Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Fri, 17 Mar 89 03:16:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Fri, 17 Mar 89 03:16:36 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #297 SPACE Digest Volume 9 : Issue 297 Today's Topics: Re: First concert from space--update Re: space news from Dec 19/26 AW&ST Re: National Space Council (from: What's New ) Moronic TV news coverage Re: Moronic TV news coverage Re: Babies born in space Re: Fusion --- a Second Look Re: NASA Prediction Bulletins Re: E'Prime Aerospace Corporation ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 14 Mar 89 00:58:45 GMT From: ssc-vax!bcsaic!rwojcik@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Rick Wojcik) Subject: Re: First concert from space--update In article <3436@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Greg Lee) writes: >... But arguing for more funds on the grounds that it will >increase the chance we will have colonies before we make our planet >unlivable, which we surely will sooner or later, is just not >going to work. I would favor a strategy that works over one that >sounds high-minded. We disagree (as usual, my friend :-) over tactics. I, too, favor policies that work. Unlike you, I believe that such policies are not inconsistent with ones that sound high-minded. You and I both remember an era--under John Kennedy--when high-mindedness got things done. I consider your tactics to be pandering, and ultimately self-defeating. The public can always be fed bread and circuses. But if it is treated as capable of making responsible and intelligent decisions, it might begin to behave as if it could. Treat the public like a child that needs to be coddled, and it will behave like one. -- Rick Wojcik csnet: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com uucp: uw-beaver!ssc-vax!bcsaic!rwojcik ------------------------------ Date: 14 Mar 89 10:28:34 GMT From: silver!chiaravi@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Lucius Chiaraviglio) Subject: Re: space news from Dec 19/26 AW&ST In article <1989Mar13.034523.10259@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >Art Dula, US rep for Soviet space products, reports that some US >government agencies are buying Soviet space photos from Soyuzkarta via >him. He won't say who; "if I did that, they wouldn't be customers >any more". [. . .] I can see it now: "_The New York Times_, September 7, 1990: Intelligence Scam Exposed: Heads Will Roll. Associated Press, Washington, D. C. -- Today White House Officials confirmed that an investigation of the use of illegally-purchased Soviet satellite photographs by the Central Intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense is in progress. In the second of two hastily-arranged press conferences, President Bush promised to 'carry the investigation to the fullest extent,' and blamed the situation on the Carter Administration. . . ." :-) -- We hope. . . -- | Lucius Chiaraviglio | ARPA: chiaravi@silver.bacs.indiana.edu BITNET: chiaravi@IUBACS.BITNET (IUBACS hoses From: fields; INCLUDE RET ADDR) ARPA-gatewayed BITNET: chiaravi%IUBACS.BITNET@vm.cc.purdue.edu Alt ARPA-gatewayed BITNET: chiaravi%IUBACS.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu ------------------------------ Date: 14 Mar 89 16:13:34 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: National Space Council (from: What's New ) In article <241920f4@ralf> Ralf.Brown@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU writes: >}... it incorporates too many high-level bureaucrats who >}will be unable to meet frequently, meaning that it will have a hard time >}getting anything done. > >Should we count that as a blessing? I doubt it. Their underlings will not wait for direction from up above, but will press on regardless. As we've seen in the last few years, that doesn't work too well. Whether it would work better with direction from on high is a good question, but it could hardly be much worse. -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 14 Mar 89 14:35:48 GMT From: mfci!rodman@yale-bulldog.arpa (Paul Rodman) Subject: Moronic TV news coverage After watching another shuttle launch and flipping desperately between channel 4 and CNN, I very much wish for a channel that would tell the commentator to SHUT-UP during the launch. CNN loves to play video games and share the NASA video feed (shrunk to a tiny box) with a mugshot of some moron telling me useless crud. Channel 4 had some bimbo saying things like: "Their waiting for the visibility to get better than 7 miles per hour". Or gems like "The Challenger successfully underwhent SRB seperation". Arrrrgggghhh. Can't I PLEASE hear and see the NASA feeds? Do we have to have the lowest common denominator? I fondly remember the days when good 'ol Walter Cronkite would cut over to the NASA feed at t- 1 minute and STAY there until near orbit was acheived. Please, please folks write your major networks and tell them to shut the f**k up! NASA folks, help! Paul K. Rodman rodman@mfci.uucp __... ...__ _.. . _._ ._ .____ __.. ._ ------------------------------ Date: 15 Mar 89 02:25:05 GMT From: ogccse!littlei!opoxsrv.i.intel.com!tim@husc6.harvard.edu Subject: Re: Moronic TV news coverage In article <704@m3.mfci.UUCP> rodman@mfci.UUCP (Paul Rodman) writes: > > >After watching another shuttle launch and flipping desperately between >channel 4 and CNN, I very much wish for a channel that would tell >the commentator to SHUT-UP during the launch. In Portland, OR (Rogers Cable TV) there were two channels that had pure NASA feeds (NASA Select?). These were a local cable access channel and (more importantly) CSPAN-II, one of the congressional channels. I know that the local channel was set to start the NASA feeds at 12:30 am pacific time. I don't know when CSPAN-II started their coverage, but there was NO ancher person overdubbing, other than the official NASA lady (which you would get even if you had a direct downlink from NASA Select. Check to see if your local cable has CSPAN-II (I watched it over the local channel because the local had a jumpy picture). Tim Forsyth Intel Corporation OEM Platforms Operation Hillsboro, Oregon tim@opoxsrv.i.intel.com ------------------------------ Date: 14 Mar 89 23:57:07 EDT From: Colin Hunter To: Subject: Re: Babies born in space From: m.cs.uiuc.edu!s.cs.uiuc.edu!carroll@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu writes > I saw a report recently that had a Get-Away-Special mission that was >sending up half of a set of ``identical'' chicken eggs, the other half >staying on the ground as a control group. While not exactly human >development, I'd say it's certainly a first step in such research. This sounds like an almost useless experiment if the intention is to extrapolate the results they will obtain to human foetal development. Earlier postings suggesting sending up pregnant rats were bad enough. There are just so many differences between human and rat embryology (gestational period, placental structure and brain development, to name but a few) that proposing to use rats as a suitable model for human pregnancy would give results that would be next to meaningless as far as humans are concerned. Pregnancy is such a species specific phenomenon that the only model I would lend any credence to as far as humans are concerned would be the chimpanzee. The egg experiment could be of use in investigating avian (and maybe eve reptillian) embryogenesis and would obviously be of interest if a colony wanted to maintain chickens as livestock for food. Beyond that, this idea is strictly for the birds. ------------------------------ Date: 15 Mar 89 11:38:38 GMT From: prometheus!pmk@mimsy.umd.edu (Paul M Koloc) Subject: Re: Fusion --- a Second Look In article <269@v7fs1.UUCP> mvp@v7fs1.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: >In article <1114@prometheus.UUCP> pmk@promethe.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) writes: >>We have proposed an advanced form of the Spheromak, the PLASMAK >>plasmoid, ... >> ... consequently pressures great enough to burn deuterium + >>helium-3 or hydrogen + boron-11 appear feasible. ... That means that >>operating "aneutronically" (no radiation), efficiently, and with >... Do you have any more information? I'd like to take >a look at it. ... . . (whatever happened to Migma?) The reference noted in my previous article appears in a supplement to "FUSION TECHNOLOGY" which covers reviewed papers from The American Nuclear Society's Salt Lake Meeting on "The Technology of Fusion Energy". The proceedings are just now being shipped by the printer to libraries and participants, although I have not yet received my copy. The article title is: 'PLASMAK(tm) Star Power for Energy Intensive Space Applications'. The article also briefly discusses MIGMA. Basically, progress on Migma has been quite steady to date. However, it must reach several orders of magnitude higher plasma density before it will be commercially successful. Each order of magnitude increase in density represents a new development or research challenge and an evolved MIGMA device. Each level requires millions of dollars and at least one or two years time. Also, there is a chorus of theorists chanting "instability" at each level of density, but so far so good. It would be great if Migma and the PLASMAK(tm) concept both worked. The former would be a sort of thermonuclear birthday candle, while the latter, with its deca-gigawatt output, would be more like an electric cutting torch by comparison. >I think, though, that pushing "no radiation" in an attempt to placate >those who run screaming in horror at the word "radiation" is futile. Not Quite so!! That is not the engineering reason for greatly minimizing or zeroing the "radiation problem." Let me explain and put aside the biological/environmental effects which can be discussed elsewhere. Certain applications need very high power density with little cooling. To fly from the earth's surface to Mars surface and turn around and fly back again within four to six weeks, requires an extremely low mass but exceptionally powerful energy device that can heat planetary atmospheric gases for reaction mass during boost phase and then "transform" to closed cycle electric power generation, which in turn drives a small reaction mass to great velocities, i. e. a plasmoid accelerator interplanetary rocket engine. The very energetic (fast) neutron flux from a D-T reaction carries most of the reaction energy and would penetrate a dense gas blanket and deposit that energy in the inertial compression driven walls. The walls would not be insulated from the fusion energy as they would be by a dense blanket gas in an aneutronic burner. Consequently, they would change state (i. e. melt to liquid or sublimate to gas or plasma). Therefore, NEUTRONIC burners (as with D-T) can NOT burn at much power density. Tokamaks face the "wall power limit" and that results in a few watts per cubic centimeter from the fuel plasma. Consequently, tokamaks are colossal in size. By comparison the volume of the compressed thermonuclear plasma in a 60 hertz three phase (180 pulse burns/second) 10 gigawatt PLASMAK burner is about that of a small plum. It is only natural that if the aneutronic fuel contains millions of times the energy per unit mass as common chemical fuels, then the burn power density should also be substantially higher, and with a developed PLASMAK device it will be. Yet there is no risk that it will become unstable and ignite or explode outside of a controlled burn that takes place in the normally functioning engine. The fuel itself is not dangerous. On the other hand NEUTRONIC fuels such as tritium or certain plutonium/uranium isotopes are hazardous. >radioactivity of fission plants can be dealt with, too, as the French >are so ably demonstrating. Hmmmm? I understand they handle their alcohol a diluted sip at a time so well, that, it is now impossible to find an imbibing French continental who can remember the details of his/her own experiences in the second world war. Handling is relative. >.. . If we don't figure out some way to ignore the technophobes, in Probably a form of xenophobe. I worry more about the investor that a few years ago considered IBM clones a "really high risk," and the tons of people apparently hooked on credit instead of piling up stock in companies on the cutting edge of technology. +---------------------------------------------------------+--------+ | Paul M. Koloc, President: (301) 445-1075 | FUSION | | Prometheus II, Ltd.; College Park, MD 20740-0222 | this | | mimsy!prometheus!pmk; pmk@prometheus.UUCP | decade | +---------------------------------------------------------+--------+ ------------------------------ Date: 15 Mar 89 15:08:04 GMT From: m2c!wpi!regnery@husc6.harvard.edu (George Regnery) Subject: Re: NASA Prediction Bulletins In article <125.24094E2D@real.FIDONET.ORG>, Dan.Charrois@f9.n342.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dan Charrois) writes: > Hello there. I have called your board a few times and have noticed these > NASA prediction bulletins up there. I thank you greatly for making these > available to us via this network (to save the monumental costs of calling > long-distance all the time...) However, I am stuck with a somewhat > non-standard computer (read not IBM-compatible). Therefore, the software > which you have available on your BBS won't work with my system (a Coco) > and I'm at a loss on what to make of those bulletins. It does appear > though as if it comes from a simple database of orbital elements for the > satellites... I'm a programmer and thus could create my own version of > those programs which determine the positioning of these satellites. > I have a CoCo 2 and converted a Basic program from IBM PCs to do what you want. It isnt too hard to make the conversions, because they both use MicroSoft Basic. The program will display all of the data, but takes two screens due to the strange screen size of the CoCo... If you have a CoCo 3, the program from the IBM should run directly after width80, because the screen size is the same and CoCo 3 basic is nearly exactly like PC Basic (except Graphic Commands I think). I have a lot of CoCo Software for Astronomy. If you or anyone else wants any, just send me a message... -- George M. Regnery ! Worcester ! Albedo 0.39 ! Going on means regnery@wpi.wpi.edu OR ! Polytechnic ! --Vangelis ! going far. Going regnery@wpi.bitnet ! Institute ! (a good album) ! far means returning. CompuServe: 73300,3655 ! (Worc, Mass.) ! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=! --Tao Te Ching ------------------------------ Date: 15 Mar 89 17:08:34 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: E'Prime Aerospace Corporation In article <12477749495031@osu-20.ircc.ohio-state.edu> RYAN-S@osu-20.ircc.ohio-state.edu (stephen) writes: > Does anybody have any opinions about which of the small launch companies >(E'Prime, OSC/Hercules, Space Services, Amroc, etc.) have any chance of >commercial success? ... OSC/Hercules seems to be going great guns; I'd bet on them. E'Prime I don't know about. Space Services has a sounding-rocket launch coming up, but they've been shopping for orbital-launch customers for a long time without success; there doesn't seem to be anything *wrong* with them, but nothing ever seems to happen. Amroc is financially tight but making progress; I question the need for their new rocket technology, but they are making it work. -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V9 #297 *******************