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.

wrcooper - 12:41pm Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8117 of 8122)

CUT OFF - CONCLUDED

In re: commondata - 11:55am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8110)

OK, I've read a little more wrcooper and a little more Johnson, and I'll concede a similarity of style. He likes rshow's map vs. territory metaphor as set out here:

http://www.mrshowalter.net/bhmath/

Whoa, horsey. Don’t let them twist you, too! :) But if you think my writing is reminiscent of that of such a fine professional wordsmith, I guess I have to take as unintended flattery.

commondata - 12:49pm Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8118 of 8122)

That's good enough for me, wrcooper; thanks for setting the record straight. It's sometimes difficult to tell the map from the territory around here.

rshow55 - 01:34pm Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8119 of 8122)
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.

The way to check a map's internal consistency is with crosschecking. Loop tests - that go "round and round" work for that - if they show consistencies - and inconsitencies are checked.

The way - the only way - to check the fit between a map and a territory is to check the territory itself - by a process of physical matching feature by feature between representation ("map") and the thing that is supposedly being represented ("territory").

On this thread - and many times where the media are involved - the rule seems to be nobody checks . That way, any lie at all can be told.

If anybody wants - there's a lot of material from Cooper - including a lot that was deleted - at a time that can be checked from this thread - and records done at definite - reconstructable times - and the deleted results are very strongly consistent with the George Johnson hypothesis.

When it matters enough - it should be morally forcing to actually check real territories - not just the maps of them - by a process of physical matching between what the map predicts - and what is there.

If that convention were established - and it was an essential purpose of the Paradigm Shift .... whose getting there? http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/0

Here are some references, to the Riley-Showalter paradigm thread, Paradigm Shift .... whose getting there? . . that I think describes, in a new and clearer way, how paradigm conflict works. I set them out on this thread in rshow55 - 05:34pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#116

306-310: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/360

313-317: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/367

166-167: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/209

" In our interactions, both Russians, and Americans, and others, can have perceptual difficulties that resemble paradigm conflict impasses -- and they can occur, for different reasons, on all sides of a controversy -- so that everybody misunderstands a great deal (and misunderstandings don't match.) I think that is the case on crucial issues involving our military balances, and especially regarding our nuclear balances. I think it is an issue involved very often when things go badly between us. Made worse, whenever deception also occurs. These same things apply to some key problems we have with the Islamic states.

Here are more links to the "paradigm" thread" -- of lower priority, but perhaps useful:

26: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/33

93-95: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/118

215-217: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/259

221-222: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/265

261-262: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/310

273-274: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/324

and something for academic folk: 295-297: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/349

One point about such problems is basic.

When a lot of change is necessary it takes a lot of feedback -- and the information being fed back into the situation had better be understood, and better be true.

gisterme - 01:38pm Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8120 of 8122)

"...It's sometimes difficult to tell the map from the territory around here."

I've noticed the same thing myself, commondata.

I don't know who Showalter thought I was before the Bush administration came to office but shortly thereafter he began to think I was National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice. Now he thinks I'm President of the United States! Wow. I've had a nice promotion and a sex change in just a couple of years! What a career I'm having! :-)

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense