Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 12:10:03 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #410 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 3 Apr 93 Volume 16 : Issue 410 Today's Topics: Abyss: breathing fluids Curvature and Embedding Elevator to the top floor Galileo Update - 04/01/93 Info on Probe Computers lie low netters! UFO's want you! Location of Superconducting Supercollider Luddites in space Mars Observer Update #2 - 03/29/93 Mars Observer Update - 03/29/93 PBS space special Shuttle *Endeavour* (was Re: Space Research Spin Off) (2 msgs) Small Astronaut (was: Budget Astronaut) Space Research Spin Off STS-1 DISASTER/COVERUP and NASA COVERUP Terraforming Venus: can it be done "cheaply"? the call to space (was Re: Clueless Szaboisms ) (3 msgs) Why use AC at 20kHz for SSF power 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: 1 Apr 1993 15:38:22 -0500 From: Pat Subject: Abyss: breathing fluids Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Apr1.024438.18955@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> tstroup@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com writes: > >Sorry Pat there are no C's in this flourcarbon emulsion. That's why it >can be used in animals and humans. But you are probably right that the >EPA will still ban it. And it does make a good non-dairy >>dessert<<. :-) Why wouldn't CFC's be usable for human or animal studies? I thought one of the great advantages of CFC's are that they are chemically inert and hence non-toxic. Ammonia was a good refrigerant but it corroded the heck out of things. Not to mention service was always a tough activity. I'm glad somebody caught my joke on cool-whip. pat ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 01:23:04 GMT From: Bruce Bowen Subject: Curvature and Embedding Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.physics,alt.sci.planetary From article , by hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin): > In article crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes: >>In article nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes: > >>>Should this go in the FAQ? > >> No. There is no intrinsic reason we should restrict inquiry to the >> "ant's eye view". If it is useful to embed the space in another, >> we should go right ahead. > >> "Existence" is a rather tenuous concept in this context. Do >> complex numbers "exist"? How about tensors? How about the >> "space" itself. Why do you think physical space is some sort >> of local manifold describable by our mathematics? > > We cannot always embed a "curved" space in a flat Euclidean space > isometrically. One way of looking at the conditions is that the > squares of the distances between points forms a matrix of finite > rank, and even a little more is needed. Even embedding a sphere > in the Euclidean space of one more dimension changes distances; > the distance ON THE SPHERE between antipodes in pi*r, whereas in > the Euclidean space the diameter is of length 2*r. On the other > hand, it can be embedded topologically in a space of enough more > dimensions. The above paragraph is wrong as stated and appears to confuse "isometric embedding" with "isometric mapping". Embedding means to isometrically map a space into a subspace of a higher dimensional space, without self intersection. It is trivial to isometrically embed the 2-sphere into Euclidian 3-space. Standard spherical polar coordinates with a constant "r" is one example. It is not possible though to isometrically map the 2-sphere to Euclidean 2-space, even locally. It was proven by Nash that given any Riemannian Manifold, it is alway possible to find a finite "N" such that the given manifold is isometrically embeddable in Euclidean n-space for all n > N. So there is no loss of generallity in assuming your manifold is embedded in a higher dimensional flat space. Whether this is true of spaces with non-positive definite metrics I don't know. -Bruce megatest!bbowen@sun.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 02:38:00 GMT From: Henry Choy Subject: Elevator to the top floor Newsgroups: sci.space If we can build bridges and towers, we can surely build a structure that reaches to the heavens. Or are we afraid of babbling? It would be like building a mountain. If possible, a mountain on a mountain can be built. How about a wall-less elevator shaft? A spaceship can winch up an "elevator car" or space shuttle. This may save on fuel because the shuttle doesn't have to take jackrabbit starts. Rocket controls can be used to keep the shuttle on course. -- Henry Choy choy@cs.usask.ca We are Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 00:34 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Galileo Update - 04/01/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary Forwarded from Neal Ausman, Galileo Mission Director GALILEO MISSION DIRECTOR STATUS REPORT POST-LAUNCH March 26 - April 1, 1993 SPACECRAFT 1. On March 29, a NO-OP command was sent to reset the command loss timer to 240 hours, its planned value during this mission phase. 2. Throughout this week, there was no spacecraft sequence controlled activity planned. This period had previously been set aside for possible High Gain Antenna rib release activities of which none were scheduled. 3. The AC/DC bus imbalance measurements have not exhibited significant change (greater than 25 DN) throughout this period. The AC measurement reads 19 DN (4.3 volts). The DC measurement reads 151 DN (17.8 volts). These measurements are consistent with the model developed by the AC/DC special anomaly team. 4. The Spacecraft status as of April 1, 1993, is as follows: a) System Power Margin - 69 watts b) Spin Configuration - Dual-Spin c) Spin Rate/Sensor - 3.15rpm/Star Scanner d) Spacecraft Attitude is approximately 13 degrees off-sun (lagging) and 8 degrees off-earth (leading) e) Downlink telemetry rate/antenna- 40bps(coded)/LGA-1 f) General Thermal Control - all temperatures within acceptable range g) RPM Tank Pressures - all within acceptable range h) Orbiter Science- Instruments powered on are the PWS, EUV, UVS, EPD, MAG, HIC, and DDS i) Probe/RRH - powered off, temperatures within acceptable range j) CMD Loss Timer Setting - 240 hours Time To Initiation - 163 hours TRAJECTORY As of noon Thursday, April 1, 1993, the Galileo Spacecraft trajectory status was as follows: Distance from Earth 121,242,900 km (0.81 AU) Distance from Sun 258,439,300 km (1.73 AU) Heliocentric Speed 98,200 km per hour Distance from Jupiter 568,132,700 km Round Trip Light Time 13 minutes, 34 seconds SPECIAL TOPIC 1. As of April 1, 1993, a total of 67693 real-time commands have been transmitted to Galileo since Launch. Of these, 62586 were initiated in the sequence design process and 5107 initiated in the real-time command process. In the past week, one real time command was transmitted: one was initiated in the sequence design process and none initiated in the real time command process. Major command activities included commands to reset the command loss timer. 2. The Galileo Preliminary Mission/System Design Review for implementation with the Low Gain Antenna (LGA) was held on March 31, 1993. A comprehensive and well organized review of the science/mission requirements, and the spacecraft and ground system design efforts to meet those requirements were presented. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Being cynical never helps /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | to correct the situation |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | and causes more aggravation | instead. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:39:42 GMT From: The Arch-Deviant Subject: Info on Probe Computers Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.folklore.computers (Originally posted to alt.sci.planetary - thanks for the ptr Bill!) I'm after _detailed_ technical information on the on-board computers used in early probes (Ranger, Mariner, Pioneer, Voyager) - system architecture, programming model, command codes, basically everything needed to write a true-to-life simulator of the probe as seen by programmers/flight engineers. Obviously this data, if it still exists, is liable to be very bulky and/or expensive, but I'd like to get an idea of how big a project it would be to get hold of it. I've tried the JPL and Ames archive sites (no joy), and have been advised that the Nat. Space Science Data Ctr at Goddard can't help either. Can anyone suggest who I should approach for this? Many thanks... Simon Brady // EXEC FS02,PARM='FILIN=CARD FILOT=PRNT' University of Otago ARF! ARF! GOT YOU! Dunedin, New Zealand /* ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 20:56:04 GMT From: Craig Keithley Subject: lie low netters! UFO's want you! Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Apr1.182335.29872@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, martin@space.ualberta.ca (Martin Connors) wrote: > > This from todays Global Mail (Canada's 'national newspaper'): > === > Toronto - The Canadian Research Association for Cosmic Knowledge of > Phenomena, Observations, and Technology Sounds like a bunch of Crackpots to me. When will they ever learn... Gee, what's today's date... Craig Keithley |"I don't remember, I don't recall, Apple Computer, Inc. |I got no memory of anything at all" keithley@apple.com |Peter Gabriel, Third Album (1980) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Apr 93 23:58:01 GMT From: "Nathan M. Urban" Subject: Location of Superconducting Supercollider Newsgroups: sci.space I was wondering: What criteria were used in choosing the location for the construction of the Superconducting Supercollider? Are there geophysical reasons why that region is preferable, or was it mainly political? What physical factors would be important to its construction/operation? --- ------------------------------------------------------- Nathan Urban nurban@tjhsst.vak12ed.edu Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 1993 15:14:00 -0500 From: Pat Subject: Luddites in space Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space In article <1993Mar31.181516.1068@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >In <1oveeu$hqk@access.digex.com> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: > >>In article <1993Mar25.204904.4885@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >>>I hardly ever 'ignore economics', since I went to the trouble and >>>effort to get a degree in the subject so I would understand things >>>that to you are apparently beyond comprehension. Perhaps you should > >>And DOug Mohney in a previous Post >> How much do I know about Economics, I have a degree in the subject. > >>SO who else has a degree in economics? > >>Pat > >> Who didn't bother, because i already know the field. > >Famous last words. I'm curious, though, Pat. How would you feel if >your doctor told you that he/she "didn't bother" with medical school >because they "already knew the field" or that the flight control >software for the airplane you were riding in was designed and built by >someone who "didn't bother" with training to learn about software >engineering because they "already knew the field"? > >Hmmm, maybe this explains some things? :-) I guess the best response would be to point out that you like mohney couldn't have been very good economists. You couldn't get jobs in the field. Now considering that one of the partners in the medical practice that I go to never went to med school what does that mean. SChools only teach dogma. Unless you are going to get a PhD, all you are doing is learning the dogma of the faculty. And in fact numerous people conduct highly valuable research without having a Degree at all. The best computer guys I ever worked with never had their degrees in either EE or CS or Math. Ward was a statistician. Bob was a physicist. Russ white was an English major, Andy was an architect. I suppose you think Ovishinky was an idiot because he never finished High School. My Grandfather is one of the greatest economists to live in in this century, and I probably learned more about the fundamentals of economic theory hanging around him then in all the classes I did take as an undergrad. You see I took the classes, I just never bothered with the detail work to get the major. I actually ended up with more classes in acctg, Finance and Economics then my brother who had a degree in economics. So fred. Do you with all your Brilliant economic reasoning think that the last administrations economic policies were advantageous to the american people and th economy? Or here. Postulate what role Space has in improving our GNP over the next 10 years, and what should be done to implement it and what levels of funding should be committed. pat (WHo obviously doesn't know enough to answer these questions) ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 93 02:20:08 GMT From: James Thomas Green Subject: Mars Observer Update #2 - 03/29/93 Newsgroups: sci.space In article <29MAR199320545366@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > >The Flight Team is conducting an "Anomalous Mars Orbit >Insertion" training rehearsal during this period. > > What exactly does this mean? Does it mean a problem during insertion? A problem before? Or insertion into the wrong orbit? /~~~(-: James T. Green :-)~~~~(-: jgreen@oboe.calpoly.edu :-)~~~\ | No animals were >_,< | | killed in (oo) | | the creation or ,-------(._.) | | testing of / | || | | this message! * ||W--'|| | ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 23:14:00 GMT From: David Ward Subject: Mars Observer Update - 03/29/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary > >Now isn't that always the kicker. It does seem stupid to drop >a mission like Magellan, because there isn't 70 million a year Message-ID: <1APR199318143683@stdvax> References: <29MAR199317304410@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> <1p7fqc$nr2@access.digex.com> <30MAR199319014478@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> <1pcgaa$do1@access.digex.com> Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center - Robotics Lab News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1 >to keep up the mission. You'd think that ongoing science could >justify the money. JPL gets accused of spending more then neccessary, >probably some validity in that, but NASA does put money into some >things that really are Porcine. Oh well. > >pat $70 million seems awfully high to keep any mission going. Where do your numbers come from and is there something I'm missing in the translation between planetary spacecraft and Earth orbiters? David W. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 03:53:29 GMT From: Norman Anderson Subject: PBS space special Newsgroups: sci.space higgins@fnalo.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: >I am interested in the Net's reaction to last night's PBS special, >whose prosaic title "Living and Working in Space" concealed the >unorthodox sights and sounds within. I've only watched a fraction of >the tape, so I'll reserve my opinion for now. I saw the last 20 minutes of the special and REALLY enjoyed what I saw. I ran to the TV schedule to see when I could see the rest. ( Saturday, April 3 at 7:00pm on KUED here in Utah.) I would like to know how the younger "kids" felt about it, but my "gettin' older" group liked it. Who knows WHEN/(if) we will return to the moon or get to Mars (and beyond), but isn't it a blast to open our minds and take off today? I think that this special really does that!! I am recomending it to ALL my friends. Norm ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 93 17:26:41 -0600 From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey Subject: Shuttle *Endeavour* (was Re: Space Research Spin Off) Newsgroups: sci.space Oh, boy, I love to write spelling flames... In article <1993Apr1.105228.17085@ucc.su.OZ.AU>, dan@key3.ae.su.oz.au (Daniel M. Newman) writes: > In article stephens@geod.emr.ca (Dave Stephenson) writes: >>For my money the most important piece of space research spin off to >>date (rather before the time of NASA) is Australia. NSW was colonised >>because of the excellent maps produced by the Endurance expedition > ^^^^^^^^^ > Endeavour > - almost like the shuttle - EXACTLY like the Shuttle, Dan. It may not be clear to a guy in Australia correcting a guy in Canada (and I don't know where Dave's originally from; his accent doesn't sound Canadian to me), but NASA named their latest orbiter after Cook's ship. Therefore they adopted the British spelling "Endeavour" for the Shuttle even though American orthography mandates "endeavor." This is endlessly confusing both to Yanks and Empire residents, and the press, and Usenet, get it wrong a significant fraction of the time. -- O~~* /_) ' / / /_/ ' , , ' ,_ _ \|/ - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / / / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap! / \ (_) (_) / | \ | | Bill Higgins Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory \ / Bitnet: HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET - - Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV ~ SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 00:27:01 GMT From: Dave Stephenson Subject: Shuttle *Endeavour* (was Re: Space Research Spin Off) Newsgroups: sci.space Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa. I will get my computer to write a 100 times do not free hand Usenet postings. I am originally from the U.K., but have been in various places, including Oz in the past 20 years. I gave up fighting my speller years ago and grudgingly accept the American Standard, as I tend to write for clients in the U.S.. I mixed up the two ships in a lecture at the World S.F. Con last year, so this is not the first time. -- Dave Stephenson Geodetic Survey of Canada Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Internet: stephens@geod.emr.ca ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 1993 15:48:37 -0500 From: Pat Subject: Small Astronaut (was: Budget Astronaut) Newsgroups: sci.space Only one problem with sending a corp of Small astronauts. THey may want to start a galactic empire:-) Napoleon complex you know. Genghis Khan was a little guy too. I'd bet Julius caesar never broke 5'1". pat ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 1993 23:13:55 -0500 From: Pat Subject: Space Research Spin Off Newsgroups: sci.space In article stephens@geod.emr.ca (Dave Stephenson) writes: >Anyone have any earlier examples of space research spin offs? I'd imagine there was some correlation between galileo's studies of the planets with the age of enlightenment. Tycho helped a lot on that. The greeks were interested ins tudying the stars, and developed a lot of geometrical techniques to help on this. pat ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 1993 22:04:21 GMT From: Mark Adam Subject: STS-1 DISASTER/COVERUP and NASA COVERUP Newsgroups: sci.space References: <1993Mar29.162041.5393@cnsvax.uwec.edu> <1993Mar30.140403.845@sol.cs.wmich.edu> <835@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp> Nntp-Posting-Host: paix.sw.stratus.com Sender: news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU hmmmm.... Columbia again. I understand! When the real Columbia launched, something happened in space. The ship went through a time warp and detonated 5 years later. (5 year mission? Naw!) The real crew of the Chalenger is hidden in Nevada with all the UFOs the Air force has downed. And they've been there for the last twelve years. Rockwell took Chalenger, which landed secretly and sold it back to NASA as the third shuttle. It's so obvious! -- mark ---------------------------- (adam@paix.sw.stratus.com) | My opinions are not those of Stratus. | Hell! I don`t even agree with myself! "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers that smell bad." ------------------------------ Date: 31 Mar 93 19:26:31 GMT From: Charles Lindsey Subject: Terraforming Venus: can it be done "cheaply"? Newsgroups: sci.space In 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. I see one fundamental problem with micro-organisms to do the job. Presumably they are still based on DNA (I don't think we can entirely re-invent life yet), and one element necessary for DNA is phosphorus. I do not believe I have heard mention of any phosphorous in the Venusian atmosphere. Is that correct? Apparently, the reason why Lake Erie was not all gummed up with green algae until recently was because the available phosphorus was all used up - that is until all the housewives of Chicago really got going with phosphate-rich washing powders. -- Charles H. Lindsey ------------------------------------------------------------- At Home, doing my own thing. Internet: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Voice: +44 61 437 4506 Janet: chl@uk.ac.man.cs.clw Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave., CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. UUCP: mucs!clerew!chl ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 1993 15:22:41 -0500 From: Pat Subject: the call to space (was Re: Clueless Szaboisms ) Newsgroups: sci.space If the japanese are really going for Nukes, why not go with better technology then we have. AS opposed to BWR/PWRs have they really considered some of the 3rd generation Inherently safe designs. Sodium has lots of chemical problems but it really solves design difficulties. Or the inherently safe types. PWR's work real good, but they need lots of steel, and they are highly complex systems. Simplicity is a virtue. pat ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 00:25:23 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: the call to space (was Re: Clueless Szaboisms ) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Mar31.162141.12851@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >>Vulnerability of the supply line. Japan could easily stockpile 50 years' >>supply of slightly-enriched uranium (which is not useful for bombs... > >Unfortunately, that is not what the Japanese are planning to do. >Their plan is to stockpile some 30 *tons* of plutonium -- potentially >weapons material, unlike reactor-grade uranium... As Gary has pointed out, the stuff they're stockpiling is reprocessed power-plant plutonium, which is *not* generally a good bomb material due to contamination with higher isotopes. Military plutonium-production reactors are designed so that the "breeding" portion of their uranium can be cycled through relatively quickly, reducing the plutonium yield but minimizing higher-isotope content. (The discovery of the higher-isotope problem was what finally squashed the Manhattan Project's hopes of building a gun-type bomb with plutonium. They didn't particularly want to use implosion if they didn't have to, because it was poorly understood and hard to test. But with plutonium they didn't have a choice, even with specialized production reactors.) I would also note that there are power-reactor types, such as the High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor, that need bomb-grade uranium. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Apr 93 23:49:31 GMT From: Ross Borden Subject: the call to space (was Re: Clueless Szaboisms ) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1pf7q5INNsrj@mojo.eng.umd.edu> sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes: >In article <1993Mar31.222126.28956@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >> >>Why would they be? They are, of course, subject to things like IAEA >>rules. And the Canadian government might make some agreements with >>the U.S. government. But have U.S. rules apply to Canada? I hadn't >>even heard we'd annexed them yet. ;-) > >Annex? No, they're going to ask to be members of the United States, once ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Quebec decides to make it on their own. > >Lord knows what we're going to do with all those maple tree flags. At least >the Marines will be relieved. > Them's fightin' words! (Where's the tar and feathers? ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | I shot a man just to watch him die; | Ross Borden | | I'm going to Disneyland! | rborden@ra.uvic.ca | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 1993 22:59:52 -0500 From: Pat Subject: Why use AC at 20kHz for SSF power Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Mar31.222456.29249@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: |>WHo'se located in Fort Worth? | |General Dynamics. Bell Helicopter (nearby, actually, I think). Just |to name a couple of big ones. I always thought GD's Fighter plants were in Long Island. ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 410 ------------------------------