[ExI] Power sats as weapons

[Anders Sandberg]

On 08/09/2012 16:32, spike wrote:
>
> A disadvantage I can see is that a space based laser might not be 
> effective in maintaining the old paradigm of mutual assured 
> destruction.  With Iran getting nukes soon, I don't know how to map 
> the future of that notion.
>

Mutually assured destruction is based on the idea that if you defect, 
the other side can make it so costly that it would be irrational to have 
defected in the first place. And vice versa.

I think one can do this with laser-sats too. Most likely they are great 
for taking each other out. That is bad, since it encourages surprise 
attacks. But the infrastructure they embody also allows you to have 
other anti-satelite weapons in orbit, including hard to detect stealth 
systems that could retaliate. More importantly a broken solar sat 
produces *loads* of fragments in the same orbit: it might be that you 
don't need any weapons for MAD, but that the Kessler fragmentation 
cascade will make any solar-sat system impossible. And even if the enemy 
has not fired on your satelites, you could in principle fire on your own 
to trigger the "everybody loses" result.

Hmm, this is worth thinking about. I like Keith's scheme a lot, but it 
will involve many loads into orbit and some big structures up there. A 
debris management solution is probably vital for it.


-- 
Anders Sandberg,
Future of Humanity Institute
Oxford Martin School
Faculty of Philosophy
Oxford University

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20120908/ca5a354c/attachment.html>