K, the ultrasound system may be able to introduce images and basic data and such (like a picture of the battle map), I am hugely less confident that it could provide very high detail information (a list of figures). The first one could be achieved, theoretically, by just exciting specific regions of the brain, the other I think would be far to difficult to achieve, simply due to the complexity and massive numbers of factors involved, even for the level of tech in the SARP. One of the big problems here is that every neural net (i.e. brain) stores information differently and accesses it differently, and this can not be predicted. This prevents the kind of non-conceptual data of a list of numbers, but the general stimulation of a region could be possible (generating a mental image of a starscape, for example).
Now, reading the mind with this system is not going to happen. Ultrasound could not read the electrical impulses, nor could it pick up the neural transmitters. These transmitters occur throughout the brain and I do not believe this system could isolate them. There are over 10 neurotransmitters and 50 neuroactive peptides that have been identified to date; each one could have different frequencies at which they would appear to the sensor as different than the surrounding proteins and tissues. These would be further complicated changes in pressure, temperature, and intervening tissue between the sensor and the neuron, all of which increase the difficulty of isolating it immensely.
For those of you who do not want to accept the reason above, here are some hard facts on the matter that would prevent it from being used in such a manner:
-Currently, bone has such a huge change in density (and thus reflectivity) that it can not be scanned and blocks any scans beyond it. However, advances in the technology should make it possible for dedicated machines to scan the bone structure. However, these machines cannot perform a normal ultrasound scan, it is one or the other.
-http://www.mercola.com/2001/dec/19/ultrasound.htm
-http://www.mindfully.org/Health/Ultrasound-Lung-Damage.htm
-http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20010730231942data_trunc_sys.shtml
-http://womensissues.about.com/library/weekly/aa121201a.htm
http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet ... s&gifs=yes
-http://www.ob-ultrasound.net/joewoo3x.html
-http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1699905.stm
so this is not totally safe.
-The synaptic cleft (over which the neurotransmitters travel) measures a mere 20 nm or smaller, the neurotransmitters are much smaller. The wavelength of a 200 MHz ultrasound through brain tissue is 0.01 mm. That is 10,000 times larger than the gap, much less the proteins/peptides. Now, you can't possibly accurately scan something smaller than the probe particle (or in this case, the wavelength of the sound). Ideally you want the wavelength to be several times smaller than what it is supposed to probe. Further, the higher the frequency, the more energy in the pulse and the more damage it can cause (by just passing through the tissue, the accuracy becomes irrelevant), so you can't just increase the frequency ad infinitum to get to the adequate wavelength (the size of the particles the wave is bouncing between would also be a limiter that would stop the accuracy from going anywhere near the resolution to see a peptide, irrelevant of whether or not you cared if you caused damage).
=Magnetic resonance Imaging functions by generating a magnetic field of such intensity that it causes the water molecules within the body to reach exited states and release photons in the radio frequency range. These are picked up by the sensor. The field necessary for this would not be compatible with a high-tech environment and thus this application, since it would quickly lead to damage to everything in its area (especially nanomachines).
-Zakalwe, comparing ultrasound to the other sensors used in this system is not a viable method since the types operate via completely different mechanisms. Because one can scan at the molecular level does not mean other methods can.