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 ; Sun, 28 Oct 1990 01:46:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sun, 28 Oct 1990 01:45:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #502 SPACE Digest Volume 12 : Issue 502 Today's Topics: Payload Status for 10/25/90 (Forwarded) UFO Giveaway Re: You Can't Expect a Space Station to be Cheap Re: "NAVY WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE" News From OSCAR-11 24-Oct-90 Re: Theory for Life Re: Theory for Life Administrivia: Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to space+@andrew.cmu.edu. Other mail, esp. [un]subscription notices, should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 Oct 90 21:11:03 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Payload Status for 10/25/90 (Forwarded) Daily Status/KSC Payload Management and Operations 10-25-90. - STS-35 ASTRO-1/BBXRT (at Pad-B) BBXRT liquid argon servicing will be performed today. Experiment monitoring continues. - STS-41 Ulysses (at OPF) The SSBUV will be removed from the payload bay today. - STS-38 DoD MMSE support (at SPIF) The canister will be mated to the transporter today. - STS-39 AFP-675/IBSS/STP-01 (at CCAFS) CITE preps and ground software development will be active today. - STS-40 SLS-1 (at O&C) Module closeouts continue along with MVAK training. - STS-37 GRO (at PHSF) Functional testing will be performed today. - STS-42 IML-1 (at O&C) Module and experiment staging will continue today. - STS-45 Atlas-1 (at O&C) Experiment and pallet staging continue. - STS-46 TSS-1 (at O&C) Experiment and pallet staging will continue today. - STS-47 Spacelab-J (at O&C) Rack and floor staging continues. - STS-67 LITE-1 (at O&C) No work is scheduled for today. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Oct 90 18:15:57 EDT From: John Roberts Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement. Subject: UFO Giveaway >From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!bruce!monu1!monu6!steve@ucsd.edu (Steve Balogh) >Subject: Re: UFO on TV in Nevada >>Something should be done to force these criminals to release these glorious >>things that belongs to the American people; NOT THE GOD DAMBED NAVY!!!! > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > THIS ATTITUDE IS SICKENING!!! >Does the rest of Humanity not exist?? >Steve Balogh (Network Manager) VK3YMY | steve@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au >Monash University (Caulfield Campus) | 52'38.8"S 145 02'42.0"E ...ICBM >PO Box 197, Caulfield East | +61 3 573 2266 Voice (Office) >Melbourne, AUSTRALIA. 3145 | +61 3 571 3646 Fax Tough luck. These are our own imaginary flying saucers. We thought them up all by ourselves, and we're not about to share. If you want some, you're just going to have to think them up yourself. So don't come here looking for a handout. Of course, if Australia is interested in *buying* some imaginary flying saucers, we have many fine models to choose from, and some of the British designs are also very nice. :-) John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: 26 Oct 90 17:54:03 GMT From: convex!convex.convex.com!schumach@uunet.uu.net (Richard A. Schumacher) Subject: Re: You Can't Expect a Space Station to be Cheap Cheap? Probably not, but we ought to expect it to do something other than let atronauts take Omnimax movies and measure each others heartbeats. Scuttle the damn thing until there's a need for a continuous human presence in orbit. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Oct 90 17:23:16 GMT From: sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvlx!bturner@ucsd.edu (Bill Turner) Subject: Re: "NAVY WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE" > Wow...as if once wasn't enough, we get a slightly different version of this > yet *again*! Worse, it's spreading (now posted in sci.space.shuttle as well, who knows where else...) --Bill Turner (bturner@hp-pcd.cv.hp.com) HP Interface Technology Operation ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 90 02:48:34 GMT From: ka2qhd!kd2bd@rutgers.edu (John Magliacane) Subject: News From OSCAR-11 24-Oct-90 * UOSAT-2 OBC STATUS INFORMATION * DIARY OPERATING SYSTEM V3.1 SMH MLJM MSH Today's date is 27 /10 /90 (Saturday) Time is 1 :31 :54 UTC Auto Mode is selected Spin Period is - 261 Z Mag firings = 0 + SPIN firings = 24 - SPIN firings = 31 SEU count = 66 RAM WASH pointer at DBB2 WOD commenced 27 /10 /90 at 0 :0 :8 with channels 10 ,11 ,19 ,29 , Last cmnd was 112 to 1 , 0 Attitude control initiated, mode 1 Data collection in progress **** UoSAT-OSCAR-11 BULLETIN 24 October 1990 **** UoSAT MISSION CONTROL CENTRE University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 5XH, England ** AO-13 Command Stations performed magnetorquing procedures near perigee of orbits on October 15-17. The new transponder schedule is as follows: Mode-B : MA 000 to 095 Mode-JL: MA 095 to 125 Mode-LS: MA 125 to 130 Mode-S : MA 130 to 135 Mode-BS: MA 135 to 140 Mode-B : MA 140 to 256 Omnis : MA 220 to 040 This schedule is expected to continue to 261290. The spacecraft attitude is: BLON = 180 and BLAT = 0 ** AO-10 AMSAT-OSCAR-10 appears NOT TO have been receiving sufficient solar panel illumination to support Mode-B transponder operations. Both beacon and transponder signals show signs of FMing. Until further notice please DO NOT use AO-10's transponder. AO-10 may be able to to support Mode-B transponder operation in November. ** AO-16 PACSAT The microsat BBS has been tested on the ground engineering unit, and is now ready for uploading to AO-16. The satellite BBS software was written by Jeff Ward, G0/K8KA, at UoSAT and was ported to the microsats by NK6K. The porting was easily achieved, as there are only 10 lines of code that are different between the UoSAT version and the Microsat version. A lot of effort went into the design of the BBS, operating system, and other support code to make that possible. Once complete, the following elements will be available: 256k file system: This is just half of one of the four available banks of bank switched memory. The more complete file system using all four banks and the 6MB mass memory will be uploaded after more testing. FTL0 file server: This implements the protocol described in the FTL0 document, available on CIS, the 9th ARRL Networking Conference proceedings, and elsewhere. It allows file uploading, downloading, and a simple directory display. It requires the use of software at the groundstation: a simple version, called "PG" has been written by Jeff and will be on CIS soon. Broadcast server: This implements the broadcast protocol as described along with FTL0 and has been running for several weeks on UO-14, and a few people have rolled their own receive program, at least one written in BASIC. A simple version, called "KISSUI" has been written by Jeff and will be on CIS soon. After this is loaded, the following separate programs will be running on AO-16: Kernel - Operating system - NK6K/Quadron AX25 - AX25 driver - NK6K/WB6YMH/Quadron, pd on a KA9Q AX25 implementation. PHT - Spacecraft control, power management & program loader - N4HY/NK6K AARTD - AART driver - NK6K/WB6YMH MFILE - File system - G0/K8KA/UoSAT FTL0 - File upload/download - G0/K8KA/UoSAT PBP - File broadcaster - G0/K8KA/UoSAT ** $BID ** Please use BID $UOSAT.1024 for PR BBS use. -- John A. Magliacane FAX : (908) 747-7107 Electronics Technology Department AMPR : KD2BD @ NN2Z.NJ.USA.NA Brookdale Community College UUCP : ...!rutgers!ka2qhd!kd2bd Lincroft, NJ 07738 USA VOICE: (908) 842-1900 ext 607 ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 90 03:42:34 GMT From: unmvax!pprg.unm.edu!topgun!mustang!nntp-server.caltech.edu!palmer@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (David Palmer) Subject: Re: Theory for Life a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) writes: > Our genetic material is based on a double strand of DNA, with each strand ... >conditions, it is possible that life might evolve with a three-copy genetic >material, in which the information is redundantly stored in three strands (a ... > Higher organisms on earth are usually bilaterally symmetrical. This >probably is a result of the inherent bilateral nature of 1 cell dividing into >two adjacent cells. With triple stranded genetic material, a cell might divide >not into two cells, but into three cells. This would bring up the interesting >idea that extraterrestrial life might be trilaterally symmetrical. The body Bilateral symmetry is not the result of cells dividing into pairs. (IMHO). If that were so, you would expect lower creatures to be bilaterally symmetric as well, being more raw, crude, and closer to their original cells (so to speak.) Instead, the more developed an animal is, the fewer symmetries it has (very roughly). The lowest animals are roughly spherically symmetric, with symmetry about any plane passing through their center. Higher animals, such as sea cucumbers, pine trees (not an animal, strictly speaking, but this is pop-science, rigor is anathema) sea urchins, worms, etc. are radially symmetric, symmetric about any plane containing the axis of the creature. Then we get to the highest levels, including people, CFAs (cute furry animals), slugs, flatworms, and politicians. These creatures are symmetric about only a single plane. Obviously, the next step in evolution is to shed symmetry altogether. -- David Palmer palmer@gap.cco.caltech.edu ...rutgers!cit-vax!gap.cco.caltech.edu!palmer I have the power to cloud men's minds -- or at least my own. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Oct 90 04:54:45 GMT From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!midway!quads.uchicago.edu!chi9@ucsd.edu (Lucius Chiaraviglio) Subject: Re: Theory for Life In article <1050400042@cdp> dyurman@cdp.UUCP writes: >This is a reply to a posting from Daniel Mocsny on the subject >of THEORIES NEEDED FOR LIFE. I would like to add a couple of >points. > >1st: in order to develop technology, the creature must have the >ability to store information external to its brain, or >equivalent, in a nonperishable form. While "pixel-addressable >pigment cells" is a wonderfully creative idea, an alphabet and >printing are more useful. Actually, information storage does not absolutely have to be external, as long as it is sufficiently non-perishable to support the development of a technological civilization. >2nd: the creature must be a predator, otherwise it's species will >spend too much time avoiding being something else's supper. This >will not leave any time for rocketry. Does not follow. Perhaps avoiding being someone else's supper might be a strong selection for intelligence and the development of technology (to be used against whomever was trying to make supper out of the technological species). This doesn't seem to have been the primary selective force for the development of intelligence and technology on Earth, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be. > It must be at or very near >the top of the trophic web not only for its niche, but also for >the planet. Why? See above. > Given the interstellar nature of DNA building >blocks, its meals must be the products of concentrated protien >and other nutrients from intermediate steps in the food chain. Silicate grains seem to be a pretty common interstellar material. Maybe these are someone's building blocks. Note: I am NOT talking about using silicon as an analog of carbon. It has been shown that that will not work. What I am talking about is the use of polysilicates and their derivatives (silicones, which are very stable, for instance) as a basis for building blocks. Also, some uses of organic chemistry to form things other than amino acids and nucleic acids are a possibility. An aside here: not only do people trying to imagine life on other worlds have the problem of their imagination tending to be channeled towards things such as exist on Earth, their imagination tends to be channeled towards the very small subset of Earth life that they know of. The great majority of science fiction and serious science (-: well, they try anyway :-) imagination of life on other worlds imagines things homologous to what most of us see: plants, animals eating either plant or animal matter, and occasionally fungi. Mention of microorganisms is generally restricted to diseases, if they are mentioned at all -- and then often the more serious thought assumes that none of these would be able to eat anything from Earth, which is likely wrong given the extraordinary variety of substances that microorganisms can metabolize -- I mean, we really have to do a considerable amount of work to make completely unmetabolizable organic compounds, and a significant number of inorganic compounds can serve as food for various organisms. Even among life using only biochemical pathways found on Earth (almost certainly less diverse than the biochemical pathways which actually exist on Earth) a staggering variety of ways to live exists, and an environment different from that which we live in (but similar to some environments found on Earth) could conceivably select for a planet-dominating organism very different from us and the organisms we know with respect to the TYPE of food chain it is in, let alone the position. Such organisms may have not developed high-order multicellularity and/or intelligence on Earth simply because their environments are too restricted. (Actually, one possible such environment we do not know the nature of is the hydrothermal environment beneath the surface of the mid-ocean ridges, which take up a substantial fraction of the surface area of our planet -- I forgot what the number is, but I am pretty sure it is up in the 10% - 20% range. Maybe a Lovecraftian mass of slime is brooding down there, waiting. . . :-)) >3rd: assuming carbon-based life, sensory organs must be seated as >close as possible to the brain in order to provide the shortest >possible response time between reception of input and reaction to >it. See predator concept above. For some environments, a factor other than response time might dominate the placement of sensors relative to the brain. For example, imagine an organism in a very treacherous and abusive environment. If the organism could regenerate parts, it could deal with repeated loss of sensors, but even with regeneration major brain damage would be majorly bad news for retaining memories needed for civilization. Therefore, it would make sense to either have the brain as far away as practical (and behind as much shielding as practical) from all of the common types of abuse, or to have a distributed redundant form of memory storage so that even a drastically mangled organism would have a good chance of containing at least one complete copy of its memories. >5th: from what we know of the processing power of our own brains, >there is a trade off of energy expended between physical >coordination or limbs and manipulation of abstract concepts. >This suggests that a creature with four arms or eight elephant >like trunks might spend all its time worrying about where the >parts of its body were and what to do with them, and less time >about its future as a life form or the meaning thereof. Our own brains should not be taken as ultimate examples -- that is, we should not assume that they represent the full range of what can be done with a nervous system. To be sure, an organism with more limbs would probably need a somewhat bigger brain to use them all as well as an organism with fewer limbs and equal intelligence and equal efficiency of utilization of brain weight and space, but this does not mean that that is impossible. Also, no reason exists why a multi-limbed organism could not evolve so as to be able to choose at will whether to distribute its motor coordination to all limbs or concentrate most of it on a few so that less brain weight would be required to control them. As a matter of fact, we can do this to some extent. >6th: the creature must have the ability to develop abstract >thinking [see #1 above on storage of information] else it will >fail to develop methods for organizing information, and thus fail >to develop technology. This suggests a protective shell of some >kind for the brain or equivalent, else the creature will never >have its mental abilities survive long enough to get the >abstractions built much less communicated. [. . .] A protective shell would certainly be useful for this, but not the only means of making memory non-perishable. Having distributed redundant memory would also work; if suitable high-data-rate communication were a biological feature of an organism, memory and even thought could be distributed over multiple physical individuals, so that logical individuals need not correspond to physical individuals (-: brains like a Sequent :-). -- | Lucius Chiaraviglio | Internet: chi9@midway.uchicago.edu ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V12 #502 *******************