Warfare at the Speed of Light 561
unassimilatible writes "From the They Said It Couldn't Be Done Dept., the Oakland Tribune reports that the Lawrence Livermore Labratory is ensuring that the Pentagon, inside of a decade, could be armed with a beam weapon that is near-instantaneous, gravity-free and truly surgical, focusing to such hair-splitting accuracy that it could avoid civilians while predetonating munitions miles away - perhaps someday even being mounted on Humvees."
Chinese embassy all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
This invention might lower the tragedies of war if we have the intell to discriminate accurately. It might also increase collateral damage/friendly fire if the device inspires overconfidence in those who press the trigger.
Call this flame if you will.. (Score:0, Insightful)
It may be able to miss civillians... (Score:1, Insightful)
Weapon? (Score:4, Insightful)
And yet it can't be used defensively?
How about the following quotes?
"What we're building... Is a laser for cutting through mountians (roads, mines etc.)"
"What we're building... is a laser to defend our skies, country against missles"
"What we're building... is a laser to cut underground bunkers on the moon"
"What we're building... a giant popcorn popper"
This is kind of sad, when we just exploit technology with weapons in the forefront of our minds and not research or domestic uses! I mean I know they're from the DoD, but with war on their minds, goodness knows what else they're up to.
No blinding, just killing. (Score:3, Insightful)
You know, if you take a laser pointer, and you point it at a fluffy poodle being walked by a little old lady at night, she might just get startled and scream a little bit. Not that I would know firsthand or anything...
Re:Chinese embassy all over again (Score:2, Insightful)
This reminds me of Reason (the depleted uranium chain-gun) in Snow Crash. The major problem with weapons such as Reason is the sense of invincibility they induce in their possessors (this is approximately what Stephenson said in the novel). This invincibility may be as hazardous to the ones possessing the weapons or technology (and to those around them) as to others on the potential receiving end. If all of the people in the chain of command using the weapon have sufficient intelligence and judgment, weapons like this are very useful; unfortunately, if that is not the case, then misguided or stupid people have the power, as the phrase goes, to make big, lethal mistakes at the speed of light.
It is good to have technology like this, but the intelligence to use technology and people effectively and wisely is a far greater strategic weapon.
We'd Throw Rocks, If Necessary (Score:5, Insightful)
War won't diappear if we're afraid to use new tools. People will throw rocks at each other if they have nothing else.
Re:No blinding, just killing. (Score:1, Insightful)
Exactly right (Score:3, Insightful)
Well one of the labs in the running is actually developing them for use in fusion, this is a side effect kinda thing, and the military paying for the weapon would help fund the research side of things. NOthing pushed forward technology like military spending
Whether we like it or not, the US spends as much on defense as the next 10-15 countries combined. Many R&D innovations start off as defense-related technologies and only later get applied to civilian problems. That's because our government is much more likely to fund research that has military uses. Other countries (e.g., Japan, Germany) are more likely to help corporations with their R&D project. Not the US.
GMD
Re:what about mirrors? (Score:3, Insightful)
The simple answer is "dust". The laser has very high energy. It hits the mirrored surface. The dust on the surface absorbs a large amount of energy very quickly. It essentially explodes, pitting the mirror surface. At this point, your mirror isn't a mirror. Game over.
The same applies for absolutely anything that can stick to or affect the surface, like skin oil or tiny scratches. This ignores the fact that you can't make a 100% reflective mirror, so it's going to heat up, and if you have enough energy you disrupt it anyway. Even a tiny fraction of a percent of inefficiency will take you to the cleaners.
That said, never say never. In the foreseeable future, it isn't a practical solution, though.
Re:what about mirrors? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Quantum Leap (Score:2, Insightful)
not bad, but (Score:2, Insightful)
2 things: relativity of simultaneity and moving targets
Any gravitational affects on the weapon beam would have affected the light coming from the target in the same fashion.
only if they are the same path (still object) and the same frequency (index of refraction is wavelength dependent)
Re:Quantum Leap (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, you are probably being facetious and my extreme boredom has driven me to type this reply.
Smoke... and mirrors (Score:2, Insightful)
This would actually be a legitimate application for "smoke and mirrors". The article did refer to problems with particulates.