Just a note for the unwary. The image posted is fake. The narrow red beam is photoshopped onto the photograph. The real beam would fill the aperture and be invisible. Laser weapons are visually undramatic when they operate. All the fun happens at the target.
Who is "they"? Not anyone in the defense industry, I can tell you that. There have been regular news items for the past half-century, as developments materialize. I can agree that uninformed people may have been saying such things. Why would you think they are a standard of knowledge?
Mysterious evil lasers don't exist, however.
Lasers can be a component of the targeting system in a weapon (target designation). Otherwise, the main categories of directed energy weapons are: lasers, microwaves, and particle beams. Laser DEWs are mainly for a "thermal kill" of the target, and range between 100 kW and 1 MW of output power. Microwave DEWs are mainly for electromagnetic warfare applications (e.g., jamming). Their physics makes it difficult to produce a small spot on target (large wavelengths). Particle beams were a subject of interest in the early SDI years (1980s), but they turned out to be impractical from the standpoint of beam generation, propagation, and directional control.
"Scalar" physics is a bogus concept, not even clearly explained. There is electromagnetism and it inherently is of a vector nature.
Doesn't affect what I said. The curtain walls of the Twin Towers would have posed no impediment (they are called "curtain walls" because they are not essentially structural; they are there to hold up the exterior covering). They were thin and mostly glass. The rest of the tower was open space between steel support columns. Read up on the 1945 collision of a B-25 bomber with the Empire State Building. It's not like these things haven't happened before.
But it does show that a very high speed collision can obliterate an airplane into small fragments.
If it is only civilians, yes that would be a war crime. If it is a military target, no it is not. The presence of civilians is the responsibility of Hamas. Use of human shields is a war crime. I have read that they established a command center in the middle of a hospital. That is expressly forbidden. And the enforcement of these prohibitions is that the other side is not obligated to defer their attacks. This has long been going in in Ukraine, where the Ukrainians post their firing points in apartment buildings, under which they keep civilians captive, all for the sake of declaring "They're targeting civilians." No. It doesn't work that way, and you should actually read up on the subject instead of sucking up the MSM brainwashing. It's just an opportunity for you to indulge in anti-Israel bias.
As for white phosphorus, target marking is totally permitted. You have no argument that they are doing anything else with it. Your only argument is to be rude and accuse me of gaslighting. I guess the fact that I have done research into the subject counts for nothing,
Since you don't have any way of proving what you are assuming, I don't understand what you bring to the discussion other than prejudice. I'm pretty sure you don't have telepathy.
The acquisition is about 2 years old. Not much excuse for anyone with interest and $220 million to pass it up. Lots of automobile brands and companies, and aircraft/aerospace companies have either folded, been acquired, or merged over the past 50 years. Not always for good results, either.
I think the lesson is that one must be vigilant about the health of those institutions we find valuable (i.e., worth saving). The fatal discovery is always upsetting, but it is hard to avoid the thought that this falls into the category of "What? My dog died?" What did we do to care beforehand? (Speaking as a survivor/victim of a corporate merger.)
Particle beam weapons? We studied those in the 1980s. Serious problems with atmospheric propagation and beam stability in the presence of terrestrial magnetic fields. No interest since then.
Nobody has ever said "they don't exist" as a category. News about them in development has been available for half a century. They don't exist as a boogeyman to start fires, however. That would be a "right wing conspiracy theory," and it would be completely unfounded. You would have better luck with a burning glass and sunlight.
The Israeli weapons are point air defense systems and are home deployed. The U.S. Navy has some comparable deck systems installed on one or two destroyers for trial use, again as air defense systems. They are too important and too expensive and too complex to be used for tasks that only require a kitchen match.
What for? Blue is a lot darker than any other paint or metal and would lovingly soak up a 100 kW laser beam (which would be infrared, anyway). The best surface we could think of was polished aluminum covered in a cleanly-degrading polymer (CDP). But at an open-fire intensity of 50+ watts/cm2, it wouldn't matter. If as much as a few watts/sq cm got through, the surface quality would be destroyed and the absorption would go up an order of magnitude. It only takes about 1.4 w/cm2 to melt aluminum.
This blue paint myth is complete hokum.
You talk a lot about physics, but you fail to demonstrate understanding of the subject. A 767 weighing about 175 tons, traveling at 440 mph, hitting an office building would cause immense damage from momentum alone, even if it consisted only of water. The major structures inside aircraft (wing spars and deck beams) are I-beams made of aluminum. They are tough cookies, and what happened had no relationship to tossing a beer can at a cement wall. In the event, the curtain walls and interior columns of the Twin Towers did not simply turn into dust upon the collision. So, your account doesn't even begin to accurately describe what happened.
I will leave it at that, because apparently it is unpopular to strip away the bogus authority claimed by people who don't really know.
The attack on oil (and coal) has nothing to do with scarcity. It is all demonization of carbon dioxide (which we all exhale, and enjoy as carbonated beverages).
The abiogenic theories (there are several, depending on the chemistry proposed) are very interesting, but it is pretty clear that coal is a "fossil" fuel, since the plant origins can be detected in its structure. And it is a perfectly good fuel. One might argue that it is proper to restore terrestrial carbon to the atmosphere from which it originated.
No. Cutting off water and electricity is something landlords can do, under legal circumstances. It can hardly be called a war crime. And use of white phosphorus smoke-producers for target-marking is specifically allowed. You really need to do the research instead of knee-jerking.
Not when you are hitting military targets. The only war crime is Hamas situating itself in the midst of the population to use them as human shields. How to enforce that? Combatants have an unrestricted right to attack military targets. They also have a positive obligation to keep their forces segregated from their civilian public.
If you are going to talk about war "crimes," you need to read up on the applicable laws of war (mostly Hague and Geneva conventions). There is also the problem that fake news (destroyed hospital) is being swallowed as truth.
I agree that will not be too surprising. But for now, I prefer to wait and let the dust settle. The false claims about the "destroyed" hospital is an indicator of the flux of truth. There are now emerging reports confirming the grisly manner of deaths in the Hamas attack, so do we whip back and forth? Better to wait and see.
I think I've figured it out. Biden's puppetmaster is Jeff Dunham.
Everybody ponders the misspelling of "stollen." But whenever I see this motto, I find it impossible not to jocularly re-read it as "The Beast is yet to come." Which can be a little frightening to ponder. The upside might be the suggestion of a rampant Trump. The downside is the last chapter in the Bible.
Not to take this seriously. Life is full of unanticipated adjacencies.
Yep. A feeder of bias confirmation. I used to visit his site on a fairly regular basis after I discovered it, but then I began to realize that he is in the business of reading Rorschach blots and finding demons. Useless for reliable information. I don't visit him any more.
Yes. I was almost going to mention him, but got distracted. Too prone to infer doom from a cloudy sky.
Might be good to listen and put it in the refrigerator to see if it stands the test of time. I never heard of Prather and looked him up. A man for all seasons: Spec Ops, DIA, DEA, "targeted by the Deep State", "whistle-blower", "exposing fake news." https://jeffreyprather.com/ No shrinking violet. I don't understand how someone formerly with the DIA now has access to information that should be highly classified from the Israeli viewpoint. Which makes me wonder. This is perfectly opportune to cultivate "false flag" conspiracy reflexes among those hungry for bias confirmation.
There is an old principle of science that a theory which cannot be disproved is not a valid theory. How would his account be disproved? Those who know the truth and deny his account---would be disbelieved as "liars." Unless we can know how his account can be disproved, it is hard to see how his account is any different from a complete myth. Which points to the need for independent confirmation---not based on unconfirmable accounts. E.g., if Netanyahu made such an admission publicly.
Unfortunately, the entire aviation industry is taking this seriously. There are a profusion of companies in operation with the goal of producing passenger-carrying drones with automatic pilot and electrical propulsion, for intra-city transport, competing with taxicabs. Imagine an airborne Tesla...crossed with a 737 MAX MCAS brain.
There are also plans for large-size passenger aircraft to be propelled by mixed propulsion (gas turbine driving generator energizing electric motors). I don't pretend to understand the design rationale, but apparently there are some aerodynamic advantages to distributing the propulsive thrust along the entire leading edge of the wing. As an aerodynamicist, I am not sold on the idea. (I'm more partial to unducted fans.)
Are you trying to refer to "AWACS" planes? (Airborne Warning and Control System). Those are big planes and I'm not aware of any owned by Israel. But they are not for ground surveillance, so they wouldn't be relevant. You might be thinking of the E-8C Joint Stars aircraft, which does ground surveillance, but Israel does not have any of them either (also big airplanes). So, it is a fact that they don't have such airplanes (you can look up the inventory of the Israeli Defense Force).
As we found out from the various Gulf Wars, there is no such thing as a fixed rocket launch site. "Shoot and scoot" is the modus operandi. Clearing an area so there is no ground cover to conceal in may be a legitimate objective.