Cloak of Invisibility

[Occhidiangela]

I'll readily admit there is a lot about optics that I do not know about.  Occhi, do you mind expanding your post a bit more, to help me fill in the gap?

My understand of a superlens is that it is a lens made with a negative refraction rating (or one that approaches a near zero refraction index).  By cutting down on defraction of light, they can be used in applications like microscopes to see at higher magnifications than previously possible due to the "more pure" source of light.

Are you using the term "superlens" to describe anything (other than a lens) which has the capability of a negative refraction index?

Cheers,

Munk
[right][snapback]108941[/snapback][/right]

I used the term "superlens" due to its use in the original Guardian article. I don't understand the arcane optical details well enough to go much further, Optics was not my specialty. I'd really need to read the paper to get a clue about what the mathematicians were proposing without the filter of a news reporter's summary.

EDIT: It would cost me 37 dollars(US) to get the article from the Royal Society.

From the Abstract
a polarizable line dipole located less than a distance d/2 from the lens, where d is the thickness of the lens, will be cloaked due to the presence of a resonant field in front of the lens. Also a polarizable point dipole near a slab lens will be cloaked in the quasistatic limit.

Occhi