Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_3/V15NO322.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 31KB

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 92 05:05:48
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #322
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Sat, 17 Oct 92       Volume 15 : Issue 322

Today's Topics:
                      Earth's two moons (5 msgs)
            Galileo's antenna (was Re: Gallileo's antenna)
           Math progs with arbitrary precicion, for UNIX...
                                Morals
                         NASA budgets....etc
                          NASA bugets....etc
                           Perot & Freedom
               Pres Debate & military spending (2 msgs)
                       SETI functional grammer
 Somewhere in the decimal stream (Was: arbitrary precision) (2 msgs)
                        Toshiba vs. Chaparral
          V-2's launched at Russia (was Re: V-2 anniversary)
                       volumes of convex bodies

    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: Fri, 16 Oct 92 19:24:04 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering)
Subject: Earth's two moons

>I took an astronomy class in high school and my teacher told us that
>Earth really has two moons but that the other one can't be seen unaided
>because it's a lot smaller and farther out.

>I've been telling some people that Earth has two moons but no one
>believes me.  Could someone please confirm this?

I'm not sure; it was once suspected that there was a second moon,
but that it burned up sometime in the '50's.

I think this thing was supposed to be pretty small, like ~50 ft.
across...


>--
>Cara Cocking               | "Believing I had supernatural powers,
>[e-mail]  |  I slammed into a brick wall"
>                                           -Paul Simon, "Gumboots"

Nice Album, too...

--
Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
---------------------
Disclaimer: Some reasonably forseeable events may exceed this
message's capability to protect from severe injury, death, widespread
disaster, astronomically significant volumes of space approaching a
state of markedly increaced entropy, or taxes.

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 23:19:28 GMT
From: Leigh Palmer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Earth's two moons
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Cara
Cocking) writes:
>
> I took an astronomy class in high school and my teacher told us that
> Earth really has two moons but that the other one can't be seen unaided
> because it's a lot smaller and farther out.
>
> I've been telling some people that Earth has two moons but no one
> believes me.  Could someone please confirm this?

Question Authority.

Leigh

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 21:21:04 GMT
From: Cara Cocking <[e-mail]>
Subject: Earth's two moons
Newsgroups: sci.space

 I took an astronomy class in high school and my teacher told us that
 Earth really has two moons but that the other one can't be seen unaided
 because it's a lot smaller and farther out.

 I've been telling some people that Earth has two moons but no one
 believes me.  Could someone please confirm this?


--
Cara Cocking               | "Believing I had supernatural powers,
[e-mail]  |  I slammed into a brick wall"
                                           -Paul Simon, "Gumboots"

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

Date: 17 Oct 92 02:13:04 GMT
From: Joshua Bell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Earth's two moons
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("Phil G. Fraering") writes:
>>I took an astronomy class in high school and my teacher told us that
>>Earth really has two moons but that the other one can't be seen unaided
>>because it's a lot smaller and farther out.
>
>>I've been telling some people that Earth has two moons but no one
>>believes me.  Could someone please confirm this?
>
>I'm not sure; it was once suspected that there was a second moon,
>but that it burned up sometime in the '50's.
>
>I think this thing was supposed to be pretty small, like ~50 ft.
>across...

The first I heard of anything like this was in Ben Bova's
_Moonbase_, where he mentions (I believe) a small body at one of
the Lagrange points (L4 or L5) named Toro. I wrote this off as
wishful thinking, tho.

Wouldn't we have detected something like this by now, given that
we know exactly where to look?

Joshua
|         A shimmering net undulating like an infinite borealis.             |
|                                                  - Chapterhouse: Dune      |
|                                                                            |
| [e-mail]  Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary |

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

Date: 17 Oct 92 03:24:45 GMT
From: david michelson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Earth's two moons
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Cara
Cocking) writes:
>
> I took an astronomy class in high school and my teacher told us that
> Earth really has two moons but that the other one can't be seen unaided
> because it's a lot smaller and farther out.
>
> I've been telling some people that Earth has two moons but no one
> believes me.  Could someone please confirm this?

Perhaps you're thinking of Little Luna, the asteroid that Tom Swift, Jr's
"space friends" put into orbit around the earth in the Tom Swift Jr. series
of books by Victor Appleton III.  Or maybe not :-)

--

Dave Michelson
[e-mail]

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

Subject: Galileo's antenna (was Re: Gallileo's antenna)
Newsgroups: sci.space

From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Oct 92 15:50:32 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>ASSUMING opening of the HGA,
>Would it be useful to use the HGA in combination with some of the on-the-fly
>"improvements" to pump back more data? I'd think of the options listed above,
>the data compression technique might be able to provide more data...

I doubt that the onboard computers have the horsepower to do the data
compression at HGA speeds.  I could be wrong.
--
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 17 Oct 92 03:18:24 GMT
From: david michelson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Math progs with arbitrary precicion, for UNIX...
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (FRANK NEY) writes:
>Where can I get a DOS or OS/2 version of Mathematica?  Keep in mind
>that I do not have FTP.

Mathematica is commercial software.  Contact the publisher, Wolfram Research,
for ordering information and academic pricing.  Mathematica doesn't run under
OS/2, by the way.  I don't know if an OS/2 version is even planned :(

     Wolfram Research
     100 Trade Center Drive
     Champaign, Illinois  61820-7237

     [phone]    voice

     [phone]    fax

     (800) 441-MATH    orders

     [e-mail]      E-mail


 --

 Dave Michelson
 [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 92 04:25:05 EDT
From: Tom <[e-mail]>
Subject: Morals

>>Only because 'ethics', in the formal sense, refers to decisions based

>OK, now we're arguing semantics.  I'll drop this point.

That's just the point.  To talk about ethics is to talk about words,
and meanings of words.  I'm just using the prevelant defintion of
'moral' and 'ethical';  choices based on principles of some sort,
using principles that predicate some value.

Perhaps you know of a better definition?

>>Unfortunately, you are using your 'meta-moral level' to decide that
>>my 'meta-moral-idea' is wrong, thus contradicting your own meta-morals.

>Actually, I'm not saying anything about your metamorals, nor am I
>saying anything metamoral.  My moral code says that your moral code
>is wrong, because it is deviant.  That's all.

However you decide it, the decision is a contradiction to your own
point:  That morals are relative and equally valid.

Also, any discussion of morals generally, is meta-moral.

And, as yet, I haven't even dropped down to the 'moral' level.  I
have been sticking to the meta-moral level.  So how can you make
any judgement about my moral system, lacking information?

>> Since contradictions lead to ambiguity about proper behavior, and moral

>Or they lead to precisely-specified and unambiguous contradictory
>behavior.

Behavior (specifically, choice) is the basis for values.  Contradictory
behavior requires contradictory values.  Contradictions in values lead
to contradictory principles, which, by the precise definition of 'moral'
are non-moral.

-Tommy Mac
------------------------------===========================================
Tom McWilliams               | Bush,                    '          ".   |
[e-mail]       | Clinton,    ,  .        .        .*'  .  |
[phone] -or- 353-2986 | Perot:    '. '  . .             ,        |
a scrub Astronomy undergrad  |                 ,        +               |
at Michigan State University | Master Debaters         '.  , .'         |
------------------------------===========================================

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

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 23:18:29 GMT
From: "Carlos G. Niederstrasser" <phoenix.Princeton.EDU![e-mail]>
Subject: NASA budgets....etc
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> William Fabanich
<[e-mail]> writes:
> I would like any info you experts might know of the top of your heads...or
wher
> e to find it...about NASA bugets/ Military space bugets...and any comparison
wi
> th other governement agencies....something for me to show that the amount we
sp
> ent on space is not really enough to solve all our countries ills.
>   Thanx!
>     Bill Fabs
>

Well, the best place to start is a book called "The budget of the United
States"  It is the budget the President submits/recomends to Congres.  Bear in
mind that the current year values are only _recomendations_ to which Congress
can do what they want (usually cut them, in the case of space)  Howver it does
have some real spending values for the two preceeding years.  You can find this
book at a local library or more likely a college library.  It is about three
inches thick, but also has tons of interesting information.  For instance, it
has major aspects of the President's domestic policy.  This year R&D took a big
chapter, with a good chunk devoted to space.  In addition you find tid bits
like: the department of defense will spend about $100M for cementary
maintenance.  Each department is usually broken down about three levels (space
shuttle operations, major space probes in the case of space)  And every
department except for the military (not civilian) department of defense is
listed.

Of the top of my head I can give you some ball park numbers:

Defense 30%
Interest on the debt %25 (This also happens to be the size of the deficit)
Social Security %25

All basic science (including NIH and NSF) 3%

Again these numbers are ball park.  The whole budget is about a trillion per
year.  In addition there are about 200 billion "off budget" which are not taken
into account for deficit purposes, but are spend none the less.

Hope this helps.



--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |
|                                 |   and the reality of tomorrow   |
| [e-mail]   |---------------------------------|
| [e-mail]     |    Ad Astra per Ardua Nostra    |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 19:52:00 GMT
From: "Donald F. Martin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: NASA bugets....etc
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, William Fabanich <[e-mail]> writes...
>I would like any info you experts might know of the top of your heads...or wher
>e to find it...about NASA bugets/ Military space bugets...and any comparison wi
>th other governement agencies....something for me to show that the amount we sp
>ent on space is not really enough to solve all our countries ills.
>  Thanx!
>    Bill Fabs
>
NASA's budget is approximately 1 to 2 percent of the Federal Budget.

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

Date: 17 Oct 92 04:02:52 GMT
From: _Floor_ <[e-mail]>
Subject: Perot & Freedom
Newsgroups: sci.space

So I watched Perot's little solutions special this Friday evening.
And whilst he showed his charts, there was one about spending cuts.
One of his proposed cuts included "specific expenses." In the fine
print beside this slice of pie, it said...."Space Station"...

  _____    "But you can't really call that a dance. It's a walk." - Tony Banks
 /  ___\  ___  __ ___   ___      _____________   [e-mail]
 | / __  / _ \ | /   \ / _ \     |  physics  |   [e-mail]
 | \_\ \ | __/ |  /\ | | __/     |racquetball|   [e-mail]
 \_____/ \___/ |_| |_| \___/     |volleyball |   [e-mail]
 Gene Van Buren, Kzoo Crew(Floor), Washington U. in St. Lou - #1 in Volleyball

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 13:41:06 GMT
From: Mark Ricci - CATS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pres Debate & military spending
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space,sci.space

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>Unfortunately, the aerospace industry is ill equipped to operate when
>separated from the government teat. There's little consumer demand for
>$800 toilet seats, or $120 million dollar ex-ballistic missiles. The
>companies don't have a clue how to make $19 Walkmans, or even $2 million
>dollar sewage treatment plants. Their corporate culture isn't setup to
>handle such concepts. A much reduced Boeing might survive on airliner
>sales, but have you looked at the airline industry lately? They aren't
>in a position to be buying a lot of airplanes. If the government money
>goes away, these companies, and their military capabilities, are going
>to go away. Perot's right, they can't be just thrown on the consumer market,
>they'll die.

So what you're saying is that we're stuck with these guys for the rest of
time.  I don't think so.  Homey don't play dat.

I do agree that the government bears responsibility for creating this industry
and has an obligation to see it gracefully decline.  To that end, I would
support measures that would help workers learn new skills or go back to school.
However, the corporate culture you speak of is on its own.  I worked for three
defense contractors during the 80s and they knew exactly what they were doing.
The last one, GE/RCA in Camden, NJ was the worst.  The project I was on, the
IRR program for Trident subs, was known as the cash cow because of the profit
they made on it by taking advantage of the contract.  They wouldn't last ten
minutes in a competitive atmosphere, but that's their doing and they will
suffer the consequences.

>The question is, though, just what high tech consumer goods do these
>companies know how to produce, and more importantly, *market*? And,
>how much of their military capabilities will they preserve for the
>day when the world heats up again, as it will? We're told that an
>Iowa class battleship can't be built today because no company has
>the technology to do it. It's been lost as the shipyards and steel
>companies have converted to civilian markets. We're told that we
>can't rebuild the Saturn V because the subcontractors went bankrupt
>during the funding cuts of the 1970s. Can we afford to let this happen
>to our aerospace companies?

Yes and no.  Yes because they must move on to other businesses and space will
be one of them.  Get the government out of space and you open up possibiities.
No because we will maintain a formidable military in any event.  I'm not
calling for gutting defense as we did in the 70s, but I'm not going to agree
to keeping these guys afloat simply because they only know one way of business.

>Actually the Federal government is in better shape than most consumers.
>They spend 35% of their income servicing the debt. How many of you
>spend less than 35% of your incomes on house notes, car notes, and
>consumer debt? The US government owes four times it's annual income.
>How many of you living in $200,000 houses and driving $40,000 cars
>can say you owe less?

Correction: the government spends our income servicing the debt. And that debt,
unlike my mortgage, is increasing every single minute.  Do the math for paying
off $4 trillion.  It's bloody scary.


Mark
--
===============================================================================
 Mark Ricci - CATS          | Four candidates are on the ballot in all 50
 Commodore Applications and | states, yet only three are invited to debate.
 Technical Support          | Why are they scared of the Libertarians?
 [e-mail] | Call the debate commission  [phone]
===============================================================================

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 10:04:37 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Pres Debate & military spending
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Ricci - CATS) writes:
> [e-mail] writes:
>
> Transforming the defense contractors into space contractors, which many of
> them are anyway, is no transformation at all.  You're simply substituting one
> government nipple for another.  The companies need to get away from the
> government, not latch onto another part.
>
>
> The transformation should be for these high-tech firms to produce high-tech
> products that the marketplace wants, not just the federal government.  This is
> how the expertise and the training they have can be put to the best use for
> them and for us.  Making space doodads instead of military doodads is not the
> solution no more than selling weapons for the sake of keeping defense workers
> employed in key states is.

But what if there is no market for the sort of high technology item these
people produce? I can see no evidence for one. Military and space contractors
focus on high cost, low volume pretty specialised kit, whereas the stuff the
general market wants is low cost, high volume, generalised stuff.

If you can give evidence that the sort of stuff these contractors make has a
market, fine, but I don't see any. In addition, we're in a world recession (or
so our government keeps telling us) and the markets for just about *everything*
are drying up. New, expensive high tech gizmos are going to be the last things
bought at the moment, so even if there is a market in boom times, its
reasonable to support these high tech industries until those times come. Or
would you rather dump them all on the scrap heap to save a bit of money now?

 > This is not to say that they shouldn't make space doodads.  They should, and
> there'd be a market outside the Beltway if the government didn't consider space
> closed to private concerns.  Nevertheless, to remain dependent on the goverment
> is a sure prescription for disaster.

Again, there is little evidence for much of a private sector market for 'space
doodads' outside the (government) established areas of commstas, waethersats
etc. And the bulk of these are still government supported.

> When you have a $400 billion deficit and a $4 trillion debt, there is no
> peace dividend, just bills due.
>

And whose fault is that???


--
================================================================================
Dave Clements, Oxford University Astrophysics Department
================================================================================
clements @ uk.ac.ox.vax            |  Umberto Eco is the *real* Comte de
dlc      @ uk.ac.ox.astro        |           Saint Germain...
================================================================================

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 16:55:12 GMT
From: Chris Kostanick 806 1044 <chris@kbsw1>
Subject: SETI functional grammer
Newsgroups: sci.space

[Arguments against SETI by Woody Ligon deleted]

Somehow this sounds like an argument that if we close our eyes and
stop our ears then things go away. We don't know if there is
anyone out there and spending modest amounts of money to look
sounds like a good idea to me. The railroad track near my office
is only infrequently occupied, but I look around before I cross
it every time.

Chris Kostanick

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 17:11:47 GMT
From: "Steven J. Edwards" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Somewhere in the decimal stream (Was: arbitrary precision)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Jones) writes:
# Millard Edgerton ([e-mail]) wrote:
#>
#>  >In article <seal.719016011@leonardo>, [e-mail] (David Seal) writes...
#>  >>Having been duly inspired by an episode of northern exposure i tried
#>  >>fiddling with ramanujan's and borwein and borwein's formulas for
#>  >>computing pi on my mac.  however, the floating point accuracy
#>  >>for MATLAB (which i was using) isn't settable and i can't get past
#>  >>the sixteenth decimal place or so.  other mac programs or ways of computing
#>  >>pi?  thanks.
#>
#>
#>  The solution of 355/113 yields PI to with 10^-7.  Archemedies knew it close
#>  enough for our use today, beyond that it is an academic exercise.
#>
# You're missing the point, guys.  The exploration of pi's digits as an
# end in itself is taken from Carl Sagan's "Contact" in which there are
# supposed to be messages from "the creators" hidden in transcendental
# numbers like pi, e etc.  At the end of the novel, the heroine finds a
# digital picture of a circle out in the jillionth place or so, indicating
# that there is indeed intelligence behind the structure of the universe,
# and that looking further will yield still more info.
#
# Of course, since pi has infinite digits, every sequence imaginable will
# occur there somewhere.  A significant sequence is one which is very unlikely
# given the number of digits computed so far.  8 consecutive 8's (10^8:1
# against) is not very significant given a couple million digits computed
# (which was the event mentioned in the show, I believe).

First, it is a common misperception that an infinite number of objects
(of a given type) must contain at least one of each possible variety
(of the same type).  For example, the decimal expansion of (1 / 9) is
infinite, yet contains only one of the ten possible digits.  On the
other hand, there are some transcendental sequences that do contain
every possible finite subsequence; for example:

0.0123456789101112131415161718192021 ...

not only contains every such finitely long subsequence, but contains
it an infinite number of times.

Second, Carl Sagan's suggestion that pi contain messages is thought
provoking, but becomes obviously incorrect after a certain amount of
thought.  The reason for this is because pi is a completely nonrandom,
totally deterministic number and so any embedded message can be the
only possible message.  A sort of superdeterminism, if you will.
There is no freedom for a creator to choose the message, at least as
long as said creator is bound by common logic.  If no such bound
exists, then further discussion by us is irrelevent.

Einstein had a comment about this.  Paraphrased from memory:

"As I learn to understand more about the order in the Lord's universe,
the more I believe that He had little choice in the way of His
creation."

 [The above opinions expressed are my own; not necessarily held by others.]
      == Steven J. Edwards           Bull HN Information Systems Inc. ==
      == [phone]              300 Concord Road         MS 820A ==
      == [e-mail]     Billerica, MA 01821          USA ==
"That Government which Governs the Least, Governs Best." -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 19:08:27 GMT
From: Dan Swartzendruber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Somewhere in the decimal stream (Was: arbitrary precision)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steven J. Edwards) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Jones) writes:
> # Millard Edgerton ([e-mail]) wrote:
> #>

[deleted]

>
> Second, Carl Sagan's suggestion that pi contain messages is thought
> provoking, but becomes obviously incorrect after a certain amount of
> thought.  The reason for this is because pi is a completely nonrandom,
> totally deterministic number and so any embedded message can be the
> only possible message.  A sort of superdeterminism, if you will.
> There is no freedom for a creator to choose the message, at least as
> long as said creator is bound by common logic.  If no such bound
> exists, then further discussion by us is irrelevent.

Well, we're kind of getting into metaphysical things here, but I think
that ruling out things based on demonstrable, provable things (i.e.
1+1=2) is fallacious when dealing with the creator of the universe.
What we're really talking about is basically the metastructure of the
universe, i.e. why is 1+1=2?  Why is ratio of a circle pi?  Why do the
angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees?

> Einstein had a comment about this.  Paraphrased from memory:
> "As I learn to understand more about the order in the Lord's universe,
> the more I believe that He had little choice in the way of His
> creation."

Again, anyone (anything?) which can not only create the universe, but define
the fundamental laws and relationships (the metastructure?) is probably
beyond our ability to even reason about.  Mind you, I'm not advocating the
existence of such a creator, just that if he/she/it exists (or existed), I
think it's kind of silly to try to prove/disprove what he/she/it could or
could not have done.

>
>  [The above opinions expressed are my own; not necessarily held by others.]
>       == Steven J. Edwards           Bull HN Information Systems Inc. ==
>       == [phone]              300 Concord Road         MS 820A ==
>       == [e-mail]     Billerica, MA 01821          USA ==
> "That Government which Governs the Least, Governs Best." -- Thomas Jefferson

--

#include <std_disclaimer.h>

Dan S.

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 21:04:09 GMT
From: Scott O'Connell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Toshiba vs. Chaparral
Newsgroups: rec.video.satellite,sci.space

Gerald Simon ([e-mail]) wrote:
:
: I've had a Montery 90 for a couple weeks now and have no complaints with it.
: I feel the remote is fine, the picture quality is GREAT, and have no problems
: with it.  It's full of features (some of which I haven't played with - or
: found - yet).  I don't understand why people complain about the remote
: for the Montery......it's layed out well, labled and easy to understand.

I've had a Montery 90 for about 6 months now and have one major complaint --
the remote is *very* sluggish.

I talked with a friend who has the 50 and he's seen the same thing.  I'm
probably a little pickier (sp?) than some but don't see how they can get
away with such a sloppy user interface.
--

Scott O'Connell - N6ZEK                UUCP: {nosc, ucsd}!crash!ipars!scotto
Spectrum Data Services                 ARPA: crash!ipars![e-mail]
Carlsbad, CA                           INET: [e-mail]

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 18:21:15 GMT
From: Elliott Kleinrock <[e-mail]>
Subject: V-2's launched at Russia (was Re: V-2 anniversary)
Newsgroups: sci.space,soc.history

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bruce Watson) writes:
>Successful V-2 combat launches (From 'The Rocket Team', Ordway and Sharpe,
1979)

>UK
>   London     1359
>   Ipswich       1
>   Norwich      43

>Belgium
>   Antwerp    1610
>   Liege        86
>   Brussels   (See Other)

>France
>   Paris        19

>Other
>   Continental 137 (including 11 at Remagen, the town whose bridge was
>                    captured before it could be blown up, Tournai, Hasselt
>                    Maastricht (been in the news lately), Lille, Arras, Mons,
>                    Cambrai, St. Quentin, and Tourning.)

>Total         3225


>Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.

Where any V-2's launched at Russia?
    - Elliott

    [e-mail]
    ...!{ philabs | yale | oliveb | decvax | iscuva }!oliafd!elliott

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

Date: 16 Oct 92 20:10:14 GMT
From: Levin <[e-mail]>
Subject: volumes of convex bodies
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space

In <[e-mail]> (Tahsin I. Alam) writes:
>Is there any algorithm or any research paper on calculating volumes of
>n-dimensional convex polyhedra? Any info would help.

Ask Ravi Kannan @theory.cs.cmu.edu . He has found fast algorithms.

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 322
------------------------------