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 - 03:20pm Jan 17, 2003 EST (# 7749 of 7755)
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.

Not so funny - but a key form of oscillatory solution - switching from + to -

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/s765381.htm http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/s765381.htm http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/s765381.htm http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/s765381.htm http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/s765381.htm

Among the birds, every form of oscillatory solution that exists is on display - and results are well documented. All such solutions require calibration and at any given time clarity - though answers may alternate in alternating sequences. Using these sequences, birds can adapt to anything that they "have to" and "possibly can" in an evolutionary sense.

So can we.

Oscillatory solutions are necesssary - they must be calibrated - and it can be done step by step.

Everything that matters enough can be accomodated - and many, many, many of the solutions are beautiful where they fit but of limited flexibility.

Small changes can have big consequences - usually bad ones - but sometimes good ones - as when a behavioral change among red tailed hawks opened up NYC as a habitat.

The behavioral mutations that can work and be stable in the world today are - so far as I've been able to check - all oscillatory solutions. And there are limitations to what one can do - but we can do a lot better than we've been doing.

You need alternating signs in some sequences - you need clarity at any given time (even if, "on average" you have contradiction) - - and context matters. Every time, in every context, issues of order, symmetry, and harmony matter for stability - and they exist in a context (and a series of contexts) so that the criteria have to be applied again and again and again - taking different priorities. The question "what happens to the children?" is a VERY good test. If we ask that question, now - much lower incidence of agony and death from war is attainable soon - and much more comfortable human circumstances.

Whether you happen to believe in God or not, we are animals - superb ones, but astonishingly screwed up ones, as well, by a lot of animal standards - ensembles of behavioral and physical mutations. To do much better than we're doing, some essentially mathematical points have to be understood. I don't think any God imaginable could change that.

It is no accident - but I think if people read the board - they know enough already.

Am I a mutation? In the behavioral sense, I'm sure of that - and I've worked hard making the behavioral mutation involved workable. A lot of people, including Casey, have wanted that.

Pardon me for moving slowly. Nobody much wants to be thought of as a freak - because of what animals do to freaks, once they spot them. I think I'm doing good stuff, myself, and feel I'm well rounded by a lot of high standards, though I'm specialized in spots.

lchic - 03:24pm Jan 17, 2003 EST (# 7750 of 7755)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

October FTAA summit

Free Trade Area of the Americas

http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&newwindow=1&q=October+FTAA+summit&btnG=Google+Search

rshow55 - 03:26pm Jan 17, 2003 EST (# 7751 of 7755)
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.

People, even people so sophisticated that they work for the New York Times, seem have accused me of something freakish - having a fundamental defect, a fundamental deficiency, in my fear responses. I think this is most unjust.

I'm afraid, consciously afraid, intensely afraid, a lot of the time. I don't deny it.

People are supposed to face the things that are real that they have to fear. I've had on choice, personally, but to "get in the habit" of doing so.

One can make excuses, or give praise, but it is a fact that I've been fighting for a long time, working at it, and so did my parents and theirs. And I'm a damn good animal, from a long line of very good animals. Pretty smart, too, within the human limits. Maybe above average. Perhaps by five standard deviations - good, but not so very good, considering.

lchic - 03:31pm Jan 17, 2003 EST (# 7752 of 7755)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

... what ?

:)

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense