HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Nuclear explosion in space?
Date: 28 Jan 93 23:59:17 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

fretts@willee.enet.dec.com (Carole Fretts) writes:

>I'm not sure that this is the right forum for my question, but I need to
>ask this.  Has anyone else heard a news report that the U.S. is planning
>on detonating a nuclear device in space?  I heard it this weekend on
>a Boston morning radio news broadcast but cannot track it down for any
>further information.  What I caught was that a planned nuclear detonation
>in space was being postponed for a few months to make sure that no
>satellites are damaged in the explosion.

No doubt what you heard was a garbled version of the recent dust-up
over the U.S. military (forget what branch) planning to orbit a Topaz
nuclear REACTOR, which they bought from the Russians not too long ago.
Not a bomb.  Also, don't think of the Topaz as a reactor in the utility
power plant sense, because it's not at all like that (I have this funny
mental image of boosting a building-size maze of concrete and ductwork
into orbit).

Astronomers are pissed off because the Topaz is not particularly shielded
and the stray radiation from the reactor will screw up the Compton Gamma
Ray Observatory, the ROSAT x-ray satellite, and probably a bunch of other
things I've forgotten.  The Topaz was planned to go into low Earth orbit
which would really mess those satellites up; they are now talking about
putting it into higher orbit as a concession to the astronomers (and, I
hope, as a concession to people who don't want it to fall on their heads -
remember Cosmos nnn, that sprayed across Canada?)  There have been at
least two articles in recent issues of the New York Times about this.

In my highly personal opinion, the whole Topaz test is unnecessary, as the
military is being very coy about what they want - I have a feeling this
is related to SDI, The Program That Just Won't Die.  They really haven't
given any good reason for putting another piece of radioactive crap in
space other than "testing."  There is an element of playing with the new
toy they got at a going-out-of-business sale to the whole affair.  Maybe
I'll write my Congresspersons to bitch.
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern)
Subject: Re: "Modeling" the Expanding Universe? 
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 07:24:22 GMT


alex@csn.org (ALEX MATTHEWS) writes:

> Picture, if you will, an infinite loaf of invisible bread studded with
> brightly glowing raisins in a cosmic microwave oven....  :-)

     That has to be an award-winning analogy.  -|Tom|-

-- 
Tom Van Flandern / Washington, DC / metares@well.sf.ca.us
Meta Research was founded to foster research into ideas not otherwise
supported because they conflict with mainstream theories in Astronomy.
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: HUSFELD@usmv01.usm.uni-muenchen.de (Husfeld, Dirk)
Subject: Re: Planetary Ephemeris Routines?
Organization: University Observatory Munich, FRG 
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:17:23 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <1993Jan22.182648.7390@zia.aoc.nrao.edu> cflatter@nrao.edu writes:

> In article 1729@ryn.mro4.dec.com, randolph@est.enet.dec.com (Tom Randolph) writes:
> >
> >In article <3190@tymix.Tymnet.COM>, kopfj@bert.Tymnet.COM (John Kopf, X6305) writes...
> >>I suspect that a FAQ describing common algorithms in ALGEBRA (rather than in a
> >>particular computer language) would be welcome by many...I really hate the common
> >>practice of displaying programs in BASIC, as it is most difficult to transcribe to
> >>some other language.
> >> 
> >>A discussion of "precision" would also be useful for those of us who are not
> >>numerical analysts.
> >> 
> >>JK
> >
> >This would quickly expand to occupy megabytes, which I imagine is why no one
> >ever posts it here. There's really no way to give it proper treatment without a
> >whole book's worth of formulae... hence the book references. "Astronomical
> >Algorithms" by Meeus is excellent.
> 
> Unfortunately his discussion of numerical precision is very outdated.  Almost
> anything you are likely to have on your desk these days will maintain much
> better precision than Meeus would lead you to believe (most machines will
> only lose one bit of precision in subtraction no matter how close the numbers
> being subtracted for example).
> 
> 	Chris Flatters
> 	cflatter@nrao.edu
>
From: bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Modelling the expanding universe?
Date: 23 Jan 93 22:25:20 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

One of my sentences trailed off into nothingness in my previous post,
here's the correction:

I wrote:

>I was, rather, trying to say that Newtonian gravitational collapse
>and a "contracting universe" were two sides of the same coin.
>Consider two points separated by a small amount in the early universe ..
>                        --------------
>                --------              --------
>  early  *------                              -----_____  galaxy forms
>         *------                              -----
>                --------              --------
>                        --------------
>    time ----->

>The lines represent geodesics followed by the particles.  I hope
>this shows 

the similarity of the expansion (due to the Hubble flow) to the
contraction, which we usually describe in terms of Newtonian gravity.
One says the spacetime in between is expanding, when they're following
geodesics which take them apart; so in some sense it is appropriate
to say that the intervening spacetime is contracting as they come
together.  However, angular momentum and internal pressure do act
to prevent the solar system/galaxy from contracting to a point.
From: Mike.Ditto@p0.f240.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Mike Ditto)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Refurbishing Observatory...surprise !!
Date: 21 Jan 93 00:17:00 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:104/240.0 - PASI, Golden CO

In a message to All <01-20-93 12:21> Jamie Fitzpatrick wrote:

> Hello. I have a few questions and I hope someone can help. I've just
> recently discovered that our school had/has an observatory in the

Great!!  I LOVE old observatories!
> was inscribed..." Alvin Clark & Sons    1877     Cambridgeport Mass."
> Does anyone know who this was ? I've removed all the brass an found

Oh my gosh!!  You have just named the PREMIER telescope maker in the latter 
half of the nineteenth century.  He was famous for making what is now the 
largest refractor in the world, the 40" at Yerkes Observatory.  I work for 
Chamberlin Observatory, where we have a 20" Clark.  PLEASE, oh PLEASE make 
sure that you know how to clean old telescope optics!!  Just a scratch would 
ruin a great piece of history!!  If you would like a PROFESSIONAL cleaning, 
please feel free to send the optics to me PROTECTED AND INSURED to the 
Denver Museum of Natural History, Gates Planetarium.  2001 Colorado Blvd. 
Denver, CO 80205.  The staff astronomers and opticians would DIE to be able 
to help you out on this wonderful project!

Jamie!  Please netmail me at mike.ditto@f104.n240.z1.fidonet.org.  Thanks!!


                                        Mike Ditto  
 
--  
Mike Ditto - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Mike.Ditto@p0.f240.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: martin@space.ualberta.ca (Martin Connors)
Subject: Re: Our Moon's Rotation
Reply-To: martin@space.ualberta.ca (Martin Connors)
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:58:00 GMT

In article <1jhaldINNicf@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> tjt@Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Tim  
Thompson) writes:
>    The Earth's moon is locked by tidal forces, applied over zillions of  
years,
> the result being that one side now always faces the Earth. Very standard  
orbital
> physics. I am quite sure there are other moons in the same fix, but I  
can't
> name any right off the top of my head.
>                                              Tim T.

I thought I was one up on you, about to post that Phobos is also  
rotationally locked, but then I checked the table in Hartmann's 'Moons and  
Planets, 2ed' and got woken up. Tidal locking is much more common than I  
thought!...
Planetary natural satellites with Revolution=Rotation
Earth: Moon
Mars:  Phobos, Deimos
Jupiter: 1979J3 (.29,.30 days), 1979J1 (.294, .29 days), J5 Amalthea,
         1979J2, Io, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto
Saturn:  Mimas, Enceladus, Tethys, Dione (2.737, 2.74),
         Rhea (4.518, 4.52), Titan (15.94, 15.9?), Iapetus

In cases where the two numbers were not exactly the same they are given as  
(revolution period,rotation period).
There are likely more cases, as Uranus and Neptune systems had a lot of ?  
in this 1983 edition which are likely now known. Also it is fairly certain  
that Pluto's moon Charon is locked.
--
Martin Connors         |
Space Research         | martin@space.ualberta.ca  (403) 492-2526
University of Alberta  |
From: hathaway@stsci.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: HST sites
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:33:00 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute

In article <1jvcesINNki1@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>, ko_mike@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu 
(Michael Y Ko) writes:

 > I know there are three main sites that receive and control information from 
 > the Hubble Space Telescope. I think they're JPL, Goddard, and Space
 > Telescope Institute in Baltimore.
 > 
 > Can anyone tell me what the function is of the Space Telescope Institute?

Bill Gawne and Ben Zellner both described some of the functions of the 
Space Telescope Science Institute, but lest net-readers think those were 
the _only_ things we'all do in Babylon on the Stony Run, let me add another. 

(To re-cap, Bill G. mentioned science data analysis center for HST science 
data, support for the Guest Observers, and software development.  Ben Z. 
added that we review the engineering data as well as the science data for 
help in science analysis as well as for monitoring the behavior of the 
instruments, and mentioned the occasional real-time commanding.)  

Well, as part of that support for the Observers, we here also make the 
observing schedules for each week, specifying what instruments are to 
look in which observing mode at which celestial targets, subject to 
target visibility (Earth, Moon, and Sun restrictions), radiation impact 
(South Atlantic Anomoly), instrument warm-up and usage times, any time 
or phase criticality of the target (periodic variables, moving targets, 
..) and in my case this morning, TDRS contact availability and data volume 
limits.  There are very many vital steps from proposal submission to 
receipt of the data done here, and while I can't list them all, this 
weekly schedule is an indispensable one.  Each week is scheduled several 
weeks in advance, with the calendar for six weeks in the future being 
started in earnest this week.  

Other divisions here could probably fill pages with their functions, 
(the Educational and Public Affairs office has oodles of lovely info 
for the truly curious) so this note is by no means complete. 

In the vein of telemetry downlink, it was interesting to hear of 
the Deep Space Network / JPL backup.  Now _that_ would add another 
interesting twist to the scheduling.   As if we didn't have enough 
to worrry about.  But we'd be glad to have it if needed. 

Wm. Hathaway - Science Planning and Scheduling System 
               Science Operations Ground System 
               Space Telescope Science Institute 
               Balto MD 21218
From: elliottb@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: cosmology/galaxy textbook
Date: 20 Jan 93 13:52:03 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

Have you looked at the cosmological distance ladder by M. Rowan-Robinson
Pub. freeman and Co., 1985 ?
From: higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Tycho Biography (was Re: Tycho Apocrypha)
Date: 21 Jan 93 11:27:09 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
NNTP-Posting-Host: fnalf.fnal.gov

In article <1jlm17INNs34@gap.caltech.edu>, jafoust@cco.caltech.edu (Jeffrey Alan Foust) writes:
> I would add "eccentric" to the above description of Tycho Brahe.  Here are
> some brief excerpts from "The Mechanical Universe: Mechanics and Heat, 
> Advanced Edition" 

There is a biography called *Lord of Uraniborg* that's gotten good
reviews, haven't read it,  can't recall the author... let's fool with
the computer here...

        QB36.B8 T49 1990
        Thoren, Victor E.
        The Lord of Uraniborg : a biography of Tycho Brahe / Victor
                 E. Thoren ; with contributions by John R.
Christianson.
        Cambridge [England] ; New York : Cambridge University Press,
                 1990.
 
One of these days I'll get around to reading it.

> Jeff Foust                        Senior, Geophysics/Planetary Science, Caltech
> jafoust@cco.caltech.edu   			   	 jeff@scn1.jpl.nasa.gov
>  	  Final score of the Interstellar Space		Deep Space 9
> 	  Station Championship Softball Game:		Babylon    5

Jeff, I really like this signature...

Kepler: "Did you know that Tycho,  | Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey
my boss, had an artificial nose?"  | Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory  
Galileo: "An artificial nose!      | Bitnet:           HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET  
How did he smell?"                 | Internet:       HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV  
Kepler: "Terrible!"                | SPAN/Hepnet:           43011::HIGGINS  
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Alec Habig)
Subject: Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE
Organization: Indiana University Astrophysics, Bloomington, IN
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 06:25:02 GMT


kill file time....
From: hhtra@usho21.hou281.chevron.com (T.M.Haddock)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Venus or Mercury - Which is HOTTER?
Date: 26 Jan 93 18:34:22 GMT
Organization: Chevron


 My 2nd grader comes home and tells us what she has learned that day. 
 Yesterday it was:

      Even though Mercury is closer to the Sun, Venus is hotter.


 That's not right... is it? 

 Any sources I can consult for a definitive answer?


 Thanks.

 TRAVIS
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: mfraser@wimsey.bc.ca (Mark Fraser)
Subject: Wanted: C8 Tripod, Wedge
Organization: Wimsey Information Services
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 06:41:01 GMT

I have an older orange C8 (with some fascinating, but irrelevant history)
but no tripod, wedge, or bracket to attach to the C8.

Who has what out there?

Thanks
Mark Fraser
mfraser@wimsey.bc.ca

Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern)
Subject: Re: Asteroidal Satellites
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:03:17 GMT


Earlier, I wrote:

>> satellites inside the synchronous orbit decay so rapidly (about 10,000
>> years) that we are quite unlikely to catch that happening.

and clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke) replied:

> Synchronous with respect to what?  Asteroidal rotation?  Asteroidal
> revolution about sun?

     Asteroid rotation.  If a prograde satellite is at the synchronous
orbit, it stays over the same spot on its parent asteroid, since its
orbital period is the same as the parent's spin period.  Tidal forces are
zero, so that orbit is highly stable.  Inside the synchronous orbit, the
satellite moves faster than the parent spins, so tidal forces drag on it
and tend to bring it down.  Outside the synchronous orbit the satellite
moves more slowly, tidal forces tend to accelerate it, and it evolves
toward escape.  In small bodies the time scale for tidal evolution is
short.  -|Tom|-

-- 
Tom Van Flandern / Washington, DC / metares@well.sf.ca.us
Meta Research was founded to foster research into ideas not otherwise
supported because they conflict with mainstream theories in Astronomy.
From: palmer@cco.caltech.edu (David M. Palmer)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Nukes in space?
Date: 28 Jan 93 00:02:28 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: alumni.caltech.edu

dpalmer@csulb.edu (David Palmer) writes:


>fretts@willee.enet.dec.com (Carole Fretts) writes:

>>I'm not sure that this is the right forum for my question, but I need to
>>ask this.  Has anyone else heard a news report that the U.S. is planning
>>on detonating a nuclear device in space?  I heard it this weekend on
>>a Boston morning radio news broadcast but cannot track it down for any
>>further information.  What I caught was that a planned nuclear detonation
>>in space was being postponed for a few months to make sure that no
>>satellites are damaged in the explosion.


>YIKES!!! Let's HOPE she heard this wrong. A nuclear explosion in space
...
>Haven't heard a peep about this anywhere else, so I think it just may be
>another one of those cases where scientifically-illiterate reporters
>tried to report on something beyond their comprehension. But THAT'S
>flamage for another forum...
>-- 
>              Dave Palmer             dpalmer@csulb.edu

There is a plan to orbit a Russian nuclear REACTOR.  This can cause trouble
for satellites because the charged particle radiation is trapped in the
Earth's magnetic field (so the inverse square law provides little
protection.)

It can also severely screw up measurements of natural radiation,
such as those made by the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory (the second
of NASAs 'Great Observatories', which is currently producing very
exciting results.)


BTW, I am not the same David Palmer as the person who posted the message
this is a reply to.


-- 
		David M. Palmer		palmer@alumni.caltech.edu
					palmer@tgrs.gsfc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke)
Subject: Re: Asteroidal Satellites
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 13:29:25 GMT

In article <C1CH8C.JwE@well.sf.ca.us> metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern)  
writes:
> 
> LABBEY@GITVM1.BITNET (Leonard Abbey, F.R.A.S.) writes:
> 
> > Tom, what are the stats on binary asteroids?  10%?  5%?
>  
> > Can we determine if any of them are in "low" orbit.....pre-contact cases?
> 
>      No, because observations generally catch them at only one instant, so
> we cannot determine their orbits.  And satellites inside the synchronous
> orbit decay so rapidly (about 10,000 years) that we are quite unlikely to
> catch that happening.

Synchronous with respect to what?  Asteroidal rotation?  Asteroidal
revolution about sun?  
--
Thomas Clarke
Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central FL
12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826
(407)658-5030, FAX: (407)658-5059, clarke@acme.ucf.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: alex@doris.par.univie.ac.at (Alexander Celic - Student)
Subject: A "picture" of a black hole
Organization: University of Vienna
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:06:59 GMT

Hi there!

A few days ago I've heard that somebody has taken a "picture" of a
black hole. In fact it was a picture of some asteroids getting sucked in
something that could be a black hole.

Can somebody tell me anything more about it, or was it just a joke?
If it wasn't a joke, where can I get those picture(s) ?

Thanks, Alex.
From: bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: research grade vs. commercial grade
Date: 23 Jan 93 22:31:49 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

LABBEY@GITVM1.BITNET writes:

>Besides, astronomers don't do "research".  They observe.  "Research"
>implies the ability to change the conditions of the experiment.

I object to this - astronomers don't do *experiments*.  Observation
is research.  Theoretical calculations are research.  Historians do
research, for that matter.

>Leonard Abbey, F.R.A.S.
>Georgia Tech Research Institute
              ^^^^^^^^ !!
From: newberry@delphinus.as.arizona.edu (Mike Newberry)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: astronomers vs researchers (was: Re: research vs commercial grade)
Date: 27 Jan 93 22:08:08 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

>In article <93025.192111LABBEY@GITVM1.BITNET> <LABBEY@GITVM1.BITNET> writes:
>The unfortunate fact is that the word "research" is only used (in astronomy)
>by the purveyors of inexpensive telescopes.

	[there's a long thread to this in which the author originally
	stated that "astronomers don't do research; instead, they observe"]


You misunderstand the distinction between the words "research" and
"observation".  Astronomers, like meteoroligists, geologists, ecologists,
anthropologists, and workers in some other disciplines depend upon
"observation" as part of their research activities. This is no basis for
suggesting that astronomers don't do research.

Mike Newberry
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle)
Subject: Re: Refurbishing Observatory...SURPRISE !!
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: 22 Jan 93 21:02:45 GMT

randolph@est.enet.dec.com (Tom Randolph) writes:


>In article <1993Jan20.020718.14371@adx.adelphi.edu>, jf4527@adx.adelphi.edu (Jamie Fitzpatrick) writes...
>>it was something special. It had all brass fittings. On the front
>>was inscribed..." Alvin Clark & Sons    1877     Cambridgeport Mass."

>WOW.

>Ever hear of the Yerkes 40" refractor? Largest refracting telescope in the
>world... and another Alvan Clarke & Sons instrument. Nice find! Clarke also
>made the telescope (18" refractor, if I recall correctly) that discovered the
>companion of Sirius.

Not forgetting of course the 26" Clark at the U.S. Naval Observatory in
Washington, DC used by Asaph Hall more than 100 years ago to discover 
Phobos and Deimos the [still only] two known moons of Mars.

>Your Criterion is equivalent to the late Baush & Lomb Schimdt-Cassegrains. B&L
>bought them out a few years back, and has since discontinued the line. If you
>ask around at some of the big astro dealers, you can proabably still get
>accessories for it.

I think that Pauli's (a.k.a. Wholesale Optics) in Danbury, CT (203-746-3579)
cornered the market on the old B&L telescope stock.  Did some business with
them in 1991 prior to the eclipse and they seemed to be THE dealer when it
came to Bausch & Lomb.  I'm not sure about their Criterion line though.
The Dynamax series preceded the B&L 4000, 6000, and 8000 (4", 6" and 8")
lines.

Personally, I'd sell the Dynamax and use the money toward restoring the
Clark.

Curt Roelle

Opinions expressed are personal.  No endorsements intended.
From: Adrian.Fortuzi@seco.unine.ch
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: info
Date: 28 Jan 93 14:39:30 MET
Organization: University of Neuchatel, Switzerland

jrjr3jrl;wejep34jrlqwkddt
ewlw

Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: chris@chrism.demon.co.uk (Chris Marriott)
Subject: Re: Availability of "Explanatory Supplement" 
Distribution: world
Organization: None
Reply-To: chris@chrism.demon.co.uk
X-Mailer: Simple NEWS 1.90 (ka9q DIS 1.19)
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:58:34 +0000

In article <1993Jan25.175758.26359@ryn.mro4.dec.com> randolph@est.enet.dec.com writes:

>
>In article <727701137snz@chrism.demon.co.uk>, chris@chrism.demon.co.uk (Chris
> Marriott) writes...
>>Does anyone know if the long-awaited new edition of the "Explanatory
>>Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac" has been published yet?
>
>Yes, but strangely, it's not a Naval Obs. publication. You can get it from:
>University Science Books
>20 Edgehill Road
>Mill Valley CA 94941
>FAX: (415) 383 3167
>for $65 + $2.50 postage. BIG book, about 750 pages, hardbound. 
>-Tom R.   randolph@est.enet.dec.com
>

I'd like to thank everyone who responded to me by e-mail over my query.
I've now ordered a copy from Willman-Bell and am eagerly awaiting
delivery!

Best wishes,

Chris
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Chris Marriott                           | chris@chrism.demon.co.uk    |
| Warrington, UK                           | BIX: cmarriott              |
|                                          | CIX: cmarriott              |
| Save the whales.  Collect the whole set. | CompuServe: 100113,1140     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------