New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Nazi engineer and Disney space advisor Wernher Von Braun helped give us rocket science. Today, the legacy of military aeronautics has many manifestations from SDI to advanced ballistic missiles. Now there is a controversial push for a new missile defense system. What will be the role of missile defense in the new geopolitical climate and in the new scientific era?

rshowalter - 05:53pm Jan 28, 2001 EST (#621 of 636)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The earth is a leaky capacitor -- and a lousy, inconvenient one, with high dissipation and resistance, if you're trying to move energy in or out. Rock and dirt have such high resistance, that getting usefully concentrated power though them would be very difficult, even if it were thermodynamically possible.

I could take some time, go to a thermo text, and show that the availability was 0, or trivially small in terms of what would need to get USEFULLY CONCENTRATED energy from "the earth as a capacitor." But talking to you, that would seem to be a wast of time.

What does this have to do with Missile Defense? Are you suggesting that all these years, all these scientists and engineers working on nuclear energy, or fusion, or squeezing the last tenth of a percent of efficiency out of electric generation systems, have been missing something big, that Tesla got to be hugely successful by accident, and then abandoned?

On the one side, you and dirac are saying that technical people are miracle workers, who can, in secret, perform feats far beyond anything anybody has done in a verifiable manner.

But at almost the same time, technical people are dolts, in another way.

You say these same technical people have missed a huge, easily tapped energy source?

I don't have any reason to believe that technical people are either that good, or that bad.

mhunter20 - 09:55am Jan 29, 2001 EST (#622 of 636)

rshowalter 1/28/01 5:53pm

The earth is a leaky capacitor -- and a lousy, inconvenient one, with high dissipation and resistance, if you're trying to move energy in or out. Rock and dirt have such high resistance, that getting usefully concentrated power though them would be very difficult, even if it were thermodynamically possible.

In his "World System", Tesla did not comtemplate beaming power through the Earth. He contemplated the transformation of naturally occurring currents of extremely low frequency into horizontal surface currents.

The surface currents that Tesla contemplated will not reach the ionosphere due to the high resistance of the atmosphere, a desirable feature of the Earth capacitor. Rock and dirt offer practically no resistance to electrical currents of extremely low frequency.

All capacitors leak. Most forms of lightning do not reach the ionosphere and are not evidence of leakage in the Earth capacitor. The leakage of the Earth capacitor occurs during Auroral events. If the energy of an Auroral event lasting several hours could be stored, then, if I remember correctly, this energy would supply current US energy demand for 7 years.

But talking to you, that would seem to be a waste of time.

I posted a link related to the thermodynamics issue. I have taken thermodynamics courses in college. I will read whatever you post on this issue.

Are you suggesting that all these years, all these scientists and engineers working on nuclear energy, or fusion, or squeezing the last tenth of a percent of efficiency out of electric generation systems, have been missing something big, that Tesla got to be hugely successful by accident, and then abandoned?

There was nothing accidental about Tesla's successful demonstration of the magnifying transmitter. He was highly motivated in working toward world peace and believed that an abundant supply of energy would help toward that goal. The device at Shoreham, NY was dismantled by court order; Tesla did not have a source of funding.

Necessity is the mother of invention. Tesla invented radar but the government, advised by Thomas Edison, rejected research into radar until the onset of WWII when the MIT rad-lab began working very hard building devices to enable us to win WWII.

What does this have to do with Missile Defense?

That's what I am trying to figure out and I will offer my opinions later. Apparently, Tesla demonstrated that this huge source of power can be used as a weapon.

rshowalter - 01:18pm Jan 29, 2001 EST (#623 of 636)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Apparent to whom?

mhunter20 - 01:39pm Jan 29, 2001 EST (#624 of 636)

rshowalter 1/29/01 1:18pm

Based on a link I previously posted, Tesla believed that he created a weapon responsible for the Tunguska event and sent a letter to the government about the possible use of the weapon during WWII.

rshowalter - 08:48pm Jan 29, 2001 EST (#625 of 636)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Not even Tesla had a perfect batting average.

Look, it is hard to hit targets even when you're aiming at them, and trying hard, and there are ususlly an unthinkably large number of inconvenient details that have to be tended to to make anything WORK.

Blow up a huge forest on the other side of the world BY ACCIDENT ?

The world isn't that easy. And because it isn't easy, VERY hard jobs, like missile defense, may be, as a practical matter, impossible.

(11 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense