Message-ID: <QbeFFo600WBw05rE5X@andrew.cmu.edu>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
Date: Fri,  1 Feb 91 02:10:44 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #099

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 13 : Issue 99

Today's Topics:
	Extracting oxygen and other gases from space materials
		    Re: NASA Prediction Bulletins
		  Re: What is cosmological constant?
    Request for Feedback on Proposed Lunar Analog Robotics Contest

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  space+@andrew.cmu.edu.  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests,
  should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to
			 tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu

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

ReSent-Message-ID: <Qbd9zvi00WB34Qf1Yi@andrew.cmu.edu>
ReSent-Date: Mon, 28 Jan 91 17:04:43 -0500 (EST)
ReSent-From: "Todd L. Masco" <tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
ReSent-To: Space <space+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date:    Fri, 25 Jan 1991 21:37:13 PST
From: AUGUST@JPLLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV (Richard B. August)
Subject: Extracting oxygen and other gases from space materials
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu"

Could someone point me toward a source of information on the extraction
of gases from rocks (moon rock etc.)?

Thanks in advance.

Richard B. August
august@vlsi.jpl.nasa.gov

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

Date: 28 Jan 91 21:16:19 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!gvlf3.gvl.unisys.com!tredysvr!dvnspc1!tom@ucsd.edu  (Tom Albrecht)
Subject: Re: NASA Prediction Bulletins


Does anyone have a description of the satellites found in these bulletins?
Long name, objective/function, date of launch, owner, etc.?

Thanks

-- 
Tom Albrecht

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

Date: 24 Jan 91 02:08:55 GMT
From: beguine!winton!ajpierce@mcnc.org  (Andrew Pierce)
Subject: Re: What is cosmological constant?

Since we are "doing the cosmology thing", I heard that the big bang and
related inflationary theories are all derived such that they are a
solution to Einstein's field equations (I think 10 equations in all).  The
solutions were made easier to find by assuming a spherical symmetry to the
universe.  Here comes the kicker:  Last year I seem to remember reading
that someone had found another solution to the field equations, but this
time with cylindrical symmetry rather than spherical.  In this model,
there is no "beginning of time" as there is in the big bang type models,
rather, the mass density of the universe gradually increases from zero at
time negative infinity, to some maximum value, and then gradually
decreases to zero again at time plus infinity.  Not nearly as theatrical
as the big bang is it?  The only other thing I remember about this is that
indications were that if this model were correct, the time of maximum mass
density has already come and gone and that we were essentially riding the
downslope now.  Sorry, no reference, but I think it may have appeared in
Nature.  Does anyone out there know anything further about this?
     -Andy

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

Date: 28 Jan 91 19:58:34 GMT
From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!orca.wv.tek.com!bamboo.CAX.TEK.COM!doughe@uunet.uu.net  (Douglas E Helbling)
Subject: Request for Feedback on Proposed Lunar Analog Robotics Contest


	I am working toward putting together a robotic competition for small
	rover-like vehicles.  The contest would take place on the Oregon
	desert at the Oregon Moonbase, an earth analog of a lunar lavatube.  
	The Oregon Moonbase is a project of The Oregon L-5 Society, Inc., a
	chapter of the National Space Society.  The robotics competition,
	if it comes to reality, will probably take place in late 1992 or 
	early 1993.

	If you are not interested in any of the above, now's the time for a kill.


	The basic goals of the contest: 

	  1) Demonstrate the feasibility of usings small, relatively inexpensive
	     robotic vehicles on productive off-planet missions.

	  2) Provide a forum for academic and industrial robotic enthusiasts to
	     meet and exchange ideas and information.

	  3) Further demonstrate the feasibility of lavatubes as useful for the
	     eventual proliferation of humans in lunar and martian settlement.

	The basic goals of the robots in the contest: 

	  1) Deploy (from contained) a robot in the proximity of a lavatube.  

	  2) Send the robot out to locate a lavatube (or a specific lavatube 
	     among several at the site).  

	  3) Have the robot navigate the terrain between the surface and the 
	     interior of the tube; in other words, have it get safely inside.  

	  4) Have the robot reach a particular location within one or more of
	     the lavatubes, said location to be marked by concentrated metal 
	     (tin foil) or mineral deposit (powdered sugar) markings detectable 
	     with some form of simple sensor capability.


	The framework for the contest currently allows for four categories:

	  Category One:  Autonomous (non-telemetry) Operation, Custom Hardware

	    Essentially, this is for self-contained rovers of unique
	    physical construction.

	  Category Two:  Autonomous Operation, Off-the-Shelf Hardware

	    This is for self-contained rovers of commercially available design
	    (hobbyist or pro), with custom programming to meet the objectives
	    of the contest and the site.

	  Category Three:  Remote Operated Operation Custom Hardware

	    This is for remote-operated rovers of custom design. 

	  Category Four:  Remote Operated Operation, Off-the-shelf Hardware

	    This is for remote-operated rovers of commercially available design. 


	What I would like to get feedback on is:

	1) What is the existing level of interest? 
	
	   Is there enough interest out there to warrant this kind of competition?  
	   If so, is it likely to come from industry, academia, or where?

	2) What sort of incentives would be required to get you to participate?

	   I'm still working on acquiring funding for some type of prize.  A
	   fabulous cash award (likely to be between $1K and $5K) or generic
	   scholarship funds (same general dollar figures) are likely to be
	   the best that this not-for-profit organization can muster without
	   a very generous individual or corporate sponsor in private industry.

	3) What are the technical constraints?

	   Here's a starting list, gleaned in part from knowledge of the sight,
	   my own goals for lunar analog demonstrations of robotic systems, and
	   from chatter on this newsgroup:

	   a) Propulsion - since this is a lunar analog, all forms of air-consuming
	      propulsion (i.e. internal combustion) are out.  Because humans will
	      be in proximity, and because we wish to avoid federal supervision
	      and control, nuclear systems are out.

	   b) Size - the current limit on physical size for the "unextended unit"
	      is two feet square.  (Must fit in a box two by two by two feet.)
	      The notion that a robot could "expand" out of its shipping crate 
	      after delivery (particularly for units basing their design on 
	      insect models from the natural world) is acceptable.

	   c) Attendance/Remote operation limitations - since some participants in 
	      a competition such as this might well spend their entire funds on the 
	      project itself, they may not be able to attend personally.  In the
	      case of robots that are fully self-operating, this should not be
	      an issue.  So long as the unit can be started with minimal
	      instructions (the limitations of which are yet to be determined),
	      it should be safe to expect that you could mail (or UPS, etc.) your
	      entry to the contest site, and have it entered for you by volunteers
	      at the site.

	      If your entry is indeed remotely operated, your presense at the site
	      during the contest may be required, unless the unit can be
	      teleoperated through a cellular phone/modem connection or via HAM
	      radio.  The latter alternative may require that some properly licensed
	      volunteer be on the sight.
	

	As with most similar competitions, the contestants would retain all rights 
	to their designs and entries.  The sponsors will probably request rights to
	any video or audio records of the contest as conditions for entry.

	If you have any feedback on this idea, critical or otherwise, I'd like to
	hear from you, here on the net (comp.robotics), via email
	(doughe@bamboo.cax.tek.com), or by paper mail to:

				Robotics Contest
				c/o The Oregon L-5 Society, Inc.
				P.O. Box 86
				Oregon City, OR 97045


	Thanks in advance.  


						Doug Helbling
						doughe@bamboo.cax.tek.com


	Disclaimer: Tektronix, Inc.,  is not a sponsor of this proposed contest, 
		    of Oregon L-5, or Oregon Moonbase.  Opinions, solicitations, 
		    etc., are the work of this individual.
			
Doug Helbling (503) 591-1696

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #099
*******************