Geneva Big Bang machine beats Chicago lab record

[HankB]

Unfortunately, NASA is not developing much in the way of tech, these days. 

But they're promoting diversity, inclusiveness, and social justice, so what's the problem?

[jackdanson]

Just reviewed the constitution.  Doesn't say anything about funding science projects.

[roo_ster]

Just reviewed the constitution.  Doesn't say anything about funding science projects.

But if we could weaponize a SSC...

Folks used to think up all sorts of different ways to knock each other off via new tech.  I don't think wee need to stop with what we have, now.  We need new ways to blast barbarians into base particles.

[Gewehr98]

Just as an aside...

A whole lot of things are permanently disqualifying for .mil service.  Any use of AD/ADHD drugs being only one.

Not necessarily true.  USAF tried to issue me Ritalin for Adult ADHD.  Welbutrin was the alternative.  There was an "adjustment phase" for monitoring, and I kept my TS/SCI.  

[roo_ster]

Just as an aside...

Not necessarily true.  USAF tried to issue me Ritalin for Adult ADHD.  Welbutrin was the alternative.  There was an "adjustment phase" for monitoring, and I kept my TS/SCI.  

Now, don't too big a head or anything, but I do suspect the AF valued you more than some guy off the street who want to enlist or even go O, but who has used such drugs in the past.

IOW, they already had a big ol' investment in you.  Dude of eth street? Not so much.

Anyways, there was a time when such drugs were a disqualifier with recruiters.  Maybe that has changed.

[myrockfight]

Jfruser, can you point me to a reference where it says that the U.S. lost more soldiers in WWII than Germany? I looked it up on Wiki and it says the U.S. lost 416,800 vs. the German's loss of 5,533,000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

Why do you say we had to throw more bodies into the mill when we lost so few comparatively (Roughly 7.5% of their losses)?

You just lost me on that. Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily disagree with the main point that you were making about technology. However, even though Germany had more advanced technology, it certainly seemed as though the U.S. made much better use of what tech we did have.

For example. Look at the effect the M1 Garand had as a simple infantry weapon. The simple fact that it was a semi-automatic made it a great force multiplier against the German bolt-action K98 Mausers. And speaking of ground breaking technology, the BAR was available for service during WWI as a light machine gun, but was held back from the field because we were afraid the enemy might get their hands on one and advance their weapon technology to the same level.

And if I remember correctly we started using aircraft mounted RADAR during WWII. U.S. warships also used RADAR against the Japanese ships at night while the Japs were sailing blind. And we used it effectively.

We also developed and employed the first explosive rounds that were able to sense when metal was near to explode. Remember the Marianas Turkey Shoot? That was the first battle which the rounds were employed to obviously devestating effect. I was looking for an online reference to this but I actually got the information from watching a History Channel documentary on the battle. So take that into consideration.


My point is that you can have the greatest, fastest, smartest, doodad that anyone has ever seen. But if you cannot make effective use of the design due to the inability to reproduce it on a largely applicable scale...it is never going to make a difference in the field. So where does that leave you?

Food for thought.

[RocketMan]

-No amateur rocketry of any significance without FAA/Air Force clearance.

Not so much.  The FAA recently loosened the regs, made them easier to deal with.  Pretty much, if you can find a safe place to fly it, you can apply for the altitude waiver.  Right to the edge of space and higher.
For advanced rocketry, Class 2 and 3 (as defined in FAR 101, not to be confused with Tripoli or NAR "Levels"), there are 45 day pre-flight notification periods and some specific rocket and predicted flight information that must be provided, but less than before.
To the best of my knowledge, the Air Force has never had much say in our activities unless we fly near one of their areas.

[RocketMan]

I am trying to figure out why that hole in my back yard is making kind of a whooshing, sucking sound.

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

Why do you say we had to throw more bodies into the mill when we lost so few comparatively (Roughly 7.5% of their losses)?

You're forgetting the Soviets. Germany had more men fighting the Russians than they did fighting anyone else, IIRC. The Russians lost an incredible number of people (according to the numbers you linked to, 14% of the population ended up dead). It stands to reason that the Germans lost most of their men to the Russians, not the Americans.

[280plus]

I am trying to figure out why that hole in my back yard is making kind of a whooshing, sucking sound.

Nothing to worry about there, just go about your usual business and everything will be just fine.

[roo_ster]

Jfruser, can you point me to a reference where it says that the U.S. lost more soldiers in WWII than Germany? I looked it up on Wiki and it says the U.S. lost 416,800 vs. the German's loss of 5,533,000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

Why do you say we had to throw more bodies into the mill when we lost so few comparatively (Roughly 7.5% of their losses)?

You just lost me on that. Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily disagree with the main point that you were making about technology. However, even though Germany had more advanced technology, it certainly seemed as though the U.S. made much better use of what tech we did have.

For example. Look at the effect the M1 Garand had as a simple infantry weapon. The simple fact that it was a semi-automatic made it a great force multiplier against the German bolt-action K98 Mausers. And speaking of ground breaking technology, the BAR was available for service during WWI as a light machine gun, but was held back from the field because we were afraid the enemy might get their hands on one and advance their weapon technology to the same level.

And if I remember correctly we started using aircraft mounted RADAR during WWII. U.S. warships also used RADAR against the Japanese ships at night while the Japs were sailing blind. And we used it effectively.

We also developed and employed the first explosive rounds that were able to sense when metal was near to explode. Remember the Marianas Turkey Shoot? That was the first battle which the rounds were employed to obviously devestating effect. I was looking for an online reference to this but I actually got the information from watching a History Channel documentary on the battle. So take that into consideration.


My point is that you can have the greatest, fastest, smartest, doodad that anyone has ever seen. But if you cannot make effective use of the design due to the inability to reproduce it on a largely applicable scale...it is never going to make a difference in the field. So where does that leave you?

Food for thought.

Germany had a Loss Exchange Ratio* greater than one (1.0) with every country they fought.  Their problem was that those countries they fought could bring vastly larger numbers of men and material to bear as they fought the USA, USSR, UK, Canada, & a few others.  Your number, I suspect, do not take into account that Germany fought the others, too.



*  Number of enemy killed divided by number of friendlies killed

[myrockfight]

Germany had a Loss Exchange Ratio* greater than one (1.0) with every country they fought.  Their problem was that those countries they fought could bring vastly larger numbers of men and material to bear as they fought the USA, USSR, UK, Canada, & a few others.  Your number, I suspect, do not take into account that Germany fought the others, too.



*  Number of enemy killed divided by number of friendlies killed

Thanks for the clarification. It was late :)

[CAnnoneer]

Jfruser, can you point me to a reference where it says that the U.S. lost more soldiers in WWII than Germany? I looked it up on Wiki and it says the U.S. lost 416,800 vs. the German's loss of 5,533,000.

Ostfront.

[Scout26]

Yep, the Germans killed more Americans then we killed Germans.  The only US Army to inflict higher casualites on the Germans then it sustained was 3rd Army.