Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 05:00:06 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #350 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Wed, 28 Oct 92 Volume 15 : Issue 350 Today's Topics: active planetary probes; should someone update the FAQ (2 msgs) Clinton's bad posting etiquette Comet => Millennial Madness ? Comet Collision (5 msgs) Federal Spending (was: Space for white people only?) nasa shake up rumor? (2 msgs) Planets, moons gifs, jpegs. pocket satellite receivers (was Re: how much is the 95LX) Preventing hypothetical Comet Collision (was: Comet collision) re HRMS for ETI (2 msgs) Smith-Tuttle Comet a sight on earth? Smith-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth? (4 msgs) Subscription Request. test Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 16:44:49 GMT From: Nick Haines Subject: active planetary probes; should someone update the FAQ Newsgroups: sci.space In article henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: [...] >... or Giotto, which I believe is still active... It's in hibernation after its second comet encounter, and will probably not be revived again -- it's too low on fuel to do much more, and its next Earth gravity-assist opportunity isn't until the end of the decade. Thanks. Launch/encounter dates, anyone? >... I think that those two complete a roster of 10 probes in solar >orbits (or escape trajectories) from which we still receive signals. >Can anyone name any others? Well, the Pioneer Venus orbiter should have rated mention unless the FAQ was updated very recently, since it only just died. It's in the FAQ, I deleted it from the list since it's dead. Pioneer 6 is still alive, and I think one or two of its later siblings are too, in near-Earth heliocentric orbits. 6, 7, and 8, according to the FAQ. I missed them. Thanks for your other tips. Nick ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 16:54:00 GMT From: Nick Haines Subject: active planetary probes; should someone update the FAQ Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Oct26.232910.28586@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: [...] Sounds like the FAQ needs to be updated to include Ulysses, Giotto, Hiten and Pioneers 6-8. Geotail may even qualify since it made a couple of lunar flybys recently. As of a couple of weeks ago, the list would of included Pioneer Venus. Whoops, I missed those Pioneers. The FAQ does include Pioneer Venus. Is Geotail different from the Japanese mission? What is Hiten? [...] The approved missions are the Soviet Mars '94 and '96 missions and the Cassini mission. Proposed missions include MESUR, NEAR, Pluto Fast Flyby, and Rosetta. I'll provide more details when I update the FAQ files. Thanks. Nick ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 92 10:45:42 GMT From: Eric Loeb Subject: Clinton's bad posting etiquette Newsgroups: sci.space > We did finally get an apology for bad posting etiquette, even if it wasn't the > most polite I've ever seen (could be that the people mentioned deserved it > though). That is the case. I should have cooled of before writing the note, but thank you for reading between the lines. I am sure most readers of this group are extremely intelligent, rational, calm, thoughtful, dedicated scientists who have no wish nor need to prop up their egos with unwarrented verbal violence. Eric Loeb ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 14:14:21 EET From: flb@flb.optiplan.fi (F.Baube x554) Subject: Comet => Millennial Madness ? Let's not be too Euro-centric here. Does anyone know whether Wednesday 14 August 2126 corresponds to any nice, round number in any *other* calendar systems ? I'm thinking, something like 31 Urgtember 4999. fred :: baube@optiplan.fi ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 92 02:07:35 GMT From: Bruce Watson Subject: Comet Collision Newsgroups: sci.space In article Subject: Comet Collision Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary Ken Jenks writes: > The date given in the Post is 2116, while the date given in the "SKY > TV" notice and the date my office mate gave me were both 2016. No > NASA people involved in the discovery. > > The Smith-Tuttle comet was first discovered in 1862. Steel re-acquired > it on Oct. 15th. The International Astronomical Union (IAU), for the > first time every, could not rule out a collision with Earth. The story > says the Smith-Tuttle comet, a 3.1-mile-wide dirty snowball, "could > plunge the world into the Dark Ages." > > Of course, the million-nukes and plunge-into-Dark-Ages part of the > story was front page, but the technical details were on the > continuation on A-6. Reading the details, it becomes clear that there > are no calculations which prove there WILL be a collision, just > speculation that there MIGHT be a collision on August 14, 2116, > when Smith-Tuttle's orbit intersects that of the Earth. > > Drat. I was hoping for the "Comet" movie scenario and a real shot > in the arm for the space program. A 2016 collision would be a > real challenge; 2116 is far enough away that Congress won't feel > the need for immediate action. First of all, the name is P/Swift-Tuttle. Second, both dates are wrong; the year of the next perihelion passage in 2126. Third, the recovery was not by Steel himself, but rather by a Japanese amateur astronomer by the name of Kiuchi. Fourth, didn't your site receive the earlier postings that would have clarified all of this? Check out IAU Circular 5636 for details. This one was posted, though I don't encourage this practice. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 92 07:47:00 GMT From: Bill Nunnelee Subject: COMET COLLISION Newsgroups: sci.space -> I caught the end of a newsclip on SKY TV this a.m. which said that -> NASA "scientists" (probably the techs. that actually do the real -> work) had tracked a comet on collision course with the earth - I -> think it was due to hit us in 2016. Anyone else hear this, or was I -> just fantasising it ! The comet that you are referring to is Periodic Comet Swift-Tuttle, which is responsible for the Perseid meteor shower each year. It was recently recovered by a Japanese comet hunter. When experts started analyzing its position, they discovered that its perihelion had been delayed several days as the result of nongravitational forces---jets of gas coming off the comet had essentially acted like braking rockets. IF this continues at the same rate (and that's a mighty big if), the next time the comet returns in 135 years it COULD hit us. But the uncertainties at this point are very large. Astronomers are obviously watching it very closely to try to refine the orbit and their predictions. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 92 13:54:45 GMT From: Jon Hanson Subject: Comet Collision Newsgroups: sci.space In article <29669@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM>, wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes: > In article | > | I was amazed and want to find out more. I'm suprised that sci.space > | seems to have almost no discussion of this discovery. Does this mean > | that the whole story is a hoax --or have you pro's out there been > | caught with your pants down? > | > | (Don't tell me: it was discussed to death 6 months ago and now > | it's part of the FAQ list :-) > | > You need to read this newsgroup more often. The news broke after the > announcement in IAU Circular No. 5636 dated October 15, 1992. Not 6 months > ago but 11 days ago. > > > -- > Bruce Watson (wats@scicom) Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando. his sounds interesting - what happened ?? Jon. __ ______ ____ __ __ /\ \ | /_ __/\/ __ \ / \ / /\ .-------------------. / \ \ | _\/ / __/ /_/ /\/ /\ \/ / / | jaxh@uk.ac.ed.dcs | / /\ \ \ | /___/ / \____/ /_/ /\__/ / | | / / /\ \ \ | \____/ \____/\__/ \__/ | | / / /__\_\ \ |---..---..---..---..---..---. | "Party on dude" | / / /________\ | |.---|| |`---.| || | | - Bill & Ted | \/___________/ ` '`---^` '`---'`---'` ' `-------------------' ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 17:10:40 GMT From: Mark 'Henry' Komarinski Subject: Comet Collision Newsgroups: sci.space schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) writes: >In <1992Oct26.155841.2096@mksol.dseg.ti.com> pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com (Dillon Pyron) writes: >>They guy they interviewed was rather strange. He kept talking about the >>tremendous threat to Earth, then says the chances of an actual collision are >>about 1:10000. >What's strange about describing this as a tremendous threat? If you knew that >on a particular day next month there was a 1 in 10,000 chance that you, your >family, all your friends and everybody you ever heard of would be boiled in >oil, wouldn't that seem to be a tremendous threat? There is a greater change of dying from a train wreck or a car accident than getting plowed by the comet. Another thing to consider: How big is this comet? It doesn't have to hit us to do some major damage. YOOGE tidal waves, earthquakes, knocking the earth out of it's orbit, etc. Y'know...minor worldwide disaters. Making your day brighter.... -Mark -- - Mark Komarinski - komarimf@craft.camp.clarkson.edu [MIME mail welcome] Credo quia absurdum est - "I believe because it is absurd" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 08:59:30 PST From: "UTADNX::UTDSSA::GREER"@utspan.span.nasa.gov Subject: Federal Spending (was: Space for white people only?) In Space Digest V15 #339 Doug Mohney flames me for writing down some facts about how people spend money. >Lies, damned, statistics. Oh yah, and computer modeling, but that's another >story. He disputes that these are really facts but, like Ross Perot, he offers no support for his claim. >> Relating spending to entertainment is especially >>pertinent, since the anti-science-spending argument is usually based on >>the notion that such spending is frivolous and expendable. > >Nope. It means you're trying to justify pulling money in the form of taxes out >of someone's pocket. If a consumer decides to spend money on entertainment, >that's his/her decision. The person in question, an Hispanic woman who said the government ought not to spend money on space because it only helps white people, already believes that people should be taxed. She just thinks this money shouldn't be spent on something she considers frivolous. My numbers were meant to help her see how to put her money where her mouth is. The question of the morality of taxation per se is another matter. >> It is much >>more difficult for someone to continue this line once they realize how >>much they spend on true frivolity. > >Not so frivilious when you start adding up everyone else's "small, little" >programs in the Big Picture. I'm just trying to show people how to see the big picture. Also, I'm assuming that spending on science increases the productivity of individuals over time. Maybe you would dispute that assumption. >Me, I'd rather give NASA $80/year, and have the other $80 to spend on more >entertainment....but, of course, Big Daddy Goverment knows best. You obviously work at a university. Does all of this university's money come from private sources? > Play in the intelluctual sandbox of Usenet > > -- > SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU < -- _____________ Dale M. Greer, whose opinions are not to be confused with those of the Center for Space Sciences, U.T. at Dallas, UTSPAN::UTADNX::UTDSSA::GREER "Pave Paradise, put up a parking lot." -- Joni Mitchell ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 13:28:55 GMT From: "Allen W. Sherzer" Subject: nasa shake up rumor? Newsgroups: sci.space In article pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu ("Phil G. Fraering") writes: >If Clinton/Gore does this, in ten years we won't have a space program, >just more of these Space Shuttle rides, 1/2 billion for half a dozen >entertainee/astronauts. It won't be ten years since Clinton will be a one term president. At the end of which (if we are successful lobbying Congress) we will have an operational SSTO at which point we may not need the government any more. Allen -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves | | aws@iti.org | nothing undone" | +----------------------179 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 16:38:48 GMT From: Gerald Cecil Subject: nasa shake up rumor? Newsgroups: sci.space In article 14284@iti.org, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: >It won't be ten years since Clinton will be a one term president. At the >end of which (if we are successful lobbying Congress) we will have an >operational SSTO at which point we may not need the government any more. Quayle/Buchannan in '96 to ensure no more government! --- Gerald Cecil cecil@wrath.physics.unc.edu 919-962-7169 Physics & Astronomy, U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3255 USA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 14:59:11 GMT From: Hartmut Frommert Subject: Planets, moons gifs, jpegs. Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp) writes: >Does anyone know of sites that carry gifs or jpegs of planets and moons? ames.arc.nasa.gov -- Hartmut Frommert Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany -- Eat whale killers, not whales -- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 14:12:01 GMT From: Bo Thide' Subject: pocket satellite receivers (was Re: how much is the 95LX) Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp48,comp.sys.palmtops,sci.space In article burn@geog.canterbury.ac.nz (Burn Hockey) writes: >: There is a GPS receiver for the 95, it probably also uses the serial >: port and would work with other serial devices. >: >Can someone point me to information on this GPS receiver please? > >Burn Hockey burn@geog.canterbury.ac.nz Me too! -- ^ Bo Thide'-------------------------------------------------------------- |I| Swedish Institute of Space Physics, S-755 91 Uppsala, Sweden |R| Phone: (+46) 18-303671. Fax: (+46) 18-403100. IP: 130.238.30.23 /|F|\ INTERNET: bt@irfu.se UUCP: ...!mcvax!sunic!irfu!bt ~~U~~ ----------------------------------------------------------------sm5dfw- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 10:52:26 GMT From: Faust Subject: Preventing hypothetical Comet Collision (was: Comet collision) Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary In article <1992Oct26.221945.13810@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas) writes: > >I saw a lot of stuff on this, too. And it brings up an interesting point. >There have been a lot of scientists in recent years discussing the >possibilities of comets and/or meteors striking the Earth. > My question: How hard would it be to deflect an incoming object with, >say, a nuclear explosive? This theory is one I have heard postulated many >times, and have wondered how easy or hard such a task would be. The >orbit mechanics aspects could be worked out, I am sure...given enough time. >Plus, the greater the distance, the smaller an orbital perturbation would be >needed to alter the orbit. But how much warning would we have in such an >instance? > I'm a software designer, dammit, not an engineer :-) so I don't have an answer on how much force would be required to deflect or destroy an incoming comet. The force required would obviously depend on the objects mass and velocity. David Langford's WAR IN 2080 (an interesting speculation on the shape of war in the future) deals with the use of asteroids (and other hunks of rock floating around in space) as weopons. At high enough velocities , an asteroid of sufficient size would be almost impossible to stop without some form of mind boggling technology (such as a device that soaks up inertia). Even if you blew the incoming object apart, many of the remaining chunks would probably still hit the Earth. The nastiest variant on this idea that he describes is the 'Relativistic Missile'. This is an object (not necessarily of all that great mass) which has been accelerated to near relativistic speeds (something on the order of .7c) and aimed at whichever planet you don't like. Given the enormous velocity of the object it would be hard to detect and difficult to track, making it almost impossible to stop. When it hit the planet the energy released would be enormous. ******** *** ** ** ******* ******** "Quantum Mechanics: ** ** ** ** ** ** ** even I don't fully ****** ******* ** ** ******* ** understand it." ** ** ** ** ** ** ** - Ian Sales ** ** ** ****** ******** ** csh019@cch.cov.ac.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 17:25:45 GMT From: Nick Haines Subject: re HRMS for ETI Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.bio To sci.bio readers: this is from a discussion going on in sci.space, about the current Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) projects. A big question in that field is the probability of (some form of) life evolving in conditions similar to those on primordial earth (it's generally believed that such conditions are reasonably common and that the evolution of intelligence is reasonably likely given life). I'd appreciate any comments from molecular biologists. In article steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes: In article nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes: [... stuff, including reference, about how My guess for P(life evolving | suitable planet) is 1e-12. Well, I disagree, I'd put it at 0.1-1.0 (formally I'd actually put it at 0.5 if really pressed) but then we have very poor sampling on that. Why so high? Can you get a molecular biologist to agree with you? The old `amino-acid soup' theory has been largely discounted (on the grounds of extreme improbability, funnily enough) and replaced by new theories involving such things as self-reproducing systems based on clay minerals. My claim is that this sort of system is still very unlikely. The anthropic principle (in any form) says that our sample (of one) tells us nothing without further analysis. Maybe further discussion on that line should move out of sci.space Agreed, hence the cross-post. Nick To: ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 18:30:27 GMT From: Nick Haines Subject: re HRMS for ETI Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.bio Whoops, typo: In article , I wrote: [...] In article steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes: In article nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes: [... stuff, including reference, about how My guess for P(life evolving | suitable planet) is 1e-12. [...] The text "how life probably emerged here ...]" got truncated. Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 1992 16:07:53 GMT From: "Kevin W. Plaxco" Subject: Smith-Tuttle Comet a sight on earth? Newsgroups: sci.space Any estimates of this things Maximum Visual Magnitude? Maximum angle subtended by the visible tail? Or am I going to have to wait untill 2116 to see a show? -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 12:07:33 GMT From: Dave Tholen Subject: Smith-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth? Newsgroups: sci.space Frank Ney writes: > On the radio news this morning, I heard a report that an Australian > astronomer by the name of Duncan Steele predicted that the > Smith-Tuttle comet will strike the earth sometime in the 22nd century. > > The news report gave an exact date, but I couldn't write fast enough > to catch up. > > Is anyone else hearing these stories, and how true are they? First of all, the comet's name is P/Swift-Tuttle, and it's the parent comet of the Perseid meteor shower, recently recovered heading in toward its late 1992 perihelion passage, the first since the discovery apparition in 1862 (though the comet has now been linked with the comet observed by Kegler in 1737). Second, replace the "will strike" by "might strike". Just like any Perseid meteor, the parent comet also has the potential for running into the Earth. The uncertainty in the time of perihelion passage at its next perihelion passage in 2126 includes the date of the Perseids, namely August 14, so it could theoretically hit the Earth, though the probability is something like less than 1 in 10,000. Actually, considering the 10-year error in the current perihelion passage, one could have claimed in 1862 that the comet might hit the Earth in 1992, but it isn't going to happen this time around. Then again, once the identification with Kegler's comet was made, that 10 year uncertainty shrank substantially, and August 14 was no longer within the uncertainty. Continued observation of the comet as it rounds perihelion and heads back out should allow a better determination of its orbit and nongravitational parameters, permitting a more definitive calculation of it 2126 perihelion date. In the meantime, don't get too excited about "The Mother of all Perseids". ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 11:25:20 GMT From: "Aaron Wigley [Wigs]" Subject: Smith-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth? Newsgroups: sci.space J. D. McDonald (mcdonald@aries.scs.uiuc.edu) wrote: : In article steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes: : >Speed relative to Earth is 50 km/s : Lord Almighty! 1/6 the speed of light!!!!!! ??????? : : Doug McDonald (Just to be the first of probably many followups to this point :) Isn't the speed of light (at least last time I checked :) 2.998e08 meters per second, (~3.0e05 kilometers per second) ? Which makes 50 km/s 1/6000 the speed of light instead. The Wigs of Oz, Aaron Wigley ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 92 13:11:48 GMT From: FRANK NEY Subject: Smith-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth? Newsgroups: sci.space I've read Lucifer's Hammer. I'm about to re-read it now. Frank Ney N4ZHG EMT-A LPVa NRA ILA GOA CCRTKBA "M-O-U-S-E" Commandant and Acting President, Northern Virginia Free Militia Send e-mail for an application and more information ---------------------------------------------------------------- Democracy is based on the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it -- GOOD AND HARD!!! -- The Next Challenge - Public Access Unix in Northern Va. - Washington D.C. 703-803-0391 To log in for trial and account info. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 92 13:20:31 GMT From: FRANK NEY Subject: Smith-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth? Newsgroups: sci.space In article mcdonald@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (J. D. McDonald) writes: >In article steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes: > > >>Speed relative to Earth is 50 km/s >Lord Almighty! 1/6 the speed of light!!!!!! ??????? > >Doug McDonald I think you dropped a few decimal points. B-) Fifty klicks per second is only SOL x 0.0000166782 Frank Ney N4ZHG EMT-A LPVa NRA ILA GOA CCRTKBA "M-O-U-S-E" Commandant and Acting President, Northern Virginia Free Militia Send e-mail for an application and more information ---------------------------------------------------------------- Look! A one-line mathematical limerick: ((12 + 144 + 20 + (3 * 4^1/2)) / 7 + (5 * 11) = 9^2 + 0 -- The Next Challenge - Public Access Unix in Northern Va. - Washington D.C. 703-803-0391 To log in for trial and account info. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 09:44:57 EST From: "Dave Hansen @ws028" Subject: Subscription Request. Please add me to the mailing list. -- David Hansen, BYTEX Corp. 4 Technology Drive, Westboro, MA 01581-1760 UUCP: {...}uunet!bytex!dave Internet:dave%bytex.com@uunet.com ------------------------------ Date: 23 Oct 92 23:25:21 GMT From: Kevin Burfitt Subject: test Newsgroups: sci.space Testing 1 2 3 Please ignore... K.B. ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 350 ------------------------------