Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday August 25 2016, @04:04AM   Printer-friendly
from the Pay-it-Forward-/-Grok-/-TANSTAAFL dept.

The Joplin Globe reports that Missouri lawmakers have inducted science fiction writer Robert Heinlein to the Hall of Famous Missourians to a cheering crowd of fans who call themselves "Heinlein's children."

State Rep. T.J. Berry says Heinlein encouraged others to "strive for the stars, for the moon" and "for what's next." Donors to the Heinlein Society and the Heinlein Prize Trust paid for a bronze bust of Heinlein, which will be displayed in the House Chamber at the Capitol where it will join 45 other Missourians honored with busts in the hall including Mark Twain, Dred Scott and Ginger Rogers, as well as more controversial Missourians such as Rush Limbaugh.

"Our devotion to this man must seem odd to those outside of the science fiction field, with spaceships and ray guns and bug-eyed monsters," Heinlein Society President Keith Kato said. "But to Heinlein's children, the writing was only the beginning of doing."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Thursday August 25 2016, @09:27AM

    by Capt. Obvious (6089) on Thursday August 25 2016, @09:27AM (#392930)

    In the book, nukes are used far more liberally, including against civilian populations. They are not a last resort, but a personal weapon every human soldier was equipped with

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday August 25 2016, @09:45AM

    by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Thursday August 25 2016, @09:45AM (#392934) Homepage Journal

    In the book, nukes are used far more liberally, including against civilian populations. They are not a last resort, but a personal weapon every human soldier was equipped with

    Those aren't the nukes you think they are:

    just then my first rocket hit - that unmistakable (if you've ever seen one) brilliance of an atomic explosion. It was just a peewee, of course, less than two kilotons nominal yield, with tamper and implosion squeeze to produce results from a less-than-critical mass - but then who wants to be bunk mates with a cosmic catastrophe? [emphasis added]

    Note that the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were 7-10 times more powerful than any "personal weapon every human soldier was equipped with." What's more, I don't have a specific reference, but Heinlein makes it clear that not everyone was allowed to carry even those small tactical nukes.

    So it's a cool story, bro. It would be cooler if it was actually part of the novel.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: 1) by ewk on Thursday August 25 2016, @10:50AM

      by ewk (5923) on Thursday August 25 2016, @10:50AM (#392942)

      There have been times/situations when a personal weapon with even 10 times less the power of a Hiroshima/Nagasaki [whichever was the smallest] would have been handy...
      Hell, I'd even settle for 100 times less! :-)

      --
      I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
    • (Score: 2) by martyb on Thursday August 25 2016, @06:57PM

      by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 25 2016, @06:57PM (#393136) Journal

      I somehow missed reading Starship Troopers -- it's going on my "gotta read it" list right now.

      As for your bolded text "two Kilotons nominal yield", I'd like to point out just how massive a bomb that is. I grew up in the era of A-Bomb and H-Bomb testing and so I grew used to the use of the terms: kiloton and megaton. Upon reflection, those are huge units of measure!

      A single stick of dynamite is something I do NOT want to be near when it goes off.

      One (short) ton of TNT is 2,000 pounds. So, "two kilotons nominal yield" is, effectively, two-thousand tons, i.e. 4,000,000 pounds (approximately 1,800,000 kg) of TNT!

      Going one more step, according to Wikipedia, TNT [wikipedia.org] has a density of 1.654 g/cm^3. A rough calculation tells me that is a cube of TNT more than 10 meters on each side.

      That's just 2 kiloton; the Tsar Bomba [wikipedia.org] was estimated at 50 megaton:

      ...equivalent to about 1,570 times the combined energy of the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki,[13] 10 times the combined energy of all the conventional explosives used in World War II,[14] one quarter of the estimated yield of the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa, and 10% of the combined yield of all nuclear tests to date.

      That just totally boggles my mind.

      --
      Wit is intellect, dancing.
      • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday August 25 2016, @07:22PM

        by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Thursday August 25 2016, @07:22PM (#393152) Homepage Journal

        Yes, 2 Kilotons of TNT is a big blast. It would be (leaving aside any radiation/fallout issues) about 2/3 he size of The Halifax Explosion [wikipedia.org] in 1917.

        This article [wikipedia.org] gives a good overview of the destructive power of varying amounts of TNT equivalents -- with examples.

        My point to GP was not that two kilotons was *small*, but rather that the weapons described in the novel aren't what we would normally think of when someone mentioned "nuclear weapons," but rather something with enormously less destructive capability than what folks generally think about when someone uses that term [wikipedia.org].

        --
        No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
        • (Score: 2) by martyb on Thursday August 25 2016, @08:08PM

          by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 25 2016, @08:08PM (#393164) Journal

          Thanks for the link! Apparently, I made a mistake in my assumption that a kiloton was 2,000 pounds of TNT; apparently, from your link [wikipedia.org], it's 1,000 kg, or closer to 2,200 pounds. Later on that page, they state: "A kiloton of TNT can be visualized as a cube of TNT 8.46 metres (27.8 ft) on a side." Learned something new today — thanks again!

          --
          Wit is intellect, dancing.
    • (Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Saturday August 27 2016, @07:15AM

      by Capt. Obvious (6089) on Saturday August 27 2016, @07:15AM (#393876)

      And each individual soldier had a dozen of them. So, you know, enough to level a city plus.

      • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Saturday August 27 2016, @07:31AM

        by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Saturday August 27 2016, @07:31AM (#393880) Homepage Journal

        And each individual soldier had a dozen of them. So, you know, enough to level a city plus.

        Please provide a reference for that in the novel. I don't recall that at all. IIRC, different suits (marauder, scout, command) had different levels of armor and armaments. Also, I don't recall anyone having more than a couple of those rockets. That's not to say they weren't heavily armed.

        I'm really not sure what difference it makes. Given that it's fiction and that it was written during a time when "duck and cover" was considered adequate protection against nuclear weapons, not to mention that just about everyone was pretty sure they were about to be vaporized or die a slow, painful death from radiation poisoning Any Day Now™, I don't really see what the big deal is. Historical context is important, as is the (and I'll repeat it) fictional setting.

        --
        No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr