Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V11_4/V11_474.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 18KB

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/usr11/tm2b/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/4aNUAB:00VcJ0=LE5I>;
          Fri,  1 Jun 1990 01:54:21 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <4aNU=ja00VcJA=[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri,  1 Jun 1990 01:53:52 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #474

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 11 : Issue 474

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

Submissions to the Digest/sci.space should be mailed to [e-mail]
 while all other mail, such as subscription requests and general question,
 should be sent to [e-mail] or, if pressing, to
 [e-mail].  Thanks.

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

Today's Topics:
            space station software
               Re: The Magellan analogy
                Re: Innumeracy
            Re: Mt. Graham Hearings (long)
           Re: Hawaii and Launching rockets
        SPACE Digest nincl. Sci.space.shuttle
            Re: Mt. Graham Hearings (long)
             Re: shuttle progress
          Re: space news from April 2 AW&ST
          Re: Jupiter and Sodium Cloud......
                Re: Radiation
          Re: space news from April 2 AW&ST
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 31 May 90 15:40:50 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Thomas A. Bitterman)
Subject: space station software

    Does anyone out there have some information on the computer
systems to be used in Space Station Freedom?  In particular:

1) Who will be the vendor? (IBM, Unisys, DEC, NEC)  Is there some sort
    of nationality restriction for security reasons?

2) What language will be used?  If not Ada, why not?

3) Who will write the software?  Will it be farmed out, or written in-
    house, or both?

4) How will software maintenance be carried out?  Will there be on-site
    programmer/debuggers?  Does NASA need volunteers? :-)

5) Even with rad-hard chips, there is going to be some program degradation.
    What is the state of the art in fault-tolerant programming?

I apologize if its rather early in the life of the project to ask these
questions.  However, early on is probably the best time to get these
details straight.  Inquiring computer scientists want to know!

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| thomas bitterman                         aka: [e-mail]    |
|                                                                           |
| "Good morning, Dave. How are you feeling?" -HAL                           |
| Disclaimer: My right to bear assault weapons ensures they'll never take   |
|             me alive...  hahahahaha!                                      |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

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

Date: 31 May 90 18:56:37 GMT
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!watdragon!watyew![e-mail]  (Brian or James)
Subject: Re: The Magellan analogy

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (S Schaper) writes:
>for $ it wouldn't hurt to mine a nickel-iron apollo asteroid to refinance the
>federal debt... Back the currency with gold, etc...  half a smiley?
>
>UUCP: {amdahl!bungia, uunet!rosevax, chinet, killer}!orbit!pnet51!schaper
>ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51![e-mail]
>INET: [e-mail]

    Problem is that gold and the other 'precious' metals don't
have an intrinsically high value. Drop a megatonne of gold on the
market, and you'll be hearing the crunch of sidewalk diving aurophiles
soon after.
    I always wondered how the nations who specialise in raw material
export would survive a hypothetical 'third industrial revolution'.
                                JDN

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

Date: 31 May 90 18:37:04 GMT
From: ogicse!zephyr.ens.tek.com!wrgate!mrloog![e-mail]  (Dan Tilque)
Subject: Re: Innumeracy

[e-mail] writes:
>
>>--Alan Wexelblat
>>  The taxes of every American west of the Mississippi are used to pay off
>>  the interest on the national debt.

>Using round numbers (remember,
>this is a quick off the cuff exercise, we don't need the answer to be accurate
>to the penny) the federal government last year spent about $1.1 trillion and
>ran a deficit of around $100 billion (that last figure is still debated, but
>$100 billion is close enough for here).  That means the feds took in about
>$1 trillion in taxes.  Now the interest payment on the deficit is about 15% of
>the budget or $165 billion.  Thus that means that only 16.5% of all the taxes
>paid in last year came from west of the Mississippi.

I believe that if you change the statement to only talk about income taxes,
it's about right.  The US government receives taxes from a variety of
sources.  The last time I checked (several years ago) import taxes were
the largest source (about 40 or 50 percent) and income taxes second (about
30%) of total tax revenues.

---
Dan Tilque    --    [e-mail]

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

Date: 31 May 90 09:26:29 GMT
From: bfmny0![e-mail]  (Tom Neff)
Subject: Re: Mt. Graham Hearings (long)

That was a humongous zero content posting.  So much whining about what
this group or that group did!  Who wants to wade through that stuff to
get to the meat of the argument?

Speak to the point.  Does the observatory endanger the squirrels or not;
if not, why not; if so, why is that OK; if you don't know, just say so
and let us keep looking.
--
Stalinism begins at home.  }{  Tom Neff  }{  [e-mail]

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

Date: 31 May 90 17:55:14 GMT
From: decvax.dec.com!jfcl.dec.com!imokay.dec.com![e-mail]  (Doug Borsom)
Subject: Re: Hawaii and Launching rockets

In article <[e-mail].> [e-mail] (Joseph C. Pistritto) writes:

 **a bunch of stuff deleted**
>
>Well, thanks, another pressure group is born.  Try getting your facts
>straight (or at least having some), before pressurizing Congress, eh?
>THIS REALLY STEAMS ME ABOUT THESE ENVIRONMENTAL/DISARMAMENT/PEACEandLOVE
>GROUPS!.  We get incessant claims, counterclaims, etc. with no facts,
>or just ridiculous extrapolations mentioned.  THESE PEOPLE KNOW, that
>Congressman, of all people, have no technical background, and are
>absolutely defenseless in the face of this pseudo-science.  The
>Jeremy Rifkins of the Universe use this fact to ruthlessly pressurize
>the body politic to their own ends.

The fact of your being steamed and the degree of your steaminess
is so irrelevant that it would be irrelevant for me to even
mention that it's irrelevant.

Members of Congress have extensive staffs that perform, among
of other things, research (as in library, not scientific) functions
for the congress people.

Hearings are characterized by the testimonies of real experts.
(For those of you who like to gnash your teeth over the
appearance of M. Streep before Congress during the Alar hearings,
she was *not* represented as an expert witness, only as a concerned
citizen.)

Members of Congress are certainly susceptible to political and
financial pressure, but the statement that they are "absolutely
defenseless in the face of this pseudo-science"  is not true,
not even in dim light with one eye closed.

The defenselessness of individual citizens who can be swayed to
apply political pressure is a different issue.

If it makes you feel any better (or even if it makes you feel
worse), many decisions are reached not so much on the basis of
scientific facts as they are on political realities.
(That's why M. Streep testified in the first place.)

>
>But we expect
>those who seek to convince us to adhere to the same standards of
>intellectual and scientific honesty we use among ourselves.
>

The most polite response I could make to the above statement
would be silence. But sometime it might be fun to review the
history of dishonesty, plagarism, and data doctoring among some
members of the scientific community. Sometime, but not today.
Suffice it to say that having standards and adhering to standards
are not synonymous, even for scientists.
>
>--
>Joseph C. Pistritto (cgch![e-mail], [e-mail])
> Ciba Geigy AG, R1241.1.01, Postfach CH4002, Basel, Switzerland
> Tel: [phone] (work) [phone] (home)   GMT+2hrs!

          -Doug Borsom

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

Date: 31 May 90 19:30:30 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Todd L. Masco)
Subject: SPACE Digest nincl. Sci.space.shuttle

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].\
MIL (Will Martin) writes:
> The other thing to remember about "sci.space" is that it is not an entity
> in and of itself; it is also part of the Internet SPACE Digest mailing list.
> These are currently two-way gatewayed together. (I think "sci.space.shuttle"
> is also fed into the SPACE Digest, one-way only.)

Sci.space.shuttle is not included in the SPACE Digest.  If other
groups were created, they would not necessarily be included, but they
might be, depending most upon my judgement and upon what requests I
get.  The Digest already tends to be large and unwieldy (witness the
"Best Of" Magazine, editted by Jon Bennett), so I would lean heavily
toward leaving out sci.space.squirrels and so forth.

I don't think that splitting sci.space into oodles of groups is the
right approach;  As Eugene Miya suggested a couple of months ago, this
newsgroup (or, its readers) just needs to learn to better gauge
postings, as the other sci groups (generally;  Ignore exploding fish)
have done.  I believe that it's been more difficult with sci.space
simply because space is a more emotional issue for most;  Still, it
should not be impossible.   If any split is made, perhaps simply a
sci.space.discuss (polite for sci.space.bicker) could be forked off.

--
| Todd L. Masco        | Quantum Mechanics: The dreams of which stuff is made.
| [e-mail]  |       ( ...!harvard!andrew.cmu.edu!tm2b )
| [e-mail] |   SPACE Digest: [e-mail]

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

Date: 1 Jun 90 01:59:15 GMT
From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!dartvax!eleazar.dartmouth.edu![e-mail]  (Dave Alexander)
Subject: Re: Mt. Graham Hearings (long)

In article <[e-mail]>
                     [e-mail] writes:

> Here are the principal players:

> The Honorable Gerry E. Stubbs, Chairman

Is this is the guy from Massachusetts, Cape Cod to be precise?

If so then he is The Honorable Gerry E. Studds, Chairman.

I'm sure that your letter, whether pro or contra, will impress
him more if you spell his name right.


                             -- Dave Alexander

--
"When I was a little boy in Baltimore in 1954, I wanted
 to be a juvenile delinquent when I grew up."
                                -- John Waters

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

Date: 31 May 90 20:45:42 GMT
From: microsoft![e-mail]  (Len POPP)
Subject: Re: shuttle progress

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James F. Small/;093090) writes:
>Did you know that the actual shuttle color is green?  The special alluminum
>used in the body is green.

Are you sure this is the aluminum?  Airplanes built by Boeing have a
protective green coating on the aluminum, which is eventually removed by
spraying the plane with some noxious solvent.

    Len Popp        ...microsoft!lenp

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

Date: 31 May 90 16:10:07 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Bill Newman)
Subject: Re: space news from April 2 AW&ST

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David V. Phillips) writes:
    (things that seem about right except)
>Humans need a minimum partial pressure of about 0.2 atm
>of O2 in order to live.

At sea level, you get very nearly .2 atm of O2.  People without special
training can hike over passes which are nearly 20,000 feet (uh, 6000
meters :-) though some of them will get altitude sickness trying.  My current
issue of Hang Gliding magazine says you shouldn't go up that high without
breathing apparatus, 'cause you won't be as competent as you think when you
land.  But if you get acclimated to it gradually, and aren't
particularly susceptible to altitude sickness
the minimum just to live is probably closer to .1 atm than .2.

  Bill Newman
  [e-mail]

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

Date: 31 May 90 18:45:47 GMT
From: thorin!homer![e-mail]  (Jonathan Leech)
Subject: Re: Jupiter and Sodium Cloud......

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("CURATOR, B.U. DEPARTMENT OF ASTRONOMY") writes:
>Last November, a team of astronomers from Boston University went to McDonald
>Observatory in Texas to image this cloud in "sodium light", which is easier
>to image than sulfur or some of the other elements Io spews out.

    Does this lie in one of the frequencies spewed out by the sodium
lighting astronomers are opposed to?
--
    Jon Leech ([e-mail])    __@/
    ``After all, the best part of a holiday is perhaps not so much to be
      resting yourself as to see all the other fellows busy working.''
    - Kenneth Grahame, _The Wind in the Willows_

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

Date: 31 May 90 16:53:44 GMT
From: clyde.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Radiation

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Harold Peter White) writes:
>... Do space agencies have `hard' facts to say `Lets
>stay out of the radiation belts because ...' or have they stayed away
>mostly because they don't really need to go there since its probably going
>to be a trouble area? ...

The radiation belts have been studied at some length, both for practical
reasons and because Earth's magnetosphere is of great interest to some
space scientists.  And the deleterious effects of radiation on most
semiconductors are quite well understood.  It's routine to design satellites
that can stand repeated passes through the Van Allen belts -- some missions
need this -- and also routine to minimize exposure to them and build your
bird so that it can stand the exposure it's going to get.  There is no
mystery about them.

It *does* seem to be hard to find solid quantitative data on them:  it seems
to appear only in obscure technical reports.  I too would be interested in
any good references.

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

Date: 31 May 90 13:11:26 GMT
From: rti!mozart![e-mail]  (David V. Phillips)
Subject: Re: space news from April 2 AW&ST

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug Lhotka) writes:
>
>I seem to remember from somewhere (in First Aid Training I think) that
>breathing pure O2 is not only dangerous, but can be lethal.  When divers
>exceed the 'normal' dive limits they are breathing a mixture of helium and
>oxygen...is it possible the EVA guys do the same thing?  I realize that the
>pressure problem is reversed, but even still pure O2?  Anyone out there work
>with the systems involved who can definitively answer this question?
>
>Thanks,
>   Doug

There is no need to dilute the O2, given the pressures (about 4 psi?) inside
the suits.  This low pressure is used to allow the suits to be more
flexible (right?)

Long explanation follows  Hit 'n' now if you don't care

I apologize for the delay in responding...our access to news is two
weeks behind.   Maybe after we get our 9600 modem???

I can speak about O2 toxicity, and HeO2 breathing mixes, since I was a
Deep Sea (HeO2) Diving Officer while in the US Navy.

Nitrogen under pressure will cause nitrogen narcosis, or 'rapture of the
deep'.  The rule of thumb is 50 ft of water is equal to 1 drink.  You can
imagine how hard it is to get good work done at depths in excess of 150 ft!
I remember one training dive to 200 ft, breathing air, where I didn't want
to surface.  Fortunately it was in a wet recompression chamber, so I didn't
have much choice! :-)  Helium is used to replace the nitrogen to prevent
the narcosis.  Decompression times are longer with helium, however.

High partial pressures of O2 can cause problems, principally convulsions.
In general, a partial pressure of 2 atmospheres is the limit, above which
the problems occur.  This means that breathing pure O2 deeper that 66 feet
is rather dangerous, as is breathing regular air ( 79% N2, 21% O2) deeper
than 330 feet (10 atmospheres), as is breathing the most common HeO2 mix
(16% O2, 84% He2) below 410 feet, etc.  The divers who go deeper than this
start reducing the percentage of O2 in their breathing mix, to reduce the
partial pressure.  Humans need a minimum partial pressure of about 0.2 atm
of O2 in order to live.

Now to the EVA astronauts.  If the total pressure inside their suits is
4 psi, they have approx 1/3 of normal pressure around them.  Since that
atmosphere consists entirely of O2, they have a partial pressure of about
1/3 atmosphere of O2.  No problem with toxicity problems.  However, if
they were to just jump into their suits and start EVA, they would undoubtedly
get decompression sickness from the nitrogen coming out of solution in their
blood.  By breathing pure O2 before EVA, the nitrogen leaves their blood
where it is supposed to, in the lungs.

BTW, the treatment for decompression sickness is to take the diver down
to 60 ft. in a recompression chamber and have him breathe O2.  This
recompresses the bubbles in the blood, putting the nitrogen back into
solution, and allowing it to escape through the lungs.


--
David Phillips  [e-mail]   ...!mcnc!rti!sas!sasdvp

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

End of SPACE Digest V11 #474
*******************