Missile defense is NP-complete
smu160.github.io
Missile defense is NP-complete
1–10 of 446 posts
Re: Missile defense is NP-complete
#2It's been known since the 1960s that effective anti ballistic missile defense is impossible.
Re: Missile defense is NP-complete
#3Oh, I thought this was going to be about the old trackball arcade game. Or perhaps it is? Same sort of rules? The maths is going so far over my head I can't hear the whoosh.
Re: Missile defense is NP-complete
#4Add multiple decoys and the missile math tends to become an argument for the importance of preemption. Han shot first for a good reason.
Re: Missile defense is NP-complete
#5Add multiple decoys and the missile math tends to become an argument for the importance of preemption. Han shot first for a good reason.
Careful. Preemption takes many forms, some of them many would find unpalatable.
Re: Missile defense is NP-complete
#6Would be interesting to know how the probabilities change once all your X band radars are destroyed. And then again how they change when all your L band radars are destroyed...
Re: Missile defense is NP-complete
#7It's been known since the 1960s that effective anti ballistic missile defense is impossible.
A lot of things involving rockets and putting things in space have changed since the 1960s.
Re: Missile defense is NP-complete
#8The author explains that this problem is actually adversarial, in the sense that the attacker gets to observe defenses and allocate warheads and decoys accordingly.
Thinking of our current circumstances, this suggests another cost of war: our offensive capabilities, as well as our defensive capabilities become more observable. Our adversaries are studying our strengths and weaknesses in Iran, and they will have a much improved game plan for countering us in future conflicts.
Re: Missile defense is NP-complete
#9Great nerd title, the maths made me nostalgic as I haven't seen a Sigma/Pi in a few years