Re: Laser Weapons

Scott Clinton wrote:

>
>
> These all assume visible light (or near visible light LASERs).  It is
my
> understanding that X-Ray (and other high freq. light) LASERs are what
hold
> the real 'promise' in this field.

X-ray lasers have the annoying problem that outside of an armored
vehicle, there
is no way to guarantee that even if the target is square in your sights
and
stationary, that you will actually deliver energy to the target (X-rays
interact
weakly with people).  Worse, it is possible to dose your target with
15,000
rems, and the bugger may still be alive a week after he has killed you
(the
Therac 25 may produce hits on the topic of megadoses of x-rays due to
faulty
software in a cancer treatment machine).  Under inadequite armor,
cascade
effects will promptly kill the occupants.