Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ll-xn!nike!sri-spam!mordor!jtk
From: jtk@mordor.ARPA (Jordan Kare)
Newsgroups: sci.misc,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: military funding in mathematics
Message-ID: <16229@mordor.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 22-Oct-86 22:45:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: mordor.16229
Posted: Wed Oct 22 22:45:57 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 23-Oct-86 07:20:53 EDT
References: <2055@princeton.UUCP> <9600044@uiucdcsp> <48@cartan.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: jtk@mordor.UUCP (Jordan Kare)
Organization: S-1 Project, LLNL
Lines: 52
Xref: mnetor sci.misc:24 talk.politics.misc:662

I don't want to get into a general discussion on SDI/military funding, but
as an associate of Peter Hagelstein (the "genius at Livermore"), 
I have some comments on Matthew Weiner's article flaming (I suspect justifiably)
an earlier posting:

In article <48@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Matthew P Wiener) writes:

>Why should optics suddenly get flooded with funds, and particle physics
>have to beg?

Rather obviously, because particle physics seems to have wandered so
far from the "real world" that it is no longer of interest to anyone
but its own practitioners (I've heard Luis Alvarez argue that
modern particle theory verges on being metaphysics (or religion) not
physics), whereas even very fundamental work in optics has more or
less obvious prospects for utility.  Massive funding for, say, missile
tracking telescopes rather than fiber optics research, though, seems
a more direct example.

>
>In the end, if the trend [to military funding of science and
>associated security hassles] continues, the military brass will be happy,
>shuffling their paperwork funding approvals, but the best minds of our
>generation will be elsewhere.

Being Lawyers :-(
  
>
>Surely you heard about the genius at
>Livermore who designed the X-ray laser quit when he realized that his
>weapon was not really going to be useful defensively, but that it
>would make a great offensive weapon.  

This is an unwarranted assumption about his motives.  

It's also a very debatable assumption about X-ray lasers -- they may be
useful defensively (in the narrow sense of being able to knock down
ICBMs; whether this is desirable, and under what circumstances, is
a larger question) or they may be useless offensively, though
I doubt both of these will prove true.


>Actually, he himself is keeping
>mum about his exact reasons, but he has not denied these assertions.

"Sir, do you still beat your wife?"  Failure to deny assertions
should not be taken to confirm them, ESPECIALLY in the case of
a private individual who has specifically avoided publicity.

Yours for rational discussion of SDI 

		Jordin Kare  jtk@s1-c.ARPA jtk@mordor.UUCP