Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V12_5/V12_578.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-06-28 | 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/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/YbGBGU600VcJ8FwU5E>;
          Tue, 20 Nov 1990 02:00:49 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 1990 02:00:14 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #578

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 12 : Issue 578

Today's Topics:
         Big bang discovered 1400 years ago ?
           Hubble Space Telescope Update - 11/11/90
            3-D MAGELLAN PICTURES
             The Gang Bang Theory
              STS 38 Observation Reports
          Re: Another philosophical question
           Re: Pity The Much Abused Shuttle

Administrivia:

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

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

Date: 16 Nov 90 20:28:18 GMT
From: eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!mucs!liv-cs!liv![e-mail]
Subject: Big bang discovered 1400 years ago ?


                    " VERILY WE ARE EXPANDING IT !"
    (The Qur'an on Cosmological Expansion, Big Bang and Space Travel)
                                  By
                              F.R.Ellahi.

  The expansion of the Universe must be one of the most striking
  discoveries of modern science.  It is now firmly established, not a
  theory but as a 'fact' of life, which later improvements in understanding
  are not likely to refute (a bit like there is not much chance of any
  later theory disputing the 'fact' that things fall when you drop them, on
  Earth.)

  There is an ironical twist to the story of the discovery of the
  cosmological expansion. Einstein's equations of General Relativity
  actually predicted that the universe was either expanding or
  contracting, but apparently the famous scientist could not accept this
  fact.. well, put yourselves in his shoes, and look up at the sky on any
  clear night : can you see any stars moving away from each other ?
  Presumably he had done the very same thing many a time, and this may be
  why Einstein apparently fiddled his equations by introducing his
  Cosmological Constant, which allowed the equations to predict a
  static Universe.

  Of course he probably wanted to kick himself later when Edwin Hubble
  (the boxer cum astronomer) discovered from red-shift
  measurements that all the galaxies are flying apart from each
  other at frightful speeds! (This doesn't show up on a cursory
  inspection of the night sky simply because they are so stupendously far
  away from each other already).

  Dr Maurice Bucaille, in his book 'The Bible, the Qur'an and Science'
  talks about these things in his chapter on Astronomy in the Qur'an. (Dr
  Bucaille is an accepted expert on the relation between Scripture and
  Science, and his books are well worth reading if you're looking for hard
  facts backed up with in-depth analysis of scriptural references.)

  On page 173, he explains how fourteen centuries ago this
  expansion of the Cosmos was made clear to all humanity for all time to
  come. He quotes the verse :

  'The heaven, We have built it with power, Verily We are expanding it.'
  (Verse 47 of Surah 51).

  (Well if that doesn't knock you for six you probably aren't a
  physicist!) This is a prime example of the way the Qur'an doesn't go only
  for the heart and soul, but it also reaches the MIND, and declares a
  challenge (like Bucaille says) to human explanation! But before you all
  reach  for your Yusuf 'Ali and other common English translations of
  the Holy Book: don't bother. For some reason, most common English
  translations have mistranslated this profoundly important verse.

  Bucaille says on page 174 :

  " 'We are expanding it' is the translation of the plural present
  participle musi'una of the verb ausa'a meaning 'to make wider, more
  spacious, to extend, to expand'.
                          ^^^^^^
  Some translators who were unable to grasp the meaning of the
  latter provide translations that appear to me to be mistaken, e.g. 'We
  give generously' (R. Blachere). Others sense the meaning, but are afraid
  to commit themselves: Hamidullah in his translation of the Qur'an talks
  of the widening of the heavens and space, but he includes a question
  mark. Finally, there are others who arm themselves with an authorised
  scientific opinion in their commentaries and give the meaning stated
  here. This is true in the case of the Muntakab, a book of commentaries
  edited by the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, Cairo. It refers to
  the expansion of the universe in totally unambiguous terms. "

  I suppose if Einstein felt pressured enough to modify his
  equations of General Relativity and make them fit with how he saw the
  Universe, then Yusuf 'Ali and others can't be blamed too much for using
  the secondary meanings of the verb, instead of the face meaning of 'to
  expand'. Their translations were made long before Edwin Hubble even
  came onto the scene. (But it would have been helpful if this was made
  clear in the footnotes!)

  Incidentally, the conclusion that the Universe came out of a Big
  Bang comes from discoveries like the Cosmological Expansion and
  others..all made principally by citizens of the modern western Kafir
  states. This is intriguing, for the Qur'an specifically singles out the
  Unbelievers in its mention of the Big Bang :

  "Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were
  joined together, then We clove them asunder and We got every living
  thing out of the water. Will they not then believe ?" (Surah 21, verse
  30 Quoted from page 145 of Bucaille.)

  It seems that Allah is specifically targeting the Unbelievers,
  and ticking them off, for despite having been given the great favour of
  seeing some of the greatest of His Signs, they still reject Him.

  After mentioning the expansion of the Universe, Bucaille goes on
  to talk about what he considers is an UNAMBIGUOUS prediction of Man's
  capability and ultimate achievement of space travel. I found his reasons
  very enlightening.
  The main verse in question is :

  "O assembly of Jinns and Men, if you can penetrate regions of the
  heavens and the earth, then penetrate them! You shall not penetrate
  them, except with a Power." (Surah 55, The Beneficent, verse 33.)

  Bucaille goes on to give an interesting explanation of some
  Arabic terms. To cut a long story short, he says that there are three
  words used in Arabic for various explicit meanings of our English 'if'.

  There is an 'if' to express a possibility in general : 'ida'. There is
  another to refer to an achievable condition : 'in' (e.g. 'if it rains
  tomorrow..'). And there is an 'if' for the impossible hypothesis : 'lau'
  (as in 'if life was a bed of roses..'!). The verse quoted above uses
  the Arabic word 'in' for our English 'if'..specifying the possibility of
  a concrete realisation of this event, the penetration of the heavens and
  the earth. He further says :

  " 'To penetrate' is the translation of the verb 'nafada' followed
  by the preposition 'min'. According to Kazimirski's dictionary, the
  phrase means 'to pass right through and come out on the other side of a
  body'..It therefore suggests a deep penetration and emergence at the
  other end into the regions in question. " (P.175)

  Indubitably this indicates that Man will one day be able to do
  what we in our time have managed to see : penetration into outer space.
  Technology seems ripe for exploration of deep space in our lifetimes.
  Bucaille notes that the verse implies not only penetration of outer
  space but also of the depths of the Earth.
                -------------------------------------

  Disclaimer : Any good to be found in this is from Allah, Glorified and
  High. Any mistakes are from me.

  References :
  ----------
     The Bible, the Qur'an and Science.
     (The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge).
     By Dr Maurice Bucaille.
     Translated from the French by :
     Alaistair D. Pannell and The Author.
     Fifth Edition, revised and expanded (1987).
     Published by :
     Seghers,
     6 Place Saint-Sulpice,
     75006 PARIS,
     France.
     By the same author :
     'What is the Origin of Man?'

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

Date: 19 Nov 90 02:46:45 GMT
From: swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Hubble Space Telescope Update - 11/11/90


                            HST STATUS REPORT
                            November 11, 1990

     WIDE FIELD/PLANETARY CAMERA (WF/PC): Observed the Saturn white spot on
coarse track on Friday, November 9, and Sunday, November 11. On Friday, 16
exposures were taken, and all data looked good in near real time.  On Sunday,
the first set of eight exposures showed the Saturn white spot quite distinctly
and, when compared with previous exposures, the dynamics of the disturbance
were evident.

     HIGH SPEED PHOTOMETER (HSP): Two focus and aperture map observations were
completed.  These observations accurately determine the locations of all
science and acquisition apertures on each Image Dissector (IDT), as well as the
proper focus for each IDT beam. Also completed a Bright Earth Avoidance Test.
The test is designed to exercise a new operating method to avoid Bright Earth
occultations while the detectors are in the "operate" mode.

     FAINT OBJECT SPECTROGRAPH (FOS): Successfully completed internal
instrument test of the Blue Side Filter and Grating Wheel.

     GODDARD HIGH RESOLUTION SPECTROGRAPH (GHRS): An internal calibration test
was conducted successfully and recorded on the onboard tape recorder.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

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

Date: 18 Nov 90 01:23:32 GMT
From: csus.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!lehigh.bitnet![e-mail]
Subject: 3-D MAGELLAN PICTURES

Did anyone see the 3-D Magellan pictures they had on (I believe) CBS
News?  I was wondering why the entire picture was in orange (or some
color like that) and there were bands of gray every so offen.

Chip Kerchner, [e-mail]

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

Date: 18 Nov 90 15:08:27 GMT
From: unmvax!uokmax!munnari.oz.au!metro!cluster![e-mail]  (Raymond Lister)
Subject: The Gang Bang Theory


The following few words couldn't have been more poorly timed ...

  >  Article xxx of sci.space:
  >  From: [e-mail]
  >  Subject: Big bang discovered 1400 years ago ?
  >  Date: 16 Nov 90 20:28:18 GMT
  >  Organization: University of Liverpool
  >
  >
  >                      " VERILY WE ARE EXPANDING IT !"
  >      (The Qur'an on Cosmological Expansion, Big Bang and Space Travel)
  >                                    By
  >                                F.R.Ellahi.
  >
  >  The expansion of the Universe must be one of the most striking
  >  discoveries of modern science.  It is now firmly established, not a
  >  theory but as a 'fact' of life, which later improvements in understanding
  >  are not likely to refute (a bit like there is not much chance of any
  >  later theory disputing the 'fact' that things fall when you drop them, on
  >  Earth.)

   ... because ye olde Big Bang Theory is taking a bit of a beating at the
moment.  For a discussion of the recent experimental data that (the authors
claim) doesn't fit the Big Bang Theory, and an attempt at a new theory (that a
colleague of mine dubbed "The Gang Bang Theory"),  I refer you to:

Arp, Burbidge, Hoyle, Narlikar, Wickramasinghe "The extragalactic Universe: an
alternative view", Nature Vol. 346 (30 Aug 1990) pp 807-812.


 _--_|\  Raymond Lister                   Internet: [e-mail]
/      \ Department of Computer Science   ACSnet:   [e-mail]
\_.--._/ University of Sydney             JANET:    munnari!cs.su.oz.AU!ray@ukc
      v  NSW  2006
         AUSTRALIA

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

Date: 18 Nov 90 13:40:20 GMT
From: csus.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu![e-mail]  (Ted Molczan)
Subject: STS 38 Observation Reports

I have received observation reports from Bill Bard, Jim Banke and
Sean Sullivan, who observe from different locations in central Florida.

The shuttle and its payload, first seen last night, were expected over
Florida at about 18:42 EDT (17 Nov 23:42 UTC).  Only one object was
seen.  Its brightness was consistent with that of the shuttle, however
it exhibited very unusual colouring.

Sean noted that as the object approached, it was the usual pure white
of the shuttle, then at 50 deg elevation (approaching), it became
salmon red, then golden.  At the zenith it became deep ruby red.
Sean oserved with binoculars from about 40 deg elevation (approaching).

Bill noted that as the object neared the shadow it became red, and
made a bright orange flash.  Bill began observing about 20 min before
the pass, and continued observing for one hour after.

Jim confirmed the unusual colours reported by Sean and Bill.

The fact that only one object was seen, would normally best be
explained by the payload having manoeuvred to its planned operational
orbit, leaving only the shuttle in the low orbit.  If the object seen
tonight was the shuttle, then its unusual colour requires explanation.
The shuttle is predominantly white and black, except for the silver
thermal radiators on the inside of the payload bay doors.

One possible explanation for the reddish colour is that the shuttle may
have rendezvoused with the payload, which was observed to be reddish when
it was seen on the previous night, about 120 miles ahead of the shuttle.
I recall that on the revolution just prior to the deployment of Lacrosse
(a very red satellite) on STS 27, an observer noted that the shuttle had
a "reddish cast".

Clearly, we need more observations before we can make sense of what
has been seen on the past two nights.

--
Ted [e-mail]

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

Date: 15 Nov 90 22:25:00 GMT
From: uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!buhub![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Another philosophical question


Rusty Wiginton ([e-mail]) posts:

>     I've been thinking lately about the public's perception of
>     space exploration and, more specifically, NASA.  I read a
>     quote from J.R. Thompson that said something like "People
>     expect a voodoo space program -- you know 'Beam me up,
>     Scotty.'"  Do you think that's true?  Is the average guy's
>     opinion on the space program distorted by fantasy?  If the
>     public understood what was really involved in a Shuttle
>     mission or in buildling a space station, would they be
>     less critical, more supportive?

    That's a pretty good question. Most "mundanes" (read: non-sf
    fans/technically oriented types) usually don't know or care
    much about space until it becomes something that affects them
    directly; my parents (yah, I'm a college student) couldn't
    remember what they did on the date of the landing of Apollo
    11, but I can remember pretty accurately what I was doing &
    even what I was wearing on the date that Challenger went boom.

    Most mundanes probably have a real distorted idea of what goes
    on up there. If the US had a REAL science education system set
    up, it's my bet that support for NASA & scientific enterprise
    in general would skyrocket; people are naturally attracted to
    the big projects-as Burnham said, "Make no small plans-they
    only attract those without vision for the better..."


Craig\The Moonman\Levin      ===()===   //////
[e-mail]       ``-----//
      You are Here               ```````
           |
\~         V
 |~  .  o  o  .    :;:    ()    -O-    0     . O
 |~
/~
Wouldn't you rather be out there -->

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

Date: 18 Nov 90 18:16:06 GMT
From: news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!watdragon!watyew![e-mail]  (Brian or James)
Subject: Re: Pity The Much Abused Shuttle


    The STS as a jeep? Jeeps are cheap and flexible, not mention
mechanically reliable. The automotive industry was a lot more mature
when the jeep was designed than the space transportation industry is now
(in terms of number of vehicles built and number of designs tried).
The STS may be like the weird motorcycle designs people tried out way back
when (My favourite being the cycle that hinged in the middle, under the rider).

    I suspect that if the USSr and USA had an orbital war of attrition,
the Soviets system would have a higher number of functioning satellites
in orbit at any given time, since their current system is already set
up to launch more satellites per unit time than the USA's is. No idea
what the equilibrium number in orbit would be, since I'm unsure of several
important factors, like how fast both sides can build launch vehicles,
how fast they can build ASAT weapons and how quickly the ASAT weapons
can kill satellites (I have faint memories that the Soviet ASAT device they
tested in the late 60s took 100 hrs or so to match orbits and toast the
targets). For that matter, the US ASAT weapon might not be reliable,
since new weapons tend to work far better in testing than in the field.
If there were such a war of attrition, I expect the US workhorse would
be something like a Delta, since the entire shuttle fleet requires four
successful attacks to be eliminated (less if there are vital systems
that aren't available to be installed in all four shuttles at once that
would be destroyed along with the shuttle carrying it). Historically,
large numbers of fairly reliable, and cheap systems will defeat small
numbers of somewhat more reliable, but expensive systems (Check out
Kursk sometime).

                            James Nicoll

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

End of SPACE Digest V12 #578
*******************