Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v11_5/v11_509.txt

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/kaQ8Ypy00VcJ47ik4Y>;
          Sat,  9 Jun 1990 01:29:26 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat,  9 Jun 1990 01:28:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #509

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 11 : Issue 509

Today's Topics:
               Re: Missing mass
         NASA Headline News for 06/08/90 (Forwarded)
             Re: Lichens on Mars?
           Re: Voyager Mission Summary (forwarded)
             Re: Lichens on Mars?
  Re: US/Soviet Planetary Activity (was Re: Manned mission to Venus)
           Re: Termination of Lunar/Mars intiative
           Re: Termination of Lunar/Mars intiative
          Re: HAWAII/ROCKET very long - 61k
                  Re: Tides
          Re: DSN Reliability and Resources Question

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: 8 Jun 90 18:19:37 GMT
From: clyde.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!physics.utoronto.ca![e-mail]  (Christopher Neufeld)
Subject: Re: Missing mass

In article <Added.QaPwDS_00Ui34=[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("Nick A. van Goor") writes:
>
>The mising matter all exists of disappeared socks.....
>
   That's right, they collect in the hozone layer.
   Sorry, but somebody had to say it.

>+ Nick A. van Goor                      + Bitnet  : [e-mail] +
>+ Slonet:Delft University of Technology + DECnet  : fortmenu::tudsv1          +
>+        Department of Chem.Engineering + Internet: [e-mail]+
>+        Julianalaan 136                + YELLnet : + (3115)784348            +
>+        2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands + FAXnet  : + (3115)784452            +


--
 Christopher Neufeld....Just a graduate student  | He's the kind of person
 [e-mail]              | who'd follow you into a
 [e-mail]          Ad astra! | revolving door and come
 "Don't edit reality for the sake of simplicity" | out first.

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

Date: 9 Jun 90 01:35:55 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 06/08/90 (Forwarded)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, June 8, 1990                 Audio Service:  202/755-1788
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This is NASA Headline News for Friday, June 8........

Kennedy Space Center managers have decided to roll the Columbia
off the launch pad to fix a leaking hydrogen line.  The repair of
the 17-inch-wide fuel line appears to be located at the
disconnect area.  This would require removing the orbiter from
the external tank.

During yesterday's news conference, the Deputy Associate
Administrator for the Space Shuttle, Robert L. Crippen, announced
that this will delay the Astro-1 mission until at least mid-
August.

Meanwhile, the Space Shuttle Atlantis is being prepared to move
to the Vehicle Assembly Building at KSC.  After mating the
external tank and the solid rocket boosters, the orbiter will be
rolled out to launch pad 39-A next Friday, June 15.

                            ********

Astronaut Steve Hawley has been named the Associate Director of
NASA Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California.  Hawley
was mission specialist aboard the Space Shuttle Discovery that
successfully deployed the Hubble Space Telescope.  He will assume
duties on July 29 as the center's 3rd-ranking executive.  Hawley
is from Salina, Kansas, and has a PhD in Astronomy and
Astrophysics from the University of Santa Cruz in California.

                            ********

The Galileo spacecraft will receive a new Venus-to-Earth cruise
sequence command today.  It is now traveling toward Earth at over
58,000 miles per hour.  The Galileo is scheduled to arrive this
December.
                            ********

Six Earth stations are now fully operational in Burma, increasing
television coverage to areas that had not previously received
service.  The $8.8 million national satellite TV program
retransmitting system has been contracted by the Chinese
government.
                            ********

A commercial Titan 3 is scheduled to carry another Intelsat
communications satellite into orbit on June 21.  The company ran
into problems with a launch last March.  A decision will be made
by Intelsat this August whether to retrieve the rocket's cargo
that was placed in a low orbit.







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

Tuesday, June 12........

         12:00 - 2:00 P.M.    NASA programming:
                              Voyager I science summary
                              replay of June 6 news conference
                              video.

Thursday, June 14.......

          11:30 A.M.          NASA Update will be transmitted.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All events and times are subject to change without notice.  These
reports are filed daily, Monday through Friday, at 12:00 P.M.
EDT.  This is a service of the Internal Communications Branch,
NASA HQ.  Contact: JSTANHOPE or CREDMOND 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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 9 Jun 90 01:52:26 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!watdragon!watyew![e-mail]  (Brian or James)
Subject: Re: Lichens on Mars?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Rehrauer) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Dietz) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark SOKOLOWSKI) writes:
>>>Of course! Mars is far easier to terraform because some lichens can
>>>live under simulated martian conditions here on Earth, which means we
>>>can send this stuff over there and watch the show.
>>
>>Ah, no.  Lichens might grow under the conditions that astronomers used
>>to (wishfully) think existed on Mars, but that was back before various
>>space probes showed how hostile the planet actually is.
>
>Ah, no.  Lichens would not grow under the conditions that various space
>probes have shown us to (actually) exist on Mars, but that was back before
>Dan Quayle revealed how habitable the planet wishfully is.
>
>(Insert smileys for the humor-impaired and/or chronically right-winged.)

    'Course, I can imagine a 'terraformed' Mars that could support
lichen, but not us. This brings up the question of what qualifies as
terraforming and what doesn't. There're lots of terran environments
that support life that won't support animals like *me*. I can also
imagine people who would consider creating a life supporting environment
that didn't include a niche for us as worthwhile anyway. Better *some*
life than none at all, and all that.
                            JDN

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

Date: 8 Jun 90 13:46:09 GMT
From: mcsun!unido!mpirbn![e-mail]  (Daniel Fischer)
Subject: Re: Voyager Mission Summary (forwarded)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Groom) writes:
>This fact sheet was posted to an internal NASA newsgroup in support
>of today's press conference covering the Voyager missions to the outer
>planets.  I thought it was a very good summary and worth reposting here.

It was a brilliant idea! About 12 hours after the fact sheet arrived, a
colleague gave a talk about the Voyager project - I made some 23 printouts
of the fact sheet, and people were really wild about it...

After the lecture an interesting question arose: where are the Voyagers
heading in the frame of the Galaxy? We often hear which nearby star they'll
visit when, but what happens in the coming millions of years? Surely their
orbital energy won't carry them out of the Galaxy, and they'll go around
the galactic center in a comet-like ellipse(?) - is there someone out there
who has them, the
                   Orbital Elements of the Voyagers
                   in respect to the galactic center,
quantities like eccentricity, major semiaxis and period? When will we see them
again, and from which distance? Anybody having thought about this?

         Dan Fischer   Bonn   FRG    [e-mail]

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

Date: 8 Jun 90 19:37:00 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!apollo![e-mail]  (Steve Rehrauer)
Subject: Re: Lichens on Mars?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Dietz) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark SOKOLOWSKI) writes:
>>Of course! Mars is far easier to terraform because some lichens can
>>live under simulated martian conditions here on Earth, which means we
>>can send this stuff over there and watch the show.
>
>Ah, no.  Lichens might grow under the conditions that astronomers used
>to (wishfully) think existed on Mars, but that was back before various
>space probes showed how hostile the planet actually is.

Ah, no.  Lichens would not grow under the conditions that various space
probes have shown us to (actually) exist on Mars, but that was back before
Dan Quayle revealed how habitable the planet wishfully is.

(Insert smileys for the humor-impaired and/or chronically right-winged.)

--
   >>"Aaiiyeeee!  Death from above!"<<     | (Steve) [e-mail]
"Spontaneous human combustion - what luck!"| Apollo Computer (Hewlett-Packard)

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

Date: 8 Jun 90 21:22:40 GMT
From: mcgill-vision!quiche!calvin![e-mail]  (Mark SOKOLOWSKI)
Subject: Re: US/Soviet Planetary Activity (was Re: Manned mission to Venus)

Everybody seems to criticize me because of my lack of respect for a (boring)
Moon mission. The fact is simply that for the taxpayers that will fund
such programs, these will rapidly become so boring (remember Apollo 17?) that
the whole project will simply die all by itself. Why the need to resort to
exotic means to find the resources that we already have here on Earth.
Don't forget that Earth is the largest solid body of the solar system, its
Oceans are covered with polymetallic nodules...
Remember too that emotions in the general public are not that much tuned
to scientific perception. I recall having seen a few weeks ago a talk show
with a guy looking like Eddie Murphy litterally laughing at the first
photo that came from the HST, especially at the moment when he compared
the old picture with the new one, the one made by the "1.5 billion $ toy".
The audience applauded, laughed, and I felt ridiculized. I wouldn't be
surprised that this could be a show watched by a congressman, or one
of his relatives...
If we have to spend 100 billion on a "Industrial" Moon base that will
finally be 1/10th as big as predicted, will accomodate 10 people after
killing 20 more in various accidents (in the same manner as Challenger),
and will run on a disastrous year round deficit, then I prefer to fight
with all my forces to get 400 billion for a one shot Venus mission, in
which everybody will know that there will be one and only (no stupid
and irrealistic expectations...) launch. I simply think that we are
in a position equivalent to that of the roman empire: Romans didn't
send a big fleet to the americas, they simply didn't needed to, and when
the Vikings tried, they failed miserably. Only progressively and with
much more advanced technology (fusion engines making the interplanetary
trips as easy as on airplanes now) is it reasonable to settle for more
than exploration.

Mark S.
-------

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

Date: 9 Jun 90 04:05:34 GMT
From: thorin!homer![e-mail]  (Jonathan Leech)
Subject: Re: Termination of Lunar/Mars intiative

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Rehrauer) writes:
>At a time when so much cries out to be done in the U.S. (socially,
>economically, technologically), and as we sink deeper in debt...
>
>Am I being terribly naive to hope that we could find ways to encourage
>more private-sector efforts in space, e.g.: Pegasus, instead?

    Not as naive as you would be if you hoped we could find ways to
encourage the govt.  to cause fewer social, economic, and
technological problems.

    Followups to talk.politics.misc.
--
    Jon Leech ([e-mail])    __@/
    "The imaging team is moving from its ``instant science'' mode to
     a more leisurely ``fast science'' mode."
    - Dr.  Bradford Smith, Voyager Imaging Team

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

Date: 8 Jun 90 19:47:00 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!apollo![e-mail]  (Steve Rehrauer)
Subject: Re: Termination of Lunar/Mars intiative

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Fineman) writes:
>Congress is ready to terminate the Lunar/Mars (aka Space Exploration)
>initiative.
>
>*** ZERO FUNDING ***  [emphasis added by poster]

>Termination would be catastrophic.  No program is of more importance to
>[the US (both government AND comercial) space program].

>Without this program there will be ... *NO* manned activity in space beyond
>low earth orbit for the foreseeable future.

At a time when so much cries out to be done in the U.S. (socially,
economically, technologically), and as we sink deeper in debt, I admit
to having misgivings about funding Yet Another Expensive, Gigantic,
Government-Fostered Space Effort.  We've already spent billions on the
Space Station, with apparently not nearly as much to show for it as
had been hoped and promised.

Am I being terribly naive to hope that we could find ways to encourage
more private-sector efforts in space, e.g.: Pegasus, instead?

--
   >>"Aaiiyeeee!  Death from above!"<<     | (Steve) [e-mail]
"Spontaneous human combustion - what luck!"| Apollo Computer (Hewlett-Packard)

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

Date: 7 Jun 90 16:52:00 GMT
From: sgi!cdp![e-mail]
Subject: Re: HAWAII/ROCKET very long - 61k


The reason for posting this message here is that there are many
scientists who are unaware of the enormous environmental
and social costs associated with their activities.  Many of you
are currently working on projects that will indirectly kill
plants, animals and humans.  Hopefully at least one more
scientist will start thinking of our planet as a complete system
instead of a bunch of discrete parts.

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

Date: 8 Jun 90 23:05:03 GMT
From: hplabsb![e-mail]  (David Smith)
Subject: Re: Tides

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Floyd McWilliams) writes:
>    The Sun has 27,000,000 times the Moon's mass (the Sun is 333,000
>times more massive than the Earth, which has 81 times the Moon's mass).
>
>    The Sun is 391 times more distant than the Moon (93,000,000 /
>238,000).
>
>    Therefore, the Sun's gravitational pull on the Earth is 177 times
>that of the Moon (divide mass ration by square of distance ratio).
>
>    This is what we would expect -- we revolve around the Sun every
>year, not the Moon.  But it seems to me that tides caused by the Sun
>should be 177 times stronger than those caused by the Moon!  What's wrong
>with my reasoning?

The Sun is certainly pulling more strongly than the Moon.  Due to the
inverse square law, the Sun (or Moon) pulls more strongly on the near
side of the Earth than on the far side.  This tends to stretch the Earth
out, but the oceans "give" more easily than the rest.  The near ocean
gets pulled away from the Earth, which gets pulled away from the far ocean.
This is not caused by the overall gravitational pull, but by its gradient
across the diameter of the Earth.  At the existing masses and distances,
the gradient of the Moon's field is greater than the Sun's.

The gradient (derivative) of the inverse-square law is inverse-cube.
So you have to divide 27,000,000 by the cube of 391, showing that the
tides due to the Sun are 45% of those due to the Moon.
--
    David R. Smith, HP Labs
    [e-mail]
    [phone]

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

Date: 8 Jun 90 13:21:37 GMT
From: mcsun!unido!rwthinf![e-mail]  (Dieter Kreuer)
Subject: Re: DSN Reliability and Resources Question

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (9240 Fraering Philip) writes:
> About JPL providing navigation aid to ESA, Ariane, and Japan,:
>
> How much do we get paid for it? After all, they charge someone
> for the launch...
>

How much did ESA get for delivering the first SPACELAB module
to NASA? I'll never understand why they gave it away for free (it
was worth $1 billion, as far as I remember).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Real programmers write programs,    | Dieter Kreuer, Lehrstuhl Informatik IV
 not documentation."                 | RWTH Aachen, Ahornstr. 55, D-5100 Aachen
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

End of SPACE Digest V11 #509
*******************