About
Community
Bad Ideas
Guns & Weapons
Irresponsible Activities
KA-FUCKING-BOOM!
Locks and Security
Scams and Rip-offs
Drugs
Ego
Erotica
Fringe
Society
Technology
register | bbs | search | rss | faq | about
meet up | add to del.icio.us | digg it

HAARP: Are There Issues of Concern to Physicists?

by C.L. Herzenberg


NOTICE: TO ALL CONCERNED Certain text files and messages contained on this site deal with activities and devices which would be in violation of various Federal, State, and local laws if actually carried out or constructed. The webmasters of this site do not advocate the breaking of any law. Our text files and message bases are for informational purposes only. We recommend that you contact your local law enforcement officials before undertaking any project based upon any information obtained from this or any other web site. We do not guarantee that any of the information contained on this system is correct, workable, or factual. We are not responsible for, nor do we assume any liability for, damages resulting from the use of any information on this site.

High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program: Are There Issues to Concern Physicists?

In 1988, discussion first appeared in Physics and Society about a recently patented concept dealing with modification of the Earth's upper atmosphere using high-intensity radio frequency radiation (1,2,3). Not only did this approach seem to have ramifications relating to ionospheric physics, but also certain of the proposed activities appeared to potentially threaten Earth's upper atmosphere and to have arms control implications.

Briefly, the patented invention involves generating an extremely intense beam of circularly-polarized radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation of appropriate frequency and directing this toward the upper atmosphere (1). At certain altitudes, electron cyclotron resonance heating of existing electrons would be expected to cause further ionization of the neutral particles in the atmosphere, and a range of other consequences could ensue (1,2). The patent presents claims that changes in Earth's atmosphere could be created which would persist for prolonged periods of time, and the language of the patent also indicated that it is intended to produce effects on a global scale (1,2). It has been suggested that these changes may pose a danger to the upper atmosphere, in that irreversible damage to the upper atmosphere may ensue from tests of the types described in the patent (1).

Among the proposed applications are the disruption of microwave transmissions of satellites; the selective enhancement, modification, or interception of communications; and causing total disruption of communications over a large portion of Earth (1,2). Other proposed applications include weather modification; changing the chemical composition of the atmosphere; transporting plumes of particulates or plasma within the atmosphere; lifting large regions of the atmosphere; and intercepting or destroying incoming missiles or aircraft (1,2). That this invention has features satisfying the requirements of a weapons system is emphasized in the patent (2).

It was pointed out in subsequent correspondence in Physics and Society that realization of this invention might lead to violations of the Environmental Modification Convention (3). This Convention, signed in 1977 and ratified by the United States in 1979, prohibits military or any other hostile use of environmental modifical techniques, and states that "Each State Party to this convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long- lasting, or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party." Both the Convention itself and the accompanying Understandings Regarding the Convention make it explicitly clear that the atmosphere, the ionosphere, and near-Earth space are included in the Convention (4).

Currently, the patented invention (which is reportedly also covered by classified patents (1)) has been developed and is being implemented in military programs, most recently in the new High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) (5). In part because of its potential to disrupt communications as a side effect as well as deliberately, this project is received with apparent apprehension by Alaskans, and with favor due to its economic impact (6,7).

The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, which is managed cooperatively by the Air Force and the Navy, is described in information sheets as a project having the goal of studying fundamental physical principles governing the ionosphere (5). The proposed research would use high-power radio transmitters to probe the overhead ionosphere, in conjunction with a complement of diagnostic instrumentation. A unique feature of the facility would be a high-power high-frequency radio transmitter with the capability of rapidly steering a narrow beam into a designated direction. HAARP would transmit HF radio waves within the 2.8 to 10 MHz band in a narrow beam, several degrees wide, depending on frequency, thus influencing a region several miles in diameter in the lower ionosphere (5). The power demands for the transmitters are reportedly 12 megawatts (5). Much higher power levels of 109- 1011 watts are also considered in the original patent (1,2).

Potential applications for HAARP are described as including developing DoD technology for detecting cruise missiles and aircraft and for communicating with submarines (5). It is planned to construct HAARP at auroral latitudes in Alaska. The US Air Force has specifically settled on a site near the village of Gakona, northeast of Anchorage, where construction was scheduled to begin in 1993 and be concluded in late 1977 (5,7).

It would appear that, while construction of the HAARP facility may provide new equipment for ionospheric studies as well as applications, this technology does present issues that need to be publicly addressed by the technical community. Related research, and particularly the fact that that research has been non- competitively funded, has already drawn the attention of physicists (8). However, a detailed examination and explicit critique by members of the physics community of the characteristics of this particular technology might clarify the issues and contribute to allaying concerns and resolving questions that have already arisen, and to suggesting courses of action to address the issues raised by this project.

C.L. Herzenberg

1. Richard Williams Physics and Society, Vol. 17, No. 2, p. 16 (April 1988).

2. Bernard Eastlund US Patent Number 4,686,605 (August 11, 1987).

3. C.L. Herzenberg Physics and Society, Vol. 17, No. 3, p. 2 (July 1988).

4. Arms Control and Disarmament Agreements: Texts and Histories of the Negotiations, "Convention on the prohibition of military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques," US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Washington, DC (1990).

5. HAARP Fact Sheet, Office of Naval Research (4 November 1993).

6. C.J. Zickuhr, Anchorage AK, private communication (November 1993).

7. Peter S. Goodman, "Gakona Gets Ionosphere Project," Anchorage Daily News, Vol. 48, No. 319, p. B-1 (15 November 1993).

8. Robert L. Park, in What's New, American Physical Society, Washington DC (2 November 1990, 9 November 1990, 29 November 1991, 6 March 1992).

 
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.
If you have any questions about this, please check out our Copyright Policy.

 

totse.com certificate signatures
 
 
About | Advertise | Bad Ideas | Community | Contact Us | Copyright Policy | Drugs | Ego | Erotica
FAQ | Fringe | Link to totse.com | Search | Society | Submissions | Technology
Hot Topics
Detonation by fire?
500 Sparklers being lit all at once (Video)
would this work???
so I've been googling around but:
Books
SHOOTER MOVIE ((Hollywood vs. Reality))
is nitro cellulose sensitive to small arms fire?
potassium nitrate
 
Sponsored Links
 
Ads presented by the
AdBrite Ad Network

 

 

TSHIRT HELL T-SHIRTS