New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

rshow55 - 03:30pm Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14679 of 14684)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Cantabb's asking key questions - questions like "what's data?" - in 14668 and elsewhere - and I've spent some time searching things - in an effort to partially respond - on the assumption that he's interested in closure - and not just conflict without end.

It deals with easy issues that make the difference between convergence and divergence - again and again. And reasons why it is easy to take steps toward understanding - or towards divergence and discourd - in discourse.

The points below may be "obvious" but they should not be controversial - and they need to be solidly understood if focusing is to be really possible.

11183-4 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.4cbkbgyRMql.1225872@.f28e622/12734

Just as in chemistry - some crystallization procedures have to happen in stages. Some explainations have to happen in steps.

Maybe the point is "obvious" - but it needs to be sharper than it is in most people's minds. We live in physical space, and pass through time - and it is useful to know clearly that space can be set out in coordinates - and measured along with time. We also live in a "logical" or "classificatory" space - of much higher dimensionality - that is similar to physical space in some ways and very different in some other ways.

It seems to me that there are some things about classificatory patterns that a four year old ought to hear about - and a six year old ought to be able to understand that could do with some clarification.

One key thing is that we learn, and focus, and reason, by dealing with similarities AND differences - together - for collections of cases. Everybody knows that, right?

They'd know it better if they looked at more examples - and did some counting. And comparing of numbers or interrealted cases - often involveing big numbers.

11185 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.4cbkbgyRMql.1225872@.f28e622/12736

People "connect the dots" - find patterns - in a large number (or large enough) number of instances similar enough to notice together. They keep trying to find patterns - and as the process goes on they very very very very very very often guess and often notice that their guesses are wrong and reject those guesses. ( more )

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense