Low Power Satellite Based Laser / Imaging System Could Easil

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes. Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Are you really this witless in real life or are you just pulling our
legs?


Bret Cahill


Why is it, that every science kook tries to let others

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

Unless you are claiming that it is prohibitively expensive to put
lasers and light sensors in space that's an a fortiori argument for
artificial snow.

Shine a 4 milliwatt 645 nm wavelength dollar store pet laser onto a
red reflector lens at night and it explodes into color.

Slender reflective fibers would easily reflect a relatively low power
satellite based laser a couple hundred miles back to the satellite and
show up on satellite imaging. A very weak magnet on each fiber could
orient the fibers in specified directions with respect to the earth's
magnitic field it the time it would take to fall hundreds or thousands
of feet from a plane.

It would be very difficult to tramp over the fibers without disturbing
the orientation.

When Al Quada tries a night time ambush, everyone on the planet knows
about it.

The mililary needs some material that can be crop dusted onto road
beds that can only be disturbed by digging and not by vehicle traffic.

Ordinary traffic performs a certain amount of "gardening" on a dirt
road, meaning some of thetaggant_will_ be mixed into the roadbed
material. How deeply depends on the exact nature of the material (sand/
clay/organic dirt, salts, concrete, asphalt, etc.) the kind and degree
of traffic, the weather _and_ climate, and so on.

Worst case you get washboarding which requires periodic repair,
meaning deeper penetration by thetaggant. It will however be more
evenly distributed than the sort of localized dugskullery you're
talking about.

Hence the sort of disturbance due to traffic will be easily
differentiable from that due to digging.

The material must be deposited with a characteristic "thumbprint" that
can be identified with the appropriate sensors but cannot be
duplicated, i.e., it cannot be swept up and spread over a freshly
planted bomb.
This method wouldn't reveal the old bombs but it would make it easy to
spot where a roadbed was recently dug up.
Just off the top of my head, how about microscopic polymer chips
like those used in dynamite. Rather than the complex layering used to
indicate batch numbers etc. it would be infused infused with an
additive which, when exposed to UV, fluoresces in the IR, not the
visible. If laid down by ground vehicle or say Predator or other drone
during low traffic periods it would have a fairly even characteristic
distribution, and any disturbance will be immediately visible by
inspection by personnel wearing IR goggles during the day, and at
night with IR goggles and the assistance of a UV lamp. Inspection
could also be done by suitably-equipped drones of course.

Attempts to "sweep up" and use the dust to cover new bombs will not
replicate the dust distribution as laid down originally.

Mark L. Fergerson

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Are you really this witless in real life or are you just pulling our
legs?

Why is it, that every science kook tries to let others
do the research??

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

Unless you are claiming that it is prohibitively expensive to put
lasers and light sensors in space that's an a fortiori argument for
artificial snow.

Your statement: "Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers
or fibers?"

The cost of any "glass slivers or fibers" would be a trivial part of the
total system cost.

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

Unless you are claiming that it is prohibitively expensive to put
lasers and light sensors in space that's an a fortiori argument for
artificial snow.

Your statement: "Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers
or fibers?"

The cost of any "glass slivers or fibers" would be a trivial part of the
total system cost.

You think a low power space based laser is expensive?

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Are you really this witless in real life or are you just pulling our
legs?

. . .

Why is it, that every science kook tries to let others
do the research??

If you aren't interested in science or engineering calculations feel
free to start a thread on your last Harlequin Romance Novel.

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

Unless you are claiming that it is prohibitively expensive to put
lasers and light sensors in space that's an a fortiori argument for
artificial snow.

Your statement: "Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers
or fibers?"

The cost of any "glass slivers or fibers" would be a trivial part of the
total system cost.

You think a low power space based laser is expensive?

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

Unless you are claiming that it is prohibitively expensive to put
lasers and light sensors in space that's an a fortiori argument for
artificial snow.

Your statement: "Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers
or fibers?"

The cost of any "glass slivers or fibers" would be a trivial part of the
total system cost.

You think a low power space based laser is expensive?

Not especially, but putting a laser in space, along with the aiming and
monitoring stuff is.

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Are you really this witless in real life or are you just pulling our
legs?

. . .

Why is it, that every science kook tries to let others
do the research??

If you aren't interested in science or engineering calculations feel
free to start a thread on your last Harlequin Romance Novel.

How are those Harlequin's doing for ya' Brett?

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

Unless you are claiming that it is prohibitively expensive to put
lasers and light sensors in space that's an a fortiori argument for
artificial snow.

Your statement: "Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers
or fibers?"

The cost of any "glass slivers or fibers" would be a trivial part of the
total system cost.

You think a low power space based laser is expensive?

you think a low power laser would suffice?

Shine a 4 milliwatt 645 nm wavelength dollar store pet laser onto a
red reflector lens at night and it explodes into color.

Slender reflective fibers would easily reflect a relatively low power
satellite based laser a couple hundred miles back to the satellite and
show up on satellite imaging.  A very weak magnet on each fiber could
orient the fibers in specified directions with respect to the earth's
magnitic field it the time it would take to fall hundreds or thousands
of feet from a plane.

It would be very difficult to tramp over the fibers without disturbing
the orientation.

When Al Quada tries a night time ambush, everyone on the planet knows
about it.



The mililary needs some material that can be crop dusted onto road
beds that can only be disturbed by digging and not by vehicle traffic..
  Ordinary traffic performs a certain amount of "gardening" on a dirt
road, meaning some of thetaggant_will_ be mixed into the roadbed
material. How deeply depends on the exact nature of the material (sand/
clay/organic dirt, salts, concrete, asphalt, etc.) the kind and degree
of traffic, the weather _and_ climate, and so on.

  Worst case you get washboarding which requires periodic repair,
meaning deeper penetration by thetaggant. It will however be more
evenly distributed than the sort of localized dugskullery you're
talking about.

  Hence the sort of disturbance due to traffic will be easily
differentiable from that due to digging.

The material must be deposited with a characteristic "thumbprint" that
can be identified with the appropriate sensors but cannot be
duplicated, i.e., it cannot be swept up and spread over a freshly
planted bomb.

This method wouldn't reveal the old bombs but it would make it easy to
spot where a roadbed was recently dug up.

  Just off the top of my head, how about microscopic polymer chips
like those used in dynamite. Rather than the complex layering used to
indicate batch numbers etc. it would be infused infused with an
additive which, when exposed to UV, fluoresces in the IR, not the
visible. If laid down by ground vehicle or say Predator or other drone
during low traffic periods it would have a fairly even characteristic
distribution, and any disturbance will be immediately visible by
inspection by personnel wearing IR goggles during the day, and at
night with IR goggles and the assistance of a UV lamp. Inspection
could also be done by suitably-equipped drones of course.

  Attempts to "sweep up" and use the dust to cover new bombs will not
replicate the dust distribution as laid down originally.

  Mark L. Fergerson- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

Unless you are claiming that it is prohibitively expensive to put
lasers and light sensors in space that's an a fortiori argument for
artificial snow.

Your statement: "Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers
or fibers?"

The cost of any "glass slivers or fibers" would be a trivial part of the
total system cost.

You think a low power space based laser is expensive?

Not especially, but putting a laser in space, along with the aiming and
monitoring stuff is.

More than GPS?

After all this only requires one sat. in GSO

So how much does it cost

Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers?

Yes.  Big talk.

Which is why we are still waiting for your spread sheet on why it
should be summarily dismissed.

Still obsessed with spreadsheets, I see.

The acquistion cost of base materials is, for most things, a trivial
cost in total system cost.

Unless you are claiming that it is prohibitively expensive to put
lasers and light sensors in space that's an a fortiori argument for
artificial snow.

Your statement: "Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers
or fibers?"

The cost of any "glass slivers or fibers" would be a trivial part of the
total system cost.

You think a low power space based laser is expensive?

you think a low power laser would suffice?

How much power is required for _any_ communication, information or
detection system? The GPS idea was never considered controversial
_decades_ before it was deployed.

We're not trying to kill anything which was the goal of some space
based laser ideas.

We just want to see if anything has disturbed some scattered micro
reflectors either by changing the orientation or shattering it with
the forces/pressures typical of an adult human wearing a boot.