It would only give you funding. It wouldn't make R&D easier (look at the history of the controlled fusion program). And even if the principle had been demonstrated by prototype examples, the idea can be quashed for other reasons (e.g., the Orion pulse propulsion concept).
I was once working with a team that was getting ready to build megawatt-class carbon monoxide electric discharge lasers (COEDLs) for weapon systems. We were in competition with Northrop. But that whole technology was bypassed when the Air Force decided to develop the chemical oxygen-iodine laser (COIL). So, you never know what the fate of an idea will be.
There is a mental process on this page that tends to go in the direction of: "It's conceivable" => "it's possible" => "it's probable" => "it's in development" => "it's a secret weapon!" When the real answer is: bumpkis. Be skeptical of super technology being touted. The stuff that is talked about is unlikely. The stuff that is likely is not talked about.
Since I was read into SCI programs that had access to tech you could only dream of, I think you are speaking out of your depth. What is this? The sauceless critic who wants to lord it over the chef?
This idea that "because I can't prove it, there must be fantastic super-weapons being held in secret" is pure delusion. Get over it.
It would only give you funding. It wouldn't make R&D easier (look at the history of the controlled fusion program). And even if the principle had been demonstrated by prototype examples, the idea can be quashed for other reasons (e.g., the Orion pulse propulsion concept).
I was once working with a team that was getting ready to build megawatt-class carbon monoxide electric discharge lasers (COEDLs) for weapon systems. We were in competition with Northrop. But that whole technology was bypassed when the Air Force decided to develop the chemical oxygen-iodine laser (COIL). So, you never know what the fate of an idea will be.
There is a mental process on this page that tends to go in the direction of: "It's conceivable" => "it's possible" => "it's probable" => "it's in development" => "it's a secret weapon!" When the real answer is: bumpkis. Be skeptical of super technology being touted. The stuff that is talked about is unlikely. The stuff that is likely is not talked about.
No offense, but if you don't think there were SCI programs way above you that had access to tech you could only dream of, then you are naive.
Since I was read into SCI programs that had access to tech you could only dream of, I think you are speaking out of your depth. What is this? The sauceless critic who wants to lord it over the chef?
This idea that "because I can't prove it, there must be fantastic super-weapons being held in secret" is pure delusion. Get over it.