Because we all know that Tesla would whip up a coil in no time that would not only take you faster than light, but would also transport you through time;-)
Now to be serious. If a coil of 6.7 meters is required just to TEST this theorom, I don't see it going very far very fast.
The military seems to have expressed issue. What is odd is that NASA (this is kinda their area) has not. It's very easy to get a general to commit to a project by claiming that if we don't the Russians/Chinese/Terrorists will get it first. Scientists typically take a little more convincing on the fundamental physics end of things.
At a Senate Governmental Affairs committee hearing today, administration officials are expected to repeat their view that the sensitive devices were destroyed in the crash. But they say that even if the Chinese did recover the microprocessor chips, it's unlikely they learned anything. "The National Security Agency doesn't consider it a big deal," the administration official said.
"Any loss of the chips . . . would have had only minimal impact on national security," the NSA said in a statement last month, in part because the 20-year-old chips could have worked to encrypt or decrypt signals, controlling the spacecraft's movement in space, beamed only to or from that particular satellite.
The agency also said it has made routine upgrades since the accident to the algorithms or sets of instructions governing U.S. satellite cryptographic gear, so even if the Chinese found a device, it "cannot be employed to gain access to or control" other satellites.
Within a day after the February 1996 accident, a U.S. search team that thoroughly inspected the debris-strewn hillside in southern China where the crash occurred concluded there was "slim to no chance" the Chinese found the two American cryptographic chips, informed industry executives said.
The military and NSA changes it's cyrptographic ALL THE TIME. AND, the codes in question only referenced point to point communications between THAT PARTICULAR SATELLITE. Since that satellite was destroyed, there was ZERO impact on US communication security.
The posession of a radioactive hardened chip will give you little or no clue as to it's fabrication. If so, China would be manufacturing cheap knock off Pentium 4s.
You know, 8 years ago I wish I knew more about the way the right wing handles things. Pretty much EVERYTHING that comes out of a Republicans mouth is some twisted fabrication. I'm sick of having to listen to this BS and nod and be polite and than have to waste my time doing research as to why what they say might hold a nugget of factual information but in substance be complete and utter nonsense.
Well, from what I can find, Clinton NEVER authorized the export of any particular technology. He approved the launching of satellites by Loral on Chinese rockets.
Loral passed some "hints" as part of a joint examination of a failed missle launch.
Republicans believed that the Clinton administration was protecting Loral as part of an "intentional" technology transfer. But you will see from Newsmax.com (a conservative news portal) that the Bush Jr administration really didn't take the issue too seriously: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/9/3/ 210022.shtml
#
Avoiding Criminal Liability
# First, the U.S. attorney's office in Washington, which was handling the Loral investigation, had transferred the case out of the Justice Department and over to the State Department "for a civil settlement."
That means Loral is out from under any criminal charges or prosecution.
Instead, it faces a negotiated penalty - estimated in the range of $10 million, which is a token slap on the wrist in a business deal of this potential magnitude - and some technical revisions in the way it goes about handling its export-license applications.
# Second, as part of the settlement, which has been negotiated by Loral attorneys and the State Department for months, the door would be opened again for the company to resume shipping satellites and other sensitive missile technology to the Chinese communists.
That settlement is purported to be ready for announcement by mid-September.
The whole language is completely twisted here. It makes Clinton's approval of TRANSPORTING A SATELLITE TO CHINA FOR LAUNCH sound like Clinton was approving the transfer of documents relating to how to improve missle technology. This IS NOT TRUE.
The worst possible effect of this would be that the Chinese did yank that crypto board before launch and managed to snoop some US messages before the NSA changed the keys. As far as "missle technology", defense analysts typically stated that this was of no real effect as the Chinese already have enough nukes to destroy all major US cities. "Close" counts in nuclear warfare and it really doesn't matter much whether the Chinese can engage in a "tactical" nuclear strike since such a conflict is inherently unwinnable.
I object to all this from the standpoint that all this money for satellite launching was going oversees. The ONLY thing wrong with the NASA commercial satellite launches was that it was "competing" with a potential US competitor. But no US competitor EVER emerged, only the Chinese government. So if you want to blame someone, blame the Reagan administration who started the policy of launching US communication satellites in China.
The missing board from the Loral Intelsat satellite is no mystery. It quickly became obvious that Chinese engineers removed the special electronics and kept the board for examination. The stolen Loral electronics consist of radiation hardened, encrypted telemetry chips, stored in a secure flight control box similar to those found on airliners. The NSA changed all U.S. satellite codes as a result of the stolen Loral chips, costing American taxpayers millions of dollars.
When quoting, please provide a link so I can look into the context and background information. I know it's difficult for a conservative as they are naturally disinclined to provide context and background information beyond that provided by the Drudge Report.
For the record, I think the Clinton approval was a bad idea, but not disastrous as you would imply. I think the whole "free trade China love" period that continues to this day is a REALLY BAD idea. I thought the Bush administrations approval to allow the Chinese military to buy out Magnaquench (http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/962493/posts -- look I even sourced a right wing bulliten board on this one) was a remarkeably BAD IDEA!!!!
The trends of outsourcing and selling out to the Chinese run deep through the Democratic and Republican parties (don't let Sen. Bayh's protests on Magnaquench fool you. He's a free trader in the DLC. The only reason he opposed the Magnaquench deal is it was a constituent issue). There are still patriots on BOTH sides of the isle, but unfortunately they do do not have control of their respective parties. The globalists are in charge now (including the Clintons and the Bush clan).
In general I don't approve of pardoning anyone unless they are innocent (i.e. railroaded). So no I don't approve of Clinton's pardon of Lasater (as Governor of Arkansas). This is mainly because pardon's are largely used as a way to:
a) Provide rewards to campaign contributors. b) Shield the President and his administration from possible scandal.
But don't get all preachy about pardon's because Republicans are notorious for covering their tracks with pardons. They pardon money lau
Regarding Lasater himself. Don't get all preachy about all that Mena Arkasas stuff. I think something fishy went on. But I don't think that Clinton had ANY power to influence a CIA operation. If you investigate, it will lead you straight back to Oliver North and straight up to President Bush Sr.
Mena is one of those weird instances where both parties seem to have simply "dropped" the issue because they were both in for a world of embarrassment. And don't tell me that Lasater was "Bill's dealer" (though it is likely that he dealt for Clinton's brother). Clinton is to well put together to deal with that shit. But one COULD make the case that George was pardoning HIS drug dealers (or his brother's, or his brother's children's) because to this day, George REFUSES to deny that he has done drugs.
You say Clinton pardoned people before their sentence was over. How about Bush Sr pardoning people before they ever got to trial (the Iran-Contra conspirators)? And of course, the ULTIMATE pardon of all time, the Ford pardon of Nixon which effectively prevented any further investigation in the so-called "second rate burglary" and the grander scheme of ILLEGAL domestic spying that Nixon was engaged in.
If this is an issue of restoring a "civil liberty", I think it's bogus. I don't really don't CARE about expungement and I really don't approve of THAT either for the same reason that I don't care for pardons. They are used as political chips. If serving your sentence warrants the return of a civil liberty, than you return it to ALL citizens, not just a select few who pay the right amount of money to a political action committee.
So there, I don't think EITHER party should engage in pardons or expungement (except in the case of minors) or commutations (except for commuting death penalties). And I think the legislative bodies should be able to overturn pardons as well by a simple majority vote.
The fact that everyone keeps bringing up everyone ELSE's pardons to me is a good thing. But don't be a partisan. And just remember that it's the Republicans that are the "tough on drugs" party. So hold yourself to a higher standard.
Personally, I'm for drug legalization. The drug war is just a big waste of time to me. But I say to you, hold yourself to your own standards!!!!
If someone asked you the color of your eyes and you said blue when your eyes are green, that is not necessarily perjury. For instance, if the case involved tax evasion than the testimony would not be relevant. It has to be RELEVANT.
The judge in the case threw out the testimony in question as irrelevant. Hence it CANNOT BY DEFINITION BE PERJURY.
If you want to call it lying, that's all you. But if it WAS perjury, than Starr should have prosecuted.
Ken Starr harrassed Bill Clinton for this stuff FOR YEARS ON END. They came up with ZIP, ZERO, NADA, ZILCH. The ONLY thing they could come up with were technically correct but misleading statements regarding immaterial testimony (hence not perjury by definition even if he did lie).
The ROCKET technology was to aid in getting US communication satellites into space. I didn't approve of it. But it doesn't affect the security of any nation or the United States. China already has enough nukes to destroy the United States. The thing they need to invade Taiwan is NOT missles, it is a NAVY!!!!
Back to the subject. Bill Clinton was never accused of spying on US citizens without court warrants. That is the issue at hand.
And for the record, Bill Clinton was NEVER, EVER a liberal. Bill Clinton was a centrist who backed globalization and free trade. Real liberals HATE free trade because it allows profiteering on human exploitation and lowers working standards worldwide.
This is the pervasive common attack of the right is to accuse left of center politicos in the US of being communists.
It isn't true. It is stupid and it degrades any political discussion into name calling. Being pro-union is not equivacal to throwing political dissidents into a gulag. Last time I checked the left was AGAINST WTO inclusion of China for just these reasons, massive human rights abuses in China.
And for the record, Bill Clinton was NEVER, EVER, EVER a leftist.
I'll add that China always points out the mistakes of Western nations. True everyone makes mistakes. The difference is that in Western Democracy, the people have the right to CORRECT their mistakes through the democratic process. In China, only the oligarchy has any power to affect change. And most likely that change will be only for THEIR benefit.
Fascism and Communism dash off in opposite directions. But they arrive in the same place. A feudalistic political/economic system where there is no distinction between governance and commerce.
So yes, when the international corporations BECOME the defacto government (by undermining political systems) than they effectively become the state and they will equally fit the "1984" paradigm.
BTW, just remember that China plays the same games as Big Brother (as does GW Bush). They are always stoking the people up about some external or social issue to keep them from thinking and acting critically against the states. A couple of months ago, it was Japan. In this case, it is pornography.
China stopped being communist when switched from a planned/command economy to a free market system. But they made sure to keep the authoritarian regime in place.
Back in the 1930s and 1940s, they called that fascism. I guess when the pots occupy the media and government infrastructure, they are unwilling to call kettles black.
What about the H1-B, LZ-1 placeholder job postings. Employers put these up for six months and turn every American down so they can demonstrate that "they couldn't hire an American".
The US has been pushing proxy government by corporation abroad for a good 80 years. We have deposed countless democracies in favor of tyrants because the tyrants were perceived as more "manageable".
Today, we've owned up to it and we're pursuing a new plan... fake democracy. That is, like the fake democracy we're trying to install in Iraq (and we're not succeeding).
I would argue that if we had pursued REAL Democracy for the last 80 years, the world would be a lot better off and a lot happier. We may have even avoided a few world wars.
Unless you're England, there is good reason for countries to be wary of US foreign policy. Likewise, there is good reason to be wary about pretty much ANY countries foreign policy. MOST of the Eurpopean countries had colonial possessions. And pretty much every country has interests overseas and disputed territories.
Do ya know that the group "La Raza" actually proposes taking back the SW United States and ceding it to Mexico? Do you know that some Russian politicians favor "taking back" Alaska?
But I have no doubt that the promise of an "always on" GPS would allow China and a whole lot of other countries (North Korea) to develop long range missle guidance on the cheap.
It really is important for your nuke to hit it's desired target. Being off by 100 miles will still cause lots of carnage, but it won't produce the desired effect of leveling a major US city.
Perhaps an ICBM launch would be one of those "extreme circumstances".
From the perspective of the US, it's Senators and Congressman, the US is indeed the world because foreigners typically cannot vote. Politicians in Euro countries act in the same way. It's just that they seem more multi-lateral because they HAVE to band together.
BTW, I hate Dubaya too. But if France was as big and powerful as the US, they would probably behave in the same manner.
With a sub 1m accuracy, you could make it into "wireless electronic fence" with ANY configuration. You could even define exclusion zones to keep your pooch out of your garden.
At 3M acccuracy, you cannot do this. It would be impossible to train the dog as they end up learning their boundries by the scents on the ground.
It's the doppler shift and strength of the singal.
The more satellites you get, the more accurate the reading can be computed. The stronger the signal, the more satellites you can get.
Will a longer antannae help receive more signals? Sure it will. But I hardly believe that your relationship between accuracy and antannae size has any basis.
I would settle for 1 foot. I would like to use GPS to map trail systems (for the purpose of creating maintenance maps for planning). At 9m resolution (even worse in the woods), GPS just doesn't cut it.
1 foot however would be plenty accurate.
Though I believe that it would be wise for Galileo to have selective availability. GPS is a cheapo missle guidance system. I have no desire to allow certain countries to take shortcuts. If they know the system can be switched off or degraded, than they will have to do the work with gyros.
Slashdot Mirror
Because we all know that Tesla would whip up a coil in no time that would not only take you faster than light, but would also transport you through time
Now to be serious. If a coil of 6.7 meters is required just to TEST this theorom, I don't see it going very far very fast.
The military seems to have expressed issue. What is odd is that NASA (this is kinda their area) has not. It's very easy to get a general to commit to a project by claiming that if we don't the Russians/Chinese/Terrorists will get it first. Scientists typically take a little more convincing on the fundamental physics end of things.
Your NewsMax story contained a deception, according to the Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/spe
At a Senate Governmental Affairs committee hearing today, administration officials are expected to repeat their view that the sensitive devices were destroyed in the crash. But they say that even if the Chinese did recover the microprocessor chips, it's unlikely they learned anything. "The National Security Agency doesn't consider it a big deal," the administration official said.
"Any loss of the chips . . . would have had only minimal impact on national security," the NSA said in a statement last month, in part because the 20-year-old chips could have worked to encrypt or decrypt signals, controlling the spacecraft's movement in space, beamed only to or from that particular satellite.
The agency also said it has made routine upgrades since the accident to the algorithms or sets of instructions governing U.S. satellite cryptographic gear, so even if the Chinese found a device, it "cannot be employed to gain access to or control" other satellites.
Within a day after the February 1996 accident, a U.S. search team that thoroughly inspected the debris-strewn hillside in southern China where the crash occurred concluded there was "slim to no chance" the Chinese found the two American cryptographic chips, informed industry executives said.
The military and NSA changes it's cyrptographic ALL THE TIME. AND, the codes in question only referenced point to point communications between THAT PARTICULAR SATELLITE. Since that satellite was destroyed, there was ZERO impact on US communication security.
The posession of a radioactive hardened chip will give you little or no clue as to it's fabrication. If so, China would be manufacturing cheap knock off Pentium 4s.
You know, 8 years ago I wish I knew more about the way the right wing handles things. Pretty much EVERYTHING that comes out of a Republicans mouth is some twisted fabrication. I'm sick of having to listen to this BS and nod and be polite and than have to waste my time doing research as to why what they say might hold a nugget of factual information but in substance be complete and utter nonsense.
Well, from what I can find, Clinton NEVER authorized the export of any particular technology. He approved the launching of satellites by Loral on Chinese rockets.
Loral passed some "hints" as part of a joint examination of a failed missle launch.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/spe
Republicans believed that the Clinton administration was protecting Loral as part of an "intentional" technology transfer. But you will see from Newsmax.com (a conservative news portal) that the Bush Jr administration really didn't take the issue too seriously: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/9/3
#
Avoiding Criminal Liability
# First, the U.S. attorney's office in Washington, which was handling the Loral investigation, had transferred the case out of the Justice Department and over to the State Department "for a civil settlement."
That means Loral is out from under any criminal charges or prosecution.
Instead, it faces a negotiated penalty - estimated in the range of $10 million, which is a token slap on the wrist in a business deal of this potential magnitude - and some technical revisions in the way it goes about handling its export-license applications.
# Second, as part of the settlement, which has been negotiated by Loral attorneys and the State Department for months, the door would be opened again for the company to resume shipping satellites and other sensitive missile technology to the Chinese communists.
That settlement is purported to be ready for announcement by mid-September.
The whole language is completely twisted here. It makes Clinton's approval of TRANSPORTING A SATELLITE TO CHINA FOR LAUNCH sound like Clinton was approving the transfer of documents relating to how to improve missle technology. This IS NOT TRUE.
The worst possible effect of this would be that the Chinese did yank that crypto board before launch and managed to snoop some US messages before the NSA changed the keys. As far as "missle technology", defense analysts typically stated that this was of no real effect as the Chinese already have enough nukes to destroy all major US cities. "Close" counts in nuclear warfare and it really doesn't matter much whether the Chinese can engage in a "tactical" nuclear strike since such a conflict is inherently unwinnable.
I object to all this from the standpoint that all this money for satellite launching was going oversees. The ONLY thing wrong with the NASA commercial satellite launches was that it was "competing" with a potential US competitor. But no US competitor EVER emerged, only the Chinese government. So if you want to blame someone, blame the Reagan administration who started the policy of launching US communication satellites in China.
The missing board from the Loral Intelsat satellite is no mystery. It quickly became obvious that Chinese engineers removed the special electronics and kept the board for examination. The stolen Loral electronics consist of radiation hardened, encrypted telemetry chips, stored in a secure flight control box similar to those found on airliners. The NSA changed all U.S. satellite codes as a result of the stolen Loral chips, costing American taxpayers millions of dollars.
s -- look I even sourced a right wing bulliten board on this one) was a remarkeably BAD IDEA!!!!
When quoting, please provide a link so I can look into the context and background information. I know it's difficult for a conservative as they are naturally disinclined to provide context and background information beyond that provided by the Drudge Report.
For the record, I think the Clinton approval was a bad idea, but not disastrous as you would imply. I think the whole "free trade China love" period that continues to this day is a REALLY BAD idea. I thought the Bush administrations approval to allow the Chinese military to buy out Magnaquench (http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/962493/post
The trends of outsourcing and selling out to the Chinese run deep through the Democratic and Republican parties (don't let Sen. Bayh's protests on Magnaquench fool you. He's a free trader in the DLC. The only reason he opposed the Magnaquench deal is it was a constituent issue). There are still patriots on BOTH sides of the isle, but unfortunately they do do not have control of their respective parties. The globalists are in charge now (including the Clintons and the Bush clan).
In general I don't approve of pardoning anyone unless they are innocent (i.e. railroaded). So no I don't approve of Clinton's pardon of Lasater (as Governor of Arkansas). This is mainly because pardon's are largely used as a way to:
a) Provide rewards to campaign contributors.
b) Shield the President and his administration from possible scandal.
But don't get all preachy about pardon's because Republicans are notorious for covering their tracks with pardons. They pardon money lau
Regarding Lasater himself. Don't get all preachy about all that Mena Arkasas stuff. I think something fishy went on. But I don't think that Clinton had ANY power to influence a CIA operation. If you investigate, it will lead you straight back to Oliver North and straight up to President Bush Sr.
Mena is one of those weird instances where both parties seem to have simply "dropped" the issue because they were both in for a world of embarrassment. And don't tell me that Lasater was "Bill's dealer" (though it is likely that he dealt for Clinton's brother). Clinton is to well put together to deal with that shit. But one COULD make the case that George was pardoning HIS drug dealers (or his brother's, or his brother's children's) because to this day, George REFUSES to deny that he has done drugs.
You say Clinton pardoned people before their sentence was over. How about Bush Sr pardoning people before they ever got to trial (the Iran-Contra conspirators)? And of course, the ULTIMATE pardon of all time, the Ford pardon of Nixon which effectively prevented any further investigation in the so-called "second rate burglary" and the grander scheme of ILLEGAL domestic spying that Nixon was engaged in.
http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/01_column
http://www.salon.com/news/col/cona/2001/02/27/par
If this is an issue of restoring a "civil liberty", I think it's bogus. I don't really don't CARE about expungement and I really don't approve of THAT either for the same reason that I don't care for pardons. They are used as political chips. If serving your sentence warrants the return of a civil liberty, than you return it to ALL citizens, not just a select few who pay the right amount of money to a political action committee.
So there, I don't think EITHER party should engage in pardons or expungement (except in the case of minors) or commutations (except for commuting death penalties). And I think the legislative bodies should be able to overturn pardons as well by a simple majority vote.
The fact that everyone keeps bringing up everyone ELSE's pardons to me is a good thing. But don't be a partisan. And just remember that it's the Republicans that are the "tough on drugs" party. So hold yourself to a higher standard.
Personally, I'm for drug legalization. The drug war is just a big waste of time to me. But I say to you, hold yourself to your own standards!!!!
Perjury and lying are two different issues.
If someone asked you the color of your eyes and you said blue when your eyes are green, that is not necessarily perjury. For instance, if the case involved tax evasion than the testimony would not be relevant. It has to be RELEVANT.
The judge in the case threw out the testimony in question as irrelevant. Hence it CANNOT BY DEFINITION BE PERJURY.
If you want to call it lying, that's all you. But if it WAS perjury, than Starr should have prosecuted.
Dude,
I didn't say they do. Read my comments.
And BTW, I have read the book.
Nice way to change the subject.
Ken Starr harrassed Bill Clinton for this stuff FOR YEARS ON END. They came up with ZIP, ZERO, NADA, ZILCH. The ONLY thing they could come up with were technically correct but misleading statements regarding immaterial testimony (hence not perjury by definition even if he did lie).
Bush just pardoned a drug dealer last month, so I don't know what you are complaining about. http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0
The ROCKET technology was to aid in getting US communication satellites into space. I didn't approve of it. But it doesn't affect the security of any nation or the United States. China already has enough nukes to destroy the United States. The thing they need to invade Taiwan is NOT missles, it is a NAVY!!!!
Back to the subject. Bill Clinton was never accused of spying on US citizens without court warrants. That is the issue at hand.
And for the record, Bill Clinton was NEVER, EVER a liberal. Bill Clinton was a centrist who backed globalization and free trade. Real liberals HATE free trade because it allows profiteering on human exploitation and lowers working standards worldwide.
China exports little girls into prostitution. I see no reason why the same people would be ethically opposed to taking pictures of it.
This is the pervasive common attack of the right is to accuse left of center politicos in the US of being communists.
It isn't true. It is stupid and it degrades any political discussion into name calling. Being pro-union is not equivacal to throwing political dissidents into a gulag. Last time I checked the left was AGAINST WTO inclusion of China for just these reasons, massive human rights abuses in China.
And for the record, Bill Clinton was NEVER, EVER, EVER a leftist.
I'll add that China always points out the mistakes of Western nations. True everyone makes mistakes. The difference is that in Western Democracy, the people have the right to CORRECT their mistakes through the democratic process. In China, only the oligarchy has any power to affect change. And most likely that change will be only for THEIR benefit.
Are they so much like our right wing that they denounce porn in public while be enthusiastic consumers in secret??
Fascism and Communism dash off in opposite directions. But they arrive in the same place. A feudalistic political/economic system where there is no distinction between governance and commerce.
So yes, when the international corporations BECOME the defacto government (by undermining political systems) than they effectively become the state and they will equally fit the "1984" paradigm.
BTW, just remember that China plays the same games as Big Brother (as does GW Bush). They are always stoking the people up about some external or social issue to keep them from thinking and acting critically against the states. A couple of months ago, it was Japan. In this case, it is pornography.
China stopped being communist when switched from a planned/command economy to a free market system. But they made sure to keep the authoritarian regime in place.
Back in the 1930s and 1940s, they called that fascism. I guess when the pots occupy the media and government infrastructure, they are unwilling to call kettles black.
http://www.forbes.com/home/free_forbes/2004/0524/
Maybe you should do some research first.
What about the H1-B, LZ-1 placeholder job postings. Employers put these up for six months and turn every American down so they can demonstrate that "they couldn't hire an American".
Yez, one that have english speak good.
You just haven't lived until you've been cold by an unintelligable Indian named "Dave".
The US has been pushing proxy government by corporation abroad for a good 80 years. We have deposed countless democracies in favor of tyrants because the tyrants were perceived as more "manageable".
Today, we've owned up to it and we're pursuing a new plan
I would argue that if we had pursued REAL Democracy for the last 80 years, the world would be a lot better off and a lot happier. We may have even avoided a few world wars.
Unless you're England, there is good reason for countries to be wary of US foreign policy. Likewise, there is good reason to be wary about pretty much ANY countries foreign policy. MOST of the Eurpopean countries had colonial possessions. And pretty much every country has interests overseas and disputed territories.
Do ya know that the group "La Raza" actually proposes taking back the SW United States and ceding it to Mexico? Do you know that some Russian politicians favor "taking back" Alaska?
We all have to be wary about one another.
They need a navy.
But I have no doubt that the promise of an "always on" GPS would allow China and a whole lot of other countries (North Korea) to develop long range missle guidance on the cheap.
It really is important for your nuke to hit it's desired target. Being off by 100 miles will still cause lots of carnage, but it won't produce the desired effect of leveling a major US city.
Perhaps an ICBM launch would be one of those "extreme circumstances".
From the perspective of the US, it's Senators and Congressman, the US is indeed the world because foreigners typically cannot vote. Politicians in Euro countries act in the same way. It's just that they seem more multi-lateral because they HAVE to band together.
BTW, I hate Dubaya too. But if France was as big and powerful as the US, they would probably behave in the same manner.
England is already in on the deal. However if FRANCE found an oilfield, they would be in trouble
BTW, my joke is not intended to imply I have anything against the French. I'm just making fun of Bill O'Reilly and his ilk.
With a sub 1m accuracy, you could make it into "wireless electronic fence" with ANY configuration. You could even define exclusion zones to keep your pooch out of your garden.
At 3M acccuracy, you cannot do this. It would be impossible to train the dog as they end up learning their boundries by the scents on the ground.
It's the doppler shift and strength of the singal.
The more satellites you get, the more accurate the reading can be computed. The stronger the signal, the more satellites you can get.
Will a longer antannae help receive more signals? Sure it will. But I hardly believe that your relationship between accuracy and antannae size has any basis.
I would settle for 1 foot. I would like to use GPS to map trail systems (for the purpose of creating maintenance maps for planning). At 9m resolution (even worse in the woods), GPS just doesn't cut it.
1 foot however would be plenty accurate.
Though I believe that it would be wise for Galileo to have selective availability. GPS is a cheapo missle guidance system. I have no desire to allow certain countries to take shortcuts. If they know the system can be switched off or degraded, than they will have to do the work with gyros.
I would call the Venture Brothers the best adult Cartoon of 2005. The new season of Family Guy would be the second.