Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from beak.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 ; Wed, 27 Sep 89 01:31:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4Z85gBa00VcJA2w04s@andrew.cmu.edu> Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Wed, 27 Sep 89 01:30:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #78 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 78 Today's Topics: Image enhancement Re: How is Voyager powered? Re: Galileo Jovian atmospheric probe -- is it sterilized??? RE: SPACE Digest V10 #45 Re: Searching for the 10th planet Re: NSS Dial-A-Shuttle Release Re: Aerobraking drag Re: Edgar Rice Quayle on Mars. Re: Analysis of Martian "Face" Announced Re: Edgar Rice Quayle on Mars. Re: space organization -- What needs to be accomplished Re: Edgar Rice Quayle on Mars. subscribe Aerobraking drag ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 89 19:09:03 EDT From: John Roberts Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement. Subject: Image enhancement >From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tekgen!tekigm2!timothym@uunet.uu.net (Timothy D Margeson) >About computer enhancement of images... With some images, blurred especially, >computer enhancement can make astoundeing improvements, with all the accuracy >one wants, so long as you have a statistically sound sample to begin with. ... >The images that come to mind that were most striking was that of a license >plate on the back of a VW bug. The original photo was taken as a bank robbery >suspect fled the scene of a crime, and a person who was standing near by >holding a camera snapped a photo hurriedly. >The photo was thought to be hopelessly blurred due to camera motion - I sure >couldn't tell what was in the original photo - but the detectives contacted >a specialty firm, had enhancements done and they were able to reconstruct >the original image to a detail sufficient to read the license plate number!! Image enhancement does not add any new information to an image. The "improvement" of the image is based on certain underlying assumptions on the appearance of the original object. A blurry photograph of a completely random set of pixels can not be enhanced, and an image of an object of unknown properties can not be enhanced with any confidence that the result is correct. Some assumptions can be made for a typical surveillance photograph, but filling in a blank left by a dead pixel in the camera just makes use of an "educated guess" that there are no major discontinuities in the appearance of the object at that point. (The brain does this at the "blind spot" in the field of vision.) I saw an example of the "enhanced blurry photo" on TV. In that case, the image was blurry because the camera had the wrong focus, so every pixel was spread out into a circular disk of fixed size. A deconvolution program was run several times with different estimates of the disk size, until a "best" reconstruction was obtained. Presumably a similar approach could be used for motion-induced blur (each pixel distributed into a line segment). The job was greatly simplified because it was known that the original image was a group of uniform, smooth-edged characters on a uniform background. John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: 15 Sep 89 05:44:46 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!percy!parsely!bucket!leonard@uunet.uu.net (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: How is Voyager powered? szabonj@ibmpa.UUCP (nick szabo) writes: Reply-To: From: "Yorik the Blind" Subject: RE: SPACE Digest V10 #45 Re "Annex Canada..." How about "Make Alaska Contiguous....Sell us to Canada? At least that way, we'd be put in the right place on maps published in the US. On a more space-worthy note: The thread on Exotic Thrusters is fascinating. Anybody got some stuff on Light Sail Technology? Or how about orbital Rail Gun launchers? (One in L5 would be down-right handy, if I understand correctly...If we could get the colonist out of the way... :>) From what I've been able to piece together, a decent orbital rail gun, with a useful "barrel aperture" (10 m diameter) is easily within current technology. (The last piece was that new "room temperature" super- conductor. You know, the one that works at reasonable temperatures, like -73 degrees F) That could do wonders for speeding up probe deliveries. Solar power would be all you need, for electricity. You launch a probe from earth, do a gravity assist from the Earth/Moon system, line up the rail gun, and give the probe one hell of a kick in the ass. Then you either use gravity assists, or a high specific impulse engine, like the Mercury Ion Thruster. Or, possibly a light sail. Or a magnetoplasmadymaic engine. All of the materials to build the mass driver could be sent up in two or three shuttle loads. (I think) Also, if the rail gun is long enough, you get the benefits of a tether effect. For orbit stabilization, use the fact that you have a long conductor passing through a large magnetic field...Add electri city from the solar cells, and you can use the earths magnetic filed to help you maintain orbit...(I know, not really needed in L5, but still...nice idea anyway.) ------------------------------ Date: 16 Sep 89 23:23:03 GMT From: cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Searching for the 10th planet In article I0908@DKAFHS1.BITNET writes: >I have read in the past about speculations for the possibility of the >exixtence of a 10th planet. >Would the deep space probes (Pioneer 10+11, Voyager 1+2) give data >(for example gravitational anomalies, visual contact) for this search? Visual contact just wouldn't happen; their cameras are good but not that good, unless they accidentally happened to go right past it. Precision tracking is indeed being done to look for gravitational effects. >What about the Space Telescope? Pretty useless unless you know exactly where to point it. It's built for in-depth studies, not sky searches. >Or am I "behind the moon" and the non-existence has already been proven? Latest word is that if it exists, it's almost certainly either quite small or a long way out. -- V7 /bin/mail source: 554 lines.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 1989 X.400 specs: 2200+ pages. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 16 Sep 89 01:45:18 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@rutgers.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: NSS Dial-A-Shuttle Release In article <14677@bfmny0.UU.NET> tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes: >> The two extraordinary [Galileo-] Earth encounters, which will occur in >> 1990 and 1992, will provide the first ever deep space look at our own >> planet. > >I dispute this. If memory serves, it was Mariner 10 in 1973 which >turned its cameras backward after orbital insertion to Venus and >Mercury, and gave us our first long shot view (a rather famous one) of >Moon and Earth together in space. You've got a bad chip in that memory, Tom. :-) Voyager 1 shot the Earth/Moon photo on Sept 18 1977. There have been others; I recall a pic of Earth from Giotto's camera (and a disappointing one it was, too, since the camera was designed for rather different circumstances). >However, it may be that the National Space Society wasn't organized at >that time, so it doesn't count. :-) [two points Neff, nice bash job] Well, actually NSS as such didn't exist in 1973, and I don't think L5 did (although I'm not sure of the dates for it), although NSI might have. Of course, whether NSS has *ever* existed in any useful way is somewhat debatable... :-) [hey, one good bash job deserves another!] -- V7 /bin/mail source: 554 lines.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 1989 X.400 specs: 2200+ pages. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 89 04:41:52 GMT From: psuvm!mrw104@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu Subject: Re: Aerobraking drag In general, it can safely be assumed that an optimal aerobraking maneuver can "kill" (square root of 2)*(planet's surface escape velocity) hyperbolic excess velocity **************************************************************************** Mike Williams mrw104@psuvm.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: 15 Sep 89 13:41:03 GMT From: tank!eecae!netnews.upenn.edu!eniac.seas.upenn.edu!barron@handies.ucar.edu (Daniel P. Barron) Subject: Re: Edgar Rice Quayle on Mars. In article <1220@marlin.NOSC.MIL> price@marlin.nosc.mil.UUCP (James N. Price) writes: >Quayle may be pro-space right now because (and only because) it's >politically fashionable. Next week (month, year) he may be pro- >(or anti-) rail transportation, abortion, civil rights or whatever >for the same reason. And lots of people bust on Quayle because it's politically fashionable right now. Do you have any references to back up your allegations that Quayle's position on these important issues has changed in the past? If so, let's hear them. I'm not supporting or criticizing the guy, I really don't know much about his political career, but jumping on the Quayle-as-Moron band- wagon without thinking is no better than what you accuse him of. Ever the Devil's advocate... db ________________________________Daniel Barron__________________________________ ______________________________________ ________________________________________ "There are four types of homicide: | E-mail: barron@eniac.seas.upenn.edu felonious, excusable, justifiable | barron@wharton.upenn.edu and praiseworthy." --Ambrose Bierce | barron@dacth01.bitnet ______________________________________|________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: 15 Sep 89 17:34:17 GMT From: dfkling@june.cs.washington.edu (Dean F. Kling) Subject: Re: Analysis of Martian "Face" Announced Summary: Suspicious of "correlations". References: <24E0E328.7286@drivax.UUCP> <6103@ingr.com> <1171@xyzzy.UUCP> In article <1171@xyzzy.UUCP>, gross@dg-rtp.dg.com (Gene Gross) writes: > In article <938@censor.UUCP> jeff@censor.UUCP (Jeff Hunter) writes: > >harry@moncam.co.uk (Jangling Neck Nipper) writes: > >> In article <6103@ingr.com> tdj@ingr.com (Ted Johnson) writes: > >> > > > > So he started in on nearby objects. There's a hill (to the north?) > >that is roughly like a five-sided pyramid. The faces are all about the same > >length, and fairly flat. Hoagland pointed out the resemblance in proportion > >to Da Vinci's famous sketch of man in a circle. He concluded that the > >hill was a reinforcement of the face directing a message to mankind. [ stuff on resemblence auto commercials deleted ] > > He then started in on a nearby ridge saying it was "obviously > >artificial". There's a notch in the ridge, and if you line it up with > >the eye of the "face" (or the main street of the "city", I forget) you > >get a completely useless direction. > > But wait! If you calculate back in time as Mars' poles precess > >the notch will eventually line up with some star or other on the > >vernal equinox, or the summer solstice. Hoagland picks one of these > >matches and thereby "proves" that the whole complex was created at some > >ancient date. > > A few months ago PBS in Seattle had a British TV show that discussed these kinds of ad-hoc correlations. As an examle they took Stonehenge, the Salisbury Cathedral, and several local farms and drew dozens of striking conclusions based on their geographical realtionships, sight lines, and long distance relationships to other English monuments, and to solstice lines, etc. The obvious conclusion they drew was that the whole complex *must* have been part of an overall coherent design, by a single culture. There were just *too* many "coincidences" to be explained by mere chance! The lesson was that if you look hard enough for post-facto relationships, you will find them. Dean F. Kling cs.washington.edu ------------------------------ Date: 16 Sep 89 04:07:39 GMT From: loft386!dpi@uunet.uu.net (Doug Ingraham) Subject: Re: Edgar Rice Quayle on Mars. In article <45a2b135.71d0@apollo.HP.COM>, rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer) writes: > [ All this assumes that he actually said the Mars bit, which I find semi-hard > to believe, even considering the source. Still, as a friend is fond of > saying -- "Dan Quayle: The best impeachment/assassination insurance a > President could ask for!" :) ] Yes, he said it. I saw the brief excerpt on CNN that evening. There are no comedians that could have parodied him with the conviction he made these statements. Anyway, I am certain he has been corrected on this by now. After all he really isn't stupid. -- Doug Ingraham (SysAdmin) Lofty Pursuits (Public Access for Rapid City SD USA) uunet!loft386!dpi ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 89 03:47:47 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@rutgers.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: space organization -- What needs to be accomplished In article <24171@louie.udel.EDU> pezely@udel.EDU (pezely) writes: >7. Raise vast amounts of money from the general public and private >investors (Billions-of-dollars range) to help pay for the station. Doesn't necessarily need to be billions. If you're willing to launch on Soviet boosters, it can probably be done for about $500M. This may require limiting the sophistication of the on-board hardware to avoid hassles from the US government, though. Unless you're willing to wait until the Australians are launching (Soviet-built) Zenits from Cape York. -- "Where is D.D. Harriman now, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology when we really *need* him?" | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 89 20:47:58 GMT From: haven!uvaarpa!virginia!kesmai!kff@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Kelton Flinn) Subject: Re: Edgar Rice Quayle on Mars. In article <8909121607.AA03206@decwrl.dec.com>, klaes@wrksys.dec.com (N = R*fgfpneflfifaL) writes: > Vice President Dan Quayle, explained why the > United States should undertake a manned mission to Mars: "Mars is > essentially in the same orbit. Mars is somewhat the same distance > from the Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where > there are canals, we believe, and water. If there is water, there is > oxygen. If oxygen, that means we can breathe." I saw this clip on CNN, and was woefully embarrassed for the Vice President. Then the CNN reporter came on and said something to the effect of "The Vice President is displaying his misunderstanding of science here, everyone knows that Mars has no atmosphere." The last part of the sentence I remember distinctly. *THAT* made me mad! Its one thing for the Vice President to make a silly statement because his staff didn't brief him properly. Thats bad enough. Its far worse for a member of the media to make a blatantly false statement that is easily checkable. The reporter was not on camera, required to answer a question on the spot, they have all the time they need to get it right. Harumph! Kelton Flinn ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Sep 89 12:15:14 CDT From: "Michael W. Watterud" Subject: subscribe sub space Michael Watterud UD017158 @ NDSUVM1 ------------------------------ Date: 15 Sep 89 19:08:30 GMT From: nis!viper!dave@UMN-CS.CS.UMN.EDU (David Messer) Subject: Aerobraking drag Does anyone have a "rule of thumb" for calculating the drag on a hypersonic object passing through an atmosphere? What I really want to determine is how much a meteor or asteroid would slow down while passing through the Earths atmosphere. Any help you can give me will be appreciated. -- Remember Tiananmen Square. | David Messer dave@Lynx.MN.Org -or- | Lynx Data Systems ...!bungia!viper!dave ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #78 *******************