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.

gisterme - 09:52pm Jan 15, 2003 EST (# 7696 of 7706)

<a href="/webin/WebX?14@93.hRIAaZfp0Fj^418578@.f28e622/9204">rshow55 1/15/03 2:21pm</a>

"...Stability and instability differ in key ways..."

No kidding?

"...but look alike in some others..."

Really.

"...For mating to work - everything has to be right..."

Tell that to all the illigitimate children in the world, Robert. Do you think they'd believe you?

"...When weapons are involved - some issues are especially touchy..."

Do you mean as in "shotgun wedding"? If so, I couldn't disagree with that.

gisterme - 10:23pm Jan 15, 2003 EST (# 7697 of 7706)

<a href="/webin/WebX?14@93.hRIAaZfp0Fj^418578@.f28e622/9209">almarst2002 1/15/03 3:10pm</a>

From the HAARP website...

"...The intensity of the HF signal in the ionosphere is less than 3 microwatts per cm2, tens of thousands of times less than the Sun's natural electromagnetic radiation reaching the earth and hundreds of times less than even the normal random variations in intensity of the Sun's natural ultraviolet (UV) energy which creates the ionosphere..."

Sounds pretty innocuous to me. That's not a whole lot more power than your body is currently receiving from local radio statons and is probably considerably less energy than the retinas of your eyes are receiving from your monitor.

The 3.6 megawatt power output distributed within a volume of inonosphere a few hundred meters thick and a couple of tens of kilometers in diameter above the site seems to be on the right order of magnitude to match the statement above.

That's definately not enough energy to cause hurricanes, tornados or earthquakes under any conditions.

So far as I can see from the pictures on the web site, there's no easy way to direct the energy "hot spot" to any location except directly above the site. HF radio waves are not nearly as directable by techniques such as array-phasing as are the microwaves used in radars. RF spreading would be a big problem for going any direction except straight up, even with a large area array. Also, according to the website, the 3.6 mW is distributed among 180 antennas. That's only 20 kW per antenna.

Almarst, it sounds to me like the Russians have been listening to the Art Bell show to get their intelligence. :-)

lchic - 02:58am Jan 16, 2003 EST (# 7698 of 7706)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

"you really think I'd fall for some dumb lug in a penguin suit like you "

http://www.maxwelldemille.com/broadway.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The board goes on ... i was 'out to lunch' ... interesting posts on bird coupling Showalter ... as you were saying 'in the ideal situation - things have to be exactly right for both parties' which goes and flows into international diplomacy too.

Examples of bird courtship: http://ladywildlife.com/animal/birdcourtship.html

Examples of international courtship diplomacy - see tomorrow's headline!

lchic - 03:56am Jan 16, 2003 EST (# 7699 of 7706)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Hollywood have been presenting this courtship to us for decades ... choreographing 'those glorious feelings' .... 'making people happy again' ...

http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/singing/essay/sequence_structure.html

http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/singing/essay/6_the_dance.html

commondata - 04:05am Jan 16, 2003 EST (# 7700 of 7706)

http://www.brojon.org/frontpage/bj0202.html

The new output power [of HAARP] is nearly 8 times the old power output in the old FDP mode. This accounts for the greatly increased signal reception throughout the world even during the daytime. And after the construction is completed for the final FIRI mode with the power rising to 462 MW, the signal will probably be easily heard on such “receivers” as left lower fillings. This may account for the “Official HAARP” denial of “It wasn’t us. We don’t exist. And if we did exist, we won’t do it again.”

And like your beloved MD system, Gisterme, it's modular and there are no real practical or political limits on its eventual power:

The HAARP transmitter facility was designed to be built in a modular fashion with additional transmitters and their associated beam antennas simply being added on in rows and columns in a large array of antennas to increase the total output power in various stages.

And if you're so convinced of the impossibility of militarily useful resonance or lensing effects, what would your reaction be to NK or Iraq building one?

(6 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense