Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V11_4/V11_489.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 17KB

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/8aOkiRS00VcJ8GV05S>;
          Mon,  4 Jun 1990 21:32:14 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon,  4 Jun 1990 21:31:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #489

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 11 : Issue 489

======================================================================
    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  [e-mail].  Other mail, esp. administrivia, should be
       sent to [e-mail], or, if urgent, to
             [e-mail]
======================================================================

Today's Topics:
     Re: Ulysses plutonium essay in *The Nation*, 14 May
      Re: mars vs. venus, which is easier to terraform?
    Re: Terraforming Venus (was: Manned mission to Venus)
             Re: Cosmology texts
       Re: Interview with Aerospace Engineer Requested
             Re: Current Ramjets?
               Re: HAWAII AND STAR WARS
   NASA briefing on solar system image and new findings (Forwarded)
    Re: Terraforming Venus (was: Manned mission to Venus)
             Re: Doing something
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 4 Jun 90 14:11:51 GMT
From: news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!watdragon!watyew![e-mail]  (Brian or James)
Subject: Re: Ulysses plutonium essay in *The Nation*, 14 May

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Stephen J. Friedl) writes:
>Kenneth Arromdee writes:
>>
>> Does anyone have any good references to exactly _how_ toxic plutonium is?
>> Hopefully when the next round starts on this newsgroup we'll be ready so there
>> won't be thousands of postings of the same factoid over and over again....
>
>Dr. Edward Teller has offered to *eat* a quantity of Pu if a journalist
>will at the same time eat a similar quantity of caffeine.  No takers...
>
>     Steve


    Did Teller specify Pu oxide, or is he willing to ingest metallic
Pu? Teller is fairly old, so perhaps the increased chance of cancer doesn't
bother him [It isn't a terminal disease if something else is likely to
kill you first :) ]. This offer from Teller does not, alas, shed any real
light on how toxic Pu is. All the descriptions I've read on the safe handling
of Pu emphasise how dangerous it can be, both chemically and radiologically.
This does not mean, of course, that we should not use Pu industrially, just
that it is unwise to eat the stuff. Aqua Regia is useful stuff, but it isn't
going to replace coffee in my diet any more than Pu is.
    Gee, now that Eastern Europe is becoming less oppressive, can we
send Teller back? His interpretation of experiments during the '80s has
not built in me a great faith in his ability to resist letting his
political goals affect his observations.
                            JDN

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 14:24:36 GMT
From: news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!watdragon!watyew![e-mail]  (Brian or James)
Subject: Re: mars vs. venus, which is easier to terraform?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (H Keith Henson) writes:
>Given nanotechnology terraforming either would be a trivial task (though
>it might take a while for venus to cool off.)  First thing to do with
>venus would be a sunshade, block *all* the solar input, and let it cool.
>The CO2 could all be liquified and stored in diamond cased cylindars
>underground; convert the sulfer to solid and store it the same way.
>But who wants to stay around this star anyway?  Keith Henson

    Could you send me your users manual on nanotechnology? All I've
got is a book of speculations by Drexler. Why is it so many discussions
of nt could easily replace the word 'nanotechnology' with 'direct
intervention of God' without signifiantly affecting their information content?
Why don't folks stick to sensible topics, like building Dyson spheres
or diverting incoming asteroids :) [Not that I won't speculate on nt
myself, but I remember all those predictions of 'meterless atomic
power' in the '40s and '50s.]
    I have to admit that I find the 'grey goo' problem rather
daunting. I'd hate to share an evironment with an organism that forgages
for resources *much* more efficiently than I do.
                            JDN

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 15:11:22 GMT
From: eplrx7![e-mail]  (Walt Leipold)
Subject: Re: Terraforming Venus (was: Manned mission to Venus)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John H) writes:
>So far no-one has mentioned the methods proposed in "The Space Merchants",
>Phol & Kornbluth, 195?.  They had big flutes generating enough energy from
>the wind to do anything you wanted.  Maybe it wouldn't have worked but it
>was a nice idea.

Those 'big flutes' were Hilsch vortex tubes.  They allow you to take a
stream of hot air and separate it into two streams, one of cold air
and one of even hotter air.  Their biggest advantage is that they have
no moving parts, which explains their use for cooling drinking water on
diesel locomotives today.

--
"As long as you've lit one candle,                         Walt Leipold
you're allowed to curse the darkness."       ([e-mail])
--
--
The UUCP Mailer

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 18:35:45 GMT
From: mcsun!ukc!icdoc!mvax.cc.ic.ac.uk!suna![e-mail]  (D.A.G. Gillies Supvsr Dr K.J. Bignell)
Subject: Re: Cosmology texts

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (PUT YOUR NAME HERE) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ray Rischpater) writes:
>>I was looking for some good introductory texts on cosmology I could consume
>>this summer.   I'm a chemistry major with a reasonable grasp on math and
>>introductory physics.
>>
>>I'd be obliged if those of you with a favorite textbook which is a little
>>more detailed than the Cosmos-style pop science writing would mail me your
>>favorites.  If there's interest, I'll compile the results and post a follow-up.
>>
>>Thank you for your time.
>>
>>
>>--     [e-mail]            Ray Rischpater
>>--     [e-mail]          [phone]
>>--
>>--     [e-mail]            Ray Rischpater
>>--     [e-mail]          [phone]
>>--As usual, all of the opinions contained herein are my own...
>
>From mvax.cc.ic.ac.uk!icdoc!ukc!mcsun!sunic!uupsi!rice!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!agate!darkstar!ucscb.UCSC.EDU!dove Mon Jun  4 18:38:27 BST 1990
>
>I was looking for some good introductory texts on cosmology I could consume
>this summer.   I'm a chemistry major with a reasonable grasp on math and
>introductory physics.
>
>I'd be obliged if those of you with a favorite textbook which is a little
>more detailed than the Cosmos-style pop science writing would mail me your
>favorites.  If there's interest, I'll compile the results and post a follow-up.
>
>Thank you for your time.
>
>
>--     [e-mail]            Ray Rischpater
>--     [e-mail]          [phone]
>--
>--     [e-mail]            Ray Rischpater
>--     [e-mail]          [phone]
>--As usual, all of the opinions contained herein are my own...
>
>

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 14:52:49 GMT
From: clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!quiche!calvin![e-mail]  (Mark SOKOLOWSKI)
Subject: Re: Interview with Aerospace Engineer Requested

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: mars vs. venus, which is easier to terraform?
Summary:
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender:
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark SOKOLOWSKI)
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Keywords: venusian blinds...

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael Kinsella) writes:
>Which do you expect to be easier to terraform, mars or venus?
>
>why?
>
>how long do you think it would take if the level of government interest
>was equal to government interest in 'atomics' during the cold war?
>
>how would you proceed?
>
>Judging from the discussion onterraforming venus, we (that is, the
>3 member committee behind the typist) think mars would be easier.

Of course! Mars is far easier to terraform because some lichens can
live under simulated martian conditions here on Earth, which means we
can send this stuff over there and watch the show. And this is a relief
for me since I don't want Venus to be terraformed. By the way, aren't
we venusforming the Earth?????

Mark S.
-------

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 16:00:34 GMT
From: shlump.nac.dec.com![e-mail]  (Gary Hughes - VMS Development)
Subject: Re: Current Ramjets?

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes...
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Vincent Cate) writes:
>> I have found a few examples of ramjets that were really built and flown:
>>
[a list of missiles and other comments deleted]
>>
>>     -- Vince
>
>One of the current-model Soviet SAMs (SAM-10 or SAM-11, I can't remember)
>is supposed to be a ramjet...
>

I don't know about an SA-10 or SA-11, but the Soviets have some older ramjet
powered missiles. The Soviet SA-4 'Ganef' is ramjet powered, with four strapon
boosters to get it to operating speed. The SA-6 'Gainful' uses an integral
rocket/ramjet. When the booster propellant is exhausted the rocket engine
casing becomes the combustion chamber for the ramjet. The nozzle (or part
thereof) is jettisonned and the ramair intakes are opened. The fuel for the
ramjet is solid. The USAF did have a project to investigate this type of system
for long range AAM use. I don't know what happened to it.

The X-7 flew with various ramjets... part of it's reason for existance was to
test ramjets (if you get The Discovery Channel, one of the current episodes of
'Wings' has a long segment on the X-7).

gary
hughes @star.dec.com

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 15:31:24 GMT
From: eplrx7![e-mail]  (Walt Leipold)
Subject: Re: HAWAII AND STAR WARS

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Daniel McGurl) writes:
>In article <1050400017@cdp> [e-mail] writes:
>>HAWAII TO BE SACRIFICED TO STAR WARS!
>(is this message a joke?  If so, I missed the smiley here)
>>
>>BERYLLIUM-POWERED STAR WARS ROCKETS
>>Star Wars payloads will include a new weapons system called Space
>>Based Interceptors (SBI).  Morton Thiokol is building a solid-fueled
>>first stage, which uses beryllium hydride fuel, to be used for SBIs.
>>Beryllium replaces the aluminum in the fuel, reducing fuel weight by
>>about 45%.
>
>Fascinating!  Henry, why haven't you  mentioned this in your postings?
>Such a wonderful increase in booster effeciency.  I'm just impressed that
>Thiokol has already been awarded a contract to build rockets that would
>go against the ABM treaty... Hrmmm. Must have missed the news where we
>decided to ignore the treaty...

Actually, beryllium hydride makes a dandy Isp enhancer for solid
propellants.  The original development of beryllium-based fuels was done
in the 60's, but the toxicity of Be vapor (berylliosis, you know) caused
it to be abandoned.  The resurgence of interest in beryllium propellants
for SDI is because some SDI missions are strictly orbit-to-orbit, e.g.,
interceptors launched from space garages, and thence pose no danger to
the environment.

The Thiokol effort has been veeeery slow, because (a) beryllium hydride is
no longer produced, so they're working from the Air Force's 25-year-old
stockpile of the stuff, and (b) all test firings are conducted in a large
vacuum tank (since it's vacuum performance they're interested in), with
complex scrubbers to clean all beryllium vapor out of the gasses exhausted
in each test.

>Daniel Sean McGurl            "He is always deceiving you into believing
>Office of Computing Services and     that he's only hunting for mice."
>Information and Computer Science Major at:
>Georgia Institute of Technology               ARPA: [e-mail]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For he's a fiend in feline shape,                            Walt Leipold
a monster of depravity."                        ([e-mail])
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
The UUCP Mailer

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 18:26:14 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA briefing on solar system image and new findings (Forwarded)

Paula Cleggett-Haleim
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                      June 4, 1990
(Phone:  [phone])


EDITORS NOTE:  N90-40

NASA BRIEFING ON SOLAR SYSTEM IMAGE AND NEW FINDINGS


     NASA will present new information from the Voyager missions
to the outer planets and a portrait of the solar system at a
press conference on June 6, 1990, at 2 p.m. EDT, NASA
Headquarters auditorium, 400 Md. Ave., S.W., Washington, D.C.

     Voyager Project Scientist Dr. Edward C. Stone of California
Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif., will discuss the
findings of Voyagers 1 and 2 obtained by the two spacecraft at
Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune between 1979 and 1989.

     Dr. Stone also will reveal a portrait of the solar system
(Sun, Venus, Earth, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune) taken by
Voyager 1 last Feb. 14, when the spacecraft was 3.7 billion miles
from Earth.  Dr. Carl Sagan, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y., will
remark on the image as well.  In addition, a new, 5-minute video
will be shown, recapping the voyage to the outer planets and
demonstrating how the image of the solar system was taken.

     The conference will be carried live on NASA Select
television, Satcom F-2R, transponder 13, 72 degrees W. longitude,
with 2-way question and answer capability.

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 23:33:54 GMT
From: concertina![e-mail]  (Steve Hix)
Subject: Re: Terraforming Venus (was: Manned mission to Venus)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dan Tilque) writes:
> [e-mail] (Walt Leipold) writes:
> >
> >Those 'big flutes' were Hilsch vortex tubes.  They allow you to take a
> >stream of hot air and separate it into two streams, one of cold air
> >and one of even hotter air.  Their biggest advantage is that they have
> >no moving parts, which explains their use for cooling drinking water on
> >diesel locomotives today.
>
> I'm probably missing some key piece of data, but this discription of
> Hilsch vortex tubes gives me the impression that they violate one or
> more of those laws of thermodynamics that physicists are so fond of.

No violations.  The temperature of a fluid is a function of the average
thermal energy of its molecules.

The Hilsch tube acts like a molecular centrifuge, separating the (slightly
lighter) warmer population from the (slightly heavier) cooler population.
(OK...it acts on a larger scale than individual molecules.)

Send a stream of pressurized air down toward spiral-shaped chamber, with
the air entering roughly tangentially to the curving wall of the
chamber.

Flat sides of the chamber perpendicular to the curving wall each have a
hole, one smaller than the other.  As the air spins in the chamber, the
cooler portion tends to fall toward the outside wall, while the warmer
part tends to fall toward the center of the spinning air mass.

The air flowing out of the smaller hole will be warmer than the air
leaving the other hole.

You can adjust the ratio in exit hole sizes, and pick your exit of choice,
to get either cold or hot air.  Properly adjusted, you can get up to
40C temperature difference between the two exit streams.

Sort of a mechanical Maxwell's Demon.

------------
  The only drawback with morning is that it comes
    at such an inconvenient time of day.
------------

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

Date: 4 Jun 90 14:10:32 GMT
From: clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!quiche!calvin![e-mail]  (Mark SOKOLOWSKI)
Subject: Re: Doing something

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Manned Mission To Venus
Summary:
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender:
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark SOKOLOWSKI)
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Keywords:

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>> [e-mail]" "Edward Joseph Bennett"
>
>
>No, that is where you miss the point.  I was specifically referring
>to one 20-year-old individual's "I wanna go to Venus and I wanna go
>NOW" postings, not to the obviously speculative postings about
>terraforming which arose from it.
>
I want to go to Venus NOW(!!!!) because we can do it right now with
our current technology. And the fact that I'm 20 doesn't mean I
have realism than you guys!!!!!!!!!!

Mark S.
-------

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

End of SPACE Digest V11 #489
*******************