Re: Jane's on Naval `electric weapons'

From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Mon Jun 23 2003 - 19:06:41 MDT

  • Next message: Olga Bourlin: "Warning: Ilk Crossing"

    --- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@yahoo.com> wrote:
    > Are you assuming that there will be some nation
    > capable of catching up
    > with US military technological progress? This flies
    > in the face of
    > Moore's Law and what we know about technological
    > singularities.

    Only if the US does not become lazy - redirecting
    research funding to bread and circuses - as prior
    military powers with similar leads have done.
    Granted, it would have to become lazy enough to stall
    the relevant portion of its present singularity, but
    that is not totally inconceivable.

    > In which case, the
    > enemy would have to develop anti-satellite
    > capabilities far greater
    > than just a small bullet-to-bullet technology. You'd
    > have to take out
    > an entire mirror array, which would require a rather
    > large explosion,
    > perhaps a nuke in space.

    Or just launch enough anti-satellite rockets. Once
    you've got the basic prototype working, unit cost goes
    down as volume goes up; it is nowhere near, say, 100
    times as expensive to launch 100 almost idential
    rockets as to launch 1. Or just build a laser more
    powerful than the mirror can reflect: every mirror
    has imperfections, and can only reflect so much light
    before absorbing some of it.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 23 2003 - 19:17:43 MDT