Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_0/V15NO048.TXT

Text File | 1993-07-13 | 23KB | 535 lines

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 05:03:03
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #048
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Wed, 29 Jul 92       Volume 15 : Issue 048

Today's Topics:
        Astronomy Lab for MS Windows 3.X - BETA TESTERS NEEDE
                     Calendar and Zodiac (2 msgs)
                   Clinton Space Position (2 msgs)
                            Delta (2 msgs)
                         Does anyone know ..
      Inverse Ephemeris (time as a function of position) Wanted
                        Solar Power Satellites
                          Space position(s)
                      Star Trek Realism (3 msgs)

    Welcome to the Space Digest!!  Please send your messages to
    "[e-mail]", and (un)subscription requests of the form
    "Subscribe Space <your name>" to one of these addresses: listserv@uga
    (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle
    (THENET), or [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 07:00:09 +0000
From: "Paul J. Gravestock" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Astronomy Lab for MS Windows 3.X - BETA TESTERS NEEDE
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> @wybbs.mi.org writes:

>
>
>I also tried to write to become a beta tester,
>and had mail bounce...
>
This seems to be happening consistantly, I had a similar problem, it looks
like there is a broken mailer somewhere as the author seems to think he
exists !

B-)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul J. Gravestock                  | email: [e-mail]
Hertfordshire                       |        [e-mail]
England                             |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 23:28:11 GMT
From: "Adam R. Brody " <[e-mail]>
Subject: Calendar and Zodiac
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (George F. McQuary) writes:

>The main question is will the seasons occur in other months of the year than
>currently. The answer is no. The Gregorian year is defined as starting
>exactly ten days after the winter solstice. The current system of leap days is
>a forecast of how to maintain the constant of Dec 21, but would change if
>necessary. (If a large enough metor hit the earth to change the current
>forecasts, however, there would probably be larger problems to deal with than
>resetting the calendar...) As long as the calendar is kept in sync with the
>sun, the rhythm of the seasons will continue to occur at the same time in the
>calendar.

>George F. McQuary
>"He is mad, bad and dangerous to know." -Lady Caroline Lamb

The point is that while the period of revolution around the sun (year) is
roughly constant, the seasons shift backwards roughly one month every
2000 years due to precession.  You can think of it as the Earth's axis
getting tangent to its orbit (equinox) before a complete revolution (year).
Over 2000 years, the equinox will be at Feb 21 rather than March 21.
Accepting the fact that Pope Gregory corrected for the past 2000 years,
how are we currently accounting for precession in the calendar?

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

Date: 29 Jul 92 05:49:46 GMT
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Calendar and Zodiac
Newsgroups: sci.space

-From: [e-mail] (Dave Jones)
-Subject: Re: Calendar and Zodiak
-Date: 28 Jul 92 19:47:36 GMT

-[Dennis]
->Today in the Northern Hemisphere's summer, the earth is at the apogee of its
->orbit around the sun.  As the precession continues on its merry way this will
->be the main parameter that will change. In 12,900 years the northern hemisphere
->will be in its summer when the Earth is at perigee. (I know these are the wrong
->terms, I just don't remember the right ones for sun centered orbits).
->
-Aphelion and Perihelion.  We're going to need generic terms for nearest
-& farthest points from the primary.  Perigee, periselenion, perihelion,
-perijove, periarion (?)........betcha everyone just says apogee and
-perigee in the end.

It's apoapsis and periapsis, with the plurals (gag) apoapsides and
(choke) periapsides. I would strongly support the use of apogee/apogees
and perigee/perigees as the generic terms. (After all, "geology" is tending
to become an acceptable term for the study of rock formations on other
worlds.) Note that apogee and perigee have been part of the English language
so long that English-style plurals have become acceptable.

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: 29 Jul 92 01:06:50 GMT
From: "Richard A. Schumacher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton Space Position
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug Davey) writes:
>However, I would respectfully ask that those who neither pay the taxes
>nor vote in the elections kindly refrain from posting politcal analyses
>of political statements from the USAian election campaign.  If you have a
>technical reason why something a candidate proposes is a good or bad idea,
>fine.  However, a cross border political analysis is rude at best.  Thanks.

Typical of a United Statesian: ask the most intelligent participant in
an enterprise to leave, merely because he's a foreigner.

I respectfully request that we hear more from all persons of intelligence
and less from all jingoes and dolts. Thanks.

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:48:00 GMT
From: University Space Society <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton Space Position
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John F. Woods) writes...
>[e-mail] (Doug Davey) writes:
>>Henry, your technical postings are probably the best things in sci.space.*.
>> However, a cross border political analysis is rude at best.
>
>Especially when he has the gall to be dead on the mark.
>
>>Stop Canadian Imperialism!
>
>Keep that up and they'll take back the Canadarm.

Go for it Henry. It is nice to see an outside opinion sometimes. The BBC
world report had a wonderful report on how the democratic party manipulates
the U.S. news media by having congressional staffers "interview" their bosses
as if they were reporters asking real questions. Lots of other chicanery
was reported on that will never be shown here.

Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revive the Saturn V!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:44:00 GMT
From: University Space Society <[e-mail]>
Subject: Delta
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary Hughes - VMS Development) writes...
>
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes...
>>You know what's funny here is that this idea was tried successfully about
>>thirty years ago. The boosters that were paralled together were Redstones, and
>>the vehicle produced was the Saturn I and IB. Very successful rockets, 28
>>launches and *NO* failures.
>>
>
>Uh, not really. The S-I stage was built out of Redstone and Jupiter structural
>parts (i.e. tanks), but propulsion, guidance and components to tie all this
>together were all new.
>
>The HL Delta idea was to cluster complete Delta 1st stage cores, functioning
>independantly, i.e. if one engine shutdown early there would be no way to
>transfer the propellants from that core and run the other engines longer to
>compensate. Avoiding complexities like this would have kept the development
>time/cost down.
>
>gary

Gary where did you get this info? I went over to the Alabama Space and
Rocket Center and looked at the Saturn IB there and looked at some of the
drawings that I happen to have inherited from some of my German friends and
they engines and tanks sure look independant to me. There are 8 tanks,
eight engines, eight sets of propulsion plumbing. The beauty of the
design is that if one engine goes south then you do not lose the mission due
to some screw up in the fuel system.  The rocket team was working on an
extremely tight budget on the Saturn I stage. It was completed and tested for
the first time BEFORE the Army Ballistic Missile Command was transferred to
the Jurisdiction of NASA. (ground and not flight test) The first flight
of the Saturn I was before the Gemini launches on the Titan II. I think it
was in 63.  A good book on the early days of the Von Braun team at Redstone
Arsenal and a good prophetic insight on the burgeoning NASA space program
is to be had in "Count Down To Decision" By General Bruce Medaris, Who was Von
Brauns boss at the ABMA. It also tells how the Saturn I was funded as well
as the Redstone.  One funny story in the book describes the idiotic
budgetary constraints that would not let Von Braun order a typwriter for
his secretary, so they ordered a "rotary data recording device". That
got through the purchasing department like a breeze.  You are right that the
avionics were new, so will the Delta's in a clustered set up.

Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:09:49 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Delta
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (University Space Society) writes:
>....engines and tanks sure look independant to me. There are 8 tanks,
>eight engines, eight sets of propulsion plumbing...

Sorry, Dennis, there were *nine* tanks:  a Jupiter-diameter tank in the
middle and eight Redstone-diameter tanks around it.  All were lengthened
from the originals.  None had horizontal partitions -- the central tank
and four of the outside ones carried LOX, the remaining four outside
tanks kerosene.  The two sets of four outside tanks were slightly
different, because the LOX tanks carried all the structural loads
while the fuel tanks had slip joints at their upper ends to accommodate
the thermal contraction of the LOX tanks.  Each fuel tank nominally
fed two engines, and the central LOX tank fed the outboard LOX tanks,
which in turn each fed two engines... but there *was* an interconnection
network to maintain vehicle balance in case one set of engines was a
bit thirstier than another.  The eight engines were not precisely
identical either, because only the outer four were gimballed, and
details like disposal of turbopump gases differed.

Ref:  Stages to Saturn, NASA SP-4206.
--
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 22:11:00 +0000
From: P & S Ltd - Accounts Dept <[e-mail]>
Subject: Does anyone know ..
Newsgroups: sci.space

I've got a question for the collected experts out there ..

I've been reading the current issue of Space News (July 27 - August 9),
and the article on secrecy of military launches (page 12) mentioned a
book by Jeff Richelson called "America's Secret Eyes in Space" published
in 1990.  I'd like to get a copy,  does anyone know the ISBN and publisher
please?

Thanks,

Paul

--------------------------< Who 'zat >-----------------------------------
    Paul Wilson,  P-and-S Ltd, P O Box 54, Macclesfield, SK10 5EH, UK
                     [e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 29 Jul 92 07:16:18 GMT
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Inverse Ephemeris (time as a function of position) Wanted
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary Murphy) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike Melnyk) writes:
>>
>>    I am in need of an inverse ephemeris for the sun. That is, I am
>>    looking for function that returns the time of year, given the position
>>    of the sun in geocentric ecliptic coordinates and a year of interest
>>    (e.g., 1994).
>
> Does this imply JPL is investigating Nostradamus? :-)

No, Gary, it means they're building a time machine with accuracy of
order a few months.  They want to make sun sightings to see which day
they've landed in.

Come to think about it, this doesn't rule out investigating
Nostradamus, does it?  It would be tremendously useful if they could
get him to predict the JPL budget for the next decade or two.
But I'm afraid the project is doomed to failure.  I've been reading
Randi's book, and it looks like Michel d'Notradame never gave a
straight answer to anybody...

"Do you know the asteroids, Mr.Kemp?...    Bill Higgins
Hundreds of thousands of them.  All
wandering around the Sun in strange        Fermilab
orbits.  Some never named, never
charted.  The orphans of the Solar         [e-mail]
System, Mr. Kemp."
                                           [e-mail]
"And you want to become a father."
  --*Moon Zero Two*                        SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS

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

Date: 24 Jul 92 17:13:14 GMT
From: Ralph Buttigieg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Solar Power Satellites
Newsgroups: sci.space

Original to: [e-mail]
  [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering), wrote:

 p> That's what bothers me about all the people griping about light
pollution
 p> from the SPS's. They probably won't be much brighter than Jupiter, and
 p> in most major cities, the light pollution will be so bad you'll be lucky
 p> to see the powersats to
 begin with.

 Well, will they? I have never seen anyone give an actual magnitude
 estimate. Several popular books have them "brighter then any star or
 planet" but that all.

 Regarding current light pollution: I live  in suburban Sydney
 Australia. A reasonably large city with no real light pollution
 controls. Yet a 40 minute drive  will get me to my astronomy club's
 observatory with good dark skys. Another 2-3 hours drive will get me to
 my friends country farm with *excellent* viewing. My fear is that
 the
 sky around all the inhabitated regions will be washed out.
 ta
 Ralph

--- Maximus 2.01wb
 * Origin: Vulcan's World-Sydney Australia 02 635-1204 (3:713/635)

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

Date: 29 Jul 92 05:36:13 GMT
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space position(s)
Newsgroups: sci.space

-From: [e-mail] (Henry Spencer)
-Subject: Re: Clinton Space Position
-Date: 28 Jul 92 20:36:09 GMT
-Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

-Political analyses?  Heaven forbid.  I don't understand US politics well
-enough to analyze them. :-)  I was merely translating some of the Clinton
-position from campaignspeak (which is as international as graft, stupidity,
-shortsightedness, and voter ignorance and apathy) into the sci.space
-vernacular.  I wasn't making any attempt to read between the lines or infer
-an overall position -- just pointing out what the statement's own words
                                          ------------------------------
-clearly mean.  Do you really think any of my translations are wrong?
 ------------

Yes.

That is, if selecting some interpretations that are pessimistic beyond
reasonable justification counts as wrong, then yes.

Campaign platforms are usually somewhat ambiguous in their wording, partly
for political reasons, and partly for want of room to describe everything
in detail. Are you seriously suggesting that it's possible to produce a
single unambiguous "translation", using only the single text source as input?
If not, then it's not just translation - there's some personal interpretation
involved. If it's a matter of personal interpretation, then it shouldn't be
put forth as "translation", and other sources should be accepted as input.

For instance, consider the Clinton statements in
[e-mail]. If that is added to the context, then
it would appear that Clinton has made definite statements favoring manned
missions to the moon and Mars. Given the current political environment (SEI
pretty much out of favor), if he were not really interested in it, he could
be much less supportive of it (or even speak unfavorably of it) at little or
no political cost (or perhaps even a slight political gain). This is at least
some indication that there is genuine interest.

The current Administration also appears to be genuinely interested in SEI.
Whether promoting a highly ambitious program but being unable to find funding
is preferable to promoting a less ambitious program for which there might be
some realistic chance of funding or vice versa is a matter of opinion.
I'm inclined to suspect that the *net result* is similar in both cases,
provided the interest is genuine.

The present Administration's record appears to have been generally supportive
of space exploration. Clinton says that he's in favor of it, though of course
he hasn't been in office to prove he means what he says. Statements of
support from both candidates has to be considered at least somewhat
encouraging to space enthusiasts.

(By the way, whose idea was setting up a program and calling it "Space
Exploration Initiative"? If the idea was to develop a focus for ideas, then
it has been fairly successful. If the idea was to promote increased
funding, then it seems to have been less successful.)

-I would, in any case, defend my right to comment on issues that affect
-all mankind, such as the fate of what is now our species' leading space
-program.

Well sure, comment on whatever you want. (And so will we. :-)
Canada in particular has a strong interest in the well-being of the US space
program, which is why I have supported technical input from Canadians.

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: 29 Jul 92 00:55:39 GMT
From: Bill Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Star Trek Realism
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (tom) writes:
|> As long as we're on the Star-Trek vs. reality thread, here's a question
|> that used to come up before my housemate Doug said "Shut up and just watch
|> the show!":   When the ship is streaming through space, stars moving past
|> at several per second, how is it that the ship is steadily lit from one
|> side?  What is the source for this light?  It's pretty bad when you aren't
|> even into the actual show, and it's already violating known principles :-)

Much as I enjoy Star Trek, this has always bugged me.  Another thing
which bugs me is the way stars stream rapidly past the ship when they're
traveling within the same star system.  AND the "whoosh" noise you hear
when they're showing the Enterprise (from the outside) cruising through
interstellar space.  AND the way the shuttles bank and turn as if they're
airplanes.  AND the fact that the Enterprise can accelerate at accelerations
which *must* be many multiples of one gravity, with no perceived acceleration
inside the ship, but a phaser hit knocks the crew out of their chairs.
AND...

--
Bill Johnson                    9U-530                   [e-mail]
Silicon Graphics, Inc.                             Office:[phone]
Systems Software Technology Center                    Fax:[phone]

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

Date: 29 Jul 92 01:35:34 GMT
From: John Stevenson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Star Trek Realism
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill
Johnson) writes:
> (deletions for brevity)
> inside the ship, but a phaser hit knocks the crew out of their chairs.
> AND...
>
> --
> Bill Johnson                    9U-530                   [e-mail]
> Silicon Graphics, Inc.                             Office:[phone]
> Systems Software Technology Center                    Fax:[phone]

And No seat belts. How many crew members have been killed or seriously
injured because they didn't wear their seat belts :-o

John Stevenson
[e-mail]

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

Date: 28 Jul 92 20:39:28 GMT
From: "gary l. schroeder" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Star Trek Realism
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Roberts) writes:
>
>-From: [e-mail] (tom)
>-Subject: Star Trek Realism
>-Date: 27 Jul 92 16:47:03 GMT
>
>-As long as we're on the Star-Trek vs. reality thread, here's a question
>-that used to come up before my housemate Doug said "Shut up and just watch
>-the show!":   When the ship is streaming through space, stars moving past
>-at several per second, how is it that the ship is steadily lit from one
>-side?  What is the source for this light?  It's pretty bad when you aren't
>-even into the actual show, and it's already violating known principles :-)
>

As for the stars streaking by...I never really assumed that they were
stars.  Could they be some optical phenomena of FTL travel?  Remember
the same effect seen when the Millenium Falcon was in "hyperdrive"?
Were those things necessarily stars?

As for the point about where is the source of illumination come
from...yeah, I've thought about that one too.  That's about when I "shut
up and just watch the show!"


--
--------------
Gary Schroeder
[e-mail]
Brookhaven National Laboratory     "Home of the Big BNL Burger."

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

Date: 
P
From: 
P

Organisation: European Space Operation Centre (E.S.O.C)
Date: Tuesday, 28 Jul 1992 08:35:10 CET
From: [e-mail]
Mmdf-Warning:  Parse error in original version of preceding line at CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: ESA Future
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

Despite my address, this is a private comment to the query about ERS-1.
There was some sort of hitch during July, but the mission is up and
running again with no problems, I understand. (Not my area of work).
RaF

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 048
------------------------------