Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_5/V16NO577.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 19KB

Date: Sun, 16 May 93 05:07:34
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #577
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Sun, 16 May 93       Volume 16 : Issue 577

Today's Topics:
                            Life on Mars.
             No. Re: Space Marketing would be wonderfull.
                      Space Marketing -- Boycott
            Space Marketing would be wonderfull. (3 msgs)
         U.S. Government and Science and Technolgy Investment

    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: 15 May 93 20:03:11 GMT
From: Bruce Watson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Life on Mars.
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.bio

In article <[e-mail]| [e-mail] writes:
|
|No if you're Fred Hoyle.  He rejects the Big Bang, and proposes an infinitely
|old universe (*really*), so in his model life *always* starts on a given planet
|by seeding from outer space - there has *always* been life somewhere.
|
Didn't Fred Hoyle abandon the steady state theory?

--
Bruce Watson ([e-mail])

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

Date: 16 May 1993 00:14:20 -0700
From: Ajay Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: No. Re: Space Marketing would be wonderfull.
Newsgroups: sci.environment,misc.consumers,misc.invest,sci.astro,talk.environment,talk.politics.space,sci.space,rec.backcountry,misc.rural,misc.headlines,k12.chat.teacher

[e-mail] (OPIRG) writes:

>I don't think that idea means what you think it does. Having everyone
>on Earth subject to some ad agency's "poor taste" *is* an abomination.

Well, we already suffer from street hoardings.  If you don't
watch TV, you are free of commercials there, but if you want
to go from A to B you cannot escape beer ads.

>us loathe it. I'd rather not have the beauty of the night sky always marred
>by a giant billboard, and I'll bet the idea is virtually sacrilegious
>to an astronomer like Sagan.

I think the right time to stop this proposal is now.

If this idea goes through, it's the thin end of the wedge.  Soon
companies will be doing larger, and more permanant, billboards in the
sky.  I wouldn't want a world a few decades from now when the sky
looks like Las Vegas.  That would _really_ make me sad.

Coca Cola company will want to paint the moon red and white.  (Well,
if not this moon, then a moon of Jupiter).  Microscum will want to
name a galaxy `Microscum Galaxy'.  Where do we draw the line?
Historically mankind is not very good at drawing fine lines.

I'm normally extremely enthusiastic about all forms of resource
allocation for space research; I think it's the most important
investment possible for mankind in the long run.  But this is not
the way to get the money.

        -ans.
--
Ajay Shah, [phone], [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 16 May 1993 03:30:05 GMT
From: David Fox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Marketing -- Boycott
Newsgroups: sci.environment,misc.consumers,misc.invest,sci.astro,talk.environment,talk.politics.space,sci.space,rec.backcountry,misc.rural,misc.headlines,k12.chat.teacher

In the New York Times on Sunday May 9th in the week in review
section there was a report of a group called "Space Marketing"
in Atlanta, Georgia who is planning to put up a one mile wide
reflective Earth orbiting satelite which will appear as large
and as bright as the Moon and carry some sort of advertising.
There was an editorial about this in the Times the following
Tuesday.

Are others as upset about this as I am?  I feel that a global
boycott of anyone involved with such a project would be a good
idea.  Perhaps it could be made illegal in various countries
around the world?  Do others agree?

-david

[Relevant messages found on the net:]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [e-mail] (Peter Webb)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Stopping the sky-vandals
Date: 13 May 1993 21:17:22 GMT
Organization: HKS, Inc.
Distribution: world



If you don't want to see Space Marketing put up orbiting billboards, write
them, or call them, and tell them so.  You might also write your
congresspeople.  Space Marketing can be reached at:

Attn: Mike Lawson
Public Relations Dept.
Space Marketing
1495 Atmbree Rd., Suite 600
Rosewell, GA 30076
(404)-442-9682

--
Peter Webb                     [e-mail]
Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc.        Voice: 401-727-4200
1080 Main St, Pawtucket RI 02860        FAX: [phone]

[Alternatively, you could try to find out who their clients
 will be and tell *them* how you feel.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.misc,sci.environment,talk.environment
From: [e-mail] (Larry Klaes)
Subject: Light Pollution (Space Ads) Information
Keywords: light pollution, advertisements
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 13 May 1993 20:45:36 GMT

        Dave Crawford ([e-mail]), Executive Director of the
    International Dark-Sky Association (IDA), sent me information on where
    you can write in regards to the proposed "Billboards in the Sky" and
    asked me to post it:

        Karen Brown
        Center for the Study of Commercialism
        1875 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 300
        Washington, D.C. 20009-5728
        U.S.A.

        Telephone:  [phone]
        Fax:        [phone]

        Please note that I have no involvement whatsoever with the CSC.

        Larry Klaes  [e-mail]
             or - ...!decwrl!verga.enet.dec.com!klaes
                 or - [e-mail]
                     or - [e-mail]

             "All the Universe, or nothing!" - H. G. Wells

        EJASA Editor, Astronomical Society of the Atlantic
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Vandalizing the Sky
Date: 10 May 93 21:51:11 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
X-Posted-From: algol.jsc.nasa.gov

F.Baube[tm] ([e-mail]) wrote:
[...]
: That's roughly akin to saying let's let Anaconda strip-mine
: the Grand Canyon so that strip-mining can boldly go where no
: strip mining technology has gone before .. because after all,
: mining means profits, and profits mean technological advance-
: ment, and technogical advancement means prosperity, and pros-
: perity means happiness, and so to hell with the Grand Canyon ..

Space advertisement in LOW Earth Orbit is very short term -- on the
order of a few years before the orbit decays.  (Higher orbits last
longer.)  Advertisers will certainly be aware of the environmental
aspects of their advertising.  Fred's argument is roughly akin to
saying that it's bad to cut down trees, so we shouldn't advertise in
newspapers.  Think that through, Fred.

Picture this: Our space billboard is a LARGE inflatable structure,
filled with "bio-degradable" foam instead of gas.  It scoops up space
debris as it orbits, thus CLEANING the space environment and bringing
you The Pause That Refreshes at the same time.  Because of the large
drag coefficient, it will de-orbit -- safely burning up -- within a
year.

Embedded in the foam structure is a small re-entry vehicle, which does
not burn up during entry.  It contains the electronics and propulsion
system (which may be refurbished and re-used) as well as space science
experiments proposed and built by high school students in
advertiser-sponsored science fairs.

Advertisers buy time on the billboard, whose surface is made up of
tiny mirrors controlled by the avionics package.  The avionics can
reconfigure the mirrors to reflect different messages at different
parts of the globe.  Clever programming allows different languages
to every country.

During orbital night, the mirrors turn perpendicular to the surface,
and small lights are revealed.  The lights spell out messages for all
to see.

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      [e-mail]  [phone]

                  "HERE MEN FROM THE PLANET EARTH
                    FIRST SET FOOT UPON THE MOON
                           JULY 1969, A.D.
                  WE CAME IN PEACE FOR ALL MANKIND."

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

Date: 16 May 93 04:41:26 GMT
From: Magnus Redin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Marketing would be wonderfull.
Newsgroups: sci.environment,misc.consumers,misc.invest,sci.astro,talk.environment,talk.politics.space,sci.space,rec.backcountry,misc.rural,misc.headlines,k12.chat.teacher

[e-mail] (David Fox) writes:
>In the New York Times on Sunday May 9th in the week in review
>section there was a report of a group called "Space Marketing"
>in Atlanta, Georgia who is planning to put up a one mile wide
>reflective Earth orbiting satelite which will appear as large
>and as bright as the Moon and carry some sort of advertising.
>There was an editorial about this in the Times the following
>Tuesday.

I realy like this idea, it would be wonderfull to see such a
big bright satelite on the night sky. I will even promise to
try to buy whatever product it advertises to help this project.

Please write to Space Marketing and encourage this project.
I sadly dosent have enough money to invest in it.

>congresspeople.  Space Marketing can be reached at:

>Attn: Mike Lawson
>Public Relations Dept.
>Space Marketing
>1495 Atmbree Rd., Suite 600
>Rosewell, GA 30076
>(404)-442-9682



>Space advertisement in LOW Earth Orbit is very short term -- on the
>order of a few years before the orbit decays.  (Higher orbits last
>longer.)  Advertisers will certainly be aware of the environmental
>aspects of their advertising.  Fred's argument is roughly akin to
>saying that it's bad to cut down trees, so we shouldn't advertise in
>newspapers.  Think that through, Fred.

>Picture this: Our space billboard is a LARGE inflatable structure,
>filled with "bio-degradable" foam instead of gas.  It scoops up space
>debris as it orbits, thus CLEANING the space environment and bringing
>you The Pause That Refreshes at the same time.  Because of the large
>drag coefficient, it will de-orbit -- safely burning up -- within a
>year.

>Embedded in the foam structure is a small re-entry vehicle, which does
>not burn up during entry.  It contains the electronics and propulsion
>system (which may be refurbished and re-used) as well as space science
>experiments proposed and built by high school students in
>advertiser-sponsored science fairs.

>Advertisers buy time on the billboard, whose surface is made up of
>tiny mirrors controlled by the avionics package.  The avionics can
>reconfigure the mirrors to reflect different messages at different
>parts of the globe.  Clever programming allows different languages
>to every country.

>During orbital night, the mirrors turn perpendicular to the surface,
>and small lights are revealed.  The lights spell out messages for all
>to see.

>-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
>      [e-mail]  [phone]

>                  "HERE MEN FROM THE PLANET EARTH
>                    FIRST SET FOOT UPON THE MOON
>                           JULY 1969, A.D.
>                  WE CAME IN PEACE FOR ALL MANKIND."
--
--
Magnus Redin  Lysator Academic Computer Society  [e-mail]
Mail: Magnus redin, Rydsv{gen 240C26, 582 51 LINK|PING, SWEDEN
Phone: Sweden (0)13 260046 (answering machine)  and  (0)120 13706

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

Date: Sun, 16 May 1993 05:35:30 GMT
From: Tom R Courtney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Marketing would be wonderfull.
Newsgroups: sci.environment,misc.consumers,misc.invest,sci.astro,talk.environment,talk.politics.space,sci.space,rec.backcountry,misc.rural,misc.headlines,k12.chat.teacher

In some sense, I think that the folks who think the idea is wonderful, and the
folks who want to boycott anyone who has anything to do with this project are
both right.

That is, I think that space advertising is an interesting idea, and if someone
wants to try it out, more power to them. However, a company may discover that
the cost of launch is not the only cost of advertising, and a company who
gauged that ill will would lose them more revenue than the advertising would
gain might decide to bow out of the project.

I got incensed when I read that Carl Sagan called this idea an "abomination."
I don't think that word means what he thinks it does. Children starving in the
richest country in the world is an abomination; an ad agency is at worst just
in poor taste.

Tom Courtney

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

Date: Sun, 16 May 1993 06:14:53 GMT
From: OPIRG <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Marketing would be wonderfull.
Newsgroups: sci.environment,misc.consumers,misc.invest,sci.astro,talk.environment,talk.politics.space,sci.space,rec.backcountry,misc.rural,misc.headlines,k12.chat.teacher

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom R Courtney) writes:
>I got incensed when I read that Carl Sagan called this idea an "abomination."
>I don't think that word means what he thinks it does. Children starving in the
>richest country in the world is an abomination; an ad agency is at worst just
>in poor taste.
>
>Tom Courtney

I don't think that idea means what you think it does. Having everyone
on Earth subject to some ad agency's "poor taste" *is* an abomination.
(abomination : n. loathing; odious or degrading habit or act; an
object of disgust. (Oxford Concise Dictionary)) Maybe *you* don't mind
having every part of your life saturated with commercials, but many of
us loathe it. I'd rather not have the beauty of the night sky always marred
by a giant billboard, and I'll bet the idea is virtually sacrilegious
to an astronomer like Sagan.

Reid Cooper

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

Date: Sun, 16 May 1993 05:05:45 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: U.S. Government and Science and Technolgy Investment
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space,sci.research,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian,misc.education

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:
>[e-mail]. (Gregory McColm) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Conor Frederick Prischmann) writes:
>>>In article <1srfii$[e-mail]> [e-mail]. (Gregory McColm) writes:

>>>Huh?  Please state your criteria for selecting the "greatest philosopher"
>>>title.  P.S. Ever read any Nietzsche?

>>Greatest = most likely to be remembered five hundred years hence.
>>I must admit that that makes many of my personal favorites not
>>that great.  I make no comment on Nietzche except to remark that
>>he was no Immanuel Kant.  Interpret that cryptic remark as you
>>please.

>Some people have appended that remark, that Nietzche was no Kant,
>with "thankfully." I haven't read enough of either to comment, although
>everyone tells me I should read Nietzche.

I would have to say that the "greatest philosopher" title would have to
go to Plato since the whole enterprise of philosophy was essentially
defined by him.  Although he got most of his answers wrong, he did
definitively identify what the important questions are.  I think it
was Descartes who said that "All philosophy is just a footnote to Plato."

If I were to choose which philosopher made the most important advances
in human knowledge over his lifetime, that's simple...it is Aristotle.
This is so much the case that many simply refer to him as "the philosopher".

Regarding Nietzsche, he's one of the most entertaining, although since his
ideas were so fragmented (and since his life was cut short) it is doubtful
that his influence as a philosopher is likely to be very extensive 500 years
from now.  They'll probably still be reading him in 500 years though.

As for "modern" philosophers, I would have to say that Kant was the most
influential since he had such a strong influence on almost everyone who
came after him (and unfortunately, they maintained his errors and
amplified them over time).

I would say that the most influential "american" philosopher would have to
be Dewey.

But as to the question of what philosopher will be most highly regarded in
500 years, it may very well be Ayn Rand (who in every important respect
was "American", but was born in Russia).  But I guess that remains to be seen.

--Brian

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


Received: from CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU by VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
          id ab16329; 15 May 93 23:25:46 EDT
To: [e-mail]
Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!digex.com!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Shuttle and Pennicillin
Date: 15 May 1993 22:44:07 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications USA
Lines: 26
Message-Id: <1t49pn$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: access.digex.net
Sender: [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]


Pennicillin if i have everything correct,  was a highly valuable
Myco-toxin,  discovered during WW2.  It proved to have an amazing
Bacterio-cidal effect without human toxicity.   It's immediate
administration  showed immediate dramatic results  solving
problems  that previously were fatal.  Although initially
enormously expensive to culture,  within 3 years,
the price had fallen at least two orders of magnitude,
and within 10 years,  was  not much more expensive then
aspirin.  Penicillin was also usable for an amazingly wide
class of infections.

Centoxin is a drug that is not passing FDA approval.  It promised
amazing results for Toxic shock, a rapidly fatal disease.
It consumed enormous amounts of funding  in testing and
developement,  However it works  less then 1 in 5 times
of administration  and costs $2,000 per administration
with no promise of any reduction in manufacturing cost.
The drug thus costs $10,000 per useful case,  and is
implicated in a slight increase in mortality for some
patients.

I would not dare to compare the shuttle to Pennicillin,
but to centoxin.

pat

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 577
------------------------------