Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Wed, 15 Nov 89 01:51:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Wed, 15 Nov 89 01:51:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #248 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 248 Today's Topics: Re: Thanks For Responding Re: HST Resolving power WANTED: Space Jokes (please EMAIL) (none) Re: Population pressure to move to space Re: Population pressure to move to space Voyager/DSN Looking for US launcher family tree Re: Population pressure to move to space Re: Hubble Space Telescope Re: Moon Colonies / Ant Tanks Re: Space Elevator Re: Moon Colonies / Ant Tanks Re: Tracking Military Satellites ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 12 Nov 89 13:27:39 GMT From: mcsun!ukc!icdoc!syma!nickw@uunet.uu.net (Nick Watkins) Subject: Re: Thanks For Responding In article <31710@cci632.UUCP> lmm@cci632.UUCP (Lance Michel) writes: >However, one thing you mentioned was Apollo 12 retrieving pieces from >Surveyor 3. WOW. I never knew that. and for some reason I find it >incredible that the navigation and guidance at that time could actually >bring someone that close to a specific spot. I think NASA were fairly impressed with themselves, especially after the difficulties with Apollo 11. > Can you provide any datails >as to WHAT PARTS?? or were their any PICURES of the Surveyor sitting there? >Was this planned, or luck? They brought back "pieces of tube, the TV camera mount, pieces of cable and, at their own suggestion, the soil scoop"(Andrew Wilson, "The Eagle Has Wings", BIS, 1982). There ARE pictures, e.g. page 39 of op. cit. or photos between pp. 212 and 213 of Richard S. Lewis', "The Voyages of Apollo" (Quadrangle, 1974). I think both of these books would also interest you. It was indeed planned. Nick -- Nick Watkins, Space & Plasma Physics Group, School of Mathematical & Physical Sciences, Univ. of Sussex, Brighton, E.Sussex, BN1 9QH, ENGLAND JANET: nickw@syma.sussex.ac.uk BITNET: nickw%syma.sussex.ac.uk@uk.ac ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 06:06:17 GMT From: gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!shadooby!terminator!ronin!allanb@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Allan M. Bjorklund) Subject: Re: HST Resolving power In Article 12446 of sci.space, MRW104@PSUVM.BITNET writes: > Going the other way, if we use lambda= 600 nm (6.0e-7 m) diameter =0.88 >we get a resolving power of a=8.318e-7 radians, which corresponds to resolving >North America at a distance of 5.3 light hours in visable light. Pretty >impressive, but not an interstellar distance. >Mike Williams >mrw104@psuvm.bitnet I redid the calculations, and came up with the HST being able to resolve a 3000 mile wide object at 39 AU which is about 5.3 light hours, which is the distance to Pluto. But unfortunately, Pluto is only about half that in diameter. Allan Bjorklund allanb@ronin.us.cc.umich.edu co-adminstrator of the allan@terminator.cc.umich.edu University of Michigan MsDos userw6bp@um.cc.umich.edu Archives. terminator.cc.umich.edu 35.1.33.8 cd msdos ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 15:41:20 GMT From: EWTILENI@pucc.princeton.edu (Eric William Tilenius) Subject: WANTED: Space Jokes (please EMAIL) I'm looking for any Space jokes - jokes about any aspect of outer space, living in space, the space program, etc. If you know any, please EMAIL them to me! I'll post a summary... Thanks, - ERIC - Eric W. Tilenius | Princeton Planetary Soc. | ewtileni@pucc.BITNET 523 Laughlin Hall | 315 West College | ewtileni@pucc.Princeton.EDU Princeton University | Princeton University | rutgers!pucc.bitnet!ewtileni Princeton, NJ 08544 | Princeton, NJ 08544 | princeton!pucc!ewtileni 609-734-7677 | 609-734-7677 | COMPUSERVE: 70346,16 ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 23:12:00 GMT From: rpi!rpitsmts!forumexp@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu, Krugannal@andrew.cmu.edu Subject: (none) They are using a technique to discover planets in which they measure the wobble of the star. Several Stars have been studied and their wobbles plotted. The HST would be able to measure the wobble better and give stronger evidence whether or not the wobble is a mismeasurement or is in fact caused by an orbiting mass. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 21:59:17 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!wrgate!mrloog!dant@uunet.uu.net (Dan Tilque) Subject: Re: Population pressure to move to space In article <2502@umbc3.UMBC.EDU> cs225202@umbc5.umbc.edu.UUCP (Sang J. Moon) writes: >It occurs to me that if the threat of major war is removed from earth via >peace between USA and USSR, the population explosion resulting from lack of >massive death will necessitate developing ways to put the surplus population >into space or else we will have to have another war. The fact that there will be no massive death will not cause a population explosion. It's not like people are going to say "Gee, there's not going to be a nuclear war, let's have 12 kids." Also, neither war nor migration has ever relieved population pressures except locally and temporarily. For example, the Great Depression slowed the growth rate in the U.S. (and many other countries) more than any war. --- Dan Tilque -- dant@mrloog.WR.TEK.COM "I spent my last ten dollars on birth control and beer, Life is so much simpler when I'm sober and queer." -- Lyrics whose author I don't know ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 14:27:52 GMT From: datapg!com50!questar!al@uunet.uu.net (Al Viall) Subject: Re: Population pressure to move to space In article <2502@umbc3.UMBC.EDU>, cs225202@umbc5.umbc.edu (Sang J. Moon) writes: > It occurs to me that if the threat of major war is removed from earth via > peace between USA and USSR, the population explosion resulting from lack of > massive death will necessitate developing ways to put the surplus population > into space or else we will have to have another war. You are obviously talking about hundreds of years from now, or are very niave. There is a major piece of the puzzle that you are forgetting to mention. Just because America and the USSR are on speaking terms does not remove a the threat of international incidents which could result in a limited war. I am not talking of a war between the superpowers, don't get me wrong. I believe the superpowers have learned a valuable lesson from the cold war, and are now old hands at playing with a loaded deck. The threat that we face, is the inumerable third world countries that already possess, or WILL possess the knowledge and the hardware to manufacture nuclear weapons. South Africa is a very good recent example of this. The government in SA has shown time and time again that they will stop at nothing to shove their ideals down everyones throats. And now, with the help of Israel, they possess the knowledge to build nuclear missles and has, indeed, launched a prototype. So, you see, we have a long time to consider whether a threat is removed from earth, considering the above example, not to mention, Pakistan, India, and China. I could go on and on about this topic, but then I am not really talking about Sci.space, am I. - Al - -- | INTERNET: al@questar.QUESTAR.MN.ORG | NEW PRODUCT ON THE MARKET | | UUCP: ..!amdahl!tcnet!questar!al | "Flame in a Can" | | FIDONET: 1/282:2,3 (Al Viall) | Just tear off the protective | | "MMMMMMM. And so good for you!" | seal, point and shoot. Great fun!| ------------------------------ Date: 13 Nov 89 22:24:33 GMT From: littlei!nosun!snidely@uunet.uu.net (David Schneider) Subject: Voyager/DSN For those that were worried about the Voyager Interstellar Mission using up the DSN when Galileo really needs it, I found the pertinent quote in the October 9 AW&ST [p 117]: "...the space craft will be reconfigured for a baseline lower data rate of 160 bits/sec -- compared to 21,600 bits/sec at Neptune -- to enable the spacecraft to use the DSN's smaller, 34 meter antenna systems. Dave Schneider Monday, Nov 13 ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 01:05:27 GMT From: littlei!nosun!snidely@uunet.uu.net (David Schneider) Subject: Looking for US launcher family tree In article <1989Nov4.071258.9854@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes on the subject "Re: Fragile Space Shuttle": >(For those who don't know who Hunter is, >the Delta launcher is a slightly souped-up Thor missile, and Hunter >designed the Thor... taking it from contract signing to operational >service in 3.5 years.) That's a good intro for my question. I've been meaning to ask if anyone can point me at a convenient family tree of US launchers, primarily the liquid-fueled variety. I can still say "Redstone" and "Atlas", and I know some second stages were originally first stages, but I can't make a coherent picture of it. Dave Schneider Monday, Nov 13 ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 21:27:18 GMT From: rochester!yamauchi@louie.udel.edu (Brian Yamauchi) Subject: Re: Population pressure to move to space In article <8911141620.AA26106@trout.nosc.mil> jim@pnet01.cts.COM (Jim Bowery) writes: >Paul F. Dietz writes: >>Overpopulation is a myth. Current demographic projections have world >>population growth stopping at about 10 billion people around 2100. > >I've seen projections that put the carrying capacity of Earth, in >a steady state technological society, at 200 million humans. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Which, of course, doesn't exist, and will never exist.....fortunately. _______________________________________________________________________________ Brian Yamauchi University of Rochester yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu Computer Science Department _______________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 21:12:36 GMT From: cs.utexas.edu!varvel@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Donald A. Varvel) Subject: Re: Hubble Space Telescope In article <2262@hudson.acc.virginia.edu>, gsh7w@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg S. Hennessy) writes: >In article <590B0C11140C02E7-MTABWIDENER*DXANDY@widener> DXANDY@WIDENER.BITNET writes: ># ># I recall reading somewhere that the Hubble Space Telescope would be able >#to resolve continents on planets orbiting distant stars. Is this a piece of >#fanciful reporting, as it would seem, or is there actually some basis in >#truth? > >The resolution of HST is [roughly] 20 milliarcseconds. Let us consider >Alpha centuri. It is about 1.3 parsecs away, this 1 arcsecond will be >1.3 AU or about 130 million miles. 20 mas will be about 26 million >miles. This is about 100 times the earth moon distance. I would >consider it rather awful reporting myself. I suspect rather slightly faulty memory. I vaguely remember reading somewhere (How's that for a weak claim?) an article considering various telescope configurations that might conceivably be placed in space, starting with the HST and ending with something that could resolve continents. Somewhere along the way was a solar-system-diameter-baseline interferometer. You don't do it with one eye in earth orbit. Given a heavy-lift launcher, three telescopes evenly spaced around the sun at a suitable orbit is not an unworkable idea. You would only be able to resolve objects around the poles of the orbit, but the resolution in those directions would be impressive. -- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu) ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 06:31:08 GMT From: bfmny0!tneff@uunet.uu.net (Tom Neff) Subject: Re: Moon Colonies / Ant Tanks Olympic athletes, like Henry's odd claustrophiles, prove that some people choose extreme lifestyles and prosper. But what about the kids, is the question! If you tried to force your toddler to be a shot put maniac they'd nail you for child abuse; same thing if you never let him leave the basement. You cannot expect children to share their parents' maladjustments. -- When I was [in Canada] I found their jokes like their | Tom Neff roads -- not very long and not very good, leading to a | tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET little tin point of a spire which has been remorselessly obvious for miles without seeming to get any nearer. -- Samuel Butler. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 17:25:34 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!csri.toronto.edu!blaak@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Raymond Blaak) Subject: Re: Space Elevator ESC1759@esoc.profs (Michel van Roozendaal ECD) writes: >... In this process angular >momentum was transferred from the shuttle to the station. We can now >disconnect the shuttle from the tether, and start reentry, having saved >a considerable amount of fuel. I was wondering what happens to the station at this point when the shuttle is disconnected. Its orbit is no longer what is was before, and thus propellant is needed to restore it. My intuition is that once the shuttle is loose, the station goes flying off into a higher orbit. Ray Blaak blaak@csri.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 14 Nov 89 19:01:59 GMT From: uceng!dmocsny@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (daniel mocsny) Subject: Re: Moon Colonies / Ant Tanks In article <8911140126.AA02081@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov>, roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts) writes: > > A US Olympic athlete goes through years of what I would consider sheer > torture, with little or no financial incentive, for the slim chance of > being able to participate in the Olympics. I think this sentence is probably misleading in many cases. While the sports media do like to drum into our heads how elite athletes are out there paying their dues and living lives of austere asceticism, all you have to do is try hanging out with elite athletes for a while to see that this is mostly a load of BS. Certainly, elite athletes in many sports have to endure a great deal of pain and discomfort during training and competition. However, all of the elite athletes I have known really enjoyed training and competing. Most of them found it more rewarding than any other occupation available to them. Remember that every major and minor sport incorporates some activity that many people are willing not only to do for free, but to pay serious money to do. That means many people consider those activities to be very enjoyable. Now certainly, once you get up to a high level of competition, things aren't all fun and games anymore. But remember, you are starting with something that is inherently fun. That is very different than doing something for a living that you start off hating, or would never consider doing spontaneously. And certainly, the elite athlete derives many more external rewards than simply competing in the olympics. In several sports, such as those with established professional competition, the olympics are not considered the most prestigious event. Even where one single event dominates in a sport, most athletes still compete frequently in lesser events, and still derive regular gratification from doing so. Those that win, anyway; as in every field, the people with the most success have the most fun. And as far as the popular notion of the athlete as the self-denying ascetic---this is mostly nonsense. Some athletes are among the most fun-loving, gregarious, and interesting people you'd want to meet. While they do have to pay more attention than sedentary people to getting enough rest, eating right, and not abusing too many drugs, many are surprisingly lax about these things. I would say that most elite athletes, even those training for the olympics, have less stress and more enjoyment in daily life than the average corporate type. Given comparable levels of success, of course. The losing or injured athlete faces enormous stress. Dan Mocsny dmocsny@uceng.uc.edu ------------------------------ Date: 12 Nov 89 13:37:33 GMT From: mcsun!ukc!icdoc!syma!nickw@uunet.uu.net (Nick Watkins) Subject: Re: Tracking Military Satellites In article <12563@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (David Palmer) writes: >In article LANG@unb.ca writes: >>> Who on the net has seen this one? Mike, Jim, Nick, Warren? This Nick had but had nothing to add to the AW&ST report. >At one time the U.S. launched a spysat, then announced that it was not working. >Observations of it by the Russkies showed that it wasn't beaming any data >down to Earth, and it wasn't kicking out any film cannisters. As a result, >they ignored it and didn't bother to cover up their missiles etc. when it >passed overhead like they do for other spysats. This appears to be the account of the first KH11 mission given in Bob Woodward's "Veil". >Some time later, somebody published (was that the Pentagon Papers?) >the fact that it was actually beaming the data up to a relay satellite, >and that sat beamed it down to Earth. As a result the Russians started >covering up and we lost a valuable asset. No it wasn't the Pentagon Papers. William Kampiles sold them the manual for the KH11. >It is up to you to decide: Is it more likely that the CIA is being >devious again, or that The Greatest Nation On Earth, Bastion Of Democracy >has produced a space vehicle with problems. About even I'd say :-). There is, seriously, the possibility that part (not all) of the spacecraft is spinning. This would seem to imply a somewhat different design to the HST, which reportedly resembles the KH12, would it not? Nick -- Nick Watkins, Space & Plasma Physics Group, School of Mathematical & Physical Sciences, Univ. of Sussex, Brighton, E.Sussex, BN1 9QH, ENGLAND JANET: nickw@syma.sussex.ac.uk BITNET: nickw%syma.sussex.ac.uk@uk.ac ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #248 *******************