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 ; Mon, 16 Apr 90 02:26:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Mon, 16 Apr 90 02:25:20 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #266 SPACE Digest Volume 11 : Issue 266 Today's Topics: Re: Is the moon upsidedown to NASA? Re: releasing data / digitized images Re: releasing data / digitized images Re: Interstellar travel Re: National Space Society Re: jobs in space PostScript Space Pictures Request (Update) Re: Re^2: Interstellar travel Re: Fermi Paradox ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Apr 90 17:51:16 GMT From: phoenix!woodhams@princeton.edu (Michael Daryl Woodhams) Subject: Re: Is the moon upsidedown to NASA? In article <6625@wehi.dn.mu.oz> BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz writes: >In Australia, the full moon looks to have an image of a rabbit with >big ears on the left, with some buckshot passing by its left (right to us) >ear. >In the northern hemisphere, is this upside down? I tried to mail a response but failed. I have recently moved to the northern hemisphere from New Zealand. The answer to you question is yes, everything is upside down down here. Michael Woodhams. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Apr 90 19:14:49 GMT From: ns-mx!iowasp!granroth@uunet.uu.net Subject: Re: releasing data / digitized images Much has been said recently about whether or not NASA should immediately release scientific data (specifically images) to the public without the benefit of expert analysis by the investigators associated with the particular project. Here's my $0.02-worth: The principle justification for the immediate release of data is that is was paid for with taxpayers' dollars. It is equally true that taxpayers' dollars have supported a large portion of the research and development in commercial industry (especially "defense"-related industry). Should we demand that their data be released to the public? Perhaps the person from HP would like to begin by releasing that company's data which has been derived from federal or state contracts. In sharp contrast, NASA researchers "live to publish." Their primary reason for collecting the data is to analyze it and publish the results. Further, it is typical that the original data becomes public domain after one or two years. I find it difficult to believe that taxpayers would feel cheated by this. Many of the research scientists involved in projects like Galileo and the HST have spent 20 years or more of their lives working on those projects and waiting for data. One year's exclusive rights to raw data doesn't seem to be an extravagant reward. On the other hand, taxpayers might justifiably complain about access to public domain data. The costs related to locating/extracting/copying data from an existing archive would generally be too high for most organizations (not to mention individuals) to handle. However, current technology (DAT, CDROM, etc.) makes it possible to consider copying these archives to a more manageable media, making routine general distribution of NASA data sets possible. Your elected representatives and NASA administrators should be made aware of your desires for ready access to these data so that archiving and cataloging projects might receive the funding they require. (Believe me, I hate to watch 100 thousand digital and analog tapes deteriorate in a dirty warehouse with practically no environmental controls here at Iowa. The hardware to read these 7-track digital tapes and 14-inch-diameter analog tapes cannot be maintained much longer, and the age of these tapes and poor storage conditions have already rendered many of them unreadable. I wouldn't be surprised if all the data from Van Allen's original Explorer experiments are lost, and much of the data from Hawkeye, IMP, ISEE, DE, Pioneer, Voyager, etc., are well on their way to becoming unreadable. . . . But that's another soapbox.) (Standard disclaimers . . . my opinions) -Larry Granroth@IowaSP.physics.UIowa.edu IOWASP::GRANROTH ------------------------------ Date: 13 Apr 90 15:58:00 GMT From: apollo!rehrauer@eddie.mit.edu (Steve Rehrauer) Subject: Re: releasing data / digitized images In article <1990Apr11.051210.12459@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> tfabian@mars.lerc.nasa.gov (Ted Fabian) writes: >I don't think that it will.. if you have a need to get the data, you're >either already in such a position, or you know how to get the data without >complaining openly to the world about it.. > >rather, I think the things we're seeing in SCI.SPACE as of late are from >people who don't have a need to have the data.. they simply want the data >either as a status symbol, or as some sort of ego booster.. "We don't have the resources to make the pictures available to you in a suitable format" seems a valid defense. I could believe & accept that. "We won't make them available to you because *you* don't really need them" seems a rather bull-shittish response, considering whose tax-dollars funded the (coming) acquisition of those pictures in the first place. (No flames at you personally. I'd be happy to have access to such pictures, though I candidly admit that my own reasons for wanting them are trivial, and therefore my satisfaction isn't worth much NASA effort / expense.) -- >>"Aaiiyeeee! Death from above!"<< | (Steve) rehrauer@apollo.hp.com "Spontaneous human combustion - what luck!"| Apollo Computer (Hewlett-Packard) ------------------------------ Date: 13 Apr 90 17:02:38 GMT From: haven!aplcen!aplvax.jhuapl.edu!jwm@purdue.edu (Jim Meritt) Subject: Re: Interstellar travel Why make this into a physics problem? Make it a biology problem. If you can't shorten the trip, lengthen the lifespan/patience of the travelers! That that is is that that is. That that is not is that that is not. That that is is not that that is not. That that is not is not that that is. And that includes these opinions, which are solely mine! jwm@aplvax.jhuapl.edu - or - jwm@aplvax.uucp - or - meritt%aplvm.BITNET ------------------------------ Date: 13 Apr 90 06:13:19 GMT From: agate!agate!web@apple.com (William Baxter) Subject: Re: National Space Society It has come to my attention that NSS President Charles Walker recently wrote to Secretary of Commerce Robert Mosbacher to tell him that the NSS represents grass-roots opinion about commercial space. This claim is based on surveys such as the one Dave Smith posted. Let Secretary Mosbacher whether the NSS and Charles Walker speak for you, and what you think about commercial space. Print out a copy of the survey and send it to him with your comments. Secretary Robert A. Mosbacher Department of Commerce 14th St. between Constitution Ave. and E. St. NW Washington, DC 20230 Here is the survey: National Survey No. 2370938476 T/F 1. Given the undisputed fact that space program innovations have provided a variety of benefits for life here on Eath - from weather forecasting, to scratch-resistant glass, to laser heart surgery - how would you rank the importance of the space program to our nation. Would you say it is: Very important Important Not important 2. How important is the continued exploration of space - the search for new planets, new stars, new life - to you personally? Is it: Very important Important Not important 3. Scientists have long debated the question: Are we alone? In your opinion, what is the likelihood that there are other forms of intelligent life in the universe? Very likely Likely Unlikely 4. President Reagan committed the U.S. to a permanently manned Space Station in much the same way that President Kennedy committed the nation to putting a man on the moon, How do you view the idea of a permanently manned Space Station? Do you regard it: Very favorably Favorably Unfavorably 5. Over the years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been responsible for virtually every facet of America's space program, including such success stories as Mercury, Gemini, Apollo and the Space Shuttle. What is you assessment of the job NASA has done? Do you: Strongly approve Approve Disapprove 6. For years, America led the world into space. But [sic] now it is argued that other countries have equalled or even surpassed, America's space prowess. In your opinion, where does America's civilian space program stand in relation to those of other nations? Is it: Ahead of other countires Even with other countries Behind other countries 7. In your view, where should America's civilian space program be in relation to other nations? Should it be: Ahead of other countries Even with other countries Behind other countries 8. Maintaining U.S. leadership in space will require increasing NASA's budget to about 1% of the total federal budget - about $2 billion a year. Do you agree that this is a reasonable amount to pay for continued exploration of the universe and the advancements that would surely result from it? Agree Disagree No opinion 9. Would you be willing to spend just a few pennies a day in support of the National Space Society's efforts to ensure that America continues the greatest adventure humandkind may ever know - the exploration of space? YES (if yes, please see form below No Membership Acceptance Form ----------------------------- -- William Baxter ARPA: web@{garnet,brahms,math}.Berkeley.EDU UUCP: {sun,dual,decwrl,decvax,hplabs,...}!ucbvax!garnet!web ------------------------------ Date: 12 Apr 90 15:45:30 GMT From: mailrus!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!lethe!tvcent!comspec!censor!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: jobs in space In article andre@elbereth.rutgers.edu (Timothy Andre) writes: >... My ultimate desire is to be Mission Specialist >for NASA. I have noticed that most Mission Specialists have their Ph.D.s, some >in EE. I am considering continuing for my PhD, but wonder if it is really >necessary... Okay, time to dust off my standard posting on this: Q. How do I become an astronaut? A. We will assume you mean a NASA astronaut, since it's probably impossible for a Westerner to get into the Soviet program, and the other nations have so few astronauts (and fly even fewer) that you're better off hoping to win a lottery. Becoming a shuttle pilot requires lots of fast-jet experience, which means a military flying career; forget that unless you want to do it anyway. So you want to become a shuttle "mission specialist". If you aren't a US citizen, become one; that is a must. After that, the crucial thing to remember is that the demand for such jobs vastly exceeds the supply. NASA's problem is not finding qualified people, but thinning the lineup down to manageable length. It is not enough to be qualified; you must avoid being *dis*qualified for any reason, many of them in principle quite irrelevant to the job. Get a Ph.D. Specialize in something that involves getting your hands dirty with equipment, not just paper and pencil. Forget computer programming entirely; it will be done from the ground for the fore- seeable future. Be in good physical condition, with good eyesight. (DO NOT get a radial keratomy or similar hack to improve your vision; nobody knows what sudden pressure changes would do to RKed eyes, and the long-term effects are poorly understood. For that matter, avoid any other significant medical unknowns.) Practise public speaking, and be conservative and conformist in appearance and actions; you've got a tough selling job ahead, trying to convince a cautious, conservative selection committee that you are better than hundreds of other applicants. (And, also, that you will be a credit to NASA after you are hired: public relations is a significant part of the job, and NASA's image is very prim and proper.) The image you want is squeaky-clean workaholic yuppie. Remember also that you will need a security clearance at some point, and the security people consider everybody guilty until proven innocent. Keep your nose clean. Get a pilot's license and make flying your number one hobby; experienced pilots are known to be favored even for non-pilot jobs. Work for NASA; of 45 astronauts selected between 1984 and 1988, 43 were military or NASA employees, and the remaining two were a NASA consultant and Mae Jemison (the first black female astronaut). Think space: they want highly motivated people, so lose no chance to demonstrate motivation. Keep trying. Be lucky. -- With features like this, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology who needs bugs? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 10 Apr 90 06:10:24 GMT From: ccncsu!pearson@boulder.colorado.edu (Kirk Pearson) Subject: PostScript Space Pictures Request (Update) Just a note to all the people who have sent me requests for a PostScript picture site: I have stored all your addresses and will mail anything I find out as soon as I get it. So far I have only received requests for the info and no actual info :-) Now, to repeat my original request: if anyone knows of where some PostScript space pictures exist (ftp site, etc.), please e-mail the address to me. If you would like to get the PSpictures addresses also, please e-mail to me, rather than post a "me too" and I will forward any information I get. Thanks! | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||| ___ __ ___ Kirk Pearson / \/ \ | \ uunet!csu-cs!pearson _/ \| \ pearson@handel.cs.colostate.edu \__ pearson%handel.cs.colostate.edu@cunyvm Time sneaks up on you like a windshield on a bug. -- Jon Lithgow | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||| ------------------------------ Date: 16 Apr 90 00:11:55 GMT From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@apple.com (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Re^2: Interstellar travel In article <1370@opal.tubopal.UUCP> alderaan@tubopal.UUCP (Thomas Cervera) writes: > I'd just like to know how one feels when interplanetary matter (meteors) or >interstellar matter (gases and dust) collides with the spacecraft at .12 c ;-) > I'm not really sure, but if my memory serves me right, Sirius (Canis Minor >alpha), for example, is somewhat 11 ly apart. A trip to that star (it's not >the closest, I know) would take decades (spacecraft's time) at .12 c. > This implies a high probability of such collisions, IMHO. The Daedalus report, which planned a nominal mission to Barnard's Star, six LY, at about that speed, concluded that this was manageable. In their design, about one-tenth of the interstellar cruise mass was the bow shield, designed to severe worst-case assumptions; a good bit of that would be lost to ablation by dust grains during the mission, and it would run moderately warm due to gas and dust throughout. Hitting something large would vaporize the whole probe, of course, but that is relatively unlikely -- interstellar space is very empty. Serious fractions of the speed of light start to pose larger problems. In particular, the protons and electrons composing the interstellar gas start to look like high-energy radiation in substantial quantities. -- With features like this, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology who needs bugs? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 15 Apr 90 05:06:59 GMT From: phoenix!drostker@princeton.edu (David Jay Rostker) Subject: Re: Fermi Paradox Am I confused? I thought that Fermi's Paradox stated that we would never find an advanced technology. The reasoning was that any technologically advanced civilization capable of space travel or at least capable of communication with us would have destroyed itself by now. I used to believe this idea, but that was about five or six years ago, when everyone was afraid of nuclear war. NOw that tension has relaxed, I don't feel it's true. Do I have the right paradox? Dave Rostker (DROSTKER@phoenix.princeton.edu) ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V11 #266 *******************