Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 05:00:19
From: Space Digest maintainer <digests@isu.isunet.edu>
Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu
Subject: Space Digest V16 #385
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk
Space Digest Tue, 30 Mar 93 Volume 16 : Issue 385
Today's Topics:
25 kg. to Venus, how much would it cost?
<None>
Breathing 100 atm. of anything
Coral and Dyson Sphere..
Gravity waves, was: Predicting gravity wave quantization & Cosmic Noise
JPL's Public Access Site
KRYSTAL in separate orbit?
Magellan Update - 03/22/93
Making Those Venusian Oceans
Nova Graphics (was Re: Space Posters, and where to get them?)
Question on Cassini Radar (3 msgs)
Sources for post-doctoral positions in Space Physics
Space Calendar - 03/27/93
Speculation: the extension of TCP/IP and DNS into large light lag enviroments (3 msgs)
Terraforming Venus cheaply? NO! (2 msgs)
Timid Terraformers (was Re: How to cool Venus)
viking cdrom question
Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to
"space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form
"Subscribe Space <your name>" 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, 29 Mar 1993 14:38:38 GMT
From: Keith Mancus <mancus@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: 25 kg. to Venus, how much would it cost?
Newsgroups: sci.space
>I wrote:
>> Sounds to me like there is a LOT of room for cost improvement on the
>>low-mass end, unless the $20M figure is really a loss to the Russians
>>and they just don't know it (quite possible)...
>> It seems to me that a cost of < $1M per launch would have a great effect
>>on the viability of this type of mission. Granted, there are some benefits
>>to scale here, but I don't believe that decreases cost by a factor of 10.
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>[Answer stating that increased *number* of flights could bring down costs
> by a very large factor]
Sorry, Henry, I didn't make my statement clear. I meant that flying
a larger booster would not bring costs down that much. In other words,
launching 1700 kg to escape velocity is probably cheaper ($/lb) than
launching 75 kg (assuming each one is a single flight on an existing
booster), but not 10X cheaper. I wasn't talking about benefits of scale
due to a larger number of flights, or mass production of the booster.
--
Keith Mancus <mancus@butch.jsc.nasa.gov> |
N5WVR |
"Black powder and alcohol, when your states and cities fall, |
when your back's against the wall...." -Leslie Fish |
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 15:36:42 GMT
From: gawne@stsci.edu
Subject: <None>
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.physics
In article <C4M8E5.AuD@csn.org>, et@teal.csn.org (Eric H. Taylor) writes:
[Quoting Nikola Tesla]
> "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have
> no properties."
> "Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the
> space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved,
> is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I,
> for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view." - Nikola Tesla
OK, how about we just return to first principles? The argument of GR,
as I recall from graduate school, is that the metric of spacetime can't
be represented by constants in the presence of masses. The metric has
to be represented by differentials.
Now the 'normal' conditions of geometry where metrics have to be represented
by differentials are curves. Thus the efforts to explain GR in non-
mathematical language have seized on this similarity to say that space
is curved in the presence of masses.
I'm sure that some of our more adroit contributors have a deeper under-
standing of this than I. Still, this may help some of the people out
there who are getting lost in the words without a background in the
Reimanian geometry.
-Bill Gawne, Space Telescope Science Institute
"Forgive him, he is a barbarian, who thinks the customs of his tribe
are the laws of the universe." - G. J. Caesar
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 16:43:20 GMT
From: Doug Loss <loss@fs7.ECE.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Breathing 100 atm. of anything
Newsgroups: sci.space
It seems to me that the major problem, everything else assumed to be OK,
is that at 100 atm. the viscosity of _any_ gasses is such that a human
diaphragm will fatigue and cease functioning, causing suffocation
regardless of partial pressures, etc.
Doug Loss
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 1993 12:10:43 GMT
From: David Toland <det@sw.stratus.com>
Subject: Coral and Dyson Sphere..
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <1993Mar27.114023.1@aurora.alaska.edu>, nsmca@aurora.alaska.edu writes:
> So I am wierd..
> I once had an idea on how to create a dyson (sp, or dysean?) Sphere, using a
> genetically engineered animal similar to a coral.. Namely using a selection of
> coral and other contructs to construct the sphere (the growth of the coral
> would have to be speeded up thou), one group to collect and convert the base
> materials, the others group to build it.. Now to figure out how it would be
> able to hanbdle space and it might work sometime in the future..
>
> A sphere or a Ringworld base structure is more like it, not sure how to do the
> rest.. But Im sure someone can figure this out..
>
> How to get the coral to build the "reef" in the shape wanted??
Assuming you've solved the problem of making the raw materials available
in sufficient quantity, and have solved all the other problems, can we
get some rate estimates? If you calculate the surface area of the sphere,
the most optimistic growth rates, and initial colony size, how long will
the sphere take to complete, and how does it compare with the current age
of the Universe? I haven't done any calculations on this, but I strongly
suspect that the answers would be amusing.
I doubt most people can easily conceive of the scale of a Niven Ring, much
less a Dyson Sphere of the same radius!
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
All opinions are MINE MINE MINE, and not necessarily anyone else's.
det@phlan.sw.stratus.com | "Laddie, you'll be needin' something to wash
| that doon with."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 15:52:47 GMT
From: Nick Haines <nickh@CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Gravity waves, was: Predicting gravity wave quantization & Cosmic Noise
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.physics,alt.sci.planetary
Geez, I didn't mean to start anything quite this wordy. The point of
my illustration is that when physicists talk of spacetime being
curved, what they mean is this sort of curvature:
"if we drew a circle on it and measured its circumference, we
wouldn't get 2\pi r"
(which spheres and saddles have but cones and cylinders don't), which
does _not_ imply the actual existence of a higher-dimensional space
which spacetime is curved `in'. Because such a space is not required
by the theory, and can not have _any_ physical consequences (because
all observables are embedded in the spacetime), why consider it? Why
discuss it? Sure, I can propose that spacetime is embedded in a
17-trillion dimensional space, but what does it win me.
The flat thing which this curvature is `measured against' is a
notional flat space in which the area of all circles is 2\pi r.
Also, spacetime topologies are theoretically possible which cannot be
embedded in higher dimensions.
Oh, and to speak of a sphere `curving downwards' and a saddle `curving
upwards' is very misleading; it implies that if you look at a sphere
from `the other side' it looks like a saddle. Absurd: the angles of a
triangle drawn in a surface don't change if you turn the surface over.
Speak instead of positive and negative curvature.
Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 1993 16:30 UT
From: Ron Baalke <baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: JPL's Public Access Site
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
In article <28MAR199322443311@cc.utah.edu>, beezer@cc.utah.edu (BEEZER) writes...
>In article <26MAR199317124999@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes...
>>From the "JPL Universe"
>>March 26, 1993
>>
>>Public access computer site spurs worldwide interest in Lab activities
>
>> -- Those with a computer and a modem may call 354-1333,
>
>Umm, forgot the area code, didn't we? {grin}
>
The number with area code is 818-354-1333. I posted the article as is, but
forgot that since it came from JPL's in house newspaper, some of the info
is localized.
___ _____ ___
/_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
| | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab |
___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Don't ever take a fence
/___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | down until you know the
|_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | reason it was put up.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 93 13:04:51 GMT
From: George Hastings <ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu>
Subject: KRYSTAL in separate orbit?
Newsgroups: sci.space
...interesting question relayed from the CompuServe SPACEFORUM:
23-Mar-93 09:56:44
Sb: KRISTAL DUMPED?
Fm: 71461.34@compuserve.com
To: ALL
To any of you that run orbital elements you might look at what the
latest set gives for Kristal and MIR. They are different. While
running a routine check on them it appears that
1)The russians have seperated Kristal from MIR. This could be to do
microgravity work (darn a free flying microgravity platform wish
someone would think of that here)
2)Space Command has made a goof.
I bumped a message to MIR last night in a query. NO reply so far.
I'll listen for MIR/Kvant telem and see what gives.
Any of the Russian experts here got a clue?
Robert G. Oler
____________________________________________________________
| George Hastings ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu |
| Space Science Teacher 72407.22@compuserve.com | If it's not
| Mathematics & Science Center STAREACH BBS: 804-343-6533 | FUN, it's
| 2304 Hartman Street OFFICE: 804-343-6525 | probably not
| Richmond, VA 23223 FAX: 804-343-6529 | SCIENCE!
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 14:11:07 GMT
From: Gary Coffman <ke4zv!gary>
Subject: Magellan Update - 03/22/93
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
In article <1oveva$iif@access.digex.com> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes:
>
>Evena simple morse-pulsing. Certainly, low rate, but good for filling
>in some of those remaining blank spaces that magellan never imaged.
I can see it now, some guy at DSN wearing cans and copying numbers
with a mill. Somehow I think the signals are a bit too weak for
such antique methods. Morse encoding is not well suited for machine
decoding at extremely weak levels.
Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it, | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | we break it. | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way | Guaranteed! | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244 | |
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 11:53:13 GMT
From: Del Cotter <mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk>
Subject: Making Those Venusian Oceans
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <C4LItx.7Cz.1@cs.cmu.edu> flb@flb.optiplan.fi ("F.Baube[tm]") writes:
>Someone suggested importing hydrogen to get
>
> CO2 + 4 H -> C + 2 H2O
As Nat Reynolds said... "speaking."
>Well, gee, the *Sun* has lots of hydrogen
>floating around free for the asking ..
sarcasm ON
Sure, Jupiter's gravity well isn't *nearly* deep enough...
sarcasm OFF
The "cheapest" places to get hydrogen and slam it into Venus would be
the furthest out (lower delta V), smallest (ditto) and coldest (lowest
refrigeration cost). Uranus and Neptune come out neck and neck at
about 2e28 J for about 4e19 kg H2. Fogg plumped for Uranus but I prefer
Neptune for a number of reasons, but there's no reason not to set up
operations around /both/ worlds.
The Sun has one great advantage as a hydrogen source:
It's a VERY high energy environment.
One great disadvantage:
It's a VERY VERY high energy environment.
--
',' ' ',',' | | ',' ' ',','
', ,',' | Del Cotter mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk | ', ,','
',' | | ','
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 04:35:42 GMT
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov>
Subject: Nova Graphics (was Re: Space Posters, and where to get them?)
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <1993Mar27.041249.28500@sol.UVic.CA>, rborden@ugly.UVic.CA (Ross Borden) writes:
> In article <1993Mar25.102746.1@aurora.alaska.edu> nsmca@aurora.alaska.edu writes:
>>Wiers question, where is a good place to get Space Posters???
>
> Try Nova Graphics in Tuscon, AZ. They have some nice prints of spacescapes
> by artists like Kim Poor and Alan Bean. They're good quality, but a bit
> pricey ($30-$80) because they're all limited editions. Sorry, can't give
> you the address, my catalog is at home.
I second the motion, Mr. Chairman. Their address is:
Nova Graphics
P.O. Box 37197,
Tucson, AZ 85740
(800)821-1989 extension 1014
Moira Higgins on astronomy: Bill Higgins
"I can always find Orion. Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
Besides that the Moon Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
is my only other specialty." Bitnet: HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 12:45:08 GMT
From: Schroder S <sschrod@cs.vu.nl>
Subject: Question on Cassini Radar
Newsgroups: sci.space
This is a request for more information about the Cassini radar.
I understand that Titan is going to be scanned with some kind of
radar, but will this be a Synthetic Aperture Radar?
Furthermore, I wonder whether a "complete Titan mapping" program
will be carried out, since (radar-)imaging can only be done during
short fly-by's of this moon. Are we going to see the same kind of
pictures as the Magellan ones?
Stefan Schroder.
<< sschrod@cs.vu.nl or schroder@bio.vu.nl >>
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 1993 16:34 UT
From: Ron Baalke <baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Question on Cassini Radar
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <C4nI39.7pv@cs.vu.nl>, sschrod@cs.vu.nl (Schroder S) writes...
>
>This is a request for more information about the Cassini radar.
>I understand that Titan is going to be scanned with some kind of
>radar, but will this be a Synthetic Aperture Radar?
Cassini's radar mapper will use SAR, and is very similar to the one
that Magellan currently uses.
>Furthermore, I wonder whether a "complete Titan mapping" program
>will be carried out, since (radar-)imaging can only be done during
>short fly-by's of this moon. Are we going to see the same kind of
>pictures as the Magellan ones?
Cassini will make about 30 close flybys of Titan, and will make a mapping
swath on each encounter.
___ _____ ___
/_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
| | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab |
___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Don't ever take a fence
/___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | down until you know the
|_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | reason it was put up.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 10:27:54 -0600
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov>
Subject: Question on Cassini Radar
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <C4nI39.7pv@cs.vu.nl>, sschrod@cs.vu.nl (Schroder S) writes:
> This is a request for more information about the Cassini radar.
I don't have it handy, but there was a substantial overview of this
radar published in *Proceedings of the IEEE* (that's "Institute of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers") sometime in the past two or
three years. Maybe one of the radar people reading this list can
provide the exact citation.
> I understand that Titan is going to be scanned with some kind of
> radar, but will this be a Synthetic Aperture Radar?
Yes.
I wonder whether they have any plans to point it at Saturn. Would it
show anything? And will they use the radar on other satellites which
are not cloudy?
> Furthermore, I wonder whether a "complete Titan mapping" program
> will be carried out, since (radar-)imaging can only be done during
> short fly-by's of this moon. Are we going to see the same kind of
> pictures as the Magellan ones?
You are correct. The SAR will scan only a few skinny little strips of
Titan's surface. Cassini will not orbit Titan, so the radar can only
be used on a few occasions when its Kronian orbit (I saw this word in an
astronomy paper the other day, I couldn't wait to use it) brings it
close to Titan. It will still be better than pictures of a
featureless orange tennis ball!
Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey | What I want to be
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory | when I grow up:
Bitnet: HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET | "Charismatic Leader
Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV | of a Heavily Armed
SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS | Religious Cult"
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 04:47:28 GMT
From: Dinesh Das <ddas@cs.utexas.edu>
Subject: Sources for post-doctoral positions in Space Physics
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers,sci.engr,sci.engr.mech,sci.geo.fluids,sci.physics,sci.research,sci.space
Hello, excuse me if I am posting to the wrong groups (and tell me
where I should post it).
I am looking for sources where I can find job advertisements for
my wife who will be completing a PhD in space plasma physics. I would
be interested in the names of any professional magazines, journals,
or similar stuff that have post-doctoral or other PhD job ads in
the areas of
-- space physics
-- numerical simulation
-- fluid mechanics/dynamics
-- fusion
-- plasma physics
-- oceanography
and related areas. Please send me email if you can help me.
Regards,
Dinesh
--
Dinesh Das Dept. of Computer Sciences, Univ. of Texas at Austin
ddas@cs.utexas.edu Austin, TX 78712-1188
(512) 471-9721 "Life is uncertain - eat dessert first"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 13:32:35 GMT
From: "William S. Werner" <wwerner@thor.mlb.semi.harris.com>
Subject: Space Calendar - 03/27/93
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.space.shuttle,alt.sci.planetary
The Delta II launch was scheduled for Sunday March 28, but was delayed
due to upper level winds......so the plan is to try tonight, March 29,
the window is from 10:09 PM to 10:37 PM
Bill
:
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 93 11:45:01 BST
From: Greg Stewart-Nicholls <nicho@vnet.IBM.COM>
Subject: Speculation: the extension of TCP/IP and DNS into large light lag enviroments
Newsgroups: alt.internet.services,sci.space
In <1p23h8INNnqi@gap.caltech.edu> M. Sean Bennett writes:
>The Moon, Mars, etc. are "claimed for all mankind".
By whom ?? ,I mean by this, who has the authority to issue such a
proclamation. More importantly, who can enforce it ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
.sig files are like strings ... every yo-yo's got one.
Greg Nicholls ... nicho@vnet.ibm.com (business) or
nicho@olympus.demon.co.uk (private)
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 14:27:03 GMT
From: Gary Coffman <ke4zv!gary>
Subject: Speculation: the extension of TCP/IP and DNS into large light lag enviroments
Newsgroups: alt.internet.services,sci.space
In article <1p23h8INNnqi@gap.caltech.edu> sean@ugcs.caltech.edu (M. Sean Bennett) writes:
>>Why is it a dangerous precedent? Should NASA or the CIS be building bases
>>that aren't under any jurisdiction?
>
>It is my fault for not making myself clearer.
>
>The Moon, Mars, etc. are "claimed for all mankind".
>
>The dangerous precedent is the exporting of our national bigotries - irespective
>of the nation involved.
>
>What is this COPOUS treaty you speak of?
That's the treaty that "claims space as the common heritage of mankind",
and incidently requires all profits from space exploitation be *shared*
equally with all mankind regardless of the efforts exerted to make space
profitable. Fortunately, the US didn't ratify that treaty, thanks in large
part to the L5 society's efforts. Ratification would have spelled doom for
all private capitalist operations in space.
Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it, | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | we break it. | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way | Guaranteed! | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244 | |
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 14:28:42 GMT
From: Keith Mancus <mancus@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Speculation: the extension of TCP/IP and DNS into large light lag enviroments
Newsgroups: alt.internet.services,sci.space
>>What is this COPOUS treaty you speak of?
pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu (Phil G. Fraering) writes:
> A treaty that gave space "to all mankind;" literally, it gave _any_ nation
> on the face of the earth veto power over anything done by anyone up there.
> Go look up the COPOUS treaty and the debate surrounding it before you
> come back to flame. Please.
I was under the impression that the US had not signed this treaty.
Right or wrong?
--
Keith Mancus <mancus@butch.jsc.nasa.gov> |
N5WVR |
"Black powder and alcohol, when your states and cities fall, |
when your back's against the wall...." -Leslie Fish |
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 12:08:11 GMT
From: Del Cotter <mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk>
Subject: Terraforming Venus cheaply? NO!
Newsgroups: sci.space
<rabjab.4.733374378@golem.ucsd.edu> rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof) writes:
>This discussion of terraforming Venus has really begun to fascinate me.
>What is especially intriguing is the possibility that the kickoff
>in the process could be the simple injection of microorganisms into
>the atmosphere of Venus. In terms of available technology, getting
>a small package to Venus would be reasonably simple. The major problem, of
>course, would be the technical advances to engineer organisms that
>could survive the conditions on Venus as they change, and have
>them perform useful activities, such as fixing the atmosphere in solid
>form.
Uh, small reality check. Genetic engineering may work wonders in the next
few decades, but no bugs are ever going to live on what's in the upper
Venerian atmosphere. We're going to have to drop trace elements on them
from above /all the time/ or nuke dust into the upper atmosphere from
below - /all the time/. The days of Jerry Pournelle's
"we could probably get the job done this century [for the cost of] a
medium sized war" (from 'A Step Further Out')
are long behind us.
>We are definitely looking at a long term project,
Right, like industrialise the rest of the solar system first, before
tackling the tough nuts.
>but work
>to construct a viable set of organisms could be done incrementally over
>an extended period of time. Testing the actual organisms might be
>possible at a facility like NASA/Ames, in a simulator designed to
>mimic Venus.
Sure, no reason not to start right now. I believe some work has already
been done breeding superstrains of /cyanidium caldarum/ for Venerian
conditions.
--
',' ' ',',' | | ',' ' ',','
', ,',' | Del Cotter mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk | ', ,','
',' | | ','
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 13:37:21 GMT
From: Paul Dietz <dietz@cs.rochester.edu>
Subject: Terraforming Venus cheaply? NO!
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <C4nGDo.BqB@brunel.ac.uk> mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk (Del Cotter) writes:
> The days of Jerry Pournelle's
>
> "we could probably get the job done this century [for the cost of] a
> medium sized war" (from 'A Step Further Out')
>
> are long behind us.
That's really humorous, when one considers that the energy required to
separate all the CO2 in Venus's atmosphere to carbon and oxygen equals
all the sunlight hitting the planet for 500 years (and, beyond that,
photosynthesis is only about 1% efficient in practice, and never mind
the reoxidation of reduced material).
My favorite Pournelle column was "Love That Shuttle!", which appeared
in Analog shortly after the first launch, tooting the horn of low
cost to orbit via this wonderful machine.
Yet another confirmation that science fiction is a poor place to
learn science.
Paul
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 14:33:26 GMT
From: Gary Coffman <ke4zv!gary>
Subject: Timid Terraformers (was Re: How to cool Venus)
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <rabjab.88.733272313@golem.ucsd.edu> rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof) writes:
>In article <93085.002514GRV101@psuvm.psu.edu> Callec Dradja <GRV101@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>
>>My proposal, I feel, makes more sense in that it is slower and more
>>managible. I propose using organisms to fix the CO2 into a solid form.
>>Someone suggested carbonate rocks which sound like a good idea to me.
>
>I like that. Perhaps develop enzymes that will convert CO2 and various
>other gases absorbed into an organism into fullerenes and "caged
>molecules". Maybe even have the enzymes sort the gases that go inside
>the buckyballs! Then the filled buckyballs are excreted and eventually
>drift down to the surface of Venus? I don't know what the stability
>of buckyballs at Venusian surface temperatures are. Haven't fullerenes
>been discovered in rock deposits and by radio astronomers?
Organisms that can exist without water, and at 860 degrees, seem to
be the problem here. Natural buckyballs have been discovered in rocks
that showed signs of being struck by lightning. Buckyballs can form
under less extreme conditions than diamond films, but not by much.
Ideally, the carbon in the Venusian atmosphere could be plated out
on the surface as diamond film. *Then* there'd be an incentive to
go to Venus. :-)
Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it, | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | we break it. | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way | Guaranteed! | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244 | |
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 93 13:07:48 GMT
From: Matthew Zenkar <mz@moscom.com>
Subject: viking cdrom question
Newsgroups: sci.space
Can anyone tell me where the pictures of the "face on Mars" and the
"pryamids of mars" are located in the cdrom library that is on line
at explorer.arc.nasa.gov. I would appreciate it if you could tell
me the volume, directory, picture (raw data picture) number, etc.
E-mail responses would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.
Matthew Zenkar
mz@moscom.com
or
mz@crl.com
------------------------------
End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 385
------------------------------