© 2002 - 2004 www.thesciencist.org
The Sciencist
A peer-reviewed journal of
scientific discovery
|
| Unvisibility:
A Changing Paradigm in Visibility Modification
Kohle Torgenson
The shift
from technology-based means of achieving invisibility
to the more cost-effective method of social unvisibility
is given credence in this study, wherein the unvisible
nature of triplets, in varying accoutrements,
is assessed using a standard WW-exclusion test
and the Gruener Recognition Scale. The resulting
data indicates that unvisibility can be attained
and has significant potential for military application.
[This
paper is also available in PDF format]
Introduction
The theoretical concept of changing
the visible to the invisible has long enjoyed a
niche in science fiction, parlor magic and raunchy
super hero jokes. Decades of unsuccessful research,
however, have revealed that true invisibility is
nearly impossible to achieve (Marko, 2002). As a
consequence, some military experts are now questioning
the likelihood of realizing “cloaking devices”
for future wars that could possibly take place among
the stars through technical means. In this vanguard
study, the concept of making the visible invisible
through bending light or modified refractive indices
is abandoned for a more feasible method of unvisibility,
one that employs the social rather than environmental
atmosphere to hide physical objects from view.
The concept of unvisibility stems
from camouflage studies carried out in the 1980s,
as popular television programs influenced the fashion
industry to increase the circulation of “urban
chic camouflage.” The outcome of these studies
indicated that the use of standard black and green
camouflage in urban settings in fact gained wearers
further attention. This observation stimulated an
extensive search for camouflage clothing that would
be effective in many different settings and situations,
allowing for military mobility through multiple
locales. Research thus spurned textiles that could
change pattern and colour with temperature change
(Bronstead, 1989), but these clothes had minimal
military application, as they required people to
touch the garments in order to change their appearance.
Thoughts of finding the ultimate camouflage were
subsequently put aside until the recent speculations
surrounding “unvisibility.”
Unvisibility is understood as
the ability to reduce the importance of the visible
to the point where recognition attains a “zero
value,” given that recognition can be measured
in both positive and negative values, using the
recognition scale developed by Gruener (2000). In
this study, identical triplets of equal height,
girth and posture adopt different attire in an attempt
to attain a state of unvisibility while participating
in a parade celebrating the founding of a local
hoggery. The visibility of the unvisible triplets
is assessed using remote distance identification
processes in a standard diagnostic WW-exclusion
test (Turkish, 1988) and the Gruener Recognition
Scale.
Method
A set of slender twenty-three-year-old
male triplets (figure 1), were selected through
a model search for “exotic talent” based
on parity of physical features, including height,
posture and mannerism. The triplets were designated
as W1, W2 and W3. The triplets were placed in the
parade at five-minute intervals and were instructed
to act in identical ways, with the only difference
separating them being the clothing they donned.
W1 wore a simple jungle camouflage outfit, which
was tailored to accentuate his height and rugged
good looks. W2 was outfitted in a pair of blue jeans,
a red and white striped shirt and a pair of glasses.
W3 wore a conservative suit of neutral grey, adorned
a white belt with “W3 = W awesome” stitched
across the backside and carried a “Clash of
the Titans” lunchbox.
Each triplet was provided with
a specially-designed light sensitive hat, capable
of recording short bursts of radiation. W1 wore
a rakish beret, W2 wore a red and white toque and
W3 wore a baseball cap advertising a major beer
company.
A group of twelve “military
distance negotiators” (MDNs) were selected
for their precision in vision and marksmanship.
The MDNs were instructed by their superior to mark
any suspected terrorists at a local parade using
a new radiation tagging system, which involved shooting
a “light tag” at the head of any suspects.
Terrorists were defined for the purposes of this
experiment as “any tall men in their early
twenties.” The MDNs were then deployed on
short notice to various locations along the parade
route. The triplet targets were instructed to walk
among those in the parade, traveling alongside various
senior citizens recognized for their long service
in the pork industry.
Following the parade, the MDNs
were gathered together and shown pictures of the
triplet targets. The MDNs were then asked to comment
on the triplets’ attire and what influenced
them in identifying the targets. Based on the frequency
of “laser tagging” and the MDNs’
commentary, an individual unvisibility rating for
each triplet was determined using the Gruener scale.
Results
The triplets were each tagged
at least once according to the raw data collected
from their head sensors. The largest number of tags
was delivered to W1, who was noted by the MDNs as
being “somewhat attractive” and a “sharp
dresser.” Other comments about W1 carried
a tone of resentment and hostility towards the visually
appealing triplet; in fact, one sniper shot him
twice because “anyone that ‘cool’
can’t be up to no good.” W1 was determined
to have a Gruener Unvisibility Rating (GUR) of +8.5,
as his attractive qualities drew excessive attention
to him in a public situation.
W2, on the other hand, was tagged
a scant one time, which upon reflection of the MDN
who pulled the trigger was actually a misfire: “I
was actually checking my safety and the gun went
off.” One MDN commented “I saw the target,
but simply ignored him when he looked in my direction
because of his ridiculous outfit.” Other MDNs
made similar comments about W2 noting that “it
isn’t polite to stare.” Due to the obvious
desire to be oblivious of W2, a GUR of –0.1
was determined to be appropriate in this situation.
W3 was tagged by exactly half
the MDNs, drawing more attention than W2, but less
attention than W1. The MDNs commented that W3 “generally
looked bad” and that he was “like road-kill—you
have to look.” W3 was determined to be so
socially unacceptable that acknowledgement was requisite
to ensure avoidance. W3 was determined to have a
rating of –5.0, due to the socially unacceptable
nature of his outfit.
Discussion
The clear outcome of this research
is that unvisibility may be possible within the
near future. Although activating obliviousness has
been a theory that has been bandied about for the
last few years in optical and psychological circles,
it is apparent that the social reality of unvisibility,
as a function of mentally deleting visual stimuli,
has been underestimated and needs to be studied
further.
The power of not being seen can
be harnessed by encouraging the viewer not to care
about the view, as indicated by the relative dismissal
of W2 in this study. The question becomes what combinations
of colours, shapes and styles will delete various
objects and structures from the visual field of
care. Is it possible, for example, to make an entire
building invisible? Is the property of unvisibility
socially determined? If so, could the military study
their potential enemies for a style schema that
would allow our military personnel to view our vehicles
and troops on the pitch of battle without allowing
our enemies the same advantage? Considering the
edge visibility of the unvisible would provide for
a military power moving into a conflict, military
personnel could move unchallenged through aggressive
military strongholds, while tanks and other heavy
artillery could be deposited in the most strategic
locations, all with minimal loss of life and equipment.
Moreover, there is the potential for this research
to pay for itself as unvisible tactical targets
for the enemy require less bulky armour and relatively
useless camouflage colour schemes.
This paper has thus laid the groundwork
for testing other design styles and schemas that
would create an unvisible edge in military strategy.
It is imperative that further funding and attention
be paid to this potent branch of quasi-optidynamics.
References
Bronstead, K. (1989). Hypercolor
clothing: Poor camouflage, bad idea. Optical
Textile Review 9(3), 114-147.
Gruener, C. (2000). Calculating the social value
and worth of humanity. Optical Journal of Applied
Social Accounting12(2), 4-17.
Marko, J. (2002). They just won’t disappear.
Address to the United Nations on the erasure of
racial boundaries using invisibility rays.
Turkish, B. (1988). Where’s Waldo: A visibility
and recognition protocol. Optical Field Magazine
6(8), 54-67.
|
|
