Because after 15 years, many of the chaotic changes in weather average out. The sun cycle is 11 years, for instance. After 15 years, you'd expect a few El-Ninos and La-Ninas. You can calculate that a 15 year period is about the minimum. For a more robust number, you could take 30 years. More than 30 years isn't very useful. There aren't really any weather related patterns that last longer than that.
because in the grand scheme of things man has little or nothing to do with squat. Long after we are gone, the sun will change phases, engulf this planet for real global warming and then the universe will die a heat death
Using that perspective, why not rob a bank today ?
Put a pan of cold water on the stove, and turn it on. After a while, watch the little swirls of water. Can you predict how they'll move around 2 seconds from any given time ? Probably not. Can you predict the average temperature 60 seconds later ? Probably yes. There's the difference between weather prediction and climate predication. Climate prediction is easier, because it deals with averages. Weather deals with chaos.
It's not going to be easy to keep a target in sight, when both yourself and the target are moving and vibrating. And by the looks of the burn marks on car, the laser spot is less than a few inches wide, so you'd need to be really accurate. And while the laser is near instantaneous, your targeting system still needs some time to identify the movement and compensate for it.
I don't think you have to worry about people wielding such powerful lasers. One little mistake where you aim the laser at something reflective, and you'd blind yourself.
This is effectively what 1-bit delta-sigma data converters do, and it is close to what Class-D audio amplifiers do
But they do this using frequencies that are much higher than the frequency of the resulting waveform. That's okay when you want to generate 20kHz waveforms, but you can't do that with a 5 GHz signal using current technology.
And generating a lower frequency signal (in 10's of MHz range), and picking off a high harmonic doesn't work either. You'll get terrible efficiency because you're throwing away most of the spectrum, and you also need narrowband, adjustable filters. That blows the "all digital" right out of the water.
then don't enact legislation on the issue. If you're trying to make something public policy in a democracy then the people have a right to audit the study.
Slashdot Mirror
Because after 15 years, many of the chaotic changes in weather average out. The sun cycle is 11 years, for instance. After 15 years, you'd expect a few El-Ninos and La-Ninas. You can calculate that a 15 year period is about the minimum. For a more robust number, you could take 30 years. More than 30 years isn't very useful. There aren't really any weather related patterns that last longer than that.
because in the grand scheme of things man has little or nothing to do with squat. Long after we are gone, the sun will change phases, engulf this planet for real global warming and then the universe will die a heat death
Using that perspective, why not rob a bank today ?
Put a pan of cold water on the stove, and turn it on. After a while, watch the little swirls of water. Can you predict how they'll move around 2 seconds from any given time ? Probably not. Can you predict the average temperature 60 seconds later ? Probably yes. There's the difference between weather prediction and climate predication. Climate prediction is easier, because it deals with averages. Weather deals with chaos.
If you predict a 50% chance 50 years in a row, and it really happens 80% of the times, you were wrong.
https://alloscomp.com/bitcoin/... says $6000/day for 2100 TH/sec.
I agree that the installed number is going to be much less than 150 million though. Just pointing out that the math is way off.
There are plenty of reflections that aren't diffuse. Also, according to some people the real system will be orders of magnitude more powerful.
Modern tanks can fire while on the move and their firing solutions have little difficulty tracking that motion too
Tanks don't need 2 inch accuracy over multiple seconds.
Deployed version will of course be cheaper.
Of course. Just like the Joint Strike Fighter.
Second of all, while a mirror layer would be more reflective, it would also be thinner and less durable than a truck's sheet-metal.
If people are going to design anti-laser mirrors, they're not going to make them super thin.
The laser defense systems aren't finished yet either. Mirrors can be stacked and cooled.
It's not going to be easy to keep a target in sight, when both yourself and the target are moving and vibrating. And by the looks of the burn marks on car, the laser spot is less than a few inches wide, so you'd need to be really accurate. And while the laser is near instantaneous, your targeting system still needs some time to identify the movement and compensate for it.
And how many billion for development of this laser ?
But it will take longer... it's already taking seconds. If you reflect 95% of the incoming beam, it's going to take a minute of careful aim.
You'd still have to have a mechanism to see where the target is going, and keep hitting the exact same spot.
0.1% of the kill rate of an A10 Warthog, for only 1000 times the cost. But hey, somebody's making a lot of money here, so we can't complain.
I don't think you have to worry about people wielding such powerful lasers. One little mistake where you aim the laser at something reflective, and you'd blind yourself.
Depends on how much work was involved, and how big your army is.
One i5-2400 does 14MH/sec, so 150 million of them can do 2100 TH/sec, which would be $6000/day.
As long as there's no public science that says it's dangerous, there's no reason for EPA to stop widespread use.
At scale, a world wide army of CPU's will easily crush an ASICs
A million CPUs can crush a single ASIC, yes, but people are running warehouses full of ASICs.
(It's funny to see people say things like "all digital circuitry is noisy," and yet they probably listen to MP3 or CD audio...)
Why is that funny ? It's not like people can hear MHz-GHz range switching noise in their MP3/CD audio.
Sure, but now try to make that into a nice clean modulated signal compliant with FCC regulations.
This is effectively what 1-bit delta-sigma data converters do, and it is close to what Class-D audio amplifiers do
But they do this using frequencies that are much higher than the frequency of the resulting waveform. That's okay when you want to generate 20kHz waveforms, but you can't do that with a 5 GHz signal using current technology.
And generating a lower frequency signal (in 10's of MHz range), and picking off a high harmonic doesn't work either. You'll get terrible efficiency because you're throwing away most of the spectrum, and you also need narrowband, adjustable filters. That blows the "all digital" right out of the water.
Or don't get US citizenship, and solve the complexity issue for $0 / year.
then don't enact legislation on the issue. If you're trying to make something public policy in a democracy then the people have a right to audit the study.
Not acting is also a form of public policy.
So, you want them to stop with 1950's research and continue with 1960's research ?