Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Received: from andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Sun, 25 Sep 88 04:40:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID ; Sun, 25 Sep 88 04:38:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by andrew.cmu.edu (5.54/3.15) id for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl; Sun, 25 Sep 88 04:36:29 EDT Received: by angband.s1.gov id AA10262; Sun, 25 Sep 88 01:08:18 PDT id AA10262; Sun, 25 Sep 88 01:08:18 PDT Date: Sun, 25 Sep 88 01:08:18 PDT From: Ted Anderson Message-Id: <8809250808.AA10262@angband.s1.gov> To: Space+@andrew.cmu.edu Reply-To: Space+@andrew.cmu.edu Subject: SPACE Digest V8 #375 SPACE Digest Volume 8 : Issue 375 Today's Topics: NASA and McDonnell Douglas sign commercial launch agreement (Forwarded) NASA/AIAA to conduct space technology conference (Forwarded) Re: "It's because of all those satellites..." National student finalists present space station proposals to NASA (Forwarded) Re: "What's New" 09/02/88 Reminders for Old Farts Re: Berserker hypothesis Re: wealth of mature spacefaring societies ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 8 Sep 88 16:56:07 GMT From: yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: NASA and McDonnell Douglas sign commercial launch agreement (Forwarded) Jim Ball Headquarters, Washington, D.C. September 7, 1988 RELEASE: 88-124 NASA AND McDONNELL DOUGLAS SIGN COMMERCIAL LAUNCH AGREEMENT NASA and the McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company, St. Louis, announced today the signing of an agreement providing for the firm's use of facilities at the Kennedy Space Center, Fla., and technical support from the Goddard Spaceflight Center, Greenbelt, Md., in support of commercial launches. Advancing the government's objectives to encourage and assist the growth of a robust U.S. commercial launch industry, the umbrella agreement enables McDonnell Douglas to gain access to NASA-managed launch support facilities when the firm begins conducting commercial launches of the Delta rocket. The Delta program was initiated by NASA in 1959 and the first launch took place in 1960. Since then, the Delta rocket, manufactured by McDonnell Douglas under contract to NASA, has been a reliable workhorse of the space program. McDonnell Douglas expects to begin commercial launches of the Delta in 1989. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Sep 88 00:04:34 GMT From: yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: NASA/AIAA to conduct space technology conference (Forwarded) Mary Sandy Headquarters, Washington, D.C. September 8, 1988 EDITORS NOTE: NASA/AIAA TO CONDUCT SPACE TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE NASA's space technology program will be the focus of a joint American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics/NASA conference, September 12-13 at the Capital Hilton, Washington, D.C. The conference, "Technology for Future NASA Missions," will examine key space program activities in the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST), including the Space Research and Technology Base program, the Civil Space Technology Initiative and Project Pathfinder. First-day proceedings will be devoted to overviews of these programs and discussions by a panel of potential users of new space technology. The second day will involve more detailed reviews of the technical efforts and discussions of how universities and industry can become more involved in these programs. Speakers include Dr. William F. Ballhaus, Jr., acting associate administrator for OAST and president, AIAA; Norman R. Augustine, chairman and chief executive officer, Martin Marietta Corp.; and Paul J. Coleman, Jr., president, University Space Research Association. Nearly all NASA centers will have participants in the program. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Sep 88 19:12:24 GMT From: rochester!rocksanne!entire!elt@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (Edward L. Taychert) Subject: Re: "It's because of all those satellites..." I remember back in the Apollo days that it always seem to rain when NASA was going to launch. Everyone in Tidewater Va came to know that moonshots caused rain! -- ____________________________________________________________________________ Ed Taychert Phone: USA (716) 381-7500 Entire Inc. UUCP: rochester!rocksanne!entire!elt 445 E. Commercial Street East Rochester, N.Y. 14445 _____________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: 9 Sep 88 00:06:47 GMT From: yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: National student finalists present space station proposals to NASA (Forwarded) Terri Sindelar Headquarters, Washington, D.C. September 2, 1988 Shelagh Lane National Science Teachers Assoc., Wash., D.C. RELEASE: 88-122 NATIONAL STUDENT FINALISTS PRESENT SPACE STATION PROPOSALS TO NASA Seven high school students will present proposals for space station experiments as national finalists of the 8th Annual Space Science Student Involvement Program (SSIP). The program, cosponsored by NASA and the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), gives high school students the opportunity to propose experiments which theoretically could be conducted in space. The students will be competing for scholarships and other awards. In addition to these seven students, three national student winners in separate competitions including the student newspaper competition and the national aerospace internship competition, will he honored during the NASA/NSTA National Space Science Symposium, Washington, D.C., Sept. 17-21. The key events follow. On Monday, Sept. 19, the seven student finalists will present their experiment proposals to a panel of scientists and educators at the Capitol Holiday Inn, Columbia South Room, 550 C. St., S.W. Also attending will be 10 students from each Washington-area magnet school. The students and teacher/advisors will attend a Monday evening reception at the National Air and Space Museum. Guest speakers will include Capt. John A. McBride, NASA astronaut and assistant administrator for congressional relations; Kenneth S. Pedersen, NASA deputy associate administrator for external relations; Bill G. Alridge, executive director of NSTA; Dr. Helenmarie Hofman, director of SSIP at NSTA; and Dr. Martin O. Harwit, director of the National Air and Space Museum. Members of Congress are invited. On Tuesday, Sept. 20, the students will tour the Capitol and meet their congressmen. The students will attend the awards ceremony Tuesday evening where NSTA will announce the top national scholarship recipients. Featured speakers will be Dr. Lemoine Motz, president of NSTA; Dr. Robert W. Brown, director of educational affairs at NASA; and Dr. Joseph P. Allen, a former astronaut. Selected from over 900 proposals, the following are the proposals of the seven national student finalists, one student newspaper competition winner and two national aerospace internship competition winners: SPACE STATION PROPOSAL FINALISTS: Kevin M. Chalmers, Mechanicsville, Va. Topic: "The Effect of Microgravity on Vital Lung Capacity of Human Respiratory System." John C. Marschhausen, Glastonbury, Conn. Topic: "Detrimental Loss of Calcium Due to Microgravity." Elexis Benzco, Uniontown, Ohio. Topic: "With the Use of Natural Bioluminescent Chemicals, Calcium and ATP Levels Can Be Related to Muscle Atrophy in a Microgravity Environment." P. Martin Johnson, Baton Rouge, La. Topic: "Frogs in Space: The Growing and Muscular Training of Rana Pipens in a Weightless Environment." Alison M. Cheney, Overland Park, Kan. Topic: "Application of Electrical Stimulation of Skeletal Muscle to the Problem of Disuse Atrophy in a Microgravity Environment." Kartik A. Parekh, Los Angeles, Calif. Topic: "Effect of Space Environment on the Proliferation of Resting, Activated and Malignant T-(213) Lymphocytes. Michael P. McCart, Anchorage, Alaska. Topic: "Increased Growth Rate of Penicillin Notatum in Microgravity." NATIONAL STUDENT NEWSPAPER AWARD WINNER: DeAnne M. Nevins, Lambert, Mont. Article: "Hey Student! It's Your Chance To Get SPACY!" NATIONAL AEROSPACE INTERNSHIP AWARD WINNERS: Eliah D. Novin, Sherman Oaks, Calif. Topic: "Control Surface Testing on a Forward Sweep Prototype Aircraft." Kenneth L. Riley, Akron, Ohio. Topic: "Measurement of Tensile Strength on Pure Water." The SSIP competition objective is to stimulate interest in science and technology by directly involving students in a space research program. When space flight resumes with Space Shuttle mission 26, two student experiments will fly aboard Discovery. To date, 15 student experiments have flown aboard the Shuttle. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Sep 88 00:40:37 GMT From: gryphon!swalton@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Steven Walton) Subject: Re: "What's New" 09/02/88 In the referenced article, the question is raised, "Why does it matter that the Hubble Space Telescope is delayed? Won't the universe wait a bit?" Well, yes, but consider: (1) It is certain that parts of HST have a finite life, and are aging while it sits on the ground; time on earth subtracts from useful life in orbit. (2) The closer launch gets to the next solar maximum in 1991, the higher the likelihood that HST will have a very premature re-entry unless a second shuttle flight is used to boost it up. (3) It has been six years since the last launch of a US astronomy spacecraft--hardly a record which inspires bright young people to get involved with space or astronomy. The HST delay is a symptom, really. I think the US, via its elected representatives in Washington, DC, has decided to cede leadership in space to Japan and Western Europe and the USSR. I predict a major drain of American space scientists to these other places within 5 years; yes, even to the USSR if perestroika and glasnost hold up. -- Stephen Walton, hanging out until my USENET feed at work is back up. swalton@solar.stanford.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Sep 88 04:00:11 PDT From: Eugene Miya Subject: Reminders for Old Farts Hints for old users (subtle reminders) You'll know these. Minimize cross references, [Do you REALLY NEED to?] Edit "Subject:" lines especially if you are taking a tangent. Send mail instead, avoid posting follow ups. [100 mail messages mean more than 1 follow-up.] Read all available articles before posting a follow-up. [Check all references.] Cut down attributed articles. Summarize! Put a return address in the body (signature) of your message (mail or article), state institution, etc. don't assume mail works. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Sep 88 07:31:11 EDT From: Chuck Musciano Subject: Re: Berserker hypothesis After reading about Berserkers for many digests now, I can't believe that someone hasn't come up with the best hypothesis: we are the Berserkers, early in our life cycle, just getting ready to go out and start destroying things. Why, we haven't even reached another planet yet, and people are already giving thought to dropping nuclear devices to form landing pads. Seems like our Berserker intuition is coming along nicely. Chuck Musciano Advanced Technology Department Harris Corporation (407) 727-6131 ARPA: chuck@trantor.harris-atd.com ------------------------------ Date: 8 Sep 88 15:28:05 GMT From: eachus@MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA (Robert Eachus) Subject: Re: wealth of mature spacefaring societies In article <3e5436c7.ae47@apollo.COM> nelson_p@apollo.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: > First of all, you don't know that Roman soldier : rich American is a > reasonable comparison. Neither is particularly representative of the > species at his time in history. To make another silly comparison-- > Today only the rich can own a horse, a hundred years ago horse ownership > was common. Silly is right. A hundred years ago, even in America, you had to be rich to own a horse for personal transportation, and many farmers, even in America, did not own plow horses. If you live in a city with paved streets, a bicycle is a much more useful form of transport, then and now. Care to check bicycle ownership figures? Also, at least in the town where I live, horse ownership is still common. Of couse, Hollis, N.H. is not a poor town, but I would say that the town riding rink gets more use that the town tennis courts. > Anyway most people CANNOT own a car. Your ethnocentrism is showing. Hmmm. Since a large percentage of the population (especially in the third world) is underage you may be right. However, if you meant to say that a majority families in the world cannot afford to buy a car today, you would be wrong. > More to the point, extrapolations can be tricky. It's true that the > average American is richer than he was a hundred years ago but he is > *poorer* than he was in the 60's. Nowadays, two incomes are required > to maintain a standard of living that one could maintain at that time. > Which way is the curve heading these days? The "average" American is richer today than he was in the sixties. In the forties, fifties and early sixties the growth in the American standard of living was very rapid, then came LBJ's "guns and butter" economics, and the oil shocks of the early seventies resulting in a decade of slow growth. In the late seventies the standard of living of the "average" American actually did decrease. You may remember that Reagan made this a campaign issue. However, the last six years have been a period of sustained economic growth similar to the fifties, and our hypothetical "average American" is somewhat better off than he was in 1976, and much better off than he was in 1966. There are several disturbing demographic trends, and the Democrats are trying to make political hay with them, but these do not affect the overall upward trend. The poor were hurt much worse during the Carter years and by the 1982 recession. This made the gap between rich and poor greater, and it is not closing. (Neither is it widening, the rising tide really is raising all boats equally. Its the falling tides which hurt the poor.) The other disturbing fact is that for the last twenty years, the middle middle class has been shrinking. Most of this shrinking has been due to people moving up from to the upper middle class (good), but it also means that the mobility of the lower middle class has been decreasing (bad). This is primarily a problem with the educational system, but it needs to be fixed. > If you had extrapolated from the time when dinosaurs first appeared on > earth to when Brontosaurus existed you might have concluded that there > would be lots of huge, powerful dinosaurs around today. Not if your extrapolation correctly included the effects of meteor strikes. It doen't take much effort to figure out that if humans don't learn to manage their environment (which includes large rocks in solar orbit), they won't be around for long. > Another BIG difference is that our material standard of living is > not mainainable in its current form. We cannot continue to consume > non-renewable resources or generate pollution and other waste at > the current rate. Automobiles are MAJOR pollution sources both > in their use and their manufacture/maintenance/infrastructure > requirements. Also, remeber that the Roman soldier's generous > payscale was a function of non-maintainable factors, too. (i.e., > the Roman Empire) Of course, this may ALSO be a silly extrapolation. It is a wrong extrapolation. One thing that economists keep track of is the amount of energy required to produce a constant dollar amount of goods. This figure has been decreasing for the last fifteen years (and for the last fifty). > Another factor is that the 'wealth' or standard of living of most > Americans is illusory. I doubt you could afford to buy a home > computer on a day's pay if that computer and all it's parts were > made by people enjoying an American wage scale. A lot of our > standard of living is based on other countries having much lower > wages, fewer pollution standards, etc. Roman senators were wealthy > in the same way. This cant has got to go. There are many computers out there built in America with American parts which are competitive in the home computer market. The main competition is not from the third world, but from countries with equal or higher living standards. In 1960, the United States had the highest living standard in the world, by 1980 we were, I think, fourteenth. Since then we've pulled ahead of several European countries, but South Korea and Taiwan are gaining on us. > ...Or how bad they can get. Sure, maybe the world of the future > will be bright and clean with robots doing all the manufacturing and > everyday is Saturday and the malls are open and our pockets are > stuffed with money. Or maybe it will be a cyberpunk's worst > nightmare with rain 'sour and acid, nearly the color of piss' > (William Gibson), respirators required for a simple walk down the > street, and remote pain inducers implanted at birth by a high-tech > tyranny to keep 20 billion people passive. First, the problems of the future will be ones which we don't know about yet. Mankind has a very good record for finding solutions to known problems. However, often these solutions often cause new problems. For example, most of the problems of the health industry today are due to finding new and better ways to cure patients or to keep them alive, not by medical failures. Second, the long term trend has been to keep improving the overall quality of life. The "good old days" only look good because you were younger then. The 1988 "standard" of living includes home computers, VCR's, pocket calculators, cordless telephones, and a whole host of medications which simply were not available at any price in 1963. (Well, not quite. I did have a computer in the basement then, but that's another story.) > These are matters of religion (faith) and science fiction, not sci.space. > While we fritter our time away in fantasy, other countries have real > space programs with realistic goals and programs to accomplish them. If > anyone on this group ever does get into space it will probably be at the > whim of the Russians or Japanese. Or of D. D. Harriman. Seriously, even if relatively cheap spaceflight is possible, creating the infrastructure will take lots of money. A number of companies in the U. S. are working on building the necessary industrial base, but once that is available, building the first Lunar Hilton is still going to require megabucks. Most people have heard the adage that "when it's steamboat time, people will build steamboats", but many don't realize that there are a lot of ideas out there whose time has yet to arrive. The lunar population may be zero on January 1, 2001, but to predict the lunar population as less than 10 million on January 1, 2100 would be lunacy. Governments can help "steamboat time" to arrive sooner, they did with steamboats in the eighteenth century, railroads in the nineteenth century, and air travel in the 1930's. I only hope when we look back fifty years from now we conclude that government space programs helped the commercial space industry (and space colonization) to get off the ground earlier than they would have otherwise. > --Peter Nelson Robert I. Eachus with STANDARD_DISCLAIMER; use STANDARD_DISCLAIMER; function MESSAGE (TEXT: in CLEVER_IDEAS) return BETTER_IDEAS is... ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V8 #375 *******************