HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chris@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Chris Jacobson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.info
Subject: James Doohan to appear on TNG!  ** SPOILERS **
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.misc
Date: 7 Sep 1992 20:26:40 GMT
Organization: Vulcan Science Academy, Tau Ceti Sector
Distribution: world
Reply-To: chris@pnet51.orb.mn.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: xcf.berkeley.edu
Originator: griffith@xcf.Berkeley.EDU


Taken from CNN 'Showbiz Today' on Thursday, August 25th 1992.

James Doohan will appear as "Scotty" in a sixth season episode of TNG called
'Relics.'  In this episode Scotty takes a 75 year 'jump' into the future,
from the original Enterprise bridge to the Enterprise-D.  Actually, it's not
the "original" bridge, but a re-creation; the original bridge is in the
Smithsonian.

The reason why Doohan didn't want to do a TNG episode at first, is because he
didn't want to be 200 years old with "...five wrinkles every inch, like
DeForest Kelley did in the pilot."  This sounds like a super-duper episode,
and I can't wait for it to be aired.

NOTE: I believe I got the quote right; if I didn't, please correct me.


Chris Jacobson
People-NET [pnet51]                          INTERNET: chris@pnet51.orb.mn.org
Minneapolis, MN                                   AOL: cjacobson@aol.com

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited by Jim Griffith - the official scapegoat of rec.arts.startrek.info

E-mail submissions to trek-info@scam.berkeley.edu or ...!ucbvax!scam!trek-info
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: sdr57@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Laser weapons
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 14:51:06 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.023332.12087@hsv3.lsil.com> mvp@hsv3.lsil.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
>In article <+4lnw#+.dani@netcom.com> dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
>>mvp@hsv3.lsil.com (Mike Van Pelt):
>>>He said that people who invoke mirrors as a defense against very high
>>>power lasers just don't understand this effect.
>
>>Do I take it we can dismiss the wearing of green cloaks as a defense
>>against green laser beams as another Nivenism?
>
>Louis Wu's laser flashlight as described didn't seem to be nearly
>powerful enough to cause a laser propagated detonation.   It was
>burning and cutting, not exploding the target.  I suspect the delay
>caused by the green cloak would be less than Niven says, but I
>suppose it's possible.
>--
If the cloak reflects exactly the right wavelength efficiently enough and
if there are no wrinkles or folds that trap the beam and
if the cloak isn't dirty...

Reflective surfaces as defenses against laser weapons are highly
overrated, especially if the surface is exposed to an environment
as dirty as a planet with an atmosphere.

******************************************************************************
Renegade academician. They're a dangerous breed when they go feral,
academics are...a chemist, too.
		    -(James P. Blaylock in "Lord Kelvin's Machine")

My organization hasn't agreed with any of my opinions so far, and
I doubt they'll start now.

Stanley "Ya nee speon" Roberts
From: swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Laser weapons
Date: 4 Sep 92 22:03:28 GMT
Reply-To: swf@tdat.teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <Bu143C.M8n@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> f3w@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Mark Gellis) writes:
|more can be carried).  Better targeting systems for the weapon, perhaps
|including things like a glove-and-lens smartgun--you wear part of your
|targeting system like a contact lens (or have it implanted in your eye)
|and its microprocessor/controller sends signals to a glove that gives
|you tactile feedback until you're aiming precisely at what you're already
|looking at.

The army is placing part of it in the helmet, and the other part in the
gun.  (At least in the prototype currently being tested).
However it is specifically designed so the user does *not* need to
look at the target, the gun does that.  Instead the helmet imaging
system synch's with the laser spot from the gun.  (Laser *targeting*
is currently widely used).  Reault: you can shoot around a corner,
or over a wall without having to expose yourself to return fire.
[Gets kind of wierd when you enemy is using the same system though ...]

[This *is* real, the army is testing the prototype for the next generation
combat uniform/combat support system, and this is part of it - along with
two layers of stuff to resist chemical warfare, a super bullet-proof vest,
and refrigerated underware].
-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace)
Subject: Re: Mini-Atomics
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 07:45:31 GMT

In <L-r-dD#@engin.umich.edu> ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:

>In article <rwallace.716073011@unix1.tcd.ie> rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace) writes:
>>In <1992Sep9.130719.6060@sctc.com> beede@sctc.com (Mike Beede) writes:
>>
>>>rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace) writes:
>>
>>>>Basically a fission device requires a critical mass, and therefore a
>>>>certain minimum amount of fissionable material. (Though you *can* reduce
>>>>the explosive yield almost arbitrarily by making the bomb inefficient so
>>>>that most of the material remains unfissioned.)
>>
>>>This critical mass thing is not really true, is it?  As I understand
>>>it, the problem is fission products escaping without causing further
>>>fission. If that can be prevented, a chain reaction can take place in
>>>any reasonable amount of material.  So, for instance, if I could
>>>create something that reflected all neutrons, I might be able to have
>>>a 1 gram fission bomb (if I could assemble it fast enough).  Is this
>>>correct?
>>
>>Yes, but no such material exists. In a far-future sf scenario, you could
>>assume one (e.g. "scrith", the Ringworld floor material, would probably
>>do), but in that case why not just assume micro-fusion bombs which don't
>>require a fission trigger?

> A: Niven actually had a "fusion field" that the Belter culture used...
>it was basically a forcefield that reflected neutrons.

I remember Niven being less than clear on the subject of force fields
(he seemed to sort of invoke them without really acknowledging their
existence). Anyway, like I said, if you're going to invoke
neutron-reflecting force fields, why not just invoke clean micro-fusion
bombs instead?
> 
> B: It was my understanding (and *please* correct me if I'm wrong) that
>a 'critical mass' *per se* is not necessary, only that you need to duplicate
>in some region the conditions of a critical mass. I.e. if you compress
>the material enough, there will be a good chance that a given neutron
>will hit another atom, etc., etc.
> So, if you just surround a less-than-critical mass with enough explosives,
>you can get a nuclear explosion. (Of course, "enough," most likely, would
>be more than you'd get out of the fission reaction... right?)

Right. In fact I don't think you could do it with chemical explosives,
not unless the material was at least reasonably close to the critical
mass. The requirement for such pressure in a fusion bomb is precisely
why the device requires a fission trigger (i.e. for a micro-fission
device you would seem to need a regular fission bomb as the trigger).

--
"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem"
Russell Wallace, Trinity College, Dublin
rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie
From: max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Niven's blunders (was:Superconductors + the 2nd law)
Date: 12 Sep 92 03:17:16 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

ingles@flea.engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:

>  If you want to stretch a point, it could still offer some safety
> to future "lucky" humans. If the Ringworld has enough control over
> its sun to induce giant flares and lasers and such, it might have
> enough to induce a continuous flare perpendicular to the plane of
> the ring, which would push the sun, which would pull the ring...
> a bigger starship than even the puppeteer worlds combined.
>  Of course, you might well run out of sun before you were moving
> fast enough...

As Niven points out, when you run out of Sun, you should be moving fast 
enough to get a significant hydrogen flux through the Ring.  AT this 
point, you should be able to use the Ringworld as a giant fusion ramship, 
using the magnetic fields to fuse the hydrogen in the center to provide 
heat, light, and propulsion.  Of course, it's probably the wrong light . 
. . but who cares.

----------
Erik Max Francis   Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.  Coming soon:  UNIVERSE _ | _
USmail:  1070 Oakmont Dr. #1 San Jose CA 95117  ICBM:  37 20 N  121 53 W _>|<_
UUCP:  ..!apple!uuwest!max   Usenet:  max@west.darkside.com   464E4F5244   |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: Mini-Atomics
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 18:48:14 GMT

In article <qar-hF#@engin.umich.edu> ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:
>In article <1992Sep10.175629.24244@pbhya.PacBell.COM> whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
>>The US used to have a back-pack nuclear demolition charge.  
>>
>>Why does everyone seem to think that small nukes are a new idea?
>
> Do you have any references for this? I'm really interested...

It was discussed extensively on sci.military a few months ago.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare
From: rclark@lpl.arizona.edu (Richard Clark x4971)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Date: 5 Sep 92 06:57:01 GMT
Organization: Lunar & Planetary Laboratory, Tucson AZ.

In article <a3m-DW+@engin.umich.edu> ingles@rootbeer.engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:
>
>In article <kelso_j.715422933@kultarr>, kelso_j@cs.uwa.oz.au (J Kyle Kelso) writes:
>
>[galactic genetic takeover-reproducing parasite idea deleted]
>
> I suppose, assuming a few things about the universality of
>DNA and the great prevalence of life-bearing planets in the
>galaxy, it might be technically feasible. I doubt it, but
>we'll assume for the sake of the argument that it is.
> The main problem I see is explaining the origin of such
>creatures. How could such a thing evolve? What are some
>plausible intermediates between this and planet-bound life?
> On the other hand, you could posit them as designed beings,
>perhaps a biotech counterpart to Fred Saberhagen's Berserkers.
>This makes it more belieavable, but I'd want to know *why*
>anmy race would build such a thing...
>
>> J Kyle Kelso 
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Ray Ingles                  || The above opinions are probably
>                            || not those of the University of
>ingles@caen.engin.umich.edu || Michigan. Yet.


To spread the gospel.

Fraternity prank.

Just showing off.

A perverse form of immortality by proxy.

To hide from an enemy.

Who needs a reason now that the idea has been published?

Richard Clark
rclark@lpl.arizona.edu
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.science:2884 rec.arts.sf.written:12009
From: hatton@socrates.ucsf.edu (Tom Hatton)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Date: 11 Sep 92 19:40:18 GMT
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab

rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace) writes:

>In <1992Sep10.212615.768@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> chisnall@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz (The Technicolour Throw-up) writes:

>>From article <1992Sep8.094119.26816@crc.ac.uk>, by gwilliam@crc.ac.uk (Gary Williams x3294):
>>>>In article <1992Sep3.031844.21399@news.eng.convex.com>, cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:
>>>>Hmmm. I read an article in my local newspaper a few days ago that claimed
>>>>that several research teams have found a "fractal pattern" in the "junk"
>>>>DNA of many diverse lifeforms, including man. (According to one team, the
>>>>fractal complexity was highest for man, according to the other, it wasn't.)

>Yes, but wouldn't you naturally expect to find fractal sequences in the
>junk DNA? After all, the junk DNA is formed not by random nucleotides
>getting appended one by one, but by the duplication (and subsequent
>modification) of segments of DNA of various sizes. Hence you would
>expect it to be self-similar at a variety of scales, which is what a
>fractal is.

Sure, ruin their fun by injecting a note of reason! If people want to believe
that there is a meaningful pattern there, let them. Just because we can 
tell them that we know there *will* be a pattern (ie. non-random) due to 
well-understood (or at least well-observed) mechanisms doesn't mean you 
can ride roughshod over their pursuit :-)
 
Tom
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.sf.written
From: clc@kepler.unh.edu (Christian L Claiborn)
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 15:39:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.031844.21399@news.eng.convex.com> cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:
>Kind of intriguing...makes me think that information is encoded in the DNA
>in ways other than the direct code we know about. Hmmm...how about a
>fractal data compression algorithm? Maybe it's a picture of God?
>Directions for the next step in evolution? The Cosmic Self-Destruct
>Command? Guess I'm in one of those moods...
I think the answer is clear here.
God codes in PKZIP.  Maybe we can convince him to switch to ARJ.  

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Christian Longshore Claiborn | clc@kepler.unh.edu | Friend of the Great     |
| Chuck Woolery's Protege      | clc@gloin.unh.edu  | Eater of Souls          |
| Future UNH Sysadmin          | clc@bifur.unh.edu  | Ask about group rates!  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"It was all very well to say 'Drink Me,' but the wise little Alice wasn't    |
| going to do THAT in a hurry."  -- The Reverend Charles Dodgson              |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.sf.written
From: gwilliam@crc.ac.uk (Gary Williams x3294)
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Organization: MRC Human Genome Resource Centre
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 09:41:19 GMT


>In article <1992Sep3.031844.21399@news.eng.convex.com>, cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:
>Hmmm. I read an article in my local newspaper a few days ago that claimed
>that several research teams have found a "fractal pattern" in the "junk"
>DNA of many diverse lifeforms, including man. (According to one team, the
>fractal complexity was highest for man, according to the other, it wasn't.)

>Kind of intriguing...makes me think that information is encoded in the DNA
>in ways other than the direct code we know about. Hmmm...how about a
>fractal data compression algorithm? Maybe it's a picture of God?
>Directions for the next step in evolution? The Cosmic Self-Destruct
>Command? Guess I'm in one of those moods...

I've checked this out in the literature.  The only thing I can find in
MEDLINE (using a 6-month-old Entrez CD-ROM) on fractal complexity in
gene sequences is:

----------------------------------------------------------------
Genet Anal Tech Appl 7: 35-8  (1990) [90226846]
Complexity charts can be used to map functional domains in DNA.
A. K. Konopka & J. Owens

"We measured local compositional complexity (LCC) of DNA sequences by
calculating Shannon information content over mononucleotide frequencies. 
Eukaryotic DNA appeared to be 'simpler' than bacterial DNA even at the
level of short oligonucleotides.  Moreover, different DNA functional
domains displayed different compositional complexity in a systematic
manner.  In particular, the complexity of exon sequences was
systematically higher than the complexity of corresponding introns.  We
therefore present examples of complexity charts (plots of complexity
versus position in sequence) for pre-mRNA sequences from higher
eukaryotes.  By taking a window width of 100 nucleotides and a window
step of 1 nucleotide, introns can be distinguished from exons in the
majority of cases studied.  Complexity charts of immunoglobulin variable
regions allowed correct mapping of exons and introns in these sequences
as well, a task that was impossible with commercial programs available
to date."
----------------------------------------------------------------

Glossary:

eukaryotic	- organisms that are more complex than bacteria, or viruses
oligonucleotide	- short (circa 1-300 nucleotide) lengths of DNA or RNA
exon		- bit of a gene that codes for protein
intron		- bit of 'junk' in the middle of a gene (edited out of final product)
pre-mRNA	- the gene when it has been 'read' before editing out introns
immunoglobulin	- antibody proteins

There may well be more recent research on fractals in gene sequences
which my search didn't find. 

-- 
GARY WILLIAMS,  Computing Services Section,  Janet:       G.Williams@UK.AC.CRC
MRC-CRC & Human Genome Mapping Centre,       Internet:    G.Williams@CRC.AC.UK
Watford Rd, HARROW, Middx, HA1 3UJ, UK
Tel 081-869 3294   Fax 081-423 1275
From: be726@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joseph A. Ellis Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Mini-Atomics
Date: 10 Sep 1992 13:53:20 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: be726@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joseph A. Ellis Jr.)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen) says:

>In article <1992Sep8.191358.21168@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes:
>|
You know, I would think a LONG time before I fired that bullet... 

It reminds me of the "Atomic Hand Grenade" in the 'Paranoia' game. I don't
recall the exact numbers, and they're not really important... but it had a
burst radius of something like 40 meters... and the thrown range of it was
_30_ meters!

I think I'll avoid that atomic handgun bullet and use something safe...
like a Nitroglycerin 'molotov'!
>|Yield can be computed as follows.  ...
>|  If 10%, then the
>|yield is about 2 tonnes TNT/gram.  The 50 gram mass liberates about
>|100 tonnes of TNT equivalent.
>
>Yow!  A bullet that packs a punch larger than the largest conventional
>bomb used by the armed forces. (The 5000 lb bunker buster).
>
>100 tons of TNT would obliterate a city block (or more)!
>
>
>-- 
>sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
>  or
>Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
>

-- 
 Joe Ellis  o/~ The Synthetic Filker o/~    |     TesserAct Studios
     Internet:   usr6184a@tso.uc.edu        |       P.O. Box 18577
        GEnie:   J.ELLIS22                  |     Fairfield, OH 45018
    All filked up and no place to sing!     |   New Dimensions In Filk!
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Dogs
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 01:40:34 GMT

	I will be roleplaying a intelligence boosted pooch
in the near future. I have read 'Sirius', but I am having
trouble visualising how a smart dog would conceptualise
its world: what are the major sensory and social-behavior
differences between humans and dogs?

					James Nicoll

	Oh, boy! Dogfood *again*! YYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYY!!!!!!!
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: neufeld@helios.physics.utoronto.ca (Christopher Neufeld)
Subject: Re: Mini-Atomics
Organization: University of Toronto Physics/Astronomy/CITA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 14:24:48 GMT

In article <rwallace.716111131@unix1.tcd.ie> rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace) writes:
>In <L-r-dD#@engin.umich.edu> ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:
>
>> So, if you just surround a less-than-critical mass with enough explosives,
>>you can get a nuclear explosion. (Of course, "enough," most likely, would
>>be more than you'd get out of the fission reaction... right?)
>
>Right. In fact I don't think you could do it with chemical explosives,
>not unless the material was at least reasonably close to the critical
>mass.
>
   Well, plutonium warheads are detonated this way. I don't know whether
uranium bombs are still dominantly gun assembly devices. The problem is
that plutonium really likes to fission. If you try to assemble it by
shooting a sub-critical mass at another sub-critical mass, the fission
between the parts as they come together pushes them apart again and it
fizzles. This happens for any reasonable assembly mechanism.
   So, the plutonium bomb is essentially a spherical mass of metal
surrounded by high explosives. Those high explosives have to be detonated
to extremely tight timing tolerances to prevent an asymmetric implosion
resulting in a fizzle. There's probably also an initiator set off at
about the same time.
   I don't know how close the spherical mass of metal is to a critical
mass of plutonium at normal densities.
   This mechanism is preferred for tactical warheads since they can be
made with smaller yields than the theoretical minimum for normal density
metal, and I expect that this solid state construction is better suited
for firing from an artillery piece than a gun-type assembly bomb with
moving parts.
   I believe the timing constraints are the reason for those fancy relays
which made the news a while back when it was suggested that Iraq was
trying to import some from Great Britain. The relays have very short
switching times and high power transmission in the on state to set off
the explosive. I have some vague memory from past Net discussions that
they contain some krypton gas and that they can also be found in modern
photocopiers.


-- 
 Christopher Neufeld....Just a graduate student  | Don't let your mind
 neufeld@helios.physics.utoronto.ca    Ad astra  | wander -- it's too little
 utzoo.utoronto.ca!generic!cneufeld              | to be let out alone.
 "Don't edit reality for the sake of simplicity" |
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Mini-Atomics
Date: 10 Sep 92 01:04:46 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester

A correction to a previous note...

A sloid lump of californium would not necessarily glow white hot from
decay heat.  A lump of Cf-252 would (halflife, 2.64 y), and since 3%
of its decays are spontaneous fissions the average energy per decay
would exceed 10 MeV.  The lump would also emit considerable numbers of
neutrons.  Cf-252 is used as a neutron source and as an ionization
source for mass spectroscopy.

More likely, one would use Cf-251 (halflife, 890 years).
Any Cf-252 present would present serious problems of premature
detonation, but that can be solved by letting the californium
age for a couple of centuries until all the Cf-252 is gone.
If the spontaneous fission rate of the the other Cf isotopes
is high enough then this wouldn't be helpful.  The decay of
Cf-251 usually involves the emission of some fairly energetic
gamma rays, so shielding would be needed.

Cm-245 has a halflife of 8500 years, and emits a 175 keV
gamma in about 10% of its decays.  The isotope Cm-248 decays
by spontaneous fission about 8% of the time, and Cm-250
decays primarily by spontaneous fission, so the concentration
of each would have to be low.

BTW, Cm-250 might be useful in rockets.  Deposited as a thin film on a
sail, it would emit fission fragments preferentially in one direction
(the other direction being absorbed in the sail), giving a nuclear
rocket with a high exhaust velocity (several percent of the speed of
light).  Alternately, fission fragments from the surfaces of thin
wires could be directed out a magnetic nozzle.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu