HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Math progs with arbitrary precicion, for UNIX...
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 04:47:10 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1720@tnc.UUCP> m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY) writes:
>Where can I get a DOS or OS/2 version of Mathematica?  Keep in mind
>that I do not have FTP.

FTP wouldn't help.  Mathematica is commercial software.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: what use is Freedom?
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:47:06 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Oct12.051652.6784@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> ins894r@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Aaron Wigley [Wigs]) writes:
>What about the Shuttle at the moment - can crew members take personal 
>belongings up?

They each get a small amount of mass and volume for personal stuff.  There
are some restrictions, although I don't know details.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
From: sharma@nrcphy1.phy.nrc.ca (Rohit Sharma)
Subject: Re: HRMS/SETI Answers
Summary: mw spectrum choice for SETI 
Keywords: spectrum, SETI, HRMS
Organization: National Research Council of Canada
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 15:53:15 GMT
Expires: Oct 12 1991

In article <1992Oct9.145536.19786@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> eto@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Edward T. Olsen) writes:
>In response to David Harwood's direct questions in
><1992Oct9.054339.16971@ousrvr.oulu.fi>:
>
>
><Is NASA/HRMS going to investigate any previously detected signals, which
><it considers might possibly have been of ETI origin? Does NASA say that no
< deletia >
>solar type stars within 25 pc (there are nearly 800) over the
>microwave spectrum between 1 GHz and 3 GHz at 1 Hz resolution.
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 why this particular portion of the mw spectrum ?

- rohit
              sharma@nrcphy1.phy.nrc.ca  or sharma@trlabs.CA
-- 

{{  Rohit Sharma         sharma@nrcphy1.phy.nrc.ca   or  sharma@trlabs.CA  }}
Xref: sparky sci.space:14166 sci.astro:10496
From: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: SETI positive?
Date: 7 Oct 1992 15:54 PST
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.197
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1992Oct7.172416@IASTATE.EDU>, danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock) writes...
>   I keep hearing rumors and there's this story in Newsweak (that our lackwit
>bookstore can't get til friday).  Allegedy we have a potential hit on a SETI
>search and a multi-telescope confimation is planned Oct 12-???

Calm down.  There is no positive signal.  It's just that NASA's big SETI 
project is scheduled to start on Oct. 12.  It's a ten year project to do a
megachannel search.  I believe that the first part of the program is to 
look locally (within some tens of light years) at specific nearby stars.
Later there will be a generic search of the entire sky.  

It's fascinating stuff, but don't hold your breath.  The search, though
4 or more orders of magnitude faster than the best previous search, is
still limitted in sensitivity.  For example, using this detector at 100 light 
years from Earth, you could not detect the random TV and radio signals that
we have inadvertantly transmitted out into space.  We really only have
a possibility of detecting civilizations which are intentionally beaming
intense signals at us.  

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"The question seems to be of such a character
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		that if I should come to life after my death
				and some mathematician were to tell me that it
				had been definitely settled, I think I would
				immediately drop dead again."      - Vandiver
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Bootstrap hardware for LunaBase
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:32:14 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
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.

In <1992Oct10.231941.1467@techbook.com> szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:

>In article <BvvwGq.A35@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:

>More than enough money _where_?  The SEI budget is in the $10's
>of millions.  Commercial funding for moon ventures is zero.  

And exactly how much is commercial funding for asteroid ventures,
Nick?

I'd really like to know.  Every time someone mentions a potential
project that is not backed by Nick Szabo Enterprises, you tell us
that it's already been rejected by private enterprise.  So, please
give us a list of Fortune 500 companies that have invested in you.

You tell us that private enterprise has always rejected manned space
missions, which are the "socialist road to space," and given its
blessing to unmanned space missions instead.  You use communications
satellites as your example.  So, please, tell us, how many fully-automated
mining missions has private enterprise financed, either in space or
on Earth?  How many communications satellites are capable of manipulating
the mass of even a small asteroid or repairing themselves on orbit?

Why is anyone who advocates a manned space program, even one that's
not run by the government, denounced as a socialist because you think
manned spaceflight is a socialist technology?  And how can you, then,
claim to be the great capitalist savior when you want to build a space
ship based on AI that came out of the same NASA labs?  (Or rather, that
is promised by the same NASA labs, has been promised for decades now,
but has still not advanced even to the prototype stage.)

And why do you wax poetic about how your asteroid-mining robots 
will allow thousands or millions of people to live in wonderful 
colonies in space, with robots serving their every need, when you 
so strongly deny that man is ever cost-effective in space.  What 
"mass delusion" will induce private enterprise to send large numbers
of people into space to do a job that you say robots can do better
and cheaper?  

Is it because you can't stand the idea that the first *real* space
colonies will be founded by men and women living in grubby little
tin cans because there's a job to do, discovering new ways to live
and work and die, just as pioneers have always done, instead of
being the beautiful shining cities in space depicted by people
like Gerard O'Neill?


Oh, BTW, commercial funding for Moon ventures is about the same
as commercial funding for aviation ventures -- in 1902.




Newsgroups: sci.space
From: gene@wucs1.wustl.edu (_Floor_)
Subject: Perot & Freedom
Organization: The K-Zoo Crew
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 04:02:52 GMT

So I watched Perot's little solutions special this Friday evening.
And whilst he showed his charts, there was one about spending cuts.
One of his proposed cuts included "specific expenses." In the fine
print beside this slice of pie, it said...."Space Station"...

  _____    "But you can't really call that a dance. It's a walk." - Tony Banks
 /  ___\  ___  __ ___   ___      _____________   gene@cs.wustl.edu
 | / __  / _ \ | /   \ / _ \     |  physics  |   gene@lechter.wustl.edu
 | \_\ \ | __/ |  /\ | | __/     |racquetball|   gev1@cec2.wustl.edu
 \_____/ \___/ |_| |_| \___/     |volleyball |   gene@camps.phy.vanderbilt.edu
 Gene Van Buren, Kzoo Crew(Floor), Washington U. in St. Lou - #1 in Volleyball
From: wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Don't forget  Other Guy(was Re: Von Braun -- Hero, Villain, or Both?)
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:11:46 GMT
Organization: Alpha Science Computer Network, Denver, Co.

In article <1992Oct6.195549.1733@kopachuk.uucp| dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman) writes:
|
|Isn't it true that the Redstone existed before the Vanguard, and that
|Von Braun lobbied for using it to send a satelite into orbit, but since

Von Braun proposed putting a satellite up as early as the late 40's and
was ready to implement it by 1954. 

|the Redstone was "owned" by the Army, Eisenhower wanted to let NACA's
|Vanguard have the first shot, especially since the launch was tied

I don't think NACA (later NASA) had anything to do with Vanguard.
The Naval Research Lab did have a small part.

|into the International Geophysical Year observance.  After numerous
|Vanguard failures, and after the Soviets slapped together the Sputnik
|mission *in*order*to* beat the US into space, the US governemnt

Sputnik I was launched on Oct 4, 1957. The first Vanguard attempt
was on Dec 6, 1957. There was no 'slapping'. They were working
on it for a long time.

|agencies finally got together and agreed to let Von Braun use the
|Redstone as a satellite launch vehicle to bolster space program morale.
|If it hadn't been for inter-department politics in the US government,
|the Soviets would have had the *second* satelite, but the US was (as

Sputnik II, launched on Nov 3, 1957 was the *second* satellite.

|stated policy) in no hurry, and the Soviets wanted to be first at all
|cost.  In fact, James Oberg (if I remember his name correctly) in his
|book _Red Star in Orbit_, documented that all the "firsts" noted
|above (except the space station) were done *primarily* to beat the
|US and score propaganda coups.  The US announced a long-term goal,
|and the Soviets rushed in with very little concern for safety,
|scientific value, etc.

Krushchev definitely wanted space spectaculars, but being first
on the moon was pretty spectacular too.

-- 
Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.  
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Hartmut Frommert)
Subject: Re: Controversy over V-2 anniversary
Organization: Dept. of Physics, University of Constance
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:10:44 GMT

clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones) writes:

>Or get a grip.  And put Peenemunde in your spell list.
                         ^^^^^^^^^^
Its correct name is Peenemuende, or more accurately Peenem\"unde (in TeX).
--
 Hartmut Frommert                 <phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de>
 Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany
                                           -- Eat whale killers, not whales --
Xref: sparky sci.space:14275 sci.astro:10572
From: rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: SETI positive?
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 19:56:20 GMT
Organization: ucsd
NNTP-Posting-Host: lutherlab.ucsd.edu


>   Curiosity: why yellow?  Don't main sequence orange and red stars last longer
>than yellow ones?  Is there some reson to think cooler stars than the sun won't
>develop technological civilizations?

The NASA targeted search will be looking at stars of spectral class F, G
and K.  M class red dwarfs (you don't want to mess with red giants!) would 
have much smaller ecospheres than the sun because they are less luminous, 
and therefore the probability of finding a habitable planet in the ecosphere 
of such a star would be very small.  If a planet was in a red 
dwarf ecosphere, it might be close enough to the star to have its rotation 
tidally locked (which might have interesting implications for weather), 
though I'm not sure about that.

>   For that matter, wouldn't _any_ star system be a candidate for an
>automated communications relay left by a self reproducing probe?  A 
>paranoid might think another civilization would attempt to contact us
>only through an offset communications device :).

The NASA sky survey is designed to be complementary to the targeted
search, though not quite as sensitive to weak signals.  Automated
probes may also be floating between the stars, perhaps in retrograde 
galactic orbits, passing by many more stars per unit time than if they
following the general galactic rotation.  

--------------------
rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: LunaOne: Beyond Boostrap
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 220-0636
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 02:46:36 GMT

In article <1992Oct08.160420.11034@eng.umd.edu> sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes:

>Any colony needs an export, an economic reason for being. 

Agreed.  At least you're a step ahead of the folks at FLO, who think
their access to government pork is endless.

>Luna One's main export would be power, generated by solar cells and beamed 
>back to LEO or earth via microwaves.

As pointed out previously, this would cost $500 billion _plus_ the
operational mines, chemical plants, and solar cell factories.  The entire 
mine-to-cell cycle on Earth includes millions of tons of a equipment, and 
uses several tons of volatiles for every kg of solar cell produced.  In
contrast the biggest commercial investments tend to be in the $1 billion
(comsats) to $15 billion (English Channel tunnel, a private effort)
range.  The volatile extraction project comes in at $10 billion.

>Secondary exports would be refined metals
>and glasses (to build the Szabo Astro/Comet Mining fleet and something at L-5 
>:), delivered by mass driver. 

We only need about 20 tons of volatile-processing equipment for the first 
set of missions.  Not much of a market, sorry. After that we'll likely
be getting metal regolith from near-earth-asteroids, which require
only low-power ice rockets to get to and have concentrations of metal
regolith over 10 times that on on the moon.  We'll be happy to sell you
volatiles and organics, assuming you get funded.  We'll also have
metal on sale far cheaper than you can make it.

>It would be self-sufficient in oxygen, metals production, 

No way.  This requires huge tonnage of factory which you can't
afford, and even if you could the factories need ongoing inputs of 
volatiles and spare parts.  Please, study your industrial processes
before you make such sweeping claims.

>It would probably be able to produce some electronics components on site
>(assuming Intel or Hitachi isn't too adverse to licensing their designs).

How are you going to get the millions of tons of fab equipment to
the moon?

>Water? A bit tougher.

Most of water's mass is oxygen, difficult to extract but at
least available on the moon.  But hydrogen makes up the largest 
volume of water (check out the STS tanks, close to stochiometric).  
The hydrogen has to be brought up in these huge tanks from  earth. (The 
suggestion that we scrounge for solar wind particles has to be the epitomy 
of desparate acts :-)  Hydrogen also leaks out after a few days so ya better 
make the water fast.

>I suppose we'll have to hire Szabo Astro/Comet Mining to deliver water, or
>build our own ships (Known as MGF Mining, for arguements sake). 

If you can swindle that $500 billion out of some mark, we'll be happy to 
have you as a customer. :-)


-- 
Nick Szabo					 szabo@techboook.com
Hold Your Nose: vote Republocrat  ////////  Breathe Free: vote Libertarian
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: With telepresence, who needs people in Earth orbit?
Date: 15 Oct 92 07:41:38 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <Cohena-061092082023@l30346.mdc.com> Cohena@mdc.com (Andy Cohen) writes:
>I'm not sure...but it seems that Allan doesnt support the notion of
>telerobotic exploration....consider this...
>If the location can be scanned with enough detail,..then the data
>transmitted back to Earth.... a vitual simulation can be constructed
>Earthside.  Use of telerobotic interfaces using a form of batch commanding
>can be feasible...  Earthside builds the batched commands using the virual
>simulation then transmits...  The scan is performed again after the
>completion of the commands as feedback again to the virtual simulation
>Earthside....
>The technical challenges include the scanning device, the throughput for
>the scanned data back to Earth and the simulation Earthside....all are
>easily solved...

I can't speak for Allan, but I certainly think that telerobotics is
handicapped by lack of force feedback and kinesthetic sensing. Over 
dependance on visual scanning misses too much information necessary 
for control. You can't tell by visual scanning if that rock will turn 
if weight is placed on it. You can't tell by visual scanning if the 
surface ahead will subside. You can't tell if a cliff edge is just the 
other side of that rock you just told the robot to climb. Etc. 
It's likely that most of these issues can be dealt with on board the
robot, but it certainly isn't *easily* solved.

Plus there are issues of the lack of on board curiosity that would
cause one to look quickly in the direction of an odd sound or notice
an odd shading on a rock that the visual scanner might miss due to
spectral limitations. I deal with television every day on a professional
basis. I know how limiting a TV view is. Telerobotic exploration is lots 
cheaper for a quick look at a surface than manned exploration, but not as 
through and more likely to miss anomalies that it was not programmed to 
find. The most important discoveries are often the ones you *aren't*
looking for.

Gary
From: sma@waikato.ac.nz (Stephen Anderson)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Drop nuc waste into sun
Date: 9 Oct 92 09:12:14 +1300
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

Nick Haines writes:
> 
> In the same way that the sun's gravity pulls the Earth towards the
> sun? Wrongo. Whatever we launch from Earth starts off in solar orbit
> (because the Earth is in solar orbit), and has to dump all of its
> orbital velocity (i.e. 30 km/sec) in order to fall into the sun. This
> is much more expensive than launching to solar escape velocity and
> leaving the solar system. Do the sums.
> 
OK.  Perhaps I am the ignoramus that you seem to assume that everyone who
doesn't share your view is.  So enlighten me.  Isn't the thing that stops the
Earth plunging into the Sun its orbital velocity.  uh-huh.  And if we placed a
satellite in an identical orbit as the earth, but at a slower orbital velocity
(by firing it off in an opposite direction to that way which the earth is
going) what will happen.  Will its orbit decay until it falls into the sun, or
will its orbit merely change to a different one.  Either way we have an
advantage.  If it falls into the Sun (or indeed hit Venus, Mercury or some
other body) the problem is gone forever.  And if it settles into a different
orbit then it is out of sight, out of mind, and we can recover it later.

> This is only one problem. The real reasons why we shouldn't `dispose'
> of nuclear waste by sending it into space are:
> 
> (1) it's far too expensive to do (even if we just want to leave it in
> 	a parking orbit somewhere, the launch costs are absurd),
> (2) we may well want the waste again in the future, and it's cheaper
> 	to get to if it's on Earth,
> (3) crazy politicians will scream blue murder because they think it'll
> 	fall on their heads. It's not worth the trouble.
Finally, some decent reasons.  Especially that first one.  But roll on fusion
so we don't have to worry about what to do with waste.


Stephen..
From: m.breunig@abbs.hanse.de (Max Breunig)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: X-Ray Maps of Earth ?
Reply-To: m.breunig@abbs.hanse.de
Date: 12 Oct 92 00:59:00 MET
Distribution: sci
Organization: ABBS AstroMail, D-W 2121 Dahlenburg / Germany
X-Version: ZerUU V6.45c



From: UUCP/Sci/Astro
>Betrifft         : X-ray map of N. California
>Erstellungsdatum : 07.10.92 18:08
>
>From: J103680@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
>Message-Id: 92279.49812.J103680@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
>Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
>
>I am searching for an X-ray map of Northern California to
>reveal caves and caverns underground.  Know of any sources?
>

Sounds interesting !
I have never heard of any X-ray maping of earth.
Knows anyone of such a project and some details on it ?


Max Breunig                  m.breunig@abbs.hanse.de


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABBS AstroMail, the first and most popular German astronomical bulletin board
------------------------- for amateur astronomers ----------------------------
    + 49 5851 7896 / V.21, V.22, V.22bis, V.32, V.42, V.42bis and MNP5
    ------------------------------------------------------------------


Xref: sparky sci.space:14500 sci.astro:10840 alt.sci.planetary:161
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Ulysses Update - 10/15/92
Keywords: Ulysses, JPL, ESA
Date: 16 Oct 92 08:28:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: elroy.1992Oct16.002822.6955
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

Forwarded from:
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011

                     ULYSSES MISSION STATUS
                        October 15, 1992

     All spacecraft and science operations are continuing
normally.  Routine Earth-pointing maneuvers were last conducted
on Oct. 10 and Oct. 13.  The next set of maneuvers will be
performed on Oct. 17 and Oct. 20.

     A reduction in the number of ranging passes continued during
this reporting period to improve the spacecraft signal at its
great distance from Earth.  Today Ulysses is nearly 11 degrees
south of the ecliptic plane, looping back toward the sun, where
it will begin its primary mission of studying the sun's poles in
June 1994.

     The spacecraft is about 890 million kilometers (554 million
miles) from Earth, traveling at a heliocentric velocity of about
32,000 kilometers per hour (20,000 miles per hour).

                             ##### 
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | If God had wanted us to 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | have elections, he would of 
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | given us candidates.