Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v09_4/v9_467.txt

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 17KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/YYUuprW00UkZQMgU4A>;
          Wed, 31 May 89 05:16:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 31 May 89 05:16:29 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #467

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 467

Today's Topics:
        Re: Proposed improvements for Arecibo
            Re: Space food sticks
             Re: Private Space Companies
            Re: New Orbiter Name Announced
     Amazon Forest Destruction (was Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs)
        Any non-shuttle launches worth seeing?
        French Geologist needs job information
            Re: How Hubble will get there
        Re: Meteorite impact in Soviet Union in 1947.
         Re: Sun's invisible partner NEMESIS
   Re: Amazon Forest Destruction (was Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs)
         Re: Sun's invisible partner NEMESIS
            Couple of recent books
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 26 May 89 06:17:50 GMT
From: jpl-devvax![e-mail]  (Larry Wall)
Subject: Re: Proposed improvements for Arecibo

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Neff) writes:
: Just to keep it in perspective, $10 million equals 18 PM (Pentagon-Minutes).

Yeah, but that's over half a nuclear war.              :-) ~ :-(

Larry Wall
[e-mail]
"So many programs, so little time..."

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

Date: 26 May 89 01:42:32 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!attcan!ncrcan!ziebmef![e-mail]  (Matthew Francey)
Subject: Re: Space food sticks

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>                                      ... I was under the impression that
>Pillsbury (?) developed them under NASA contract, in which case the
>formulation would be in the public domain.

  I was under this impression as well when I asked Spar Aerospace for details
on the RMS for a shuttle (masses, moments, lengths, motor torques, etc...
enough to make a simulator for one).  I was bluntly told that such information
was "proprietary".
--
Name: Matthew Francey             Address: N43o34'13.5" W79o34'33.3" 86m
[e-mail]          uunet!utgpu!{ontmoh!moore,ncrcan}!ziebmef!mdf

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

Date: 27 May 89 02:09:05 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Private Space Companies

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>The 707 was originally the KC-135...

As I've said elsewhere, this is a common misconception.  The two planes
look similar, and share a common ancestor (a Boeing private-venture
prototype whose designation I can't remember offhand), but in fact are
not very similar at the detailed hardware level.  The huge order the
USAF placed for KC-135s undoubtedly helped supply the cash to launch
the 707, but that's known as "making a profit", and is not normally
considered a form of subsidy. :-)

>The 747 was initially proposed as an entry in the competition that the
>C-5 won.  (That's why it has a through deck.) ...

True, but note (a) it lost, and (b) it cost Boeing something like a
billion dollars to launch it as a transport.  It wasn't until over a
decade later, at 747 number 400 or so, that it was in the black.

>... the 747-400 has winglets that were conceived
>by a NASA aerodynamicist (Whitcomb or Jones, I don't remember) and
>flown in a technology-demonstration program funded jointly by NASA and
>the Air Force.

Most aircraft on the planet owe some aspect of their design to technology
development done by NASA or its predecessor NACA.  (I would say "all",
and it's pretty nearly the truth, but there are still aircraft like the
original Wright Flyer that pre-date NACA.)

>This latter makes a really good point.  Essentially all aerospace is
>subsidized _somehow_ by military and government entities...

And of course, private industry subsidizes government entities in the
same way.  This really is not a particularly meaningful argument;
technology flows one way as often as the other.

>Even Pegasus, which is touted as private enterprise at its best, is
>subsidized by NASA providing the B-52 and the test range at a
>ridiculously low cost.

For government launches, and government launches only.  OSC/Hercules will
be buying or leasing a widebody transport for commercial flights.  The
only real subsidy here is DARPA's willingness to buy (at a fixed price)
the first launch of a new launcher -- a risky deal, mitigated somewhat
by the fact that OSC/H don't get paid if it fails.  There is nothing
unreasonable about using government facilities for government launches
without full cost reimbursement; just who would be reimbursing who?
--
Van Allen, adj: pertaining to  |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
deadly hazards to spaceflight. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 27 May 89 02:10:55 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: New Orbiter Name Announced

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Sparks) writes:
>Er, what about 'Atlantis'? Sure it's a mythical contenent, but what fictional
>ship was it named after?

If I recall correctly (it's been so long since Eugene posted the
frequently-asked-questions list that I'm forgetting even the parts
I contributed :-)), the Atlantis was the first ship built specifically
for oceanographic research, a few decades ago.
--
Van Allen, adj: pertaining to  |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
deadly hazards to spaceflight. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 25 May 89 12:29:30 GMT
From: mcvax!ukc!reading!cf-cm!cybaswan![e-mail]  (Steve Hosgood)
Subject: Amazon Forest Destruction (was Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (The Daimyo) writes:
>Extinctions on the smaller scale, aka caused by man, continue on this
>planet in several key places : 1South America 2Africa ...etc. the list
>goes on.  The destruction of the Amazon to make farm land is by far
>one of the fastest destruction of both animal and plant species in the
>world.  The uniqueness of the Amazon enviroment is such that the plant
>and animal species that live there cannot be found anywhere in the world.
>In fact in a recent shuttle picture, the Amazon area was nothing but
>smoke as the forest is being burned down.

Does anyone reckon that an 'educate the Brazilians' campaign based on these
shuttle photos would do any good? I'd like to think so, but I don't really
believe anything short of direct action would solve the problem. After all,
it's like asking the original white settlers of what is now the USA and Canada
not to got west because they'll destroy the Amerinds. They'd have shot you
and continued regardless.

It *might* be possible to convince the Brazilian govenment and the World Bank
(the latter are probably really responsible for this disaster) by dragging them
to the nearest IMAX theatre (probably in the Smithsonian) and showing them the
films from the shuttle. Trouble is, the situation's out of their control by the
look of it.

Apart from the political repercussions, bombing the Trans-Amazonian highway
every fortnight is possibly the most likely saviour of the forest.

I wish I could put a smiley on that last paragraph, but I can't. If only the
photos and film would turn the tide, it would be a triumph for space technology
to solve an ecological problem.

Steve

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

Date: 26 May 89 10:05:30 GMT
From: mcvax!ukc!warwick!inmos![e-mail]  (Conor O'Neill)
Subject: Any non-shuttle launches worth seeing?

I realise that Shuttle launches are relatively few and far between,
but could anyone tell me if there are any other launches worth seeing
in early-mid July in Florida, and if so what I would have to do or where
I would have to go to see them.

--
Conor O'Neill, Software Group, INMOS Ltd. JANET:    [e-mail]
Disclaimer: All views are my own,         UUCP:     uunet!inmos-c!conor
            not those of INMOS.           INTERNET: @col.hp.com:conor@inmos-c

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

Date: 26 May 89 18:07:04 GMT
From: mcvax!inria!geocub![e-mail]  (Robert Strandh)
Subject: French Geologist needs job information

[I am posting this message for a friend, a young man here in France.
Please send valid responses by paper to him or by e-mail to me:
    mcvax!inria!geocub!kc        Kathleen Callaway]

I am a French geologist living in Bordeaux.  I did my Doctorat de Troisieme
Cycle (PhD disseration) on digital image processing as applied to geology,
specifically to the study of porous rock.  I am very much interested also
in astronomy and planetary geology.

I would be delighted to add my skills and expertise in
image processing in geology and/or astronomy to projects in the US as a
post-doctoral fellow, researcher or intern.  I welcome  "leads" and
contacts to observatories, labs, or private companies and I will reward
valuable ones with a bottle of wine and foie gras.

Dominique Genty            Institut de Geodynamique
6, rue Rouget de l'Isle        Universite de Bordeaux III
33400 Talence            Avenue des Facultes
FRANCE                33405 Talence cedex
                FRANCE

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

Date: 26 May 89 10:29:47 GMT
From: mcvax!ukc!icdoc!syma![e-mail]  (Andy Clews)
Subject: Re: How Hubble will get there

From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Greg Hennessy):
> Actually it will go in a C5A transport plane. It was going to go by
> boar, but recently it was determined that the place could carry the load.
  ^^^^
Hmm, going back to using animal power are they? I know we're getting
more green-conscious, but this is going too far. I've heard about
horse-power, but pig-power takes a bit of thinking about.

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

Sorry folks, I couldn't resist that one!  Flames > /dev/null

--
Andy Clews, Computing Service, Univ. of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QN, ENGLAND
JANET: [e-mail]   BITNET: [e-mail]
Voice: [phone] ext.2129

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

Date: 27 May 89 17:19:06 GMT
From: m2c!wpi![e-mail]  (Jonathan T Drummey)
Subject: Re: Meteorite impact in Soviet Union in 1947.

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>    If memory serves me, this was known as the "Tingustu Event"
>(or something close to that).  Witnessed by many from afar, there
>were reports of extremely high-intensity light from the horizon.
>An enormous circular section of forest was flattened and flash-
>burned.  However, NO CRATER nor evidence of any crater exsists.

I believe you're referring to the Tunguska Event which occured in
Siberia in 1906.  You're right about the trees and lack of crater.
The flash was observed several hundred miles away, even to Moscow.
Science Fiction writers have used it as a plot device for years, as
have tabloid writers...

jonathan t drummey                        bitnet:
                                          [e-mail]
box 375
worcester polytechnic institute           internet:
worcester, ma  01609                      [e-mail]

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

Date: 27 May 89 07:11:09 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Jonathan Patrick Leech)
Subject: Re: Sun's invisible partner NEMESIS

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Stephen Walton) writes:
>The clay abundances, such as the iridium anomaly and the
>isotope ratios, point to the culprit as a nickel-iron asteroid.
>Comets are ice plus carbonaceous chondrite stuff, and it would take
>implausibly many of them to deposit significant heavy elements on the
>Earth.

    It's a lot harder to observe objects which don't outgas, so who's to
say that metal-rich objects don't exist in the cometary halo?  We
don't even know if comets are truly primordial material. I think your
conclusion is too strongly stated given how little we really know.
    Jon Leech ([e-mail])
    Apple Integrated Systems
    __@/

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

Date: 27 May 89 22:54:53 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Amazon Forest Destruction (was Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Hosgood) writes:
>it's like asking the original white settlers of what is now the USA and Canada
>not to got west because they'll destroy the Amerinds. They'd have shot you
>and continued regardless.

Speak for yourself, Yanqui. :-)  If they'd tried that in Canada, the RCMP
(or RNWMP or NWMP as it then was, depending on the year) would have hauled
them off to jail fairly promptly.  The Canadian West was very different
from the American West:  in Canada, the police arrived *before* the settlers.
Mostly because of lawless characters leaking up from down south, too.

The Mounties' job was to make sure that the Amerinds were destroyed in a
peaceful and superficially-lawful manner. :-(
--
Van Allen, adj: pertaining to  |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
deadly hazards to spaceflight. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 25 May 89 13:05:02 GMT
From: mcvax!ukc!reading!bru-cc![e-mail]  (M D Ayton)
Subject: Re: Sun's invisible partner NEMESIS

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (jim sullivan) writes:

>       FLAME ON
>       [ Hot stuff deleted ]
>    FLAME OFF
>                    Jim Sullivan
>                    [e-mail]

Martin reassembles himself from what charred remains are left on the floor...

Jim,

I'm sorry if I offended you old boy, my very short note was intended to be
firmly tongue in cheek. I didn't mean to poke fun at anyone in particular,
just the "if I can't feel it, see it or touch it, then it ain't there"
brigade. I didn't really mean to poke my nose in on the "Nemesis" debate at
all - I'm a mechanical engineering student and thus not at all qualified to
do so. I wasn't asking anybody to take anything on whatever evidence, merely
trying (and failing it seems) to inject some humour into the discussion by
making an obviously facile comment. I hope that somebody, somewhere, smiled.

For those of a more serious nature I did append a smiley to force the point,
but I think that you must have missed it.

Truce? Friends again? Pleeease.....

Martin.      [e-mail]
             [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 27 May 89 03:20:23 PDT
From: Ken Harrenstien <[e-mail]>
Subject: Couple of recent books
Cc: [e-mail]

I ran across a couple of books in the local library recently which others
might want to know about.  I don't recall seeing them mentioned before,
which of course might only mean that I missed a message.

    "Faster Than Light -- Superluminal Loopholes in Physics"
    Nick Herbert (1988)

    "$PACE INC.: Your Guide to Investing in Space Exploration"
    Tom Logsdon (1988) ISBN: 0-517-56812-8

I haven't started the latter yet, but I finished and returned the
first (didn't note the ISBN, sorry).  FTL hopefuls will probably be
encouraged by the title and the first few chapters, but the author
seems to have his feet solidly planted after all and by the time the
book ends, every one of the promising ideas of the past several years
has been gently but firmly squashed.  He does give his own estimate of
the probabilities of success in each area and where he thinks people
should be looking.  Anyone who asks about FTL here should be pointed
at that book.

$PACE INC. (yes there really is a dollar sign in the title) looks like
exactly the kind of propaganda some recent queries have asked for.
I'll quote some of the jacket blurb here without further comment:
        -----------------------

"The next generation of billionaires is going to come from the business
of space." -- Art Dula, space industrialization expert, Houston, Texas.

Enormous financial rewards are in store for small and large companies,
private investors, scientist-entrepreneurs, and all those wise enough
to prepare now for the coming resurgence of the American space
program.  Such is the bullish message of "Space, Inc.", in which
space-program insider Tom Logsdon takes a comprehensive look at a wide
range of scientific and commercial ventures in space that the business
community can mine for profits, while helping to secure the nation's
technological competitiveness for the future.
    <...> Anyone with an innovative idea for producing <...> or for
exploiting <...> will be shown how to seek help in designing an
experimental package and raising the money to launch it.
    The tragic explosion of the space shuttle Challenger, Logsdon
argues, will only accelerate the movement of space exploration away
from NASA and into the private sector.  <etc etc>

-------

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #467
*******************