To keep the crew and the computers alive you have to shield them from both gamma rays and pions. As far as the crew is concerned both reaction products come under the heading of "deadly radiation. Given an absorbing propellant or radiation shield of a specific density you can figure the thickness that will stop all the pions. This is the pion's "range" through that material.
I see a hierarchy of decision-making levels, roughly as follows from "lowest" to "highest: Moreover, the higher functions aren't necessarily confined to high ranks.
In a counterinsurgency war, for example, the individual grunt often has to make rules-of-engagement decisions that are essentially political: Presuming that space yachts won't often blunder into the middle of a battle.
Level 1 seems almost certain to be automated.
I just can't see guys spinning wheels to slew a laser cannon around, let alone shoving photons into the breech. I can easily see all human decision making confined to the bridge and CIC, with turrets operated by some mix of automation and remote control.
And — depending on range, light lag, and other comms factors — the turrets might well detach from the ship and maneuver in formation, still controlled from bridge and CIC.
In other words, combat drones at least partly controlled from a mother ship. Levels 4 and 5 are a much taller order. I have speculated, though, on what I call the "legate" concept, in which the only human decision-makers are essentially policy representatives of the government.
The only military orders a legate gives are, in effect "authorized to fire" and "cease firing. Level 6 can only be automated if you have fully sentient AI that not only can vote, but be elected or functional equivalent.
We do not know how human judgment and intuition — "the Force" — work, so we haven't the first clue of how to replicate it. I don't rule it out in the future i.
Level 3 is also pretty dicey — however, depending on your specific tech assumptions, remote control may well be viable at this level. For example, in my setting combat is at ranges on order ofkm, but unfolds as a slow pavane, with maneuver and firing taking place on a scale of hours.
In that environment, it's quite plausible to have uncrewed weapon platforms whose Level 1 and 2 functions are automated, while their Level 3 functions are performed by operators in safer positions a few light seconds away. Now, how does all this relate to "space fighters" in the usual sense?
Whether space fighters are viable depends on two things: First, are vest-pocket space warcraft of any value at all, and if so, do they benefit substantially from having humans on board, rather than being either automated or controlled by remote operators or some combination.
I'll further note that "fighter" is — at least in the WW II naval analogy — a misleading term; fighters and all aircraft operated in an entirely separate environment from ships, and had radically different performance characters: They could go ten times faster than any ship, though they could not heave-to even for a moment.
If beam weapons are dominant, miniature space warcraft seem pretty useless whether crewed or uncrewed — their small size must limit their weapon installations to peashooters, useless against large ships.
If kinetics are dominant, small warcraft may be viable if useful missiles are even smaller so that they can carry a few — and especially if one hit one kill is the rule, so that a bigger ship is merely a richer target.
However, then the question is whether these small platforms need an onboard crew, or can be handled by a combination of remote control and onboard expert-system AI. My own take is that for most Plausible [TM] tech and tactical scenarios, there's little reason for putting humans aboard small platforms, especially since putting the human-in-the-loop elsewhere allows them to be cheaper and semi-expendable.
Majority of arguments below are based on a realistic hard scifi setting.The s were all about rationing, protein stretching, substitutions, rediscovering "grandma's foods", and making do with less. Home cooks made sugarless cookies, eggless cakes, and meatless heartoftexashop.comoks, magazines, government pamphlets, and food company brochures were full of creative ideas for stretching food supplies.
A child of divorce turns private eye in the latest well-observed study of domestic dysfunction from Simpson (My Hollywood, , etc.).
In some ways, Simpson's sixth novel marks a return to her first, Anywhere But Here (), which also features a teenage . Can you see the big burst of gas from the Sun in the bottom left? The Sun is a star, because it produces its own energy. The Sun appears bigger and brighter because it .
NEWTON’S RINGS PowerPoint Presentation, PPT - DocSlides- INTRODUCTION. The formation of Newton’s rings is an important application of interference of light wave from the opposite faces of a thin film of variable thickness.
The phenomenon of the formation of the: Newton's rings can be explained on the basis of wave theory of: light. An air film of varying thickness is formed between the lens and the glass sheet. When a light ray is incident on the upper surface of the lens, it is reflected as well as refracted.
If you are a teacher searching for educational material, please visit PBS LearningMedia for a wide range of free digital resources spanning preschool through 12th grade.