Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V16_3/V16NO399.ZIP/V16NO399

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 29KB

Date: Thu,  1 Apr 93 05:39:55
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #399
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Thu,  1 Apr 93       Volume 16 : Issue 399

Today's Topics:
                    Atlas rocket question (2 msgs)
                  color temperature of sun and earth
             Flight time comparison: Voyager vs. Gallileo
                  Gerald Bull (was: Jules Verne Gun)
                       Guns for Space (3 msgs)
                               Omnimax
               Small Astronaut (was: Budget Astronaut)
                       Space Research Spin Off
                         Space Station Aldrin
                  Status of U.S./Soviet Cooperation
                STS-1 DISASTER/COVERUP (and mcelwaine)
           the call to space (was Re: Clueless Szaboisms )
         TOPEX Observes Giant Waves from Storm of the Century
                         Why is Venus so hot?
        WORKSHOP: SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES FOR SATELLITE AUTONOMY

    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: 31 Mar 93 20:12:07 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Atlas rocket question
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael Richards) writes:
>    Looking at footage of the Mercury programme launches, the Atlas
>rockets (I think?) all seem to have a feature that I've never seen in any
>other rocket.  Just above the base of the first stage seem to be at least one,
>or possibly more small engines that fire at an angle to the main engines.

There's one on each side.  This has been done on one or two other rockets
of similar vintage; I think the Thor did it that way, and there are vernier
engines among the clutter of nozzles at the base of the Russian "A" booster.

They were for roll control, especially after booster-engine dropoff when
there was only one main engine still firing, and for final trajectory
adjustments.  At the time Atlas was built, they weren't confident of
being able to shut main engines down very precisely, and ICBMs need a
very precise final velocity vector.

I believe one of GD's improved-Atlas designs now in the works finally
gets around to deleting them.  The precision issue is unimportant now
that there is always an upper stage doing the final boost.  They must
be doing something about roll control, but I imagine it's a lot smaller
and lighter.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 21:07:44 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Atlas rocket question
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1pch7k$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>According to the space news article, the Atlas has an unusual configuration.
>It has a two engine three nozzle configuration.  Now that's an odd one.

No, it just means they asked some pedantic twit of a rocket engineer.
He wasn't even entirely right.

There is a peculiar belief in some rocket-engineering circles that what
really defines an "engine" is not combustion chamber or nozzle but pumps.
So if two engines share pumps, they are really only one engine.

Ignoring a few of the very earliest test flights (which had no sustainer
engine), all Atlases have three main engines:  two boosters and a sustainer.
*Some* (not all!) versions of Atlas have the two booster engines sharing
pumps.  I don't know, offhand, which way the currently-operational Atlas
variants do it.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 23:38:15 GMT
From: Wyatt Miler <[e-mail]>
Subject: color temperature of sun and earth
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

Hello, I am looking for the min/max range of the color temperatures and
intensities of the sun and earth as seen from the poles of the moon.  Any
help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance,

  - Wyatt -

Internet: [e-mail]


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

Date: 31 Mar 93 20:23:37 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Flight time comparison: Voyager vs. Gallileo
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <2n5tb=[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lowell O Specht Jr.) writes:
>>>... There is NO WAY that a Titan IV could lift
>>>TWO Centaurs much less a small solid kick motor and a probe on top of that.
>>Remember, it doesn't have to lift it into orbit, although I'm not sure
>>how the arithmetic would go on total lift capacity...
>
>I'm not following you.  What do you mean it does not have to lift it
>into orbit?

We're talking about a mission out to infinity (well, pretty much) with
no orbital phase.  Clearly, at some point the thing will have just enough
velocity to make orbit, if that's what you were trying to do.  However,
there is no requirement that this be at a stage break.  The question is
not whether T4+C can put a Centaur into orbit, but whether T4+C+C gives
higher final velocity than T4+C.  You lose some because the earlier
stages are pushing a heavier load, perhaps enough that the second
Centaur starts firing before orbital velocity is reached.  You gain
some from having another high-energy stage; PFF *is* a rather flyweight
payload for this big booster, and putting some more mass into another
stage might be a net win.

>Regardless, the Titan IV was not structurally designed to carry that much
>weight anyway...

I'm sure the Titan II designers would make the same comment about the
poor little slightly-uprated Titan II that sits in the middle of the
Titan IV.  Doesn't mean it can't be done, only that you have to think
about it hard before deciding.

However, this is a good question, and the answer is probably "no", because
Titan IV is structurally a rather marginal design, I'm told.  Reportedly,
only about 90 days a year have sufficiently mild high-altitude winds for
a Titan IV launch to be permissible.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 17:27:55 GMT
From: CLAUDIO OLIVEIRA EGALON <[e-mail]>
Subject: Gerald Bull (was: Jules Verne Gun)
Newsgroups: sci.space

> Actually, as I understand it, they [the Iraqis] were funding the work of
>  Gerald Bull.
> This is the same man responsible for the Canadian program, who simply
> moved  on to Iraq when the Canadians cut off his funding.  He was
> assassinated in  Brussels a year or two back

Hmm... Interesting... I did not know that he was assassinated.  Look what
I got from the book SPACE, Canada in the 20th Century by Christopher
G. Trump;


    "In [Gerald Bull] own words: 'I had been given U.S. citizenship by an
act of Congress and was then accused of treason for trying to sell my
output to the Saudi Arabians. But I am still a Canadian - I will always be a
Canadian. They allowed to plead guilty in the U.S. court for selling a 60
year-old Caribbean radar set to South Africa. After that they sent me to
that "gulag" (prison camp) in Allentown, PA, where I served three
months.'
    "An irrepressible man", the book continues, "Bull still maintains a
home in Quebec, but also does most of his business in Spain and
Belegium. He also has a major rocket research programme underway
in China."


Since the book was published in 1987 I do not doubt that Bull was
subsequently assassinated...

 [e-mail]

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 19:02:35 GMT
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Guns for Space
Newsgroups: sci.space

 One of the National Labs, Livermore, sandia?????  is futzing
with a light gas gun.  Rapidly compress hydrogen, then light it off.
the projectile is in vacuum  until it blows a diagphram off the
end of the muzzle.

It's just a research prototype.

pat

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

Date: 1 Apr 93 00:33:34 GMT
From: John Hinkey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Guns for Space
Newsgroups: sci.space

Just  a note to all who read this

>Sorry about Key Words!
>There has been a lot of work over the years on using a Gun to
>launch space payloads. The Harp project under G. Bull launched
>payloads to 130 Kms from Barbadoes using "Ole Betsy", two 16
>inch naval guns butted together. Accelerations up to 5000 G's
>are acceptable if you want to launch solid fuel rockets, after that
>the grains come unstuck. This was the priciple behind "Babylon" of
>the Iraquis. Really a static charge, plenum chamber, rocket launcher
>rather than a conventional gun.
>    The Germans in the 2 world war used their Millipede, or Hochsdruck-
>pump cannon to bombard Antwerp, and the principle could be re-tried.
>More interesting and practicable would be the "Ram Tube" being developed
>by Prf. Herzberg at Washington University in Seattle, or the electromagnetic
>coil gun under study at Sandia Labs..
>Incidently I am told that a nuke launcher was accidently created when
>a 'very heavy' metal cover on the bore tube for an underground test
>was blown off. Last seen going up at an estimate velocity of about
>twice escape!

The "Ram Tube" as Dave Stephenson called it is actually the "Ram Accelerator"
being developed at the Univ. of Washington since 1984.  The ram accelerator
is also being developed at the Army Research Lab in Aberdeen, MD (120mm
diam. bore), Eglin Air Force Base (93mm) and at the Institute de Saint Louis in
France (90mm and 20 mm).

Except for the Eglin facility, all are working and producing interesting results
(Eglin's facility is not yet completed).  No one has yet scaled the device up to
space-launch usable (> 1 meter diam.) dimensions yet though.

Current feelings are that the ram accelerator is capable of 7 Km/s which is
good enough to get to LEO.


Additional note,

John? Hunter at Livermore is using a scaled-up two-stage light gas gun to get
projectiles up to high velocities to put payloads into LEO, but the drawback
to this method is high g loading of the payload (>50,000 g's).
The ram accelerator has the
ability to "soft launch" projectiles (meaning peak g loading under 10,000 g's)
theoretically and is one of it's major advantages over other technologies.
The advantage of the light gas gun is that it is simple technolgy that is just
scaled up in size.  The disadvantage of scaling up a light gas gun is that it
suffers from the "squared-cubed" law of scaling and hence does not scale
well.
Recently Hunter's group was given a set back when their breech or pump tube
ruptured when the pressure inside it rose too high from unexpectedly
rapid combustion.  He is rebuilding though.


John Hinkey
Research Assistant
Ram Accelerator Research Program
Univ. of Washington
Seattle, WA

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

Date: 1 Apr 93 00:38:25 GMT
From: John Hinkey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Guns for Space
Newsgroups: sci.space

>One of the National Labs, Livermore, sandia?????  is futzing
>with a light gas gun.  Rapidly compress hydrogen, then light it off.
>the projectile is in vacuum  until it blows a diagphram off the
>end of the muzzle.

>It's just a research prototype.

>pat


Sorry Pat , the hydrogen is just compressed and is never combusted.


John Hinkey
University of Washington
Seattle

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 20:27:47 GMT
From: "Robert J. Niland" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Omnimax
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

[e-mail] (Dave Kipfer u) writes:

: Now, is my guess that the same company
: who built IMAX also built OMNIMAX as well correct?

True.  Both are works of the IMAX corp (formerly Threshold).

Both IMAX and OMNI are 70mm 15-perf 24 fps processes, run horizontally thru
the 65mm camera and 70mm projector.  The IMAX prints are "flat" and the OMNI
prints are corrected for projection on a dome screen.  There are also
3D, HD (48 fps) and other subvarieties.

Regards,                                            1001-A East Harmony Road
Bob Niland                                          Suite 503
Internet:  [e-mail]                              Fort Collins CO 80525
CompuServe: 71044,2124                              [phone]

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 23:02:14 GMT
From: Brenda Kalt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Small Astronaut (was: Budget Astronaut)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Frank Crary) writes:

<<stuff deleted>>

|> Definitely possible: George is 6'2" and insists that any project
|> he works on be large enough to, in theory, fit himself. You could
|> probably cut the mass of his manned Pegasus capsule by 5% to 10%,
|> just by insisting on a 5'0" astronaut...
|>
|>                                            Frank Crary
|>                                            CU Boulder
|>

I've wondered about this for a long time. For space missions lasting
months or years, wouldn't it be more efficient to use small astronauts?
The beds and other equipment can be smaller or, in the case of
off-the-shelf equipment, the astronauts would get less claustrophobic.
Food requirements would be less (somebody help me out on this). Anything
in space flight that now requires classical human muscle could be done
by a machine. The limiting factor (for colony flights!) would probably
be the size at which a woman can deliver a baby without complications.
Large astronauts seem to come from (1) SF magazines that wanted heroic
types and (2) current pilot-training requirements, which evolved from
the military. Neither of those reasons is carved in stone.

B. Kalt
[e-mail]          "Someday a .sig will live here."

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 21:10:08 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Research Spin Off
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <stephens.733603989@ngis> [e-mail] (Dave Stephenson) writes:
>Sorry, slipped up on the name of the ship of Capt. Cook's first voyage.
>Before I get corrected from OZ, his ship was the Endeavor. Appologies!

Nope.  Want to try for third time lucky? :-)

It's spelled "Endeavour".
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 21:17:50 GMT
From: "Matthew R. Feulner" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Station Aldrin
Newsgroups: sci.space

This is a summary of a Feb 15 article in the New York Times.

From the MIT Tech Talk:

Edwin E. (Buzz) Aldrin Jr., the MIT alumnus (ScD, 1963) who walked on the moon
as an astronaut in 1969, has received a patent for a permanent space station
he designed in his office at home.

The New York Times (Feb 15) reported that Dr. Aldrin, who went to the moon with
Neil Armstrong on the Apollo 11 mission, wants his space station to be the core
of a "complete family of spacecraft that support it."

The story continued:  "Mr. Aldrin's design, though large enough for a crew of
8 to 10 astronauts, can be launched in one piece and then unfolded in space."

Because it would rely on a large rocket like the Saturn 5, which the US no
longer uses, he hopes for eventual cooperation with the Russian space
program, which still has a powerful rocket capable of putting a heavy
payload into space.


Matt
[e-mail]

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 20:50:47 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Status of U.S./Soviet Cooperation
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>>"Let's wait and see" is a mistake; we should start small, to make it
>>clear that we aren't yet happy, but we should start now.
>
>The problem with the idea of Western aid saving the Russians is that any amount
>that is politically viable in the West is going to be far too small to have
>any effect...

Matthew, you missed the entire point of my posting.  Please go read it again.

I'm not suggesting that these relatively small initial ventures will, by
themselves, make a big difference to the Russian economy.  Ultimately, the
Russians are going to have to sort most of it out themselves.  That will
not be easy.  Holding a political consensus together long enough to do it
will not be easy either.  The West can contribute far more in hope and
incentive -- things to look forward to if people sweat and struggle for a
few years -- than it can in money.  But vague mumblings from the White
House or Brussels, or vague half-disbelieved notions of how the West lives,
are not enough.

As a non-space example, the single biggest thing the European Common
Market could do to help the ex-satellite nations, and even the CIS states
themselves, would not involve a single penny of cross-border cash flow:
far more valuable than any form of direct aid would be a firm commitment
to a specific set of unambiguous requirements for allowing those nations
into the Common Market.

The aim of cooperative ventures in the near future should not be to prop
up the Russian economy, but to establish the possibility of more ("we *are*
willing to cut real deals, not just charity") and to make it clear how that
would happen ("but you're going to have to fix this, this, and this first").
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 22:37:16 GMT
From: "G. Patrick Molloy" <[e-mail]>
Subject: STS-1 DISASTER/COVERUP (and mcelwaine)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Eric
> H Seale) writes:
>
>     (About the Beter tape)
>
> > How do we get this bone-head turned off so that we don't waste so d**n
> > much bandwidth on "Dr. Peter Beter" and his drivel?
> >
> > Eric
>     The physics newsgroup suggest ignoring, him.  Otherwise use
> your kill file.
>     (Who's this Beter guy anyway that I'm supposed believe?)
Actually, I thought this article belonged in one of the rec.sf.* groups :-)
It was actually pretty funny, if not for the pathetic fact that there are
people out there who believe this kind of garbage.
>
> Candi Cabaniss
> Western Kentucky University  [e-mail]
> (now that we haven't won NCAA basketball, they'll finally get rid of
> the football team)
Sounds good!  Although I don't quite follow the logic, as a WKU alumnus I think
the football program is pretty worthless.   If they MUST have a sports program,
concentrate on basketball.


G. Patrick Molloy
Huntsville, Alabama

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 21:00:09 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: the call to space (was Re: Clueless Szaboisms )
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1pcge0$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>Are canadian exports of Radio-nucliedes, also controlled by US
>rules.  Technology export  controls, that sort of thing?

The relevant export rules are set in Ottawa, not in Washington.

However, with occasional exceptions (e.g. trade with Cuba, where Canada
didn't share the US's hysterical reaction to Castro), Canadian export
rules tend to be pretty similar to US ones.

It is also possible for US rules to apply to Canadian exports because
there is significant US content in the product being exported, and the
export of those bits to Canada was conditional on any re-export complying
with US rules.  (This sort of thing is why the US has such clout in the
question of who is allowed to launch Western commercial satellites --
it's rare to find such a bird that lacks significant US technology.)
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 22:20:34 GMT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: TOPEX Observes Giant Waves from Storm of the Century
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.geo.meteorology

Brian Dunbar
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                       March 31, 1993
(Phone:  [phone])

Mary A. Hardin
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
(Phone:  [phone])


TOPEX/POSEIDON OBSERVES GIANT WAVES IN STORM OF THE CENTURY

    As the "storm of the century" hit the eastern part of the United States
on March 14, giant waves measuring up to approximately 40 feet (12 meters) high
were observed in the North Atlantic by the U.S.-French TOPEX/POSEIDON
satellite.

    The highest waves measured by the radar altimeter onboard the satellite
were observed halfway between the United States and Europe at the latitude of
New York City - approximately 41 degrees North.  Strong winds of 45 miles per
hour (20 meters per second) also were recorded in the high waves vicinity.

    "The TOPEX/POSEIDON mission studies the dynamics of the world's
ocean currents by measuring the shape of the sea surface using a radar
altimeter," said Dr. Lee Fu, Project Scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.

    "The height of the waves and the speed of the wind over the ocean also
are measured by the radar as byproducts of the mission," he continued.
Measuring sea level allows oceanographers to study changes in ocean currents
and global circulation and to determine how those changing currents affect
world climate.

    In related activities, scientists at the Naval Research Laboratory in
Mississippi report that their recent analysis of TOPEX/POSEIDON data, as well
as measurement taken by tide gauges and buoys confirms that the Kelvin wave
pulse that they predicted in February has arrived at the South American coast
as they anticipated.

    A Kelvin wave is a large warm water mass that moves along the equator
in the Pacific Ocean.  These pulses sometimes contribute to El Nino conditions
in the eastern equatorial Pacific.

    JPL manages the NASA portion of the TOPEX/POSEIDON mission for
NASA's Office of Mission to Planet Earth.  Launched Aug. 10, 1992 from Kourou,
French Guiana, TOPEX/POSEIDON is the second satellite in the Mission to
Planet Earth Program, NASA's long-term effort to study Earth as a global
environmental system.

-end-
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Don't ever take a fence
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | down until you know the
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | reason it was put up.

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

Date: 31 Mar 93 20:05:29 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why is Venus so hot?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Frank Crary) writes:
>>To make Venus habitable, we really have to get *rid* of most of the
>>atmosphere somehow.  It's a hard problem...
>
>I assume someone earlier in the discussion showed that 100 atm.
>pressurized domes/structures weren't feasable. But what about a
>combination? If you raise the internal pressure to 50 atm, the
>structural requirements become reasonable...

If you're going to have to live inside domes -- especially such massive
ones -- it is a whole lot simpler to do it on the Moon or Mars.  There
is little point to large-scale meddling with Venus unless it can be
made rather more attractive than that.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 31 Mar 1993 20:34:37 GMT
From: "R. S. Statsinger" <[e-mail]>
Subject: WORKSHOP: SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES FOR SATELLITE AUTONOMY
Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.misc,sci.space,sci.aeronautics

    WORKSHOP ON SOFTWARE FOR SATELLITE AUTONOMY

             ALBUQUERQUE, NM

             JUNE 22-25, 1993

The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) is sponsoring a
workshop on software technologies for satellite autonomy with support by the
Air Force Phillips Laboratory. The purpose of the workshop is to gather
information and facilitate communication amongst industry and other government
organizations regarding candidate technologies which may have applicability in
the development of increasingly autonomous spacecraft. It is anticipated that
the workshop will develop a roadmap which will include objectives, goals, and
timelines for further government/industry efforts in satellite autonomy. It is
further hoped that a baseline will be established for future cooperative
government/industry research efforts to increase spacecraft autonomy in areas
such as navigation, health and status monitoring, anomaly resolution, and
threat assessment/response.
A small registration fee (approximately $100) will be asked.

POSITION PAPER SUBMISSION: Workshop attendance will be based on position
paper submissions. Interested participants should submit a short paper
(not to exceed 1000 words) describing their position and interests regarding
software technologies applicable to spacecraft autonomy. Position papers
should include no proprietary or classified information and should be
suitable for publication in the proceedings with permission to print.
Some participants will be chosen to present their positions at the
workshop. Interested parties should submit their position papers no later
than 30 April 1993 to:

        Paul Zetocha
        Phillips Laboratories
        3550 Aberdeen Avenue SE
        Kirtland AFB, NM  87117-5776

        Email: [e-mail]
        FAX:  [phone]

Selection notifications will be sent by 12 May 1993. For additional information
contact Paul Zetocha or Christine Anderson at [phone]/0461, or reply
to this article via email ([e-mail]).


--
Don't even IMAGINE that these opinions have anything to do    | Honk
with those of my employers, my customers, my Aunt Aileen, or  | if you'd
any other persons or organizations real or imagined; or past, | like to help
present, or future; or living, dead, or not yet conceived. OK?| kill Barney

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


From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space
Subject: Re: Luddites in space
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 31 Mar 93 22:50:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: srl03.pgf.733618200
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <1oveeu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: Anonymous NNTP Posting <[e-mail]>
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern Louisiana
Lines: 35
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

[e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>>Pat:

>>    Who didn't bother, because i already know the field.

>Famous last words.  I'm curious, though, Pat.  How would you feel if
>your doctor told you that he/she "didn't bother" with medical school
>because they "already knew the field" or that the flight control
>software for the airplane you were riding in was designed and built by
>someone who "didn't bother" with training to learn about software
>engineering because they "already knew the field"?

>Hmmm, maybe this explains some things?  :-)

I think a lot of the economics going around these days is at the
equivalent level that medicine was in when it was unneccesary for
a medical student (who were the _medical professionals_ as opposed
to midwives given the job) to wash his hand between disecting the
corpse of a leper and assisting a woman in labor (although I wonder:
was he just there to make sure the kid caught something and died,
before he moved on to the next patient? I mean, what good could he
do, compared to the bad he was doing? The Nineteenth century in
Europe, because of this practice, had an abnormally high infant
mortality rate).

Getting back to economics, many people in both parties seem to be
operating at the level of the "broken window" fallacy, or worse.

>[e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

--
Phil Fraering         |"...drag them, kicking and screaming,
[e-mail]|into the Century of the Fruitbat." - Terry Pratchett,
                       _Reaper Man_

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 399
------------------------------