Low Power Satellite Based Laser / Imaging System Could Easily Track Activity Disturbing Cheap Reflecting Fibers
in [Basics]
|
Prev: Discussing audio amplifier design -- BJT, discrete
Next: Low Power Satellite Based Laser / Imaging System Could Easily Track ?Activity Disturbing Cheap Reflecting Fibers
From: Immortalista on 1 Feb 2010 22:44 On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Shine a 4 milliwatt 645 nm wavelength dollar store pet laser onto a > red reflector lens at night and it explodes into color. > Sure thing, next thing you know the stupid Americans will have to cut their eduction and infrastructure expenditures to chase some guys around in some caves with camels while China and India cover the debt. I the rest of the world doesn't want to help Irag and Afghanistan why should we? > 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
From: Michael A. Terrell on 2 Feb 2010 02:52 Bret Cahill wrote: > > On Feb 1, 1:38 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> > wrote: > > krw wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 20:46:39 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill > > > <BretCah...(a)peoplepc.com> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> >>>> 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? > > > > > >> >If you aren't interested in science or engineering calculations, in > > > >> >other words, if you are interested in science and technology period, > > > >> >feel free to start a thread on your last Harlequin Romance Novel. > > > > > >> Your reading list, no. > > > > > >This thread is for those interested in some _numbers_ on the > > > > > It certainly isn't. You're here. > > > > > >deployment of a satellite based laser system that tracks terrorists > > > >hiding in caves by crop dusting large regions with reflectors. > > > > > No, you were discussing another of your wet dreams. You even brought > > > up Harlequin novels. > > > > > >If you are a moronic high school drop out rightard who flunked math > > > >feel free to start a thread on some other issue, i.e. Harliquin > > > >Romance novels or whatever girly books you read. > > > > > No Bret, you're the one who is infatuated with Harlequin romance > > > books. They are about your speed, though. > > > > Is Bret still > > . . . still a possible defendant in your defamation suit? > > You know, where you demonstrated you couldn't fake a science or tech > background and got your panties all knotted up over me for some > reason? Yawn. Another drug induced fanatsy of yours? -- Greed is the root of all eBay.
From: Bret Cahill on 2 Feb 2010 10:31 > > Shine a 4 milliwatt 645 nm wavelength dollar store pet laser onto a > > red reflector lens at night and it explodes into color. > Sure thing, next thing you know the stupid Americans will have to cut > their eduction and infrastructure expenditures to chase some guys > around in some caves with camels while China and India cover the debt. > I the rest of the world doesn't want to help Irag and Afghanistan why > should we? The BushCo quagmires were losers from the very beginning, the last desperate attempt of the Repugliar Party to cling to power through jingoism. In fact Cheney and Bush both knew their quagmires were losers, Cheney on a youtube video the corp. media wanted to low profile. This does _not_ mean it is easy to get out of these quagmires and it does _not_ mean we cannot save lives and money with new, relatively low cost technology. Bret Cahill > > 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 -
From: Bret Cahill on 2 Feb 2010 11:45 > > > > >> >> >> >>>> So how much does it cost > > > > >> >> >> >>> Can you think of any commodity cheaper than glass slivers or fibers? No answer? .. . . > Yawn. Everyone _already_ knows science and technology bores your empty head. Try commenting on this: http://www.me-sensor.com/news/Archiv/2009-11-10-ILD1302/index.html Or go back to posting on alt.harliquin.romance. Bret Cahill
From: Michael Price on 3 Feb 2010 22:08
On Jan 29, 2:45 am, Bret Cahill <BretCah...(a)peoplepc.com> wrote: > > >>> Fine, you can detect "tramping". So how do you > > >>> tell that it was the bad guys and not some kid herding his Daddy's > > >>> goats? > > >> Send a drone over. > > > And how does "sending a drone over" tell you about events that happened > > > hours earlier? Are you going to "send a drone over" every time a rabbit > > > runs down the road? > > You think a rabbit will have the same footprint as a dozen men? I think they both trigger your idiotic device and unless you're going to install software that distinguishes them in the device it's useless. Transmitting millions of false alarms to a satelite which can only deal with hundreds (maybe) to tell it to send a drone that we have limited numbers of is stupid. This is even assuming that terrorists don't avoid the patently obvious red beams. > > > >> The satellite system monitors hundreds of thousand of square miles > > >> silently and, with UV or IR lasers, invisibly. > > > And it finds that, wonder of wonders, there is traffic on roads. > > And that there is traffic around mountain caves w/o roads. Yep, most of it goats. If there is anywhere near the evidence that a particular place is a likely terrorist hideout any other device would be better than this hackneyed scheme. > > > > The > > > problem is not determing whether there is traffic but determining which > > > specific traffic is planning to cause trouble. > > You can always buy 400,000 drones. Which is what your scheme would require. > > They already have 25 years worth of video of Afghan countryside, > almost all of it is useless. > > Bret Cahill |