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.

rshow55 - 12:14am Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12775 of 12783)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Movie people have a lot of influence - and a lot of sophistication. Last year, I wrote this:

1228 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.uKPyb4a9lNo.0@.f28e622/1572

"I've been looking at the question -- how would you really get an unlimited supply of solar energy - in technical terms, the basic ways forward are clear - but actually doing it is much less clear.

"How would you make a fully believable, interesting movie about doing this job?

"By the time the movie was done, if the job was actually technically realistic -- people would know a lot about how, in enough detail to raise the organizational, financial, and political resources needed to do the job.

"In fact, getting a business proposal good enough for the job, and getting the movie done -- share a lot of elements -- and might be done in parallel.

1229 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.uKPyb4a9lNo.0@.f28e622/1574

"When political leaders approach problems that are more important, and basically harder, these days - the approaches are very often stumped because patterns of socio-technical function are much less advanced than movie-making takes.

That's true of technical problems, too. For two reasons, at least:

1. Movies are at roughly the level of complexity actually involved.

and

2. Movies have to make emotional and aesthetic sense and everything else people do that works well has to make emotional and aesthetic sense, too.

. . .

Gisterme , I've written a good deal since I wrote that "I've taken some time to block out a "briefing" that I'd like to give, not necessarily to gisterme , but to a real high-shot (say, the President, or the head of a movie studio). " 12717 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.uKPyb4a9lNo.0@.f28e622/14385

And I've responded to some of your questions. But not to all your comments and questions, and I hope to get to more of them tomorrow.

Including some things about global warming, about my background, and about education where you, gisterme have made comments I've wanted to respond to, but haven't yet.

gisterme - 12:58am Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12776 of 12783)

"..."When political leaders approach problems that are more important, and basically harder, these days - the approaches are very often stumped because patterns of socio-technical function are much less advanced than movie-making takes.

Huh? Robert, I have to argue that its easier to present a fantasy movie depicting a reality that doesn't exist than it is to make the same fantasy become reality.

"...That's true of technical problems, too....

It is?

"...For two reasons, at least:

1. Movies are at roughly the level of complexity actually involved. and..."

Complexity involved in what, Robert? If you mean making a movie is as complex as making a movie then the statement is trivial. If you mean making a movie about a star ship is as complex as making a star ship I'd say you're off your nut. Which is it?

"...2. Movies have to make emotional and aesthetic sense

They do? I hadn't noticed that. "Have to" covers a pretty broad scope, Robert.

"...and everything else people do that works well has to make emotional and aesthetic sense, too.

To whom and why? I'd say that that's a nice place to want to be but once again, "have to" is a very large net.

bbbuck - 01:06am Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12777 of 12783)

I love it when gisterme argues with robert.

Not many bother any more.

I just skipped 169 posts. That's more than 'human origins' for god's(can you say that?) sake.

Did anyone mention me?

lchic - 03:06am Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12778 of 12783)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

The by-product, end product, waste product of the varied 'energy' potentials are :