Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_2/V15NO202.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 30KB

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 05:02:37
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #202
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Tue, 15 Sep 92       Volume 15 : Issue 202

Today's Topics:
                Anyone know the address of John Hunter
                          Armstrong's boots
                    Clinton, Gore, Space (2 msgs)
                  Clinton and Space Funding (5 msgs)
                       Ethics of Terra-forming
                        Magellan Caption Files
                    Nasa's Apollo rerun vs. Zubrin
                  Nasa's Apollo rerun vs. Zubrin...
                   Pluto Direct Propulsion Options
              Pluto Fast Flyby mission goals... (2 msgs)
                            RL-10 (2 msgs)
             Space Platforms (political, not physical :-)
                            stuck antennae
                       Terra-forming, The E-car

    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: 14 Sep 92 19:04:46 GMT
From: Dale Deutscher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Anyone know the address of John Hunter
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hello,
   Does anyone have the address for John W. Hunter at Lawrence
Livermore National Labs? He is the principal scientist on the
SHARP project.

Thanks.

Dale Deutscher     (No sig yet)

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

Date: 14 Sep 92 17:57:11 GMT
From: Richard Schroeppel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Armstrong's boots
Newsgroups: sci.space

Glen K Moore <[e-mail]> writes ...

>   I was aked today a question by someone who hadn't even thought of all of
    the useful things I know about the moon. A typical non scientist! He asked
    me "What material was used to make Neil Armstron's boots?" He needed the
    answer for a lecture on ?? and was serious in his request.

    I don't know where on earth to look. Does anyone out there know the answer?

Osmium  :-)

Rich Schroeppel  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 13:35:32 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering)
Subject: Clinton, Gore, Space

Charles Pooley writes:

\First, in the article (58 or 59 atr. back), it said something about
/...spending 1/2 billion to study reprocuction of wasps in space...

\I'm a wasp, and I will volunteer to reproduce in space for MUCH less.

/Seriously, gov't spending has become a zero sum business, and ANY spending
\only cannibalizes something else.   I think nothing can be done in this
/environment.   The only hope for progress in space in the future is via
\private ventures.....

In fact, private ventures will be very important in the future
because they aren't subject to the extreme short-term thinking
of the government...

I know this stands the statist arguments about how the
government is needed to do all the long term stuff on
its head, but it doesn't make sense now anyway, or won't
once Clinton/Gore eliminate the non-jobs-project aspects
of the space program...


--
Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
"NOAH!"
"Yes Lord?"                          - Bill Cosby
"HOW LONG CAN YOU TREAD WATER?"

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:22:55 GMT
From: Charles Pooley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton, Gore, Space
Newsgroups: sci.space

First, in the article (58 or 59 atr. back), it said something about
...spending 1/2 billion to study reprocuction of wasps in space...

I'm a wasp, and I will volunteer to reproduce in space for MUCH less.

Seriously, gov't spending has become a zero sum business, and ANY spending
only cannibalizes something else.   I think nothing can be done in this
environment.   The only hope for progress in space in the future is via
private ventures.....
--
Charles Pooley                  [e-mail]    GEnie  c.pooley
EE consultant, Los Angeles, CA

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:30:14 GMT
From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton and Space Funding
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,talk.politics.space,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton

[e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:

>[e-mail] (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:



>>Military research will probably be cut.  As I pointed out, this is not
>>necessarily a very bad thing, since this kind of research is no longer
>>economically beneficial.  And you're probably totally off base, given
>>the voting records and policy statements of Clinton/Gore.

>Yes, but thanks to Al Gore's Porkization of the Space Program,
>military research is the last refuge in the US government
>of advanced propulsion research. After Gore manages to
>cut that tree down, like Isle Derniere, the whole tree
>is going to wash away.

I posted this just before I realized I was incoherent in that
last sentence.

I meant it to be "After Gore manages to cut that tree down, like
Isle Derniere, the whole program is going to be washed away."

Isle Derniere was (and sometimes still is) an island off the
coast of Louisiana. A resort was built there out of native
hardwood in antebellum times, and due to the fact that none
of the hardwood was left to hold the island in place, the first
Category four hurricane to come along washed the island away.

Personally, I think trees are neat, and I hug them every chance I
get (except for the pines).

--
Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
"NOAH!"
"Yes Lord?"                          - Bill Cosby
"HOW LONG CAN YOU TREAD WATER?"

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:37:02 GMT
From: Doug Mohney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton and Space Funding
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,talk.politics.space,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>
>Military research will probably be cut.  As I pointed out, this is not
>necessarily a very bad thing, since this kind of research is no longer
>economically beneficial.  And you're probably totally off base, given
>the voting records and policy statements of Clinton/Gore.

Wrong on both counts. How do you define "economically beneficial"? The Global
Positioning System is one pretty nifty spin-off from the Evil Military, hm?
Smaller computers? Smart-optics compensation for telescopes?


                 Play in the intelluctual sandbox of Usenet

  -- >                  [e-mail]                        < --

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:30:26 GMT
From: alex <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton and Space Funding
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,talk.politics.space,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:

|> >    Because they're going to have to get
|> >    lots and lots of money from somewhere,
|> >    ---without raising taxes or slashing social spending---
|> >    and they're going to have to do it in a Big Hurry,
|> >    since there will be a lot of pressure on them to get quick results
|> >    in order to prepare for the next election.

    I don't think that this is a partisan issue. Bush is actually talking
about across the board tax cuts, and since he hasn't offered a somution
to the ballooning entitlement programs, the space program is going to
look pretty tasty, come budget time.

    If Clinton can really pull off welfare reform and health insurance
reform, he opens the door to restructuring medicare and medicaid, which
is the only hope for long term budget relief. In any case, his whole
economic plan is based on investment in hte infrastructure, which includes
space and computer technology.

--
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens,
 nor should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God"
                                     - George Herbert Walker Bush, Feb 1989

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

Date: 14 Sep 92 08:29:37 GMT
From: Paul Johnson <[e-mail]-mrc>
Subject: Clinton and Space Funding
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Vignes Gerard M) writes:

>    When election day comes,
>    please get out and vote.
>    It's your right AND your duty.

>    A non-vote is not a form of protest;
>    it's a clear signal that you're happy with things
>    just the way they are and you really don't care anyway.

Hear Hear.  Like the great Heinlein said, even if you can't see anyone
you want to vote for, you can surely find someone you want to vote
against.  Aternatively find some well meaning fool (there is always
one around), ask his advice, and then vote the other way.

Yes, I AM in the UK, but the US has so much influence over here that I
really think we ought to get to vote for him (her?).

Paul.

--
Paul Johnson ([e-mail]).        | Tel: [phone] ext 3245
--------------------------------------------+----------------------------------
These ideas and others like them can be had | GEC-Marconi Research is not
for $0.02 each from any reputable idealist. | responsible for my opinions

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

Date: 14 Sep 92 20:07:00 GMT
From: Jon J Thaler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton and Space Funding
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

[e-mail] (Doug Mohney) says:

> [e-mail] (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:

>> Military research will probably be cut.  As I pointed out, this is not
>> necessarily a very bad thing, since this kind of research is no longer
>> economically beneficial.  And you're probably totally off base, given
>> the voting records and policy statements of Clinton/Gore.

> Wrong on both counts. How do you define "economically beneficial"? The Global
> Positioning System is one pretty nifty spin-off from the Evil Military, hm?
> Smaller computers? Smart-optics compensation for telescopes?

I suspect that the spin-off argument is about as bogus for military research
as it is for other fields (eg, the SSC).  For example, unclassified work
on laser guide stars was proceeding at the same time that the SDIO was
pursuing its own program.  Needless to say, the budget for the former was
vastly smaller than for the latter.  My conclusion:  If you want some benefit,
then go for it, but don't hope that by doing some unrelated work at much
greater expense you'll be lucky.

GPS is certainly a nifty spin-off.  It also is good for the consumers that
they don't have to pay for the R&D and capital costs.

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:23:58 EDT
From: Tom <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ethics of Terra-forming

>>Perhaps Mars has life already.  So what?  ...

>Perhaps the rain forest has life already.  So what?  Anthing we do will increas
>the amount of life in the rain forest, and probably won't even interfere with
whatever is there, assuming we aren't toxic to each other, as it is doubtlessly
>better suited to living in the rain forest that anything we could bring,
>engineer, or evolve.  Suppose we do hurt the indigenous life.  Again, so what?
>we can predict that its natural course would be to eventually grow more
>usefull to us through the mechanism of science and breeding.  But we would
>bring already-useful stuff along, speeding the process ... etc, etc.

The situation is different.  The negative value of messing with rainforests
depends totally on the effects of that change reaching Humans.  Mars,
obviously, I think, will not affect us adversely if we mess with it.

I should have known my post would have drawn fire from the anti-lifers..

1) Your reply has incorrect statements...We have interfered with rainforests,
and have decreased the amount of life.  And, I doubt we could make the
rainforests more complex.  Are you saying that life on Mars will be as
complex as a climax tropical forest?  I get your drift, but Mars and
Earth are different places, and we are only affected by the one.

2) You totally missed the point.  Ethics questions are based on values.
I submit that you either value life, or not.  No middle ground.

If you do not value life, then messing with rainforests is OK, as are CFC's,
DDT, Aids, Polio, and lots of other DEMONSTRATED life-damagers.

If you do value life, then you will want to protect life here, particularly
life-forms or -systems upon which your own survival may depend.  Protection
of other, non-affecting life-forms may be desired for aesthetic reasons,
or simply to have a 'cushion', or to be safe, in the case of systems or
forms we don't know much about.

But, if you do value life, than you must conclude that terra-forming
Mars would be good, as it would support more life, and, especially, Human
life.  Or, you may decide that the terra-forming question is intractable,
unanswerable, nuetral.  In no case would you conclude that terra-forming
would be bad, unless you are an anti-lifer.

The only way you can logically make the situation on Mars the same as on
Earth is to a) Demonstrate that life there affects life here, or
b) Assert that life-in-general has value without Human life. (This
choice is the route many greens take, and it is for this reason that many
people correctly identify them as anti-life double-thinkers.  Anti-life
non-double-thinkers have to be dead.)  You can also jump out of the system
and c) claim that value exists seperate from Human Choice.

To choose a) above is damn-near impossible, unless you follow Astrology.
To choose b) or c) is in contradiction to your own existence.
Therefore, terra-forming Mars is bad, if and only if you don't value Life.

Only dead people can conclude that terra-forming Mars is bad.  I dare any
of them to flame me :-)

The point of my post was to show how the argument about whether we hurt
Earth or not was intractable, while an argument based on our ability to
hurt Mars was doomed to fail, and that's why Dave's argument was flawed.
The only possible question about Mars-terra-forming;  "Is it good for us?"
If you think there is some other, more important question, you are an
anti-lifer, and, unless already dead, a hypocrite.

Knowledge about Mars-life is different, and easily seperated from the question
of co-existence or destruction.  We can know about it, but kill it anyway.
Like AIDS, Polio, the Flu, rabid dogs, etc., knowledge has value, even though
the thing known may not.  That's why I understand the Green Mind so well >;->

As I said before, I was assuming, above, that knowledge of Mars-life was a
pre-req. to terra-forming; not part of the question of ethics.
I'll make that distinction clear next time.

-Tommy Mac                     .  "                  +
.------------------------  +                      *       +
|   Tom McWilliams; scrub       ,     .                        "        +
|  astronomy undergrad, at     *       +;.     .  '             There is
| Michigan State University   '                      .    "   no Gosh!
|   [e-mail]                        '      ,   *
|       [phone]       ;  +  '                                 *
'-----------------------

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 23:32:35 GMT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Magellan Caption Files
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.geo.geology,alt.sci.planetary

                            ==========================
                              MAGELLAN CAPTION FILES
                                September 14, 1992
                            ==========================

     An updated version of the caption files for the Magellan images is now
available.  These files contain descriptions of the public released Venus
images taken by the Magellan spacecraft.  The caption files are provided in
four formats:  ASCII format, IBM Wordperfect 5.1 format, IBM Word
format, and a Macintosh Word format compressed with the Stuffit program
(MacBinary format).  The files are available using anonymous ftp at:

        ftp:      ames.arc.nasa.gov (128.102.18.3)
        user:     anonymous
        cd:       pub/SPACE/MAGELLAN/CAPTIONS
        files:    captions.txt        (ASCII)
                  caps_txt.zip        (ASCII -> PKZIP)
                  caps_wp5.zip        (IBM PC Wordperfect 5.1 -> PKZIP)
                  caps_wrd.zip        (IBM PC Word -> PKZIP)
                  captions.sit        (Macintosh Word -> Stuffit)

     Each caption refers to a P number.  By using this P number you can
obtain the corresponding photograph from one of the following places:

        Newell Color Lab
        221 N. Westmoreland Avenue
        Los Angeles CA 90064
        Telephone: [phone]
        Fax: [phone]

               OR

        National Space Science Data Center
    Goddard Space Flight Center
    Greenbelt, Maryland 20771
    Telephone: [phone]
        Email address:  [e-mail]

                                   #####
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Anything is impossible if
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you don't attempt it.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 13:32:24 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering)
Subject: Nasa's Apollo rerun vs. Zubrin

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] ("Phil G. Fraering") writes:
>
>Nick, don't you think it's funny that they think they need a rocket
>1.5 times the size of the Saturn 5 to return to the moon?

>These guys couldn't even return to the moon if you gave them a
>full-size, fully operational moon rocket. They'd complain about
>how it was too small for the job.

Doug Mohney writes:

\They're also putting a LOT more mass up there too. Four people, lots
/of instruments, groceries for 15-30-45 days. Pilot projects. We're
\talking serious camping and roaming around.

I know, but they are deliberately setting up things so that
the pilot projects won't reduce weight, which is the opposite

of Zubrin's scheme. Please take a look at it.

/If you want to do serious exploration, you have to bring something
\more than duct tape, a screwdriver, and a copy of "The moon on $5 a
/day" by Shezer & Szabo.

I know. I was planning on adding some Monty Python movies on
videotape to the list, so the astronauts wouldn't care about
not keeping their sanity.

\                 Play in the intelluctual sandbox of Usenet

That's it! Support UN military action against Usenet! Why didn't
I see that earlier?

Of course, they have yet to stop Doug from his vicious verbal
attacks on Canada...




--
Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
"NOAH!"
"Yes Lord?"                          - Bill Cosby
"HOW LONG CAN YOU TREAD WATER?"

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:32:51 GMT
From: Doug Mohney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nasa's Apollo rerun vs. Zubrin...
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] ("Phil G. Fraering") writes:
>
>Nick, don't you think it's funny that they think they need a rocket
>1.5 times the size of the Saturn 5 to return to the moon?

>These guys couldn't even return to the moon if you gave them a
>full-size, fully operational moon rocket. They'd complain about
>how it was too small for the job.

They're also putting a LOT more mass up there too. Four people, lots of
instruments, groceries for 15-30-45 days. Pilot projects. We're talking serious
camping and roaming around.

If you want to do serious exploration, you have to bring something more than
duct tape, a screwdriver, and a copy of "The moon on $5 a day" by Shezer &
Szabo.

                 Play in the intelluctual sandbox of Usenet

  -- >                  [e-mail]                        < --

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

Date: 14 Sep 92 10:26:28
From: Mark Gabriele <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pluto Direct Propulsion Options
Newsgroups: sci.space

I was under the impression that there are space-qualified ion thrusters
in the NASA inventory; these are very low-thrust, weigh about 10 kg, and
are qualified for one year of operation.  Of course, they do burn a
pretty serious amount of power, but if you're willing to test a space-based
nuclear reactor, you'll get all the power you need (25 kW in a small
reactor).  The only problem is decellerating upon reaching Pluto.  The
thrust from the ion engines is so small that you'd need to begin to
slow down very shortly after passing the halfway point, which is
not going to help make this a short mission.

=Mark
([e-mail])

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 13:38:29 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering)
Subject: Pluto Fast Flyby mission goals...

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:
>--
>Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
>Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
>
>           --> Support UN military force against Doug Mohney <--

Doug Mohney replies (finally):

Gee, and I was starting to feel sorry for the folks who got hit by Hurricane
Andrew down in Swampland U.S.A.....:->

I wasn't serious; I basically was wondering _if_ _ANYONE_ ever read
those .signature thingies. I think I've had that one for about four
days, and you just noticed?


--
Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
"NOAH!"
"Yes Lord?"                          - Bill Cosby
"HOW LONG CAN YOU TREAD WATER?"

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:26:01 GMT
From: Doug Mohney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pluto Fast Flyby mission goals...
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:
>--
>Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
>Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
>
>           --> Support UN military force against Doug Mohney <--

Gee, and I was starting to feel sorry for the folks who got hit by Hurricane
Andrew down in Swampland U.S.A.....:->

                 Play in the intelluctual sandbox of Usenet

  -- >                  [e-mail]                        < --

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

Date: 14 Sep 92 16:10:20 GMT
From: Doug Mohney <[e-mail]>
Subject: RL-10
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>Jerry Pournelle claims to have told Quayle, in the course of selling him
>on SSX (the project that, somewhat mutated, became Delta Clipper), that
>he didn't want astronauts flying it -- he wanted test pilots.  Why?
>Because "astronauts are national treasures", and if you kill one, your
>program grinds to a halt for a couple of years.  If you kill a test pilot,
>you name a street after him at Edwards, and carry on flying.

Probably more astronauts now than test pilots, if you include the mission
specialists.

Of course, "national treasure" is a strange way to put it.

                 Play in the intelluctual sandbox of Usenet

  -- >                  [e-mail]                        < --

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:02:03 GMT
From: "Michael V. Kent" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RL-10
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>Since 1960, 12 Delta boosters have gone boom.
>These 30 year old designs have not had stellar success records.

And in the 14 Sep 92 issue of Toward 2001:

[Satcom-C4] is...in geostationary orbit, following a
successful launch 31 August aboard a Delta 2 rocket. It is the 35th
consecutive Delta success since 1986.

-----

When I joined MCAIR I was told, "You may have heard the saying 'If it works,
don't fix it.'  Well, here we've changed that to 'If it works, improve it."

Propaganda or not, they're good words to design by.

Mike

--
Michael Kent                                   [e-mail]
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
All facts in this post are based on publicly available information.  All
opinions expressed are solely those of the author.    Apple II Forever !!

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:00:43 EDT
From: Tom <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Platforms (political, not physical :-)

>>  but we also know that Clinton and Gore are...

Well, now that we've seen bandied about various versions of both the
Democratic and Republican Official Platforms Re: Space, would anyone
happen to know the Libertarian Official Space Platform?

Nick, Dale, Anyone?  Equal space for all parties, right?

If no-one knows, maybe I'll take the initiative and call the HQ myself...

-Tommy Mac                     .  "                  +
.------------------------  +                      *       +
|   Tom McWilliams; scrub       ,     .                        "        +
|  astronomy undergrad, at     *       +;.     .  '             There is
| Michigan State University   '                      .    "   no Gosh!
|   [e-mail]                        '      ,   *
|       [phone]       ;  +  '                                 *
'-----------------------

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

Date: 11 Sep 92 23:57:18 GMT
From: Shari L Brooks <[e-mail]>
Subject: stuck antennae
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer)
writes:

>  The antenna on Compton stuck too -- although
>in a somewhat different way -- and the shuttle crew went out and fixed it.

Ah, I remember that!  I was in Washington, D.C., at the time, watching CNN...
the main thing that struck me, is that good-ole American fix-it philosophy...
If there's something wrong with the thing, Kick It!  It works on TVs, it
should work on satellites!

Maybe that's what we should do to Galileo....too bad we can't rendezvous with
it on its next flyby.

--
  Shari L Brooks                   |   [e-mail]
  NAVSOC code NSOC323D             |   [e-mail]
  NAWS Pt Mugu, CA 93042-5013      |
--> All statements/opinions above are mine and mine only, not the US Navy's.

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

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:07:33 EDT
From: Tom <[e-mail]>
Subject: Terra-forming, The E-car

>>Perhaps Mars has life already.  So what?  ...

>At the cost of possibly destroying a life form of which we know nothing,
>thus costing science a golden possibility of examining, firsthand, an
>extra-terrestrial life form.

Sure, I believe in knowledge for it's own sake.  But in the above discussion,
I was assuming that understanding potential Mars-life would be a pre-requisite
to terraforming, and possibly destroying any life there.  Once that life is
understood, maybe sampled, kept in a 'zoo', why not kill it, if we have to,
to terra-form Mars?  What has it done for us lately? :-)

>Unfortunately, electric cars depend on energy even more than fossil-fuel cars,
>>as they are less efficient (from the orignal source) than oil-powered
cars now.
>>To really get pollution-advantages from electric cars requires a new energy
>>source, not a new way of using more coal and oil.

>EXCUSE ME?  Please support this.  Every TECHNICAL article I've read on the
>subject says the opposte - that seperating the power generation into a more
>effecient (because car engines aren't) means of generating electricity, then
>using an effecient electric motor would save energy.

Perhaps the GM Impact, which doesn't use gears or brakes, but rather puts
braking energy back into the motor, may have increased the efficiency of
electric cars to near-fossil levels.

But everything I've ever read says that converting crude oil into burnable
fossil fuels, then converting that into electricity, then converting that
into motion, is less efficient than skipping the electric step.  With ceramic
car engines (higher engine temperatures) I'm not sure how burning-in-the-
plant will be more efficient than buring-in-the car.  Perhaps you could
post some excerpts from your TECHNICAL articles?

As long as were at it, please include the energy-use and polluting
potential for millions of pounds of lead batteries that must be replaced
every year...

And, I mis-spoke (wrote?)  I should have said 'efficiency advantage', above,
rather than pollution-advantage.  The burn-in-a-plant scheme MAY have
pollution advantages over burn-in-a-car, just because of the ease of
putting the exhaust system in one place.

-Tommy Mac                     .  "                  +
.------------------------  +                      *       +
|   Tom McWilliams; scrub       ,     .                        "        +
|  astronomy undergrad, at     *       +;.     .  '             There is
| Michigan State University   '                      .    "   no Gosh!
|   [e-mail]                        '      ,   *
|       [phone]       ;  +  '                                 *
'-----------------------

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 202
------------------------------