Home Facebook RSS Newsletter Twitter IBM Ziff Davis Enterprise

TECHNOLOGY FOR CHANGE

    Reader Comments

  • POST COMMENT NOW>>
  • EnquiryPosted on: 08-25-10 | By: sattarDo you have available devices detectr for explosives remotely, if possible please tell me Regards, ssjz_67@yahoo.com and sxalll67@yahoo.com
  • My new idea may be idioticPosted on: 08-07-10 | By: AnithaI thought like to trace the bombs kept in the railway lines we can use laser technology where the laser sourse can detect the flaw when scanning is done on the way through which it is passed.so if v keep a laser along the corners of the train in their front side then as it moves along the railway track if it comes through some particals on its way it may detect and it can be displayed in the CRO which should be watched by the engine driver or some responsible person and v can connect the CRO wit an alarm so that if it detects any flaw alarm is blown so the train can be stopped..laser has a property of less divergence so that it can detect the flaw which is at a distance also..
  • do that voodooPosted on: 07-30-10 | By: MadScientistThis story sounds fishy - 800nm + 400nm laser = plasma, plasma + THz radiation = fluorescence - but not just any fluorescence, one that can detect 'explosive substances' - whatever that means. THz detection schemes will be ready in "a few years"? Dang, I heard that 7 years ago! One problem with THz is that every solid object emits lots of it and at every frequency, so unless you shine a bright THz source onto things everything looks the same. (A bright source will be reflected/absorbed differently by different substances.) There is also the matter of detection and, even more demanding, imaging. So - nice story, but is it true?
  • A user comment on this articlePosted on: 07-24-10 | By: AnonymousIf microwaves come before X-rays on the EMS and these come just before microwaves then after many many screenings, I guess many of us will just get a little cancer
  • A user comment on this articlePosted on: 07-22-10 | By: AnonymousThere are millions who live in similar circumstances that do not become terrorists. The assumption that you can throw money at it or change someones lot in life and it will alter their belief system is flawed. Poverty doesn't breed hate, Hate breeds hate and that breed terrorists. Osama wasn't impoverished or disadvantaged but he does hate, and he uses his money and influence to breed more hate. Yes we need technology and whatever advantage it brings because we'll never wipe out hate. Smart guys and gals, keep it coming.
  • Great work, but not ultimately usefulPosted on: 07-22-10 | By: Gary DavisThese smart folks have developed a potentially useful technology and the article also revelas its major downfall, the inability to penetrate water or human tissue. Let's say it really works nicely and homeland security mandates installation of fabulously expensive detectors at every airport, train and bus stration entry point. Then we have yet another costly and flawed method which dedicated terrorists already NOW know how to circumvent. Ultimately all the measures we have and can devise are no substitute for working on the other end and making people and their communities less apt to wish to commit terrorist acts. For the money it would take to deploy and operate all such machines, we could with vision enact means of improving local economies and educational opportunities so that terrorism dies at the root. As for illegal drugs... again, if one route is closed the smugglers will find another so why should this technology be any more successful than dogs, etc.?
  • A user comment on this articlePosted on: 07-22-10 | By: AnonymousSome form of detection is better than none. At the very least, it's a step in the right direction.