What Are the Potential Dangers of Using Plasma Propulsion for Space Travel?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Someone502
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential dangers and implications of using plasma propulsion for space travel, with a focus on military applications and geopolitical considerations. Participants explore theoretical scenarios involving satellite missile defense systems, nuclear deterrence, and the formation of a world government.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that a country with satellite capabilities and nuclear weapons could create a missile defense system, leading to a shift in the balance of power.
  • There is a suggestion that such a defense system could render mutually assured destruction (MAD) ineffective, potentially allowing for the establishment of a world government.
  • Others argue that weapons in space would not protect against ground forces, regardless of the technological advancements.
  • One participant mentions the neutron bomb as a response to ground threats, indicating a historical context for the discussion.
  • Concerns are raised about the feasibility of forming a world government based solely on military superiority, questioning the authority that such a defense would confer.
  • A participant introduces the concept of plasma propulsion for space travel, noting its potential for rapid trips to Mars and expressing concerns about its weaponization.
  • Another participant emphasizes that a large number of plasma systems would be necessary to have a significant impact.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the effectiveness and implications of satellite missile defense systems and the potential for plasma propulsion technology to be weaponized. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on the validity of the proposed theories.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical military strategies and technologies, indicating a complex interplay of ideas that may depend on specific definitions and assumptions about military capabilities and geopolitical dynamics.

Someone502
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
ok can anyone tell me what is wrong with my theory.
Any country that can put satellites into space and has nuclear weapons could possiblely do this.

Firstly build a sattleite missle defense system.

Then threaten everyone, MAD loses its effect because the country is invurneable.

Finally create a world government.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Someone502 said:
ok can anyone tell me what is wrong with my theory.
Any country that can put satellites into space and has nuclear weapons could possiblely do this.

Firstly build a sattleite missle defense system.

Then threaten everyone, MAD loses its effect because the country is invurneable.

Finally create a world government.
yeah, probably could.
 
Someone502 said:
Firstly build a sattleite missle defense system. Then threaten everyone, MAD loses its effect because the country is invurneable. Finally create a world government.
The widespread knowledge of and agreement with that logic is why Star Wars has been called first-strike technology since March 23, 1983.
 
Last edited:
weapons in space won't save you from boots on the ground, no matter what the country in question is.
 
cronxeh said:
weapons in space won't save you from boots on the ground
The neutron bomb was purportedly developed to address this issue.
 
so, my idea would work :devil:

now i just need a politiction i can use to put my plans into action.
 
lol......
 
i was just trying to beat the 10 characters thing in my last post. wah hahahahaha.
 
  • #10
That wouldn't work.

Maybe you do get a satellite defense system. We could still kick it old school and fit a nuke into a plane if need be and drop it Enola Gay style.

And besides, even if you had a totally flawless nuclear defense, what authority would that grant you to form a world government?
 
Last edited:
  • #11
no they would have a missile defence so that they could shot down nukes coming at them
 
  • #12
Someone502 said:
no they would have a missile defence so that they could shot down nukes coming at them
Yeah, re-read your initial post and edited mine to suit it...
 
  • #13
wasteofo2 said:
And besides, even if you had a totally flawless nuclear defense, what authority would that grant you to form a world government?

The fact that you can blow up anyone without them being able to blow you up.
 
  • #14
Someone502 said:
The fact that you can blow up anyone without them being able to blow you up.
Enola Gay.

And even if you can knock out all planes, someone could still bring a biological or chemical agent in by automobile and mess up your country pretty bad.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
I saw an item today, touted as a potential plasma drive for vehicles going to Mars. They were talking enough of a pulse to make a 50 day trip of it. Then they showed the satellites reflecting the pulse, or whatever they were doing, and it sure looked like a weapon to me.
 
  • #16
Dayle Record said:
I saw an item today, touted as a potential plasma drive for vehicles going to Mars. They were talking enough of a pulse to make a 50 day trip of it. Then they showed the satellites reflecting the pulse, or whatever they were doing, and it sure looked like a weapon to me.

Well you'd need a large amount of these systems to make any difference.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
14K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
9K