Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v11_5/v11_515.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/EaQmhlq00VcJM:X05a>;
          Mon, 11 Jun 1990 01:26:10 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 1990 01:25:42 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #515

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 11 : Issue 515

Today's Topics:
             Re: Ersatz Free Fall
              Re: How about a hst group
      Re: mars vs. venus, which is easier to terraform?
Re: Public Perception Of Space (was Re: US/Soviet Planetary Activity)
            Re: Mt. Graham Hearings (long)
           Frequently asked SPACE questions
  Public Perception Of Space (was Re: US/Soviet Planetary Activity)
               Re: HAWAII AND STAR WARS

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: 10 Jun 90 04:34:15 GMT
From: crdgw1!sixhub![e-mail]  (Wm E. Davidsen Jr)
Subject: Re: Ersatz Free Fall

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Zeke Hoskin) writes:

|      Just in case I don't make it into orbit someday, I'd
| like to try a substitute experience I heard of.  Basically,
| it's a vertical wind tunnel with the airspeed somewhere
| between the extremes of human terminal velocity. You pay
| your money and get to jump in and ride the updraft for a
| few minutes.

  Not like free fall at all. This is a uniform support, similar to the
sensation when floating in water. Neat, but not the same. If you want to
experience free fall (for 1-2 sec) find a pilot who will take a small
plane into a "power on stall" with you. Bring your barf bag, many people
do not like this at all!

  The Air Force gets about 30 seconds by flying a parabolic trajectory
with a bomber (details if someone has them).
--
bill davidsen - [e-mail] (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen)
    sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX
    moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me

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

Date: 10 Jun 90 01:03:07 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!qucdn![e-mail]  (Arnold G. Gill)
Subject: Re: How about a hst group


     I would say don't bother.  HST is currently in vogue.  As a fad, it will
die out within a few months, a year at the very most when serious science
starts to be done on it.  There are enough groups out there already - we don't
need another one.
-------
 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|  Arnold Gill                        |                                     |
|  Queen's University at Kingston     |     If I hadn't wanted it heard,    |
|  BITNET   : gilla@qucdn             |       I wouldn't have said it.      |
|  X-400    : [e-mail]  |                                     |
|  INTERNET : [e-mail]  |                                     |
 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

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

Date: 9 Jun 90 17:08:25 GMT
From: decvax.dec.com!zinn!ubbs-nh!siia![e-mail]  (David Dick)
Subject: Re: mars vs. venus, which is easier to terraform?

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (H Keith Henson) writes:

>Given nanotechnology terraforming either would be a trivial task (though
>it might take a while for venus to cool off.)  First thing to do with
>venus would be a sunshade, block *all* the solar input, and let it cool.
>The CO2 could all be liquified and stored in diamond cased cylindars
>underground; convert the sulfer to solid and store it the same way.
>But who wants to stay around this star anyway?  Keith Henson

Wouldn't it be easier to bind the carbon and sulfur into some solid
compounds (limestone == calcium carbonate and some metal sulfide
come to mind)?

David Dick
Software Innovations, Inc. [the Software Moving Company(sm)]

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

Date: 10 Jun 90 22:11:37 GMT
From: tucson![e-mail]  (Bill Ganoe)
Subject: Re: Public Perception Of Space (was Re: US/Soviet Planetary Activity)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John A. Weeks III) writes:

> The only hope NASA has to rescue it's new Moon program would be to
> send a mission to "the dark side" of the Moon.  Maybe they could con
> the public on this.  After all, the commies have never seen the dark
> side of the moon!  8-)

Actually, the "commies" saw the far side (it gets as much sun light as
the side we see, so it really isn't "dark") of the moon back in Oct. 1959
(Luna 3) and wasted little time showing the pictures to the rest of the
world.

--
"Any society that needs | William H. Ganoe      [e-mail]
disclaimers has too many|  Systems & Industrial Engr. Dept, Univ. of Arizona
lawyers." -- Eric Pepke |  Tucson, AZ 85721; USA

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

Date: 9 Jun 90 17:29:37 GMT
From: decvax.dec.com!zinn!ubbs-nh!siia![e-mail]  (David Dick)
Subject: Re: Mt. Graham Hearings (long)

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>Congressional Hearings on Mt. Graham

>As a result, an intense lobbying and letter writing effort has been intiated
>by certain environmental groups - primarily the Sierra Club - opposed to an
>observatory on Mt. Graham.

>Similar efforts were made to block the establishment of an observatory on
>Mauna Kea (unsuccessful) and Junipero Serra (successful, but because it turned
>out to be a site of significance to the religion of coastal Native Americans,
>not for environmental reasons).  If the effort to block an observatory on Mt.
>Graham succeeds, it is unlikely that any future site will be developed in the
>continental US again.

>What is at stake is the future of astronomy on Mt. Graham, and with it the
>future of the further development of ground-based astronomy in the continental
>United States.

It looks like the old days of isolationism--only this time we
are talking about being isolated to Earth, not just isolating ourselves
from outside countries!

>In 1985, OSU began considering joining a consortium with UofA to build the
>"Columbus Telescope", a twin 8-meter telescope that when completed would be an
>effective 11.3m telescope - the largest then planned.  At this time a letter
>was sent from the Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club to the Chairman of
>the Astronomy Dept at OSU, Eugene Capriotti.  This letter stated in no
>uncertain terms that they would use any means in their power to block the
>development of a new observatory site on *any* mountain in Arizona.  That it
>was Mt. Graham in particular made no apparent difference to them.  This group
>has been at the forefront of all subsequent legal action to block the
>observatory.

>There was no mention in this letter of the red squirrel.  Probably for good
>reason.  Before 1987, when the sub-species was listed as "endangered" by the
>US Fish and Wildlife Service, it was legal to hunt the red squirrel in season.
>The "bag limit" being 5 squirrels per hunter.  In addition, to make hunting
>more attractive, the Fish and Wildlife Service artificially introduced the
>Abert squirrel onto Mt. Graham, where, in the absense of its usual predators,
>it has thrived and competed with the red squirrel for food and other
>resources. Given nearly 4 years of dry winters in the Western and Southwestern
>US, this enhanced competition has not helped the red squirrel much.  All this
>time, between 1980 and 1986 - SIX YEARS - the environmental groups so
>concerned about the squirrel now did not say a single word.

>As an environmentally concerned individual, I am most appalled by the alacrity
>with which opponents to the Mt. Graham project have stooped to distortion and
>outright lies.  If they have a truly valid complaint, then they have no need
>to resort to such tactics.  I am even more distressed by those groups that
>have used and/or threatened violence against both property and individuals (it
>is a fact that the heads of the three major astronomy depts have all received
>death threats in association with their involvement in this project).

>So far as biologists and ecologists can determine, the only scopes that have
>ever killed red squirrels have been attached to hunting rifles.

I'm sure many people feel that there are many pressing environmental
concerns in this country and around the world.  Have the environmetal
groups participating is this kill-the-observatories effort lost all
sense of perspective?  Have they such infinite resources that they
can spend any amount on every little environmental concern?

In the face of limited resources politicians, businesspeople, bankers,
engineers, ..., in short, everyone, should establish some priorities.
In the light of the present development on Mt. Graham, the fact that
the observatory would dramatically reduce the development, and the
fact that the endangered species issue is quite questionable, I
would think that the participating environmental groups would have
much more serious things to work on, even if you accept all their
premises.

David Dick
Software Innovations, Inc. [the Software Moving Company(sm)]

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

Date: Sun, 10 Jun 90 04:00:28 -0700
From: Eugene N. Miya <[e-mail]>
Subject: Frequently asked SPACE questions

This list does change.

This is a list of frequently asked questions on SPACE (which goes back
before 1980).  It is in development.  Good summaries will be accepted
in place of the answers given here.  The point of this is to circulate
existing information, and avoid rehashing old answers.  Better to
build on top than start again.  Nothing more depressing than rehashing
old topics for the 100th time.  References are provided because they
give more complete information than any short generalization.

Questions fall into three basic types:
1) Where do I find some information about space?
Try you local public library first.  You do know how to use a library, don't
you?  Can't tell these days.  The net is not a good place to ask for
general information.  Ask individuals if you must.  There are other sources,
use them, too.  The net is a place for open ended discussion.

2) I have an idea which would improve space flight?
Hope you aren't surprised but 9,999 out of 10,000 have usually been
thought of before.  Again, contact a direct individual source for
evaluation.  NASA fields thousands of these each day.

3) Miscellanous queries.  Sorry, have to take them case by case.

Initially, this message will be automatically posted once per month
and hopefully, we can cut it back to quarterly.  In time questions and
good answers will be added (and maybe removed, nah).

1) What happen to Saturn V plans? What about reviving the Saturn V
as a heavy-lift launcher?

Possible but very expensive -- tools, subcontractors, plans, facilities
are gone or converted for the shuttle, and would need rebuilding,
re-testing, or even total redesign.

2) Where can I learn about space computers: shuttle, programming,
core memories?

%J Communications of the ACM
%V 27
%N 9
%D September 1984
%K Special issue on space [shuttle] computers

Other various AIAA and IEEE publications.

Computers in Spaceflight: The NASA Experience
James E.  Tomayko
1988?

3) SETI computation articles?

%A D. K. Cullers
%A Ivan R. Linscott
%A Bernard M. Oliver
%T Signal Processing in SETI
%J Communications of the ACM
%V 28
%N 11
%D November 1984
%P 1151-1163
%K CR Categories and Subject Descriptors: D.4.1 [Operating Systems]:
Process Management - concurrency; I.5.4 [Pattern Recognition]:
Applications - signal processing; J.2 [Phsyical Sciences and Engineering]:
astronomy
General Terms: Design
Additional Key Words and Phrases: digital Fourier transforms,
finite impulse-response filters, interstellar communications,
Search for Extra-terrestrial Intelligence, signal detection,
spectrum analysis

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

Date: 9 Jun 90 15:09:36 GMT
From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!srcsip!jhereg!wd0gol!newave![e-mail]  (John A. Weeks III)
Subject: Public Perception Of Space (was Re: US/Soviet Planetary Activity)

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark SOKOLOWSKI):

> 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.

The Arsenio Hall show.  Although Arsenio is a fairly bright person, he
seemed to be counting on the stupidity of the typical American to make
that joke work.

The article that I read in my newspaper commented that the new HST view
was unexpectly good for an engineering print and at least one new discovery
was made.  Some star was found to be a double star, which was not previously
known.  There must have been something different in those two pictures to
make a new discovery.

For being a publicity driven organization, NASA seems to have a real
problem distributing information to the general public.  For example,
most everyone that I came in contact with (mostly at work--a group
of people above average in intelligence) was aware of the HST launch,
and many knew that it was delayed on the pad several times.  Several
people even knew that it was scheduled for launch as early as the mid
1980's.  But nobody that I talked with was aware that there was any
type of set up or alignment required, and no one could understand why
it would take more than a few hours, let alone 7 months to calibrate
the HST.

The newspaper pictures were handled in an especially ignorant manner.
I did not see any real hard information in any of the articles that
I read about how each of the pictures was created or rendered.  The
least that NASA could have done was to print a little note saying
that the newspaper reproduction of the photo would probably be of
low resolution and the actual digital information received was better
(or x% higher resolution where x is made-up but sounds impressive 8-).

As a result, the pre-HST hype and the post-HST grainy half-tone
newspaper pictures == HST failure.  Need proof?  Of course HST is
no longer working...where is the second photo?  Several people have
told me that they read that HST is dead in the newspaper.

I really enjoy reading the NASA press releases and information provided
on the net (especially those posted by Peter Yee), and the perspective
that the other net people always seem to add (especially the "Canadian"
viewpoint).  The information that the general public gets from NASA is so
watered down and out of context to be virtually meaningless.

No wonder people lost interest in Apollo 17.  NASA positioned it as a
one-time stunt.  Apollo 11 achieved all mission requirements, so Apollo
17 was just a redundant backup mission (as were all missions after 11).
Perhaps public interest and perception of Apollo 17 would have been
different if Apollo were billed as a "lunar exploration program".  Maybe
missions 18-21 would have flown in those circumstances.

I get the current feeling from people that I talk with that President
Bush's moon program is stupid.  To sum it up, America went to the Moon
in 1969.  There was nothing there.  Why go back?

The only hope NASA has to rescue it's new Moon program would be to
send a mission to "the dark side" of the Moon.  Maybe they could con
the public on this.  After all, the commies have never seen the dark
side of the moon!  8-)

Recently I was talking with a co-worker about the early history of the
shuttle.  Another co-worker butted in and told me the "real" story
as he remembered it.  NASA was dropping Shuttles off of a 747, but
they kept crashing because they couldn't fly.  So they added rockets
to it to make it work.  He knew this was true because he watched two
of the early lanuch attempts on TV.  He obviously was confused with the
Enterprise glide tests.  Oh well...

One thing that NASA could try is a TV show on network tv.  How about
a 15 minute weekly or hour monthly show to give NASA news, mission updates,
behind the scenes views, and review past missions.

-john-

--
===============================================================================
John A. Weeks III               [phone]               [e-mail]
NeWave Communications                ...uunet!rosevax!bungia!wd0gol!newave!john
===============================================================================

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

Date: 9 Jun 90 17:35:20 GMT
From: decvax.dec.com!zinn!ubbs-nh!siia![e-mail]  (David Dick)
Subject: Re: HAWAII AND STAR WARS

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gregory N. Bond) writes:

>We are living in green times, especially in Australia, and I think it
>may be the end of large scale projects like this.

Colloquially, "green" also means "unskilled, unsophisticated, or
immature."

I think environment extremism, that is, environment concerns applied with
no sense of perspective, is unfortunate and just the kind of thing
that can result in political or other kinds of backlash.

David Dick
Software Innovations, Inc. [the Software Moving Company(sm)]

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

End of SPACE Digest V11 #515
*******************