3 ms·

> The twitter thread mentions this. It involved a bombardment of microwave rays that was detected. How would a similar attack evade detection now? Sounds like

> The twitter thread mentions this. It involved a bombardment of microwave rays that was detected. How would a similar attack evade detection now? Sounds like something they could have worked on in the past half-century. Detection of a narrowly focused burst of radiation would be fairly challenging if you're outside of whatever volumetric detection zone is generated by the attack device. How would you differentiate it from other RF interference? > if you think a microwave weapon caused this event you should be able to explain how it would function. I don't see what exists to be gained by explaining the function of a weapon that jeopardizes and frightens your diplomats. If the claims are true, then there is nobody to convince here; the US is going to act internally on its own information, and the alleged foreign actors involved are going to spread their own disinformation accordingly.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
>I don't see what exists to be gained by explaining the function of a weapon that jeopardizes and frightens your diplomats. Why would that be more frightening than releasing a report saying they were probably attacked by an unknown microwave weapon? I think a radiation beam powerful enough to hurt people as described but able to avoid detection seems unlikely. Anything similar to interference is unlikely to cause damage.
janekm 6y ago
Radio receivers (and the LNA component of such) are incredibly sensitive... that's what allows all the radio systems we use daily to work at all. If a signal is strong enough to have a physiological effect on the human body it is many many orders of magnitude stronger than can be measured with off-the-shelf instruments (i.e. an antenna and spectrum analyser). Even if you make an effort to concentrate the effect in a specific spot (e.g. phased array antennas), you can only achieve a moderate reduction (e.g. 1-2 orders of magnitude) outside the central lobe. It will be easily detectable outside the effective area.

boomboomsubban 6y ago

>I don't see what exists to be gained by explaining the function of a weapon that jeopardizes and frightens your diplomats. Why would that be more frightening than releasing a report saying they were probably attacked by an unknown microwave weapon? I think a radiation beam powerful enough to hurt people as described but able to avoid detection seems unlikely. Anything similar to interference is unlikely to cause damage.

janekm 6y ago

Radio receivers (and the LNA component of such) are incredibly sensitive... that's what allows all the radio systems we use daily to work at all. If a signal is strong enough to have a physiological effect on the human body it is many many orders of magnitude stronger than can be measured with off-the-shelf instruments (i.e. an antenna and spectrum analyser). Even if you make an effort to concentrate the effect in a specific spot (e.g. phased array antennas), you can only achieve a moderate reduction (e.g. 1-2 orders of magnitude) outside the central lobe. It will be easily detectable outside the effective area.