From: Damien Sullivan (phoenix@ugcs.caltech.edu)
Date: Mon May 12 2003 - 15:27:33 MDT
On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 01:45:48PM -0700, Michael M. Butler wrote:
> FWIW, the above URL did not work for me. But a search at the front door of
Me neither. But
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0305062
Note upfront they do say "this is very futuristic" and
| We also note that a 1000 TeV machine requires the accelerator circumference
| of the order of 1000 km with the magnets of ~ 10 Tesla which is totally
| ridiculous.
A cynic might view the whole thing as a bid for more neutrino research
funding.
> (they guesstimate a monetary cost of 100 billion dollars for the beam
> machine and a power expended of 50 gigawatts for many seconds per bomb).
> would make easier (sitting) targets. You could conceivably also degrade a
> standing inventory of yellowcake if you thought it was worth the effort
Yellowcake?
> I swear I am not making this up: The writers promote a world government
> *and* claim that this device would not be used as a weapon because it would
> cost too much.
Whereas I think the US could easily spend $100 bn on a proven nukebuster.
But how do you aim it with 1m accuracy? And submarines have got to move
faster than 1m/second, which makes them immune, assuming you can find them,
which is pretty questionable in itself.
> So the entire scenario would seem to be: some centralized authority has
> control of the beam machine and its power supply, something like a GIS-
> coded map of all the authorized concentrations of fissionables, the ability
> and will to remotely probe elsewhere with the beam plus the ability to
> decode resultant fission product signatures from any place on Earth, and
> the ability and will to fry any unexepected concentrations--unless they
> just feel like frying people. Oh, heck, we have the power budgeted already,
> let's just scan the whole Earth once a year. Good training for the boys.
>
> Gee, I want *that* job. </sarcasm>
Hey, it's the Peace Authority!
More realistically, the US could use it to zap 3rd world proliferation bombs,
without threatening Russian subs. I assume the Russians have SLBMs. (Haven't
seen that acronym in a long time!) Unless they build it first and mess up our
reactors. Oh wait, $100 billion. Never mind.
*More* realistically, the whole thing is a fizzle.
-xx- Damien X-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 12 2003 - 15:39:09 MDT