Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V10_0/V10_031.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 19KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
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/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/IZ3N0sC00jaS41pU5F>;
          Tue, 12 Sep 89 19:24:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 89 19:24:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #31

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 10 : Issue 31

Today's Topics:
    List of Space Grant Colleges and Consortia (Forwarded)
               Re: Pluto fly-by
                 Re: Question
Re: Progress M-1 (new type of cargo craft) launched to USSR's Mir station
        Re: Voting via taxes and other 3&*%^#!
    NASA designates 17 space grant colleges/consortia (Forwarded)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 1 Sep 89 03:38:56 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: List of Space Grant Colleges and Consortia (Forwarded)


                        SPACE GRANT COLLEGE AND FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM
                         DESIGNATED SPACE GRANT COLLEGES/CONSORTIA

1.  Alabama Space Grant Consortium
    o University of Alabama in Huntsville       o Alabama A&M University, Normal
    o University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa         o Auburn University
    o University of Alabama at Birmingham

2.  Arizona Space Grant College Consortium
    o University of Arizona, Tucson             o Arizona State University, Tempe
    o Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff

3.  California Space Grant Consortium and Fellowship Program
    o University of California, Berkeley        o University of California at San Diego
    o University of California at Los Angeles

4.  Colorado Space Grant Consortium
    o University of Colorado, Boulder           o Fort Lewis College, Durango
    o Colorado State University, Fort Collins   o Mesa State College, Grand Junction
    o University of Colorado, Colorado Springs  o University of Southern Colorado, Pueblo

5.  Cornell Space Grant College Consortium
    o Cornell University, Ithaca, NY            o Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY

6.  Florida Space Grant Consortium
    o University of Florida, Gainesville        o Florida A&M University, Tallahassee
    o Florida State University, Tallahassee     o University of Miami

7.  Georgia Institute of Technology Space Grant Consortium
    o Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta  o Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta
    o Georgia State University, Atlanta         o Tuskegee University, Ala.

8.  Aerospace Illinois Space Grant Consortium
    o Illinois Space Institute                  o University of Chicago
    o University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign  o University of Illinois, Chicago
    o Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago o Northwestern University, Evanston

9.  The Johns Hopkins Space Grant Consortium
    o The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore   o Morgan State University, Baltimore
    o Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore

10. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

11. Michigan Space Grant College Program
    o University of Michigan, Ann Arbor         o Wayne State University, Detroit
    o Michigan Technological University, Houghton
    o Saginaw Valley State University, University Center

12. Ohio Aerospace Institute
    o University of Akron                       o University of Cincinnati
    o Cleveland State University                o University of Dayton
    o Ohio State University, Columbus           o Ohio University, Athens
    o University of Toledo                      o Wright State University, Dayton
    o Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland

13. Pennsylvania State University, University Park

14. Rocky Mountain Space Grant Consortium
    o Utah State University, Logan              o University of Utah, Salt Lake City
    o University of Denver, Colo.

15. Texas Space Grant Consortium
    o University of Texas, Austin               o University of Texas at Arlington
    o Texas A&M University, College Station     o University of Texas at El Paso
    o Baylor University, Waco                   o University of Texas at San Antonio
    o UT Health Science Center, Houston         o Texas Southern University, Houston
    o UT Health Science Center, San Antonio     o Texas Christian University, Fort Worth
    o UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas    o Rice University, Houston
    o University of Houston                     o Prairie View A&M University
    o University of Houston at Clear Lake       o Southern Methodist University, Dallas
    o Texas A&M University at Galveston         o Texas Technological University, Lubbock
    o Texas A&I University, Kingsville

16. Virginia Space Grant Consortium
    o University of Virginia, Charlottesville   o Hampton University
    o College of William and Mary, Williamsburg o Old Dominion University, Norfolk
    o Virginia Polytechnical Institute and State University, Blacksburg

17. University of Washington, Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 31 Aug 89 09:12:18 PDT
From: [e-mail]
X-Vmsmail-To: SPAN::AMES::"[e-mail]"
Subject: Re: Pluto fly-by

In Space_Digest V10 #8, D. Scott Hess asks:

>... I've spent time trying to figure out
>exactly how gravity-assist works, and thus far, its beyond me...

To which Henry Spencer answers:

>I'll explain it briefly here, because it's relevant below.  (This one is
>common enough that it probably ought to go in the frequently-asked-
>questions list.)  Doing a pass by Jupiter will not change your speed
>with respect to Jupiter, but it will change the direction of your motion.
>This matters because Jupiter itself is moving.  Call Jupiter's orbital
>velocity J (don't have the number handy).  If you approach Jupiter "from
>the front" at 5 km/s relative to Jupiter, and do a tight hyperbola around
>it so that the direction of motion with respect to Jupiter gets pretty
>much reversed, then with respect to Jupiter you went in at 5 km/s and came
>out at 5 km/s, but with respect to the *Sun* you went in at J-5 km/s and
>came out at J+5 km/s.  Jupiter got slowed down infinitesimally in the
>process.

    Which is partly wrong.  You have to come from the back, not the
front.  Imagine that the Mighty Hand of Jove grabs you as you go by and
flings you in the direction of his own motion.  Also, with respect to the
Sun, you went in at 5 km/s and came out at 5+J km/s.
    The Voyager Updates from JPL were introduced with one of Jeff
Blinn's(?) animations of Voyager's trajectory, which showed the gravity
assist effect nicely.  Perhaps one day they'll make a video tape library
available...
    For only $19.95 you'll get the first installment in the Voyager
    video library: Encounter with Jupiter.  Examine it for ten days
    and send it back if you're not satisfied.  Order now, and receive
    your free Voyager mission lapel pin...

----
"Drive Friendly or Die"            |         Dale M. Greer
  Proposed Texas License Plate Motto    |   Center for Space Sciences
              -- Anonymous    | University of Texas at Dallas
                    | UTSPAN::UTADNX::UTDSSA::GREER
The opinions are my own, and may or may not reflect those of my employer.

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

Date: 30 Aug 89 23:46:24 GMT
From: sumax!amc-gw!sigma!uw-nsr!gtisqr![e-mail]  (Kevin Bagley)
Subject: Re: Question

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (rds) writes:
>>         Would a clock (earth time) placed on voyager
>>         12 years ago be presently running at a different time
>>         compared to current earth time due to relativistic
>>         effects?

>A very, very little bit.  The crucial issues are velocity (special
>relativity) and gravitational fields (general relativity), both of
>which affect clocks.  Voyager is moving (mostly) at fairly modest
>speeds, and is also in (mostly) somewhat weaker gravitational fields
>than clocks here.  The effects ought to be detectable but would not
>be dramatic.

        I vaguely remember a newspaper article about some researchers
        at a university (don't remember which one) detecting the time
        difference (due to relativistic) effects, on a outbound probe.
        It may have been a Pioneer, or the Voyager probe. It seems like
        it was prior to Jupiter that the announcement was made.

        I seem to recall that the researchers were rather excited about
        having another confirmation of special relativity.

        Does anybody out there recall anything like this. I think the
        University was a major one. MIT, Stanford, ???

        So sorry for the vagueness of this, but they say the mind starts
        to go with age.


>--
>V7 /bin/mail source: 554 lines.|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
>1989 X.400 specs: 2200+ pages. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]


--
   _____    Kevin Bagley  Global Technology Mukilteo WA 98275 [phone]
     )__) _   _   _       UUCP:uw-beaver!uw-nsr!gtisqr!kevin
   _/__) (_(_(_)_/_)_     ARPA:uw-nsr!gtisqr![e-mail]
  ____________/           Disclaimer: "I did not say this. I am not here."

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

Date: 31 Aug 89 01:49:14 GMT
From: ibmpa![e-mail]  (nick szabo)
Subject: Re: Progress M-1 (new type of cargo craft) launched to USSR's Mir station

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Glenn Chapman) writes:
>
>Aviation Week and Defense Daily describing the possible substantial
>reductions in the Freedom station it may be that Mir will exceed
>the NASA/International station this year when the expansion module
>is launched in October.  Do you really want that?
>

Yes!  Let the Sovs spend billions on obsolete, labor-intensive capsules
which go nowhere but LEO, are filled with vibrations, and contaminated
by fluid leaks.  By scrapping "Freedom" we will save at least $30 billion,
which I suggest we divy up as follows:

Planetary Expoloration: an extra $10 billion
    --5 more Galileo-class (Mariner Mk. II) missions: to Uranus,
      Neptune, Pluto, asteroid rendesvous/comet flyby, and
      (if technology permits) Mercury orbiter/lander.
    --2 more Observer-class missions: Lunar Polar Orbiter, and
      Mars Observer follow-on.
    --Thousand-Astronomical-Unit mission
    --ground-based asteroid survey
    --Antartic meteor hunts (retrieve lunar, Martian, asteroid
             and comet samples)

Mission to Planet Earth:  an extra $5 billion

Basic technology prototyping: an extra $5 billion
    aeronautical research
    electric propulsion
    nuclear propulsion
    laser propulsion
    optical communications
    EML
    tethers
    automated microgravity labs
    etc.

Private launch company purchase guarantees: $10 billion


Nick Szabo
uunet!ibmsupt!szabonj
These opinions are not related to Big Blue's

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

Date: 31 Aug 89 18:53:11 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Terry Hancock)
Subject: Re: Voting via taxes and other 3&*%^#!

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (6079 Smith James) writes:
>
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>> [Advocacy for "Tax Voting" --- selecting who gets your tax money]
>
>Neat idea.  Pretty soon we'd spend 70% of the budget on Social Security,
>25% on Welfare, 4% on defense, and maybe .00001% on space.  If you let
>people vote themselves a free lunch, they'll take it.
>
    The people who have more money would have more taxes.  Tax-voting
would favor the rich and middle class -- not people who benefit from
welfare and social security.  We would more likely see a crueler
poverty than we have now if total tax-voting were implemented.
    Allowing the voter to redirect 25% to 50% of his taxes would
be reasonable for several agencies which are supported only by sections
of the population.  Space, all basic research, the environment, and the
arts would probably be bolstered by such a system.  Naturally, some of
the rich, conservative, and scared will still spend huge sums on
defense, in any taxation system.  This country has a long way to go
toward a constructive, non-paranoid posture.

>
>Essentially, if we want a space program, we'll have to buy stock in
>private space companies (NOT milindustrial governmentplace contractors).

    Maybe.  Launchers, space exploitation, hardware, yes. Space
exploration and science, I doubt it.  The best you can do there is
to sell the info you get.  This is detrimental toward scientific
progress (it promotes secrecy), and won't generate much revenue.  Those
who do pay a lot for it will have government grants for basic
research anyway -- so it still takes government funding.
    I do agree this is the way to handle the development of space,
but I suspect subsidies may be needed.  Space colonies, for instance,
will take a long time to start generating their own revenue -- or
even break even.  You can't sell much stock to people who won't live
to see the dividends.  The best you can do is sell it to them as an
investment for their heirs -- I have no idea if that will work.

>The uneducated, pap-fed population of this country simply isn't
>interested in long-range planning beyond their new TV.
>
    I realize this was intended as a generalization, but I object
to it.  It may be that 60, 70, or even 90% of the population is a lot
like what you describe -- but the remainder can do a lot if they try.
Saying that no one will follow is a common excuse for not leading.
Remember all the people who DO care, please.

>
>Elitist ranting from:
>James Smith
>[e-mail]

    You said it, I didn't.



*************************
Terry Hancock
[e-mail]
*************************

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

Date: 1 Sep 89 03:37:16 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA designates 17 space grant colleges/consortia (Forwarded)

Terri Sindelar
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                      August 31, 1989


RELEASE:  89-136

NASA DESIGNATES 17 SPACE GRANT COLLEGES/CONSORTIA


     NASA today announced the selection of 17 universities and
consortia as Designated Space Grant Colleges/Consortia in the first
element of NASA's new National Space Grant College and Fellowship
Program.

     The program was mandated by Congress in 1987.  Its first
element names certain schools or consortia of schools as Designated
Space Grant Colleges/Consortia.  These designated institutions,
which are already significantly involved in space-related
activities, will receive grants and fellowships.  The designated
colleges/consortia were selected based on a competitive evaluation
of the institutions' existing aerospace activities as well as the
quality of their plans to strengthen the national educational base
for science, math and technology.

     The original program announcement forecast the number of
expected space grant college designations as no more than 12, due
to anticipated budget limitations.  However, NASA Administrator
Richard H. Truly decided to extend designations to 17
colleges/consortia in response to the high quality of the proposals
received and as an indicator of NASA's desire to get this important
program off to a strong start.

     Truly said, "I expect this program to have a very significant
educational impact throughout the nation, by enhancing the training
of future scientists and engineers at the university level, as well
as by improving the teaching of science, mathematics and technology
at the elementary and secondary levels."

     The Designated Space Grant Colleges/Consortia will provide
leadership and form partnerships with other universities,
government and industry to better understand, develop and use space
resources through research, education and public service functions.

     The 17 designated universities and consortia, listed in
alphabetical order, are:  Alabama Space Grant Consortium; Arizona
Space Grant College Consortium; California Space Grant Consortium;
Colorado Space Grant Consortium; Cornell Space Grant Consortium;
Florida Space Grant Consortium; Georgia Institute of Technology;
Aerospace Illinois Space Grant Consortium; The Johns Hopkins Space
Grant Consortium; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Michigan
Space Grant College Program; Ohio Aerospace Institute; Pennsylvania
State University; Rocky Mountain Space Grant Consortium; Texas
Space Grant Consortium; Virginia Space Grant Consortium; and the
University of Washington.  NASA expects to designate additional
Space Grant Colleges/Consortia in future years as funds become
available and as schools expand their capabilities in the space
area.

     These Designated Space Grant Colleges/Consortia will receive
funding for 5 years.  In fiscal year 1989 each designee will
receive $75,000.  In subsequent years, the institutions will
receive up to $225,000 per year and are expected to obtain, as a
minimum, matching non-Federal funds.  In addition, these designated
institutions will receive $100,000 funding to support fellowships
for undergraduate and graduate students beginning in fiscal year
1990.

     "The National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program will
help maintain America's leadership in aerospace research, training
and education," Adm. Truly said.  "The investment in these
universities and consortia will greatly impact and nourish all
levels of education.  I am very pleased with the growing aerospace
education programs and the strong desire of universities to expand
and coordinate these activities.  In light of the President's
recently announced space exploration initiative, this program will
be key to attracting and developing future generations of the most
talented engineers and space scientists."

     The National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program
comprises three elements:  (1) designation of Space Grant
Colleges/Consortia which will provide for a national network of
universities and colleges; (2) awards to support space grant
programs at other institutions that will expand participation of
colleges/universities/consortia that have not been as extensively
involved in aeronautics and space research and education; and (3)
space grant fellowships that will be made available to students at
institutions selected in the first two elements.  The first of the
elements is the subject of this announcement.  The second and third
elements of the National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program
will be initiated in fiscal year 1990.

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

End of SPACE Digest V10 #31
*******************