Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Saturday, September 1, 2012
Friday, August 31, 2012
Monday, August 13, 2012
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Friday, July 20, 2012
Friday, July 6, 2012
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Sunday, June 3, 2012
June 2, 2012
The Wisdom Fund
A Note on the Technical Feasibility of the Destruction of World Trade Center 1 and 2 by a Directed Energy Weaponby Enver Masud SUGGESTION: Read the FREE ebook "9/11 Unveiled"
Watch author's rebuttal of The 9/11 Commission Report
Some in the 9/11 truth movement have advanced the theory that a directed energy weapon was used to destroy World Trade Center 1 and 2. Before one entertains this theory, one must determine if this is technically feasible.
For example, if I were to state that I will transport 1000 people, 3000 miles, in my BMW z3 Coupe, in one week, it would immediately be obvious that this is not technically feasible.
Similarly, when one considers the possibility of a directed energy weapon having been used to destroy World Trade Center 1 and 2, a little research (undertaken between 3:00 am and 4:00 last night) shows that this too is not technically feasible.
The goal of the High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System, launched following a research breakthrough by DARPA in 2003, was to fabricate and demonstrate a system with an output power of 15 kW. "Based on the results of this demonstration, additional laser modules [would] be developed... to produce a 150 kW laser weapon system demonstrator."
The Defense Science Board Task Force on Directed Energy Weapons in its December 2007 report proposed 1-3 MW (i.e. 1000 to 3000 kW) Free Electron Laser prototype in 2020.
Note that a few years after the destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, directed energy weapons of the order of 15kW, to 3000 kW by the year 2020, were targets for development. A 15 kW system was yet to be "fabricated and demonstrated".
Could a 15 kW directed energy weapon (not yet developed in 2001) have brought down the World Trade Center?
To put this in perspective, "Measurements show a house will occasionally use as much as 15 kilowatts for short intervals".
In other words, the 15 kW directed energy weapon (not yet developed in 2001) is equivalent to the maximum demand for a typical house. Even a 3000 kW directed energy weapon (a target for 2020) would be equivalent to the maximum demand for 200 homes.
One doesn't need to do any calculation to conclude that directed energy weapons available in 2001 were not sufficient to bring down the World Trade Center. Even directed energy weapons that were targeted for development by 2020 would not be sufficient to bring down the World Trade Center.
Therefore, one may safely conclude that a directed energy weapon having been used to destroy World Trade Center 1 and 2 is not technically feasible.
"What Really Happened on September 11, 2001," 2002 - 2012
[Whether Tesla's idea was ever taken seriously is still a mater of conjecture. Most experts today consider his idea infeasible. . . .
In 1958 the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) initiated a top-secret project code-named "Seesaw" at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory to develop a charged-particle beam weapon. More than ten years and twenty-seven million dollars later, the project was abandoned "because of the projected high costs associated with implementation as well as the formidable technical problems associated with propagating a beam through very long ranges in the atmosphere." . . .
In the late 1970s, there was fear that the Soviets may have achieved a technological breakthrough. Some U.S. defense analysts concluded that a large beam weapon facility was under construction near the Sino-Soviet border in Southern Russia.
The American response to this "technological surprise" was the Strategic Defense Initiative announced by President Ronald Reagan in 1983. . . .
Today, after a half-century of research and billions of dollars of investment, the SDI program is generally considered a failure--"A Weapon to End War," PBS
[One major problem with laser weapons . . . is their high electric energy requirements. . . .
This problem could also be lessened if the weapon were mounted either at a defensive position near a power plant, or on board a large, possibly nuclear powered, water-going ship. A ship would have the advantage of water for cooling.--"Directed- energy weapon," Wikipedia]