Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_4/V15NO430.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 38KB

Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 05:04:52
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #430
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Tue, 17 Nov 92       Volume 15 : Issue 430

Today's Topics:
            ALTERNATIVE Heavy Element Creation in Universe
                            Antenna Specs
               Future of Planetary Exploration Lecture
                           Hubble's mirror
Minority Kids into Techies (was Re: Free Middle/High School Broadcasts)
                     Shuttle replacement (3 msgs)
                Shuttle replacement, STS-52 half-full
                         Space suit research?
                           sticky questions
                  Usage of Online Campaign Materials
              What kind of computers are in the shuttle?

    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: 16 Nov 92 21:14:57 GMT
From: Mike Thayer <[e-mail]>
Subject: ALTERNATIVE Heavy Element Creation in Universe
Newsgroups: sci.space

Is this for real?????

BMFO
--
Laboratory For Astrophysics        "Is it not the height of silent humour
and Space Research             to cause an unknown change
(but I don't speak for them...)         in the Earth's climate?"
University of Chicago                "Cry...for the Fire..."

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

Date: 16 Nov 92 19:26:49 GMT
From: Joshua Natarajan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Antenna Specs
Newsgroups: sci.space

I came across the Friis equation and would like some data to play around
with it.....Does anyone know the gain,transmitted power etc for the
probes we sent ?

Well,   P_r/P_t = D_t*D_r*squ(lambda)/squ(4*pi*r)

what is the typical recieved power and the gain of the receiver?
Also what is the typical beam width of those transmitting antennas?

Thanks in advance

Josh   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 05:28:03 GMT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Future of Planetary Exploration Lecture
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

     This came in a flyer from the Planetary Society, and I thought it
would be of interest to everyone here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Thirty years ago this month, humanity witnessed its first planetary
encounter when Mariner 2 flew by Venus and demonstrated that the planet
is astonishingly hot.  On December 8, 1992, we will celebrate our newest
encounter when Galileo swings past Earth one last time on its voyage to
Jupiter...

                          The Planetary Society
                           in cooperation with
                  NASA, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and
                  the California Institute of of Technology

                                presents

                  THE FUTURE OF PLANETARY EXPLORATION:
                              A DIALOGUE

                      Daniel Goldin & Carl Sagan

                      Introduction by Edward Stone

                        Friday, December 4, 1992
                               8:00 pm
                          Bechman Auditorium
                    California Institute of Technology
                    Michigan Avenue (sout of Del Mar)
                           Pasadena, California
                Information: [phone] or [phone]

                           Admission: $10.00

     On December 14, 1962, Earth's first successful planetary probe, Mariner 2,
entered space exploration history when it gathered important scientific data
on it flight past Venus.  30 years later Earth itself will be visited by a
planetary spacecraft when Galileo flies past Earth for the second and last
time.  Using three planetary fly-bys (two with Earth, one with Venus) as
gravity assists, Galileo will have finally gathered enough speed for the last
leg of its journey to a rendezvous with Jupiter and its moon in 1995.

     In celebration, the Planetary Society will sponsor a very special event
on December 4, 1992 as a prelude to the encounter.  NASA Administrator
Daniel Goldin and Planetary Society President Carl Sagan will meet one-on-one
in a public forum to discuss the future of planetary exploration, both here
in the United States and with international partners.  Their dialogue will be
followed by a question and answer session to allow audience participation.

     Edward Stone, Director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, will begin
the evening with an update on Galileo's progress and a tribute to Mariner 2.

     Doors open at 7:30 PM.  Free parking on Caltech campus.

     Tickets may be ordered by mail or phone.  To order by mail, please
enclose a self-addressed, stamped envelope for return of your tickets.
Orders received within seven (7) days of the event will be help up for
pick-up at the door of the Auditorium, beginning one hour before
performance time.  Mail or fax your order to: Ticket Office, Caltech 332-92,
Pasadena, CA 91125; fax [phone].  Or charge by phone [phone]
or [phone].  Charge to your VISA, MASTERCARD, AMERICAN EXPRESS or
DISCOVER CARD ($3 per order phone service charge).

 Name:
 Address:
 City:                     State:      Zip:        Phone (day):
 Method of Payment:       Check (made payable to CALTECH):
                          VISA, MC, AMEX, DISCOVER
 Card No:                          Expiration Date:
 Signature as name appears on card:
 Number of General Admission tickets desired @ $10.00 each:       Total:

                                #####
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Learn to recognize the
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | inconsequential, then
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | ignore it.

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

Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 23:55:54 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hubble's mirror

-From: [e-mail] (Greg Hennessy)
-Subject: Re: Hubble's mirror
-Date: 16 Nov 92 03:35:55 GMT
-Organization: University of Virginia

-Henry Spencer writes:
-#To the best of my knowledge, the only statement in my posting which is
-#not a solidly-established fact . . .

-I was referring to your statment implying that Dr. Jefferys was
-contributing to the "technological myth of the century." Correcting
-Dr. Jefferys on matters of the HST is like correcting Dennis Ritchie
-on matters of C.

Careful yourself - Henry is an internationally recognized authority on
C - I wouldn't put it past him to correct Ritchie on some detail.
I have a book with a chapter entitled something like "Henry Spencer's
laws of C programming". :-)

-While certianly a very expensive end to end test would have caught the
-trouble, assuming that such a test is even possible (which I'm not
-convinced of given the difficulty), the set of tests that you develop
-to test a mirror BEFORE you know it has a certian problem is not
-necessarily the same as the set of tests that you develop AFTER you
-know it has a problem. PE developed a system of testing that they
-THOUGHT would be good enough. Unfortunately it was not.

PE made themselves believe that there was no problem until after the launch.
The testing protocol used was robust, but not sufficiently robust to
compensate for people ignoring the test results.

-At least we can be pretty sure that this blunder won't be repeated.

PE (now Hughes Danbury) is reported to have cleaned up their act following
the discovery of the HST error - I think they're making a set of mirrors
for AXAF. I expect NASA will more insistent on full supervision in the
future (at least for contracts where they might take the blame :-).

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: 17 Nov 92 00:48:20 GMT
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Minority Kids into Techies (was Re: Free Middle/High School Broadcasts)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Patrick S. Golden) writes:
> REACHING FOR THE STARS
>
> A free, nationwide distance-learning program designed to
> encourage young minority and female middle and high-school
> students to pursue careers in science and engineering

I agree it's a damned shame more females, and members of American minority
groups, don't take up these professions.  But sometimes I wonder...

Would it be simpler to ask white males, politely, *not* to become
engineers?  Or it might be even more effective to pay them.  "You
don't want to be a scientist, kid!  Here's some cash.  Sign here and
we'll help you become a tobacco farmer instead."

This would help make room for the ambitions of young people of other
races, genders, or ethnic heritages to enter techie professions.

Or maybe we could promote new toys for white boys.  How about a
Talking G.I. Joe that says, "Math class is haaaarrrd...?"

     O~~*           /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
   - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /       \                          (_) (_)                    / | \
 |       |     Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 \       /     Bitnet:     [e-mail]
   -   -       Internet:  [e-mail]
     ~         SPAN/Hepnet:      43011::HIGGINS

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

Date: 16 Nov 92 19:33:37 GMT
From: John DeVenezia <[e-mail]>
Subject: Shuttle replacement
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian Stuart Thorn) writes:
>
> >It seems to me that in 1992, Space Shuttle is offering one of the best
> >returns on investment in the space community!
>
> Atlas and Delta are providing profits for the companies which build them.
> That means they offer a return on investment.
>
> How can the Shuttle possibly be said to offer ANY (much less the best) return
> on investment? Shuttle has LOST billions.
>

Well, considering that the Shuttle project also provides/provided profits for the
companies which launch/re-furbish/built it can you tell us what the difference
is?  Consider that the Atlas and Delta carry many goverment payloads.

>   Allen
>
> --
> +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
> |  [e-mail]     |  nothing undone"                                       |
> +----------------------159 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+

John DeVenezia
[e-mail]

--> insert favorite disclaimer here <--

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

Date: 16 Nov 92 23:21:50 GMT
From: "Michael V. Kent" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Shuttle replacement
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Behre) writes:
>
>|>   What about the SSTO DC-Y?  It's my understanding that the DC-1 should be
>|> able to do just about everything that the shuttle can do (with the possible
>|> exeption of carry the SpaceLab).  And a lot cheapter to boot.

It will hopefully be able to perform crew transfer and small satellite launches
more reliably and for less money than the Shuttle or even expendables.  I don't
see it replacing all of the Shuttle's functions, but it's a start.

>What level of success would the DCX testing program have to show to make it a
>viable candidate?  Does this program have the ability to fascinate congress and
>Al Gore if it demonstrates what it intendend to do? On the other hand, would a
>DCX program shifted to taking on the duties of a HL-20 be a disasterous
>move in terms of the programs efficiency?

Crew transfer to the space station is already included in the standard view-
graph pitch.  Whether the potential cost reductions and increased access to
space will excite Congress is a question I can't answer.  NASP made a go of
it and failed, but DC is doing things a bit differently.  The main point in
DC's favor is they are FLYING.  Being able to show that the first $58 million
has already produced results should make funding for DCY easier to come by.

Of course with Congress, you never know.

Mike

--
Michael Kent                                   [e-mail]
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!

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

Date: 17 Nov 92 01:53:56 GMT
From: Brian Stuart Thorn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Shuttle replacement
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space

>> Atlas and Delta are providing profits for the companies that make them <<

As for Delta, absolutely, positively right. But I fail to see how depositing
two enormously expensive satellites in the Atlantic can be said to be
a profit for General Dynamics and the Atlas. One more misfire, and GD might
be relegated to government flights only (Ariane will make a killing).

Besides, you seem to have missed my point.

The Space Shuttle was already more-or-less paid for, so why not use it.
I was trying to say (got sidetracked, I must admit) that the U.S. should
have put its money into a new unmanned booster system, not tired old
designs like Titan and Atlas. In the meantime, we should have continued to
use Shuttle to launch as much as possible until an NLS-or-whatever came
online. It would be online by now, I think, if we hadn't taken the Titan IV
plunge.

-Brian

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

Date: 17 Nov 92 01:42:25 GMT
From: Brian Stuart Thorn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Shuttle replacement, STS-52 half-full
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space

Actually, I was trying to support the Space Shuttle, not insult those who
work on STS and payloads.

But you must admit, I think, that STS-52 was darned near half-full, despite
the SVS tests with the robot arm. It is my opinion that SVS could have easily
been added to another flight, such as the STS-54 TDRS-F flight next January.
Even with TDRS-F/IUS and the DXS payload, it would seem SVS should have fit.

As for the USMP-1 payload, well once upon a time (STS-41D to be specific)
NASA launched three satellites aboard Shuttle, and still had space for
the OAST-1 solar array system. Now, it seems, NASA considers one satellite
(and a very small one at that) plus one pallet a full manifest.

What gives?

-Brian

P.S., I consider myself more than mildly supportive of the Space Shuttle,
but when NASA starts flying half-empty Space Shuttles and saying "the mission
was full", I get worried.

Challenger wasn't that long ago.


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

Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 23:09:53 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space suit research?

-From: [e-mail] (Adam R. Brody )
-Subject: Re: Space suit research?
-Date: 16 Nov 92 18:01:02 GMT
-Organization: NASA Ames Research Center

-Actually, the latest I have heard is that cold plates will be used
-for cooling

What are cold plates? Does that mean a heat pump driven by running power
into a thermocouple?

-and the sole reason for high pressure is health.  The fact
-that people live in high elevations like Denver and Mexico City, where
-the atmospheric pressure is lower than sea level does not hold much weight.

Read the recent Scientific American article on altitude sickness. (Of course
on Earth, reduced partial pressure of oxygen is the primary concern.)

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 23:34:19 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: sticky questions

-From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Clark)
-Subject: Two sticky questions on astrophysics
-Date: 16 Nov 92 12:21:34 GMT
-Organization: ITC, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

-This may display my ignorance but:

-1. Nothing can travel faster then the speed of light. Therefore
-gravitational influence takes time to travel. Therefore the influence of
-objects on the other side of the galaxy are being felt in our solar system
-as those far flung objects were some 80,000 years ago, yes? More to the
-point the massive centre of our galaxy (possibly contains a mega-black hole)
-will not influence us from it's current position for another 30,000 years.
-Now this (according to my naive musings) should not present a problem if we
-are orbiting the centre of our galaxy in a near perfect circular orbit, but
-I would surmise that our solar system would have some eccentricity in it's
-orbit. According to me the solar system is falling toward a non-existant
-centre and has been doing this (as all galactic objects do) since the
-beginning of galactic history.  Should this not cause orbital deviations
-that are measurable? Can someone help me out here please am I missing some
-obvious relativistic point?

Ignoring things like spin, the gravitational field of a black hole (as seen
from outside the black hole) should be virtually indistinguishable from that
of an equal but uncollapsed mass.

-2. An object is detected 15 billion light years away, pushing the beginning
-of time to at least that many years ago. But surely it pushes that time to
-double 15 billion years (ie 30 billion years). Nothing can travel faster
-than light. The object that generated that radiation did so 15 billion years
-ago from 15 billion light years away. But first we had to get 15 billion
-light years away from this object. Both the object and the particles that we
-consist of must have been together at the Big bang. In order for the light
-to have taken 15 billion years to reach us, the object must have been 15
-billion light years away from our current position 15 billion years ago. In
-other words the earth and the object relative to each other must have been
-travelling for some 15 billion years (at least) to get that far apart before
-the light was emmitted from far-flung object. Once again am I missing some
-obvious relativistic point or have I just doubled the age of the universe?

George Smoot, well-known researcher on the COBE team that measured the cosmic
background radiation of the universe, gave a lecture on the findings this
spring in Washington, D.C. After the lecture, I asked him about the "drift"
of our galaxy with respect to the "uniform" (isotropic?) glow. If I understood
his answer correctly, he said that shortly after the big bang, the universe
was much larger "across" than the age of the universe times the speed of
light. (In other words, space expanded along with everything else?)
So there may well be parts of the universe that are more light years away
now than the age of the universe in years, though we can never directly
know of their existence. If that's right, then it's not unreasonable to
have a young galaxy just fresh from the big bang, but still 10-15 billion
light years from our galaxy.

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: 16 Nov 1992 12:36:45 -0500
From: MIT Presidential Information Service <[e-mail]>
Subject: Usage of Online Campaign Materials
Newsgroups: sci.space

Explanation: Please answer this survey as best you can and return it to:

            [e-mail]

Purpose: This survey is intended to measure the impact of computer
networks in the 1992 Presidential Campaign, with particular reference to
the MIT Information Service experiment.  Your responses will help us
assess the usefulness of these services and will inform future efforts
of this type.  The results of this third of four surveys will sketch
your usage of email connections to the Presidential campaigns, and
ascertain your views on several current questions of national
information policy.  We will post the results of this survey to the
respondents when they become significant.

Redistribution:  If you redistributed on-line campaign materials to
other people on the network, please also send this survey to them.

Directions: Try to answer all the questions as best you can in order
make this survey as accurate as possible.  Be sure to put your answer
AFTER the PROMPT for each query BUT NOT on a new line.  You need only
provide enough characters to distinguish your answer from the
alternatives.  For multiple choice questions with letter or numeric
labels, you need only provide the letter or number for your answer.  Be
careful NOT TO DELETE the FORM IDENTIFIER and SPECIFIER appearing at the
beginning of the survey, or the system will have trouble figuring out
which survey you are submitting.

If you are unsure how to complete this survey, you can learn how to fill
out our computerized forms by sending mail to:

            [e-mail]

Eligibility: People who have interacted with this system or received
on-line materials during the recent presidential campaign are eligible
to participate.


Comments: If you wish to register comments on this survey or other
aspects of these experiments, you may send them to:

            [e-mail]

Duplicates: If you receive duplicate copies of this survey, you may be
registered with this system under more than one email address.  You can
check on this by sending the subject line STATUS to

            [e-mail]

No Surveys:  If you wish to receive no more surveys (there is one left
to do), simply send the subject line REMOVE SURVEYS to

            [e-mail]

No Further Contact: If you wish never to hear again from this service,
simply send the subject line REMOVE CONTACTS to [e-mail]

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

PLEASE DO NOT DELETE THE NEXT LINE!
:FORM: SERVICE-USAGE

Question: Do you consider yourself politically active?
Answer:  Yes or No.
:POLITICALLY-ACTIVE: No

Question: Were you more politically involved in this campaign than in previous
campaigns?
Answer:  Yes or No.
:MORE-ACTIVE: No

Question: How would you describe your principal geographic location during the
campaign, on a metropolitan to rural continuum?
Answer: Select one of:  1  Metropolitan (over one million population)
                        2  Urban (less than one million population)
                        3  Metro-Suburban (near Metropolitan area)
                        4  Suburban (near urban area)
                        5  Rural Town (under 50,000 population)
                        6  Rural Village (Under 1,000 population)
                        7  Rural
:LOCATION-TYPE:

Question: If you were located in the United States during the campaign,  in
what state were you principally located?
Answer:  Unambiguous State name, or NONe (don't forget about North Dakota)
         Note that standard state abbreviations do NOT work here.
:US-LOCATION:

Question: If you are located in the United States, what is the zipcode
where you vote?
Answer:  U.S. Zipcode or None.
:ZIPCODE:

Question: If you are located outside the United States, what country were you in
during the campaign?
Answer:  Type the full name of the country on one line.
:FOREIGN-LOCATION:

Question: If you obtained obtain on-line campaign materials during the
presidential campaign, did they come to you directly or indirectly via
the MIT Presidential Information Service?  You can tell by looking in
headers of a message for the received from field, e.g., ``Received: From
<host domain name>....''  Answer yes if you find any hosts whose domain
name ends with the domain AI.MIT.EDU.
Answer:  Yes, No, or Unknown.
:RECEIVED-FROM-MIT: Yes

Question: Did you obtain on-line campaign materials during the presidential
campaign?  If so, please list the sources you used in DECREASING order
of use. Rank the most often used sources first.
Answer:  Select some integers from:
            7  Sent to me by a friend via email
            4  MIT Campaign Packages
            2  Usenet/NETNEWS Discussions
            6  Local Bulletin Boards
            1  FTP Sites
            5  Mailing lists
            3  MIT Campaign Distribution Lists
            8  Don't know
:RECEIVED-ONLINE-MATERIALS:

Question: Did you print hardcopies of any on-line campaign materials?
Answer:  Yes or No.
:HARDCOPY: No

Question: If you redistributed copies of the campaign literature, what
distribution methods did you use?
Answer:  Select some letters from:
            F  Hand redistribution
            C  Recommended online sources to others
            G  Electronic distribution (PLEASE SEND THIS SURVEY TO THE SAME LISTS)
            B  Face-to-face discussion with others
            J  Newspaper or radio in local area
            I  Local campaign office
            K  Major market TV or radio (more than 500,000)
            H  US Mail
            L  Distribution to class or lecture audience
            D  Telephone canvassing
            A  Personal use (immediate family)
            E  Displayed/distributed hardcopy locally (e.g. work, school, churches, clubs)
            M  Not applicable
:SECONDARY-DISTRIBUTION:

Question: If you redistributed copies of the campaign literature, how many people
received any of the redistributed material?
Answer:  Select one of:  1  1 - 5 people
                         2  5 - 20 people
                         3  20 - 100 people
                         4  100 - 500 people
                         5  500 - 1,000 people
                         6  1,000 - 10,000 people
                         7  10,000 - 100,000 people
                         8  over 100,000 people
:SECONDARY-AUDIENCE:

Question: If you redistributed copies of the campaign literature, do you believe
those people in turn redistributed the material, and if so, what
distribution means do you believe they used?
Answer:  Select some integers from:
            E  Displayed/distributed hardcopy locally (e.g. work, school, churches, clubs)
            A  Personal use (immediate family)
            L  Distribution to class or lecture audience
            D  Telephone canvassing
            B  Face-to-face discussion with others
            C  Recommended online sources to others
            I  Local campaign office
            J  Newspaper or radio in local area
            G  Electronic distribution (PLEASE SEND THIS SURVEY TO THE SAME LISTS)
            H  US Mail
            K  Major market TV or radio (more than 500,000)
            F  Hand redistribution
            M  Not applicable
:TERTIARY-DISTRIBUTION:

Question: If you redistributed copies of the campaign literature, to how many
people do you believe those people in turn redistributed the literature?
Answer:  Select one of: 1  1 - 5 people
                        2  5 - 20 people
                        3  20 - 100 people
                        4  100 - 500 people
                        5  500 - 1,000 people
                        6  1,000 - 10,000 people
                        7  10,000 - 100,000 people
                        8  over 100,000 people
:TERTIARY-AUDIENCE:

Question: How carefully did you read the document that you read the MOST
CAREFULLY?
Answer:  Select one:  1  Never looked at it
                      2  Skimmed it
                      3  Read it
                      4  Read it carefully
                      5  Debated the key points from it
:READING-DEPTH:

Question: Did the on-line campaign material help you decide how to vote?
Answer:  Yes or No.
:DECISION-EFFECT: No

Question: Which presidential candidate did you vote for?
Answer:  Select one:  2  Bill Clinton - Democrat
                      3  Ross Perot   - Independent
                      5  John Hagelin - Natural Law Party
                      1  George Bush  - Republican
                      7  Did not Vote
                      4  Andre Marrou - Libertarian
                      6  Other
                      8  Not US Citizen
:VOTED-FOR:

Question: Did the on-line campaign material change your opinion of any of the
candidates?
Answer:  Yes or No.
:OPINION-EFFECT: No

Question: Did you try to change anybody's mind about any of the candidates?
Answer:  Yes or No.
:CHANGE-MINDS: No

Question: Did you use electronic mail to successfully communicate with the
headquarters of a presidential campaign?
Answer:  Yes or No.
:HQ-COMMUNICATION: No

Question: Are you a member of any political organizations that
engage in lobbying or advocacy activities?
Answer:  Yes or No.
:ORGANIZATION-MEMBERSHIP:

Question: Which campaign(s) put out material with more factual errors?  List the
campaigns in DECREASING order of factual errors, from most error-prone
to most accurate.  If you noticed no factual errors in the campaign
literature, skip this question.  If you believe a campaign made no
significant factual errors, omit them from the list.
Answer:  Select some of:  3  Ross Perot   - Independent
                          2  Bill Clinton - Democrat
                          1  George Bush  - Republican
                          4  Andre Marrou - Libertarian
                          5  John Hagelin - Natural Law Party
:FACTUAL-ERRORS:

Question: How many hours per week on average did you devote to reading online
campaign materials during the last two weeks of the campaign?
Answer:  Specify number of hours (an integer).
:HOURS-READING: 0

Question: How many hours per week on average do you spend viewing, listening to,
or reading off-line news (conventional news sources)?
Answer:  Specify number of hours (an integer).
:NEWS-HOURS: 0

Question: How many hours per week on average would you devote to on-line policy
discussions if the relevant government officials were participating?
Answer:  Specify number of hours (an integer).
:GOVT-LISTENS: 0

Question: Please list the media to which you generally pay any attention in
DECREASING order of familiarity. Rank the most familiar media sources
first.  Omit any unfamiliar media sources.
Answer:  Select any letters from:
            N  Scientific Journals
            R  Mailing lists (e.g., clinton@marist)
            Q  Usenet/NETNEWS
            P  FTP Sites
            L  CSPAN
            H  Local Radio
            O  Professional/Trade Publications
            G  Foreign Broadcasts (e.g., BBC, VOA, other national services)
            B  Weekly News Magazines (e.g., Time, Newsweek)
            C  Expert News Weeklies (e.g., The Economist)
            E  Local Newspapers
            K  Public TV (e.g., McNeil/Lehrer News Hour)
            D  Foreign Newspapers (e.g., Le Monde, Manchester Guardian)
            I  Network News (i.e., ABC, NBC, CBS)
            S  MIT Information Service
            F  Public Radio (i.e., NPR)
            M  Local TV News
            A  Newspapers of Record (e.g. New York Times, Wallstreet Journal)
            J  Cable News (i.e., CNN, CNBC)
            T  Online Newspapers (e.g. Clarinet)
:MEDIA-SOURCES:

Question: Please order the media sources according to their focus on issues that
concern you.  List only the media familiar to you in DECREASING order of
relevance for you.  Rank the most relevant first.
Answer:  Select any letters standing for media sources.
:MEDIA-FOCUS:

Question: Please order the media sources according to their depth of analysis.
List only the media familiar to you in DECREASING order of their depth
of analysis. Rank the media with deeper analysis first.
Answer:  Select any letters standing for media sources.

:MEDIA-ANALYSIS:

Question: Please order the media sources according to their level of bias FOR or
AGAINST a candidate. List only the media familiar to you in DECREASING
order of their bias. Rank the media with greater bias first.
Answer:  Select any letters standing for media sources.
:MEDIA-BIAS:

Question: If you communicated directly with the headquarters of a campaign
via email, what was the nature of your communication?  If you did not communicate
directly with headquarters, skip this question.
Answer:  Select any letters from:
            D  Delivered insults or hate mail
            J  Reviewed resumes or recommended personnel
            A  Asked questions for clarification
            H  Imparted specialized knowledge or private information
            B  Critiqued policy positions
            G  Offered moral support, congratulations, or condolances
            C  Complained about INTERNET usage
            F  Other activity
            L  Supplied expert/technical services or advise
            I  Proposed political strategy
            E  Failed to establish communication
            K  Sought direction/advise from HQ for partisan activity
            M  Informed HQ about local campaign efforts
:HQ-COMMUNICATION-NATURE:

Question: Should future political campaigns use electronic mail
to communicate issue positions and receive feedback from the public?
Answer:  Yes, No, or Unknown (don't know).
:CAMPAIGN-EMAIL: Unknown

Question: Should the U.S. Presidency use electronic networks to communicate policies
and receive feedback from the public?
Answer:  Yes, No, or Unknown (don't know).
:PRESIDENT-EMAIL: Unknown

Question: Should the U.S. Congress use electronic networks to publish pending
legislation, the Congressional record, and communicate with constituents?
Answer:  Yes, No, or Unknown (don't know).
:CONGRESS-EMAIL: Unknown

Question: Should the agencies of the U.S. Federal Government use electronic
networks to publish government information and field questions or
suggestions from the public?
Answer:  Yes, No, or Unknown (don't know).
:AGENCY-EMAIL: Unknown

Question: Should the full text of the Library of Congress as well as other
government databases be available over electronic networks?
Answer:  Yes, No, or Unknown (don't know).
:ONLINE-INFO: Unknown

Question: Should the government charge on a per-use basis for the information
resources made publicly available over electronic networks?  Assume a
fair, competitive price.
Answer:  Yes, No, or Unknown (don't know).
:INFO-PRICE: Unknown

Question: Would you use networked information resources significantly less if
you, or your institution, had to pay for each transaction, billed like
telephones?  Assume a fair, competitive price.
Answer: Yes, No or Unknown (don't know)
:INFO-USAGE: Unknown

Question: What would be the effects if the Federal Government spent billions of
dollars to create newer, faster, more extensive computer networks and make
available over those networks major new information resources, such as
the Library of Congress and all major public databases?
Answer:  Select any letters from:
            D  No effect on productivity growth
            P  Strengthens industrial competitiveness
            F  No effect on basic research
            L  Quickens the pace of basic research
            E  No change in the quality of education
            G  No effect on progress in computers
            A  Increases productivity
            J  Opens vast new markets in information and knowledge services
            O  Stimulates advances in computers
            H  No effect on the way business is done
            N  Spreads information rights more evenly
            M  Represents a wise investment for the 21st century
            Q  Usurps business opportunities from the private sector
            B  Improves the quality of education
            C  Makes information access more uneven
            K  Provides crucial public goods that business cannot supply
            I  Not relevant for industrial competitiveness
            R  Squanders scare government resources on a boondoggle
:INFO-VALUE:

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

The Presidential Campaign Information Service is a non-partisan
service operated at M.I.T to make campaign information available,
facilitate electronic discussion of the issues, and to study the
use of electronic mail as a component of a presidential campaign.
The service can neither control who reads what you write in public,
nor how they may use your written words.  For our part, we store
most messages, and we will make them available after the election
for scientific study.  Names and any other identifiers will not be
released; they will be omitted or replaced with random symbols.

Eric Loeb and John Mallery
M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Laboratory

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

Date: 16 Nov 92 10:31:01 EST
From: "John F. Woods" <[e-mail]>
Subject: What kind of computers are in the shuttle?
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brad Whitehurst) writes:
>>... I seem to remember that the
>>old computer's memory was the old style magnetic "core" memory.  Is
>>that correct?  And what kind of memory does the new unit use?  That
>>could explain a lot of the power consumption!
>The old ones used plated-wire memory, I believe.  (This was a relative of
>magnetic-core memory, one that didn't catch on except in specialized
>applications.)  The new ones use rad-hard SRAM memory.

Rad-hard SRAM, 50 bits of ECC for each 32 bits of memory, *and* a background
scrub cycle every two seconds.  They didn't buy this at "BACK OF THE TRUCK
PEECEES, LIMITED", nosir!

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 430
------------------------------