Seeing A Future For Invisibility

Physicists say that it is theoretically possible to design a container that would be invisible, along with whatever was inside it--even you. Karen Hopkin reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


September 6, 2007 -- Seeing A Future For Invisibility

I’m sure there’ve been many times when you’ve wished you were invisible. Like when your boss is looking for “volunteers.” Or when your clueless friend is just begging to be pranked. I don’t need to know the details.

Well, physicists from Sweden and China have determined that it should be theoretically possible to design a container that would render its contents totally invisible. This non-magical invisibility box would be cylindrical in shape and would be made of special “metamaterials” whose intricate microscopic structure would force light to follow a specified path. If the tube’s wall were the ideal thickness, the scientists say, light would be guided around it, thus making the container…and whomever is inside…invisible. To “reappear,” one need only take apart the container…peeling away the wall of the tube one layer at a time.

Of course a few practical problems still need to be ironed out. First, the scientists haven’t actually constructed such a chamber. Their analysis, which will appear in the journal Physical Review Letters, is theoretical, and the column is just a simulation. But perhaps more annoying: the person inside the container wouldn’t be able to see out. Which would definitely put a crimp in your elaborate pranking plans, whatever they might be.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe