RE: FT Taskforce and Fleet Actions

On Aug 7 , "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> 
> >From Ryan's original post
> > Granted space is big. But what is the granularity here? NASA has
> > fits every time they send something through the field. Some
> > smaller chunks that are hard to map are always the bigger worry.
> > Even still, closer to earth we're still finding damnably big
> > rocks (3-6 Mile Pluse size) really close.

     The NASA thing has been covered adequately by others, so I'll 
touch briefly on the "big rocks near Earth" question. The biggest 
reason that they don't tend to be found is that we're not looking for 
them. A few (less than 10) telescopes, even Earth-based, actively 
looking for near-Earth asteroids, would find any that habitually stay 
near the Earth fairly quickly. There just isn't the funding available 
to do that right now (meaning that governments don't WANT to spend 
the money there, rather than that they don't have enough to do so if 
they did want to) (I'm not going to touch on why, and whether this is 
justified, my point is merely that it is well within our capability 
to find these things if we really wanted to).
     Of course, most asteroids that approach close to the Earth also 
get fairly far away, and may have long orbits (some may even have 
orbits looking quite a bit like short-period comets). For these, you 
not only have to detect them (which can be done) but figure out their 
orbits (which would be more difficult). Of course, space-based 
telescopes would make all of this much easier.... The thing right now 
is that you tend to find asteroids while looking for something else, 
because there really isn't any funding to look for near-Earth 
asteroids (as an independent activity).

> Or you could base hyperlimits or hyperwalls on some completely
> different High-SF quality. For example, go whacked out and say the
> total biomass on a planet determines the hyperlimit (Earth's would
> be say 5 or 10 AU). Or you gould say that the FTL limit  is subject
> to hyperspace "tides" that sweep in and out of the system based on
> some PSB mechanic. That could mean that on rare occasions, even
> core worlds could be subject to direct assault, and defensive fleet
> movements would have to take the tides into account.

     One mechanism that I haven't seen used very often which might be 
worth looking at is magnetic flux. It has several advantages:
     -most planets have a fairly high field, but not all. This means 
that some planets might be naturally exposed, while others (even 
others farther out) are better protected.
     -magnetic fields follow an inverse cube law (for dipoles, 
anyway). This means that there will be less difference in field 
limits from smaller to larger fields (in general).
     -jovian-style gas giants put out a fairly intensive flux. Useful 
for shielding their moons (so do stars, and so would almost any 
habitable planet).
     -Screens use (PSB) magnetic fields to deflect particle beams. If 
that is the case, you might have to drop your screens just before you 
jump. Maybe even a LOT before....