Anyone have a link to the actual study, so we can find out what "better than chance" really means?
The Songs of Distant Earth, 1986
Blocks of ice were frozen on-planet and then lifted with a space elevator to create a shield. The shield was there to protect against micrometeorites and other space debris though, not radiation.
Link to Original Source
What's the use of a new-born baby?
Funny you classify a theory as truth. It was once known as truth that the world was flat by scientists. That truth was "known" for many years before proven to be false. What about the earth being the center of the universe, wasn't that "truth" also? How about that all matter was made up of electrons (and only electrons)?
Scientists – well, Greek philosophers using scientific methods to be more precise – have known that the Earth was a sphere since before the time of Christ (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth)
You hold a common misconception over the meaning and significance of a scientific theory:
As many have said, longer hours do not necessarily translate into less bugs, more features or a better product in a reduced period of time. Changing processes if they are broken and motivating employees to work more effectively are going to be better bets in the long run (and probably even in the short term). Brute-forcing software development is not sustainable.
On the subject of motivation, you can point your boss to a couple Dan Pink videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc (short version)
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html (long version)
I am not sure what "space" you are developing in or what processes you use in your software development, but it may be worth considering Agile processes if you are not currently using them. They are not panacea, but if implemented properly they can bring some gains in efficiency and the effectiveness of the programmers you have now at the hours they are working.