HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gwilliam@crc.ac.uk (Gary Williams x3294)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: FTL
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:09:27 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: MRC Human Genome Resource Centre

In article <BxM47x.19B@cen.ex.ac.uk> cs92mjd@cen.ex.ac.uk (M.J.Davis) writes:
>
>_How to accelerate a spacecraft to c_
>
>Fill said containment system with anti-matter, until the net mass of the 

Didn't Robert Forward produce some theory about *negative* matter? That
is, matter that actually has negative mass and gravity.  Your idea
probably still wouldn't work because nature abhores a smartass, but I
can't immediately see the flaw. Anyone?


-- 
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   
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Applications of time travel and teleports
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:00:07 GMT

In article <BxICL4.H0C@cen.ex.ac.uk> cs92mjd@cen.ex.ac.uk (M.J.Davis) writes:
}
}Time travel would make breaking into buildings a breeze. Simply pop back a
}few years to before the building was build, walk onto the area its going to be
}and hop forward again. Obviously you'd have to be a bit careful to avoid ending
}up in a wall or anything awkward. Of course, this assumes that for some reason
}you can't just teleport in...

Select your inertial frame, of course.  Why not just stand a few yards west of
the building and hop a second or so into the future?  Presto, it would have
moved to your location.  (earth rotation)


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: dagibbs@quantum.on.ca (David Gibbs)
Subject: Re: Weapons systems?
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:19:37 GMT
Organization: Quantum Software Systems

In article <6yPZTB9w165w@west.darkside.com> max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis) writes:
>I've been thinking about combat in space, and am wondering if anyone has 
>come up with any novel weapons/delivery systems.
>
>So far I have:
>
>    o laser beams
>    o particle beams
>    o kinetic weapons (shells)
>    o missiles
>    o torpedos (nuclear missiles)

I'm not sure you can make this distinction between missiles and
torpedos -- the distinction in our world was that torpedos went
through water, and missiles through air, but that distinction
doesn't apply in space. (Unless you postulate that torpedos
go through "subspace" or "hyperspace" or some such thing.)

Also many (most) shells used now are not kinetic weapons, but
actually have explosive warheads.

So possibly a better break down of these would be:

- shells (or guns): all velocity imparted at launch
- dumb missiles: have some kind of engine, but no guidance
- smart missiles: have engine and steering ability -- ie
    some form of active guidance

The question of whether or not the warhead in you munitions
is nuclear/conventional/other is not a major distinguishing
factor in your type of weapon, but rather is a secondary
characteristic.

-David
(dagibbs@quantum.qnx.com)
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Power for electric cars?
Date: 5 Nov 1992 19:11:46 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: concertina

In article <ALANB.92Nov4153218@catalina.sdl.mdcbbs.com> alanb@sdl.mdcbbs.com (Alan Braggins) writes:
>
>And LA is one of the few cities where it is possible to build an
>internal combustion engine whose exhaust is cleaner then the ambient
>air (this month's Scientific American), 

Note that the worst years for air pollution in L.A. was 1967 - 69.

It's improved since then...(I've been aware of this sort of stuff
since I was a little kid in the early 50's: my father was an inspector
with Air Pollution Control District in L.A. from the time they were
started).

>one of the few
>cities where being able to see hills a few miles away is unusual...

This was true two hundred years ago.

L.A. sits inside a ring of mountains that let a temperature inversion
form to trap all sorts of dust/salt/smoke/haze in the basin.

When the first Europeans saw the L.A. basin, they remarked on the
hazy atmosphere, a few grass fires could make things disappear.

Makes it real easy to see autos as a major pest, though.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Some things are too important not to give	 |  Meteor counting is |
| them all away and have none left for yourself. |  is not a crime...  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Timothy D Little)
Subject: Re: Star Wars
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 06:47:03 GMT

pksuk@mothra.syr.EDU (Peter K. Suk) writes:

>If one assumes that the ship being pursued by the missle can teleport
>forever, or is at least considerably longer ranged, then the ship will
>escape.  However, if the missle has a longer range, then with Timothy's
>path:

>	1     3     5
>	 \   / \   / \
>	  \ /   \ /   \
>	   2     4     6...

>All the missle has to do is to home in on every-other image of the fleeing
>ship.  (And, given a dumb missle, it will do just that, since the light
>from point 3 will reach point one BEFORE the light from point 2.)  While

I'm pretty sure that, given my coordinates, that the distance between (1)
and (3) was 48ms, whereas it was only 30ms between (1) and (2).

At least, it should have been!

[... Practical detection issues...]

>(P.S.  In case anyone has any doubt about my argument:
>	-Assume negligible detection times-

>	Time
>	  0	- Ship teleports to 2
>	  1	- Ship arrives at 2, teleports to 3
>	  2	- Ship arrives at 3
>	  3	- Ship arrives at 4
>	  4	- Ship arrives at 5
>		* * * * *
>	  26	- light arrives at 1 from 3, missle tele to 3
>	  27	- missle arrives at 3
>	  28	- light arrives at 3 from 5, missle teleports
>	  29	- missle arrives at 5
>	  30	- light arrives at 5 from 7, missle teleports... )

So, at all points in space, the missile always arrives 26ms late, even
with a highly curved path that should be really easy to short-cut.

>(P.P.S.	If you stretch out the zig-zag a bit, you should be able to fool
>a dumb missle in just two jumps, assuming neglible latency, ala Picard
>manuver.  Add as many jumps as you think you need to increase your 
>chances suitably.)  

I'm pretty sure I *did* stretch my zig-zag!

What it the Picard maneuver?  It sounds like it would be something out of
Star Trek (which I don't get here on TV, and buying books is too expensive).

>(P.P.P.S. If you arrange your jumps the right way, you can arrange to
>have the dumb missle arrive AFTER your expanding light shell has
>passed him by.)  

I thought about that, then decided that it was 'cheating'.  Besides, the
gravity-wave pulse will still get there.
--
Timothy D Little   a.k.a.   u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Weapons systems?
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 00:09:26 GMT

In article <lg0h2tINNh7l@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes:
> 
>Is kinetic weapon.  As would be a big dump of water released 
>in a head-on orbit... 

You can have really big kinetic weapons, like asteroids with motors on
them, if you want to kill planets.  A little more efficient, perhaps,
than the gun on a Death Star.



And gentlemen in England now abed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speak
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.	   [Henry V, 4.3]
From: mhorning@zeus.calpoly.edu (Mark E. Horning (Captain Neutrino))
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Weapons systems?
Date: 13 Nov 92 12:32:35 GMT
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

pksuk@mothra.syr.EDU (Peter K. Suk) states
>----- sl25@cus.cam.ac.uk (Steve Linton) writes:
>
>>missile would have to survive thousands of Gs, so it probably won't contain 
>>any active components.
>
>
>On another note.  I still maintain that stealth will be the most
>important factor, once your theatre encompasses interplanetary
>distances.  Finding something like like an asteroid is very
>challenging, even if they're miles wide, and reflect sunlight.  What
>about something a few-dozen feet wide that doesn't reflect or emit
>hardly anything at all?  (At least in your direction.)  
>
>If such a device spent its time accelerating toward you, by the time
>it could be easily detected by starlight occlusion, it might be too
>late to stop the thing.  (A fraction of a percent of c should do the 
>trick.)  How would you protect, say, a permanent orbital installation 
>from such a missle?  (Assume it has homing capability.) 
>
>Any takers?
>
Same way you keep an F-15 from being shot down. Massive ECM.  With those
90 degree tailfins an F-15 has the radar signiture of most bombers, but
has enough Electronic countermeasures to knock out most incomming
missiles.
	Normal guns would be better for use against a permenent orbital
station. ( It can't doge) ;-)


Mark E. Horning, Physics 	A penny saved is a congressional oversite.	
mhorning@pan.calpoly.edu	Don't steal, the IRS hates competition.
The meek can _have_ the Earth, the rest of us are going to the stars.(Heinlein)
		*** H. Ross Perot in '96 ***
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: chisnall@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz (The Technicolour Throw-up)
Subject: Re: Teleporting Things into Other Things (was Re: Star Wars)
Organization: Computer Science,University of Canterbury,New Zealand
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 07:34:15 GMT

From article <BCR.92Nov5140738@hpl3sn02.cern.ch>, by bcr@cernapo.cern.ch (Bill Riemers):
> In article <1992Nov02.112308.144136@zeus.calpoly.edu> mhorning@zeus.calpoly.edu (Mark E. Horning (Captain Neutrino)) writes:
> 
>>      Neutronuim, definately not. The energy density is to high.
>>  Neutronuim can not exist in a free state.
> 
> This I'll agree with.  However, purhaps something stable could be formed
> with an even higher density?  The real question is could we form a large
> stable system of quarks and gluons with transporter technowledgy?

What's the current status of "strange matter"?  Last I heard people believed
that there were good grounds for thinking that it was likely to be stable.
--
Just my two rubber ningis worth.
Name: Michael Chisnall  (chisnall@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz)
I'm not a .signature virus and nor do I play one on tv.
Will be .signature virus for food.
From: cs92mjd@cen.ex.ac.uk (M.J.Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Applications of time travel and teleports
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:03:04 GMT
	<BxFHoA.2Lx@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <V7A=qB-@engin.umich.edu>
Organization: Computer Unit. - University of Exeter. UK


Time travel would make breaking into buildings a breeze. Simply pop back a
few years to before the building was build, walk onto the area its going to be
and hop forward again. Obviously you'd have to be a bit careful to avoid ending
up in a wall or anything awkward. Of course, this assumes that for some reason
you can't just teleport in...

Mike.

--



"Ride and find where all the freedom has gone..."

Michael J. Davis          |   cs92mjd@ac.uk.ex.cen
Dept of Computer Science  |   cs92mjd@cen.ex.uk.ac
University of Exeter      |
UK                        |   #include<disclaimer.std>




   








-- 



"Ride and find where all the freedom has gone..."
From: dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Donald A Shaffer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Weapons systems?
Date: 13 Nov 92 18:25:23 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


  I don't know where this would fit, but did any of you read Ender's game.
The MD device might be nice against fleet formations.
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Weapons systems?
Date: 10 Nov 1992 23:23:09 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: concertina

In article <1992Nov10.165701.3496@linus.mitre.org> m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
>In article <6yPZTB9w165w@west.darkside.com> max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis) writes:
>}I've been thinking about combat in space, and am wondering if anyone has 
>}come up with any novel weapons/delivery systems.
>}
>}So far I have:
>}
>}    o laser beams
>}    o particle beams
>}    o kinetic weapons (shells)
>}
>}Anything else pop into mind?
>gravel.
 
Is kinetic weapon.  As would be a big dump of water released 
in a head-on orbit... 


















--
-------------------------------------------------------
| Some things are too important not to give away      |
| to everybody else and have none left for yourself.  |
-------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles)
Subject: Re: Teleporting Things into Other Things
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 22:29:04 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

In article <BxFHoA.2Lx@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> ajmiller@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Arkayn) writes:
>In <k1-=+v_@engin.umich.edu> ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:
>
>> Well, in one series, (I misremeber the author, but the series was about
>>a guy who is accidentally time-traveled to 13th-century Poland and fights
>>to Mongol Horde...) there was a bit of discussion about the effect of
>>time travel on manufacturing. Some of if can be applied to teleportation.
>Fabulous series. The Adventures of Conrad Stargard, by Leo Frankowski.
>First book: The Cross-Time Engineer.
>
>> For example, how much control of the teleportation do you have? Can you
>>teleport only a *portion* of an object? How sharp can you make the boundary?
[...]
>> Any ideas? Design-aheads? :->
>
>Where did you get this from?
>Sounds cool.

 Well, in one of the books (the third, I think (the series is interesting,
if somewhat improbable)) there's a discussion of how to make a sword if you
have time travel.
 Take a big chunk of diamond, the length of a sword. (Where do you get the
diamond? Why, you plant some carbon a few million years ago...) do some
fast timetravel/teleportation and you've go a sword-shaped slice of diamond
a few hundred atoms thick. Then, take a standard steel sword, split it in
half lengthwise the tt/teleport way, then clamp the diamond slice in the
middle. (All this is done in a vacuum, of course.) Keep the stuff pressed
togther under heat and pressure for about 300 years, so the diamond and
steel lattices interpenetrate a bit. Voila, a flexible sword with a diamond
edge. (In the story, the poor stranded fellow was not discovered until ten
years after he'd been there. So they went back and planted some stuff to
help him out when he first arrived, like the sword.)
 Now, surely, other people have ideas that these techniques could be
applied to?

 Sincerely,

 Ray Ingles
 ingles@engin.umich.edu

 "Icky icky icky icky fKANG zoop-boing n zowzyin..." -The Knights Who
So Recently Said "NEE!"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Timothy D Little)
Subject: Re: Star Wars
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 12:16:30 GMT

alien@acheron.amigans.gen.nz (Ross Smith) writes:

>>Obviously, the problem is needing to wait for the light to arrive from
>>the new target location.  [... irrelevant stuff ...]

>This is true *if* the target is fleeing directly away from the missile

Here, I'll even posit that the missile can jump any distance it likes in
zero time - and the target will still get away.  I just restrict the missile
from making any predictions, acting only on light from the target.
I'll make it a 2D problem for simplicity, and follow a very simple path, a
triangular zig-zag, jumping every 1 ms.  (Jump distance of 30 light-ms, or
9 000 km)

First few coordinates (x,y) in light-ms from missile's initial position :
0 to 1ms: (0,18),
to 2ms: (24,0),
to 3ms: (48,18),
to 4ms: (72,0),
...etc.

Now, all you need to do is specify the path of the missile, obeying the
conditions, such that it will intercept my target.
It should be easy enough  :-)

--
Timothy D Little   a.k.a.   u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jonathan M Lennox)
Subject: Re: Power for electric cars?
Reply-To: jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jonathan M Lennox)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 06:43:51 GMT

In article <ALANB.92Nov4153218@catalina.sdl.mdcbbs.com> alanb@sdl.mdcbbs.com (Alan Braggins) writes:
>And LA is one of the few cities where it is possible to build an
>internal combustion engine whose exhaust is cleaner then the ambient
>air (this month's Scientific American), [...]

Well, if this is the case, then how about a car for Los Angeles which
runs *entirely* on smog?  Sort of the automotive equivalent of a
Bussard Ramjet...and it has a *positive* environmental effect!

(I know, I know--the smog would have to be *much* worse for this to be
practical.  Still, it's a cute idea.)

Does anyone know how much (if any) energy could be theoretically
extracted from air pollution?  (I assume that there isn't much that
could be gotten from NOx, but incompletely-burned organics make up a
lot of the pollution, yes?)

--
Jonathan Lennox
jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: mhorning@zeus.calpoly.edu (Mark E. Horning (Captain Neutrino))
Subject: Re: Teleporting etc.
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 08:51:49 GMT

d2jonas@dtek.chalmers.se (Jonas Olsson) states
>I'd like to return to the original idea of teleporting things into things
>in order to destroy or severely damage an enemy ship:
>
>Let's assume that somebody (somehow) managed to produce larger portions
>of anti-matter (I hear they can only make a few atoms these days) and
>also has figured out a safe way of handling and storing it (The few atoms
>mentioned above only lasted for parts of a second).
>How about teleporting something like that into another craft!! Pretty neat!
>
	What are you talking about? CERN has kept positrons in their
lepton storage ring for over 7 YEARS. Not hard to handle using magnetic
fields in vacua.

	Also they  have the facilitys for producing a rather large 
(for a particle physicist anyway) number of antiprotons. 
The whole idea the got ahold of was to get a whole bunch of anytiprotons
and fire tem as a streem into a stream of protons. WHich
is how they beat fermilab to some of the discoveries in HEP.

Mark E. Horning, Physics 	A penny saved is a congressional oversite.	
mhorning@pan.calpoly.edu	Don't steal, the IRS hates competition.
The meek can _have_ the Earth, the rest of us are going to the stars.(Heinlein)
		*** H. Ross Perot in '96 ***
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: gwilliam@crc.ac.uk (Gary Williams x3294)
Subject: Re: Weapons systems?
Organization: MRC Human Genome Resource Centre
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 10:01:00 GMT


And don't forget Larry Niven's 'right-angle turn in space' that the
Brennan-monster pulled off when being chased by Pak scouts. 

He found a black hole (or was it a neutron star?) without an accretion
disk and did a close flyby of it, dropping some mass on the way (you'll
have to read the book to find out how to do this :-) so that when the
Pak scouts get to the black hole it is producing X-ray flares. 

Is this a radiation weapon or a mass weapon?


-- 
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: tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Weapons systems?
Date: 11 Nov 92 01:00:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: hrt213.9211110100.AA10026
Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB

On Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:19:37 GMT, dagibbs@quantum.on.ca (David Gibbs) said:

 D> - shells (or guns): all velocity imparted at launch 
 D> - dumb missiles: have some kind of engine, but no guidance
 D> - smart missiles: have engine and steering ability -- ie some form
 D>   of active guidance

    - mines: explosive proximity fused and/or emissions-activated smart
      missiles. 

-- Cerebus <tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
"Cruising through what looks like empty space; 1 sweep with radar, and
 suddenly there's thousands of missiles coming down your throat from
 *everywhere*..."
From: cs92mjd@cen.ex.ac.uk (M.J.Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Applications of time travel and teleports
Date: 11 Nov 92 12:29:51 GMT
	<BxICL4.H0C@cen.ex.ac.uk> <1992Nov10.170007.3638@linus.mitre.org>
Organization: Computer Unit. - University of Exeter. UK

In article <1992Nov10.170007.3638@linus.mitre.org> m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:

>   Select your inertial frame, of course.  Why not just stand a few yards west of
 >  the building and hop a second or so into the future?  Presto, it would have
 >  moved to your location.  (earth rotation)

Dang. Why didn't I think of that? How do you go north or south :-)?

Mikey D
--




"Ride and find where all the freedom has gone..."

Michael J. Davis          |   cs92mjd@ac.uk.ex.cen
Dept of Computer Science  |   cs92mjd@cen.ex.uk.ac
University of Exeter      |
UK                        |   #include<disclaimer.std>




   








-- 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Weapons systems?
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:51:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.201513.10032@utkux1.utk.edu> rdosser@UTKUX1.UTK.EDU (rdosser) writes:
}In article <1992Nov10.165701.3496@linus.mitre.org> m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
}>In article <6yPZTB9w165w@west.darkside.com> max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis) writes:
}>}I've been thinking about combat in space, and am wondering if anyone has 
}>}come up with any novel weapons/delivery systems.
}>}
}>}So far I have:
}>}
}>}    o laser beams
}>}    o particle beams
}>}    o kinetic weapons (shells)
}>}    o missiles
}>}    o torpedos (nuclear missiles)
}>}
}>}Anything else pop into mind?
}>
}>gravel.
}>
}To misquote a character from "Footfall":
}"Hell, marshmallows would be lethal at this speed."

yup.  And remember what they did in _Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ - they threw
rocks.  Anyway, I was thinking along some of the antisatellite work done
using gravel if you had a cheap booster (a preceived Soviet threat).  And sand
works well against precision optics.  You can't laser through a foggy lens.
And there is the minor detail that it is tough to STOP the gravel & sand...
From: dove@cats.ucsc.edu (Ray Rischpater)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Teleporting etc.
Date: 8 Nov 1992 15:24:45 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu


d2jonas@dtek.chalmers.se (Jonas Olsson) writes:

>I'd like to return to the original idea of teleporting things into things
>in order to destroy or severely damage an enemy ship:
>Let's assume that somebody (somehow) managed to produce larger portions
>of anti-matter (I hear they can only make a few atoms these days) and
>also has figured out a safe way of handling and storing it (The few atoms
>mentioned above only lasted for parts of a second).
>How about teleporting something like that into another craft!! Pretty neat!

I've thought about this on and off.
Most reasonable teleportation schemes require either mass-energy conversion
or large amounts of energy anyway.
Why bother keeping a/m around?  Instead, you could simply materialize the anti-
matter in the enemy object, drawing the energy to do so straight from your
power source.






-- 
--		Ray Rischpater			dove@cats.ucsc.edu
--		Cowell College, UCSC		(408) 459-8801
Water in a round glass is round, and in a square glass square.  People
			often forget that fact.