Slashdot Mirror
E-Bombs: Technology Update
vaderhelmet writes "'In these media-fueled times, when war is a television spectacle and wiping out large numbers of civilians is generally frowned upon, the perfect weapon would literally stop an enemy in his tracks, yet harm neither hide nor hair. Such a weapon might shut down telecommunications networks, disrupt power supplies, and fry an adversary's countless computers and electronic gadgets, yet still leave buildings, bridges, and highways intact. It would strike with precision, in an instant, and leave behind no trace of where it came from.' (Story from IEEE Spectrum Online)"
i-surrender!
Just reading the story made my teeth tingle.
"Most types of matter are transparent to microwaves, but metallic conductors . . . strongly absorb them, which in turn heats the material."Maybe somebody with better physics can help me out here, but I think I'd rather be shot than have all my fillings melt.
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
It would strick with precision, in an instant, and leave behind no trace of where it came from.' (Story from IEEE Spectrum Online)"
That's why they didn't have any EMPs at Zion - they were still waiting for IEEE Compliancy.
The government's moral compass is controlled by GPS.
In times of crises, they alter it to suit their needs.
Ever seen a rat after 15s in a microwave?
Yeah, the batter gets all mushy. They're better deep fried.
Trolling is a art,
High Technology always loses! Hasn't anyone ever seen Stargate? Camel-riding nomads will always destroy their teched-out overlords!
+1 Insightful, -1 Troll. What can I say, I'm an Insightful Troll.
Believe it or not, most modern pacemakers are fairly well shielded against EMP. Most of the problems that were had with people being near microwaves, etc. were with older designs of pacemakers. They have to put the warning signs on microwaves because you never know who has an old pacemaker. However, the amount of old (unipolar lead) pacemakers still around is rather small. Any EMP which damages the new designs is going to make every muscle in your body twitch, and do heart damage to those without pacemakers too.
I'm afraid I don't have a link, but I could refer you to the Report of Task Group 34, from the American Association or Physicists in Medicine, section IV. Don't ask why I have that paper lying around my office - it's a long story. The basic gist is, pacemakers are already encased in a Faraday cage.
The military must prepare for The Next Enemy, whomever that may be. That's how you stay ahead of the curve and assured your not blindsided by something (say Sputnik and the possibility of living under a Commie Moon). Most nations out there have a varied mix of irregular and regular land, sea, and air branches. Predicting their national government, culture and outlook (and their possible hostility towards us and our friends) 40 years into the future is the domain of the State Department and think tanks.
So, yeah, an e-bomb might just gather dust... now. But in 10 years when it's in production? 20? Back in 1983 could anyone here predict the path of events that lead us to now?
Politicians start wars. Armies finish them. The military is just preparing for any contigency our governments decide to point and click them towards.
What is music when you despise all sound?
I wonder what sort of effect this would have on our lives if one just "accidently" gets dropped on the Microsoft campus? Hmmm.
Wow, 'The perfect weapon kills all of your enemies' reads like the logic of an 18-year-old. Since I turned 18, I've learned:
Injuries are preferred in combat: Kill an opposing combatant, and you take one enemy out of combat; wound him and you take out two or three people (to carry him, provide medical support, etc.). Plus, screaming comrades are a lot more demoralizing and distracting than dead ones.
Most combatants are not eager and hateful. They're conscripts or patriotic supporters of their government. When governments say the fighting should stop, they're happier alive than dead, and within decades most citizens can reconcile the deepest of rifts with former enemies, if their leadership doesn't continue to incite animosity.
In that vein, a man wounded in combat will reconcile, generally. His kids will, too. Kill him, and they'll never forget and are somewhat less likely to forgive.
Most importantly, your argument is hugely simplistic. Ignoring the lack of a pure litmus test that allows you tell the difference between friendlies and enemies, you can't kill *EVERYONE*. There's always a compassionate bystander. Kill a man, his family resents you. Kill a town, and you piss off a lot of friends and relatives. Kill all Iraqis and you just piss off all of the other arab nations. Kill off all the arabs, and muslims worldwide will hold a deep grudge. Once the damage exceeds the personal level, the circle of influence grows.
Sorry for the ad-homenim about you sounding like an 18-yr-old, but you got rated as insightful. Nothing could be further from the truth.