<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_17_2115218</id>
	<title>The Jet Fighter Laser Cannon</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1258452660000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>fahrbot-bot sends in a Register piece about DARPA issuing the penultimate contract for what is intended to be a <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/17/hellads\_phase\_iv\_contracts/">jet-mounted laser cannon</a>. The Reg outdoes itself in a BOTEC involving downsizing to shark scale. <i>"The US military will shortly issue a brace of contracts for 'refrigerator sized' laser blaster cannons. One of the deals will see a full-power ground prototype built which will be the final stage prior to America's first raygun-equipped jet fighter. ... If it scales down far enough, this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms. A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy: a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long. ... A dolphin can carry a human being weighing up to 100kg along for a ride. A thoroughbred shark in good training can surely match this. Thus, we seem to be looking at practicable head-[laser] output in the 20-kilowatt range."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>fahrbot-bot sends in a Register piece about DARPA issuing the penultimate contract for what is intended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon .
The Reg outdoes itself in a BOTEC involving downsizing to shark scale .
" The US military will shortly issue a brace of contracts for 'refrigerator sized ' laser blaster cannons .
One of the deals will see a full-power ground prototype built which will be the final stage prior to America 's first raygun-equipped jet fighter .
... If it scales down far enough , this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms .
A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy : a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long .
... A dolphin can carry a human being weighing up to 100kg along for a ride .
A thoroughbred shark in good training can surely match this .
Thus , we seem to be looking at practicable head- [ laser ] output in the 20-kilowatt range .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fahrbot-bot sends in a Register piece about DARPA issuing the penultimate contract for what is intended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon.
The Reg outdoes itself in a BOTEC involving downsizing to shark scale.
"The US military will shortly issue a brace of contracts for 'refrigerator sized' laser blaster cannons.
One of the deals will see a full-power ground prototype built which will be the final stage prior to America's first raygun-equipped jet fighter.
... If it scales down far enough, this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms.
A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy: a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long.
... A dolphin can carry a human being weighing up to 100kg along for a ride.
A thoroughbred shark in good training can surely match this.
Thus, we seem to be looking at practicable head-[laser] output in the 20-kilowatt range.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30148490</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>Valdez</author>
	<datestamp>1257069300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire second</p></div><p>Northrop Grumman's <a href="http://www.defense-update.com/directory/THEL.htm" title="defense-update.com">Mobile/Tactical High Energy Laser</a> [defense-update.com] system disagrees with your assessment... just ask the mortar shells it <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LThD0FMvTFU&amp;NR=1" title="youtube.com">shot down</a> [youtube.com]. They've been able to shoot down large and small caliber artillery rockets, artillery shells and mortars.
</p><p>
Last I heard someone decided it was too expensive given the current technology and cut funding. NG was working on a less expensive version dubbed <a href="http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Northrop\_Grumman\_Develops\_Skyguard\_Laser\_Defense\_System\_For\_Local\_Defense\_999.html" title="spacewar.com">Skyguard</a> [spacewar.com], which may be able to protect traffic at commerical airfields from shoulder-launched anti-air missiles. (Haven't seen any videos of that system yet).
</p><p>
There's also the <a href="http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/abl/" title="airforce-technology.com">YAL-1A</a> [airforce-technology.com], same concept but mounted on a turrent in the nose of a 747.
</p><p>
All these systems use chemical lasers, and while we can fit them into "a few semi-trucks" (or a 747) right now, they're far from being hand-held. In any event, we're past the "Can we shoot down X with a laser" argument and are currently figuring out how to make it smaller and more cost effective. It takes intermediate research programs such as these if we ever want our ships, tanks, or soldiers making pewpewpew noises when they pull the trigger.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire secondNorthrop Grumman 's Mobile/Tactical High Energy Laser [ defense-update.com ] system disagrees with your assessment... just ask the mortar shells it shot down [ youtube.com ] .
They 've been able to shoot down large and small caliber artillery rockets , artillery shells and mortars .
Last I heard someone decided it was too expensive given the current technology and cut funding .
NG was working on a less expensive version dubbed Skyguard [ spacewar.com ] , which may be able to protect traffic at commerical airfields from shoulder-launched anti-air missiles .
( Have n't seen any videos of that system yet ) .
There 's also the YAL-1A [ airforce-technology.com ] , same concept but mounted on a turrent in the nose of a 747 .
All these systems use chemical lasers , and while we can fit them into " a few semi-trucks " ( or a 747 ) right now , they 're far from being hand-held .
In any event , we 're past the " Can we shoot down X with a laser " argument and are currently figuring out how to make it smaller and more cost effective .
It takes intermediate research programs such as these if we ever want our ships , tanks , or soldiers making pewpewpew noises when they pull the trigger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire secondNorthrop Grumman's Mobile/Tactical High Energy Laser [defense-update.com] system disagrees with your assessment... just ask the mortar shells it shot down [youtube.com].
They've been able to shoot down large and small caliber artillery rockets, artillery shells and mortars.
Last I heard someone decided it was too expensive given the current technology and cut funding.
NG was working on a less expensive version dubbed Skyguard [spacewar.com], which may be able to protect traffic at commerical airfields from shoulder-launched anti-air missiles.
(Haven't seen any videos of that system yet).
There's also the YAL-1A [airforce-technology.com], same concept but mounted on a turrent in the nose of a 747.
All these systems use chemical lasers, and while we can fit them into "a few semi-trucks" (or a 747) right now, they're far from being hand-held.
In any event, we're past the "Can we shoot down X with a laser" argument and are currently figuring out how to make it smaller and more cost effective.
It takes intermediate research programs such as these if we ever want our ships, tanks, or soldiers making pewpewpew noises when they pull the trigger.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139658</id>
	<title>Re:Recoil</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258479000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a handheld laser weapon, it is not the beam that kicks -- the real surprise comes from the power supply. There is a real thump when you pull the trigger. The power supply utilizes high energy capacitors and inductors to provide several hundred joules in just a microsecond. Unshielded, this massive electrical discharge causes everything to leap. It produces a sharp bump in the rifle that is not as strong as a bullet, but nevertheless distracting -- especially if you are trying to fire a tight grouping on a distant target. And as for the effect when the beam hits flesh -- it explodes very violently. Hit squarely in the thigh, the concusive force of vaporizing  muscle tissue can cause the loss of the leg -- completely blown off -- and no cauterizing. Ouch!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a handheld laser weapon , it is not the beam that kicks -- the real surprise comes from the power supply .
There is a real thump when you pull the trigger .
The power supply utilizes high energy capacitors and inductors to provide several hundred joules in just a microsecond .
Unshielded , this massive electrical discharge causes everything to leap .
It produces a sharp bump in the rifle that is not as strong as a bullet , but nevertheless distracting -- especially if you are trying to fire a tight grouping on a distant target .
And as for the effect when the beam hits flesh -- it explodes very violently .
Hit squarely in the thigh , the concusive force of vaporizing muscle tissue can cause the loss of the leg -- completely blown off -- and no cauterizing .
Ouch !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a handheld laser weapon, it is not the beam that kicks -- the real surprise comes from the power supply.
There is a real thump when you pull the trigger.
The power supply utilizes high energy capacitors and inductors to provide several hundred joules in just a microsecond.
Unshielded, this massive electrical discharge causes everything to leap.
It produces a sharp bump in the rifle that is not as strong as a bullet, but nevertheless distracting -- especially if you are trying to fire a tight grouping on a distant target.
And as for the effect when the beam hits flesh -- it explodes very violently.
Hit squarely in the thigh, the concusive force of vaporizing  muscle tissue can cause the loss of the leg -- completely blown off -- and no cauterizing.
Ouch!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136378</id>
	<title>Re:Mirrors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258457940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bullets are made up mostly (by mass) of protons. Duh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bullets are made up mostly ( by mass ) of protons .
Duh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bullets are made up mostly (by mass) of protons.
Duh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144198</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>GameboyRMH</author>
	<datestamp>1257093480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Desert Eagle - the first anime weapon ported to meatspace. Wieldable giant swords and weaponized yo-yos coming soon!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Desert Eagle - the first anime weapon ported to meatspace .
Wieldable giant swords and weaponized yo-yos coming soon !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Desert Eagle - the first anime weapon ported to meatspace.
Wieldable giant swords and weaponized yo-yos coming soon!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137382</id>
	<title>Bullets and the LHC</title>
	<author>Roger W Moore</author>
	<datestamp>1258462500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Time to get into the mirror business! It's a lot easier to deflect protons than bullets, I'll tell you that.</p></div><p>
That's strange considering that bullets, at least lead ones, are 40\% protons by mass. It's also a real shame that you didn't tell us that before we designed the LHC - it would have been a lot easier to use mirrors to bounce the protons beams about the ring instead of using superconducting magnets. Perhaps you meant photons....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Time to get into the mirror business !
It 's a lot easier to deflect protons than bullets , I 'll tell you that .
That 's strange considering that bullets , at least lead ones , are 40 \ % protons by mass .
It 's also a real shame that you did n't tell us that before we designed the LHC - it would have been a lot easier to use mirrors to bounce the protons beams about the ring instead of using superconducting magnets .
Perhaps you meant photons... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time to get into the mirror business!
It's a lot easier to deflect protons than bullets, I'll tell you that.
That's strange considering that bullets, at least lead ones, are 40\% protons by mass.
It's also a real shame that you didn't tell us that before we designed the LHC - it would have been a lot easier to use mirrors to bounce the protons beams about the ring instead of using superconducting magnets.
Perhaps you meant photons....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30149430</id>
	<title>Re:Mirrors</title>
	<author>TCPhotography</author>
	<datestamp>1257073800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was told a story by a guy who worked in the ABM field in the 80's.</p><p>They wanted to see if mirroring an ICBM would work against lasers, and they had a whole lot of money they needed to spend, so they bought a top of the line astronomical mirror (the kind that astronomers would kill their grandmother for), and pointed a big laser at it.  The mirror reflected something like 99.99\% of the light that hit it.  The<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.01\% though heated the mirror up so that a few microseconds later, the reflectivity was down to 99.9\%, a microsecond later it was down to 98\%, and less than 20 microseconds later it was close to 80\%.  Then the mirror exploded from the thermal stresses.</p><p>Mirroring doesn't work with weapons grade lasers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was told a story by a guy who worked in the ABM field in the 80 's.They wanted to see if mirroring an ICBM would work against lasers , and they had a whole lot of money they needed to spend , so they bought a top of the line astronomical mirror ( the kind that astronomers would kill their grandmother for ) , and pointed a big laser at it .
The mirror reflected something like 99.99 \ % of the light that hit it .
The .01 \ % though heated the mirror up so that a few microseconds later , the reflectivity was down to 99.9 \ % , a microsecond later it was down to 98 \ % , and less than 20 microseconds later it was close to 80 \ % .
Then the mirror exploded from the thermal stresses.Mirroring does n't work with weapons grade lasers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was told a story by a guy who worked in the ABM field in the 80's.They wanted to see if mirroring an ICBM would work against lasers, and they had a whole lot of money they needed to spend, so they bought a top of the line astronomical mirror (the kind that astronomers would kill their grandmother for), and pointed a big laser at it.
The mirror reflected something like 99.99\% of the light that hit it.
The .01\% though heated the mirror up so that a few microseconds later, the reflectivity was down to 99.9\%, a microsecond later it was down to 98\%, and less than 20 microseconds later it was close to 80\%.
Then the mirror exploded from the thermal stresses.Mirroring doesn't work with weapons grade lasers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30149470</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>TCPhotography</author>
	<datestamp>1257073980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are reasons why ballistic missiles don't spin.  Most are related to the thin-wall structure that they use, and others are related to the fuel not linking being spun at the RPMs needed to have any effect.  As for mirroring, see my post here: <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1447506&amp;cid=30149430" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1447506&amp;cid=30149430</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are reasons why ballistic missiles do n't spin .
Most are related to the thin-wall structure that they use , and others are related to the fuel not linking being spun at the RPMs needed to have any effect .
As for mirroring , see my post here : http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1447506&amp;cid = 30149430 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are reasons why ballistic missiles don't spin.
Most are related to the thin-wall structure that they use, and others are related to the fuel not linking being spun at the RPMs needed to have any effect.
As for mirroring, see my post here: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1447506&amp;cid=30149430 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30146764</id>
	<title>Re:Acronym of an acronym?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257103860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LASIK (laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis)? You would have it be LASERASIK? "Laser" started as an acronym but has become a noun in its own right. You never see LASER in caps, it's "laser". A simple noun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LASIK ( laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis ) ?
You would have it be LASERASIK ?
" Laser " started as an acronym but has become a noun in its own right .
You never see LASER in caps , it 's " laser " .
A simple noun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LASIK (laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis)?
You would have it be LASERASIK?
"Laser" started as an acronym but has become a noun in its own right.
You never see LASER in caps, it's "laser".
A simple noun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30146576</id>
	<title>Mosquitos  / House Fly Laser cannon</title>
	<author>Wargames</author>
	<datestamp>1257103080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think of a time when I can leave the room, flick a switch, come back, and sweep up the dead bugs and feed them to my fish.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think of a time when I can leave the room , flick a switch , come back , and sweep up the dead bugs and feed them to my fish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think of a time when I can leave the room, flick a switch, come back, and sweep up the dead bugs and feed them to my fish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137170</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>socz</author>
	<datestamp>1258461480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But it doesn't have the look of the desert eagle! That is one bad ass looking gun... also one of the most used in movies no doubt to it's very aggressive look! I don't own a gun, but if I did it would be a DE,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.50 AE with extended barrel. Not sure what length though.
<br> <br>
My buddy said many years ago, "why would I want to carry that heavy POS? Look, i can fit a shotgun in my pants and most people can't tell. But you try walking with that thing in your pants and you can't because it's too heavy. (Proceeds to show me how a short barrel shotgun (mossberg) fit in his pants)."
<br> <br>
My reply was, well, if the.50 hits you, it's pretty much over Vs a 9mm or almost anything smaller. As well as being able to go through walls and what not. But at close range the shotgun will most definitely win. But, as he put it, sometimes, for the use of some people, it's not about actually using but rather the threat of using. So you might have a shotgun out, but you wouldn't want to risk it against the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.50.
<br> <br>
Then again, I would go for the gold or chrome plated cause it's all about the intimidation and hey look at my big ass hand canon factor!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</htmltext>
<tokenext>But it does n't have the look of the desert eagle !
That is one bad ass looking gun... also one of the most used in movies no doubt to it 's very aggressive look !
I do n't own a gun , but if I did it would be a DE , .50 AE with extended barrel .
Not sure what length though .
My buddy said many years ago , " why would I want to carry that heavy POS ?
Look , i can fit a shotgun in my pants and most people ca n't tell .
But you try walking with that thing in your pants and you ca n't because it 's too heavy .
( Proceeds to show me how a short barrel shotgun ( mossberg ) fit in his pants ) .
" My reply was , well , if the.50 hits you , it 's pretty much over Vs a 9mm or almost anything smaller .
As well as being able to go through walls and what not .
But at close range the shotgun will most definitely win .
But , as he put it , sometimes , for the use of some people , it 's not about actually using but rather the threat of using .
So you might have a shotgun out , but you would n't want to risk it against the .50 .
Then again , I would go for the gold or chrome plated cause it 's all about the intimidation and hey look at my big ass hand canon factor !
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But it doesn't have the look of the desert eagle!
That is one bad ass looking gun... also one of the most used in movies no doubt to it's very aggressive look!
I don't own a gun, but if I did it would be a DE, .50 AE with extended barrel.
Not sure what length though.
My buddy said many years ago, "why would I want to carry that heavy POS?
Look, i can fit a shotgun in my pants and most people can't tell.
But you try walking with that thing in your pants and you can't because it's too heavy.
(Proceeds to show me how a short barrel shotgun (mossberg) fit in his pants).
"
 
My reply was, well, if the.50 hits you, it's pretty much over Vs a 9mm or almost anything smaller.
As well as being able to go through walls and what not.
But at close range the shotgun will most definitely win.
But, as he put it, sometimes, for the use of some people, it's not about actually using but rather the threat of using.
So you might have a shotgun out, but you wouldn't want to risk it against the .50.
Then again, I would go for the gold or chrome plated cause it's all about the intimidation and hey look at my big ass hand canon factor!
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138706</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>Zantetsuken</author>
	<datestamp>1258471560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally, this is why the Saiga exists - upscale an AK47 into a 12 gauge semi-automatic (full auto for Gov't/Military) shotgun.
<br> <br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saiga-12" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saiga-12</a> [wikipedia.org] <br>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jPI5j3jjqo&amp;feature=player\_embedded" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jPI5j3jjqo&amp;feature=player\_embedded</a> [youtube.com]
<br> <br>
Even with a 10 shell box magazine, load that with slugs. Assuming you're military with authorization to do so, get one with a short barrel, maybe an assault grip, and you'd have a helluva semi-auto hand-cannon or super high caliber smg...
<br> <br>
As to so many people yelping about the Desert Eagle, it has the potential to *occasionally* look kinda cool, but if you're really needing a high caliber pistol, you'd be going with a revolver anyway. A revolver basically can't jam, and can use much higher and uncommon rounds that any other handgun design would not be able to handle the stresses of firing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , this is why the Saiga exists - upscale an AK47 into a 12 gauge semi-automatic ( full auto for Gov't/Military ) shotgun .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saiga-12 [ wikipedia.org ] http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = -jPI5j3jjqo&amp;feature = player \ _embedded [ youtube.com ] Even with a 10 shell box magazine , load that with slugs .
Assuming you 're military with authorization to do so , get one with a short barrel , maybe an assault grip , and you 'd have a helluva semi-auto hand-cannon or super high caliber smg.. . As to so many people yelping about the Desert Eagle , it has the potential to * occasionally * look kinda cool , but if you 're really needing a high caliber pistol , you 'd be going with a revolver anyway .
A revolver basically ca n't jam , and can use much higher and uncommon rounds that any other handgun design would not be able to handle the stresses of firing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, this is why the Saiga exists - upscale an AK47 into a 12 gauge semi-automatic (full auto for Gov't/Military) shotgun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saiga-12 [wikipedia.org] 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jPI5j3jjqo&amp;feature=player\_embedded [youtube.com]
 
Even with a 10 shell box magazine, load that with slugs.
Assuming you're military with authorization to do so, get one with a short barrel, maybe an assault grip, and you'd have a helluva semi-auto hand-cannon or super high caliber smg...
 
As to so many people yelping about the Desert Eagle, it has the potential to *occasionally* look kinda cool, but if you're really needing a high caliber pistol, you'd be going with a revolver anyway.
A revolver basically can't jam, and can use much higher and uncommon rounds that any other handgun design would not be able to handle the stresses of firing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147440</id>
	<title>Dolphins are WAY stronger than sharks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257107100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't use dolphin strength to estimate shark strength. Dolphins are larger (than most types of sharks) and have greater power. The move their fins up and down, not side to side like sharks. sheesh!  We'll never get freakin lasers on sharks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't use dolphin strength to estimate shark strength .
Dolphins are larger ( than most types of sharks ) and have greater power .
The move their fins up and down , not side to side like sharks .
sheesh ! We 'll never get freakin lasers on sharks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't use dolphin strength to estimate shark strength.
Dolphins are larger (than most types of sharks) and have greater power.
The move their fins up and down, not side to side like sharks.
sheesh!  We'll never get freakin lasers on sharks!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30141946</id>
	<title>Re:Legal Mambo-Jumbo</title>
	<author>sphazell</author>
	<datestamp>1257080280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>...a brace of contracts...</p></div><p>I get lost with all the legal verbiage.</p></div><p>Its like going to the pub and ordering a brace of lagers</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a brace of contracts...I get lost with all the legal verbiage.Its like going to the pub and ordering a brace of lagers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...a brace of contracts...I get lost with all the legal verbiage.Its like going to the pub and ordering a brace of lagers
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136610</id>
	<title>Energy  T Y P E  matters -- HOT water</title>
	<author>redelm</author>
	<datestamp>1258458900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OK, so 702 joules sounds impressive.  It is, but only for mechanical energy.  Those same 702 joules only heat 10 mL of water 17'C (30'F).  Not even enough for a burn!  But maybe enough to blind.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , so 702 joules sounds impressive .
It is , but only for mechanical energy .
Those same 702 joules only heat 10 mL of water 17'C ( 30'F ) .
Not even enough for a burn !
But maybe enough to blind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, so 702 joules sounds impressive.
It is, but only for mechanical energy.
Those same 702 joules only heat 10 mL of water 17'C (30'F).
Not even enough for a burn!
But maybe enough to blind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136760</id>
	<title>Re:What about the ultimate contract?</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1258459500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>OK, so did they also let the ultimate contract</p></div></blockquote><p>No, the "ultimate" contract "for what is intended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon" would be the contract <i>for a jet-mounted laser cannon</i>. The contract described here as "penultimate" is for "a full-power ground prototype" intended as to "be the final stage prior to America's first raygun-equipped jet fighter" and which is, therfore, correctly described by TFS as being "the penultimate contract for what is itended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon".</p><p>There is lots of misguided pedantry here ragging on TFS for using "penultimate" <i>correctly</i>.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , so did they also let the ultimate contractNo , the " ultimate " contract " for what is intended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon " would be the contract for a jet-mounted laser cannon .
The contract described here as " penultimate " is for " a full-power ground prototype " intended as to " be the final stage prior to America 's first raygun-equipped jet fighter " and which is , therfore , correctly described by TFS as being " the penultimate contract for what is itended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon " .There is lots of misguided pedantry here ragging on TFS for using " penultimate " correctly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, so did they also let the ultimate contractNo, the "ultimate" contract "for what is intended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon" would be the contract for a jet-mounted laser cannon.
The contract described here as "penultimate" is for "a full-power ground prototype" intended as to "be the final stage prior to America's first raygun-equipped jet fighter" and which is, therfore, correctly described by TFS as being "the penultimate contract for what is itended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon".There is lots of misguided pedantry here ragging on TFS for using "penultimate" correctly.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136278</id>
	<title>Recoil</title>
	<author>Doc Ruby</author>
	<datestamp>1258457640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does firing a laser bring recoil opposite the laser's direction with the energy equal to that in the laser, the way firing a bullet does?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does firing a laser bring recoil opposite the laser 's direction with the energy equal to that in the laser , the way firing a bullet does ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does firing a laser bring recoil opposite the laser's direction with the energy equal to that in the laser, the way firing a bullet does?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136600</id>
	<title>Re:Acronym of an acronym?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258458840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It could be worse.  It could stand for the HELL Energetic Liquid Laser.</p><p>Also, I'm wondering when the military brainchidren are going to develop the GREATSATAN weapon.  Surely this too will help improve our image among people who already think we're controlled by the devil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It could be worse .
It could stand for the HELL Energetic Liquid Laser.Also , I 'm wondering when the military brainchidren are going to develop the GREATSATAN weapon .
Surely this too will help improve our image among people who already think we 're controlled by the devil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could be worse.
It could stand for the HELL Energetic Liquid Laser.Also, I'm wondering when the military brainchidren are going to develop the GREATSATAN weapon.
Surely this too will help improve our image among people who already think we're controlled by the devil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139576</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258478340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yea, i hear that kent's tracking system is gone.</p><p>The Crossbow Project. There&rsquo;s no defense like a good offense.</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2rtmoSuoL4&amp;feature=fvw</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yea , i hear that kent 's tracking system is gone.The Crossbow Project .
There    s no defense like a good offense.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = S2rtmoSuoL4&amp;feature = fvw</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yea, i hear that kent's tracking system is gone.The Crossbow Project.
There’s no defense like a good offense.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2rtmoSuoL4&amp;feature=fvw</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136596</id>
	<title>Re:Is a comparison to bullets apt?</title>
	<author>BlueKitties</author>
	<datestamp>1258458780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What you're thinking of is impulse -- when car hits a brick wall, it loses the same energy it does when it uses its breaks, the difference is impulse (though the momentum remains the same.)
<br> <br>
I'm not sure how much that applies to lasers; You have to realize a laser will never "bounce," the energy distribution is entirely different. It's like comparing catching someone on fire to shooting them in the face. A laser of that power might burn a four inch hole, whereas a bullet might shoot right through.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What you 're thinking of is impulse -- when car hits a brick wall , it loses the same energy it does when it uses its breaks , the difference is impulse ( though the momentum remains the same .
) I 'm not sure how much that applies to lasers ; You have to realize a laser will never " bounce , " the energy distribution is entirely different .
It 's like comparing catching someone on fire to shooting them in the face .
A laser of that power might burn a four inch hole , whereas a bullet might shoot right through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you're thinking of is impulse -- when car hits a brick wall, it loses the same energy it does when it uses its breaks, the difference is impulse (though the momentum remains the same.
)
 
I'm not sure how much that applies to lasers; You have to realize a laser will never "bounce," the energy distribution is entirely different.
It's like comparing catching someone on fire to shooting them in the face.
A laser of that power might burn a four inch hole, whereas a bullet might shoot right through.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137244</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>bonze</author>
	<datestamp>1258461840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh, but the<nobr> <wbr></nobr><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.454\_Casull" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">.454 Casull</a> [wikipedia.org] is endorsed by <a href="http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/4072/alucard1gj7.jpg" title="imageshack.us" rel="nofollow">Alucard</a> [imageshack.us].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh , but the .454 Casull [ wikipedia.org ] is endorsed by Alucard [ imageshack.us ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh, but the .454 Casull [wikipedia.org] is endorsed by Alucard [imageshack.us].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136686</id>
	<title>Darpa&rsquo;s &lsquo;Liquid Laser&rsquo; Gunship</title>
	<author>auric\_dude</author>
	<datestamp>1258459200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>More information via <a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/11/darpas-liquid-laser-gunship-program-pushes-ahead/" title="wired.com">http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/11/darpas-liquid-laser-gunship-program-pushes-ahead/</a> [wired.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>More information via http : //www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/11/darpas-liquid-laser-gunship-program-pushes-ahead/ [ wired.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More information via http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/11/darpas-liquid-laser-gunship-program-pushes-ahead/ [wired.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136182</id>
	<title>Dr. Evil</title>
	<author>hellercom</author>
	<datestamp>1258457280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want those frickin Lasers on the sharks heads!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want those frickin Lasers on the sharks heads !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want those frickin Lasers on the sharks heads!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137912</id>
	<title>Re:Is a comparison to bullets apt?</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1258465380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If your laser is intense enough it won't so much burn through tissue as vaporize it.  In the case of a person, that means turning water into steam.  Steam has a volume something in the neighbourhood of 1500 times that of water, so that phase change really qualifies as an explosion (nitroglycerine expands by about the same factor when detonated).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If your laser is intense enough it wo n't so much burn through tissue as vaporize it .
In the case of a person , that means turning water into steam .
Steam has a volume something in the neighbourhood of 1500 times that of water , so that phase change really qualifies as an explosion ( nitroglycerine expands by about the same factor when detonated ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your laser is intense enough it won't so much burn through tissue as vaporize it.
In the case of a person, that means turning water into steam.
Steam has a volume something in the neighbourhood of 1500 times that of water, so that phase change really qualifies as an explosion (nitroglycerine expands by about the same factor when detonated).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137712</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1258464240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They've demonstrated the HELL system shooting down missiles and (spinning) artillery and mortar shells.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've demonstrated the HELL system shooting down missiles and ( spinning ) artillery and mortar shells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've demonstrated the HELL system shooting down missiles and (spinning) artillery and mortar shells.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137304</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1258462140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire second.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's based on two mistaken assumptions:  First, that the last doesn't have any tracking and pointing mechanism.  Second, that only delivering 100\% of the energy onto the target is militarily useful.<br>
&nbsp; </p><blockquote><div><p>Bullets on the other hand expend their energy in a range of ten thousandths of a second.</p></div></blockquote><p>Yet, fighters and soldiers both are equipped with machine guns because it's hard to get a bullet on target.<br>
&nbsp; </p><blockquote><div><p>Just make your missiles spin and any energy hitting them will be over a very large area.</p></div></blockquote><p>That would be true - if spinning the missile was easy.  For a large variety of reasons, missile designers go to great lengths to <i>prevent</i> their missiles from spinning.  (And the other aircraft, manned and unmanned, that will be main target of a laser equipped fighter <i>can't</i> spin.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire second.That 's based on two mistaken assumptions : First , that the last does n't have any tracking and pointing mechanism .
Second , that only delivering 100 \ % of the energy onto the target is militarily useful .
  Bullets on the other hand expend their energy in a range of ten thousandths of a second.Yet , fighters and soldiers both are equipped with machine guns because it 's hard to get a bullet on target .
  Just make your missiles spin and any energy hitting them will be over a very large area.That would be true - if spinning the missile was easy .
For a large variety of reasons , missile designers go to great lengths to prevent their missiles from spinning .
( And the other aircraft , manned and unmanned , that will be main target of a laser equipped fighter ca n't spin .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire second.That's based on two mistaken assumptions:  First, that the last doesn't have any tracking and pointing mechanism.
Second, that only delivering 100\% of the energy onto the target is militarily useful.
  Bullets on the other hand expend their energy in a range of ten thousandths of a second.Yet, fighters and soldiers both are equipped with machine guns because it's hard to get a bullet on target.
  Just make your missiles spin and any energy hitting them will be over a very large area.That would be true - if spinning the missile was easy.
For a large variety of reasons, missile designers go to great lengths to prevent their missiles from spinning.
(And the other aircraft, manned and unmanned, that will be main target of a laser equipped fighter can't spin.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137726</id>
	<title>Re:Legal Mambo-Jumbo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258464420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love how we use the measure word for rabbits when talking about legal documents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love how we use the measure word for rabbits when talking about legal documents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love how we use the measure word for rabbits when talking about legal documents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136268</id>
	<title>Re:Mirrors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258457580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> It's a lot easier to deflect <b>protons</b> than bullets</p></div><p>Umm...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a lot easier to deflect protons than bulletsUmm.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It's a lot easier to deflect protons than bulletsUmm...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138970</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258473960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It appears you haven't fired these lasers on simulators like the VCS2600; jet-mounted lasers make a distinctive "Pew! Pew! Pew!" sound.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It appears you have n't fired these lasers on simulators like the VCS2600 ; jet-mounted lasers make a distinctive " Pew !
Pew ! Pew !
" sound .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It appears you haven't fired these lasers on simulators like the VCS2600; jet-mounted lasers make a distinctive "Pew!
Pew! Pew!
" sound.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137476</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>cfa22</author>
	<datestamp>1258462920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know someone's house that's full of unpopped popcorn...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know someone 's house that 's full of unpopped popcorn.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know someone's house that's full of unpopped popcorn...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136026</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258456620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, what we have here is:</p><p><b>Laser Fight:</b> Sharks <i>vs.</i> Jets</p><p>Yes, I think a "pewpewpew" tag is obligatory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , what we have here is : Laser Fight : Sharks vs. JetsYes , I think a " pewpewpew " tag is obligatory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, what we have here is:Laser Fight: Sharks vs. JetsYes, I think a "pewpewpew" tag is obligatory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137000</id>
	<title>Re:Wake me ...</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1258460580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>40 watt?  So basically, you want a flashlight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>40 watt ?
So basically , you want a flashlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>40 watt?
So basically, you want a flashlight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</id>
	<title>over one second?</title>
	<author>painandgreed</author>
	<datestamp>1258457400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>We've been down this way back during the star wars days and trying to shoot down missiles. Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire second. Bullets on the other hand expend their energy in a range of ten thousandths of a second. Until lasers or other beam weapons can deliver enough energy in a short enough amount of time similar to a bullet or supersonic missile, they simply will not make good weapons. Just make your missiles spin and any energy hitting them will be over a very large area. Similarly, the energy given for a 9mm hitting a human target that is moving around will be affected less than the firer of a 9mm who will probably absorb that energy over a shorter time and less area due to recoil.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've been down this way back during the star wars days and trying to shoot down missiles .
Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire second .
Bullets on the other hand expend their energy in a range of ten thousandths of a second .
Until lasers or other beam weapons can deliver enough energy in a short enough amount of time similar to a bullet or supersonic missile , they simply will not make good weapons .
Just make your missiles spin and any energy hitting them will be over a very large area .
Similarly , the energy given for a 9mm hitting a human target that is moving around will be affected less than the firer of a 9mm who will probably absorb that energy over a shorter time and less area due to recoil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've been down this way back during the star wars days and trying to shoot down missiles.
Any sort of energy that is released in the term of a second or so is useless against anything but stationary targets where you can assume you will hit the same point for that entire second.
Bullets on the other hand expend their energy in a range of ten thousandths of a second.
Until lasers or other beam weapons can deliver enough energy in a short enough amount of time similar to a bullet or supersonic missile, they simply will not make good weapons.
Just make your missiles spin and any energy hitting them will be over a very large area.
Similarly, the energy given for a 9mm hitting a human target that is moving around will be affected less than the firer of a 9mm who will probably absorb that energy over a shorter time and less area due to recoil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30143288</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1257090120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've seen that; but, personally don't have a use for it.  I'm not military.  While I have 3 family members who are in law enforcement, I'm not (You might say I'm the geek of the family).  A standard Mossberg is good enough for me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen that ; but , personally do n't have a use for it .
I 'm not military .
While I have 3 family members who are in law enforcement , I 'm not ( You might say I 'm the geek of the family ) .
A standard Mossberg is good enough for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen that; but, personally don't have a use for it.
I'm not military.
While I have 3 family members who are in law enforcement, I'm not (You might say I'm the geek of the family).
A standard Mossberg is good enough for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138344</id>
	<title>Laser defences</title>
	<author>TandooriC</author>
	<datestamp>1258468740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Could a mirror deflect a laser cannon blast? Or should we just stick to the more conventional deflector shields? Full power to shields!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could a mirror deflect a laser cannon blast ?
Or should we just stick to the more conventional deflector shields ?
Full power to shields !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could a mirror deflect a laser cannon blast?
Or should we just stick to the more conventional deflector shields?
Full power to shields!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137118</id>
	<title>Re:useless against the enemies of freedom</title>
	<author>YrWrstNtmr</author>
	<datestamp>1258461180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We love you too, CZ. Have you paid off those student loans yet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>We love you too , CZ .
Have you paid off those student loans yet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We love you too, CZ.
Have you paid off those student loans yet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138894</id>
	<title>sharks with frickin' lasers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258473180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who wouldn't want a pool full?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who would n't want a pool full ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who wouldn't want a pool full?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30140404</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258485720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You also run faster with a knife!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You also run faster with a knife !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You also run faster with a knife!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138162</id>
	<title>Re:Fly in the clouds</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1258467300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reflective to what part of the spectrum?</p><p>Clouds don't block all wavelengths equally, nor does a mirror reflect all wavelengths equally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reflective to what part of the spectrum ? Clouds do n't block all wavelengths equally , nor does a mirror reflect all wavelengths equally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reflective to what part of the spectrum?Clouds don't block all wavelengths equally, nor does a mirror reflect all wavelengths equally.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137290</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>socceroos</author>
	<datestamp>1258462020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object can't be TOO hard.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I thought that the star wars system failed because of this very fact?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object ca n't be TOO hard .
I thought that the star wars system failed because of this very fact ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object can't be TOO hard.
I thought that the star wars system failed because of this very fact?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137958</id>
	<title>On board generator</title>
	<author>EdZ</author>
	<datestamp>1258465620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I recall correctly, the original plan was to put this in the F35. Take out the lift fan, and use the driveshaft to power a generator.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I recall correctly , the original plan was to put this in the F35 .
Take out the lift fan , and use the driveshaft to power a generator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I recall correctly, the original plan was to put this in the F35.
Take out the lift fan, and use the driveshaft to power a generator.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138334</id>
	<title>the thing that's really cool about this</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1258468680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is that it's a laser Canon, so it makes prints and copies too!  Nothing like taking out your enemies with laser clarity, high resolution, and extreme prejudice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is that it 's a laser Canon , so it makes prints and copies too !
Nothing like taking out your enemies with laser clarity , high resolution , and extreme prejudice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is that it's a laser Canon, so it makes prints and copies too!
Nothing like taking out your enemies with laser clarity, high resolution, and extreme prejudice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136670</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1258459140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you feel you're going to need a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.50 cal, then use a 20ga shotgun (0.620" bore) loaded with slugs.  At least then you'll be able to control the recoil.  You will be able fire it faster.  Maybe reload it faster.  Use it as an effective club when you're out of ammo.  And you'll be able to afford the ammo.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you feel you 're going to need a .50 cal , then use a 20ga shotgun ( 0.620 " bore ) loaded with slugs .
At least then you 'll be able to control the recoil .
You will be able fire it faster .
Maybe reload it faster .
Use it as an effective club when you 're out of ammo .
And you 'll be able to afford the ammo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you feel you're going to need a .50 cal, then use a 20ga shotgun (0.620" bore) loaded with slugs.
At least then you'll be able to control the recoil.
You will be able fire it faster.
Maybe reload it faster.
Use it as an effective club when you're out of ammo.
And you'll be able to afford the ammo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144404</id>
	<title>SHARK!</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1257094320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stealth Harrier Armored Ray Kannon or S.H.A.R.K. is the latest is fighter laser technology!</p><p>sry the best I could do on short notice... you do better, I dare you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stealth Harrier Armored Ray Kannon or S.H.A.R.K .
is the latest is fighter laser technology ! sry the best I could do on short notice... you do better , I dare you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stealth Harrier Armored Ray Kannon or S.H.A.R.K.
is the latest is fighter laser technology!sry the best I could do on short notice... you do better, I dare you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136594</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1258458780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't doubt the engineers involved see the glaring problems that need to be fixed before this can be deployed, but if DARPA thinks they've got the potential to produce the real deal they'd do well to throw money at this project to speed development. <br> <br>

In any case, these lasers just have to replace some roles for more expendable munitions, assuming firing the laser is significantly cheaper than dropping a bomb or firing a smart missile.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't doubt the engineers involved see the glaring problems that need to be fixed before this can be deployed , but if DARPA thinks they 've got the potential to produce the real deal they 'd do well to throw money at this project to speed development .
In any case , these lasers just have to replace some roles for more expendable munitions , assuming firing the laser is significantly cheaper than dropping a bomb or firing a smart missile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't doubt the engineers involved see the glaring problems that need to be fixed before this can be deployed, but if DARPA thinks they've got the potential to produce the real deal they'd do well to throw money at this project to speed development.
In any case, these lasers just have to replace some roles for more expendable munitions, assuming firing the laser is significantly cheaper than dropping a bomb or firing a smart missile.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144418</id>
	<title>The acronym department is failing</title>
	<author>ClintBartonWannabe</author>
	<datestamp>1257094320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There has to be some way to put Frickin into an acronym for the shark laser.  That way it truly would be sharks with F.R.I.C.K.I.N. lasers on their heads.

I guess you could lose the C if needed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There has to be some way to put Frickin into an acronym for the shark laser .
That way it truly would be sharks with F.R.I.C.K.I.N .
lasers on their heads .
I guess you could lose the C if needed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There has to be some way to put Frickin into an acronym for the shark laser.
That way it truly would be sharks with F.R.I.C.K.I.N.
lasers on their heads.
I guess you could lose the C if needed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</id>
	<title>Tags</title>
	<author>Shadyman</author>
	<datestamp>1258456320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok, I see the obligatory "sharks" tag, but what about the "pewpewpew" tag?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , I see the obligatory " sharks " tag , but what about the " pewpewpew " tag ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, I see the obligatory "sharks" tag, but what about the "pewpewpew" tag?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137892</id>
	<title>PLASMA CANNONS. Come ON!</title>
	<author>Kingrames</author>
	<datestamp>1258465320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, how many times to I have to ask this. The Razer needs a total of SIX plasma cannons; two mounted on the tips of its wings and 4 along the hull.  This prototype they've sent us will do for now, but what are lazers supposed to do againt giant frickin mechs? and don't get me started on projectile weaponry. With an aerial combat vehicle like this we get one shot at a stealth strike, and a one shot one kill weapon is the best we can hope for. <br> <br>

I ain't taking this on any test runs until you deliver me some real firepower.<br> <br>

(kudos to anyone who gets the reference)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , how many times to I have to ask this .
The Razer needs a total of SIX plasma cannons ; two mounted on the tips of its wings and 4 along the hull .
This prototype they 've sent us will do for now , but what are lazers supposed to do againt giant frickin mechs ?
and do n't get me started on projectile weaponry .
With an aerial combat vehicle like this we get one shot at a stealth strike , and a one shot one kill weapon is the best we can hope for .
I ai n't taking this on any test runs until you deliver me some real firepower .
( kudos to anyone who gets the reference )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, how many times to I have to ask this.
The Razer needs a total of SIX plasma cannons; two mounted on the tips of its wings and 4 along the hull.
This prototype they've sent us will do for now, but what are lazers supposed to do againt giant frickin mechs?
and don't get me started on projectile weaponry.
With an aerial combat vehicle like this we get one shot at a stealth strike, and a one shot one kill weapon is the best we can hope for.
I ain't taking this on any test runs until you deliver me some real firepower.
(kudos to anyone who gets the reference)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136252</id>
	<title>Re:Mirrors</title>
	<author>Orange Crush</author>
	<datestamp>1258457520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>^photons.  These are lasers, not particle guns.</htmltext>
<tokenext>^ photons .
These are lasers , not particle guns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>^photons.
These are lasers, not particle guns.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30143954</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>astat</author>
	<datestamp>1257092640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your parent message already gave you the counter-argument: Simply make the missile spin, and you have (at least) an entire circumference to cook instead of a single point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your parent message already gave you the counter-argument : Simply make the missile spin , and you have ( at least ) an entire circumference to cook instead of a single point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your parent message already gave you the counter-argument: Simply make the missile spin, and you have (at least) an entire circumference to cook instead of a single point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170</id>
	<title>Mirrors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258457220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Time to get into the mirror business!  It's a lot easier to deflect protons than bullets, I'll tell you that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Time to get into the mirror business !
It 's a lot easier to deflect protons than bullets , I 'll tell you that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time to get into the mirror business!
It's a lot easier to deflect protons than bullets, I'll tell you that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147914</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>Lord Pillage</author>
	<datestamp>1257066420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well it depends. If we're up north with a slab of ice, I'd put my money on the Sharks. Otherwise, the Jets would crush them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well it depends .
If we 're up north with a slab of ice , I 'd put my money on the Sharks .
Otherwise , the Jets would crush them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well it depends.
If we're up north with a slab of ice, I'd put my money on the Sharks.
Otherwise, the Jets would crush them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136806</id>
	<title>Laser blasters are the weapons of barbarians.</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1258459740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would like an elegant weapon from an more civilized age.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like an elegant weapon from an more civilized age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like an elegant weapon from an more civilized age.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142212</id>
	<title>Re:Acronym of an acronym?</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1257083580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, there is a weapon with the NATO codename SS-18 SATAN. It is a large MIRV ICBM. It can either launch a single 20 mton warhead or 10x 550-750 kt MIRV warheads.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , there is a weapon with the NATO codename SS-18 SATAN .
It is a large MIRV ICBM .
It can either launch a single 20 mton warhead or 10x 550-750 kt MIRV warheads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, there is a weapon with the NATO codename SS-18 SATAN.
It is a large MIRV ICBM.
It can either launch a single 20 mton warhead or 10x 550-750 kt MIRV warheads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137752</id>
	<title>liquid fuel laser = fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258464480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Call me when DARPA/NG get the solid state laser down to refrigerator size. Why? Because (generally) a solid state laser runs on electricity, no consumable liquid fuel. The F-35 JSF has the option of mounting a DE weapon bay where the lift fan goes, and using the engine shaft power normally diverted to the fan to drive a high speed generator. Thus the "ammo" for the laser is no longer limited by custom nasty liquid fuels, but by the available jet fuel in the plane, which already has an extensive refueling infrastructure readily available, aka a tanker refuel.</p><p>Though that brings up the ugly issue of energy management in a modern fighter with electric DE weaponry. The available number of shots is limited by the onboard jet fuel, so you have to balance flight mission range with offensive/defensive needs. Which either forces tankers to get closer to the action, or committing to a lot of back and forth runs to pick up more fuel and ultimately limiting the war load. Though this could easily be mitigated by using a cheaper UCAV fleet, which could be teamed with manned fighters directing the DE weaponry via something like Link16. You have this constantly shift rotating swarm fleet of drones that you can call down DE strikes at will. Cue SkyNet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Call me when DARPA/NG get the solid state laser down to refrigerator size .
Why ? Because ( generally ) a solid state laser runs on electricity , no consumable liquid fuel .
The F-35 JSF has the option of mounting a DE weapon bay where the lift fan goes , and using the engine shaft power normally diverted to the fan to drive a high speed generator .
Thus the " ammo " for the laser is no longer limited by custom nasty liquid fuels , but by the available jet fuel in the plane , which already has an extensive refueling infrastructure readily available , aka a tanker refuel.Though that brings up the ugly issue of energy management in a modern fighter with electric DE weaponry .
The available number of shots is limited by the onboard jet fuel , so you have to balance flight mission range with offensive/defensive needs .
Which either forces tankers to get closer to the action , or committing to a lot of back and forth runs to pick up more fuel and ultimately limiting the war load .
Though this could easily be mitigated by using a cheaper UCAV fleet , which could be teamed with manned fighters directing the DE weaponry via something like Link16 .
You have this constantly shift rotating swarm fleet of drones that you can call down DE strikes at will .
Cue SkyNet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Call me when DARPA/NG get the solid state laser down to refrigerator size.
Why? Because (generally) a solid state laser runs on electricity, no consumable liquid fuel.
The F-35 JSF has the option of mounting a DE weapon bay where the lift fan goes, and using the engine shaft power normally diverted to the fan to drive a high speed generator.
Thus the "ammo" for the laser is no longer limited by custom nasty liquid fuels, but by the available jet fuel in the plane, which already has an extensive refueling infrastructure readily available, aka a tanker refuel.Though that brings up the ugly issue of energy management in a modern fighter with electric DE weaponry.
The available number of shots is limited by the onboard jet fuel, so you have to balance flight mission range with offensive/defensive needs.
Which either forces tankers to get closer to the action, or committing to a lot of back and forth runs to pick up more fuel and ultimately limiting the war load.
Though this could easily be mitigated by using a cheaper UCAV fleet, which could be teamed with manned fighters directing the DE weaponry via something like Link16.
You have this constantly shift rotating swarm fleet of drones that you can call down DE strikes at will.
Cue SkyNet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30145796</id>
	<title>Re:Energy T Y P E matters -- HOT water</title>
	<author>holmstar</author>
	<datestamp>1257099960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>yes, but what if that energy is focused on a 1 sq cm area?  then you would be heating 1ml of tissue by about 170 degrees C.  If you managed to do that in, say 1/10 of a second then you would have explosive vaporization of that tissue, the shock-wave of which causing damage to the surrounding tissues.  Maybe not quite as bad as a bullet wound, but still a severe injury.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , but what if that energy is focused on a 1 sq cm area ?
then you would be heating 1ml of tissue by about 170 degrees C. If you managed to do that in , say 1/10 of a second then you would have explosive vaporization of that tissue , the shock-wave of which causing damage to the surrounding tissues .
Maybe not quite as bad as a bullet wound , but still a severe injury .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, but what if that energy is focused on a 1 sq cm area?
then you would be heating 1ml of tissue by about 170 degrees C.  If you managed to do that in, say 1/10 of a second then you would have explosive vaporization of that tissue, the shock-wave of which causing damage to the surrounding tissues.
Maybe not quite as bad as a bullet wound, but still a severe injury.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139686</id>
	<title>Body Armor</title>
	<author>neorush</author>
	<datestamp>1258479300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would body armor for this weapon involve covering your self in something like tinsel to refract as much of the energy as possible?  It would just be awesome to see a bunch of highly trained marines running around in Christmas Tree outfits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would body armor for this weapon involve covering your self in something like tinsel to refract as much of the energy as possible ?
It would just be awesome to see a bunch of highly trained marines running around in Christmas Tree outfits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would body armor for this weapon involve covering your self in something like tinsel to refract as much of the energy as possible?
It would just be awesome to see a bunch of highly trained marines running around in Christmas Tree outfits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30145064</id>
	<title>Re:Is a comparison to bullets apt?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257096840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There's also a question of how big the target spot is and of course the fact that just the color of the target can cause a substantial amount of the energy to be reflected (substantial in this case being perhaps a few hundred Joules).</p></div><p>So if I get a suit made of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oExwxkuT\_c&amp;feature=fvw" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">Cyanea Octopus</a> [youtube.com], does that mean I'm invincible?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also a question of how big the target spot is and of course the fact that just the color of the target can cause a substantial amount of the energy to be reflected ( substantial in this case being perhaps a few hundred Joules ) .So if I get a suit made of Cyanea Octopus [ youtube.com ] , does that mean I 'm invincible ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also a question of how big the target spot is and of course the fact that just the color of the target can cause a substantial amount of the energy to be reflected (substantial in this case being perhaps a few hundred Joules).So if I get a suit made of Cyanea Octopus [youtube.com], does that mean I'm invincible?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137188</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142176</id>
	<title>Don't be ridiculous</title>
	<author>Logos</author>
	<datestamp>1257083220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The laser is nailed to the head, so that it won't fall off during high speed maneuvers and the fish* is taped to the airplane so that it can be dropped on commando raids deep behind enemy lines - granted, they just sorta flop around on the ground afterward, but anyone walking by is likely to get quite a sunburn.</p><p>*Yes, we've been *told* they are mammals, but I believe its all a conspiracy started by the "late"** Douglas Adams to ensure that they wouldn't be seen as cannibals during the pre-release marketing for his fourth book in the trilogy.</p><p>**I put late in quotes because we know that he's just gone home.***</p><p>***OK, I've got nothing... POPCORN!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The laser is nailed to the head , so that it wo n't fall off during high speed maneuvers and the fish * is taped to the airplane so that it can be dropped on commando raids deep behind enemy lines - granted , they just sorta flop around on the ground afterward , but anyone walking by is likely to get quite a sunburn .
* Yes , we 've been * told * they are mammals , but I believe its all a conspiracy started by the " late " * * Douglas Adams to ensure that they would n't be seen as cannibals during the pre-release marketing for his fourth book in the trilogy .
* * I put late in quotes because we know that he 's just gone home .
* * * * * * OK , I 've got nothing... POPCORN !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The laser is nailed to the head, so that it won't fall off during high speed maneuvers and the fish* is taped to the airplane so that it can be dropped on commando raids deep behind enemy lines - granted, they just sorta flop around on the ground afterward, but anyone walking by is likely to get quite a sunburn.
*Yes, we've been *told* they are mammals, but I believe its all a conspiracy started by the "late"** Douglas Adams to ensure that they wouldn't be seen as cannibals during the pre-release marketing for his fourth book in the trilogy.
**I put late in quotes because we know that he's just gone home.
******OK, I've got nothing... POPCORN!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142026</id>
	<title>1 second = 9mm ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257081180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need to keep the laser right on the same spot for almost one second to place the same energy as a 9mm ?<br>Then it is unusable by humans. Need a robot and static targets to work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to keep the laser right on the same spot for almost one second to place the same energy as a 9mm ? Then it is unusable by humans .
Need a robot and static targets to work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to keep the laser right on the same spot for almost one second to place the same energy as a 9mm ?Then it is unusable by humans.
Need a robot and static targets to work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136462</id>
	<title>Moving Mass</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1258458300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Think about how a gun works - you are accelerating a substantial mass (bullet).  With a laser, you are accelerating photons which have almost no mass, so even though the same amount of energy is involved you have far less recoil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Think about how a gun works - you are accelerating a substantial mass ( bullet ) .
With a laser , you are accelerating photons which have almost no mass , so even though the same amount of energy is involved you have far less recoil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think about how a gun works - you are accelerating a substantial mass (bullet).
With a laser, you are accelerating photons which have almost no mass, so even though the same amount of energy is involved you have far less recoil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136608</id>
	<title>Re:Is a comparison to bullets apt?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1258458840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no.<br>It depends on the lengths of time the 750 is delivered</p><p>"A laser can only burn through tissue,"<br>I don't know why you think that, for 400 bucks you can buy a LASER that cuts metal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no.It depends on the lengths of time the 750 is delivered " A laser can only burn through tissue , " I do n't know why you think that , for 400 bucks you can buy a LASER that cuts metal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no.It depends on the lengths of time the 750 is delivered"A laser can only burn through tissue,"I don't know why you think that, for 400 bucks you can buy a LASER that cuts metal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30140976</id>
	<title>9mm para has about 450-550 joules</title>
	<author>Werrismys</author>
	<datestamp>1257067200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A typical 9mm pistol using a typical 9mm cartridge can achieve kinetic bullet energies in the 500J ballpark.
<p>
More than that requires overpressure variants (P+, +P+) or lighter-than-normal bullets.
</p><p>
P+/+P+ loads impose more wear and tear on the frame/slide, so I say using them is madness.
Many use these in IPSC to achieve greater "power factor."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A typical 9mm pistol using a typical 9mm cartridge can achieve kinetic bullet energies in the 500J ballpark .
More than that requires overpressure variants ( P + , + P + ) or lighter-than-normal bullets .
P + / + P + loads impose more wear and tear on the frame/slide , so I say using them is madness .
Many use these in IPSC to achieve greater " power factor .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A typical 9mm pistol using a typical 9mm cartridge can achieve kinetic bullet energies in the 500J ballpark.
More than that requires overpressure variants (P+, +P+) or lighter-than-normal bullets.
P+/+P+ loads impose more wear and tear on the frame/slide, so I say using them is madness.
Many use these in IPSC to achieve greater "power factor.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520</id>
	<title>useless against the enemies of freedom</title>
	<author>czarangelus</author>
	<datestamp>1258458480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yet another weapon in the arsenal of the doomed Empire that will amount to nothing. A complete and total waste of money from start to finish; nothing but welfare for Boeing and Raytheon. The fact is <b>no</b> collection of military hardware will prevent a people from seeking self-government and self-determination. All of these weapons used to keep al-Maliki and Hamid Karzai in office just prove how corrupt and illegitimate the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are. <b>No</b> amount of military power, short of genocide, will crystalize these countries as satraps of America.<br> <br>
In fact, America is <b>so stupid</b>, that the same pathetic fags from Iraq War I who were surrendering to CNN cameramen have now become brave and determined fighters. How did you accomplish this, America? My mind is boggled by just how idiotic the actions of your corporate-military-political axis have been. Of course, it's no surprise when <b>you fund your own enemies</b>. The Nation recently had an article, "How the US Funds the Taliban." You pay the Taliban not to attack your convoys and then they turn around and use that money to buy weapons to attack convoys. What a comedy! I guess Kissinger was right: soldiers are dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign policy. Not only does America massacre civilians in occupied nations like clockwork, it also sets up its <b>own</b> soldiers as human sacrifices in order to enrich military contractors!<br> <br>
The USA is a stupid, evil Empire. The Black Iron Prison, the Fourth Reich, Satan's will made manifest on Earth. No wonder hunger is epidemic in your streets and millions of people are homeless while millions of homes sit empty. <br> <br>
But the very funniest part - is that <b>you're next!</b> The government of the USA which is willing to massacre tens of thousands of civilians who had no involvement in 9/11 whatsoever doesn't give a damn about <b>you</b>. All these weapons and surveilleince techniques; all this spying on social networks and guilt-by-association ploys: <b>you are the next victim</b>. The moment it's more profitable for Goldman Sachs that you be dead instead of alive, you had better believe these bastards will come up with a justification for it. You had better believe it. Maybe they'll sell it all this great new technology to China to pay off our debt and then stand aside, as we bribe the Pakistani government to stand aside, or the Lebanese government to stand aside - while China uses it to massacre Americans by the tens of thousands. Oh evil Empire, reap what you have sown!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet another weapon in the arsenal of the doomed Empire that will amount to nothing .
A complete and total waste of money from start to finish ; nothing but welfare for Boeing and Raytheon .
The fact is no collection of military hardware will prevent a people from seeking self-government and self-determination .
All of these weapons used to keep al-Maliki and Hamid Karzai in office just prove how corrupt and illegitimate the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are .
No amount of military power , short of genocide , will crystalize these countries as satraps of America .
In fact , America is so stupid , that the same pathetic fags from Iraq War I who were surrendering to CNN cameramen have now become brave and determined fighters .
How did you accomplish this , America ?
My mind is boggled by just how idiotic the actions of your corporate-military-political axis have been .
Of course , it 's no surprise when you fund your own enemies .
The Nation recently had an article , " How the US Funds the Taliban .
" You pay the Taliban not to attack your convoys and then they turn around and use that money to buy weapons to attack convoys .
What a comedy !
I guess Kissinger was right : soldiers are dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign policy .
Not only does America massacre civilians in occupied nations like clockwork , it also sets up its own soldiers as human sacrifices in order to enrich military contractors !
The USA is a stupid , evil Empire .
The Black Iron Prison , the Fourth Reich , Satan 's will made manifest on Earth .
No wonder hunger is epidemic in your streets and millions of people are homeless while millions of homes sit empty .
But the very funniest part - is that you 're next !
The government of the USA which is willing to massacre tens of thousands of civilians who had no involvement in 9/11 whatsoever does n't give a damn about you .
All these weapons and surveilleince techniques ; all this spying on social networks and guilt-by-association ploys : you are the next victim .
The moment it 's more profitable for Goldman Sachs that you be dead instead of alive , you had better believe these bastards will come up with a justification for it .
You had better believe it .
Maybe they 'll sell it all this great new technology to China to pay off our debt and then stand aside , as we bribe the Pakistani government to stand aside , or the Lebanese government to stand aside - while China uses it to massacre Americans by the tens of thousands .
Oh evil Empire , reap what you have sown !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet another weapon in the arsenal of the doomed Empire that will amount to nothing.
A complete and total waste of money from start to finish; nothing but welfare for Boeing and Raytheon.
The fact is no collection of military hardware will prevent a people from seeking self-government and self-determination.
All of these weapons used to keep al-Maliki and Hamid Karzai in office just prove how corrupt and illegitimate the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are.
No amount of military power, short of genocide, will crystalize these countries as satraps of America.
In fact, America is so stupid, that the same pathetic fags from Iraq War I who were surrendering to CNN cameramen have now become brave and determined fighters.
How did you accomplish this, America?
My mind is boggled by just how idiotic the actions of your corporate-military-political axis have been.
Of course, it's no surprise when you fund your own enemies.
The Nation recently had an article, "How the US Funds the Taliban.
" You pay the Taliban not to attack your convoys and then they turn around and use that money to buy weapons to attack convoys.
What a comedy!
I guess Kissinger was right: soldiers are dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign policy.
Not only does America massacre civilians in occupied nations like clockwork, it also sets up its own soldiers as human sacrifices in order to enrich military contractors!
The USA is a stupid, evil Empire.
The Black Iron Prison, the Fourth Reich, Satan's will made manifest on Earth.
No wonder hunger is epidemic in your streets and millions of people are homeless while millions of homes sit empty.
But the very funniest part - is that you're next!
The government of the USA which is willing to massacre tens of thousands of civilians who had no involvement in 9/11 whatsoever doesn't give a damn about you.
All these weapons and surveilleince techniques; all this spying on social networks and guilt-by-association ploys: you are the next victim.
The moment it's more profitable for Goldman Sachs that you be dead instead of alive, you had better believe these bastards will come up with a justification for it.
You had better believe it.
Maybe they'll sell it all this great new technology to China to pay off our debt and then stand aside, as we bribe the Pakistani government to stand aside, or the Lebanese government to stand aside - while China uses it to massacre Americans by the tens of thousands.
Oh evil Empire, reap what you have sown!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139222</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258475760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmmm... Sharks vs. Jets... I presume this implies a "Westside Story" tag as well...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmmm... Sharks vs. Jets... I presume this implies a " Westside Story " tag as well.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmmm... Sharks vs. Jets... I presume this implies a "Westside Story" tag as well...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147362</id>
	<title>Re:Mirrors</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1257106620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of those responding are hung up on the typo, but really it's the factual errors that need a bit of attention.</p><p>A flawless, clean mirror might reflect 95\% of the beam energy.  It's going to have to be awfully durable to remain flawless and clean for very long while absorbing 5\% of the energy from laser weapon.</p><p>If you do deploy a mirror shield that reflects enough energy to keep from being destroyed, a clever opponent will either hit it with a projectile first and then aim the laser at the resulting cracks, or splatter the shield with something (anything non-reflective) and aim at that.  Either technique will increase the amount of energy converted to heat before you get the chance to reflect it, causing further damage to the shield.</p><p>I suspect in a battlefield situation a mirror might by you a few seconds against an opponent with a laser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of those responding are hung up on the typo , but really it 's the factual errors that need a bit of attention.A flawless , clean mirror might reflect 95 \ % of the beam energy .
It 's going to have to be awfully durable to remain flawless and clean for very long while absorbing 5 \ % of the energy from laser weapon.If you do deploy a mirror shield that reflects enough energy to keep from being destroyed , a clever opponent will either hit it with a projectile first and then aim the laser at the resulting cracks , or splatter the shield with something ( anything non-reflective ) and aim at that .
Either technique will increase the amount of energy converted to heat before you get the chance to reflect it , causing further damage to the shield.I suspect in a battlefield situation a mirror might by you a few seconds against an opponent with a laser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of those responding are hung up on the typo, but really it's the factual errors that need a bit of attention.A flawless, clean mirror might reflect 95\% of the beam energy.
It's going to have to be awfully durable to remain flawless and clean for very long while absorbing 5\% of the energy from laser weapon.If you do deploy a mirror shield that reflects enough energy to keep from being destroyed, a clever opponent will either hit it with a projectile first and then aim the laser at the resulting cracks, or splatter the shield with something (anything non-reflective) and aim at that.
Either technique will increase the amount of energy converted to heat before you get the chance to reflect it, causing further damage to the shield.I suspect in a battlefield situation a mirror might by you a few seconds against an opponent with a laser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137288</id>
	<title>Re:Legal Mambo-Jumbo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258462020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>think of it like a gaggle of geese, or a murder of crows,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>think of it like a gaggle of geese , or a murder of crows,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>think of it like a gaggle of geese, or a murder of crows,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30145162</id>
	<title>Canon Laser Jet Printer</title>
	<author>OricAtmos48K</author>
	<datestamp>1257097260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Am the only one to percieve the heading like this ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Am the only one to percieve the heading like this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am the only one to percieve the heading like this ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142702</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257087360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, don't bring <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pew" title="wikipedia.org">religion</a> [wikipedia.org] into this!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , do n't bring religion [ wikipedia.org ] into this !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, don't bring religion [wikipedia.org] into this!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142166</id>
	<title>I see..</title>
	<author>dgr73</author>
	<datestamp>1257083160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the US taxpayer money is obviously hard at work again. The Taliban must be shaking in their boots when they hear of this... "A jetfighter with a laser?!?! How much rock can it penetrate?".</htmltext>
<tokenext>the US taxpayer money is obviously hard at work again .
The Taliban must be shaking in their boots when they hear of this... " A jetfighter with a laser ? ! ? !
How much rock can it penetrate ?
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the US taxpayer money is obviously hard at work again.
The Taliban must be shaking in their boots when they hear of this... "A jetfighter with a laser?!?!
How much rock can it penetrate?
".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137228</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>hAckz0r</author>
	<datestamp>1258461720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In theory you are right, but the real world presents many problems for such technology. For one, an aircraft flying through a chaotic air stream has a real problem with keeping the laser on target, hence the funding for the airborne missile defence laser getting yanked by Congress. A fighter will bounce around a lot more than a 747 class aircraft, so if you can't knock it out in a couple of nanoseconds of burst, good luck with trying to heat it up as it travels through the atmosphere cooling off. Most thing that travel fast are designed to take the heat, as friction can play a major role in military equipment and is designed into most anything that matters. And all that is still assuming that the target is steady and the air refraction at that wavelength of light is optimal for the distance, humidity, and air pressure you are operating at. Light bends when it travels through air of varying densities. <p>

My take is its hard enough to hit something using a stationary laser, so good luck with one that is bouncing around at even a short distance, unless it is VERY powerful. A Gigajoule laser would be helpful but you won't find one of them in a fighter-jet any time soon. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In theory you are right , but the real world presents many problems for such technology .
For one , an aircraft flying through a chaotic air stream has a real problem with keeping the laser on target , hence the funding for the airborne missile defence laser getting yanked by Congress .
A fighter will bounce around a lot more than a 747 class aircraft , so if you ca n't knock it out in a couple of nanoseconds of burst , good luck with trying to heat it up as it travels through the atmosphere cooling off .
Most thing that travel fast are designed to take the heat , as friction can play a major role in military equipment and is designed into most anything that matters .
And all that is still assuming that the target is steady and the air refraction at that wavelength of light is optimal for the distance , humidity , and air pressure you are operating at .
Light bends when it travels through air of varying densities .
My take is its hard enough to hit something using a stationary laser , so good luck with one that is bouncing around at even a short distance , unless it is VERY powerful .
A Gigajoule laser would be helpful but you wo n't find one of them in a fighter-jet any time soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In theory you are right, but the real world presents many problems for such technology.
For one, an aircraft flying through a chaotic air stream has a real problem with keeping the laser on target, hence the funding for the airborne missile defence laser getting yanked by Congress.
A fighter will bounce around a lot more than a 747 class aircraft, so if you can't knock it out in a couple of nanoseconds of burst, good luck with trying to heat it up as it travels through the atmosphere cooling off.
Most thing that travel fast are designed to take the heat, as friction can play a major role in military equipment and is designed into most anything that matters.
And all that is still assuming that the target is steady and the air refraction at that wavelength of light is optimal for the distance, humidity, and air pressure you are operating at.
Light bends when it travels through air of varying densities.
My take is its hard enough to hit something using a stationary laser, so good luck with one that is bouncing around at even a short distance, unless it is VERY powerful.
A Gigajoule laser would be helpful but you won't find one of them in a fighter-jet any time soon. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137742</id>
	<title>power storage?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258464480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmmm. Just several years ago, these units did not have the power to run for multiple shots and would not be ready until after 2015. Now, it appears that we have solved the power issue.  Chemical storage (batteries) can not do it (high energy, but not enough power). Likewise a chemical approach would not allow for lots of shots (it would be more like 10-20 shots; no more).
<br>
What changed? Is there a new supercap coming that has VERY HIGH power storage? Perhaps with high power AND high energy (charge it on the ground and then take the energy up)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm .
Just several years ago , these units did not have the power to run for multiple shots and would not be ready until after 2015 .
Now , it appears that we have solved the power issue .
Chemical storage ( batteries ) can not do it ( high energy , but not enough power ) .
Likewise a chemical approach would not allow for lots of shots ( it would be more like 10-20 shots ; no more ) .
What changed ?
Is there a new supercap coming that has VERY HIGH power storage ?
Perhaps with high power AND high energy ( charge it on the ground and then take the energy up ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm.
Just several years ago, these units did not have the power to run for multiple shots and would not be ready until after 2015.
Now, it appears that we have solved the power issue.
Chemical storage (batteries) can not do it (high energy, but not enough power).
Likewise a chemical approach would not allow for lots of shots (it would be more like 10-20 shots; no more).
What changed?
Is there a new supercap coming that has VERY HIGH power storage?
Perhaps with high power AND high energy (charge it on the ground and then take the energy up)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136262</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>Lonewolf666</author>
	<datestamp>1258457520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those people are not up to date. The<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.50 Action Express (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50\_AE" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50\_AE</a> [wikipedia.org]) is a much better gun-penis<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those people are not up to date .
The .50 Action Express ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50 \ _AE [ wikipedia.org ] ) is a much better gun-penis ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those people are not up to date.
The .50 Action Express (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50\_AE [wikipedia.org]) is a much better gun-penis ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136096</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30152360</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257089700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Been there done that.  I present to you the THEL and the MTHEL.</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVxZ9IHTH2E</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Been there done that .
I present to you the THEL and the MTHEL.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = nVxZ9IHTH2E</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Been there done that.
I present to you the THEL and the MTHEL.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVxZ9IHTH2E</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137188</id>
	<title>Re:Is a comparison to bullets apt?</title>
	<author>esampson</author>
	<datestamp>1258461540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes and no. The amount of energy isn't a terrible base line of comparison if you are doing "apples to apples". There are really 3 factors involved; the energy, how rapidly and efficiently the energy is transferred to the target and over how much area. Sunlight is a pretty good way of illustrating this. In full sunlight you can assume that 1 square foot (30cm x 30cm) receives about 100 watts of energy. Since 1 Joule is 1 watt per second that means that in about 7.5 seconds an area roughly the size of your chest would receive about as much energy as a 9mm bullet.</p><p>Obviously this has practically no effect on you. However take a magnifying glass a bit over 1 foot across (32 cm) and focus all of the energy into a spot a little under 1/3 of an inch (9 mm) across and all of a sudden you're causing some serious skin trauma. Likewise if the sun were suddenly 7.5 times brighter you would start to peel and blister in a hurry. Combine all the light of 7.5 seconds into a circle 1/3 of an inch across and apply it all in 1/100th of a second and you'll inflict some real damage.</p><p>Unfortunately the laser in their example delivers all its energy about 100 times slower than that. There's also a question of how big the target spot is and of course the fact that just the color of the target can cause a substantial amount of the energy to be reflected (substantial in this case being perhaps a few hundred Joules). So while the total amount of energy isn't a terrible way to compare them that does assume that the beam is focused relatively tightly (probably a safe assumption) and delivers the energy as a sudden single shot (which it clearly doesn't). As it is the comparison is less "apples to apples" and more "apples to orangutans".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes and no .
The amount of energy is n't a terrible base line of comparison if you are doing " apples to apples " .
There are really 3 factors involved ; the energy , how rapidly and efficiently the energy is transferred to the target and over how much area .
Sunlight is a pretty good way of illustrating this .
In full sunlight you can assume that 1 square foot ( 30cm x 30cm ) receives about 100 watts of energy .
Since 1 Joule is 1 watt per second that means that in about 7.5 seconds an area roughly the size of your chest would receive about as much energy as a 9mm bullet.Obviously this has practically no effect on you .
However take a magnifying glass a bit over 1 foot across ( 32 cm ) and focus all of the energy into a spot a little under 1/3 of an inch ( 9 mm ) across and all of a sudden you 're causing some serious skin trauma .
Likewise if the sun were suddenly 7.5 times brighter you would start to peel and blister in a hurry .
Combine all the light of 7.5 seconds into a circle 1/3 of an inch across and apply it all in 1/100th of a second and you 'll inflict some real damage.Unfortunately the laser in their example delivers all its energy about 100 times slower than that .
There 's also a question of how big the target spot is and of course the fact that just the color of the target can cause a substantial amount of the energy to be reflected ( substantial in this case being perhaps a few hundred Joules ) .
So while the total amount of energy is n't a terrible way to compare them that does assume that the beam is focused relatively tightly ( probably a safe assumption ) and delivers the energy as a sudden single shot ( which it clearly does n't ) .
As it is the comparison is less " apples to apples " and more " apples to orangutans " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes and no.
The amount of energy isn't a terrible base line of comparison if you are doing "apples to apples".
There are really 3 factors involved; the energy, how rapidly and efficiently the energy is transferred to the target and over how much area.
Sunlight is a pretty good way of illustrating this.
In full sunlight you can assume that 1 square foot (30cm x 30cm) receives about 100 watts of energy.
Since 1 Joule is 1 watt per second that means that in about 7.5 seconds an area roughly the size of your chest would receive about as much energy as a 9mm bullet.Obviously this has practically no effect on you.
However take a magnifying glass a bit over 1 foot across (32 cm) and focus all of the energy into a spot a little under 1/3 of an inch (9 mm) across and all of a sudden you're causing some serious skin trauma.
Likewise if the sun were suddenly 7.5 times brighter you would start to peel and blister in a hurry.
Combine all the light of 7.5 seconds into a circle 1/3 of an inch across and apply it all in 1/100th of a second and you'll inflict some real damage.Unfortunately the laser in their example delivers all its energy about 100 times slower than that.
There's also a question of how big the target spot is and of course the fact that just the color of the target can cause a substantial amount of the energy to be reflected (substantial in this case being perhaps a few hundred Joules).
So while the total amount of energy isn't a terrible way to compare them that does assume that the beam is focused relatively tightly (probably a safe assumption) and delivers the energy as a sudden single shot (which it clearly doesn't).
As it is the comparison is less "apples to apples" and more "apples to orangutans".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30140582</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258487700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was modeled after caltech, not MIT.</p><p>Just so's ya know's.</p><p>m!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was modeled after caltech , not MIT.Just so 's ya know 's.m !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was modeled after caltech, not MIT.Just so's ya know's.m!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147306</id>
	<title>Armed Predator</title>
	<author>freedomseven</author>
	<datestamp>1257106380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I imagine that these type laser weapons will first be seen in UAV's anyway. They are kind of perfect when you think about it because they can attack soft targets so well. Like say a group of miscreants planting a roadside bomb. You just fire the laser and if there is something explosive, it blows up in the face of the person planting it.</p><p>Awwww. He fall down and go boom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I imagine that these type laser weapons will first be seen in UAV 's anyway .
They are kind of perfect when you think about it because they can attack soft targets so well .
Like say a group of miscreants planting a roadside bomb .
You just fire the laser and if there is something explosive , it blows up in the face of the person planting it.Awwww .
He fall down and go boom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I imagine that these type laser weapons will first be seen in UAV's anyway.
They are kind of perfect when you think about it because they can attack soft targets so well.
Like say a group of miscreants planting a roadside bomb.
You just fire the laser and if there is something explosive, it blows up in the face of the person planting it.Awwww.
He fall down and go boom.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136228</id>
	<title>What about the ultimate contract?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258457400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>DARPA letting the <a href="http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Strategy=*&amp;Form=Dict1&amp;Database=*&amp;Query=penultimate" title="dict.org">penultimate</a> [dict.org] contract for what is intended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon</p></div>
</blockquote><p>OK, so did they also let the <a href="http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Strategy=*&amp;Form=Dict1&amp;Database=*&amp;Query=ultimate" title="dict.org">ultimate</a> [dict.org] contract, or do they now award to the second-best bidder?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>DARPA letting the penultimate [ dict.org ] contract for what is intended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon OK , so did they also let the ultimate [ dict.org ] contract , or do they now award to the second-best bidder ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DARPA letting the penultimate [dict.org] contract for what is intended to be a jet-mounted laser cannon
OK, so did they also let the ultimate [dict.org] contract, or do they now award to the second-best bidder?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136786</id>
	<title>Re:useless against the enemies of freedom</title>
	<author>Areyoukiddingme</author>
	<datestamp>1258459620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only Godwinned but also... Satan?  Surely there's a law for that too...</p><p>Even though this read mostly like a paranoid rant, it contains just enough grains of truth to be uncomfortable.  It IS corporate welfare for Boeing and Raytheon, America DOES fund its own enemies, and the deaths of American soldiers DO enrich military contractors.</p><p>The only reason the last paragraph remains a paranoid rant is because I'm worth more to Goldman Sachs as a LIVE victim, rather than a dead one.  My taxes justify their bailout.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only Godwinned but also... Satan ? Surely there 's a law for that too...Even though this read mostly like a paranoid rant , it contains just enough grains of truth to be uncomfortable .
It IS corporate welfare for Boeing and Raytheon , America DOES fund its own enemies , and the deaths of American soldiers DO enrich military contractors.The only reason the last paragraph remains a paranoid rant is because I 'm worth more to Goldman Sachs as a LIVE victim , rather than a dead one .
My taxes justify their bailout .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only Godwinned but also... Satan?  Surely there's a law for that too...Even though this read mostly like a paranoid rant, it contains just enough grains of truth to be uncomfortable.
It IS corporate welfare for Boeing and Raytheon, America DOES fund its own enemies, and the deaths of American soldiers DO enrich military contractors.The only reason the last paragraph remains a paranoid rant is because I'm worth more to Goldman Sachs as a LIVE victim, rather than a dead one.
My taxes justify their bailout.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30150414</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>avandesande</author>
	<datestamp>1257077820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There has been huge gains made in efficiency and maximum power of lasers in the last decade.<br>Look up 'fiber lasers'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There has been huge gains made in efficiency and maximum power of lasers in the last decade.Look up 'fiber lasers'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There has been huge gains made in efficiency and maximum power of lasers in the last decade.Look up 'fiber lasers'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144528</id>
	<title>Re:Fly in the clouds</title>
	<author>TagrenHawk</author>
	<datestamp>1257094740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In principle I would agree with you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... if there weren't such things as radar, SAMs and standard fighter jets.  A highly reflective airplane, even in the clouds, would be a huge target for most modern radars.  So, load up your jet with a laser AND a few missiles.   Boom.  No more pretty, shiny jet.</p><p>Even if you don't carry missiles on your fighter jets, fly in such a way to force the enemy to fly over your SAM sites.  They would show up just as well for a ground radar.</p><p>There is a reason that most military aircraft aren't shiny any more.</p><p>Now, if you could create a paint that is highly absorbent to a variety of wavelengths, and can dissipate the heat, that would make more sense.</p><p>Makes me wonder just how well our current composite paints for aircraft like the F-117 would absorb a laser hit.  I bet someone has the corollary defense contract for this laser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In principle I would agree with you .... if there were n't such things as radar , SAMs and standard fighter jets .
A highly reflective airplane , even in the clouds , would be a huge target for most modern radars .
So , load up your jet with a laser AND a few missiles .
Boom. No more pretty , shiny jet.Even if you do n't carry missiles on your fighter jets , fly in such a way to force the enemy to fly over your SAM sites .
They would show up just as well for a ground radar.There is a reason that most military aircraft are n't shiny any more.Now , if you could create a paint that is highly absorbent to a variety of wavelengths , and can dissipate the heat , that would make more sense.Makes me wonder just how well our current composite paints for aircraft like the F-117 would absorb a laser hit .
I bet someone has the corollary defense contract for this laser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In principle I would agree with you .... if there weren't such things as radar, SAMs and standard fighter jets.
A highly reflective airplane, even in the clouds, would be a huge target for most modern radars.
So, load up your jet with a laser AND a few missiles.
Boom.  No more pretty, shiny jet.Even if you don't carry missiles on your fighter jets, fly in such a way to force the enemy to fly over your SAM sites.
They would show up just as well for a ground radar.There is a reason that most military aircraft aren't shiny any more.Now, if you could create a paint that is highly absorbent to a variety of wavelengths, and can dissipate the heat, that would make more sense.Makes me wonder just how well our current composite paints for aircraft like the F-117 would absorb a laser hit.
I bet someone has the corollary defense contract for this laser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136186</id>
	<title>Acronym of an acronym?</title>
	<author>gurps\_npc</author>
	<datestamp>1258457280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>HELL = "High Energy Liquid Laser"
<p>
"LASER" = Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation.

It strikes me as wrong to use the first letter of an acronym as the last letter of another acronym.

</p><p>It should be HELLASER = High Energy Liquid Light Amplification by Stimulated Emision of Radiation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HELL = " High Energy Liquid Laser " " LASER " = Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation .
It strikes me as wrong to use the first letter of an acronym as the last letter of another acronym .
It should be HELLASER = High Energy Liquid Light Amplification by Stimulated Emision of Radiation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HELL = "High Energy Liquid Laser"

"LASER" = Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation.
It strikes me as wrong to use the first letter of an acronym as the last letter of another acronym.
It should be HELLASER = High Energy Liquid Light Amplification by Stimulated Emision of Radiation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138328</id>
	<title>not very effective</title>
	<author>assert(0)</author>
	<datestamp>1258468620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>5kg, 750 J? Seriously?</p><p>Wake me when 5kgs of marine mammal weapon systems produce 4.5E17 J.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>5kg , 750 J ?
Seriously ? Wake me when 5kgs of marine mammal weapon systems produce 4.5E17 J .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>5kg, 750 J?
Seriously?Wake me when 5kgs of marine mammal weapon systems produce 4.5E17 J.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147240</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1257106140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And what has become of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. when this gets no "popcorn" tag? And you call yourselves nerds?!?!?</htmltext>
<tokenext>And what has become of / .
when this gets no " popcorn " tag ?
And you call yourselves nerds ? ! ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what has become of /.
when this gets no "popcorn" tag?
And you call yourselves nerds?!?!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142898</id>
	<title>Re:useless against the enemies of freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257088440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Alex Jones? Is that you in there?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alex Jones ?
Is that you in there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alex Jones?
Is that you in there?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136270</id>
	<title>Obligatory</title>
	<author>Dripdry</author>
	<datestamp>1258457580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Val Kilmer seen running around MIT hollering with joy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Val Kilmer seen running around MIT hollering with joy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Val Kilmer seen running around MIT hollering with joy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137286</id>
	<title>Re:Is a comparison to bullets apt?</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1258462020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It seems to me that 750 joules of kinetic energy in a bullet would do a lot more damage to a target than 750 joules of electromagnetic energy.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's going to depend primarily on how the energy is distributed (both in space and time). The particular hypothesized device here would deliver the 750J over a much longer time than the firearm it is being compared to (nothing is said about the area in which it would be concentrated), but there is nothing inherent in lasers which means that this would necessarily always be the case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that 750 joules of kinetic energy in a bullet would do a lot more damage to a target than 750 joules of electromagnetic energy.That 's going to depend primarily on how the energy is distributed ( both in space and time ) .
The particular hypothesized device here would deliver the 750J over a much longer time than the firearm it is being compared to ( nothing is said about the area in which it would be concentrated ) , but there is nothing inherent in lasers which means that this would necessarily always be the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that 750 joules of kinetic energy in a bullet would do a lot more damage to a target than 750 joules of electromagnetic energy.That's going to depend primarily on how the energy is distributed (both in space and time).
The particular hypothesized device here would deliver the 750J over a much longer time than the firearm it is being compared to (nothing is said about the area in which it would be concentrated), but there is nothing inherent in lasers which means that this would necessarily always be the case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138012</id>
	<title>I need sleep</title>
	<author>Das Auge</author>
	<datestamp>1258465980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read that as "I would like an <b>elephant</b> weapon from an more civilized age."<br>
<br>
I thought, "What kind of weapon is an 'elephant weapon'? And before I could stop myself, I had a mental picture of an elephant slamming into a Mig fighter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read that as " I would like an elephant weapon from an more civilized age .
" I thought , " What kind of weapon is an 'elephant weapon ' ?
And before I could stop myself , I had a mental picture of an elephant slamming into a Mig fighter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read that as "I would like an elephant weapon from an more civilized age.
"

I thought, "What kind of weapon is an 'elephant weapon'?
And before I could stop myself, I had a mental picture of an elephant slamming into a Mig fighter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138172</id>
	<title>That does it! This is insane!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258467360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A dolphin with a laser taped to its head, nailed to an airplane?!!</p><p>THIS IS MADNESS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A dolphin with a laser taped to its head , nailed to an airplane ? !
! THIS IS MADNESS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A dolphin with a laser taped to its head, nailed to an airplane?!
!THIS IS MADNESS!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136260</id>
	<title>nice</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1258457520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now that's a slashdot article title I think we can all approve of.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that 's a slashdot article title I think we can all approve of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that's a slashdot article title I think we can all approve of.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1258458540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But you can keep a laser focused on something a lot easier.  Light moves a whole lot faster than a supersonic missile.  If you think of it as a "photon machine gun," it's a lot easier to keep the "bullets" hitting the target when your bullets fire rather rapidly and can move at the speed of light.  One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object can't be TOO hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But you can keep a laser focused on something a lot easier .
Light moves a whole lot faster than a supersonic missile .
If you think of it as a " photon machine gun , " it 's a lot easier to keep the " bullets " hitting the target when your bullets fire rather rapidly and can move at the speed of light .
One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object ca n't be TOO hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But you can keep a laser focused on something a lot easier.
Light moves a whole lot faster than a supersonic missile.
If you think of it as a "photon machine gun," it's a lot easier to keep the "bullets" hitting the target when your bullets fire rather rapidly and can move at the speed of light.
One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object can't be TOO hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137768</id>
	<title>ObRealGenius</title>
	<author>TheSync</author>
	<datestamp>1258464600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looks at the facts: very high power, portable, limited firing time, unlimited range.</p><p>All you'd need is a big spinning mirror and you could vaporize a human target from space.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks at the facts : very high power , portable , limited firing time , unlimited range.All you 'd need is a big spinning mirror and you could vaporize a human target from space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks at the facts: very high power, portable, limited firing time, unlimited range.All you'd need is a big spinning mirror and you could vaporize a human target from space.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137636</id>
	<title>Re:Acronym of an acronym?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258463760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are too late. The mysterious process of de-acronymization has already occurred. Much like S.C.U.B.A. became scuba and RA.D.A.R. became radar so has L.A.S.E.R. become laser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are too late .
The mysterious process of de-acronymization has already occurred .
Much like S.C.U.B.A .
became scuba and RA.D.A.R .
became radar so has L.A.S.E.R .
become laser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are too late.
The mysterious process of de-acronymization has already occurred.
Much like S.C.U.B.A.
became scuba and RA.D.A.R.
became radar so has L.A.S.E.R.
become laser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137076</id>
	<title>How did we get sharks to fly at jet speeds? with a</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1258460880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How did we get sharks to fly at jet speeds? with a laser on them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How did we get sharks to fly at jet speeds ?
with a laser on them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did we get sharks to fly at jet speeds?
with a laser on them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30146230</id>
	<title>Arming fighters with pistols</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257101700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms. A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy: a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long.</p></div> </blockquote><p>
I can't get the article to load, but that claim sure underwhelms me. So the author thinks it would be useful to put something that emits the equivalent of the muzzle energy of a 9mm (presumably Parabellum) pistol round per second? Even if that meant the beam had the destructive potential of such a round, it would be a ridiculous weapon for a very expensive, very fast fighter plane&mdash;they have automatic <em>cannon</em> that fire armor-piercing, tank killing shells, they have electric "gatling guns" that can fire thousands of rounds a second, they have missiles that can kill or destroy at great distances. And we're supposed to think it's a good idea to mount the equivalent of a <em>pistol</em> on such a plane? As for blinding enemies...well sure it might work for that. But why not just obliterate them? </p><p>
In any case, comparing the kinetic energy of a projectile to the energy of a laser beam is not useful. While energy is pretty much irrelevant in pistol calibers (they are just good for making holes), the kinetic energy of a 5.56 NATO round can cause considerable damage if it tumbles inside you. A tungsten or depleted uranium 2cm cannon projectile has a lot more energy, and does correspondingly more damage. The problem with a laser is that unless you can deliver a <em>lot</em> of energy in a very small amount of time, you will wind up spreading that energy over a large surface area as your beam moves over your target, which is presumably not holding still and offering itself for frying. Then there are other factors that mitigate the effects of lasers as weapons; for example, if you manage to vaporize some metal on your target, the cloud of vapor may diffuse your beam, thus preventing it from doing further damage. A laser is also going to have trouble shooting through clouds, fog, or even rain. </p><p>
I'm not saying we're never going to get science fictional blasters, but this is a long way from a useful weapon. By the way, does the 5kg include the battery? How many seconds of continuous fire is the battery good for? Dang, wish I could get the article to load.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms .
A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy : a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long .
I ca n't get the article to load , but that claim sure underwhelms me .
So the author thinks it would be useful to put something that emits the equivalent of the muzzle energy of a 9mm ( presumably Parabellum ) pistol round per second ?
Even if that meant the beam had the destructive potential of such a round , it would be a ridiculous weapon for a very expensive , very fast fighter plane    they have automatic cannon that fire armor-piercing , tank killing shells , they have electric " gatling guns " that can fire thousands of rounds a second , they have missiles that can kill or destroy at great distances .
And we 're supposed to think it 's a good idea to mount the equivalent of a pistol on such a plane ?
As for blinding enemies...well sure it might work for that .
But why not just obliterate them ?
In any case , comparing the kinetic energy of a projectile to the energy of a laser beam is not useful .
While energy is pretty much irrelevant in pistol calibers ( they are just good for making holes ) , the kinetic energy of a 5.56 NATO round can cause considerable damage if it tumbles inside you .
A tungsten or depleted uranium 2cm cannon projectile has a lot more energy , and does correspondingly more damage .
The problem with a laser is that unless you can deliver a lot of energy in a very small amount of time , you will wind up spreading that energy over a large surface area as your beam moves over your target , which is presumably not holding still and offering itself for frying .
Then there are other factors that mitigate the effects of lasers as weapons ; for example , if you manage to vaporize some metal on your target , the cloud of vapor may diffuse your beam , thus preventing it from doing further damage .
A laser is also going to have trouble shooting through clouds , fog , or even rain .
I 'm not saying we 're never going to get science fictional blasters , but this is a long way from a useful weapon .
By the way , does the 5kg include the battery ?
How many seconds of continuous fire is the battery good for ?
Dang , wish I could get the article to load .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms.
A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy: a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long.
I can't get the article to load, but that claim sure underwhelms me.
So the author thinks it would be useful to put something that emits the equivalent of the muzzle energy of a 9mm (presumably Parabellum) pistol round per second?
Even if that meant the beam had the destructive potential of such a round, it would be a ridiculous weapon for a very expensive, very fast fighter plane—they have automatic cannon that fire armor-piercing, tank killing shells, they have electric "gatling guns" that can fire thousands of rounds a second, they have missiles that can kill or destroy at great distances.
And we're supposed to think it's a good idea to mount the equivalent of a pistol on such a plane?
As for blinding enemies...well sure it might work for that.
But why not just obliterate them?
In any case, comparing the kinetic energy of a projectile to the energy of a laser beam is not useful.
While energy is pretty much irrelevant in pistol calibers (they are just good for making holes), the kinetic energy of a 5.56 NATO round can cause considerable damage if it tumbles inside you.
A tungsten or depleted uranium 2cm cannon projectile has a lot more energy, and does correspondingly more damage.
The problem with a laser is that unless you can deliver a lot of energy in a very small amount of time, you will wind up spreading that energy over a large surface area as your beam moves over your target, which is presumably not holding still and offering itself for frying.
Then there are other factors that mitigate the effects of lasers as weapons; for example, if you manage to vaporize some metal on your target, the cloud of vapor may diffuse your beam, thus preventing it from doing further damage.
A laser is also going to have trouble shooting through clouds, fog, or even rain.
I'm not saying we're never going to get science fictional blasters, but this is a long way from a useful weapon.
By the way, does the 5kg include the battery?
How many seconds of continuous fire is the battery good for?
Dang, wish I could get the article to load.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190</id>
	<title>Legal Mambo-Jumbo</title>
	<author>Frosty Piss</author>
	<datestamp>1258457280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...a brace of contracts...</p></div><p>I get lost with all the legal verbiage.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a brace of contracts...I get lost with all the legal verbiage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...a brace of contracts...I get lost with all the legal verbiage.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30141838</id>
	<title>Re:That does it! This is insane!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257078900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is Sparta!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Sparta !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Sparta!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136334</id>
	<title>Yes but....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258457820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Will Val Kilmer be able to redirect the laser to pop popcorn from the sky?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Will Val Kilmer be able to redirect the laser to pop popcorn from the sky ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will Val Kilmer be able to redirect the laser to pop popcorn from the sky?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30156920</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>bobzaguy</author>
	<datestamp>1258648260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like that this is about ray guns, lasers as guns, all this and Starwars too!
The return of Ronny Raygun.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like that this is about ray guns , lasers as guns , all this and Starwars too !
The return of Ronny Raygun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like that this is about ray guns, lasers as guns, all this and Starwars too!
The return of Ronny Raygun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136564</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1258458660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the knife:</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cudCajMNRM0&amp;feature=player\_embedded" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cudCajMNRM0&amp;feature=player\_embedded</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the knife : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = cudCajMNRM0&amp;feature = player \ _embedded [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the knife:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cudCajMNRM0&amp;feature=player\_embedded [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142882</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257088320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You jest, but I see far less discrimination than in my youth. Hell, afaik I'm completely from European roots and have hazel eyes and brown hair, but I've been called both "bro" and "nigger" by young black guys (whodathunkit). The world is getting better, not worse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You jest , but I see far less discrimination than in my youth .
Hell , afaik I 'm completely from European roots and have hazel eyes and brown hair , but I 've been called both " bro " and " nigger " by young black guys ( whodathunkit ) .
The world is getting better , not worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You jest, but I see far less discrimination than in my youth.
Hell, afaik I'm completely from European roots and have hazel eyes and brown hair, but I've been called both "bro" and "nigger" by young black guys (whodathunkit).
The world is getting better, not worse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30141804</id>
	<title>Cue the former US president</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257078300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cue the Former US president.  He would be all smiles.<br>Star Wars was his idea after all.  Of course, I'm talking about Ronald Ray-Gun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cue the Former US president .
He would be all smiles.Star Wars was his idea after all .
Of course , I 'm talking about Ronald Ray-Gun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cue the Former US president.
He would be all smiles.Star Wars was his idea after all.
Of course, I'm talking about Ronald Ray-Gun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137786</id>
	<title>Re:Legal Mambo-Jumbo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258464660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Brace is not a legal word, it is a common english word meaning pair.  It's not their fault that you are thick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Brace is not a legal word , it is a common english word meaning pair .
It 's not their fault that you are thick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brace is not a legal word, it is a common english word meaning pair.
It's not their fault that you are thick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137986</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>kaizokuace</author>
	<datestamp>1258465860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>is it like a football laser fight?</htmltext>
<tokenext>is it like a football laser fight ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is it like a football laser fight?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138316</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1258468500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Ok, I see the obligatory "sharks" tag, but what about the "pewpewpew" tag?</i></p><p>Why? Because the story stinks? Peeewwwwwwww!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , I see the obligatory " sharks " tag , but what about the " pewpewpew " tag ? Why ?
Because the story stinks ?
Peeewwwwwwww !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, I see the obligatory "sharks" tag, but what about the "pewpewpew" tag?Why?
Because the story stinks?
Peeewwwwwwww!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136778</id>
	<title>Re:useless against the enemies of freedom</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1258459560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obvious troll is obvious.</p><p>I am not from the US but it is pretty clear to me that the US is vulnerable <b>only</b> on its energy supply. That is why they now have an oil producer (Iraq) as a client state. You can mouth off about the US being the next victim but the fact is that as long as they have a supply of energy they can't be effectively attacked short of lobbing nukes. And even there the chance of success is small.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obvious troll is obvious.I am not from the US but it is pretty clear to me that the US is vulnerable only on its energy supply .
That is why they now have an oil producer ( Iraq ) as a client state .
You can mouth off about the US being the next victim but the fact is that as long as they have a supply of energy they ca n't be effectively attacked short of lobbing nukes .
And even there the chance of success is small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obvious troll is obvious.I am not from the US but it is pretty clear to me that the US is vulnerable only on its energy supply.
That is why they now have an oil producer (Iraq) as a client state.
You can mouth off about the US being the next victim but the fact is that as long as they have a supply of energy they can't be effectively attacked short of lobbing nukes.
And even there the chance of success is small.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136720</id>
	<title>That's great, but...</title>
	<author>esampson</author>
	<datestamp>1258459380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:</p><p>If it scales down far enough, this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms. A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy: a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long.</p><p>Since 9mm guns tend to be pistols they weigh a lot less than 5kg (11 lbs.). Most semi-automatic pistols are also capable of accurately firing 3-4 rounds per second and as has already been mentioned keeping a 750 joules laser on a target for an entire second would be close to impossible unless the target was completely incapable of movement, so that energy is going to be diffused across the target reducing it's effectiveness pretty severely.</p><p>I guess the last thing I feel obligated to point out is that a handheld HELL-gun that is within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small arms would have about 75 joules of muzzle energy and would be about as dangerous as a BB gun (You could put your eye out with it). An order of magnitude is a factor of 10.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : If it scales down far enough , this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms .
A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy : a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long.Since 9mm guns tend to be pistols they weigh a lot less than 5kg ( 11 lbs. ) .
Most semi-automatic pistols are also capable of accurately firing 3-4 rounds per second and as has already been mentioned keeping a 750 joules laser on a target for an entire second would be close to impossible unless the target was completely incapable of movement , so that energy is going to be diffused across the target reducing it 's effectiveness pretty severely.I guess the last thing I feel obligated to point out is that a handheld HELL-gun that is within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small arms would have about 75 joules of muzzle energy and would be about as dangerous as a BB gun ( You could put your eye out with it ) .
An order of magnitude is a factor of 10 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:If it scales down far enough, this would seem to put handheld HELL-guns within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small-arms.
A 9mm pistol bullet has about 750 joules muzzle energy: a 5kg portable HELL-ray weapon would put out this much energy in a blast less than a second long.Since 9mm guns tend to be pistols they weigh a lot less than 5kg (11 lbs.).
Most semi-automatic pistols are also capable of accurately firing 3-4 rounds per second and as has already been mentioned keeping a 750 joules laser on a target for an entire second would be close to impossible unless the target was completely incapable of movement, so that energy is going to be diffused across the target reducing it's effectiveness pretty severely.I guess the last thing I feel obligated to point out is that a handheld HELL-gun that is within an order of magnitude of the striking power offered by conventional small arms would have about 75 joules of muzzle energy and would be about as dangerous as a BB gun (You could put your eye out with it).
An order of magnitude is a factor of 10.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138690</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>Have Brain Will Rent</author>
	<datestamp>1258471380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>And what the heck are thoroughbred sharks? What? Like a mongrel shark isn't good enough to carry a laser now? Damn discrimination everywhere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And what the heck are thoroughbred sharks ?
What ? Like a mongrel shark is n't good enough to carry a laser now ?
Damn discrimination everywhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what the heck are thoroughbred sharks?
What? Like a mongrel shark isn't good enough to carry a laser now?
Damn discrimination everywhere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139500</id>
	<title>re:over one second?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258477740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked on a laser system that was designed to shoot down rockets and mortars. I can tell you that there's enough energy put onto the target to melt through inch thick or thicker rocket/mortar casings easily within the time of flight.</p><p>As to the spinning, that's actually better. When a laser is melting metal, the melted part gets in the way of the beam. On non-spinning targets you actually have to wiggle the beam a bit to counteract that problem. If the missile spins, then you just keep it on the target and you melt a nice ring through it.</p><p>I see two problems with the laser in the article though<br>1) too weak, 150 Kw isn't really weapons grade<br>2) lasers melt, they don't explode, so you have to have very precise targeting to put energy on something that goes boom, otherwise you just melt divots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked on a laser system that was designed to shoot down rockets and mortars .
I can tell you that there 's enough energy put onto the target to melt through inch thick or thicker rocket/mortar casings easily within the time of flight.As to the spinning , that 's actually better .
When a laser is melting metal , the melted part gets in the way of the beam .
On non-spinning targets you actually have to wiggle the beam a bit to counteract that problem .
If the missile spins , then you just keep it on the target and you melt a nice ring through it.I see two problems with the laser in the article though1 ) too weak , 150 Kw is n't really weapons grade2 ) lasers melt , they do n't explode , so you have to have very precise targeting to put energy on something that goes boom , otherwise you just melt divots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked on a laser system that was designed to shoot down rockets and mortars.
I can tell you that there's enough energy put onto the target to melt through inch thick or thicker rocket/mortar casings easily within the time of flight.As to the spinning, that's actually better.
When a laser is melting metal, the melted part gets in the way of the beam.
On non-spinning targets you actually have to wiggle the beam a bit to counteract that problem.
If the missile spins, then you just keep it on the target and you melt a nice ring through it.I see two problems with the laser in the article though1) too weak, 150 Kw isn't really weapons grade2) lasers melt, they don't explode, so you have to have very precise targeting to put energy on something that goes boom, otherwise you just melt divots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136310</id>
	<title>Wake me ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258457760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wake me when they make a {voice=Arnold}"phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range" {/voice}</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wake me when they make a { voice = Arnold } " phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range " { /voice }</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wake me when they make a {voice=Arnold}"phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range" {/voice}</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356</id>
	<title>Is a comparison to bullets apt?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258457880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to me that 750 joules of kinetic energy in a bullet would do a lot more damage to a target than 750 joules of electromagnetic energy. A laser can only burn through tissue, and that'll always take longer than a metal slug takes to penetrate, given the same amount of energy, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that 750 joules of kinetic energy in a bullet would do a lot more damage to a target than 750 joules of electromagnetic energy .
A laser can only burn through tissue , and that 'll always take longer than a metal slug takes to penetrate , given the same amount of energy , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that 750 joules of kinetic energy in a bullet would do a lot more damage to a target than 750 joules of electromagnetic energy.
A laser can only burn through tissue, and that'll always take longer than a metal slug takes to penetrate, given the same amount of energy, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139272</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>barath\_s</author>
	<datestamp>1258476060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Until lasers or other beam weapons can deliver enough energy in a short enough amount of time (10 thousandths of a second) similar to a bullet or supersonic missile, they simply will not make good weapons"

How about using lasers to deliver 4 MJ of energy in a few picoseconds, resulting in 500 TW of power?. That's expected to be enough to cause fusion. Of course, this plan will deliver it to a stationary capsule instead of a missile, but surely that's engineering ?
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_ignition\_facility" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_ignition\_facility</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Until lasers or other beam weapons can deliver enough energy in a short enough amount of time ( 10 thousandths of a second ) similar to a bullet or supersonic missile , they simply will not make good weapons " How about using lasers to deliver 4 MJ of energy in a few picoseconds , resulting in 500 TW of power ? .
That 's expected to be enough to cause fusion .
Of course , this plan will deliver it to a stationary capsule instead of a missile , but surely that 's engineering ?
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National \ _ignition \ _facility [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Until lasers or other beam weapons can deliver enough energy in a short enough amount of time (10 thousandths of a second) similar to a bullet or supersonic missile, they simply will not make good weapons"

How about using lasers to deliver 4 MJ of energy in a few picoseconds, resulting in 500 TW of power?.
That's expected to be enough to cause fusion.
Of course, this plan will deliver it to a stationary capsule instead of a missile, but surely that's engineering ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_ignition\_facility [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139472</id>
	<title>Re:Mirrors</title>
	<author>joe\_frisch</author>
	<datestamp>1258477500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Corner Cubes. Somewhat seriously, it would be pretty easy to figure out what wavelength they are using and build high reflectivity mirrors. Rather bad for your radar cross section though.

Still don't see how this will stop suicide bombers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Corner Cubes .
Somewhat seriously , it would be pretty easy to figure out what wavelength they are using and build high reflectivity mirrors .
Rather bad for your radar cross section though .
Still do n't see how this will stop suicide bombers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corner Cubes.
Somewhat seriously, it would be pretty easy to figure out what wavelength they are using and build high reflectivity mirrors.
Rather bad for your radar cross section though.
Still don't see how this will stop suicide bombers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139738</id>
	<title>weapon efficiency and "energy"</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1258479720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The amount of energy imparted has little to do with actual weapon performance. What matters is how well that energy is imparted to the subject/target. This is why many consider the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.45ACP (a cartridge which has relatively little energy) a better stopping caliber than, say,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.223 Remmington/5.56 NATO (which has a relatively larger energy). The percentage of PE to energy imparted from the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.45 is significantly higher than from the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.223 (which tends to just pass on through) due to bullet design.</p><p>
&nbsp; To get a laser cannon capable of "stopping power" (regardless of your target) you would need to, essentially, burn a crater into or a hole through the subject. I have no idea how much power is required for that, but if we're talking about kjoules, we haven't got nearly the technology for it. The article is pure fantasy: short of portable, weapon magazine ("clip") like nuclear power cells capable of short, multiple, controlled explosions, this won't be actionable for some time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The amount of energy imparted has little to do with actual weapon performance .
What matters is how well that energy is imparted to the subject/target .
This is why many consider the .45ACP ( a cartridge which has relatively little energy ) a better stopping caliber than , say , .223 Remmington/5.56 NATO ( which has a relatively larger energy ) .
The percentage of PE to energy imparted from the .45 is significantly higher than from the .223 ( which tends to just pass on through ) due to bullet design .
  To get a laser cannon capable of " stopping power " ( regardless of your target ) you would need to , essentially , burn a crater into or a hole through the subject .
I have no idea how much power is required for that , but if we 're talking about kjoules , we have n't got nearly the technology for it .
The article is pure fantasy : short of portable , weapon magazine ( " clip " ) like nuclear power cells capable of short , multiple , controlled explosions , this wo n't be actionable for some time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The amount of energy imparted has little to do with actual weapon performance.
What matters is how well that energy is imparted to the subject/target.
This is why many consider the .45ACP (a cartridge which has relatively little energy) a better stopping caliber than, say, .223 Remmington/5.56 NATO (which has a relatively larger energy).
The percentage of PE to energy imparted from the .45 is significantly higher than from the .223 (which tends to just pass on through) due to bullet design.
  To get a laser cannon capable of "stopping power" (regardless of your target) you would need to, essentially, burn a crater into or a hole through the subject.
I have no idea how much power is required for that, but if we're talking about kjoules, we haven't got nearly the technology for it.
The article is pure fantasy: short of portable, weapon magazine ("clip") like nuclear power cells capable of short, multiple, controlled explosions, this won't be actionable for some time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136586</id>
	<title>Kent... Wake up Kent.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258458720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All you'd need is a large spinning mirror and you could vaporize a human target from space. Better go make sure someone didn't steal Kents tracking system.</p><p>Plus sharks with FRICKIN LAZER BEAMS attached to their heads?</p><p>I like the first movie better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All you 'd need is a large spinning mirror and you could vaporize a human target from space .
Better go make sure someone did n't steal Kents tracking system.Plus sharks with FRICKIN LAZER BEAMS attached to their heads ? I like the first movie better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All you'd need is a large spinning mirror and you could vaporize a human target from space.
Better go make sure someone didn't steal Kents tracking system.Plus sharks with FRICKIN LAZER BEAMS attached to their heads?I like the first movie better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136846</id>
	<title>Re:useless against the enemies of freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258459920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of what you wrote is true, but really you're just jealous that we have death rays and you don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of what you wrote is true , but really you 're just jealous that we have death rays and you do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of what you wrote is true, but really you're just jealous that we have death rays and you don't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136096</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>HEbGb</author>
	<datestamp>1258456920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always considered the people who religiously adhere to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.45 over 9mm, despite its negligible, if any, benefit, to really be compensating for a lack of genitalular fortitude.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always considered the people who religiously adhere to .45 over 9mm , despite its negligible , if any , benefit , to really be compensating for a lack of genitalular fortitude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always considered the people who religiously adhere to .45 over 9mm, despite its negligible, if any, benefit, to really be compensating for a lack of genitalular fortitude.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136698</id>
	<title>Re:Tags</title>
	<author>Haxzaw</author>
	<datestamp>1258459260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My guess is it is supposed to be the sound the laser gun will make, like the Enterprise firing a photon torpedo.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is it is supposed to be the sound the laser gun will make , like the Enterprise firing a photon torpedo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is it is supposed to be the sound the laser gun will make, like the Enterprise firing a photon torpedo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139004</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258474320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object can't be TOO hard.</p></div><p>When I read that I nearly spewed beer out my nose all over my laptop; yes it is very hard especially from an aircraft at tactical ranges, turbulence around the laser turet, dust, water vapor, smoke, vibrations, moving target...</p><p>There's a lots of good reasons we still use kinetic vehicles to deliver heat blast and frag on target instead of tickling targets with ray guns.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object ca n't be TOO hard.When I read that I nearly spewed beer out my nose all over my laptop ; yes it is very hard especially from an aircraft at tactical ranges , turbulence around the laser turet , dust , water vapor , smoke , vibrations , moving target...There 's a lots of good reasons we still use kinetic vehicles to deliver heat blast and frag on target instead of tickling targets with ray guns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One second of laser-shining-on-a-moving-object can't be TOO hard.When I read that I nearly spewed beer out my nose all over my laptop; yes it is very hard especially from an aircraft at tactical ranges, turbulence around the laser turet, dust, water vapor, smoke, vibrations, moving target...There's a lots of good reasons we still use kinetic vehicles to deliver heat blast and frag on target instead of tickling targets with ray guns.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137490</id>
	<title>Fly in the clouds</title>
	<author>Ralph Spoilsport</author>
	<datestamp>1258463040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>in a craft with reflective skin - lasers no longer a problem.
<p>
NEXT!
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in a craft with reflective skin - lasers no longer a problem .
NEXT !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in a craft with reflective skin - lasers no longer a problem.
NEXT!
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136772</id>
	<title>Re:Recoil</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1258459560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Does firing a laser bring recoil opposite the laser's direction with the energy equal to that in the laser, the way firing a bullet does?</i></p><p>Most of the energy of a laser is in the heat, and very little in the mass of the photons being fired.  Bullets work the other way, their energy is almost all in the mass, and very little in their heat.</p><p>So lasers have almost zero recoil.</p><p>That being said, the kinetic (mass) energy of a bullet is basically converted to heat when it hits, and it can be considered to burn/melt through armor to some degree as well as punch a hole in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does firing a laser bring recoil opposite the laser 's direction with the energy equal to that in the laser , the way firing a bullet does ? Most of the energy of a laser is in the heat , and very little in the mass of the photons being fired .
Bullets work the other way , their energy is almost all in the mass , and very little in their heat.So lasers have almost zero recoil.That being said , the kinetic ( mass ) energy of a bullet is basically converted to heat when it hits , and it can be considered to burn/melt through armor to some degree as well as punch a hole in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does firing a laser bring recoil opposite the laser's direction with the energy equal to that in the laser, the way firing a bullet does?Most of the energy of a laser is in the heat, and very little in the mass of the photons being fired.
Bullets work the other way, their energy is almost all in the mass, and very little in their heat.So lasers have almost zero recoil.That being said, the kinetic (mass) energy of a bullet is basically converted to heat when it hits, and it can be considered to burn/melt through armor to some degree as well as punch a hole in it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138142</id>
	<title>Re:over one second?</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1258467180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just for reference, the Star Wars lasers of yesterday are very much becoming a reality today.</p><p>Last weekend NatGeo or Discovery, can't remember which was running a series of shows showing lasers being used to destroy missiles and other lower powered versions being used to simply blind them, causing them to lose tracking and not hit the target.</p><p>Due to defraction (is that the right word?) in the atmosphere, you don't even hit the target with a 'laser beam' like you see in the typical TV show, its already a beam of light thats spreading out over distance anyway.</p><p>Lasers are already being used to shoot down targets from larger aircraft ( large bombers who can carry the currently large required hardware ) and UAVs have already been fitted with systems to track targets heat seeking missiles and blind them.</p><blockquote><div><p>They will not make good weapons</p></div></blockquote><p>They already ARE weapons, they just need some refinement before they become <strong>good</strong> weapons.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just for reference , the Star Wars lasers of yesterday are very much becoming a reality today.Last weekend NatGeo or Discovery , ca n't remember which was running a series of shows showing lasers being used to destroy missiles and other lower powered versions being used to simply blind them , causing them to lose tracking and not hit the target.Due to defraction ( is that the right word ?
) in the atmosphere , you do n't even hit the target with a 'laser beam ' like you see in the typical TV show , its already a beam of light thats spreading out over distance anyway.Lasers are already being used to shoot down targets from larger aircraft ( large bombers who can carry the currently large required hardware ) and UAVs have already been fitted with systems to track targets heat seeking missiles and blind them.They will not make good weaponsThey already ARE weapons , they just need some refinement before they become good weapons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just for reference, the Star Wars lasers of yesterday are very much becoming a reality today.Last weekend NatGeo or Discovery, can't remember which was running a series of shows showing lasers being used to destroy missiles and other lower powered versions being used to simply blind them, causing them to lose tracking and not hit the target.Due to defraction (is that the right word?
) in the atmosphere, you don't even hit the target with a 'laser beam' like you see in the typical TV show, its already a beam of light thats spreading out over distance anyway.Lasers are already being used to shoot down targets from larger aircraft ( large bombers who can carry the currently large required hardware ) and UAVs have already been fitted with systems to track targets heat seeking missiles and blind them.They will not make good weaponsThey already ARE weapons, they just need some refinement before they become good weapons.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144100</id>
	<title>Stormtroopers</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1257093120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Over 350 comments and no one has mentioned Stormtroopers (from 40k) carrying hellguns or made jokes about the AP value of these new weapons? For shame, Slashdot, for shame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Over 350 comments and no one has mentioned Stormtroopers ( from 40k ) carrying hellguns or made jokes about the AP value of these new weapons ?
For shame , Slashdot , for shame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over 350 comments and no one has mentioned Stormtroopers (from 40k) carrying hellguns or made jokes about the AP value of these new weapons?
For shame, Slashdot, for shame.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136256</id>
	<title>Re:9mm?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258457520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  Compare the USP and the Glock pistols in Counter-Strike - which one does more damage?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
Compare the USP and the Glock pistols in Counter-Strike - which one does more damage ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
Compare the USP and the Glock pistols in Counter-Strike - which one does more damage?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136096</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138362</id>
	<title>Re:Laser blasters are the weapons of barbarians.</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1258468800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a musket?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a musket ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a musket?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144384</id>
	<title>Meh..</title>
	<author>EriktheGreen</author>
	<datestamp>1257094200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>HELL-guns are ok, but given a choice I'll take a godwyn pattern bolter any day of the week.
<p>
Erik</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HELL-guns are ok , but given a choice I 'll take a godwyn pattern bolter any day of the week .
Erik</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HELL-guns are ok, but given a choice I'll take a godwyn pattern bolter any day of the week.
Erik</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135982</id>
	<title>9mm?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258456380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not compare it to a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45\_ACP" title="wikipedia.org">real handgun caliber</a> [wikipedia.org]?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not compare it to a real handgun caliber [ wikipedia.org ] ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not compare it to a real handgun caliber [wikipedia.org]?
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136232</id>
	<title>Somewhere in the Universe.....</title>
	<author>Sean Trembath</author>
	<datestamp>1258457400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Greedo is starting to sweat</htmltext>
<tokenext>Greedo is starting to sweat</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Greedo is starting to sweat</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30145064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30149430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30143954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30146764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30140582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30141838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30143288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30148490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30140404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30150414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30145796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30152360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30156920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30141946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_2115218_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30149470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136600
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30146764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30141838
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30146230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30140582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137476
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136096
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136256
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136564
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30140404
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136262
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136670
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138706
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30143288
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137170
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144198
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137244
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30144528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138162
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136760
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137892
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30145796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30135966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136026
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137986
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139222
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138690
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30142702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147240
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30141946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137786
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30156920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30149470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30138142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30148490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136522
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139004
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30152360
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137290
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137228
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30143954
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30150414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137188
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30145064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30147362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30137382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30139472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30149430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_2115218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_2115218.30136720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
