Smart adventurers wear their eyes on the outside . . .

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by ldj00

If they are communicating wirelessly to each other, then I am assuming some mesh network, they could time the signal from their neighbors and compare that timing. That should allow each small group to accurately position those neighbors...

This method is not precise enough for visual interferometry; the wifi wavelengths are much larger than visual light's.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

This method is not precise enough for visual interferometry; the wifi wavelengths are much larger than visual light's.

Can't they signal with light?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Can't they signal with light?

Subject to the diffraction problems of visible light, sure. For dust mote sizes, even those are substantial. 0.1mm motes, which are fairly big for dust, can't resolve one another beyond a range of about a centimeter.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Subject to the diffraction problems of visible light, sure. For dust mote sizes, even those are substantial. 0.1mm motes, which are fairly big for dust, can't resolve one another beyond a range of about a centimeter.

Is there any indication that "surveillance dust" is literally dust sized? It just needs to be small enough to be invisible or indistinguishable from dirt to the naked eye, right?

Also is a centimeter too close to make a useful network of sensors?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Is there any indication that "surveillance dust" is literally dust sized? It just needs to be small enough to be invisible or indistinguishable from dirt to the naked eye, right?

Also is a centimeter too close to make a useful network of sensors?

No, but given light gathering power requirements, the array will be visible (the simplest way to achieve an array is to just self-organize into a mirror...).

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Anthony

No, but given light gathering power requirements, the array will be visible

I'm afraid you are going to have to unpack that for me.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I'm afraid you are going to have to unpack that for me.

You need adequate numbers of photons as well as adequate resolution, and that means you need at least a couple square millimeters of light-gathering surface to match the night vision capabilities of the human eye.

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by Anthony

You need adequate numbers of photons as well as adequate resolution, and that means you need at least a couple square millimeters of light-gathering surface to match the night vision capabilities of the human eye.

Why can't smaller bits be composited to collect enough photons?

[MatthewVilter]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

This method is not precise enough for visual interferometry; the wifi wavelengths are much larger than visual light's.

If I understand correctly it is quite possible to measure distance at sub-wavelength accuracy (ie GRAIL's Lunar Gravity Ranging System used microwaves to measure distance at sub-micron accuracy). But yeah, I doubt that a wifi antenna is up to the task (which had something to do with polarization iirc).

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

Why can't smaller bits be composited to collect enough photons?

I think the point is that if enough of those bits are all within a 1 cm sphere then they will be visible.



In ThS isn't surveillance dust the only swarm that approaches nanoscale? Doesn't it need to be fixed on a surface to work (at which point I guess it would not be too hard to work out the motes' relative positions)?

Would returning to the original concept of tentacles help? Heir thin, branching into hundreds of strands with surveillance dust optics mounted all along it's length(s). It would be hard to spot from a distance, hard to catastrophically damage, and would use it's physical continuity to simplify the problem of keeping track of the relative position of the optics.



As far as (I guess TL11) surveillance nanoswarms go: You just have some dedicated bots sweeping out arcs through the swarm with lasers. They could track each other's positions and the optics bots could just "feel" the arcs hitting them with passive omnidirectional detectors and based on the timing determine their own position. ... Right?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

Why can't smaller bits be composited to collect enough photons?

They can, but the total required area is the same.