FUN SPACE WARFARE
June 3, 2016 8:56 AM Subscribe
This was really fun, but I wish I had realized earlier on that it was premising its analysis of MAD logic on fantasy interstellar war, not on plausible orbital combat between human nations.
When it comes to China or the US smashing each other's satellites I think MAD still applies just fine.
posted by Wretch729 at 9:13 AM on June 3, 2016 [1 favorite]
When it comes to China or the US smashing each other's satellites I think MAD still applies just fine.
posted by Wretch729 at 9:13 AM on June 3, 2016 [1 favorite]
Translation: "If you accept my implausible assumptions about space warfare, then this is the result."
He tosses around concepts like throwing relativistic moons around, without any consideration of the energy involved, or the effects thereof. For a start, the energy required to accelerate a relativistic "world killer" would make the launching system very, very visible, sans Star Was level handwaving. Likewise, steering an asteroid in from the Oort cloud would would shown be either highly visible, or extremely slow. In either case, surprise attacks aren't very plausible.
He also plays fast and loose with some other concepts, and, and, and...bottom line, this is just a bunch of assertions, no math. So as far as space war scenarios go, I'd give it a C. Not the worst out there, but not Project Rho quality either.
posted by happyroach at 9:34 AM on June 3, 2016 [4 favorites]
He tosses around concepts like throwing relativistic moons around, without any consideration of the energy involved, or the effects thereof. For a start, the energy required to accelerate a relativistic "world killer" would make the launching system very, very visible, sans Star Was level handwaving. Likewise, steering an asteroid in from the Oort cloud would would shown be either highly visible, or extremely slow. In either case, surprise attacks aren't very plausible.
He also plays fast and loose with some other concepts, and, and, and...bottom line, this is just a bunch of assertions, no math. So as far as space war scenarios go, I'd give it a C. Not the worst out there, but not Project Rho quality either.
posted by happyroach at 9:34 AM on June 3, 2016 [4 favorites]
This post reminds me of Three-Body Problem and its sequel The Dark Forest. One of the main takeaways of those books is the idea that the only rational response to discovering an alien civilization is to make every possible effort to destroy it, especially if the other civilization might know of your existence.
posted by shponglespore at 9:38 AM on June 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by shponglespore at 9:38 AM on June 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
What me worry?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:43 AM on June 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:43 AM on June 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
One of the main takeaways of those books is the idea that the only rational response to discovering an alien civilization is to make every possible effort to destroy it, especially if the other civilization might know of your existence.
But what if the other civilization is already Roko's Basilisk?
I'm like 20% into Three-Body Problem. Nobody tell me if the alien civilization is already Roko's Basilisk.
posted by brennen at 11:10 AM on June 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
But what if the other civilization is already Roko's Basilisk?
I'm like 20% into Three-Body Problem. Nobody tell me if the alien civilization is already Roko's Basilisk.
posted by brennen at 11:10 AM on June 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
Nobody tell me if the alien civilization is already Roko's Basilisk.
No spoilers, but I think you'll find that it's considerably more interesting than the banal Basilisk.
posted by chimaera at 11:27 AM on June 3, 2016 [2 favorites]
No spoilers, but I think you'll find that it's considerably more interesting than the banal Basilisk.
posted by chimaera at 11:27 AM on June 3, 2016 [2 favorites]
One of the footnotes in the article contains a link to a piece at Overcoming Bias warning sci-fi readers not to be seduced by highly detailed visions of the future.
Really? The people who brought us Roko's Basilisk and other future fantasies are going to lecture us on the dangers of projecting onto tomorrow?
posted by Sangermaine at 11:44 AM on June 3, 2016
Really? The people who brought us Roko's Basilisk and other future fantasies are going to lecture us on the dangers of projecting onto tomorrow?
posted by Sangermaine at 11:44 AM on June 3, 2016
Relativistic kill vehicle make cool finction, but yeah just crashing an asteroid into a planet does plenty of damage.
posted by jeffburdges at 12:28 PM on June 3, 2016
posted by jeffburdges at 12:28 PM on June 3, 2016
In fact, there's a lot to be said for slamming an asteroid into your enemy's world at perfectly ordinary orbital speeds - it might not be recognized as an attack at all.
posted by Mr. Excellent at 2:08 PM on June 3, 2016
posted by Mr. Excellent at 2:08 PM on June 3, 2016
The proximity of the words 'fun' and MAD caused me to think the article is about the magazine.
such advocacy seems foolish to us who survived the Cold War; we are not quite so impressed by the argument that Communism is inimitable to the American Way of Life
Indeed! Apart from the madness of thinking that nuclear is a certain deterrent to a moment of madness (see: Cuban missile crisis), the 'better dead than red' line of thinking was extremely profitable for a certain line of politicians interested in Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, and for a certain line of industries and agencies. Brinksmanship is only a 'solution' for the marginally insane.
posted by Twang at 3:03 PM on June 3, 2016
such advocacy seems foolish to us who survived the Cold War; we are not quite so impressed by the argument that Communism is inimitable to the American Way of Life
Indeed! Apart from the madness of thinking that nuclear is a certain deterrent to a moment of madness (see: Cuban missile crisis), the 'better dead than red' line of thinking was extremely profitable for a certain line of politicians interested in Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, and for a certain line of industries and agencies. Brinksmanship is only a 'solution' for the marginally insane.
posted by Twang at 3:03 PM on June 3, 2016
Is this assuming the state of the art of astronomy holding at early 2000's level? Because using hobbyist level optics from under mostly cloud covered dense atmosphere there is a very complete survey of objects in our solar system. Once there is a running infrastructure off this planet the cost of dozens or thousands of Hubble* scale telescopes becomes very practical. There will be few ways to hide in space. Add a bit of clever weaponry to a small asteroid (let alone changing the orbit) and the variance of the existing predicted path will be noticed by several agencies.
(*the existing Hubble is configured for extra solar distances, consider automated telescopes far off the plane of the elliptic optimized for local scanning. The astronomers don't get a few hours a night per telescope but hundreds running on an automated schedule reviewing known objects and looking for new bits of large dust constantly 24/7)
posted by sammyo at 5:04 PM on June 3, 2016
(*the existing Hubble is configured for extra solar distances, consider automated telescopes far off the plane of the elliptic optimized for local scanning. The astronomers don't get a few hours a night per telescope but hundreds running on an automated schedule reviewing known objects and looking for new bits of large dust constantly 24/7)
posted by sammyo at 5:04 PM on June 3, 2016
Relativistic kill vehicle make cool finction.
Finction: FINK shun. n. A tale told by a nark.
posted by Herodios at 12:39 PM on June 5, 2016 [1 favorite]
Finction: FINK shun. n. A tale told by a nark.
posted by Herodios at 12:39 PM on June 5, 2016 [1 favorite]
MAD works fine, you just tell every other civilization you find that you've got an asteroid aimed at their home world that'll automatically deploy if anything happens to yours.
posted by BrotherCaine at 6:16 PM on June 5, 2016
posted by BrotherCaine at 6:16 PM on June 5, 2016
« Older “Careful when you go outside or some tenant group... | We were a blues rock band from Texas...better than... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
The article concludes that MAD won't work in space warfare, but not because pre-emptive strikes are guaranteed. That has nothing to do with MAD, which is about a second stroke, and the problem is you might not know who to strike back against since space attacks can be untraceable.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:11 AM on June 3, 2016 [1 favorite]