HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Merpeople
Date: 26 Aug 92 23:42:50 GMT
Reply-To: swf@tdat.teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <1992Aug21.102052.22406@aston.ac.uk> evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans) writes:
|: |: bjgaed@bb1t.monsanto.com writes:
|: |: 
|: |: I don't believe this is the case. there are well documented instances
|: |: of smaller, mammal-like dinosaurs that appear to have come relatively
|: |: far along the intelligence ladder before getting squashed.
|: ....
|: Now, I would still quible with 'mammal-like', the dinosaurs with the highest
|: encephalization quotient were rather more *bird*-like than mammal-like.
|: (Actually that goes for all dinosaurs, but that that is irrelevant here).
|: 
|: Of course birds are endothermic also.
|
|That would keep the bio-physists happy,
|I think the mammal-like originaly refered to the marine types, which resembled
|cetatarns in form.

You mean the Ichthyosaurs?  They were not dinosaurs, they were their own
group, quite distinct from all other reptilian groups.

Besides, from the original context (above) I think that he was talking about
Troodontids or Deinonychids, which where advanced, specialized carnivorous
dinosaurs, some of which had binocular vision, and an encephalization
quotient at the lower edge of the avian range.  In fact one genus of
Troodontid is often considered to have been a nocturnal mammal hunter.

[But then since the troodont/deinonychosaur lineage is the one most often
cited as containing the immediate predecessors of the birds, this is
more or less what one would expect, and leaves them far more bird-like
than any other dinosaurs].
-- 
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: Laser weapons
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 10:58:20 GMT

In <FRANCIS.92Sep3154408@galois.dogwood.atl.ga.us> francis@dogwood.atl.ga.us (John Stracke) writes:

>In article <1992Sep3.184558.4898@spss.com> markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder) writes:

>>Guns with bullets seem to be pretty energy-efficient, but they're not
>>very futuristic, are they?  Can anyone think of anything that's likely
>>to replace them?

>Needlers and other gauss-type weapons.

Problem is the power source; by the time you've got the electromagnetic
launcher, the huge capacitor bank, and the massive quantity of batteries
to recharge the capacitors, you'll wish you'd just brought an AK-47
instead. Rail guns might be useful on warships where there is already a
power source and weight isn't so much of an issue.

>Possibly sonics (anybody know feasibility here?).

Not very; it's the same as lasers, you simply can't get enough power
output. Also there's no way to keep the sound in a tight beam. (Though
one weapon I did use in an sf scenario was a sonic stunner that was like
a directional version of the stun grenades used by anti-terrorist teams;
it produces a very intense blast of sound that will shock anyone within
a few metres in a 60 degree arc into immobility. Not a general-purpose
weapon, but a nice touch I thought.)

>Rocket-propelled projectiles (a la GyroJet) could be fun, especially
>if they carried tiny autopilots to make them veer around.

Main problem with rocket-propelled projectiles is that they will be very
much slower than bullets. You could use a small explosive warhead, but
experience with tanks has shown that composite armor can defeat
shaped-charge warheads much easier than it can defeat high-velocity
solid slugs; this might scale down to personal armor.

--
"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem"
Russell Wallace, Trinity College, Dublin
rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: hillyard@msc.cornell.edu
Subject: Re: Niven's teleportation & 2nd law of thermodynamics (was: Superconductors + the 2
Originator: hillyard@tiger.msc.cornell.edu
Reply-To: hillyard@msc.cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:38:48 GMT

From article <FRANCIS.92Sep3094741@galois.dogwood.atl.ga.us>, by francis@dogwood.atl.ga.us (John Stracke):
> In article <1992Sep2.204731.4669@msc.cornell.edu> hillyard@msc.cornell.edu writes:
[..]
>>It is less fundemental in the sense that it is a statistical law.  Entropy
>>can go down in a system--its just unlikely.
> 
> Make that *extremely* unlikely.  Sufficiently unlikely that it
> probably has not occurred more than a handful of times in the history
> of the Universe to date.

Sure, for reasonably sized systems the fluctuations become infinitesimal
quickly.  But isn't one of the hypothesis for the creation of the universe
a fluctuation in a formally homogeneous system?  A pretty significant event
in the handful. :)

SEH
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: Ringworlds
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 15:38:44 GMT


In article <1992Aug28.114139.3270@nwnexus.WA.COM> elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg) writes:
>In article <15250@suns6.crosfield.co.uk>
>     jc@crosfield.co.uk (jerry cullingford) writes:
>
>>Benefits [of a ringworld]? _Lots_ of living space, and cheaper than a
>>dyson sphere.
>
>   Actually, I always thought that the major benefit of a Ringworld
>when compared to a Dyson Sphere Classic (see Dyson's original works to
>see what a true Dyson Sphere is) is that a Dyson Sphere requires a sort
>of technology that we presently find incomprehensible (i.e. artificial
>gravity) to make the interior surface livable.

	So live on the exterior of the sphere, where there is a 
small attraction towards the primary, or hang habitats  off solar
sails hovering  on light pressure above  the  primary. Neither
requires artificial gravity. I am not sure how  AG  would help,
in the case of a hollow sphere's inner surface, as  the problem  
results from geometric concerns, not lack-of-mass.

	Orbitsville  was  pretty silly on this point, as I recall.

							James Nicoll
From: slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Glen Anthony Graham)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Niven's blunders (was:Superconductors + the 2nd law)
Date: 31 Aug 92 23:04:19 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <8_ty6z#@rpi.edu> kasprj@rpi.edu writes:
> We Made It already has a headstart on this... their cities are already
>underground. A few hundred meters of rock makes nice shielding, and if
>that's not enough, you can line the walls with lead, or GP hull material.
>Vacuum colonies like the asteroids and the Ends of Jinx can also use this
>without much of a shakeup in the infrastructure.
>
>Also note that the GP hull was custom designed to be transparent to the
>puppeteers' customer races. Once you know the basic method of construction,
>it shouldn't be hard to design a version that's opaque only to harmful
>radiation. Or opaque to everything, if you want that. Or a one-way mirror.
>The possibilities are endless...
> 
> There's one factor you're forgetting, probably the one that will ultimately
>save Known Space: humanity's genetic luck. They'll discover something in the
>next twenty thousand years to avert the crisis, whether it be a cheap and 
>reliable radiation shield, a better hyperdrive, an easy way to move entire 
>solar systems, or something we can't even guess at now. A trillion Teelas 
>are too lucky to fall victim to some silly little accident like an exploding
>galaxy. (-:

Um... if I recall correctly (and it has been a couple of years since I've read
all the Niven books...), wasn't the "radiation" from the core explosion in the
form of nutrinos or something like that?  Nutrinos have a nasty habit of being
able to pass through planets and rocks without slowing down, so underground
cities would not help at all.  

Also, the GP hull was not impervious to whatever radiation the galactic 
explosion was hurling at Known Space, but the Ringworld just happened to be
completely impervious to this radiation.
 
As for leakage, with the core being some 20,000 lightyears away, that makes for
an awfully small (apparant) source of radiation, so if the ring is aligned   
along the radiation path, the opposite side would not really receive any 
radiation.  I believe there was something mentioned about some leakage around
the very edges of the Ringworld, but remember that you are dealing with a 
lifing area that is 1 million miles wide.  No, I think that there would be
no real problem of radiation on the Ringworld.  Neither did the Puppeteers  
which is why they introduced the superconducting virus on the Ringworld- to
destroy it's current civilization and make room for the Puppeteers themselves.
 
Glen Graham.
slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: lsj@kloker.quark.lu.se (Sverker Johansson)
Subject: Re: Niven's blunders (was:Superconductors + the 2nd law)
Organization: none
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 11:27:17 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.235032.5416@rigel.econ.uga.edu> hughes@dogwood.botany.uga.edu (Wayne Hughes) writes:
>In article <78796@ut-emx.uucp> slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Glen Anthony Graham) writes:
>>
>>Um... if I recall correctly (and it has been a couple of years since I've read
>>all the Niven books...), wasn't the "radiation" from the core explosion in the
>>form of nutrinos or something like that?  Nutrinos have a nasty habit of being
>>able to pass through planets and rocks without slowing down, so underground
>>cities would not help at all.  
>>
>   Neutrinos are not considered damaging radiation.

In reasonable amounts they're not, but if the sun went supernova,
it is likely that the neutrino flux would kill us.  (Plenty of
other lethal stuff around, of course, but the neutrinos would get
here first.)  Dunno the neutrino flux from the core, but it
might well be unhealthy.


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: gapdrr@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Daniel R T Rothman)
Subject: Re: Donaldson's _Gap Cycle_: does this add up?
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:44:23 GMT

CAVEAT: I have not read these books, and make some assumptions below.

pepke@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke) writes:

>In article <1992Aug26.191013.9965@news2.cis.umn.edu> alberti@mudhoney.micro.umn.edu (Albatross) writes:
>>My second question is simpler:  in several places in the novels ships
>>accelerate to significant portions of c.  They do so with levels of
>>acceleration which approach human tolerances for durations of between four and
>>about ten hours.  I suppose based on these descriptions one might expect
>>these accelerations to be between 3 and 8 G (?)

>From my high school physics class, I seem to remember that relativistic 
>momentum is p = gamma m0 v, where gamma is 1/(sqrt(1 - (v^2/c^2))), m0 is the 
>rest mass, v is the velocity, and c is the speed of light.  The total delta v 
>you need starting from relative rest is gamma v.  Using the MKS system, to get 
>to v = 50% of c, you need a delta v of about 1.7e8 m/s.  G is about 10 m/s^2.  
>Assume the thrust is 10G, that's 100 m/s^2.  To get this amount of delta v 
>you would need to run the engines for 1.7e6 seconds, or about 20 days.
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ten G's for 20 days is fatal. period. On the other hand, running the
acceleration at 1G (or more probably, 1.3 or so G..) for 100 days, with
a period of 8-10G acceleration for 4 hours every 3 days gives you about
the same numbers. and you don't die.
From: swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Dinosauers and Dragons, (mostly dinos)
Date: 26 Aug 92 17:41:15 GMT
Reply-To: swf@tdat.teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <NICKH.92Aug20141547@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU> nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes:
|
|- it seems extremely likely now that the Yucatan impact was
|responsible for the mass extinction. The exact effects of this ("fried
|much of the vegetation in the Americas and between the ash from the
|fires and the dust kicked up by the meteorite, gave the Earth a night
|that lasted at least 3 years") is based on our best models of that
|kind of event, and seems very likely to be true.

Actually I would word this more as that the impact was a 'major contributing
factor to the mass extinction'.  There are several reasons to doubt it was
the sole cause. (In particular the existance of large Tertiary impact
craters without even a minor blip in the extinction record, and the fact
that the Deccan Traps flood basalt also dates from exactly the K-T boundary).

Also, there is some reason to doubt the extreme form of the 'nuclear winter'
models.  It is not really clear that the 'three-year night' was a reality.
[The impact almost certainly was, and it almost certainly happened in what
is now Yucatan].

But the explosion was indeed immense.  Assuming the Yucatan location, the
shock wave flattened vegetation at least 2000 miles away (the Canadian
border).  And the tsunami ripped up coastal vegetation in Japan.
This makes the explosion so immense that it makes the largest H-bomb
ever exploded look like a fire cracker.  Awesome man!

And yet, Dr. Sloan makes an excellent case that dinosaurs may have survived
as much as 100,000 years *after* this impact, even in the zone of major
impact damage, the American Midwest.  (Dr. Sloan's results are controversial,
but I have yet to see a truly convincing refutation).

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
From: dillard@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Alex Dillard)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: a private little flamewar
Summary: Columbus didn't prove the earth was round
Date: 23 Aug 92 22:52:31 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <92Aug21.200847.14168@acs.ucalgary.ca> iwsbarke@acs.ucalgary.ca (I W Scott Barker) writes:
>
>To hold out hope is never absurd. Until Columbus showed otherwise, the vast 
>majority of people, both experts and laymen alike, believed the world was flat.
>Obviously, it is possible that experts and majorities *can* be mistaken.
>
  Although this has little to do with the current flamewar, I feel it is 
necessary to point out that Columbus didn't prove the world was round. He was
rather a dunce, in fact.  The ancient greeks had figured out the world was 
spherical by looking at shadows at different lattitudes and noting that they 
varied dependent on the sine of the lattitude (or was it cosine, I forget)
anyway. Columbus did his own calculations of the _size_ of the earth and got
it _wrong_ by quite a bit.  He managed to convince Isebella that he was right
and got _damn_lucky_ that there was another 'undiscovered' (by Europeans, 
anyhow) landmass between Spain and the _real_ Indians.  Basically, Columbus
was a lucky fool, who really deserved to be killed by mutineers or starvation
on the high seas.  However, science is full of lucky fools, but the polite 
term for it is 'serendipity'.

-- 
 \ _
 - o  We were once so close to Heaven, Peter came out and gave us medals,
  ^   declaring us the nicest of the Damned. - They Might Be Giants
        Alex  dillard@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: advax@reg.triumf.ca (A.Daviel)
Subject: Re: Ringworlds
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: TRIUMF: Tri-University Meson Facility
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 02:28:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.114139.3270@nwnexus.WA.COM>, elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg) writes...
>In article <15250@suns6.crosfield.co.uk>
>     jc@crosfield.co.uk (jerry cullingford) writes:
> 
>>Benefits [of a ringworld]? _Lots_ of living space, and cheaper than a
>>dyson sphere.
> 
>   Actually, I always thought that the major benefit of a Ringworld
>when compared to a Dyson Sphere Classic (see Dyson's original works to
>see what a true Dyson Sphere is) is that a Dyson Sphere requires a sort
>of technology that we presently find incomprehensible (i.e. artificial
>gravity) to make the interior surface livable.
> 

In one of Niven's collections he writes about various ways of making Dyson 
spheres, etc. I seem to remember that a real Dyson sphere isn't necessarily a 
sphere at all; just a collection of hardware in various orbits that 
collectively intercept 100% of the stellar radiation. So a large collection 
of orbiting habitats would qualify. Niven talks about a spaghetti habitat - 
actually, more like uncut macaroni - where people live on the inside of 
incredibly long tubes which spin to provide artificial gravity. I forget what 
stabilizes the tubes in solar orbit. He also proposes a discworld, where the 
habitat consists of a thing like a gramophone record with a hole in the 
middle. The star oscillates from side to side through the hole (I think it is 
less massive than the disc. Due to the oscillation, this motion is stable. 
Gravity is normal to the disc on both sides, due to the mass of the disc. 

Andrew
From: mcline@terapin.com (Matthew Cline)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:46:20 GMT
Organization: BBS


        Well, it sounds like an interesting idea, but I doubt that something
like that could ever work.  For this parasite to propagate, the change in the
genome would have to make the hosts want to mess with other species genomes. 
To do this, the concept of a genome and the idea of messing with it (among
other things) would have to be encoded, and as far as is known, its impossible
to genetical encoded an idea or concept.

Matthew Cline
mcline@terapin.com
From: rat@erg.sri.com (Ray Trent)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Niven's blunders (was:Superconductors + the 2nd law)
Date: 1 Sep 92 20:39:54 GMT
Reply-To: rat@erg.sri.com (Ray Trent)
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA

In the referenced article, bcr@cernapo.cern.ch (Bill Riemers) writes:
>[neutrinos aren't dangerous]
>>  If the flux is high enough, they are.
>
>I need to see some detailed calculations to swollow that one.  My god you have
>to have a large enough flux to produce fission in a large fraction of your
>ship and body mass...  Any sort of resonable distance from the star and the
>inverse square law will save you.  Even in the heart of the star only a small
>percentage of the total mass undergoes interactions.  (And this is very hot,
>dense, and unstable matter.)  This hardly sounds like the description of
>any sort of ship I want to be in.

Last I heard, current theory is that the gravitational collapse in a
supernova converts some 30-40% of the star's mass directly into
neutrinos during the first few milliseconds.

Has this estimate changed?

That's a hell of a lot of energy. What's the interaction probability
of a neutrino with a human body (or planet, for that matter)?

-- 
"When you're down, it's a long way up
 When you're up, it's a long way down
 It's all the same thing
 And it's no new tale to tell"                      ../ray\..
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.sf.written
From: elwin@gamma.phys.clemson.edu (Lawrence E. Brown)
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Reply-To: elwin@gamma.phys.clemson.edu (Lawrence E. Brown)
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:31:29 GMT


In article <1992Sep3.031844.21399@news.eng.convex.com>, cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:
In article <ABL.92Sep2141929@cybill.inesc.pt> abl@cybill.inesc.pt (Antonio Leal) writes:
>kelso_j@cs.uwa.oz.au (J Kyle Kelso) writes:
>> [SF story idea]
>>  I'd especially like to hear where else it occurs in SF literature.

>>       The idea is this: all life forms in the galaxy have their genetic code
>> "infected" by a kind of genetic parasite.  It's life cycle goes like:

>David Zindell wrote a book called Neverness (publ. 1988), where the
>"junk DNA" (i.e. apparently useless code) is a main point of the plot.
>I think your approach is completely different from his.

-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...

If you find this idea intriguing, you should try _Blood Music_
by Greg Bear.  He takes exactly this idea and runs with it.  I
can't say more without large spoilers.





--
Larry Brown                        "Philip K. Dick is dead, alas
elwin@gamma.phys.clemson.edu        Let's all queue up to kick God's ass"
Dept. of Physics and Astronomy      --Michael Bishop in _The Secret Ascension_
Clemson University
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Laser weapons
From: news@massey.ac.nz (USENET News System)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:25:09 GMT
Organization: School of Maths and Info Sciences, Massey University, NZ.

... Stuff deleted...

>explosion to pump it (See "Footfall") People say one can stop visible light
>lasers by 'polish'/mirroring the armor- but lasers require special mirrors
>deisgned for that wavelength (99.x%) to use in the first place.  Such mirrored
>armour may reduce damage, but not stop entirily.  Still heating will take place.
>Better than nothing I guess.  Higher energy sources (gamma) will 'punch'
>through armour better (with the effect of spreading/spray!), but laser will
>concentrate energy to 'burn' through.
In Dan Simmons Fall of Hyperion the battle armour used was camoflaging, as 
well as self tuning to frequencies hitting it - they still took damage 
during the period of adjustment, so the built in cooling stuff came into 
effect

>Nuf for now.

Byeee...
Brenden