Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V09_2/V9_271.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 13KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
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/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/UY3DVRy00UkZAigU4Q>;
          Thu,  2 Mar 89 03:16:30 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu,  2 Mar 89 03:16:21 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #271

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 271

Today's Topics:
         Re: First concert from space--update
            Re: The never-ending argument
            Re: centrifugal forces
            Re: centrifugal forces
            Re: centrifugal forces
             Re: More good news!
         Put your money where your dream is.
     Re: manned vs unmanned, and space commercialization
                Public thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 26 Feb 89 01:38:09 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!attcan!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: First concert from space--update

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brooke King) writes:
>...The Iron Curtain launchers are simply facing the reality of their
>need for hard currency and the results of the (until recently)
>reality of the US government's foolish, all-the-eggs-in-one-
>expensive-shuttle-basket, monopolistic launch policy.  They
>oughtn't be credited with any love of free enterprise.

Neither should NASA, which really would prefer to go back to said
monopolistic launch policy, so it could retain control.  At the moment
the space-launcher competition isn't between free enterprise and the
socialist bureaucracies, it's between four or five different socialist
bureaucracies.  Predictably, the simplest and crudest one -- China's --
is the low bidder for current launch contracts, the most experienced
one -- the Soviet Union's -- is not far behind, and the newest and most
factionalized one -- NASA and the US aerospace contractors -- is dead
last.

There are some glimmerings of free enterprise here and there, at places
like OSC/Hercules, Amroc, Pacific American, et al, but they are still
very small and vulnerable.  Pray that the US government doesn't step on
them, deliberately or through sheer negligence, in the next few years.
If they succeed, it will be a whole new ballgame.
--
The Earth is our mother;       |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
our nine months are up.        | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 26 Feb 89 00:43:42 GMT
From: minke![e-mail]  (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: The never-ending argument

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nick Szabo) writes:
><In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Sparks) writes:
><> ... most supporters of the Unmanned Program are against the Manned
><>Program altogether, or put it off indefinately.
><
><Nobody has argued anything of the kind.  The argument is that we
><must "put it off" until it provides cost-effective return of scientific
><knowledge or money, or there are volunteers willing to undertake it at their
>
>Which ammounts to exactly the same thing.

Gee, you're sure a pessimist today.   :-)

>Knowledge about precisely
>how to live and work in space will NEVER be obtained --- EVER ---
>unless we go out there and try it.

It can best be obtained with unmanned projects, as I have said before.  When
the above criteria are met, we can try it for real.  If manned spaceflight
does not provide economic or scientific return commesurate with its cost,
it is a parasite, sucking resources away from the important endevours of our
society, such as space development and future space settlement.  If you
want to waste money, waste your own.  Let the public spend its money wisely.



Nick Szabo              [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 89 20:22:48 GMT
From: vsi1!v7fs1![e-mail]  (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: centrifugal forces

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wayne D. T. Johnson) writes:
:Along the same lines,  I once read a short story about a community housed in
:a cylindrical space colony.
:
:As  I recall,  the propulsion system had failed and several of the  citizens
:had  taken  up with jogging around the cylinder to keep  it  spinning,  thus
:causing the spin (and of course the gravity) to increase.
 ...
:The  result  was a compromise where they jogged one way around the  cylinder
:one day, and the other direction the next.

Of course, the main thing this shows is that the writer of that
story doesn't know about conservation of angular momentum!
--
Mike Van Pelt                                 "Hey, hey, ho ho,
Video 7                                       Western culture's got to go."
...ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp                        Stanford students and faculty.

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 89 19:01:21 GMT
From: mailrus!uflorida!haven!aplcen![e-mail]  (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: centrifugal forces

>The  result  was a compromise where they jogged one way around the  cylinder
>one day, and the other direction the next.

I remember this too.  It was from Analog.  If I recall correctly, there was
a big fuss over it in the letter column; scientifically inaccurate Analog
stories tend to get such treatment.

It was inaccurate.  When a jogger stops jogging, the angular momentum of
the jogger jogging in one direction exactly cancels out what was added to
the angular momentum of the colony when the jogger started jogging.  Conser-
vation of angular momentum.
--
               EARTH          |       --Kenneth Arromdee
           smog  |   bricks   |      UUCP: ....!jhunix!ins_akaa
        AIR     mud       FIRE|  INTERNET: [e-mail]
      soda water |   tequila  |    BITNET: g49i0188@jhuvm
               WATER          |(please, no mail to arrom@aplcen)
Element chart from "Science Made Stupid".  (The chart seems rather popular...)

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 89 19:41:44 GMT
From: rochester![e-mail]  (Paul Dietz)
Subject: Re: centrifugal forces

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wayne D. T. Johnson) writes:
>Along the same lines,  I once read a short story about a community housed in
>a cylindrical space colony.
>
>As  I recall,  the propulsion system had failed and several of the  citizens
>had  taken  up with jogging around the cylinder to keep  it  spinning,  thus
>causing the spin (and of course the gravity) to increase.
>
>After generations of this,  the non-jogging population got upset and started
>an  incident because the gravity was increasing beyond the  original  level,
>whereas the joggers had gotten so accustomed to their daily ritual that they
>refused  to  stop.
>
>The  result  was a compromise where they jogged one way around the  cylinder
>one day, and the other direction the next.

Ah yes.  I believe the story (which appeared in the now defunct
Galaxy) was called "Jogging Up Main Street".  The author and the
editor were apparently both scientific illiterates, since they did not
understand the law of conservation of angular momentum.  Jogging would
cause the colony to spin up very slightly as long as the runner kept
moving, but as soon as he stopped, the extra spin would disappear
(considering the mass of a runner vs. the colony, the effect would be
unnoticable).  Similarly, a space colony does not need a propulsion
system to keep spinning.

Another story with the same error (not as fatal to the plot) appeared
in Analog a few years later, where it prompted letters from readers.

Then there was the story in Analog about a race in earth orbit between
human-powered vehicles with ion engines.  What a stupid concept.

Followups to rec.arts.sf-lovers.

  Paul F. Dietz
  [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 26 Feb 89 02:53:56 GMT
From: att!pegasus![e-mail]  (Paul S. R. Chisholm)
Subject: Re: More good news!

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Bowery)
writes that Vice Presient Quayle supports CDSF, and:
} Would you please all write to him expressing your support for his
} position?
}
} He can be reached care of the White House:
}
} Vice President
} 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
} Washington, D.C. 20500

Golly, I never thought I'd agree with Dr. Bowery.  Sure, Jim, I'll be
happy to write him.  I'll tell him that CDSF is an excellent way to
encourage our fledgling commercial space industry (by showing that
there *are* dollars at the end of the tunnel if you're doing something
worth while).  I'll also tell him that that a man-tended station is a
supplement, but not a replacement, for the permanently manned space
station that's our logical next step in the exploration and
exploitation of space.

}Jim Bowery, {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!jim

Paul S. R. Chisholm, AT&T Bell Laboratories, att!pegasus!psrc
[e-mail], AT&T Mail !psrchisholm
I'm not speaking for the company, I'm just speaking my mind.

------------------------------

Reply-To: mordor!rutgers!pnet01.cts.com![e-mail]
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 89 17:23:06 PST
From: mordor!rutgers!pnet01.cts.com![e-mail] (Jim Bowery)
To: ucsd!nosc!crash![e-mail]
Subject: Put your money where your dream is.

You now have the opportunity to begin investing in your own dream of
space as a place to live, work and play.  After reviewing my opportunities
to invest in space businesses, I decided on E'Prime and made the largest
investment of my life.  I did this because I believe in what these people
are doing whether or not they are eventually successful as a company.

Christians tithe 10% of their income (if they are following their
scriptures to the letter).  How much more can we afford to INVEST in
what, in many respects, is the religion of technological civilization?

Look around, pick your favorites and invest what you can.  Let them know
WHY you are investing in their company (whoever they may be).  You may not
make it into space yourself, but your odds can only be increased by putting
your money where your dream is.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Bowery    Phone: [phone]
PO Box 1981                  Join the Mark Hopkins Society!
La Jolla, CA 92038   (A member of the Mark Hopkins family of organizations.)

UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!jim
ARPA: crash!pnet01![e-mail]
INET: [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 26 Feb 89 06:02:07 GMT
From: uccba!uceng![e-mail]  (daniel mocsny)
Subject: Re: manned vs unmanned, and space commercialization

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (daniel mocsny) writes:
> >What prevents you from using a tele-operated rig?

> The complete lack of an adequate, workable "tele-operated rig" available
> as reliable off-the-shelf hardware, perhaps?

The time has never been better to develop an orbiting, tele-operated
materials-processing and biological experimentation laboratory. With
skillful miniaturization, an unmanned laboratory could be lofted
by a fairly small, and thus inexpensive, expendable launcher. The
launcher would be well within the range of a private launch service.

The nation with the most efficient and inexpensive automated
manufacturing technology will be the first to establish an
extraterrestrial industrial base. By sinking our space resources into
the shuttle and the space station, NASA may well be ceding space to,
say, the Japanese (they'll ship VCRs to the Soviets in exchange for
launchers, if necessary).

Dan Mocsny
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1989 15:59-EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Public thanks

I want to thank Phil Karn for getting me a copy of an article that came
up during a previous discussion. Although Phil and are almost
invariably on the opposite sides of issues, I nonetheless consider him
a gentleman and a scholar and one whose opinion is worth listening too,
even when I disagree with it.

I'll be doing another post on the "Great Face" as soon as I find a
little time to think about it, so roll up your sleeves again, Phil...

                In this corner....
                    Dale Amon

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V9 #271
*******************