Did Donald Give Away A National Security Secret?

[toobfreak]

Heads up mods: this post is based on something Trump said in France today at the G7 conference talking about the Iran deal and other stuff before leaving. I do not have a linked article nor video clip of it.

Let me preface all of this by saying that as a polymath, I have several areas of interest including electronics, optics, music and religion to name a few. I've spent quite a number of years studying optics and image processing science. That said:

Trump today was going on about the Fordrow nuclear site and the buried uranium there. He was commenting that it will be hard to dig it out but ITMT, while we get around to it, that our Space Force (which Trump created) will be watching from orbit.

This is where Trump may have made a faux pas in inadvertently exposing a national secret:

In optics, there are relationships between aperture and resolution. There is both linear and angular resolution. General, the more resolution you want, the more aperture you need. But there are also modern computerized image processing techniques to artificially enhance resolution. For instance, we commonly deploy radio telescopes on opposite sides of the Earth both looking at the same object, then we synthesize an artificial aperture where the synthetic aperture is equal to their distance in separation effectively making a radio telescope with a synthetic aperture as big as the Earth.

While talking to the press, Trump let it slip that if anyone goes in there from Iran fooling around trying to dig out that uranium themselves, that we will see it. More than that, Trump went on to explain HOW WELL we can see them. He probably should not be talking about that. A very tightly regarded secret is HOW SMALL of a detail we can resolve on the ground from orbit. 10-15 years ago, I was certain that we could probably resolve a pack of cigarettes and identify individuals.

You see, the technology is out there now perhaps using some variant of enhanced adaptive speckling interferometry to resolve much smaller. Trump basically said that if we want to, we could read the name tags on their uniforms. Dear Donald: I don't know if you were just speaking off the cuff figuratively, or literally, but best not give our enemies any idea of our true capability, even in jest.

If we can indeed resolve that fine a detail from orbit (I have been able to identify a brand of cigarettes from a mile away and see detail in the scabs of rust on the head of a bolt on a street sign from a mile away (where the air is most turbulent from heat, etc.) with my own gear, and my father did aerial reconnaissance from aircraft during WWII, if you just gave away a tightly guarded secret, I can just imagine the people back in Washington pulling their hair out.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Heads up mods: this post is based on something Trump said in France today at the G7 conference talking about the Iran deal and other stuff before leaving. I do not have a linked article nor video clip of it.

Let me preface all of this by saying that as a polymath, I have several areas of interest including electronics, optics, music and religion to name a few. I've spent quite a number of years studying optics and image processing science. That said:

Trump today was going on about the Fordrow nuclear site and the buried uranium there. He was commenting that it will be hard to dig it out but ITMT, while we get around to it, that our Space Force (which Trump created) will be watching from orbit.

This is where Trump may have made a faux pas in inadvertently exposing a national secret:

In optics, there are relationships between aperture and resolution. There is both linear and angular resolution. General, the more resolution you want, the more aperture you need. But there are also modern computerized image processing techniques to artificially enhance resolution. For instance, we commonly deploy radio telescopes on opposite sides of the Earth both looking at the same object, then we synthesize an artificial aperture where the synthetic aperture is equal to their distance in separation.

While talking to the press, Trump let it slip that if anyone goes in there from Iran fooling around trying to dig out that uranium themselves, that we will see it. More than that, Trump went on to explain HOW WELL we can see them. He probably should not be talking about that. A very tightly regarded secret is HOW SMALL of a detail we can resolve on the ground from orbit. 10-15 years ago, I was certain that we could probably resolve a pack of cigarettes and identify individuals.

You see, the technology is out there now perhaps using some variant of enhanced adaptive speckling interferometry to resolve much smaller. Trump basically said that if we want to, we could read the name tags on their uniforms. Dear Donald: I don't know if you were just speaking off the cuff figuratively, or literally, but best not give our enemies any idea of our true capability, even in jest.

If we can indeed resolve that fine a detail from orbit (I have been able to identify a brand of cigarettes from a mile away and see detail in the scabs of rust on the head of a bolt on a street sign from a mile away (where the air is most turbulent from heat, etc.) with my own gear, and my father did aerial reconnaissance from aircraft during WWII, if you just gave away a tightly guarded secret, I can just imagine the people back in Washington pulling their hair out.

This a well-known fact from decades back!

Take a chill pill!

 

[ozro]

I think the President has a better idea of what is a state secret than some freak on the Internet.
Just an observation

 

[1srelluc]

No worries Scro.....I think we have been able to see people digging in the dirt from orbit for sometime now.

 

[toobfreak]

Hey Admiral, being the EXPERT in ALL THINGS military, I'd be interested to hear your analysis of using bicubic interpolation on a speckling interferometer to artificially extend the LPM resolution of the imager at a given focal ratio. Thoughts?

PCA-enhanced Speckle Interferometry with Bicubic Interpolation at the OAN-SPM México - IOPscience

PCA-enhanced Speckle Interferometry with Bicubic Interpolation at the OAN-SPM México, Guerrero, C. A., Ochoa, D. O., Hernández-Valencia, B., Benadalid, T., Peralta-Mendoza, I. A., Romero Hernández, E., García-Castillo, F. A., Ayala, S., Pérez-León, J. E., Tamayo, F. J., Avilés, A., Sánchez, E...

iopscience.iop.org

​

 

[toobfreak]

I think the President has a better idea of what is a state secret than some freak on the Internet.
Just an observation

You think? Well, how about that.
Better still, anyone posting to the web must just be a freak on the internet? I guess that means no one reputable talks on the web, I guess they all still just use the Post Office?

Or maybe Ozro, you are just shooting your big dumb mouth off here because you have nothing more intelligent to add to the thread?

Just an observation from an actual, trained observer.

 

[ozro]

You think? Well, how about that.
Better still, anyone posting to the web must just be a freak on the internet? I guess that means no one reputable talks on the web, I guess they all still just use the Post Office?

Or maybe Ozro, you are just shooting your big dumb mouth off here because you have nothing more intelligent to add to the thread?

Just an observation from an actual, trained observer.

Maybe you should consider a verbal play on your username and stop being a *****

 

[toobfreak]

No worries Scro.....I think we have been able to see people digging in the dirt from orbit for sometime now.

Trucks and people moving around, yes. Being able to read the name tags on their vest is quite a different matter. That is what Trump said before he sort of caught himself and appeared to cut himself off.

You see, foreign governments scrutinize our every public appearance just looking for a slip like that, in between spying on us and trying to steal or capture our technology. That's why we blow stuff up.

What Trump implied was easily a factor of 10X better than I would have dared imagine, but not beyond the pale nor given implied technology which I fairly understand.

For instance, I would guess the maximum aperture of a space camera to be around a meter across, which according to Dawes Limit to limit optical resolution to about 0.1 to 0.14 arcseconds. That is simply no where near good enough to reach the resolution they already are known to have much less the resolution Trump implied.

Using simple trig and Pythagorean's formula, and inputting 12,000 miles as the hypotenuse (estimated distance in orbit) and entering 0.14 arcsecs as the cosine theta, what distance on the ground do you come up with as the Dawes Limit to an ordinary optical instrument?

Then keep in mind that the camera must see down through layers of atmosphere of changing density, temperature, direction, clouds, etc., much like we see heat waves rising off a highway, then use adaptive optics in order to compensate for the distortions by creating an equal but opposite distortion via analysis of a laser beam sent along the path of sight to determine the atmospheric effects from millisecond to millisecond?

 

[toobfreak]

Maybe you should consider a verbal play on your username and stop being a *****

I don't know what a ***** is, so maybe you should either find another thread more your speed, contribute something worthwhile here or STFU before I report you for trolling my thread?

 

[alang1216]

Heads up mods: this post is based on something Trump said in France today at the G7 conference talking about the Iran deal and other stuff before leaving. I do not have a linked article nor video clip of it.

Let me preface all of this by saying that as a polymath, I have several areas of interest including electronics, optics, music and religion to name a few. I've spent quite a number of years studying optics and image processing science. That said:

Trump today was going on about the Fordrow nuclear site and the buried uranium there. He was commenting that it will be hard to dig it out but ITMT, while we get around to it, that our Space Force (which Trump created) will be watching from orbit.

This is where Trump may have made a faux pas in inadvertently exposing a national secret:

In optics, there are relationships between aperture and resolution. There is both linear and angular resolution. General, the more resolution you want, the more aperture you need. But there are also modern computerized image processing techniques to artificially enhance resolution. For instance, we commonly deploy radio telescopes on opposite sides of the Earth both looking at the same object, then we synthesize an artificial aperture where the synthetic aperture is equal to their distance in separation effectively making a radio telescope with a synthetic aperture as big as the Earth.

While talking to the press, Trump let it slip that if anyone goes in there from Iran fooling around trying to dig out that uranium themselves, that we will see it. More than that, Trump went on to explain HOW WELL we can see them. He probably should not be talking about that. A very tightly regarded secret is HOW SMALL of a detail we can resolve on the ground from orbit. 10-15 years ago, I was certain that we could probably resolve a pack of cigarettes and identify individuals.

You see, the technology is out there now perhaps using some variant of enhanced adaptive speckling interferometry to resolve much smaller. Trump basically said that if we want to, we could read the name tags on their uniforms. Dear Donald: I don't know if you were just speaking off the cuff figuratively, or literally, but best not give our enemies any idea of our true capability, even in jest.

If we can indeed resolve that fine a detail from orbit (I have been able to identify a brand of cigarettes from a mile away and see detail in the scabs of rust on the head of a bolt on a street sign from a mile away (where the air is most turbulent from heat, etc.) with my own gear, and my father did aerial reconnaissance from aircraft during WWII, if you just gave away a tightly guarded secret, I can just imagine the people back in Washington pulling their hair out.

Let's not forget this is Trump we're talking about, nobody would believe anything he said. Anyway, it may be advantageous to convince our adversaries that we are much more capable than we really are.

 

[ozro]

I don't know what a ***** is, so maybe you should either find another thread more your speed, contribute something worthwhile here or STFU before I report you for trolling my thread?

Report away. My comment was directly related to the thread topic.

 

[Darkwind]

Trucks and people moving around, yes. Being able to read the name tags on their vest is quite a different matter. That is what Trump said before he sort of caught himself and appeared to cut himself off.

You see, foreign governments scrutinize our every public appearance just looking for a slip like that, in between spying on us and trying to steal or capture our technology. That's why we blow stuff up.

What Trump implied was easily a factor of 10X better than I would have dared imagine, but not beyond the pale nor given implied technology which I fairly understand.

For instance, I would guess the maximum aperture of a space camera to be around a meter across, which according to Dawes Limit to limit optical resolution to about 0.1 to 0.14 arcseconds. That is simply no where near good enough to reach the resolution they already are known to have much less the resolution Trump implied.

Using simple trig and Pythagorean's formula, and inputting 12,000 miles as the hypotenuse (estimated distance in orbit) and entering 0.14 arcsecs as the cosine theta, what distance on the ground do you come up with as the Dawes Limit to an ordinary optical instrument?

Then keep in mind that the camera must see down through layers of atmosphere of changing density, temperature, direction, clouds, etc., much like we see heat waves rising off a highway, then use adaptive optics in order to compensate for the distortions by creating an equal but opposite distortion via analysis of a laser beam sent along the path of sight to determine the atmospheric effects from millisecond to millisecond?

I pretty much assumed that we were at the "Identify finger jewelry or necklace jewelry. Reading faces and name tags is so 2000s.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Hey Admiral, being the EXPERT in ALL THINGS military, I'd be interested to hear your analysis of using bicubic interpolation on a speckling interferometer to artificially extend the LPM resolution of the imager at a given focal ratio. Thoughts?

PCA-enhanced Speckle Interferometry with Bicubic Interpolation at the OAN-SPM México - IOPscience

PCA-enhanced Speckle Interferometry with Bicubic Interpolation at the OAN-SPM México, Guerrero, C. A., Ochoa, D. O., Hernández-Valencia, B., Benadalid, T., Peralta-Mendoza, I. A., Romero Hernández, E., García-Castillo, F. A., Ayala, S., Pérez-León, J. E., Tamayo, F. J., Avilés, A., Sánchez, E...

iopscience.iop.org

​

I don't give a shit and neither do you. You are just pissed because you said something anyone with an education and exposed to technology should know. You just said something incredibly stupid. We all do it occasionally, but don't double-down when called on it.

I know it exists. I also know some top-secret information that would curl your short hairs! But I'll never tell anyone that.

Everyone but you apparently know our capabilities.

 

[Chuz Life]

I understand the concern, toobfreak, but I also consider the audience. Very few in that region have even the slightest clue about what any of the rest of us take for granted, every day.

 

[toobfreak]

Let's not forget this is Trump we're talking about,

Like I said, I could not be certain if he was merely rambling off his cuff or accidentally spilling real data. But better not even hint at the possibilities, as, real or not, it was in the conceivable range--- its not like he suggested we could see threads in his jacket.

But my point here is if Trump was committing a slip of the tongue, then interested parties like the Chinese will recognize real capability from mere bloviation.

 

[toobfreak]

Report away. My comment was directly related to the thread topic.

No, it was just an attack against me.

 

[toobfreak]

I understand the concern, toobfreak, but I also consider the audience.

Keep in mind that every enemy on the planet watches, tapes, and analyzes every word out of Trump's mouth and any within his administration.

 

[g5000]

Heads up mods: this post is based on something Trump said in France today at the G7 conference talking about the Iran deal and other stuff before leaving. I do not have a linked article nor video clip of it.

Let me preface all of this by saying that as a polymath, I have several areas of interest including electronics, optics, music and religion to name a few. I've spent quite a number of years studying optics and image processing science. That said:

Trump today was going on about the Fordrow nuclear site and the buried uranium there. He was commenting that it will be hard to dig it out but ITMT, while we get around to it, that our Space Force (which Trump created) will be watching from orbit.

This is where Trump may have made a faux pas in inadvertently exposing a national secret:

In optics, there are relationships between aperture and resolution. There is both linear and angular resolution. General, the more resolution you want, the more aperture you need. But there are also modern computerized image processing techniques to artificially enhance resolution. For instance, we commonly deploy radio telescopes on opposite sides of the Earth both looking at the same object, then we synthesize an artificial aperture where the synthetic aperture is equal to their distance in separation effectively making a radio telescope with a synthetic aperture as big as the Earth.

While talking to the press, Trump let it slip that if anyone goes in there from Iran fooling around trying to dig out that uranium themselves, that we will see it. More than that, Trump went on to explain HOW WELL we can see them. He probably should not be talking about that. A very tightly regarded secret is HOW SMALL of a detail we can resolve on the ground from orbit. 10-15 years ago, I was certain that we could probably resolve a pack of cigarettes and identify individuals.

You see, the technology is out there now perhaps using some variant of enhanced adaptive speckling interferometry to resolve much smaller. Trump basically said that if we want to, we could read the name tags on their uniforms. Dear Donald: I don't know if you were just speaking off the cuff figuratively, or literally, but best not give our enemies any idea of our true capability, even in jest.

If we can indeed resolve that fine a detail from orbit (I have been able to identify a brand of cigarettes from a mile away and see detail in the scabs of rust on the head of a bolt on a street sign from a mile away (where the air is most turbulent from heat, etc.) with my own gear, and my father did aerial reconnaissance from aircraft during WWII, if you just gave away a tightly guarded secret, I can just imagine the people back in Washington pulling their hair out.

It's no secret our spy satellites can resolve objects as small as 10 cm from space. I used to work for a company that made the lenses.

Not good enough to read a newspaper, but good enough to monitor a nuclear site's traffic.

 

[Chuz Life]

Keep in mind that every enemy on the planet watches, tapes, and analyzes every word out of Trump's mouth and any within his administration.

I know that, And the smartest of our enemies already know (or can safely assume) that our military capabilities are even beyond what the civilian sats can do. . . and even those civilian sats are more powerful than most of us will ever have access to.

That said, I agree with your point.

There is no need to bring attention to any of it.

 

[toobfreak]

our military capabilities are even beyond what the civilian sats can do. . .

Definitely.