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 - 03:46pm Oct 4, 2003 EST (# 14301 of 14305)
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.

Here's a book that makes an only partly tongue-in-cheek effort to provide common culture.

AN INCOMPLETE EDUCATION by Judy Jones and William Wilson Ballantine Books, NY 1987

On the front dust jacket:

From Freud to Floating Currencies . . Job to Jasper Johns . . . Opera Etiquette to Party Politics . . Plato's Cave to Planck's Constant . . . Einstein to Gertrude Stein . . Twelth Night to Twelve Tone Theory . . . Nicaragua to Nanook of the North . . . Half-Life to Afterlife PLUS How to tell Keats from Shelley

The front inside dust jacket includes this:

Become the Renaissance man or woman you always knew you could be.

. . .

Celebrate An Incomplete Education . Ten years in the making, it brings you ten thousand years of cuture with wit, style, and sophistication.

For four days now, I've been trying to respond - in an organized way - to key questions that Cantabb may have - that I think people ought to have:

I promised to do a technical posting - on the connection of latent semantic analysis - statisitics - logic - and schema - and the importance of loop tests.

Yesterday - I took incomplete work product that was part of that effort - and posted it 14266-71 - mostly as an effort to break away from the board - and concentrate on thetechnical posting - on the connection of latent semantic analysis - statisitics - logic - and schema - and the importance of loop tests that I'd promised to produce. It cited pieces that I believe an editor of the NYT would respect - that are not subject to the objections I understand from Cantabb - results that don't "go round and round" - but are focused, finished products - within a format. Here they are.

A Solution to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction and Representation of Knowledge by Thomas K. Landauer and Susan Dumais http://lsi.argreenhouse.com/lsi/papers/PSYCHREV96.html

ELDER BUSH IN BIG G.O.P. CAST TOILING FOR TOP EQUITY FIRM http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/05/politics/05CARL.html

In Virginia, Young Conservatives Learn How to Develop and Use Their Political Voices by Blaine Harden http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/11/politics/11CONS.html

FAREWELL ADDRESS of President Dwight D. Eisenhower January 17, 1961. http://www.geocities.com/~newgeneration/ikefw.htm

ARMED TO EXCESS by Bob Kerrey http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/02/opinion/02KERR.html

Dead Men Talking by LAWRENCE OSBORNE http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20001203mag-osborne.html

The Democratic Party's Southern Problem by Senator Zell Miller http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/04/opinion/04MILL.html

In the Storage Race, Will Consumers Win? by MICHEL MARRIOTT http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/05/technology/05STORR.html

Laser Project Hits a Snag; Court Hints At Conflict by JAMES GLANZ http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/30/science/30NIF.html

Cantabb objected to the illustration of multiple citation to these pieces. But I hope we agree that the pieces themselves are - focused - they do not "chase their tails." I think we have more to learn about how such focus comes into existence - and think we can learn more directly - proceeding along the lines of this thread. Cantabb doubts that. The issue involves convergence - and some questions about how dialog works that have been discussed - pretty steadily - for 2500 years. We now have new tools - and I think useful answers are within sight. Cantabb disagrees.

But I hope we do agree on the quality of the articles cited just above -in themselves.

cantabb - 03:46pm Oct 4, 2003 EST (# 14302 of 14305)

lchic - 03:03pm Oct 4, 2003 EST (# 14296 of 14297) ~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

The afore mentioned writer made the assertion (additional to Shakespeare being Captain of teams of teams) that 'Language is where we live' and that 'we live in a SWIRL of language'

Suggests:

the 'bi-lingual' enjoy dual residency; implies a need for acculuralisation to make 'outsiders' integral to the group; begs understanding and digestion of the language of an issue such as Missile Defense And yet, MD is a zone shunned and deflected by cultures generally - as indicated by: few songs stories plays films limited information regularly available to reader MD doesn't feature in general conversation the negative aspects (fallout) of defense are ignored the clean-ups of past war are NOT priority The swirl of language with respect to MD is patchy and limited, perhaps a flurry here and there - it's pushed aside rather than taken on board. Perhaps the human brain is protecting itself from overload.

Posts don't suddenly become relevant and on-topic, just because you include the words (Missile Defense) or the abbreviation (MD).

This post just one more example !

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense