Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V12_1/V12_121.ZIP/V12_121

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 18KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/cafHNgm00VcJ01H05P>;
          Wed, 25 Jul 1990 02:04:29 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 1990 02:03:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #121

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 12 : Issue 121

Today's Topics:
         NASA Headline News for 07/24/90 (Forwarded)
            Re: World Space Agency
                <None>
                  Soyuz mass
        Re: Soviet shuttle, did it fly more than once?
        Re: Negative Matter [was Anti-Gravity Devices]
        Re: Negative Matter [was Anti-Gravity Devices]

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  [e-mail].  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription notices,
  should be sent to [e-mail], or, if urgent, to
             [e-mail]

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

Date: 24 Jul 90 19:02:14 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 07/24/90 (Forwarded)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, July 24, 1990               Audio Service:  202/755-1788
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This is NASA Headline News for Tuesday, July 24........

Preparations are underway at the Kennedy Space Center for
tomorrow's liquid hydrogen tanking test on the Space Shuttle
Atlantis.  The call-to-stations for the test started on schedule
this morning at 7:00 A.M.  A baggie has been reinstalled over the
tank flange and foaming operations have been completed.  The
closeouts of the aft compartment for the test are underway.

                            ********

The launch of the unmanned Atlas-Centaur rocket carrying the
Combined Release and Radiation Effects Satellite has been delayed
to tomorrow afternoon.  The launch is now scheduled for 3:21
P.M., weather permitting.  Live coverage of the launch on NASA
Select TV will begin at 2:00 P.M. EDT.

                            ********

A new moon, 12 miles in diameter, orbiting planet Saturn, has
been discovered by Dr. Mark Showalter, a researcher at NASA's
Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California.  He found the
small, bright object while analyzing images taken by the Voyager
2 Spacecraft.  A computer program used a "wake" pattern similar
to the one that discovered the planet Neptune.  The program
sorted through 30,000 images sent back to Earth during the
Voyager/Saturn encounters in 1980-81.

                            ********

On August 10, the Magellan spacecraft reaches Venus after a 15-
1/2 month voyage.  A media briefing will be held Thursday,
July 26, to discuss what can be expected during the spacecraft's
arrival, insertion into the planet's orbit, instrument check-out
and subsequent mapping.  Magellan's primary mission is to map 70
to 90 percent of Venus, with 10 times better resolution than any
achieved before.
                            ********

New research indicates that Venus may have lightning similar to
that on Earth, according to NASA researcher Dr. Christopher
Russell, Magnetic Fields Investigator for the Pioneer Venus
Spacecraft.  Previous studies revealed the lightning may be
related to volcanic activity on the surface of the planet.
However, radio signal data show that it is due to activity that
occurs during the afternoons in a heavy layer of clouds about 35
miles above the surface, not from volcanos.







---------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the broadcast schedule for Public Affairs events on NASA
Select TV.  All times are Eastern Daylight.

Tuesday, July 24......

              11:45 A.M.   U.S. and Soviet crew members of
                           the Apollo-Soyuz Space Mission--
                           15-year reunion news briefing at
                           the Johnson Space Center.

            12-2:00 P.M.   NASA Video Productions.

             6-8:00 P.M.   NASA Video Productions replay.

Wednesday, July 25....

               7:00 A.M.   Tanking test on the Space Shuttle
                           Atlantis at the Kennedy Space Center.

               2:00 P.M.   Launch of the Combined Release
                           and Radiation Effects Satellite
                           aboard the Atlas Rocket.

Thursday, July 26.....

              11:00 A.M.   U.S. and Soviet crew members of
                           the Apollo-Soyuz Space Mission--
                           15-year reunion news briefing at
                           the Kennedy Space Center.

              12:00 P.M.   NASA Update will be transmitted.

               2:00 P.M.   Magellan Status Press Conference.
                           A summary on the Venus encounter
                           scheduled August 10.

               6:00 P.M.   NASA Video Productions.

Friday, July 27......

              10:00 A.M.   Exobiology briefing at Ames
                           Research Center tape replay from
                           Thursday, July 26.
--------------------------------------------------------------
All events and times may change without notice.  This report is
filed daily, Monday through Friday at 12:00 P.M., EDT.  This is
a service of the Internal Communications Branch, NASA HQ.
Contact:  JSTANHOPE on NASAmail or at 202/453-8425.
--------------------------------------------------------------
NASA Select TV:  Satcom F2R, Transponder 13, C-Band, 72 Degrees
West Longitude, Audio 6.8, Frequency 3960 MHz.  JSNEWS7-24
---------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 25 Jul 90 00:34:13 GMT
From: apple.com![e-mail]  (Ben Hekster)
Subject: Re: World Space Agency

I, for one, would have grave objections to any closer collaboration
between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R in either space exploration or research.

NASA still undeniably has the world's most technologically advanced space
program.  The fact that it requires the Russians eight years to make a
smaller, non-functioning copy of the Space Shuttle obviously confirms
this.  The mere consideration of simply handing over all that we have so
painstakingly built and learned, with all the sacrifices that so many have
made, is utterly excruciating to me.

In my opinion, NASA would most likely have voiced much stronger opposition
to the idea, were it not for the awkward fact that so many of the liberal
figures in the West are so completely overwhelmed by the dictator of the only
remaining one-party state in Europe that the only way to get any
reasonable amount of funds allocated is by the embarassing kissing-up to
said state.

While I am personally convinced that President Bush would not favor the
idea, I can only hope that he can hold out against the political pressure.

Ben

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

Date: 20 Jul 90 18:55:33 GMT
From: eagle![e-mail]  (Ronald E. Graham)
Subject: <None>

sci.aeronautics, comp.software-eng, comp.org.ieee, sci.misc, sci.skeptic
Subject: Discussion on engineering education newsgroup
Date: 20 JUL 90 14:20:25
Expires:
References:
Sender:
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Followup-To:
Distribution:  world
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Keywords:

This posting is in response to requests from Ian Hawthorn and Richard Miller,
contributors to misc.education, that some discussion be carried out on the
subject of problems in engineering education, and how they relate to (or,
how they differ from) problems in any other educational realm.  Their point
(and I think it's valid) is that discussion outside of e-mail will better
measure the interest in the proposed group (talk.engineering.education was
the original title, but look for that to be changed before a call for votes)
than e-mail alone.

Let me kick off the discussion by describing a couple of problems I believe
we have at the NASA Lewis Research Center that have piqued my personal
interest in this subject: (1) the way things work; and (2) communications
skills.

Regarding (1):

Russell Lawrence, one of the respondents to the call for discussion, stated:
"I've met dozens of people who were able to perform intricate tasks by means
of complex symbols or procedures while having no understanding whatsoever of
the underlying problem."  This is a good summary.  We sometimes come out of
school knowing how to use the book, especially if the book has the equations
highlighted or boxed or listed in an Appendix, but we don't understand the
physics of the problem.  My mother continually is on my case for being a
mechanical engineer who can't fix his own car.  In my work area, a new hire
is limited as to what s/he can accomplish on the job until some sense of the
way the thing that is in question (generally a rocket, satellite, or the
Space Station Freedom) works.  But even that knowledge is based on the way
simpler mechanisms work, and we sometimes have a limited understanding of
that as well.

Regarding (2):

The Government continually states in its job descriptions that it is looking
for personnel with "good oral and written communications skills".  Where do
you get these skills, in an engineering curriculum?  In my own background,
I was required two quarters of English and one of Speech as an undergraduate,
and that wasn't enough to prepare me for the amount of, and the varied nature
of, the communications I am expected to provide as part of my day-to-day
duties.  (About 60 to 75 percent of my job is reports, memos, bean-counting,
meetings, phone calls, and teaching.)

This problem is aggravated by the influx of internationals in the job-force.
The internationals are great engineers, but, depending on the country of
origin and on the length of stay in the USA, they may be simply terrible at
communication.  We have managers who hire internationals (they are easier
to hire than white Americans), and then, faced with a communication gap
that takes some work to overcome, just let them go to do their own thing.
Then they actually wonder why the results are not what they want.

Harry, a Chinese gentleman in my area, is also frustrated at this situation.
In his previous position, he tells me all he had to do was "do analysis,
get result".  Now he has to do all the same paper-pushing as most of the
rest of us.  And it takes him that much longer, because we don't understand
what he is saying on the first, or second, or third, try.

Now, the Government offers ample training opportunities for its employees.
How are the opportunities chosen?  It's every one for him/her self, in most
cases.  I am interested, for myself, in finding out how to remedy (1) and
(2) without turning all of Lewis upside-down to do it.  (The Government
would never put up with it anyway.)  Are these kinds of things due to
shortcomings in the university educational process?  Or is the Government
doing something wrong?  For my own situation, did I do all I could?

This is the sort of thing I am interested in, at least.  Others will have
to speak for themselves.

RG

"The scientific method is holy." - M. Scott Peck

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

Date: 24 Jul 90 17:34:13 GMT
From: ksr![e-mail]  (Chris Jones)
Subject: Soyuz mass

In article <[e-mail]>, serre@boulder (SERRE GLENN) writes: >
>Does anyone know how much a Soyuz weighs?
>
A Soyuz TM (the latest model) has a mass of 6600 kg.  The SL-4 booster used to
orbit it can put 7500 kg into LEO.
--
Chris Jones    [e-mail]    {world,uunet,harvard}!ksr!clj
Chris Jones    [e-mail]    {world,uunet,harvard}!ksr!clj

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

Date: 24 Jul 90 18:48:08 GMT
From: concertina![e-mail]  (Steve Hix)
Subject: Re: Soviet shuttle, did it fly more than once?

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>
> >If I remember correctly, the name of the orbiter that is going to fly next
> >year translates as 'Little Bird'; I forget what the Russian transliteration
> >is.

Ptitsa?  (with all letters pronounced)  You do what you can when you can't
use various non-ASCII letters.

Maybe that's my old reading of serbo-croatian coming back to haunt me.

------------
  The only drawback with morning is that it comes
    at such an inconvenient time of day.
------------

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

Date: 24 Jul 90 20:10:34 GMT
From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!physics.utoronto.ca![e-mail]  (Christopher Neufeld)
Subject: Re: Negative Matter [was Anti-Gravity Devices]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian or James) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Christopher Neufeld) writes:
>>If we
>>posit "negative matter" whose response to a gravitational field is to
>>move in the "wrong" direction, but is otherwise composed of charged
>>particles in bound states, then it should behave qualitatively the same
>>as normal matter in interactions with photons.
>
>    Ah. In that case, change the question to 'How can you tell you're
>looking at negative matter'?
>
   Because it falls up. It looks qualitatively similar (let's not ask
whether the fundamental charge will still equal the electron charge, as
that would change its interaction strength with photons), but in the
absence of all other forces, it moves away from a collection of matter
which we refer to as "positive matter." Negative matter is that material
which is repelled by a hydrogen atom taken at random from the ocean, and
which attracts that atom in turn.
   Note that there is no experimental evidence to suggest the existence of
"negative matter," but that doesn't keep us from speculating about its
possible properties, if it does exist.


--
 Christopher Neufeld....Just a graduate student  | "The eagle may soar, but
 [e-mail]    Ad astra! | the weasel never gets
 cneufeld@{pro-generic,pnet91}.cts.com           | sucked up into a jet
 "Don't edit reality for the sake of simplicity" | engine."  Simon & Simon

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

Date: 25 Jul 90 01:11:32 GMT
From: usc!wuarchive!wuphys![e-mail]  (Ian H. Redmount)
Subject: Re: Negative Matter [was Anti-Gravity Devices]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Christopher Neufeld) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian or James) writes:
>>    Ah. In that case, change the question to 'How can you tell you're
>>looking at negative matter'?
>>
>   Because it falls up....it moves away from a collection of matter
>which we refer to as "positive matter." Negative matter is that material
>which is repelled by a hydrogen atom taken at random from the ocean, and
>which attracts that atom in turn.

This isn't the usual meaning attached to ``negative [mass] matter''---you
have to breach the equivalence principle to do this.  Negative-mass matter,
as usually understood, falls DOWN in the gravitational field of a positive-
mass body.  (In relativistic terms, the spacetime geodesics near the body
correspond to downward fall, irrespective of the mass of the test body on
a geodesic.  In Newtonian terms, the negative mass cancels from both sides
of the equation of motion.)  The signature of negative mass is that it
REPELS other bodies---of positive or negative mass---gravitationally.  Thus
a lump of negative-mass stuff would fall toward the earth, while exerting
a repulsive force on it.

Sound contradictory?  It isn't.  Consider two bodies with masses equal
in magnitude and opposite in sign.  The negative-mass body is attracted
to the positive mass; the positive-mass body is repelled from the negative
with equal force.  If they start at rest, the two bodies will chase each
other across the Universe.  It may appear, since the total energy of this
odd couple is ever zero, that they can accelerate beyond the speed of light
to infinite speed.  Doesn't work that way...the pair approach the speed of
light asymptotically, because each feels the RETARDED gravitational field
of the other, and the transmission time becomes important at relativistic
speeds.

This problem is treated in detail in the ``Problem Book in Relativity and
Gravitation,'' by Lightman, Press, Price, and Teukolsky (Princeton
University Press, 1975), p. 81 and pp. 379-385.  A more general treatment
of negative mass, with references to earlier works, is the article
``Negative Mass in General Relativity,'' by W. B. Bonnor, General
Relativity and Gravitation, v. 21, n. 11 (1989), pp. 1143-1157.

The usual argument against negative mass is not merely that none has
been observed, but:  if it exists, why aren't we simply drowning in
it?  It would be energetically favorable to produce it from the vacuum,
the more the better.  In technical terms, the vacuum would be unstable,
contrary to observation.

Ian H. Redmount,
Sole Proprietor of any of the above which is not fact

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

End of SPACE Digest V12 #121
*******************