News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @01:02PM (#36435279)
Given military subs operate around a maximum of 500msw why would the USN have randomly coverage of hydrophones to detect implosions at depths no military sub would be at? This sub probably imploded around 1500 msw.

A lot of people are saying sounds travel far under water that's true.. but laterally and not between the typical layers of the sea.

Not to mention that these hydrophone systems are at critical choke points not littering the ocean floor uselessly.

It seems motivated by a sci-fi understanding of the physics.

Don't get me wrong things like this happen as cover ups. In this specific instance it seems driven by nonsense.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by stochtastic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @01:28PM (#36435676)
Hydrophones don't need to be nearby or even at a similar depth. The SOFAR channel acts as a waveguide and will duct sources from other depths as long as the bottom is below the critical depth. As others have said, this part of the North Atlantic is one of the most heavily monitored parts of the ocean as well. No sci-fi physics necessary — this has been done continuously since the 1950s.
Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @01:48PM (#36435989)
So basically you think that the USN should be able to detect the implosion and so must be hiding that they can do so.

Rather than any information specific to this event leading to the conclusion that USN can.

This is the same reasoning "UFOlogists" use to insist area 51 has aliens.

1. Aliens must exist.

2. US must be able to detect any aliens.

3. The US must be covering up that aliens exist.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by stochtastic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @02:32PM (#36436674)
> and so must be hiding that they can do so

I don't believe I said that. You can draw your own conclusion from the fact that it is within their capabilities to detect, localize, and to some extent classify a wide range of sources in this region of the ocean.

What you won't find is a lot of information about those capabilities in the public domain. Just consider that what _is_ known tells us that we had these capabilities in the 1950s, and that they were continuously improved upon throughout the cold war. This is not Area 51 conspiracy speculation; it is bread-and-butter NRL stuff that is more than half a century old at this point and is classified for good reasons.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @02:50PM (#36436926)
I'll rephrase. What about this incident supports your claim?

As far as I can see not only is the answer to that is "nothing" but the claim itself is non-falsifiable.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by danso on Thursday June 22, 2023 @02:47PM (#36436883)
Maybe there's a miscommunication here; detecting underwater sound from hundreds, even thousands of kilometers away, is made possible via the publicly known laws of physics.

Detecting extraterrestrial aliens requires technology that is not publicly known. Therefore, it is not at all logical to compare "hearing an imploding submersible in the Atlantic" to "detecting aliens/UFOs"

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @03:06PM (#36437117)
Really you'd need advanced technology to detect aliens if Roswell was indeed an crash landing?

You've got to be kidding!

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by dTal on Thursday June 22, 2023 @03:48PM (#36437755)
I fail to see the analogy between "aliens must exist" (a statement for which there is no evidence) and "the submersible imploded" (which is substantiated by debris). The syllogism is simple:

* submarines make loud noises when they implode

* the navy can hear loud noises underwater

* the submersible is thought to have imploded based on debris

therefore,

* the navy heard the submarine implode

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by danso on Thursday June 22, 2023 @01:33PM (#36435752)
I'm not a physics expert, but sound seems to travel for long distances extremely well underwater. So even if they have a buoy at 1000 ft, hearing a loud sudden sound at 10000 feet (the sub's last communication was 1h45m into a roughly 2hr descent) would not require "sci-fi" physics?

[0] https://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/16challenger/wel...

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @01:47PM (#36435968)
Yes because if you have a buoy there you need one everywhere...

Doesn't matter, I was curious why people were speculating this and that's clarified.

You believe that USN would detect this, and it's not motivated by any factor in the story. And a conspiracy to cover up capabilities is the only way you can sustain that belief.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by jerf on Thursday June 22, 2023 @02:26PM (#36436587)
I am a bit mystified at your apparent belief that the military has any obligation to proactively tell anybody anything, or find it shocking that a military would ever hide things from anybody, to the point that you would attack people claiming that they might do so.

Are you aware that there is, in fact, a such thing as "classified" information? If you'll pardon me linking to that hotbed of conspiratorial thinking, the Cornell Law School, here's some of the basic, completely open, law covering such things: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798

Where on Earth do you get the idea that everyone in the world is operating in a regime where they tell you everything you want to know simply because you want to know it?

You are operating at personally dangerous levels of naivety, like, levels that are going to cost you money when you fall for a big scam because you thought someone was just informing you of a great money-making opportunity, as everyone always does when they find a way to make money. Or worse. You're light years beyond "rejecting conspiracy theories", you're operating on a Theory of Mind that has no visible correspondence to the real world. This is not how the world works. People and organizations do not rush to reveal everything they are, everything they can do, everything they know, to everybody, all the time, for free, simply because it would be really nice, and the military least of all!

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @02:45PM (#36436862)
You're misreading me.

I asked what about that link made them think that. The answer nothing.

They were making up explanations about how to maintain a pre-existing belief.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by jerf on Thursday June 22, 2023 @04:23PM (#36438343)
A fully justified, well-established pre-existing belief, not one that they just pulled out of the blue. Mere "pre-belief" is not intrinsically bad, certain sloppy and popular statements to the contrary.
Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by jerf on Friday June 23, 2023 @10:31AM (#36447299)
Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by danso on Thursday June 22, 2023 @02:13PM (#36436384)
Here's my question for you:

Let's assume that in our current reality, U.S. agencies did not detect an anomalous sound. So what we've observed is how they would operate if they had zero foreknowledge or data other than the initial report to the Coast Guard.

Now imagine the alternate scenario in which Navy or NOAA buoys pick up a suspicious sound near the Titanic. There might be a flurry of U.S. gov activity (e.g. communication between NOAA, the military, and intelligence agencies) to make sure it's not a Russian sub, but that would be completely hidden to the public, and for all we know, is something that happens relatively routinely.

In this alternate scenario, what would change about how the Navy, Coast Guard, or any other U.S. official has responded? Coast Guard rescue ships would still conduct search-and-rescue, the Navy would still send a deep sea salvage ship. You honestly think the Navy would volunteer information about an intelligence report that, as far as they know, may or may not be related to a now-missing civilian sub?

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @02:28PM (#36436618)
In the second scenario the Russell's teapot satellite the Soviets put into space would have picked up the uptick in US military Comms.

Maybe they kept it quiet to not reveal the satellite was still operational? I doubt it given the current situation, mostly likely it'd be all over telegram and we'd have known about it.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by danso on Thursday June 22, 2023 @02:34PM (#36436707)
What would that have to do with anything?
Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Thursday June 22, 2023 @03:00PM (#36437078)
Russell's teapot is a criticism of non-falsifiable claims

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot#Analysis

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by danso on Thursday June 22, 2023 @06:37PM (#36440132)
Ok, but for posterity’s sake, the Navy has now said that they did in fact hear the implosion:

https://archive.is/pSpem

> The Navy began listening for the Titan almost as soon as the sub lost communications, according to a U.S. defense official. Shortly after its disappearance, the U.S. system detected what it suspected was the sound of an implosion near the debris site discovered Thursday and reported its findings to the commander on site, U.S. defense officials said.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Friday June 23, 2023 @02:59AM (#36443710)
Don't you think it's weird how you'd thought it'd be secret capability and never disclosed.

Instead they leaked it once the debris was found?

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by danso on Friday June 23, 2023 @05:05AM (#36444464)
LOL. C'mon man, you're the only one here who thought this was some kind of super secret capability. My entire premise is that this was a logically foregone conclusion based on what we know of their decades-old systems and the laws of physics with respect to how sound travels in water.

As for why they revealed their foreknowledge now? I don't speak for the military, but admitting to it vaguely, well after the fact is a significantly different situation than talking about it at the time and making it actionable intelligence. Furthermore, something may have leaked to a journalist, who then pressed them to make some kind of answer.

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by psychphysic on Friday June 23, 2023 @07:33AM (#36445435)
After debris was found, had Elon Musk twitter "SpaceX detected the original implosion at the debris site".

What conclusions would you draw?

Re:Debris field found in search for missing submersible by giantrobot on Thursday June 22, 2023 @06:00PM (#36439680)
Sound reflects off thermoclines. If there's a thermocline at say 1000ft and you have a hydrophone at 900ft, a sound originating at 1500ft will reflect off the thermocline and won't be detected by the 900ft hydrophone above the thermocline (frictionless pulleys and spherical cow assumptions).