Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Satellite Plan Could Knock Out GPS and Radio

Audent writes "Otago University researchers are concerned by U.S. plans to protect satellites from solar storms... "The approach, which is being considered by the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, involves using very low frequency radio waves to flush particles from belts and dump them into the upper atmosphere over either one or several days". The plan could disrupt GPS signals and high frequency radio over the Pacific for up to a week. "The disruptions result from a deluge of dumped charged particles temporarily changing the ionosphere from a "mirror" that bounces high frequency radio waves around the planet to a "sponge" that soaks them up.""

152 comments

  1. so what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Yes and a solar storm could disrupt them forever.

    1. Re:so what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You hit the nail on the head. Reading further into the story we see the true agenda:

      "However, the case for using the system to mitigate the lesser risk to satellites from charged particles injected by naturally-occurring solar storms needs to be considered more closely."
      Are these the same people that think that naturally occurring radiation is less harmful than manmade radiation? Is anything natural OK for these people?

      Wake up! Supernovas and comet impacts are natural as well, but that doesn't make them good for humans!
    2. Re:so what? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Are these the same people that think that naturally occurring radiation is less harmful than manmade radiation? Is anything natural OK for these people?

      They probably think that a Damnation Alley scenario is A-OK as well. It would eliminate a lot of those pesky blue states.

  2. hmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I wonder if they are going to emply "Sharks with fricking laser-beams" on this one...

    1. Re:hmmm.... by notaspunkymonkey · · Score: 1

      They could use my sponge - its in the shape of a foot and is blue

    2. Re:hmmm.... by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, but they'll not do it if we pay them one...MILLION...dollars...

      --


      This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
    3. Re:hmmm.... by tobiasly · · Score: 1

      I dunno, but this talk of "mirrors" and "sponges" has me really confused. I wish they would describe it in simpler terms, such as trucks and tubes.

  3. Toilet habits by krell · · Score: 2, Funny

    "flush particles from belts and dump them "

    Isn't the dump supposed to come first?

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:Toilet habits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if you want to show off what you've accomplished.

    2. Re:Toilet habits by pisces22 · · Score: 1
      Isn't the dump supposed to come first?


      I'd take the belt off first.
    3. Re:Toilet habits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ayn Rand is to philosophy what Karl Marx is to philosophy, two extremes, both wrong.

    4. Re:Toilet habits by krell · · Score: 1

      "Ayn Rand is to philosophy what Karl Marx is to philosophy, two extremes, both wrong"

      True, but Rand and her followers are "mostly harmless". In comparison, Marxism directly influenced and justified the actions of most of the worst killers in human history. There would have been no "Killing Fields" if Pol Pot had read "Fountainhead" instead of "Das Kapital". The extremism of the selfish hermit has much less potential to damage than the extremism of the megalomaniac.

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
  4. Sounds like job preservation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone's stretching really, really hard to justify the budget for Jim Creek and the other VLF submarine radio stations.

  5. But what if by MECC · · Score: 4, Funny

    But what if we reversed the polarity of the particle beam, and then redirected the emissions harmlessly into space - like deflating a balloon. We'd just need 30 minutes to recharge the anti-matter particle deflector grid.

    --
    "We are all geniuses when we dream"
    - E.M. Cioran
    1. Re:But what if by Cait+Sith · · Score: 2, Funny

      Geordie, that just might work. Make it so.

    2. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'd just need 30 minutes to recharge the anti-matter particle deflector grid.

      Scotty could have done it in 10. While sustaining warp 9.

    3. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Leela: I didn't want to leave them either Fry but what are we supposed to do?
      Fry: Well, usually on the show someone would come up with a complicated plan then explain it with a simple analogy.
      Leela: Hmm. If we can reroute engine power through the primary weapons and reconfigure them to Melllvar's frequency that should overload his electro-quantum structure.
      Bender: Like putting too much air in a ballon!

      Leela: It's not working. He's drawing straight from our weapons.
      Fry: Like a balloon when ...something bad happens.

    4. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Scotty could have done it in 10, but he would always say that it would take 30! And he would never guarantee anything greater than Warp 2.

      Everyone likes to pretend that Scotty was some genius engineer. The only thing about him that could be classified as genius was his ability to lie to the captain. Considering that Kirk was in command I don't blame him. Kirk wasn't well known for his ability to ferret out lies from crewmembers. But Scotty wasn't the worst liar. It was Bones! He was always saying "He's dead Jim!" because he never completed medical school and didn't have a clue. But in reality, most of his patients were just unconcious and would recover fine--until he finished the job later.

    5. Re:But what if by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      But he'd have told the captain it would take 30 minutes.

    6. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That doesn't sound like a TNG explanation to me. The analogy of deflating a baloon screams voyager to me.

    7. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up Wes... Oops. Sorry, wrong guy.

    8. Re:But what if by warkda+rrior · · Score: 1

      And you have only 15 minutes.

      --
      You need to install an RTFM interface.
    9. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But what if we reversed the polarity of the particle beam"

      Cross the streams?! I thought you said that was "bad"

    10. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you sent a graviton pulse along a second carrier wave, it should work!

    11. Re:But what if by ATMD · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's from Futurama, isn't it?

      --
      Nobody else has this sig.
    12. Re:But what if by hunterx11 · · Score: 1

      You're going to need a positronic phase inverter to make it work.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
  6. I'm sure they've thought of it by andrewman327 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Why would the USAF jam its own military signals? A friend who flies Blackhawks says the worst part of training was then they shut down the GPS receiver and made him navigate on the fly, so to speak. It's not like we have any military presence aroundin the Pacific or anything.


    Not surprisingly, this plan does not appear to be in any stage of implementation. From TFA: "The US Air Force and the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) have proposed using very low frequency radio waves to flush particles from radiation 'belts' above Earth and dump them into the upper atmosphere over either one or several days."


    My guess is that this is an emergency countermeasure in the event of a nuclear strike. Also from TFA: "If the intense radiation belts resulted from a rogue state detonating a nuclear-tipped missile in the upper atmosphere, using such remediation technology would probably be acceptable to the international community."

    I hate to inform everyone, but the sky is not falling. At least not yet (always keep your towels handy in case it does).

    --
    Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    1. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1
      Why would the USAF jam its own military signals?
      So they don't see the Goa'uld and Ori fleets.
      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    2. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would the USAF jam its own military signals?
       
      .

      Because they have another means of comunicating that they're not letting on? Like Gamma ray transmition... Maybe. And to prove to folks that it can survive such an attack by others. Or spoof it as a bluff, for misinformation purposes. Or because they're intensly stupid. Like REALLY stupid (your friend excluded of course).
       
      JOKE BTW.

    3. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by carn1fex · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Exactly, I hate it when these sort of things hit the news. The government has all sorts of wacky proposals coming into it all the time. I review technology proposals for a particular agency and you wouldn't believe the wacky stuff that comes down the pipe. But they're just that, proposals and most never see the light of day. When the media says "the government is considering a proposal" it means theres simply a stack of paper on my desk that I've covered in red ink and usually thrown in the shredder and I and one other person are the only people who will ever have read the thing. Anyone and everyone can submit a proposal to a government grant system, and believe me they do. There should be better secrecy regarding proposal submission so as not to impede the free flow of ideas resulting from paranoia that your idea will land on the cover of the Post and make you look like a shmuck, much like this case.

      --

      ---------

      No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.

    4. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A friend who flies Blackhawks says the worst part of training was then they shut down the GPS receiver and made him navigate on the fly, so to speak.

      wow what a bunch of big babiesw the military pilots are today.

      He cant navigate without GPS, good god.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1

      Why would the USAF jam its own military signals?

      To also disrupt ham shortwave. If the darkside wants to pull some serious machinations, they would not want news to leak.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    6. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd sure like to see some of those 'way out' proposals here for the /. community to tear to shreads... fun oh fun.

    7. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by andrewman327 · · Score: 1

      He can navigate perfectly well without GPS, thus why he passed his tests with flying colors (again with the puns, what's wrong with me today). It is just one more thing to have to think about while controlling several different flight systems at once. Military practical testing is incredibly difficult. My friend and his helo both survived their tour in Iraq so I would hardly call him a baby.

      --
      Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    8. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor him. They don't even have GPS in the planes I'm training in. All hail dead reckoning!

    9. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm just guessing that the choppers of today are just slightly more complicated than those of the old days.

    10. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You mean it didn't get shot down by the insurgent air-force?

    11. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Exactly, I hate it when these sort of things hit the news. The government has all sorts of wacky proposals coming into it all the time. I review technology proposals for a particular agency and you wouldn't believe the wacky stuff that comes down the pipe.

      Yeah, I bet! Now I'd appreciate if you could hurry through that garbage and get to my ingenious proposal to defend our northern border from a deadly Canadian Moose Blitz via electrified orphans.

      There should be better secrecy regarding proposal submission so as not to impede the free flow of ideas resulting from paranoia that your idea will land on the cover of the Post and make you look like a shmuck, much like this case.

      Which must be even worse because this would only disuade the somewhat rational and self-aware, while the true loons would be undeterred.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    12. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by andrewman327 · · Score: 1

      As talented as most ham radio operators are, I do not think that the mass media would respect that technology enough to run stories based on it. And what "machinations" would the USAF be pulling without the benefit of GPS to guide them? Localized jamming is not an unheard of concept in military operations and it would stop leaking radio reports.

      --
      Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    13. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      I hate to inform everyone, but the sky is not falling. At least not yet (always keep your towels handy in case it does).

      I always keep mine right on my head...

      **yes it's worth the karma points :p

    14. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >My guess is that this is an emergency countermeasure in the event of a nuclear strike.

      Or a jamming measure...

    15. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Schemat1c · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      wow what a bunch of big babiesw the military pilots are today.

      He cant navigate without GPS, good god.


      That's right. Back in my day we would strap a private to a kite and fly him over the enemy to drop rocks and flaming pinecones. We didn't need no confangled GPS...
      ahhhhhh.... get off my lawn!

      --

      "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
    16. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by SmokedS · · Score: 1
      There should be better secrecy regarding proposal submission so as not to impede the free flow of ideas resulting from paranoia that your idea will land on the cover of the Post and make you look like a shmuck, much like this case.

      I don't think you thought that the whole way through. Secrecy and democracy do not mix. Anything secret cannot, by it's very definition, be democratic. If the working of the leadership of a country is not transparent to it's population, then the population does not have the information necessary to cast votes based on fact. Hence that country is not a democracy.

      The risk of embarrassment seems an inconsequential inconvenience in comparison. Where do you draw the line? Should bills remain secret until they're passed in order to save the authors of failed bills from embarrassment?

      I consider any unnecessary secrecy in a democracy to be a very bad sign.
    17. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by carn1fex · · Score: 1

      Oh im definatly for open access to what the government is doing. However "what we are doing" I define as what we have actually funded. When proposals are awarded, they should, generally, be made public. But not before-hand for the reasons above.

      --

      ---------

      No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.

    18. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by hanshotfirst · · Score: 1
      My guess is that this is an emergency countermeasure in the event of a nuclear strike. Also from TFA: "If the intense radiation belts resulted from a rogue state detonating a nuclear-tipped missile in the upper atmosphere, using such remediation technology would probably be acceptable to the international community."

      I hate to inform everyone, but the sky is not falling. At least not yet (always keep your towels handy in case it does).


      Why would a rogue state go to the trouble of launching a nuke into space? My guess is Washington, NYC, LA, Prudhoe Bay, or some other ground target would be more appealing and easier to hit. Terrorists don't have to actually crash a plane to disrupt our air travel, so why would they (or a rogue state) have to take out our satellites to affect our communications? I think they are smarter than we give them credit.
      --
      Why, oh why, didn't I take the Blue Pill?
    19. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by SmokedS · · Score: 1

      Well um, that would in affect mean that the operation of your agency would be entirely opaque to the public. Only the majority of the output would be visible. If the full records of your the working of your agency are not made public the public cannot accurately judge the working of your agency. I'm still firmly of the opinion that this would effectively put your agency outside of the scope of democracy. I believe that such operational procedures should only be allowed where secrecy is imperative.

    20. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought Japan was in the Pacific. Maybe I was mistaken.

    21. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on guys..Let's not get paranoid about this..If you stop and think about the reason why they're purposing these drastic measures..You would completely endores it..
      It all has to do with the sun-spot cycle and, the next one coming up (should peak around 2011) is going to be the WORST ever. The strength of the sun's solar flare output is expected, when it impacts the Earth..To close down all communication, major power grids will have black-outs, the list goes on and on. Not to mention what effects/impact all of this massive energy will have once it strikes the satellites in orbit. You can research these effects from past records. Ham Radio Operators have studied and made use of the solar flares in the past.

    22. Re:I'm sure they've thought of it by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Now you know why Apache pilots call them Fag-Hawks pilots. ;)

      I'm not sure about Blackhawks, but Apache pilots can not use GPS as their primary navigation device. They are forced to fly by VFR chart and only use GPS for validation.

  7. Summary by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    - This is a proposed system; not one that has been approved or even designed

    - The system would protect hundreds of satellites in low earth orbit from solar storms (or high altitude nuclear detonations)

    - Depending on how the system is designed and operated, neither of which have been done yet, it COULD have deleterious effects on certain other communication systems

    - They say GPS could be affected, but they ignore the fact that GPS is critical to the US itself

    - Certainly the international community should consider implications, and nowhere is it stated or shown that the US is ignoring any obligations, considering the fact that the same possible harmful, but temporary, effects would also be felt by the US

    1. Re:Summary by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      It sounds like something that can easily cause more harm than good. Storms disrupt satellite service, but not for long that I've seen. There aren't a whole lot of publicly confirmed "deaths" of satellites by solar storm. There are a few, but I don't think it happens anywhere nearly often enough to warrant this.

      I think it's also lesson not to depend on GPS too much.

    2. Re:Summary by daveschroeder · · Score: 1

      Well, this is a DARPA proposal. DARPA's charge is to do some sometimes-outlandish research and propose unique solutions to military problems. They attempt to bridge the gap between a basic principle and a high-payoff, revolutionary application. Usually when DARPA is discussing or proposing something, it's far from anywhere near being implemented.

      Also, from TFA:

      It has been suggested that a nuclear airburst at high-altitude would significantly shorten the operational lifetime of Low Earth Orbiting satellites. Even a "small" detonation (~10-20 kilotons) occurring at altitudes of 125-300 km, could lead to the loss of 90% of all low-earth-orbit satellites within a month. In 2004 there were approximately 250 satellites operating in low-Earth orbit (LEO). These satellites fulfil a large number of roles, including communications, navigation, meteorology, military and science. In the event of a nuclear airburst at high-altitude, or an unusually intense natural injection, this large population of valuable satellites would be threatened. Due to the lifetime of the injected electrons, the manned space programme would need to be placed on hold for a year or more.

      The idea here is risk vs. payoff.

    3. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite, and seriously, if Apple was planning on doing this, they certainly wouldn't do it at the start of the Intel transition. That would make no sense, people would blame the communications failures on Tiger or Leopard.

      More likely, they'll wait until the iPhone is released and has been in production and in use for a year or more before trying to pull a stunt like this.

    4. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      University researchers. Who cares? Cry wolf too many times. You've fucked it up for all the legitimate research going on.

      Besides, the goal is to protect low earth orbit satellites. As far as this one goes, I trust the government to make sure that the bulk of the satellites will be protected, no matter what the university says...

      On the other hand, if someone like Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter were in office, I'd be worried as fuck. No one could possibly screw something up as bad as those two.

    5. Re:Summary by ArtStone · · Score: 1

      Insert obligatory Art Bell reference here.

      Hey, Art Bell moved recently to the Phillipines - which is in the Pacific. Do you think he knows something we don't?

      --
      Final 2006 "Proof of Global Warming" US Hurricane Count -> 0
  8. Discharging one's load. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, wouldn't a draining wire be better?*

    *Remember we're talking charges. The wire doesn't need to be big.

  9. TyDeeBowl! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    It's Blue, Too!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  10. Survivor: Radio Blackout by andphi · · Score: 1

    In other news, CBS has announced the new season of Survivor:
    Survivor: Radio Blackout: Landforms of Silence
    We can't say where it is or what it looks like. Jeff hasn't told us yet. All we can say is that damn La-la-la-loli-loli intro has been replaced by white noise.

  11. Umm... by salad_fingers · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can you find me now? Good.

  12. RIAA by ThePopeLayton · · Score: 4, Funny

    Whatever, I am sure this is an RIAA funded project to shut down XM radio

  13. The actual research by FleaPlus · · Score: 5, Informative

    I fished around a little and found a link for the actual research paper the article is based on. The paper itself requires a subscription, but here's the abstract:

    The atmospheric implications of radiation belt remediation

    C. J. Rodger, M. A. Clilverd, Th. Ulich, P. T. Verronen, E. Turunen, N. R. Thomson

    Abstract: High altitude nuclear explosions (HANEs) and geomagnetic storms can produce large scale injections of relativistic particles into the inner radiation belts. It is recognised that these large increases in >1 MeV trapped electron fluxes can shorten the operational lifetime of low Earth orbiting satellites, threatening a large, valuable population. Therefore, studies are being undertaken to bring about practical human control of the radiation belts, termed "Radiation Belt Remediation" (RBR). Here we consider the upper atmospheric consequences of an RBR system operating over either 1 or 10 days. The RBR-forced neutral chemistry changes, leading to NOx enhancements and Ox depletions, are significant during the timescale of the precipitation but are generally not long-lasting. The magnitudes, time-scales, and altitudes of these changes are no more significant than those observed during large solar proton events. In contrast, RBR-operation will lead to unusually intense HF blackouts for about the first half of the operation time, producing large scale disruptions to radio communication and navigation systems. While the neutral atmosphere changes are not particularly important, HF disruptions could be an important area for policy makers to consider, particularly for the remediation of natural injections.


    I'd never heard of the "radiation belt remediation" procedure that was mentioned in the article, so I dug around some more and located the following paper:

    Remediation of radiation belts using electrostatic tether structures

    Abstract: Scattering of energetic charged particles by high-voltage electrostatic tether structures may present a technically and economically viable method of rapidly remediating radiation belts caused by both natural processes and manmade events. In this paper, we describe a concept for a system of electrostatic tether structures designed to rapidly remediate an artificial radiation belt caused by a high altitude nuclear detonation. We then investigate the scaling of the system size and power requirements with the tether voltage and other design parameters. These scaling analyses indicate that a conventional single-line tether design cannot provide sufficient performance to achieve a system design that is viable. We then propose innovative multiwire tether geometry and show that this tether design can significantly improve the overall performance of the electrostatic system, enabling the requirements for total power and number of satellite systems to be reduced to levels that are both technically and economically viable.


    The slashdot submission and popular press-article (but not the research paper) engages in some fear-mongering about how the US is supposedly planning on deploying RBR, but I haven't found any sources which confirm this to actually be the case. It should probably be mentioned that DARPA funds almost everything under the sun, usually without much expectation of it actually being of practical use. I mean, this is the same DARPA that funded psychic telepathy research and mechanical elephants for the jungles of Vietnam.

    Regardless of whether or not it's practical, radiation belt remediation still seems like interesting research. It'd be a shame if fear-mongering about this being a "US plot to disrupt worldwide communications" or something resulted in funding for this research being cut off.

    1. Re:The actual research by diodeus · · Score: 1

      I bet they're doing this using HAARP. The ionosphere is now under our control. Bahahahaha....zap....oooops.

    2. Re:The actual research by russ1337 · · Score: 1
      Good info, cheers.

      I say go for it. Its not like there is anyone important living in the South Pacific: Just Hawaii, Easter Island, New Zealand, Cook Islands, Marquesas, Samoa, Society, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuamotu, Tuvalu & Wallis, Futuna islands, Caroline Islands, Marshall Islands, Mariana Islands, New Guinea, Bismarck Archipelago, Fiji, New Caledonia, the Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu.

      and I'm sure some of those names are made up too. What do they care, they probably dont even have satellite communications, or rely on HF for communication, or listening to the BBC world service on 15.220MHz for their news or anything. Its not like the planes flying between the islands need GPS. Heck they can see them on a clear day when they get close.

      Sure it might affect the ozone layer for a while, but its not like the Ozone hole over the South Pacific isnt already huge. Opening up the Ozone hole is not expected to heat the globe up a little more.

      Go for it America. We love that you mess with the world in the way that you do. It makes the world a better place. Heck, it provides us assurance that if your global 'intelligence' network and nuclear proliferation polices dont work, and should someone actually aim their nuke for the upper atmosphere, we will all be saved from the resulting temporay loss of HF communications and GPS..... Yay, America, Thanks.

    3. Re:The actual research by paralaxcreations · · Score: 1

      You forgot the Hanso Foundation's electromagnetic research facility.

    4. Re:The actual research by mike2R · · Score: 1
      Opening up the Ozone hole is not expected to heat the globe up a little more.
      Not only is it not expected, it has never even been sugested.
      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    5. Re:The actual research by russ1337 · · Score: 1
      fair comment. The last paragraph of the article said "ozone depletion would be short-lived" and I figured that it would have an effect on global warming, but our prime /. reference (Wikipedia) states:
      Ozone depletion represents a radiative forcing of the climate system. There are two opposed effects: reduced ozone allows more solar radiation to penetrate, thus warming the troposphere. But a colder stratosphere emits less long-wave radiation, tending to cool the troposphere. Overall, the cooling dominates
      and
      ozone layer depletion is expected to increase surface UVB levels, which could lead to damage, including increases in skin cancer.
      So yeah, no global warming, just more cancer. Sorry for the mistake. You can go ahead with your testing now. so thanks for setting me straight. BTW I look foward to the Cancer.
  14. One... BILLION... Dollars! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... in payment from the UN, or else we'll carry out our dastardly plan to dump the radiation belts into the atmosphere!

    (Man, this is so much cooler than that shark / laser beam idea...)

    Muhahaha!

    1. Re:One... BILLION... Dollars! by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

      (Man, this is so much cooler than that shark / laser beam idea...)

      I don't know. Currently, you and the 'shark/laser idea' are tied with a score of three.

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
    2. Re:One... BILLION... Dollars! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, you think being Evil is a matter for voting?

      (Presses button on arm of conference chair to eject thoughtlover into the waiting pool of sharks with laser beams)

      Besides, Virtucon stock has been doing very well. There's no reason we can't afford to do both.

  15. How? by Lazarian · · Score: 1
    Unless I missed it, neither article outlined how the States would accomplish this. The only thing that comes to mind would be research done with http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/HAARP.

    It doesn't seem surprising that they're considering measures like this to protect satellites, considering nutbag states like North Korea and their fondness for testing missiles (Oops! tee hee, we didnt mean to do that to your satellites). Even if there was a massive solar storm that threatened low-orbiting sats instead of an act of malice, it might be preferable to disrupt communication and navigation for a couple weeks than potentially lose hundreds of billions in satellite infrastructure.

    1. Re:How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the studies involve the lower radiation belt, not the ionosphere, and require putting something inside the belt: gas, electrified wire, or radio transmitters. At least the ionosphere is a little easier to reach, but if someone fires a ground-tethered wire up there I wouldn't want to be near that lightning bolt.

  16. Article mirror by Ankur+Dave · · Score: 0
  17. The next step by amightywind · · Score: 1
    The approach, which is being considered by the US Air Force and the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, involves using very low frequency radio waves to flush particles from belts and dump them into the upper atmosphere over either one or several days

    Flushing ions from the radiation belts is one step from focusing them on our enemies satellites.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
  18. particles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i dont give a rats ass

  19. I Sure Hope.... by SkyDude · · Score: 1

    this doesn't affect my new transporter. They were on sale a few weeks ago at Sears and it just got installed over the weekend.

    --
    == First cross river, then insult alligator.
  20. Could we please wait with the global experiments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    until we have at least one other inhabitable planet as a backup for when we mess up?

  21. But seriously by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    Why don't they send it the other way into space?

  22. Well.... by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

    How is this going to affect us Ham operators?

    One side, it says they'll use HF (well, probably MF to ELF) signals which re-attune the ionosphere to EHF absorption...

    So, which is it?

    --
    1. Re:Well.... by Dielectric · · Score: 1

      I don't think the energy at the Earth's surface will be enough to hurt your ham, but then I'm not a pig farmer so who knows?

  23. Hulk Smash by m0ok1e · · Score: 1

    Are there any plans to put astronauts into space at the same time, for some "experiments..." I think the USAF is planning to make some big green angry fly-boys. Or maybe a team of highly trained scientists will create do some fantastic research out there during the tests.

  24. Nothing to see here by Nurf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The article summary seems a little hysterical to me. It's "US plans" this and "US plans" that, combined with dark words about tampering with our environment. I am not American myself and am rather used to seeing this bias in reporting, especially in New Zealand press.

    Solar sun spot activity often disrupts HF radio communications, and amazingly the world does not end. I have been involved in an HF station that provides missionaries and farmers in central Africa with a way to communicate, and you generally live with the fact that no communications are possible much of the time. HF is just plain unreliable. If GPS and HF communications were disrupted with some advance warning, it would be inconvenient for sure, but that's about it. In exchange the world would get a much safer radiation environment for satellites and human-occupied space stations.

    So, we have a cost and a benefit. The cost isn't anything that people have had to do without before.

    Political manoeuvering and a mildly hysterical press aside, there isn't much of a story here.

    --
    ---
    1. Re:Nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Solar sun spot activity often disrupts HF radio communications, and amazingly the world does not end. I have been involved in an HF station that provides missionaries and farmers in central Africa with a way to communicate, and you generally live with the fact that no communications are possible much of the time. HF is just plain unreliable


      You obviously aren't a very experienced HF operator, or were using very poor equipment. The entire HF spectrum displays a wide variety of propogation. If one frequency isn't working, switch to another that is. It's exceedingly rare that there would be no HF band that would allow communication.

    2. Re:Nothing to see here by Nurf · · Score: 1

      Argh. I should have previewed one more time. The cost is something that people have had to do without before.

      --
      ---
    3. Re:Nothing to see here by kaffiene · · Score: 1

      Oh FFS, the Slashdot article refers to a "US Plan" as well - is Slashdot suddenly anti-American too?

      Get a grip.

    4. Re:Nothing to see here by Nurf · · Score: 1

      Um, the fact that there was even an article about something so pedestrian says something. The fact that they had to put the word "US" in front of almost every reference to the scheme says something. They told everyone it was a US plan at the beginning of the article; the redundancy was totally unnecessary.

      *shrug* And yes, there is a general bias in many world media sources. They don't even know they have it. It's just that they spend most of their time speaking to each other, and the group "center of mass" is different from that of the rest of the world, or citizens of their own country. I strongly disagree with much of the conventional wisdom within those circles, and part of the conventional wisdom is a very distorted view of the USA and Europe.

      New Zealand has its own problems. Their media is just as bad as usual, perhaps a bit worse, and they have destructive biases that come into play when talking about the environment and the USA. I am not a kiwi, but I have family there, so I'm not just making this up.

      It is reasonable to say that that article may contain no bias whatsoever. It's just more statistically likely that there is some bias. Please feel free to ignore the first paragraph of my post and read the really important bits below it.

      --
      ---
    5. Re:Nothing to see here by Nurf · · Score: 1

      There is nothing sudden about the anti-American nature of Slashdot. I think I can make a reasonable argument that Slashdot has more bad things to say about the USA than other nations:

      1) People tend to talk more about things that annoy them. Things that annoy people generate more comments, and are more likely to be accepted as articles, because increased commenting is assumed to be correlated with increased interest. Your reply to me is an example.
      2) People tend to be more annoyed about things that affect them. Typically things affect you more if they are in your country or are related to your country.
      3) Slashdot editors are (as far as I know) exclusively American. This affects which articles they will find personally interesting.
      4) There are more American slashdotters than any other nationality, by a large margin.
      5) Hence, there will be more articles and comments about things that annoy Americans, and those things will be related to the USA.

      It is unfortunate, but the absense of negative detail about other places will make many assume that the USA is worse than the other places. If those people read Slashdot a lot and comment too, this impression will be self-reinforcing.

      Hence, you will see more negative stuff about America on Slashdot than about other countries.

      The demographics of Slashdot readers implies that more readers would have bad things to say about the USA than not, even given a neutral environment, but I can't really construct a proper argument for that other than to suggest you have a look at the computer enthusiast / Internet user demographics data and draw your own conclusions.

      Generally I find many an American's contempt for his own country annoying, as it usually based on ignorance about the rest of the world.

      --
      ---
    6. Re:Nothing to see here by Nurf · · Score: 1

      The entire HF spectrum displays a wide variety of propogation. If one frequency isn't working, switch to another that is. It's exceedingly rare that there would be no HF band that would allow communication.

      You are assuming that everyone is able to use every band. If the other guy is listening on the wrong band, no amount of switching is going to help you. Also, people are limited to the bands for which they have licenses (and/or antennas). Propogation is time of day specific, sun spot activity specific, dependent on whether you are crossing the equator, dependent on geomagnetic disturbances, and dependent on the distance between the two stations. It all adds up to being not that reliable.

      Solar flares have forced en effective shutdown on most HF bands before. It happens. HF is variable enough that people don't assume they will have perfect HF connectivity. Removing HF connectivity with some advance warning (and to fix a far greater problem) shouldn't be that much of an issue. Anyone depending exclusively on 100% available HF connectivity is already asking for trouble.

      I would be surprised if the ionosphere were more affected by the proposed plan than by a really bad solar flare. It's been a really long time since I did plasma physics, but I suspect plain old UV radiation from the sun would be enough to keep some bands open.

      I wonder how both GPS and HF will be affected? If the ionosphere is not ionized enough to reflect HF, how can it stop microwaves?

      --
      ---
    7. Re:Nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In terms of media bias, a study a couple of years ago found New Zealand to be one of the top (I seem to recall it being first equal with another country) for accuracy in reporting in a study which examined global media sources.

      So I don't know where you're getting the idea that NZ media is "perhaps a bit worse" than (presumably) your own country's media.

      Interestingly, the US came near the bottom of the survey for accurate non-biased reporting.

    8. Re:Nothing to see here by ArtStone · · Score: 1

      If you had to make a regular ham contact and the propogation was wrong, you would just IM them or call them on Skype.

      Oops - there goes the justifcation for reserving bandwidth for ham radio.

      --
      Final 2006 "Proof of Global Warming" US Hurricane Count -> 0
    9. Re:Nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "suddenly anti-American"

      No, not suddenly.

    10. Re:Nothing to see here by spickus · · Score: 1

      "Oops - there goes the justifcation for reserving bandwidth for ham radio."

      No, it doesn't. Ham radio's strength is it's decentralized nature but you knew that and were just trolling.

      KI4INR

      --
      Indecision is the key to flexibility.
  25. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by gothzilla · · Score: 1

    Don't worry about the whales. Kirk will be by later to fix that problem for us.

  26. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by khallow · · Score: 1

    I guess if you're the same people killing the whales, then dumping little-understood materials into the little-understood upper atmosphere is a smart business decision.

    Destroying the fragile ecosystem of the little-understood upper atmosphere in the process? It's PERFECT.

    More seriously, the plasma in the Van Allen belts is at space vacuum pressures. Meaning that you have densities of grams per cubic kilometer or less. Plus, the belts contain only a portion of what hits Earth's magnetic fields. A lot ends up hitting Earth's upper atmosphere. So we're talking miniscule amounts of physical material and it already enters the Earth's atmosphere. The electromagnetic effects are what's important. There, humanity and its technology is far more susceptible than any other animal life.

    Finally, despite your bland assertion to the contrary, we know a great deal about what's in the upper atmosphere and in the Van Allen belts.
  27. hmm.. I have a question.. by wyt3dr4g0n · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If the Earth uses its own magnetic field to repel these dangerous particles.. why not generate magnetic fields in some way to protect the satellites in the same manner?

  28. Very silly article and plan! by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Somedays I wonder if I've fallen through the looking-glass.
    • A high-altitude nuke blast will scrable the ionosphere pretty good. The one the US tested in 1962 shut down the HF radio bands for many hours. That much is known.
    • Using big conductive hair-nets to discharge the ionization is a blue-sky, well, black-sky speculation.
    • It involves a lot of non-existent hardware and techniques.
    • Among the many unknowns are : how to orbit a many kilowatt 200Kv power source.
    • how to deploy up to 100Km of fishnet stockings.
    • and how to keep these satellites and stockings deployed as they plow through electrostatic and magnetic fields.
    • And oh, it's unclear how much of the ionization will be affected by a pair of ho-net stockings approximately the size of New Jersey.

      So IMHO it's way too early to worry about the existence, magnitude, or net benefit of the side-effects.

    1. Re:Very silly article and plan! by Frightening · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute. Did you say stockings?

  29. Not comfortable by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1, Informative

    The theory is sound, but if the practice screws up then they could end up dumping excess radiation on to the Earth's surface. Sure the Satellites would be protected, but given the resulting state of people on the planet, is it really worth it. Surely building in better protection into the satellites in the first place would be the better solution.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:Not comfortable by RexRhino · · Score: 2, Informative

      1. It would not dump any excess radiation to the Earths surface. It would effect the ionosphere and possibly (speculative since the technology only exists in people's imagination), effecting how radio waves bounce off the ionosphere.

      2. Even if it did, this is primarily proposed as a defense against nuclear detonations in the upper atmosphere... I think detonating nuclear weapons in the upper atmosphere is going to cause so many problems with radio that this plan would be the least of people's worries.

      You throw the words "radiation" into an article, and throw in "U.S. Military" for good measure, and people start to lose basic common sense. You would have people demanding a global ban on lightbulbs if you told them that the "U.S. Military is widely deploying small radiation emmiting devices to facilitate night time observation."

  30. Not the likely target by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    FTFA

    "'If the intense radiation belts resulted from a rogue state detonating a nuclear-tipped missile in the upper atmosphere, using such remediation technology would probably be acceptable to the international community,' they said."

    Any small country that goes through the trouble of building a nuke AND a reliable long-range missle to deliver it is probably not going to waste it on the upper atmosphere. Body-counts make for much better bragging.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    1. Re:Not the likely target by Detritus · · Score: 1

      If I was the guy with the monocle and persian cat, I'd seriously consider it. Let's say that I have a dozen nuclear weapons. For the cost of one weapon and launch vehicle, I can cause severe economic damage and disruption to the Great Satan, without directly killing anyone. This makes it difficult for my enemies to justify retaliating with nuclear weapons. I still have 11 nuclear weapons that I can use to threaten anyone who attacks me with conventional weapons.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:Not the likely target by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Do you REALLY think just because you blew it up in the atmosphere they wouldn't retaliate against people? Look at Iraq, they never touched the US and we still invaded them.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    3. Re:Not the likely target by Detritus · · Score: 1
      Let's take North Korea for an example. Kim Jong-il can pick up the telephone, and in a half-hour, Seoul will be a smoking hole in the ground. That's without using any nukes or other weapons of mass destruction. How are you going to punish him without destroying South Korea in the process?

      Anyone with a few nukes and some medium-range missiles could threaten to destroy his neighbors' largest cities if attacked.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  31. It's like... by Five+Bucks! · · Score: 1

    a super-Degauss button!

    --
    52 52'23" W 47 32'07" N
  32. Other remediation proposals by Jon+Luckey · · Score: 1
    There have been other metods proposed to remediate radiation belts that don't require wrecking RF comminucations.

    one proposal suggests using a long conductive tether orbiting in the radiation belt. The charged particles in the belt would interact with the electric charge on the tether, altering their orbit in a way that would remove them from the belt.

    Yes, this is a spaced based solution. But even though it has to be launched, it still could be simpler and cheaper than making a huge VLF transmitter on the ground.

    --
    -- 3 events that reshaped the world in the 20th century: WW1, WW2, and WWW
    1. Re:Other remediation proposals by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      There have been other metods proposed to remediate radiation belts that don't require wrecking RF comminucations.

      one proposal suggests using a long conductive tether orbiting in the radiation belt. The charged particles in the belt would interact with the electric charge on the tether, altering their orbit in a way that would remove them from the belt.


      The details are kind of hazy, but I think the tether-based approach is actually what the submitter's article is about. The claim is that using tethers to remediate the radiation belts might temporarily disrupt GPS and high-frequency radio over the Pacific.

  33. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Tell me how we know all about that sensitive, dynanmic system. You know, like what doubling the tiny amounts of materials will do to the feedback systems in one metastable state. Show me the research that shows there's no consequences in the rest of the atmosphere from interfering with the process.

    Despite your bland assertion to the contrary, we know just a little more about that system than we did when we knew nothing. And we know practically nothing of how it interacts with the rest of the ecosystems of the planet.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  34. How could this affect GPS? by BitterOak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I understand the summary correctly, the procedure would cause the ionosphere to stop reflecting signals, which would indeed disrupt radio communications which use the ionosphere as a "mirror". But the GPS system relies on signals being sent directly from the satellites to the receivers and doesn't use the mirror effect. Indeed, "bounced" signals would destroy the accuracy of the system as the signal path length would be way, way off.

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    1. Re:How could this affect GPS? by ortholattice · · Score: 1

      Would someome please mod parent up? Finally someone asks an intelligent question. The abstract of the article in question say "HF" and nothing about GPS. In fact, GPS uses 1.5 GHz, which is UHF, not HF (2.3 to 26 MHz). UHF does not bounce off the atmosphere (or does so only under extremely rare conditions), which is why TV stations are ordinarily limited to line-of-sight, unlike shortwave radio. The whole "GPS" aspect appears to have been invented by the news reporter for sensationalism.

    2. Re:How could this affect GPS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To answer your question after I RTFA, it stated "The operation of an RBR system would lead to serious GPS degradation at mid latitudes, a new and unexpected experience for mid-latitude GPS users." GPS signals do not bounce off of the ionosphere, rather they propigate through it. The electron content (measured in TEC, or Total Electron Conetent) of the ionosphere leads to a delay in the GPS signal, which is the major source of error in a point solution for civilian receivers. From what I can determine the method proposed would lead to high variations of the TEC of the ionosphere, which would lead to larger noise variances on a receiver point solution.

      Note, however, this does not apply to dual frequency, or DoD, GPS receivers. GPS broadcasts on two seperate frequencies, L1 (1575.42 MHz) and L2 (1227.60 MHz). Civilian users can track the L1 frequency only. However DoD receivers can track both the L1 and L2 frequencies. This is important because a dual frequency user can completely measure the ionospheric delay, thus remove any variations in the ionosphere. Therefore this system would be AOK for the military to use in conjuction with its dual frequency GPS receivers. Civilian receivers would produce solutions with more noise, but otherwise not effect the receiver. Most likely RMS errors would look like they did before SA was turned off by executive order of President Clinton in '99.

    3. Re:How could this affect GPS? by Ramadog · · Score: 1
      HF (2.3 to 26 MHz)

      Not quite, HF is 3MHz to 30MHz.

    4. Re:How could this affect GPS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The precipitating radiation belt particles will penetrate deep into the upper atmosphere until they are stopped by collisions with neutral atoms and molecules. This will create a non-negligible amount of ionization that will be quite detectable above the background, ambient ionosphere, especially for the most energetic 1-10 MeV particles that penetrate to 60-90 km.

      This ionization will have a couple of effects on HF radio links. First, the skip distance can be reduced because the ionosphere effectively moved closer to the ground. This determines how far your signals go. Second, the anomalous ionization created by this mechanism is not smooth and will reduce the SNR of HF signals propagating through it. Third, secondary processes that produce radio emissions occur along with the creation of ionization, much as happens in the Earth's natural auroral region. This will be received on HF sets as noise, effectively raising the noise floor.

      The same ionization actually can affect GPS signals as well. First, the increase in the effective thickness of the ionosphere in some locations (and not others) will degrade GPS accuracy because the built-in ionospheric correction in the system will be incorrect. Second, as with HF, this ionization is not smooth. The irregularities will cause scintillation of GPS signals which can result in loss of lock and degradation in accuracy.

      The entire discussion attached to this article (up to now) has been most disappointingly filled with a singular lack of informed commentary.

  35. GPS Effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After RTFA, it stated "The operation of an RBR system would lead to serious GPS degradation at mid latitudes, a new and unexpected experience for mid-latitude GPS users." GPS signals do not bounce off of the ionosphere, rather they propigate through it. The electron content (measured in TEC, or Total Electron Conetent) of the ionosphere leads to a delay in the GPS signal, which is the major source of error in a point solution for civilian receivers. From what I can determine the method proposed would lead to high variations of the TEC of the ionosphere, which would lead to larger noise variances on a receiver point solution.

    Note, however, this does not apply to dual frequency, or DoD, GPS receivers. GPS broadcasts on two seperate frequencies, L1 (1575.42 MHz) and L2 (1227.60 MHz). Civilian users can track the L1 frequency only. However DoD receivers can track both the L1 and L2 frequencies. This is important because a dual frequency user can completely measure the ionospheric delay, thus remove any variations in the ionosphere. Therefore this system would be AOK for the military to use in conjuction with its dual frequency GPS receivers. Civilian receivers would produce solutions with more noise, but otherwise not effect the receiver. Most likely RMS errors would look like they did before SA was turned off by executive order of President Clinton in '99.

  36. fuck me. american military is so fucking arrogant. by lkcl · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    as if we haven't got enough to fucking worry about with global warming, now the american military has to go fuck with the ionosphere as well. i mean jesus fucking christ what _exactly_ do they want to try to do: accelerate the death of everybody?? have they actually studied what the ionosphere actually _does_?

    hey you stupid american military dicks: get your dicks out of your collective arses and STOP fucking with the planet, for god's sake.

    did it _ever_ occur to you _why_ those radio waves are bounced back by the ionosphere??

    FUCK your satellites - we have ENOUGH to worry about without your stupid arrogance killing us off.

  37. Re:Underware in Space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Abstract: High altitude nuclear explosions (HANEs) "

    Wait till I get my Hanes on you!

  38. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by Atheose · · Score: 1

    Wow, congratulations on using this post as an excuse to make a completely irrelevant jab at the current administration. Go find a forum about saving the whales if you want to get on your soapbox on that issue.

  39. Maybe somebody knows what caused this ... by Aging_Newbie · · Score: 1

    When I was young (like the range of 1958-62, when I was 9-13 years old) I saw what appeared to be an aurora display except that the display was entirely colored specks, like colored stars. I don't believe that aurora is capable of that, but I have always wondered if it were somehow a result of a high altitude, maybe exoatmospheric, nuclear blast that caused it. It was quite impressive and clearly visible. I have sought explanations for it on the web, but to no avail.

    1. Re:Maybe somebody knows what caused this ... by decsnake · · Score: 2, Interesting

      very likely.

      read about it here

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime

    2. Re:Maybe somebody knows what caused this ... by qeveren · · Score: 1

      That sounds weirdly familiar, though that was before my time. I have some vague recollection of reading an article describing an effect like that caused by pumping microwave energy into the ionosphere. I could be completely off-base here, though...

      Nuclear blasts at high altitudes generally look like huge, glowing auroral blobs, from what footage I've seen of them.

      Wasn't there also a fairly major meteor storm in the early 60's as well?

      --
      Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
    3. Re:Maybe somebody knows what caused this ... by forgetful · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Life Magazine had a photo of the aurora from the nuke blast as well as a photo of folks gathered in Hawaii to watch the fireworks. The expression on their faces is unforgettable after all these years. What is the famous quote from the first Trinity shot?

      --
      "...while history is usually explicable it is often irrational" --Roger Spiller
    4. Re:Maybe somebody knows what caused this ... by virtualthinker · · Score: 1

      There were various high altitude experiments in those days - I remember seeing several, and one in particular. At the time I was told it was a NASA experiment, but lately I have come to believe it was an asteroid very near the earth. What I saw does not match any of the explainations given at the time or since. Back then no one really worried much about near earth objects from space, we were more concerned about getting stuff into space. Anything we did not understand was credited as a NASA experiment, whether or not NASA had anything to do with it. As for this article they have most everything backward. The problem is not even properly stated. It is so wrong there is no point in even replying. As for an upper atmosphere N-test, a light that bright would be seen by hundreds of millions of people, plus disrupt AM and shortwave radio communications, no way to keep that a secret. I grew up in Virginia, and I remember hearing about auroa tests, prehaps from wallops island

    5. Re:Maybe somebody knows what caused this ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "we're all bastards now"

    6. Re:Maybe somebody knows what caused this ... by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

      "...now I am become Death [Shiva], the destroyer of worlds..."
            -- Physicist Robert Oppenheimer
            -- Supervising Scientist Manhattan Project

      The Manhattan Project

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
  40. Re:fuck me. american military is so fucking arroga by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you really as stupid as your post makes you sound? Its a an idea a person put forth to correct a problem. Read TFA (oh god I know) They didnt say they are going to be doing this. Do you have any idea how many ideas are put forth and nothing comes of it with DARPA? Pull your biased head outa your ass and breath some fresh air and actually I dont know educate your self alittle before you go on another stupid mindless rant.

  41. Re:fuck me. american military is so fucking arroga by Atheose · · Score: 1

    I think you hurt your cause more than helped it, buddy. Care to try again without using profanity every other word? You might actually trick people into thinking that you're smart.

  42. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Troll

    My sincerest scorn on your using this thread to bash the whales and worship Bush, when we're talking about screwing with the upper atmosphere. Go fuck yourself.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  43. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by qeveren · · Score: 1

    Exactly how many times did various nations detonate high-yield nuclear devices in low-orbit space? Funny, the atmosphere and the biosphere still seem to be here after that. What makes you think that this proposed process is going to do any worse?

    --
    Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
  44. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Show me the research that demonstrates that those detonations have not had, will not have, ill effects on the ecosystem. Now you're practicing science, not sciencyism.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  45. This shows how ARROGANT the US is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The effects of this is not confined to US terratory or airspace its a GLOBAL effect.

    Where is the UN in all this? Where is outher countries in all this?

    Seriously, your country is pissing off the rest of the world. STOP THIS MADMAN NOW. Doesnt your constitution say that those with the power to do something have the obligation to do something (something good that is). How will this affect wildlife? Nature and more? What about weather? INCONSIDERATE SELFISH BASTARDS THE US IS. Its the same with the climate. ITS EVERY FUCKING THING THEY MEDDLE IN.

    1. Re:This shows how ARROGANT the US is by Minshu · · Score: 0

      The US Military owns and maintains the GPS system at a cost of ~#400 MILLION/year, while it's free for industry and civilians to use. So exscuse me if your complaints fall on unsympathetic ears. For all I care, they can do what they will with thier own equipment. If it was such a big deal, I'm sure some other company would launch their own system of sats so provide a charged GPS-type service. So, like the other person that was looking for just another exscuse to cry about Americans, go grab your GPS and go for a hike to blow off some steam or something, cause you need it.

    2. Re:This shows how ARROGANT the US is by wuie · · Score: 1

      It isn't exactly "free" for the civilians to use. I did pay my taxes.

  46. Could be bad for ships and planes by hey! · · Score: 1

    I'd imagine huge snarl ups and disasters in the wake of a GPS outage, with LORAN usage in decline and navigators unfamiliar with older methods of navigation.

    I wonder if inertial navigation would offer a self-contained alternative that could, at least for airplanes and large ships, replace or augment GPS. These systems integrate acceleration in three dimensions to arrive at a new position given a starting position; the same method used in the Apollo mission and for ICBMs.

    My father in law, who died a few months ago, worked on both Apollo and ICBM guidance systems. Once he took a suitcased sized unit from Draper Labs near MIT to a nuclear submarine base, and discovered that the base had it's position wrong by a good fraction of a kilometer. Pretty significant when you're targeting nuclear weapons. Anyway, it was an old family story. I was reminded of it when they were drilling the outfall for the Boston Harbor clean-up, which was the longest tunnel ever drilled from one end only. One of the engineering concerns was that the risers drilled into the rock met the tunnel. They used traditional surveying methods, but I'd thought at the time a suitcase sized inertial guidance system would be a good double check for something like this, or a conventional tunnel that is bored from two ends. You'd just carry it into each end, take a reading at the point you'd excavated to, and you'd know you were on heading.

    I could see a number of applications for inexpensive inertial guidance. If it was cheap enough, it could be used to supplmenent GPS where coverage was not available.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Could be bad for ships and planes by flydude18 · · Score: 1

      Many (most? all?) US military aircraft already have inertial navigation that is aided by GPS, i.e. the inertial system does its thing, occasionally receiving updates from GPS to reduce error. For them, GPS is not necessary, but it helps. Even JDAMs, which are often called "GPS-guided" bombs, are guided by INS, with GPS aid (if available).

    2. Re:Could be bad for ships and planes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct - also, all commercial aircraft are required by either EUROCAE/JAA or the FAA to have an inertial guidance system as a backup for GPS-aided guidance.

  47. Uh huh. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    I seriously doubt these tests will ever come to pass. DARPA doesn't like to run tests that other scientifically advanced nations can detect and then point a damning finger at. They'd be more likely to fund research for high MeV particle resistant satellite and aircraft systems (since that has no noticeable external effects... keep the "advantage" secret)

    And enjoy your cancer.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  48. I feel a great disturbance in the force... by eheldreth · · Score: 2, Funny

    As if thousands of Geocachers suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced...

    --
    The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
  49. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by iced_773 · · Score: 1

    Unless, of course, they're disappearing because they know the Vogons will be along shortly.

  50. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by Atheose · · Score: 1

    I neither love Bush nor hate the whales, and I didn't say anything to that effect. I merely name your completely irrelevant whale comment for what it was--completely irrelevant.

  51. You haven't been paying attention lately. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Samzenpus was simply looking for a story to post with a New Zealand connection, just as guys like Zonk and ScuttleMonkey spend all their time posting stories with an Australian connection.

    Since almost nothing of interest ever happens in Australia and New Zealand they'll post pretty much anything they can find with even the most tenuous of interest or relevance to Slashdotters.

    Getting Aussie or NZ mentioned on Slashdot is a very big deal to them, and it doesn't matter at all whether or not the so-called story is really even a story. All that matters is that Australia or New Zealand is mentioned.

    It helps them sleep at night.

    1. Re:You haven't been paying attention lately. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im sorry , buts thats a load of BS.

      You are never welcome in our contry.

  52. Re:fuck me. american military is so fucking arroga by Minshu · · Score: 1

    Lets see. The American Military actually owns the GPS sats... and as for the other ones, how do you think they got up there? I mean, you don't exactly see a lot of stuff going up from other countries, at least not for American companies. Quote from Wikipedia on 'GPS' "United States Department of Defense developed the system, officially named NAVSTAR GPS (Navigation Signal Timing and Ranging GPS), and launched the first experimental satellite 1978. The satellite constellation is managed by the 50th Space Wing at Schriever Air Force Base. Although the cost of maintaining the system is approximately US$400 million per year, including the replacement of ageing satellites, GPS is available for free use in civilian applications as a public good." So, you're basically crying over losing something that was placed there for you, free to you, when in reality they never had to let you use the GPS or put the radio sats up in the first place. Gratitude much? Or is it you're just looking for any reason to be all upset at the U.S.? I sense it's the latter of the 2. Either way, go take your GPS and take a hike, looks like you need to burn off some steam.

  53. I wonder how many people remember by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 1

    that the US military built the GPS network and reserves the right to turn it off whenever it feels the need?

  54. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by khallow · · Score: 1
    Tell me how we know all about that sensitive, dynanmic system. You know, like what doubling the tiny amounts of materials will do to the feedback systems in one metastable state. Show me the research that shows there's no consequences in the rest of the atmosphere from interfering with the process.

    Well, we know the physics of plasmas pretty well. We know the composition of the upper atmosphere, the solar influx, and the composition of the plasma trapped by Earth's magnetic field. That restricts the amount of energy and the effects this system can have on Earth. We also have decades of research on the aurora which is one of the two ways for particles to escape from Earth's magnetic field.

    So for example, it means that it can effect radio communications since energetic plasma trapped in magnetic fields radiates well at those frequencies and there's enough energy available to cause problems. Since there's so little matter and energy involved, it won't have a direct effect on ecosystems. It also means that these plasmas will have no real effect on the Earth's magnetic field (eg, won't contribute to magnetic pole switching).

  55. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    We know the physics of hydraulics and valence chemistry, but that doesn't mean we know ecology or even cytology.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  56. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by khallow · · Score: 1

    But biological systems are notoriously unsusceptable to radio waves. The amount of energy required for radio waves to interfere with cellular development is many orders of magnitude greater than that required to interfere with GPS systems. While the polar regions would be exposed to somewhat higher ionized radiation levels, they already are especially when a large solar flare is active. And contrary to your claim, we know a lot about ecology and cytology too. Particularly the effects of various forms of radiation on biological tissue.

  57. GPS and HF...does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a ham who plays with radio for fun. I have a 5.8 ghz link for my background music, am often scanning VHF and UHF public safety, and listening to AM radio....so I'm pretty much top to bottom. Listening to CB in the car with Satellite radio as a backdrop takes me from primitive to modern.

    If the ionosphere was juiced in this way, and I doubt VLF radio waves could do this, then you'd lose HF communications, which would be a problem for airplanes, ships at sea, government "numbers stations" and hams. To bollix up frequencies all the way to the SHF and microwave region would be difficult...even when major solar flares break out, the microwave region stuff, which does not rely upon the ionosphere, still works. The US Govt could shut down the system, but that has been as of day one of operation and is not news, and given the yahoos in there now, I hope we make it to 2008.

    Anyway, if you blew out microwave commuincations, most your phones, all the TV would go buggy.

    Loss of TV pacifer would be the worst possible thing or best possible thing for the Western nations.

    Still, I doubt that you could create this effect with VLF.

  58. Re:Dumping & Flushing the Earth by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    You're really not getting it. We do not know much, if anything, about how the sparse upper atmosphere's cycles will react to our dumping significantly more/faster amounts of material into it. Dynamic and sensitive systems have tipping points, beyond which new stable cycles can emerge with very different characteristics, once bumped. We don't know how a changed upper atmosphere will affect the rest of our ecosystem, even though far away and much more massive.

    I pointed out that contrary to your claim, knowing a lot about about hydraulics and chemistry doesn't mean we know a lot about cytology - as an example of how knowledge of a few aspects of the upper atmosphere doesn't substitute for actual knowledge of its role in our larger ecosystem. But you are insisting on ignoring how ignorant we are, because you are hot for some new tinkering with the upper atmosphere. That kind of conceit is exactly what's driving the people deciding to take these unknown risks.

    If you paid attention, you'd realize that you're locked in a cycle of your own that you don't really understand.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  59. Seems quite sensible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whats everyone makeing a big deal surely causeing short term problems with radio and gps is better than haveing haveing all satilites in orbit includeing the GPS ones burnt out completely. isn't it better that they start acting up for a week or so than they all die and have to be replaced??

  60. solar storms? by jeremyp · · Score: 1

    I don't understand how this scheme of putting a shield in the ionosphere is supposed to protect satellites, which are all outside the ionosphere, from solar storms caused by the Sun which is also outside the ionosphere. It seems to me that this shield would be effective only for Earth originated "attacks".

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  61. Obligatory Matrix reference by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

    "We were the ones to scorch the sky..."

    I didn't see anything that mentioned the (theoretical) affect this would have on the upper atmosphere and the normal processes that occur there outside of the absorption of radio waves. Ozone layer? Electric charge and storms?

    --
    *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***