Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V16_3/V16NO312.ZIP/V16NO312

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 21KB

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 05:22:08
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #312
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Sun, 14 Mar 93       Volume 16 : Issue 312

Today's Topics:
                   Charon: Planet or moon? (3 msgs)
                     Clementine, SDIO, ABM Treaty
                            DC-X (2 msgs)
                          Life in the Galaxy
                      Mars exploration (2 msgs)
                    Mars Observer Orbital Elements
              Pluto Fast Flyby post-flyby fate (2 msgs)
                   Query on sun synchronous orbits
         Road & Track road tests 1996 JPL Rocky IV Microrover
               See if this gets cancelled by Pepe Depew
                       shuttle-derived vehicles
        Sisters of Mars Observer (was Re: Refueling in orbit)
Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anonymity is NOT the issue (3 msgs)
                      Timberwind on Beyond 2000

    Welcome to the Space Digest!!  Please send your messages to
    "[e-mail]", and (un)subscription requests of the form
    "Subscribe Space <your name>" to one of these addresses: listserv@uga
    (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle
    (THENET), or [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 14 Mar 93 00:26:54 GMT
From: Arthur Chandler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Charon: Planet or moon?
Newsgroups: sci.space

  I apologize if this question seems to elementary for this group; but
how else are the uninformed masses going to learn?    :<)
  Is Charon a moon or a coplanet of Pluto?  And what, if any, are the
formal distinctions between the two categories?  And finally, is there
any minimum size for a body to be considered a moon, and not just
orbiting debris?  In other words, would you call a 2-centimenter rock
revolving around a planet a moon of that planet?
  Thanks for the clarification.


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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 01:39:10 GMT
From: Michael Moroney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Charon: Planet or moon?
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Arthur Chandler) writes:


>  I apologize if this question seems to elementary for this group; but
>how else are the uninformed masses going to learn?    :<)
>  Is Charon a moon or a coplanet of Pluto?  And what, if any, are the
>formal distinctions between the two categories?  And finally, is there

Well, since Pluto itself is hardly large enough to qualify for "planet",
much less Charon, perhaps it's just best to consider them both moons
without a planet, orbiting each other instead.

many :-)

-Mike

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 06:31:15 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Charon: Planet or moon?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Arthur Chandler) writes:
>
>   I apologize if this question seems to elementary for this group; but
> how else are the uninformed masses going to learn?    :<)
>   Is Charon a moon or a coplanet of Pluto?  And what, if any, are the
> formal distinctions between the two categories?  And finally, is there
> any minimum size for a body to be considered a moon, and not just
> orbiting debris?  In other words, would you call a 2-centimenter rock
> revolving around a planet a moon of that planet?
>   Thanks for the clarification.
>

There is no basis for any formal distinction.  Call it what you like.

Ben

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

Date: 14 Mar 1993 00:31:14 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clementine, SDIO, ABM Treaty
Newsgroups: sci.space

For Brian who Asked:

THe ABM treaty, like all other treaties we signed with the SOviet union
is still in effect.  Our requirement for Recognizing the CIS government and
the Russian Federal Republic was they blanket accept the treaties in force
in whole.  THey had the choice of an up or down acceptance.  If they rejected
any one treaty,  then they were going to have to re-negotiate all of them.

The prospect of facing jesse helms over 150 times,  was so scary, they signed.
Even worse, rush limbaugh might have started ranting, and then where would
we be *gak*.

pat

PS  THe CIS and russians  had to take joint responsibilty for all foreign
debts.

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

Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1993 22:22:30 GMT
From: Jeffrey David Hagen <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X
Newsgroups: sci.space

This may be a question that has already been answered in this group, but I'll ask anyway.
Do you know what portion of its payload the DCY will be able to RETURN from orbit?

Jeff Hagen
Rice University

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

Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1993 23:58:12 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeffrey David Hagen) writes:
>... what portion of its payload the DCY will be able to RETURN from orbit?

All of it.  It can't do intact aborts otherwise.
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1993 21:57:54 GMT
From: Josh Hopkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Life in the Galaxy
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Jeff Bytof) writes:


>            Some Thoughts on Technological Life in the Galaxy
>            -------------------------------------------------

>If technological life were abundant in the galaxy (and I don't think it
>is) then we might have to face annihilation or assimilation with a fair
>degree of certainty, in my opinion.

If new technological life forms commonly face annihilation and the galaxy still
manages to teem with life then new civilizations must be popping up all over
the place.

Assimilation poses other interesting questions.  One might examine the
interactions between western visitors and various native cultures.  What
determines their fate?

>Not that they would travel here
>directly, but that when the "galactic conversation" got around to biology
>they (and we) might want to trade DNA sequences.  Whatever the importance
>to our science of such an exchange, it might give them the knowledge to
>effectively introduce something nasty into our biosphere, and do it by
>either unwitting cooperation on our part or by swift dispatch of a
>small ampule to our Solar System and Earth.

Dispatching data seems much more likely than hardware.  It is, after all, a
few trillion times cheaper and selectively destroys only those planets which
develop intelligence enough to be threatening. However, I tend to go along with
the hope that any civilization that contacts us will have "outgrown" violence
or at least not feel threatend.  Whether my belief is based in reality or simply
stems from optimistic naivite is open to question.

The possibility for disease
is an interesting one, but it seems more likely to be accidental than
deliberate.  If you take a look at the population of native Americans before
and after Columbus you'll see tha huge numbers of people did die, but that
most of them were killed by European diseases.  Even if saints had discovered
the "New World" the problem would still have occured.  However, we can hope that
anyone who wants to assemble alien designs, be they hardware or biological,
will use caution.

>This is what I would call
>the "Galactic Jungle" model.

Oh come on!  You have to call it the Andromeda Strain model :-)


>On the other hand, I believe that technological life is very sparse in
>the Galaxy, and so favor the "Desert" model.  A possible activity in such a
>model would be the placement in counter-revolving galactic orbits of a
>series of automated stations that would be designed to relay general
>astronomical information back to the home planet.
>I estimate as the most probable scenerio that any systematized
>transmission we receive from another technological civilization will be
>from an automated probe within 1000 light years.

Care to tell us where the number came from?  It would seem to require an
understanding of the industrial capacity and population of the galaxy.

>Thus we have quite a
>while to wait before such a station detects the earth.

And while you're at it, explain why this follows.

>The placement
>of automated probes effectively increases N in the Drake equation, and
>perhaps we should add factors to the equation that estimates the number of
>working probes that technological civilizations deploy and how long
>they might last.

N in the Drake equation is the number of civilizations in the galaxy.  This
concept does not increase N, it just increases the probability that two of

those civilizations will be aware of each other.
--
Josh Hopkins                                          [e-mail]
          "Tout ce qu'un homme est capable d'imaginer, d'autres hommes
                     seront capable de la realiser"
             -Jules Verne

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 02:51:44 GMT
From: Steve Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars exploration
Newsgroups: sci.space

I know some folks working on MESUR at JPL and I think you would be hard
pressed to keep them from using VR at some level, especially if the
full MESUR network is flown. I think that you should expect VR access to
the Mars Observer data as well. As the technology becomes available
comercially, it my become hard to get the old flat displays we are used to
now.
When was the last time you saw a card reader or a current loop tty?...
?
Steve Collins MO Spacecraft Team (AACS)

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

Date: 14 Mar 1993 00:24:29 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars exploration
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Collins) writes:
>When was the last time you saw a card reader or a current loop tty?...


Walk into any army Data processing center.  Better wear safety boots
in case a wire board is lying on the floor.

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 03:08:05 GMT
From: Steve Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer Orbital Elements
Newsgroups: sci.space

For the cruise trajectory, the inclination is referenced to the mean
orbit of the Earth about the sun at the J2000 epoch.
For the Mars orbits, it is WRT the Mars mean Equator {at J2000.zVLP}

That is: the inclination is the angle between the normal to the MO orbit
and the normal to the Earth's orbit ( or the mars equator) respectively.
Steve Collins  MO spacecraft team (AACS)

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

Date: 13 Mar 93 23:28:55 GMT
From: Kenneth Ng <sugra!ken>
Subject: Pluto Fast Flyby post-flyby fate
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]: [e-mail] (Jeff Foust) writes:
:In a recent article [e-mail] (Gregory P Dubois) writes:
:>Leaving aside all the questions
:>which can be asked about the past efforts, given that the Pluto Fast
:>Flyby mission currently under consideration will presumably be on an
:>escape trajectory, does anyone know if there has been any serious
:>consideration of affixing some form of message to the two spacecraft?
:In the working draft of the Pluto Project plan, there is a provision for
:carrying on the spacecraft a "commemorative plaque and/or encoded historical
:cultural information", provided that it has a mass of less than 0.3 kg and
:little or no cost that the project would have to incur.

Hm, how about this: sell space to write your own message on a strip of
microfilm?  1/2 :-)  Proceeds will go toward the funding of the probe.

--
Kenneth Ng
Please reply to [e-mail] for now.
"All this might be an elaborate simulation running in a little device sitting
on someone's table" -- J.L. Picard: ST:TNG

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

Date: 14 Mar 1993 09:46:46 GMT
From: George William Herbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pluto Fast Flyby post-flyby fate
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kenneth Ng) writes:
>:In the working draft of the Pluto Project plan, there is a provision for
>:carrying on the spacecraft a "commemorative plaque and/or encoded historical
>:cultural information", provided that it has a mass of less than 0.3 kg and
>:little or no cost that the project would have to incur.
>
>Hm, how about this: sell space to write your own message on a strip of
>microfilm?  1/2 :-)  Proceeds will go toward the funding of the probe.

Better Yet, a CD-ROM with archives of sci.space...

[little green man lands UFO on White House lawn, gets out, walks up to
confused President and asks "Take us to Henry Spencer!..." ;-) ]

-george

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 03:20:36 GMT
From: Steve Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Query on sun synchronous orbits
Newsgroups: sci.space

Mars Observer is in fact using a sun syncronous orbit for mapping.{
I belive it is also a "frozen" orbit in that the eccentricity is chosen
to prevent the v:w3argument of periapsis from changing
Steve Collins  MO Spacecraft Team AACS

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

Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1993 07:41:28 GMT
From: Daniel Burstein <[e-mail]>
Subject: Road & Track road tests 1996 JPL Rocky IV Microrover
Newsgroups: sci.space

the review I'd like to see is for the Saturn V's tractor trailer...
weight of umpity umpity tons, top speed 0.something miles per hour,
acceleration of near zero and with a pretty looooonnnng stopping distance.

[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 17:35:27 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: See if this gets cancelled by Pepe Depew
Newsgroups: sci.space

Meaningless test message with no controversial content, though
perhaps irritating by its very presence and worthy of automatic
cancellation by the new self-appointed net god Pepe Depew.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to [e-mail].
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to [e-mail].
*IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to [e-mail] for details.

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

Date: 14 Mar 1993 09:50:26 GMT
From: George William Herbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: shuttle-derived vehicles
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>Actually, Zubrin's Ares, as of his presentation at the last Worldcon, has
>its SSMEs in a little pod where the orbiter's tail section is now, although
>it puts its payload (and upper stage) on top of the ET rather than
>immediately above the SSMEs.

Ah, was wondering when they were going to get around to trying that one.

>However, Ares is only the latest of a long line of such shuttle-derived
>launchers; Zubrin didn't invent the idea.

I think the man responsible for the Ares concepts is Dave Baker at Martin
Marietta.  He and Zubrin were working closely together for obvious
reasons; Zubrin has the mission (40 ton chunks of a manned Mars program)
and Baker has the potential vehicle.

-george william herbert

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 03:01:39 GMT
From: Steve Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sisters of Mars Observer (was Re: Refueling in orbit)
Newsgroups: sci.space

i]
The MO spares are already being rummaged through for use on other missions.
MESUR is looking hard at the possibility of using some of our AACS hardware
and I believe that some components are already assigned to other projects.
I understand that Magellen used a fair number of Galileo spares in this way.
Steve Collins MO SCT (AACS)

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

Date: 14 Mar 93 00:08:34 GMT
From: Jonathan Eifrig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anonymity is NOT the issue
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,comp.org.eff.talk,sci.space,alt.privacy,news.admin

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nicholas Kramer) writes:
>We seem to agree on
>the basics: Sending cancel messages isn't a great solution.

    I'm surprized that no one has brought up the _real_ reason that
vigilante cancel messages aren't a good idea:

    Suppose someone on the Net (like me, for instance! :-)) decides
that cancelling other people's articles really just Isn't The Thing.
Thus, he programs his news software so that, when it receives a cancel
message, REPOSTS the article instead of cancelling it.

    Can you say "Bandwidth Overload," boys and girls?  :-)

    The really sad thing is that this is just the same sort of knee-jerk,
paternalistic crap we see from the Fundamentalists who spend their lives
looking for smut to stamp out.

    Let's face it: if somebody doesn't want to see anonymous postings,
there are readily available technical solutions: the killfile, for one.
What this clown wants to do is to dictate content for _everyone_ based
on his preferences.  What a moron; he probably thought the Meese commission
was to lenient.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                "If you start throwing hedgehogs under me, I
                 shall thow two porcupines under you."

                    - Nikita Kruschev

Jack Eifrig ([e-mail])       The Johns Hopkins University, C.S. Dept.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

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

Date: Sat, 13 Mar 93 14:38:01 EST
From: "George W. Pogue (Bill " <[e-mail]>
Subject: Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anonymity is NOT the issue
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,sci.space,alt.privacy,news.admin.policy

"William C. Hulley" <[e-mail]> writes:

>
> we can assume that three things will happen if rick enacts his
> delightfully sensitive censorship scheme:
>
>     - his site will be cut off from the rest of the net,
>
>     - another anonymous site with a different naming scheme will be started
>       within hours,
>
>     - someone will try to post anonymously and when that post is
>       "moderatedly moderated" he or she will contact the EFF and the ACLU
>       and begin, probably through the courts, an action to protect our
>       first amendment rights.
>
> gee rick, i dunno, this ARMM thingy doesn't sound like such a good
> idea, maybe you should think about it just a wee bit more before you
> implement it.


I think that you are right on this... first, if I posted anon and it suddenly
disappeared then I'd sure start wondering what happened. Let's think now,
the only way rick can stop a post if it his site is the first to receive
it. Otherwise, the anon will get into the group and passed on endlessly.
The only sites that will have this major kludge is his and any he feeds.

Second, the ACLU and the EFF would be highly interested in this act. They
of course love to fight for first amendment rights and have more than enough
deep pockets to drag this out. Does rick?

Moderation in an otherwise unmoderated group is censorship. Better watch it!

bill

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Buy & Sell American When Possible!  <->  All Standard Disclaimers Do Apply!
 [e-mail]  (George W. Pogue  (Bill ))
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 14 Mar 1993 06:33:35 GMT
From: Peter Honeyman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anonymity is NOT the issue
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,sci.space,alt.privacy

Karl_Kleinpaste writes:
|> [e-mail] writes:
|>     "Two wrongs does not make a right."
|>
|> Quite so -- I'm not recommending it.  But in order to have applied that
|> aphorism, you must have acknowledged that what Johan is doing is wrong.

oh come on, karl!  (why am i picking on karl tonight?)  so one wrong
doesn't make a right either.

    peter

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 04:52:31 GMT
From: Hugh Emberson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Timberwind on Beyond 2000
Newsgroups: sci.space

Last weeks Beyond 2000 carried a short piece on Nuclear Rockets,
including Timberwind and an interview with Dr Zubrin.  They also
mentioned a test facility for nuclear rockets that (has been
proposed)/(is awaiting funding)/(is under construction).

Since we (NZ) seem to get Beyond 2000 before the US this program will
probably appear in the US sometime in the next couple of months/years.

Happy viewing.

Hugh
--
Hugh Emberson -- CS Postgrad
[e-mail]

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 312
------------------------------