HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 08 January
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date:  9 Jan 93 21:33:39 GMT

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 008, 01/08/93
10.7 FLUX=132.9  90-AVG=139        SSN=144      BKI=2122 2223  BAI=007
BGND-XRAY=B3.4     FLU1=2.6E+06  FLU10=1.2E+04  PKI=3222 2233  PAI=009
  BOU-DEV=019,006,012,014,018,018,017,024   DEV-AVG=016 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= B9.5   @ 0127UT    XRAY-MIN= B2.8   @ 2321UT   XRAY-AVG= B4.2
NEUTN-MAX= +002%  @ 2140UT   NEUTN-MIN= -002%  @ 1935UT  NEUTN-AVG= -0.1%
  PCA-MAX= +0.1DB @ 2345UT     PCA-MIN= -0.4DB @ 0905UT    PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55421NT @ 0423UT   BOUTF-MIN=55396NT @ 1946UT  BOUTF-AVG=55414NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+107NT@ 1852UT   GOES7-MIN=N:+003NT@ 2359UT  G7-AVG=+076,+028,+009
GOES6-MAX=P:+128NT@ 1853UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-013NT@ 2248UT  G6-AVG=+094,-002,+037
 FLUXFCST=STD:140,145,150;SESC:140,145,150 BAI/PAI-FCST=015,015,012/015,015,010
    KFCST=3334 3333 3343 3333  27DAY-AP=006,006   27DAY-KP=3111 2222 2001 2222
 WARNINGS=
   ALERTS=**245STRM:0635-0735UTC
!!END-DATA!!
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.physics
From: wvhorn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (William VanHorne)
Subject: Re: averting doom
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 12:55:00 GMT

In article <1iiddsINNmpn@chnews.intel.com> bhoughto@sedona.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) writes:
>Do you seriously believe that a species capable of creating
>and enjoying The Love Boat is capable also of learning
>galactic engineering?
>
Son, if there's a buck to made doing it, It Will Be Done.
Amen.

---Bill VanHorne

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And when the world is overcharged with inhabitants, the last remedy is Warre;
 which provideth for every man, by Victory or Death" - Thomas Hobbes "Leviathan"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: baresson@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (pete.oram)
Subject: Quantisation of REDSHIFT
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 13:01:51 GMT


	I understand from an netnews article based on the New York 
Times of 15 September 1992 and the Jan 1989 edition of the 21st
Century Science and Technology magazine that Bruce Guthrie and 
William Napier of the Royal Observatory, Edinburgh, Scotland
have come to the conclusion that the redshifts of galaxies are 
quantised in agreement with the works of William Tifft
- after spending 4 years trying to disprove it.
The article states: "The preference of galaxies and quasars for
periodic redshift values corresponds to no known physical cause
and raises the question that redshifts (or a component thereof)
may not result from the velocity of the source [which] may
'force a rethink of cosmic questions'" and "has spill-over
implications in favour of the much-maligned astronomer Halton
Arp."
	I find this cosmic phenomena interesting - what I would
be grateful if anyone reading this would do for me would be to 
give me some more details about this (the article is brief), such as:

1. Are there any other significent details that would shed any
light on the reason for this phenomena?

2. What statistical methods did Guthrie & Napier use to disprove the
quantisation?

3. Does this have any implications for 'Big Bang'?

4. What other explanations are there for the redshift
quantisation if it doesn't just correspond to the velocity of
the source? ie for example to do with any forces acting on the
galaxies while they are moving (related to Einsteinian curvature
of space ??) Or could there be a problem with the vantage point
from which we observe the quantisation? (apart from the sun's
influence.)

5. How do you understand the significence of the phenomena,
especially in the light of any other views/ theories of Tifft
and Arp? What does Tifft believe? What does Arp believe?

6. What are the implications involved in the 'cosmic rethink'? -
the origins/age of the universe, concepts of spacetime, the
existance of God posited by some divine order in this ?

If you have electronic copies of either/both the aforementioned source
articles I would appreciate a copy. 

As well as posting I would appreciate a reply electronically; you can 
also reach me at att!ihlpb!poram.

Thanks in advance

Peter Oram
From: wdb3926@zeus.tamu.edu (Danny)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Universal Time Clock
Date: 8 Jan 1993 01:49 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

I'm looking for a Universal Time Clock that receives radio
signals to give universal time accurately.  I have checked the
Thomas Register for company names....no luck.
These clocks are used at most observatories.

Does anyone know who carries the clocks?
Dan


Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.physics,sci.environment
From: zowie@daedalus.stanford.edu (Craig "Powderkeg" DeForest)
Subject: Re: averting doom
Organization: Stanford Center for Space Science and Astrophysics
Date: 7 Jan 93 00:13:25

In article <bar> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>	     WASHINGTON (UPI) -- Life on Earth as we know it will
>     come to an end in 1,500 million years and the planet will
>     look more like its dusty, volcanic sister Venus in 2,500
>     million years, scientists said Wednesday.

Not too likely, on a planet with over five billion potential planetary civil
engineers and over 10^9 years to think of a solution!
--
DON'T DRINK SOAP! DILUTE DILUTE! OK!
From: J.JAHN@ABBS.zer.sub.org
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Distribution: world
Subject: Sunspots at 10.01.1993.
Date: 10 Jan 93 14:34:00 +0100
X-Gateway: ZCONNECT AB ABBS.hanse.de [UUCPfZ V3.8a U004]

Sunspots at 10.01.1993., 0 h UT.

No.    Pos.  Cl.  Ar.  Mag. SF  F  M  X
---------------------------------------
7386 05S 38W Cso  220   b    1
7387 22S 35W Dso   30   b
7389 20S 17W Bxo    0   b
7391 12S 15E Hsx   20   a
7394 18S 33W Dao   60   b
7395 13N 33E Hsx   20   a
7396 12S 01E Hsx   10   a
7398 08N 29E Dso   40   b
7399 07N 16E Axx    0   a


No optical or x-ray flares yesterday observed.



Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Subject: Re: Meteor Impact Site In Northern Minnesota?
Organization: University of Rochester
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 00:29:51 GMT

In article <726187167.AA02789@tdkt.kksys.com> Greg.Prince@f31.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com (Greg Prince) writes:

> It'd be interesting though if it is an impact site, because of the previous
> glaciation of the area.  Anything that wasn't fairly recent wouldn't still be
> there.


Let's all not forget that small, round depressions are often found in
places that glaciers once covered.  Called "kettles", these
depressions are formed in glacial till by the melting of buried masses
of ice left behind as the main glacier retreats.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: rstory@simhp720.mentorg.com (Ron Story)
Subject: Looking for a source of apparent star positions
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 03:01:23 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics
Keywords: ephemeris database star catalog position
Followup-To: 

Hi--

	I've written an ephemeris library and I'm looking for an 
accurate source of on-line apparent star positions.  I've spent
a good deal of time working around the numerical limitations of
C language double variable and would like to check my program against
a known source.
	What I would really like is list of RA and Dec values with
proper motions of a given Epoch and the apparent object position at
a given date.  It would be great if the positions were also took in
latitude and longitude and maybe altitude but that would be icing 
on the cake.
	Optionally, a program in the public domain that would take 
these values and produce apparent positions would be fine.

Thanks,

Ron

-- 
Ron Story N7TLC (rstory@mentorg.com)| These are my opinions so: |
Mentor Graphics Corp. (503)685-7000 | #include <std_disclaim.h> |
 "...Yes,  I believe that's sarcasm,  the lowest form of wit."  |
From: J.JAHN@ABBS.zer.sub.org
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Distribution: world
Subject: Sunspots at 04.01.1993.
Date: 4 Jan 93 19:22:00 +0100
X-Gateway: ZCONNECT AB ABBS.hanse.de [UUCPfZ V3.8a U004]

Sunspots at 04.01.1993., 0 h UT.

No.    Pos.  Cl.  Ar.  Mag. SF  F  M  X
---------------------------------------
7379 12S 89W Bxo   10   b
7381 05N 93W Hrx   30   a
7386 05S 41E Cko  260   b
7387 23S 45E Cao  180   b
7388 08S 43W Dao   50   b
7390 12N 35W Axx   10   a


No optical or x-ray flares yesterday observed.



Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: avl0@cine88.cineca.it
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Informal tools survey
Date: 8 Jan 93 10:35:09 +0100
Organization: CINECA, Italian Interuniversity comp. centre

I would have an informal survey of tools used by astronomers.
I'm insterested to see if there are some 'standard' tools and utils
available via FTP or commercial. A rough and not exhaustive list of 
applicationf field could be the following one:

* Sky and planetary positions mappers
* Astrophysical modeling and visualization
* Image processing and analysis
* Other

A line description of the tools, its name and where to get it
could be enough for my pourpose.

Any informations and suggestion are welcome. Thanks in advance.

-- 
"To be or not to be,  /// Marco Voli    [voli@cineca.it]     | ph.+39-51-598411
 that is the         /// Supercomputing Group                | FAX+39-51-594872
 problem"           /// CINECA  Interuniversitary Computing Centre
 Billy the kidder  /// via Magnanelli 6/3 - 40033 Casalecchio (BO) ITALY
From: J.JAHN@ABBS.zer.sub.org
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Distribution: world
Subject: Sunspots at 07.01.1993.
Date: 7 Jan 93 21:39:00 +0100
X-Gateway: ZCONNECT AB ABBS.hanse.de [UUCPfZ V3.8a U004]

Sunspots at 07.01.1993., 0 h UT.

No.    Pos.  Cl.  Ar.  Mag. SF  F  M  X
---------------------------------------
7386 05S 02E Cko  290   b    1
7387 24S 04E Dao  150   b
7388 07S 85W Dao  130   b    1
7391 10S 51E Dso   80   b
7393 18S 11W Bxo   10   b
7394 17S 08E Bxo   10   b
7395 11N 72E Hsx   40   a
7396 12S 41E Axx    0   a


No optical or x-ray flares yesterday observed.



Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.physics,sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: averting doom
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1993Jan5.002123.12093@news.acns.nwu.edu>
Date: 6 Jan 93 23:09:37

Leonard Evens solemnly posts

     4> Except as interesting speculation, why should anyone
     care?  Remember that the real (plentiful) fossil record on
     earth is only about 500 million years old.  Surely no one
     should worry seriously about what sort of actions humanity
     should take to deal with such a problem.  Unfortunately,
     this may confuse people about the issue of global warming
     which is something which may radically affect human
     societies in the next several generations and which we may
     be able to do something about.

No comment except the above adverb.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: mcfarlan@aurigaxerox.com (Doug)
Subject: Calculating the position of the sun ... 
Reply-To: mcfarland.henr801c@xerox.com
Organization: Xerox Corporation
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:32:23 GMT


... in the field with magnetic compass and protractor given
my current latitude.

Forgive me if this is the wrong place for this question, or the
answer is so obvious that every one is groaning. I've browsed
the FAQ and could not find a reference.


I would like to be able to calculate the *approximate* date(s) (plus
or minus a week is fine enough resolution) that the sun would
appear in the sky based on my latitude, a magnetic compass
reading and approximate angle above the horizon. I would
like to take the measurements in the field and do the
calculation/lookup without the aid of a computer.

The reason I ask ? As Scoutmaster, my Scout Troop is doing an
astronomy module this month and we were discussing telling
direction using the sun (post and shadow arc method), and
using the clock/sun method. The question arose about
using this type of information in reverse to predict what day
and time the sun would appear at a particular place in the sky.

Perhaps some sort of approximation table that I could create ?
Or some device I could build that could be used in the field ?

Any help/pointers would be appreciated -

   thanks in advance 

	Doug McFarland


********************************************
        McFarland.henr801c@Xerox.com    
********************************************


From: Greg.Prince@f31.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com (Greg Prince)
Sender: FredGate@tdkt.kksys.com
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Meteor Impact Site In Northern Minnesota?
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 12:46:58 -0600

 DO> seldom visited by anybody.  The crater is 12' across, has water in
 DO> it, and lies in a heavily forested area.  Unlike the surrounding
 DO> forest area, all of the trees near the depression look to be the
 DO> same age.

 DO> My question is this: who should this Minnesotan contact that can
 DO> follow up on this report to see if it is really a meteor impact
 DO> site?  Perhaps there is existing aerial photography of the area that

Has he asked the Dept. of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Minnesota? 
I'd be interested in seeing the site myself, for that matter.  It sounds
interesting.

It'd be interesting though if it is an impact site, because of the previous
glaciation of the area.  Anything that wasn't fairly recent wouldn't still be
there.

greg


Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: sschaff@roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Stephen F. Schaffner)
Subject: Re: averting doom
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 20:50:44 GMT

In article <Jan.8.15.28.14.1993.12014@ruhets.rutgers.edu>, bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner) writes:
|> bhoughto@sedona.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) writes:
|> 
|> >>>	     WASHINGTON (UPI) -- Life on Earth as we know it will
|> >>>     come to an end in 1,500 million years ...
|> 
|> >Do you seriously believe that a species capable of creating
|> >and enjoying The Love Boat is capable also of learning
|> >galactic engineering?
|> 
|> A better question in my opinion is whether a species capable of
|> creating and enjoying The Love Boat *should* be saved from doom.

Or whether the much-deserved doom has already arrived in the form of The 
Love Boat (could the extinction of all life really be that much worse?).


-- 
Steve Schaffner        sschaff@unixhub.slac.stanford.edu
	The opinions expressed may be mine, and may not be those of SLAC, 
Stanford University, or the DOE.
From: galenr@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Galen Raben)
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 20:37:12 GMT
Subject: Re: Equations that give planetary positions
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Greeley, CO
Newsgroups: sci.astro

In sci.astro, stone@cwis.unomaha.edu (Travis Stone) writes:

>See "Astronomical Algorithms" by Jean Meeus, Wilemann-Bell (1990)
>for planetary position trig series.

>T.R. Stone

I'm interested in this also, is this the book that comes with the
software on disk?  The local bookstores don't seem to have it, and
would like to know before I order it...

I recently went through the excercize of translating some of 
Peter Duffet_Smith's book "Astronomy on your Calculator" (not sure
of the exact title) for a shareware program I'm writing.  However I'm
not happy with the results I get (occassionaly see errors as large
as a degree in declination and at least several minutes RA...).  
Are the algorithms in the Meeus book a bit better? 

Thanks,
- Galen -
galenr@hpgrla.gr.hp.com
From: butler@natinst.com (Paul Butler)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: obstructed view?
Date: 12 Jan 1993 14:56:02 -0600
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: falcon.natinst.com
Keywords: telescope refractor reflector

It seems that people prefer refractors for viewing the planets, but are
willing to use a telescope with an obstruction (e.g. Newtonians) in
order to gain aperture when viewing far away objects.

1.  Why is this?

2.  What do people prefer to look through when viewing large far away
    objects (nebulae)?  Why?

3.  Could a reflecting telescope without an obstruction be as good as a
    refractor?

4.  Is it practical (possible?) to build a parabolic mirror
    that is not centered around the trough of the parabola (so that the
    primary's focal point is not directly over the mirror)?

5.  How is this idea related to the idea of using an aperture stop?

I don't know much about optics or telescopes, so keep it simple.

Thanks,

Paul Butler
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com (Ed McCreary)
Subject: Re: Galileo coverup
Organization: Compaq Computer Corp.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 14:47:50 GMT

In article <105898@bu.edu> steelie@csa.bu.edu (James Howard) writes:
>
> Ok, so the title is a bit misleading.  But it doesnt seem far from
>the truth, according to what you read in the press.   To my eyes,
>there is absolutely NO WAY to get 70% of the original mission data
>through the backup antenna.    What was the data rate 4 or 5 months
>ago.. 40bps?    

I believe that's 70 % of the mission objectives, not 70 % of the
original mission data.  They've cut imaging science studies down
because of the great deal of bandwidth images requires.  I'm not
sure what the data rate is currently.  Check out the old updates
archived at ames.arc.nasa.gov.

> 
>I dont care how much they throw around terms like "compression" , it
>doesnt fool me.   Anyone who has ever used a computer knows that 
>a 300bps modem is barely in the same species as a 19.2k.  (for analogy's sake)

True, but I still got a lot of work done with an old 300bps modem
and dumb terminal wake back when.

> 
>When will NASA come out and admit that it's busted, and the original mission
>is practically dead?

I've never heard anyone from NASA claim that the probe was anything
but broke.  Although the mission is trimmed down, it's far from dead.
I'm still hopeful that the hammering will work.
>
>  James
>
>P.S.  I think NASA has great press control.. If I hadn't been reading
>this group I would never have know anything substantial was wrong with
>Galileo.

Hmm, I haven't seen that many press reports about Galileo at all.
The only ones I explicitly remember were on CNN and they definitely
mentioned it.  They even included a graphic of what the antenna
probably looks like.
--
Ed McCreary                                               ,__o
mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com                       _-\_<,
"If it were not for laughter, there would be no Tao."  (*)/'(*)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: bcannard@hppcb36.mentorg.com (Bob Cannard)
Subject: Re: Apparent brightness of Sun's surface vs distance
Originator: bcannard@hppcb36
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:18:30 GMT
Reply-To: bob_cannard@mentorg.com
Organization: Yuggoth Interstellar Travel Inc.
Keywords: 
Followup-To: 


In article <73361@cup.portal.com>, Van@cup.portal.com (Sylvan Van Jacques) writes:
|>  I posted this in the Space and Science section of Genie, and was met with 
|> disbelief. The more I think about this, the more it seems to make sense. I 
|> would appreciate any comments.
|>    ======
|>   I was once told that the apparent brightness of the Sun would be the same
|> from Venus, Earth, Mars, or at any distance. It would only appear smaller.
|> 
|>  Is this true? How does one reconcile this with the 1/r^2 decrease in the
|> intensity of radiation received by a given area, whether it be the eye or a
|> planet? (Venus gets a lot more radiation than the Earth.)

An easy way of thinking about it: If the sun were twice as far away,
you receive 1/4 the radiation from it. But the image on your soon-to-burn-
out retina would be half the diameter, 1/4 the area, so the radiation is
concentrated by exactly the right amount for constant apparent brightness.

|>  One could say that the reason the flux goes down as
|>  1/r^2 is that the apparent area of the sun goes down as 1/r^2, but
|>  the apparent brightness of the sun is the same.
|>  
|>  Does this breakdown when we get so far way that we can't resolve the source?
|>  Point sources, like stars, do obey the 1/r^2 law for apparent brightness,
|> don't they?

Yes. Since the image can't get any smaller, its brightness has to change.

|>   How about this? Suppose that the Sun had twice the radius, but the same
|> brightness. Any surface would receive 4 times as much radiation (wouldn't it?).
|>  But it would not appear any brighter to our eyes (again, unless it were so far
|> away that we couldn't resolve the surface). Isn't this the inverse of what I 
|> posted above?

Different cases. The apparent brightness of an object is the brightness
of the image you see. The illumination provided is altogether different;
a sun twice as far away would provide only 1/4 the illumination.

|>  Does this make sense to anyone?
|>  Has anyone else heard this about the sun?
|>   Does anyone see this as an apparent paradox?
|>   Any comments at all?
|>  Van
|>   van@cup.portal.com

Do the explanations make sense?

Cheers,

	Bob.
-- 
bob_cannard@mentorg.com			"More dynamite!" - Theron Marks
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: lee@convex.com (Gene W. Lee)
Subject: Parameters of Swift-Tuttle Comet
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1993 13:29:25 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.


Can anyone supply me with these values for the 
Swift-Tuttle Comet?

Perihelion Date			______________

Perihelion Distance (AUs)	______________

Argument of Perihelion		______________

Longitude of Ascending Node	______________

Inclination			______________
	

	Please email your response if possible to lee@convex.com
	Thanks 



-- 
Gene W. Lee          lee@convex.com         +1 214 497 4733
Convex Computer Corporation                  ------- __o   
3000 Waterview Parkway                      ------ _`\<,_ 
Box 833851, Richardson,Tx,75083            ------ (*)/ (*)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.misc,sci.skeptic
From: Guest@MAXWELL (Guest account)
Subject: Focal length of KPNO 4m telescope?
Organization: Dept. of Physics,Natinal Centeral University,Taiwan,R.O.C
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 16:44:39 GMT


I need to know the f.l ,focal ratio ...detail data
of KPNO 4m telescope ? Please send e-mail to 
tseng@tycho.phy.ncu.edu.tw
Thanks.

H. Tseng
From: wang@optigfx.optigfx.com (Alice Wang)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: FAQ on telescopes
Date: 6 Jan 93 02:22:05 GMT
Organization: Optigraphics Corporation, San Diego

Would someone please send me the FAQ on selecting telescopes?
Sorry for the wasted bandwidth but my company news server
doesn't feed this news group.

Thanks in advance,
Alice Wang
wang@optigfx.com


Xref: sparky sci.astro:13751 sci.physics:22262
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
Subject: Re: That Great Pulsar Timing Flame War
Date: 8 Jan 93 01:01:57 GMT
Organization: LLNL

In article <1993Jan7.085151.13461@nuscc.nus.sg> scip2124@nusunix1.nus.sg (MARC PAUL JOREF VAN LOO) writes:
>  There exists no decent derivation of the
>  gravitational radiation of a binary pulsar.
>  Yu's objection to this derivation is correct.
>  But I found out recently that it is not new:
>  Read the 16th lecture of Buchwald's book
>  17 simple lectures on GR. (1982).

	What does he claim?

	And if you wish to see the "canonical" viewpoint on G-waves
and how to derive G-wave emission, check out Misner, Thorne, and
Wheeler's _Gravitation_ or some other such GR textbook.

	To claim that "there is no decent derivation" would mean that
MTW's derivation is somwhow flawed. Can you point out the error in it?
-- 
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/lip@s1.gov
Newsgroups: sci.astro