Getting light to bend backwards

Just to make sure I have this right, this could be a means of measuring distances, if sent out into the reaches of space and targeted the lens, which would send back the same light to it's near point of origin, thus giving us a means to send a measured beam of light to a target, have it bent back upon itself or near self, and therefore a means of measuring the speed of light accurately and not theoretically, out to and beyond what we can see in the visual spectrum from any point in space, providing a reflected image of that interlining space, and thus providing a means to see into an image of that reflection?

That would mean if a smaller reflector was made and tractable, and or traceable you could intervene into sub molecular structures as well and thus be able to view an actual image of that interlining space as well ?

Joshua

http://cr4.globalspec.com/blogentry/3599

And now according to this all we see is already past and thus a reflection of that time as we perceive it to be, leading to where we are in time and space at that moment of perception, that thus, measurable in time and space, we have already sent the light outward only to have it reflected back to us from out past?

And therefore spherical in nature, the limits of space the limited range of perceived light, yet we are only at the midpoint of that line, the center of the sphere of our perception and, therefore what we perceive is what we have ourselves sent out to perceive, from some other point on the space and time line even to a subatomic level?

joshua

Uh...no.

No because, why?

Because it sounds like gibberish.

And if that doesn't work for you then I just plain disagree for the same reason, I am guessing, that you base what you said, because I think so.

And if that isn't good enough then maybe you could couch whatever you are trying to say in more scientific language so we could begin to get some idea of what it is you are trying to say because it really doesn't make any sense to me unless I apply my new age decoder wheel and actually I lost it so maybe it's just me.

So what do you get for the gist of the two articles?

OK. I hate to do this to you, but let's apply a little simple logic to this situation:

1) we send a lens made of negative refractive material out into space. Questions: how FAR into space? How LONG do we wait while it transits to the desired location?

2) we aim a laser at said lens. Questions: How do you propose to know exactly where to aim said laser? How long will it take said laser beam to transit the distance to *AND* from the lens?

3) Assuming we overcome the problems and questions in step 2, one need not be a genius to realize that the intercept said returning light beam, the earth will have to be in PRECISELY the same position, RELATIVE to said negative refractive lens, when the beam finally DOES arrive back at its point of origin. Problem: the Earth will ***NEVER*** (from the point of view of human life spans) again, not EVER. A) The Earth is spinning on its axis. B) the Earth is orbiting the Sun. C) the Sun itself is in an orbit, which the entire solar system follows through the Galaxy. D) The Galaxy is in an orbit around some central point elsewhere in the Universe. E) In all probability, our Universe (which may well NOT be the only UNiverse in existence) is also orbiting around some unkonwn origin point.

So, even if we find answers and solutions to all the questions and problems posited in A through D, E clearly tells us that we won't be in the appropriate locaiton to intercept the returning laser beam, assuming it makes it to the negative refractive lens and reflects in the first place (which, because of A through D, is unlikely, assu,king any significant distance between us and gthe lens in its final location).

Do you understand why, now?

Okay this was stated in the referred articles

A new metamaterial crafted from alternating layers of semiconductors (indium-gallium-arsenic and aluminum-indium-arsenic) acts as a single lens that refracts light in the opposite direction.

"light is so fast that we perceive our surroundings in real time. Look up into the night sky and this illusion begins to falter. "Because light takes time to get here from there, the farther away 'there' is the further in the past light left there and so we see all objects at some time in the past,"

accepting the premise of reflecting the light back, placement in space and making the adjustments as to perspective as to where, when the reflector will be in a location to measure the distance and that interval in between would be a simple launched satellite package on a prearrange orbit would give us the target aim point verified by radio waves and adjustments made to account for movement of the earth to receive that reflected light, or a geosynchronous orbited target.

If a reflector can be small enough to be made at the subatomic level, or an already existing subatomic element can be found to reflect the source back in the same fashion, this should also function in the same manner reflecting the light back to a source of measurement. Then we should be able to see the intervening space as well. At the least we would have a measure of the distances at the subatomic level based on the speed of light.

Still not quite sure what your talking about, but if you mean miniaturising the newly discovered meta-material to the sub atomic level, you will find that the material will not exhibit the same behaviour (due, in part to the fact that it will be smaller than the individual atoms that make up the meta-material).

Are we on the same page here? The actual speed of light is measurable using existing techniques. Time (the way we perceive it) and the speed of light are separate and individual.

What exactly are you thinking of trying to accomplish (looking back in time like the movie "Paycheck" or something)?

No, it doesn't work this way.

Besides, it is a relatively simple matter to fire a beam of light out and using (well just a couple of plain mirrors) have the same beam of light come back to the origin point on its same path. You can do this yourself at home. As for light and time, I think you have gotten very confused somewhere (perhaps you have mixed a couple of time theory's together to get to your current reasoning). Light is linear and does not travel from the present to the past. As far as I am aware there is only one particle that has ever been observed traveling back in time (and its a pretty exotic and short-lived one at that!). And no, its not a Tachyon.