Date: Tue, 4 Aug 92 05:00:08 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #063 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Tue, 4 Aug 92 Volume 15 : Issue 063 Today's Topics: Energiya's role in Space Station assembly Final CFP: Physics of Computation Workshop Hubble used for spying? ReEe: aA 12 mile tether that gernerates 5000v? Soyuz as ACRV What does ASTV stand for? What is the ASRM?? Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 3 Aug 92 13:07:06 BST From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk Subject: Energiya's role in Space Station assembly > but could we have them ship a complete (unfueled) > Energiya rocket to Kennedy and we launch it from there? Do we have any > launch pads that could hancle it? Or taken out of mothballs? > Lets go one better. Launch it from Australia. There was discussion some time back of firing Proton's from there. You still get a penalty in putting it into Fred's non-equatorial orbit, but I suspect that for private purposes the higher mass to equatorial for the same price would make that a more economically justifiable location for many private space stations. (Earth observation business excluded) ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jul 92 21:22:38 GMT From: Steve Ford Subject: Final CFP: Physics of Computation Workshop Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.theory,sci.astro,sci.bio,sci.logic,sci.math,sci.philosophy.meta,sci.psychology,sci.physics,sci.space,comp.parallel,comp.arch The Symbiosis of Physics and Computation Call for Participation Physics of Computation Workshop October 2 - 4, 1992, Dallas, Texas Sponsored by Dallas IEEE Computer Society Corporate Sponsor: Texas Instruments Incorporated The Physics of Computation Workshop is an opportunity for participants to better understand and contribute to the intimate relationship emerging between Modern Physics and Computation Theory. One commonly held view is that information laws are dependent on the laws of physics. Another emerging view is that the universe would not work without information primitives underlying physical laws. Both of these views conclude that physics and computation are linked together at a very fundamental level. Understanding the convergence of computation and physics will lead to a better understanding of using physical mechanisms as computing engines, and also lead to a better understanding of how the universe is organized. This field will become increasingly important as the complexity and computational horsepower requirements continually exceed the available computing engines we are able to design or build. The keynote speaker for this workshop will be Rolf Landauer, who co-organized the first conference on the Physics of Computation. Creative thinkers are welcome from any background, but basic interest or expertise in physics, computer sciences, mathematics, philosophy and/or psychology will contribute to the discussions. You are not expected to come with answers, but with an interest in exploring the questions. We are interested in papers that unify Computation (Information Theory, Communication Theory, Algorithms, Cellular Automata, Automatic Learning, Neural Networks, Architecture, Simulation, etc) and Physics (Entropy, Thermodynamics, Complexity, Quantum Theory, Energy/mass, Relativity, Gravity, etc). The goal of this workshop is to establish links between participants from various backgrounds. BACKGROUND: The first conference on the Physics of Computation was held in 1981 at MIT. The papers from that conference were printed in the 1982 International Journal for Theoretical Physics, Vol 21, April, June, and December issues. Work in this field has focused on how energy consumption and computation are related. Many excellent papers on reversible computation, and energy costs/limits of computation, and quantum models of computation provide introductions to the subject. We are assembling a bibliography for this field. SUBMISSION: Each prospective attendee is requested to submit a position paper of 1-4 pages (plus 1 page of references). Please send your submission by Aug 7, both by surface mail (3 copies) and also electronically (if possible) to: Douglas Matzke EMAIL: matzke@hc.ti.com Texas Instruments Incorporated PHONE: (214) 917-7426 PO BOX 655621, MS 369 FAX: (214) 917-7487 Dallas, Texas 75265 Notification of acceptance (limit of 100 people) will be mailed by Aug 24, 1992. The technical committee will group submissions into relevant topics, and select papers and panel members. Time for questions after each talk and breakout sessions will provide structured time for discussion and participation. Copies of the position papers will be distributed at registration. REGISTRATION (if position paper is accepted): A block of rooms is being reserved at a North Dallas Area Hotel. Full registration details will be mailed with acceptance notification. The room rate will be $59 flat rate. The workshop fee will be $100, payment by check or credit card. Transportation to hotel: Supershuttle or Taxi. Free hotel shuttles for transportation around Addison. SCHEDULE: Friday August 7: Position papers due Monday August 24: Notification of acceptance and final schedule Thursday Oct 1: Out of town arrival, early registration,& Reception Friday Oct 2 thru Sunday Oct 4(noon): Physics of Computation Workshop -- Steve Ford Net: ford@csc.ti.com Texas Instruments Tel: (214) 995-0780 Computer Science Laboratory Fax: (214) 995-0304 PO Box 655474, MS 238, Dallas, TX 75265 MSG: SFRD ------------------------------ Date: 3 Aug 92 11:42:17 GMT From: "E.J. du Toit" Subject: Hubble used for spying? Newsgroups: sci.space Can the Hubble telescope be rotated to view the earth's surface and what could be seen (resolution)? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Aug 92 12:58:16 BST From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk Subject: ReEe: aA 12 mile tether that gernerates 5000v? > I can see that this will work, though it's practicality may be limited > as it would start to slow down the shuttle if any serious power could > be drawn. > I would hardly call it "limited practicality" when you can change orbit to a lower one by storing the orbital energy in a battery for later reuse (less entropies bill) for reboost to higher orbit. Reaction mass need only be used for recharging this "orbital battery" after some number of cycles. It might also be useful for re-entry. Maybe add on a small electric thruster to make it a bit quicker. And you could move cargo (slowly) to higher orbits. But you probably want something that won't mind spending a bit of time in the Van Allen Belts... If you limit your definition to "for an internal power source", I would agree with your statement though. ------------------------------ Date: 3 Aug 92 13:14:23 GMT From: George William Herbert Subject: Soyuz as ACRV Newsgroups: sci.space In article <64879@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: >There's more than just the launcher-capsule interface to consider. Power >systems, communications protocols, computer interfaces, et cetera may all >need some work. I don't know all the details, but I would be surprised >if you can just modify the launcher a bit and use a Soyuz in the U.S. Actually, the adapter systemw would fit nicely in the orbital module where they normally fly some science instruments. Alternatively, you could leave the OM off (and lose a couple of tons mass) and figure out some alternative. Such as running the Soyuz on its own solar panels for its on-orbit lifetime 8-) (horrors...). Communications is no biggie; just radios. Computer interfaces is a disaster, but there's no real need to handle that. Just have some standard low-rate telemetry (on some radio perhaps) to the station and relay it to the ground. >I'm not referring to launch and landing certification, although if we do >have to modify the internals we'd probably want to give it a few tests. I >am referring to the work needed to make sure the Soyuz can stay up for months >and years as a lifeboat; it's not designed for that. If we take the easy >way out and swap capsules every few months, we're going to eat up our >potential savings in repetitive launch costs and capsule procurment. Using >Soyuz is hardly a guaranteed cheap-and-easy solution to the question of >guaranteed crew return. THAT is the rub; the Soyuz as is has a limited on-orbit lifetime. What I've heard suggested quietly is to buy the capsules on-orbit at the station, with no OM, prelaunched on russian boosters to keep it all cheap. If you delete the OM, they can just about put it into SSF orbit from their normal pads (one big dogleg...). Overall cost, right now, about $25-50m/launch, with four launches a year needed to keep 2 in good shape on orbit (up to 6 crew returned: for 8 man crews, you need six launches a year). Will it fly? I've heard wierder things... like someone in the shuttle program office talking to someone from NPO Energia about mating the US Shuttle Sans SSME's to a Energia (Why? Ask the Shuttle Office about refurbishment prices on SSME's sometime...). Not likely, but anything's possible... -george william herbert gwh@soda.berkeley.edu gwh@lurnix.com herbert@uchu.isu92.ac.jp until 28 aug ++ copyright 1992 george william herbert. All rights except usenet ++ ++ transmission/use and inclusion in followup/reply articles/mail reserved. ++ Current Freedom Gripe: The Solar Panels are Buckling! The Solar Panels are Buckling! ------------------------------ Date: 3 Aug 92 08:45:22 GMT From: Frederic Chalot Subject: What does ASTV stand for? Newsgroups: sci.space AOTV and AFE are well known projects. But what is exactly the ASTV about which I heard recently? -------*****------- Frederic Chalot, Scientific Computing & Computational Mathematics Division of Applied Mechanics, Stanford University "Il n'est pas defendu d'attendre et il est toujours doux d'esperer!" ------------------------------ Date: 3 Aug 92 12:00:09 GMT From: "Allen W. Sherzer" Subject: What is the ASRM?? Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle In article <1992Aug3.051304.28891@newshost.anu.edu.au> butler@rschp2.anu.edu.au (Brent Butler) writes: >If anybody has some info on NASA's Advanced Solid Rocket Motor could >you please post/send it to me. Don't bother; it's dead Jim. Last week the House voted to kill the program largely due to a blunder by House proponents [1]. The Senate Appropriations subcommittee also zeroed funds (but left a small loophole in the report language). Odds are about 90% that it is dead. Allen [1] For those interested in the blunder, the proponents brought out Jamie Lee Whitten, chair of the Appropriations Committee to speak for ASRM (also known as the Jamie Whitten Memorial Pork Launcher). Normally, this very powerful person strikes terror into the hearts of pork loving congresscritters everywhere and they cross him at their peril. Now however, he is in his 80's and sounded pretty senile before the House. This may have convinced members that Whitten is history and they could vote any way they wanted. -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they | | aws@iti.org | put a man on the Moon?" | +----------------------263 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+ ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 063 ------------------------------