Daily Archives: May 27, 2024

Last week, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Cosmos-2553 spacecraft, launched in February 2022, is being used to secretly test components of Russias anti-satellite nuclear weapons. And just a week before, Russia vetoed a UN resolution banning the deployment of nuclear weapons in space, effectively confirming such intentions.

We will not discuss the moral and ethical side of this issue. Instead, we will talk about why no country has ever placed nuclear weapons in space, why it is a very risky idea, and why Russia needs all this.

In the early years of the space age, near-Earth space was not a nuclear-free territory. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the USSR and the US conducted a series of high-altitude nuclear explosions. At that time, a number of projects to deploy nuclear weapons in orbit and even detonate a nuclear bomb on the Moon were also discussed in earnest, formally for scientific purposes only.

However, in 1963, the superpowers signed the Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water. Four years later, the Outer Space Treaty was adopted. It banned the deployment of nuclear weapons in outer space, on the Moon and other celestial bodies.

It should be said at the outset that the ban on the deployment of nuclear weapons in space was not due to any peacefulness of the military or their moral anguish over the fact that the arms race would now spread to the entire solar system. The reasons were purely practical.

To begin with, in those years, the idea of deploying nuclear weapons in space was of interest to the military mainly in terms of its use as a first-strike capability. After all, a warhead dropped from orbit would theoretically take only a few minutes to pass through the atmosphere and hit the target. This was faster than using intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

However, on closer inspection, there were a number of buts that quickly buried the idea. Firstly, unlike ICBMs hidden in silos and submarines, satellites are always in plain sight, making them more vulnerable while much more expensive.

Secondly, an ICBM can be aimed at any point at any time, while an orbital bomb can only hit a target that is currently on its flight path. If it abruptly changes its orbit, such manoeuvres will inevitably be noticed by the enemy, which will negate the effect of surprise. Moreover, any change in the orbit of a nuclear-capable satellite could in principle be interpreted as preparation for an attack and provoke a preemptive strike even if the other side had no intention of attacking.

Thirdly, the launch vehicles used for space launches sometimes fall down. And in the case of a rocket carrying a satellite with a nuclear bomb, it is not yet clear what is worse: if it crashes into ones own territory or if it crashes into the territory of a potential enemy.

Fourth, spacecraft have a limited lifespan. What should be done with a satellite carrying a bomb that has exhausted its life? In theory, it can be transferred to a higher orbit. But, again, this is only a delay in solving the problem. And what if the satellite fails prematurely, cannot enter the burial orbit (and such situations are not uncommon) and falls down in a few years to unpredictable place?

All these factors brought the initial enthusiasm of the military to naught. And that is why the USSR and the US never deployed nuclear weapons in space. This option simply did not have any obvious advantages over the use of ICBMs. Instead, it had many risk factors that could lead to the accidental outbreak of World War III.

After the above, many people probably have several obvious questions. Why does Russia need to deploy nuclear weapons in space now? Has something radically changed over the past sixty years and now it has suddenly become safe (if such a concept can be applied to nuclear weapons in principle)?

Lets start with the answer to the second question. No, the deployment of nuclear weapons in space still carries a huge number of risks and could lead to an accidental outbreak of war. Even if we take into account the increased reliability of rockets (although they still fall), the main question remains: what to do with a bomb in space after the satellite has exhausted its life? Its no secret that, given the deplorable state of Russian electronics, its spacecraft have a much shorter lifespan than Western ones and are much more likely to fail prematurely.

In theory, this problem could be solved by using a spacecraft with a shuttle-like cargo bay that could deorbitalise the bomb and return it to Earth. But Russia does not have anything like that, and it is not likely to get such craft in the coming decades. So any satellite it launches with an atomic bomb will eventually fall out of orbit and crash to Earth. It is hardly necessary to explain the consequences of such Russian roulette in space.

Now lets answer the main question. Why did Russia need a nuclear bomb in space in the first place?

Tests carried out in the 1950s and 1960s showed that a space nuclear explosion leads to the formation of an artificial radiation belt around the Earth, which is very harmful to electronics. According to some estimates, it could destroy up to 90% of all existing vehicles in low orbits and make any manned spaceflight impossible for at least a year.

Such a weapon can be used for only one purpose to destroy mega-satellite constellations, primarily the Starlink system. It already has more than six thousand active satellites, making it virtually impossible to destroy by conventional means. The irony is that Russia could use nuclear weapons in space because of its technological backwardness. It does not have many satellites, so they can be sacrificed. But for Western countries, the loss of most of their satellites would have very, very serious consequences both militarily and economically.

However, there is one small nuance. Radiation belts do not care about the nationality of spacecraft. If such a weapon is used, the satellites of absolutely every country on Earth, including its formal allies like China, will be under attack. They would also be destroyed, just like, say, the Chinese Tiangong orbital station. Therefore, a nuclear bomb in space can, in fact, be considered something akin to a weapon for the doomsday a total war of complete destruction, when the consequences are absolutely unimportant.

The final question is why put a satellite with a bomb into orbit at all. After all, the same result can be achieved by launching a ballistic missile with a nuclear charge and then detonating it at the desired altitude (as was done during nuclear tests in the late 1950s and early 1960s). In this case, Russia would not even violate its formal obligations, such as the Outer Space Treaty.

Most likely, the answer lies in surprise. The launch of a ballistic missile would be detected, giving the West a few minutes to respond. A satellite with a bomb, on the other hand, can be blown up at any second without any visible preparations.

Of course, we cannot rule out the possibility that this entire programme could be part of a large-scale Russian bluff to intimidate the West into stopping helping Ukraine. After all, as we have already noted, the deployment of nuclear weapons in space creates a huge number of risks and problems that are very difficult, if not impossible, to solve. And this is not the first time that Russia has rattled its imaginary weapons in front of the world.

But if Russia really tries to deploy nuclear bombs in space, it will be a direct challenge not only to the West, but to the entire planet, to all states on Earth, because such weapons can throw civilisation back in time for many decades. In this case, we can only hope that they will be able to realise the scale of the threat and develop a joint response before it is too late.

The rest is here:

Russian Roulette: Why should Russia want nukes in outer space? - The Universe. Space. Tech

The upcoming mystery thriller drama No Way Out: The Roulette has revealed more cast lineup!

No Way Out: The Roulette is an upcoming drama that depicts the fierce confrontation between those who want to kill and those who want to survive amidst the situation where a bounty of 20 billion won (approximately $14.7 million) is placed for the murder of a heinous criminal who is released from prison.

Originally slated to portray the lead character Baek Joong Sik, the late actor Lee Sun Gyun withdrew from the project following drug-related allegations and his untimely passing.

Subsequently, Jo Jin Woong has assumed the role of Baek Joong Sik, a detective who finds himself in the ironic position of having to protect the notorious criminal Kim Gook Ho. Yoo Jae Myung plays Kim Gook Ho, the ex-convict now targeted for nationwide execution after his 13-year imprisonment.

Other key characters include those who seek to use the public assassination offer for their own purposes. Kim Moo Yeol plays Lee Sang Bong, Kim Gook Hos legal representative and lawyer. Driven by ambitions to achieve success in this corrupt world, Lee Sang Bong volunteers to become Kim Gook Hos lawyer. Yum Jung Ah portrays Ahn Myung Ja, the two-faced mayor of Hosan, who, upon facing the demise of her political career, sees Kim Gook Ho as her last hope and decides to use him.

Sung Yoo Bin stars as Seo Dong Ha, Kim Gook Hos son and a prodigious violinist burdened by the stigma of being a murderers son. Greg Han will star as Mr. Smile, a seasoned and ruthless killer who comes to Korea to kill Kim Gook Ho. Notably, this will mark his first debut in a Korean drama.

Lee Kwang Soo portrays Yoon Chang Jae, a butcher aiming to claim the substantial financial reward by killing Kim Gook Ho. Lastly, Kim Sung Cheol joins the ensemble as Sung Joon Woo, a young pastor who wields his influence over the believers of his huge church.

No Way Out: The Roulette will premiere on U+Mobile TV in July.

While waiting, watchJo Jin Woong in The Policemans Lineage:

Watch Now

Source (1)

More here:

No Way Out: The Roulette Starring Jo Jin Woong, Kim Moo Yeol, And More Confirms Full Cast Lineup And Broadcast ... - soompi

On 4 April, Somalia escalated tensions with Ethiopia when it expelled Addis Ababas ambassador from Mogadishu over the Somaliland Memorandum of Understanding. Since 2006, Ethiopia has been a key regional security partner, fighting alongside Somalia against al-Shabaab. Somali and allied forces have made significant gains against al-Shabaab since 2022. However, as diplomatic relations have broken down between Somalia and Ethiopia, the continuation of joint counterterrorism operations has been called into question.

Fears of a security vacuum emerging are especially pertinent, considering the conclusion of the African Unions Transition Mission to Somalia (ATMIS) in December 2024. Ethiopias bid to regain sea access is threatening to destabilise the Horn of Africa with serious consequences for its domesticsecurity.

Key Judgement 1. If Ethiopia withdraws from Somalia in the next 12 months, it is likely Al-Shabab will regroup and pose a significant threat to the Ethiopian border region.

Key Judgement 2. It is unlikely Al-Shabaab will strike Ethiopian interests in Somaliland in the next 12 months.

Key Judgement 3. It is highly unlikely Al-Shabaab will launch a military-style offensive into Ethiopia in the next 12 months.

See the rest here:

Ethiopia Roulette: Gambling on a Port Against Al-Shabaab Anger - Grey Dynamics

It seems the bright lights are going to set Aer Lingus on fire, as the airline is planning to launch a winter seasonal service to Las Vegas.

The Irish flag carrier will start the service on Friday 25th October 2024, just in time for the midterm break, operating through to 29th April 2025, covering the East Holiday perfect to get a little bit of desert sun or adjust your eyes to the flashing slot machines in the hotels.

The planned operation is

Aer Lingus will deploy an Airbus A330 on the route, typically with 30 business class seats and over 275 economy class seats (with the airline operating three different seating variants).

Lead-in prices start from 499 return including taxes and charges, with tickets on sale now from Aer Linguss site, as well as the usual distribution channels.

Lynne Embleton, Aer Lingus Chief Executive Officer said:

Aer Lingus is bringing this iconic destination to Irish customers seeking an escape to the winter sun.

In addition to the warm climate, Las Vegas is renowned for being one of the greatest entertainment capitals in the world, famous for its shows, concerts, sports events and natural wonders. It is a long-held ambition of ours to fly to Las Vegas. The launch of this new Aer Lingus route is a significant moment for us and our customers.

Steve Hill, president and CEO of the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority added:

On behalf of all of Las Vegas, we couldnt be more thrilled to welcome Aer Lingus to Las Vegas for the very first time,

In 2023, our city welcomed more than 52,000 visitors from Ireland, and this direct, nonstop service from Dublin will undoubtedly be motivation for Irish travelers and visitors throughout Europe to discover everything Las Vegas has to offer. We congratulate Aer Lingus on this expansion and look forward to a very successful partnership.

Its not surprising Aer Lingus is launching another transatlantic route with those routes being the core of the airlines long haul business.

Perhaps the only thing that is surprising is that it has taken so long for Aer Lingus to consider the route launch. With three flights a week for an extended winter season, it provides holiday lift capacity as well as for those who are connecting at Dublin Airport (and thus provides an easy connection, along with pre-clearance in the USA).

It should provide a useful link for those who wish to explore some of the wonders of the region as well as beyond the hotels on the strip.

Welcome toEconomy Class and Beyond. Its coming up toAircraft Interiors Expoand well be on the show, gathering news and experiencing the latest in passenger innovations. Find out more at ourAIX 2024 landing page!

In the meantime, welcome to your no-nonsense guide to network news, honest reviews, in-depth coverage, unique research, as well as the humour and madness I only know how to deliver.

Our Social Media pool has expanded. You can find us across most networks as@economybeyondonTwitter,Mastodon,BlueSky,ThreadsandInstagram!

Also, remember that we are part oftheBoardingAreacommunity, bringing you the latest frequent flyer news from around the world.

Read this article:

Aer Lingus spins the roulette wheel, with a winter service to Las Vegas - Economy Class & Beyond - Kevin Marshall

The first commercial gambling operations emerged, coincidentally or not, at the same time as the study of mathematical probability in the mid-1600s.

By the early 1700s, commercial gambling operations were widespread in European cities such as London and Paris. But in many of the games that were offered, players faced steep odds.

Then, in 1713, the brothers Johann and Jacob Bernoulli proved their Golden Theorem, known now as the law of large numbers or long averages.

But gambling entrepreneurs were slow to embrace this theorem, which showed how it could actually be an advantage for the house to have a smaller edge over a larger one.

In my book The Gambling Century: Commercial Gaming in Britain from Restoration to Regency, I explain how it took government efforts to ban and regulate betting for gambling operators to finally understand just how much money could be made off a miniscule house edge.

The illusion of even odds in games that were the ancestors of roulette and blackjack proved immensely profitable, sparking a probability revolution that transformed gambling in Britain and beyond.

The law of large numbers refers to events governed by chance.

When you flip a coin, for example, you have a 50% or even money chance of getting heads or tails. Were you to flip a coin 10 times, its quite possible that heads will turn up seven times and tails three times. But after 100, or 1000, or 10,000 flips, the ratio of heads to tails will be closer and closer to the mathematical mean of probability that is, half heads and half tails.

This principle was popularized by writers such as Abraham De Moivre, who applied them to games of chance.

De Moivre explained how, over time, someone with even the smallest statistical edge would eventually win almost all of the money that was staked.

This is what happens in roulette. The game has 36 numbers, 18 of which are red and 18 of which are black. However, there are also two green house numbers 0 and 00 which, if the ball lands on them, means that the house can take everyones wager. This gives the house a small edge.

Imagine 10 players with $100 apiece. Half of them bet $10 on red and the other half bet $10 on black. Assuming that the wheel strictly aligns with the mean of probability, the house will break even for 18 of 19 spins. But on the 19th spin, the ball will land on one of the green house numbers, allowing the house to collect all the money staked from all bettors.

After 100 spins, the house will have won half of the players money. After 200 spins, theyll have won all of it.

Even with a single house number the single 0 on the roulette wheels introduced in Monte Carlo by the casino entrepreneur Louis Blanc the house would win everything after 400 spins.

This eventuality, as De Moivre put it, will seem almost incredible given the smallness of the odds.

As De Moivre anticipated, gamblers and gambling operators were slow to adopt these findings.

De Moivres complex mathematical equations were over the heads of gamblers who hadnt mastered simple arithmetic.

Gambling operators didnt initially buy into the Golden Theorem, either, seeing it as unproven and therefore risky.

Instead, they played it safe by promoting games with long odds.

One was the Royal Oak Lottery, a game played with a polyhedral die with 32 faces, like a soccer ball. Players could bet on individual numbers or combinations of two or four numbers, giving them, at best, 7-to-1 odds of winning.

Faro was another popular game of chance in which the house, or bank as it was then known, gave players the opportunity to defer collecting their winnings for chances at larger payouts at increasingly steep odds.

These games and others played against a bank were highly profitable to gambling entrepreneurs, who operated out of taverns, coffeehouses and other similar venues. Keeping a common gaming house was illegal, but with the law riddled with loopholes, enforcement was lax and uneven.

Public outcry against the Royal Oak Lottery was such that the Lottery Act of 1699 banned it. A series of laws enacted in the 1730s and 1740s classified faro and other games as illegal lotteries, on the grounds that the odds of winning or losing were not readily apparent to players.

Early writers on probability had asserted that the house advantage did not have to be very large for a gambling operation to profit enormously. The governments effort to ban games of chance now obliged gaming operators to put the law of long averages into practice.

Further statutes outlawed games of chance played with dice, cards, wheels or any other device featuring numbers or figures.

None of these measures deterred gambling operators from the pursuit of profit.

Since this language did not explicitly include letters, the game of EO, standing for even odd, was introduced in the mid 1740s, after the last of these gambling statutes was enacted. It was played on a wheel with 40 slots, all but two of which were marked either E or O. As in roulette, an ivory ball was rolled along the edge of the wheel as it was spun. If the ball landed in one of the two blank bar holes, the house would automatically win, similar to the 0 and 00 in roulette.

EOs defenders could argue that it was not an unlawful lottery because the odds of winning or losing were now readily apparent to players and appeared to be virtually equal. The key, of course, is that the bar holes ensured they werent truly equal.

Although this logic might not stand up in court, overburdened law enforcement was happy for a reason to look the other way. EO proliferated; legislation to outlaw it was proposed in 1782 but failed.

Gambling operators may have even realized that evening the odds drew more players, who, in turn, staked more.

After EO appeared in Britain, gambling operations both there and on the continent of Europe introduced even money betting options into both new and established games.

For example, the game of biribi, which was popular in France throughout the 18th century, involved players betting on numbers from 1 to 72, which were shown on a betting cloth. Numbered beads would then be drawn from a bag to determine the win.

In one iteration from around 1720, players could bet on individual numbers, on vertical columns of six numbers, or other options that promised large payouts against steeper odds.

By the end of the 18th century, however, one biribi cloth featured even money options: Players could bet on any number between 36 and 70 being drawn, or on any number between 1 and 35. Players could also select red or black numbers, making it a likely inspiration for roulette.

In Britain, the Victorian ethos of morality and respectability eventually won out. Parliament outlawed games of chance played for money in public or private in 1845, restrictions that were not lifted until 1960.

By 1845, however, British gamblers could travel by steamship and train to one of the many European resorts cropping up across the continent, where the probability revolution had transformed casino gambling into the formidable business enterprise it is today.

View post:

How the 18th-century 'probability revolution' fueled the casino gambling craze - The Conversation