | order of packets.
        
         | ouid wrote:
         | We could already make light "slow", and then we can move our
         | eyeballs faster than the light, hitting photons in the reverse
         | of the order they were emitted in. It certainly isn't "time
         | reversed light", it's a time reversed signal. I didn't RTFA
         | though.
        
       | mcdonje wrote:
       | >When a light wave enters the new time interface and the device
       | changes its optical properties, the signal keeps moving forward
       | in space. However, the signal gets reversed--if it was a spoken
       | word, it would sound as if it was getting played backwards. In
       | contrast, with a conventional reflection, a light or sound wave
       | would travel back at its source but mostly look or sound the same
       | as it did before
       | 
       | So it's reflecting in a novel way. It's not sending information
       | into the past. The headline gave me the wrong impression.
       | Relativity lives. Time travel doesn't exist.
        
         | IshKebab wrote:
         | In fairness this technique _is_ called time reversal because it
         | is equivalent to playing back the waves but with the time axis
         | reversed. (I assume that 's it anyway - that's what you do in
         | acoustics.)
         | 
         | I agree the headline is misleading though. It doesn't affect
         | how light travels in time.
        
         | greenhearth wrote:
         | This. I really thought light was literally going back in time,
         | not getting rewound like a cassette tape.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-22 23:01 UTC)