Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 05:20:39 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #487 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Mon, 26 Apr 93 Volume 16 : Issue 487 Today's Topics: army in space Boom! Whoosh...... Drag free satellites (was: Stephen Hawking Tours JPL) Gamma Ray Bursters. WHere are they. Gamma Ray Bursters. Where are they? General Information Request Gravity waves, was: Predicting gravity wave quantization & Cosmic Noise HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days (2 msgs) Jemison on Star Trek Level 5? PLANETS STILL: IMAGES ORBIT BY ETHER TWIST (2 msgs) Russian Phobos Mission (2 msgs) Soviet Space Book Space Debris Space Station Redesign, JSC Alternative #4 Vandalizing the sky. (2 msgs) 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: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 03:37:00 From: Pat Hoage Subject: army in space Newsgroups: sci.space I just got out of the Army. Go signal corps or Intelligence; photointelligence interpretation. If you go ADA you might get to play with rockets but space will look pretty far away dug in the mud next to a grunt protecting the foward troops from low flying objects. Good Luck * Origin: *AmeriComm*, 214/373-7314. Dallas'Info Source. (1:124/6507) ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 93 18:27:00 GMT From: Bruce Watson Subject: Boom! Whoosh...... Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1r6mcgINNe87@gap.caltech.edu+ kwp@wag.caltech.edu (Kevin W. Plaxco) writes: +In article <37147@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM+ wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes: +++ ++Once inflated the substance was no longer ++needed since there is nothing to cause the balloon to collapse. ++This inflatable structure could suffer multiple holes with no ++disastrous deflation. + +preasure (and the internal preasure that was needed to maintain +a spherical shape against this resistance) caused them to +catastrophically deflated. The large silvered shards + +The billboard should pop like a dime store balloon. No, you're wrong about this. Give me some time to get my references. -- Bruce Watson (wats@scicom.alphaCDC.COM) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 20:57:25 GMT From: Joe Cain Subject: Drag free satellites (was: Stephen Hawking Tours JPL) Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.physics In article <1raee7$b8s@access.digex.net> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >In article <23APR199317325771@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: >> In answer >>to a question from Hawking, Chahine described a proposed >>drag-free satellite, but confirmed that at this point, "it's only >>a concept." > >SO what's a drag free satellite? coated with WD-40? I am puzzled by the term "concept." Drag free may already have been flown. It was the idea behind putting up a spacecraft that would more accurately respond to motions from the Earth's gravity field and ignore drag. It was proposed many years ago and involved a ball floating between sensors whose job it was to signal to little adjustment jets to keep the ball away from them. The ball itself would then be in a drag free condition and respond only to gravity anisotropies, whereas the spacecraft itself would be continuously adjusting its position to compensate for drag. Joseph Cain cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu cain@fsu.bitnet scri::cain (904) 644-4014 FAX (904) 644-4214 or -0098 ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 1993 15:05:50 GMT From: "David M. Palmer" Subject: Gamma Ray Bursters. WHere are they. Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: > What evidence indicates that Gamma Ray bursters are very far away? >Given the enormous power, i was just wondering, what if they are >quantum black holes or something like that fairly close by? >Why would they have to be at galactic ranges? Gamma Ray Bursts (GRBs) are seen coming equally from all directions. However, given the number of bright ones, there are too few faint ones to be consistent with being equally dense for as far as we can see--it is as if they are all contained within a finite sphere (or a sphere with fuzzy edges) with us at the center. (These measurements are statistical, and you can always hide a sufficiently small number of a different type of GRB with a different origin in the data. I am assuming that there is only one population of GRBs). The data indicates that we are less than 10% of the radius of the center of the distribution. The only things the Earth is at the exact center of are the Solar system (at the scale of the Oort cloud of comets way beyond Pluto) and the Universe. Cosmological theories, placing GRBs throughout the Universe, require supernova-type energies to be released over a timescale of milliseconds. Oort cloud models tend to be silly, even by the standards of astrophysics. If GRBs were Galactic (i.e. distributed through the Milky Way Galaxy) you would expect them to be either concentrated in the plane of the Galaxy (for a 'disk' population), or towards the Galactic center (for a spherical 'halo' population). We don't see this, so if they are Galactic, they must be in a halo at least 250,000 light years in radius, and we would probably start to see GRBs from the Andromeda Galaxy (assuming that it has a similar halo.) For comparison, the Earth is 25,000 light-years from the center of the Galaxy. >my own pet theory is that it's Flying saucers entering >hyperspace :-) The aren't concentrated in the known spacelanes, and we don't see many coming from Zeta Reticuli and Tau Ceti. >but the reason i am asking is that most everyone assumes that they >are colliding nuetron stars or spinning black holes, i just wondered >if any mechanism could exist and place them closer in. There are more than 130 GRB different models in the refereed literature. Right now, the theorists have a sort of unofficial moratorium on new models until new observational evidence comes in. -- David M. Palmer palmer@alumni.caltech.edu palmer@tgrs.gsfc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 93 22:13:44 -0600 From: belgarath@vax1.mankato.msus.edu Subject: Gamma Ray Bursters. Where are they? Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro In article <1radsr$att@access.digex.net>, prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: > What evidence indicates that Gamma Ray bursters are very far away? > > Given the enormous power, i was just wondering, what if they are > quantum black holes or something like that fairly close by? > > Why would they have to be at galactic ranges? > > my own pet theory is that it's Flying saucers entering > hyperspace :-) > > but the reason i am asking is that most everyone assumes that they > are colliding nuetron stars or spinning black holes, i just wondered > if any mechanism could exist and place them closer in. > > pat Well, lets see....I took a class on this last fall, and I have no notes so I'll try to wing it... Here's how I understand it. Remember from stellar evolution that black holes and neutron stars(pulsars) are formed from high mass stars, M(star)=1.4M(sun). High mass stars live fast and burn hard, taking appoximately 10^5-10^7 years before going nova, or supernova. In this time, they don't live long enough to get perturbed out of the galactic plane, so any of these (if assumed to be the sources of GRB's) will be in the plane of the galaxy. Then we take the catalog of bursts that have been recieved from the various satellites around the solar system, (Pioneer Venus has one, either Pion. 10 or 11, GINGA, and of course BATSE) and we do distribution tests on our catalog. These tests all show, that the bursts have an isotropic distribution(evenly spread out in a radial direction), and they show signs of homogeneity, i.e. they do not clump in any one direction. So, unless we are sampling the area inside the disk of the galaxy, we are sampling the UNIVERSE. Not cool, if you want to figure out what the hell caused these things. Now, I suppose you are saying, "Well, we stil only may be sampling from inside the disk." Well, not necessarily. Remember, we have what is more or less an interplanetary network of burst detectors with a baseline that goes waaaay out to beyond Pluto(pioneer 11), so we should be able, with all of our detectors de tect some sort of difference in angle from satellite to satellite. Here's an analogy: You see a plane overhead. You measure the angle of the plane from the origin of your arbitrary coordinate system. One of your friends a mile away sees the same plane, and measures the angle from the zero point of his arbitrary system, which is the same as yours. The two angles are different, and you should be able to triangulate the position of your burst, and maybe find a source. To my knowledge, no one has been able to do this. I should throw in why halo, and corona models don't work, also. As I said before, looking at the possible astrophysics of the bursts, (short timescales, high energy) black holes, and pulsars exhibit much of this type of behavior. If this is the case, as I said before, these stars seem to be bound to the disk of the galaxy, especially the most energetic of the these sources. When you look at a simulated model, where the bursts are confined to the disk, but you sample out to large distances, say 750 mpc, you should definitely see not only an anisotropy towards you in all direction, but a clumping of sources in the direction of the galactic center. As I said before, there is none of these characteristics. I think that's all of it...if someone needs clarification, or knows something that I don't know, by all means correct me. I had the honor of taking the Bursts class with the person who has done the modeling of these different distributions, so we pretty much kicked around every possible distribution there was, and some VERY outrageous sources. Colliding pulsars, black holes, pulsars that are slowing down...stuff like that. It's a fun field. Complaints and corrections to: belgarath@vax1.mankato.msus.edu or post here. -jeremy ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 93 23:34:28 From: "T. Giaquinto" Subject: General Information Request Newsgroups: sci.space I am looking for any information about the space program. This includes NASA, the shuttles, history, anything! I would like to know if anyone could suggest books, periodicals, even ftp sites for a novice who is interested in the space program. Todd Giaquinto maverick@wpi.WPI.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 00:58:16 GMT From: S901924@hp720a.csc.cuhk.hk Subject: Gravity waves, was: Predicting gravity wave quantization & Cosmic Noise Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.physics,alt.sci.planetary In article et@teal.csn.org (Eric H. Taylor) writes: >From: et@teal.csn.org (Eric H. Taylor) >Subject: Re: Gravity waves, was: Predicting gravity wave quantization & Cosmic Noise >Summary: Dong .... Dong .... Do I hear the death-knell of relativity? >Keywords: space, curvature, nothing, tesla >Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 20:18:04 GMT >In article metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern) writes: >>crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes: >>> Bruce.Scott@launchpad.unc.edu (Bruce Scott) writes: >>>> "Existence" is undefined unless it is synonymous with "observable" in >>>> physics. >>> [crb] Dong .... Dong .... Dong .... Do I hear the death-knell of >>> string theory? >> >> I agree. You can add "dark matter" and quarks and a lot of other >>unobservable, purely theoretical constructs in physics to that list, >>including the omni-present "black holes." >> >> Will Bruce argue that their existence can be inferred from theory >>alone? Then what about my original criticism, when I said "Curvature >>can only exist relative to something non-curved"? Bruce replied: >>"'Existence' is undefined unless it is synonymous with 'observable' in >>physics. We cannot observe more than the four dimensions we know about." >>At the moment I don't see a way to defend that statement and the >>existence of these unobservable phenomena simultaneously. -|Tom|- > >"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 > >---- > ET "Tesla was 100 years ahead of his time. Perhaps now his time comes." >---- ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 1993 23:45:04 -0400 From: Pat Subject: HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro SOmebody mentioned a re-boost of HST during this mission, meaning that Weight is a very tight margin on this mission. How will said re-boost be done? Grapple, HST, stow it in Cargo bay, do OMS burn to high altitude, unstow HST, repair gyros, costar install, fix solar arrays, then return to earth? My guess is why bother with usingthe shuttle to reboost? why not grapple, do all said fixes, bolt a small liquid fueled thruster module to HST, then let it make the re-boost. it has to be cheaper on mass then usingthe shuttle as a tug. that way, now that they are going to need at least 5 spacewalks, then they can carry an EDO pallet, and sit on station and even maybe do the solar array tilt motor fix. pat ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 06:04:36 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro In article <1rd1g0$ckb@access.digex.net> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >How will said re-boost be done? >Grapple, HST, stow it in Cargo bay, do OMS burn to high altitude, >unstow HST, repair gyros, costar install, fix solar arrays, >then return to earth? Actually, the reboost will probably be done last, so that there is a fuel reserve during the EVAs (in case they have to chase down an adrift astronaut or something like that). But yes, you've got the idea -- the reboost is done by taking the whole shuttle up. >My guess is why bother with usingthe shuttle to reboost? >why not grapple, do all said fixes, bolt a small liquid fueled >thruster module to HST, then let it make the re-boost... Somebody has to build that thruster module; it's not an off-the-shelf item. Nor is it a trivial piece of hardware, since it has to include attitude control (HST's own is not strong enough to compensate for things like thruster imbalance), guidance (there is no provision to feed gyro data from HST's own gyros to an external device), and separation (you don't want it left attached afterward, if only to avoid possible contamination after the telescope lid is opened again). You also get to worry about whether the lid is going to open after the reboost is done and HST is inaccessible to the shuttle (the lid stays closed for the duration of all of this to prevent mirror contamination from thrusters and the like). The original plan was to use the Orbital Maneuvering Vehicle to do the reboost. The OMV was planned to be a sort of small space tug, well suited to precisely this sort of job. Unfortunately, it was costing a lot to develop and the list of definitely-known applications was relatively short, so it got cancelled. -- SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 1993 12:17:30 -0400 From: Pat Subject: Jemison on Star Trek Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Apr22.214735.22733@Princeton.EDU> phoenix.Princeton.EDU!carlosn (Carlos G. Niederstrasser) writes: >A transporter operator!?!? That better be one important transport. Usually >it is a nameless ensign who does the job. For such a guest appearance I would >have expected a more visible/meaningful role. Christian Slater, only gota cameo on ST6, and besides. Maybe she can't act:-) pat ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 1993 00:10:21 -0400 From: Pat Subject: Level 5? Newsgroups: sci.space WHile we are on the subject of the shuttle software. what ever happened to the hypothesis that the shuttle flight software was a major factor in the loss of 51-L. to wit, that during the wind shear event, the Flight control software indicated a series of very violent engine movements that shocked and set upa harmonic resonance leading to an overstress of the struts. pat ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 18:47:51 GMT From: robert lennips 9209 U Subject: PLANETS STILL: IMAGES ORBIT BY ETHER TWIST Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.aci.planetary,alt.astrology Please get a REAL life. ------------------------------ Date: 25 Apr 1993 02:19:21 GMT From: David Gordon Empey Subject: PLANETS STILL: IMAGES ORBIT BY ETHER TWIST Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro In <1993Apr23.165459.3323@coe.montana.edu> uphrrmk@gemini.oscs.montana.edu (Jack Coyote) writes: >In sci.astro, dmcaloon@tuba.calpoly.edu (David McAloon) writes: >[ a nearly perfect parody -- needed more random CAPS] >Thanks for the chuckle. (I loved the bit about relevance to people starving >in Somalia!) >To those who've taken this seriously, READ THE NAME! (aloud) Well, I thought it must have been a joke, but I don't get the joke in the name. Read it aloud? David MACaloon. David MacALLoon. David macalOON. I don't geddit. -Dave Empey (speaking for himself) >-- >Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week. Enjoy the buffet! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 22:45:14 GMT From: Arthur Chandler Subject: Russian Phobos Mission Newsgroups: sci.space Did the Russian spacecraft(s) on the ill-fated Phobos mission a few years ago send back any images of the Martian moon? If so, does anyone know if they're housed at an ftp site? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 04:23:37 GMT From: Tom O'Reilly Subject: Russian Phobos Mission Newsgroups: sci.space Yes, the Phobos mission did return some useful data including images of Phobos itself. The best I've seen had a surface resolution of about 40 meters. By the way, the new book entitled "Mars" (Kieffer et al, 1992, University of Arizona Press) has a great chapter on spacecraft exploration of the planet. The chapter is co-authored by V.I. Moroz of the Space Research Institute in Moscow, and includes details never before published in the West. Don't know of any ftp sites with images though. Tom O'Reilly Department of Geology Arizona State University ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 22:48:20 GMT From: "Robert Landis,S202,," Subject: Soviet Space Book Newsgroups: sci.space What in blazes is going on with Wayne Matson and gang down in Alabama? I also heard an unconfirmed rumor that Aerospace Ambassadors have disappeared. Can anyone else confirm?? ++Rob Landis STScI, Baltimore, MD ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 22:45:44 GMT From: "Robert Landis,S202,," Subject: Space Debris Newsgroups: sci.space Another fish to check out is Richard Rast -- he works for Lockheed Missiles, but is on-site at NASA Johnson. Nick Johnson at Kaman Sciences in Colo. Spgs and his friend, Darren McKnight at Kaman in Alexandria, VA. Good luck. R. Landis "Behind every general is his wife.... and... behind every Hillary is a Bill . ." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 23:24:00 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Space Station Redesign, JSC Alternative #4 Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1ralibINNc0f@cbl.umd.edu> mike@starburst.umd.edu (Michael F. Santangelo) writes: >... The only thing >that scares me is the part about simply strapping 3 SSME's and >a nosecone on it and "just launching it." I have this vision >of something going terribly wrong with the launch resulting in the >complete loss of the new modular space station (not just a peice of >it as would be the case with staged in-orbit construction). It doesn't make a whole lot of difference, actually, since they weren't building spares of the station hardware anyway. (Dumb.) At least this is only one launch to fail. -- SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Apr 93 16:20:52 GMT From: Srinivas Bettadpur Subject: Vandalizing the sky. Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space In article <1993Apr23.140649.1@rhea.arc.ab.ca> thacker@rhea.arc.ab.ca writes: >In article , enzo@research.canon.oz.au (Enzo Liguori) writes: > >> What about light pollution in observations? (I read somewhere else that >> it might even be visible during the day, leave alone at night). > >No need to be depressed about this one. Lights aren't on during the day >so there shouldn't be any daytime light pollution. Thanks for these surreal moments.... Srinivas -- Srinivas Bettadpur Internet : byab314@hermes.chpc.utexas.edu P.O. Box 8520, Austin, Tx. 78713-8520, U.S.A. Tel. (512) 471 4332 BITNET : byab314@uthermes ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 22:51:20 GMT From: hathaway@stsci.edu Subject: Vandalizing the sky. Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space >Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space >Subject: Re: Vandalizing the sky. > (excerpts from posting on this topic) >In article enzo@research.canon.oz.au >(Enzo Liguori) writes: > >>Now, Space Marketing >>is working with University of Colorado and Livermore engineers on >>a plan to place a mile-long inflatable billboard in low-earth >>orbit. >... >>... the real purpose of the project is to help the environment! >>The platform will carry ozone monitors > >... >I can't believe that a mile-long billboard would have any significant >effect on the overall sky brightness. Venus is visible during the day, >but nobody complains about that. Besides, it's in LEO, so it would only >be visible during twilight when the sky is already bright, and even if >it would have some miniscule impact, it would be only for a short time >as it goes zipping across the sky. > (I've seen satellites at midnight - they're not only in twilight.) :o) >... > >From the book "Prodigal Genius: The Life of Nikola Tesla" by John J. O'Neill: > >"This remarkable conductivity of gases, including the air, at low >pressures, led Tesla to suggest, in a published statement in 1914, a >system of lighting on a terrestrial scale in which he proposed to treat >the whole Earth, with its surrounding atmosphere, as if it were a >single lamp.... >The whole Earth would be transformed into a giant lamp, with the night >sky completely illuminated. ... making the night as bright as day." > Now my comments: I'd like to add that some of the "protests" do not come from a strictly practical consideration of what pollution levels are acceptable for research activities by professional astronomers. Some of what I would complain about is rooted in aesthetics. Many readers may never have known a time where the heavens were pristine - sacred - unsullied by the actions of humans. The space between the stars as profoundly black as an abyss can be. With full horizons and a pure sky one could look out upon half of all creation at a time - none of which had any connection with the petty matters of man. Any lights were supplied solely by nature; uncorruptable by men. Whole religions were based on mortal man somehow getting up there and becoming immortal as the stars, whether by apotheosis or a belief in an afterlife. The Space Age changed all that. The effect of the first Sputniks and Echo, etc. on this view could only happen once. To see a light crossing the night sky and know it was put there by us puny people is still impressive and the sense of size one gets by assimilating the scales involved is also awesome - even if the few hundreds or thousands of miles involved is still dwarfed by the rest of the universe. But there is still a hunger for the pure beauty of a virgin sky. Yes, I know aircraft are almost always in sight. I have to live in a very populated area (6 miles from an international airport currently) where light pollution on the ground is ghastly. The impact of humans is so extreme here - virtually no place exists that has not been shaped, sculpted, modified, trashed or whipped into shape by the hands of man. In some places the only life forms larger than bacteria are humans, cockroaches, and squirrels (or rats). I visited some friends up in the Appalacian mountains one weekend, "getting away from it all" (paved roads, indoor plumbing, malls, ...) and it felt good for a while - then I quickly noticed the hollow was directly under the main flight path into Dulles - 60-80 miles to the east. (Their 'security light' didn't help matters much either.) But I've heard the artic wilderness gets lots of high air traffic. So I know the skies are rarely perfect. But there is still this desire to see a place that man hasn't fouled in some way. (I mean they've been TRYING this forever - like, concerning Tesla's idea to banish night, - wow!) I don't watch commercial television, but I can imagine just how disgusting beer, truck, or hemmorrhoid ointment advertisements would be if seen up so high. If ya' gotta make a buck on it (displaying products in heaven), at least consider the reactions from those for whom the sky is a last beautiful refuge from the baseness of modern life. To be open about this though, I have here my listing of the passage of HST in the evening sky for this weekend - tonight Friday at 8:25 p.m. EDT it will reach an altitude of 20.1 degrees on the local meridian from Baltimore vicinity. I'll be trying to see it if I can - it _is_ my mealticket after all. So I suppose I could be called an elitist for supporting this intrusion on the night sky while complaining about billboards proposed by others. Be that as it may, I think my point about a desire for beauty is valid, even if it can't ever be perfectly achieved. Regards, Wm. Hathaway Baltimore MD ------------------------------ Received: from CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU by VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU id aa06744; 24 Apr 93 20:05:27 EDT To: bb-sci-space@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Xref: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu sci.space:61246 sci.astro:34985 Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!uunet!digex.com!digex.com!not-for-mail From: Pat Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro Subject: Gamma Ray Bursters. WHere are they. Date: 23 Apr 1993 23:58:19 -0400 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt MD USA Lines: 16 Message-Id: <1radsr$att@access.digex.net> Nntp-Posting-Host: access.digex.net Sender: news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU What evidence indicates that Gamma Ray bursters are very far away? Given the enormous power, i was just wondering, what if they are quantum black holes or something like that fairly close by? Why would they have to be at galactic ranges? my own pet theory is that it's Flying saucers entering hyperspace :-) but the reason i am asking is that most everyone assumes that they are colliding nuetron stars or spinning black holes, i just wondered if any mechanism could exist and place them closer in. pat ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 487 ------------------------------