New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Campaigns
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] 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.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (5548 previous messages)

lunarchick - 10:45am Nov 8, 2002 EST (# 5549 of 5556)

brain - illusion - moon

"Finally I said, 'why don't we just measure it?' There must be a way we can make an experimental measurement of what the brain is doing as opposed to what people are concluding," he said.

Ponzo illusion
http://www.sandlotscience.com/Distortions/Ponzo_java.htm
http://fates.cns.muskingum.edu/~psych/psycfair/ponzo.htm

...... The brain uses a variety of different cues to give meaning to the size of objects -- to keep small objects looking small even if they are nearby, and large objects staying large even if they are far away.

The perceptual system encounters difficulty with celestial objects, though.

"At those vast distances, you can't get an accurate perception of distance," Kaufman continued. "The moon is 240,000 miles away and it's 4,000 miles across, and it doesn't look like its 4,000 miles across."

At the horizon, details in the foreground allow the brain to determine -- even if it can't tell exactly -- that the moon is, at least, very far away. "If you were to look toward an elevated moon where there are less salient cues to the distance to the moon, you locate it at a closer distance and therefore it is perceived as being smaller," he said.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/bigmoon_000105.html

lunarchick - 11:00am Nov 8, 2002 EST (# 5550 of 5556)

Iraq

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iraq/thestory.html

http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?50@@.3ba775cd/0

rshow55 - 11:12am Nov 8, 2002 EST (# 5551 of 5556) Delete Message
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.

U.N. Panel Vote Is Unanimous By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-UN-Iraq.html Filed at 10:42 a.m. ET

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- The Security Council unanimously approved a new Iraq resolution Friday, forcing Saddam Hussein to disarm or face ``serious consequences'' that would almost certainly mean war.

The vote came after eight weeks of tumultuous negotiations and was seen as a victory for the United States, which drafted the resolution together with Britain.

If the result is war, it will be a great human failure and tragedy - but the consequences for the world will still be far better than they would have been without the negotiation. If the result is peaceful, practical disarmament - it will be a great and historical step toward a better world.

I'm glad the vote went as it did, and that the negotiation went as it did.

One could look at
Oct 30: 5380-81 rshow55 10/30/02 11:34am
Oct 31: 5409 rshow55 10/31/02 12:19pm
Nov 1: 5437 rshow55 11/1/02 8:40am
Nov 1: 5441 rshow55 11/1/02 12:23pm
Nov 1: 5442 lchic 11/1/02 2:06pm
and some other postings, and think that the MD forum may have been influential and useful in the discourse about Iraq at the United Nations.

I hope so - and think that, at the least, lchic and I have succeeded in setting out some arguments congruent with some useful discussions that have gone on at the UN.

rshow55 - 12:13pm Nov 8, 2002 EST (# 5552 of 5556) Delete Message
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.

U.N. Panel's Vote Is Unanimous By TERENCE NEILAN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/08/international/08CND-NATI.html

mazza9 - 02:36pm Nov 8, 2002 EST (# 5553 of 5556)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

lchic:

Aren't you ecstatic that the Bali bomber admits the act but mitigates the Australian deaths since he really meant to kill Americans?, (NY Times front page).

Murder and mayhem. such an interesting form of 'suasion!

More Messages Recent Messages (3 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us