A Firm Foundation in Physics

J.P. Ballanger, Raytheon Company, jp_ballenger@raytheon.com

These are demanding times for military operations research as the United States military transforms itself during a period when our country is engaged in a war against terrorism. This new war is quite different from those in the past, and it does not fit the models that we have used in the past. However, military operations researchers should once again prove their value to military wartime operations as did our founders during World War II. To do so, military OR, like the military, must transform itself to address the military operations of our future transformation forces and those of our new adversaries.

Transformation will not come easily as it requires change, and changing requires overcoming great inertia. Models of the past and the simulations derived from them are easy to use because we have grown accustomed to them, and each of them has its own group of vested interest followers. Thus, the path of least resistance and minimal funding may beckon military operations researchers to only tweak the relics of the past rather than develop new models and simulations. However, I am reminded of what my thermodynamics professor said many years ago with regard to the efficiency limit of internal combustion engines used in automobiles. My professor was disturbed by the reluctance of the automobile industry to develop new and more efficient engines for the future. Likening the internal combustion engine to a mule, he said that you can bathe a mule, comb him, and put a straw hat on him, but the mule will never be a racehorse. Similarly, our old models and simulations cannot reasonably be tweaked into transformation models and simulations for the future. Future instruments of war will not behave as those in the past, and future warriors will not use these instruments in the same manner as warriors in the past used the old instruments. Indeed, we are experiencing a quantum paradigm shift in warfare.

Sorting out these new instruments of war will be one of the many challenges for military operations researchers. With constrained budgets, those instruments that are expected to perform well must be selected for acquisition, while those that are expected to perform inadequately or those expected to not perform are to be rejected. Moreover, as we face a ruthless and amorphous foe who is bent on our destruction and who possesses weapons of mass destruction, it is critical that the best selections be made. Thus, as military operations researchers develop the new models and simulations to assist the military make the best selections, it is critical to have a firm foundation. This firm foundation in great part must be based on the laws of physics.

Research reports and their equations and experimentation reports and their results can be judged in the light of physics. Physics demands hard evidence; evidence that is often lacking from a slide presentation. The ubiquitous use of slide presentations to present science has been recently referred to by some as "Power Point â Acquisition." Briefing slide cartoons can perform miraculous feats. The popular and funny television cartoon staring a roadrunner and coyote is notorious for defying the laws of physics. Both of these cartoon characters routinely defy the law of gravity, and the ability of the coyote's gizmos would make even Newton marvel. However, unless cartoons are backed up by hard evidence, they can lead us erroneous conclusions. Valid models that depict future instruments of war and their efficiency, or lack thereof, must be firmly rooted in physics.

Additionally, there is a time element involved. That is, our military expects to have new instruments of war for transformation forces by a certain time. Some can be expected to be developed and fielded by a given time while others cannot. Physics can establish that Rome cannot be built within a day given current science; cartoons cannot. For many centuries, science and technology have advanced. New weapons and devices were developed over time providing an empirical data trail to enable reasonable forecasting methods to be used by current military operations researchers. We must not let our wishes and hopes cloud our vision of the probable and the improbable. Science and technology require time, and we must assess new instruments of war proposed for transformation in the light of scientific evidence. Military operations research from its inception has been a multidiscipline science. Physics is just part of our repertoire, but a very important part to guide us through transformation.

NFL players practice the basics of blocking and tackling just like little league players. We must also continue to practice our basics such as physics. Learning has been shown to have a decay curve or retention curve. What we learned 10, 15, 20, or more years ago in physics courses has decayed unless we have taken time to stay refreshed. A book that should be within the quick grasp of those working transformation activities should be a good physics text, and it should be in the top ten of any reading list. A very good one used by universities is: Fundamentals of Physics, sixth edition, by Halliday, Resnick, and Walker, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002. I just added this one to my personal library. I still have my own copy of the one that I used as an undergraduate: Elements of Physics, fourth edition, Shortley and Williams, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.

This is my last Phalanx message as the Military Applications Society (MAS) President. In November, I will be succeeded by Dr. Philipp Djang, MAS Vice President and President Elect. These past two years as MAS President have been very enjoyable and rewarding, and I hope that my service to MAS and the field of military operations research has been positive.