HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gbc@med.unc.edu (Geoff Crooks)
Subject: Re: TransAtlantiCon
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 04:18:17 GMT

In article <3447@creatures.cs.vt.edu> apdent@actor.realtime.cs.vt.edu (Tripp Lilley) writes:
>So... now that Glasgow's official in '95, how'd people feel about a pre-con
>con: TransAtlantiCon... a cruise from some East-Coast US port to England/
>Scotland/wherever with the traditional trappings of a con?  If so, I'd 
>suppose that now would be a good time to start organizing it, and if 
>people think it a keen idea, I will.
>
> - Tripp Lilley
>-- 
> USES disclaim;                                                      |^^\/^^| 2
> Tripp Lilley   -- APDENT@actor.realtime.cs.vt.edu                   | |\/| |
> The MultiMedia Lab of the Colleges of Architecture and Engineering  |_|  |_|
> Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University         (silly ASCII logo)

Sounds like a wonderful idea to me!  I also happen to work as a travel
agent and would be more than happy to see about arranging for a "deal" ...
Usually, with large groups, for every 10 paying passengers you can get
someone along for free... ie Guest of Honors, organizers, etc.  If there
is enough interest I will check out what's available (though it is a bit
early for '95 right now), cost, etc.

Geoff.

Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons,rec.sf.fandom
From: kfl@access.digex.com (Keith F. Lynch)
Subject: 1995 Worldcon
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 04:39:03 GMT

Glasgow has won the 1995 Worldcon, "Intersection", 24-28 August.
Guests of honor will be Samuel R. Delany and Gerry Anderson.
The addresses are:
Theresa Renner, Box 15430, Washington DC 20003, USA
Bernie Evans, 121 Cape Hill, Smethwick, Warley, West Midlands B66 4SH, UK

Atlanta will host the 1995 NASFiC.
From: Laurie Mann
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: Re: TransAtlantiCon
Date: 15 Sep 92 11:59:41 GMT
Reply-To: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com

D. 'krikket' Krick writes
>In article <6298@transfer.stratus.com>, Laurie Mann writes:
>>For those of us flying over early, if someone wants to
>>organize a relaxacon somewhere in Great Britain, France, or
>>Germany a two weeks before Glasgow, I'd love to go!
>Sounds damned good...  I'll be there for the RelaxiCon as well as the  
WorldCon!
> (But let's make it only 1 week in advance...  Many of us in the US will onl  
be
>able to afford so much time off, etc...)

The problem with making it just the weekend before is that
it makes it impossible for most people actually working on the
Worldcon to attend it.  For both Noreascon 3 and MagiCon, I worked
at least part of the weekend prior to the con, and I know a few
people who worked constantly on that weekend.

Any input from people who plan to work on/attend Intersection out
there??  Is a relaxacon even feisable, or is everything already booked
with summer travelers?  (Imagine this---a whole lot of fen renting
a castle or summer house out in the country...hmmm, this could
be way cool...)

*  NeXT: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com * GEnie:  Laurie.Mann  *
**** Vote to can George and Dan! **  Vote for CHANGE in 1992!****
**********    Member of the cultural elite and PROUD!  **********
From: krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us (D. 'krikket' Krick)
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: Re: TransAtlantiCon
Date: 14 Sep 92 10:25:47 GMT
Organization: The Meltdown - A Team Star BBS

In article <6298@transfer.stratus.com>, Laurie Mann writes:
>>In article <3447@creatures.cs.vt.edu> apdent@actor.realtime.cs.vt.edu (Tripp 

>Lilley) writes:
>>>So... now that Glasgow's official in '95, how'd people feel about a pre-con
>>>con: TransAtlantiCon... a cruise from some East-Coast US port to England/
>>>Scotland/wherever with the traditional trappings of a con?  
>
>This sounds like a neat idea, but I know we're going to fly.
>For those of us flying over early, if someone wants to
>organize a relaxacon somewhere in Great Britain, France, or
>Germany a two weeks before Glasgow, I'd love to go!

Sounds damned good...  I'll be there for the RelaxiCon as well as the WorldCon!
 (But let's make it only 1 week in advance...  Many of us in the US will onl be
able to afford so much time off, etc...)

+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
|Krikket              | krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us | I'll *LEGALLY* ordain   !
|a.k.a Doug Krick     | Team Star Charter Member   | anyone, no questions    !
|Data # 708/665-9732  | #include<std.disclaimers>  | asked for just $5!      !
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| From the makers of "IBM Made Easy" is "Cray-2 Simulations On your VIC-20"  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: Laurie Mann
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: Re: TransAtlantiCon
Date: 11 Sep 92 12:25:45 GMT
Reply-To: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com

>In article <3447@creatures.cs.vt.edu> apdent@actor.realtime.cs.vt.edu (Tripp  
Lilley) writes:
>>So... now that Glasgow's official in '95, how'd people feel about a pre-con
>>con: TransAtlantiCon... a cruise from some East-Coast US port to England/
>>Scotland/wherever with the traditional trappings of a con?  

This sounds like a neat idea, but I know we're going to fly.
For those of us flying over early, if someone wants to
organize a relaxacon somewhere in Great Britain, France, or
Germany a two weeks before Glasgow, I'd love to go!

*  NeXT: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com * GEnie:  Laurie.Mann  *
**** Vote to can George and Dan! **  Vote for CHANGE in 1992!****
**********    Member of the cultural elite and PROUD!  **********
From: plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: Lunar/Mars Rover Missions
Date: 9 Sep 1992 20:10:27 GMT
Organization: Brown University Planetary Geology
NNTP-Posting-Host: pilsner.geo.brown.edu

In article <9SEP199214273331@vx.cis.umn.edu> soc1070                          writes:
>Over the last few months, I have seen alot of attention being given
>to Mars and Mars manned & unmanned missions in the early part of the
>next century....

   And don't forget Mars Observer, which is scheduled for launch on the
25th of this month.

>Through all this, I have heard little mention of concuring lunar missions.

   Currently, two missions are being planned (but haven't been funded
yet) for lunar exploration later this decade.  They're collectively
called Lunar Scout, and I'm fairly sure a rover is not planned for
either mission.  However, the information collected by these missions
can certainly be used for planning future surface missions.
--
Joel Plutchak, Research Programmer/Analyst
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: Lunar/Mars Rover Missions
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 220-0636
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 08:13:32 GMT

I agree that we should do a lunar rover before, or at least in
parallel with, doing a Mars rover.  There is in fact a proposal under
the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) called Artemis, that would land
small (300 kg) landers on the Moon which in turn would release
c. 100 kg rovers to run around and sample.  Each mission is slated
to launch on a Delta 2 and cost $200-300 million.  There are no current
plans for sample return, but that could be added with some extra
cost.  The most powerful pro-space lobby, NSS, has endorsed the
SEI and this mission; if the planetary science community endorsed
Artemis it would give a significant boost to deep space exploration
technology as well as being a political victory all around the table.

One of the big problems is political: SEI is not coming out of JPL, but
on the other hand NASA has been starving JPL projects, especially the
planetary projects. In turn, JPL has shown a lack of interest in coordinating 
with projects such as SEI on missions.  This has got to stop!  Artemis is a 
close cousin to MESUR and Mars Sample Return, and they should share technology 
to save costs and increase mission effectiveness.  Ditto for lunar orbiters 
and Mars orbiters.  Given the further fact that SEI has Mars missions as 
its major goal, it is completely ridiculous for this schism to 
continue.  JPL needs to give up its claim of monopoly on planetary
exploration, and NASA needs to start funding planetary exploration again.  
Stop the turf battles and get on with these projects!


-- 
szabo@techbook.COM  	  Tuesday, November third  ##  Libertarian  $$  vote
Tuesday  ^^ Libertarian  --  change  **  choice && November 3rd @@Libertarian 
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
From: soc1070                         
Subject: lunar missions
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Minnesota CIS
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:41:00 GMT

One other benefit of operating parallel lunar/mars missions is that
taxpayers get immediate gratification. The time required to get to
the moon makes it easier for the public to see the fruits of the
mission, while a bolder mission is quietly on its way to mars.

The other thing is that people can IDENTIFY with the moon much
easier that any other planet in the system (except earth). You can
see it and visualize it as a planet - a place to go, where the 
other planets, to the untrained eye, appear as just other stars.

I believe that this is one of the reasons of the success of the 
Apollo missions.

Basically, I believe that if you include the moon as a part of a
larger mission (and not seperate missions), it would be easier
to capture the imagination of the public.

Tim Harincar			"Always listen to experts.			
Central Minnesota 		They'll tell you what can't
Association of Rocketry		be done and why. Then do it."
soc1070@vx.acs.umn.edu			-Lazarus Long
From: simons@tuntu.think.com (Joshua Simons)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
Subject: digital orrery
Date: 11 Sep 92 13:38:20
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Distribution: alt
NNTP-Posting-Host: tuntu.think.com


I'm interested in a detailed digital orrery. I don't care if the orrery is
simulating the physics of the solar system or not, but I would like all of
the following to be correct:

	1. positions and orbits of all planets.
	2. positions of all known planetary satellites with respect to
	   their planet and each other. orbits, too.
	3. correct inclinations for all planets and satellites.

Does anyone know if something like this already exists? If not, does
anyone have any idea how one would go about gathering all of these
data?

Thanks for any information.

-josh simons

--
simons@think.com
thinking machines corporation
245 first street					tel: 617.234.2844
cambridge, ma  02142-1214				fax: 617.234.4444
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
From: fsrsg@acad3.alaska.edu (Richard S. Guse)
Subject: Interplanetary Spacecraft?
Organization: Psi INc.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:57:40 GMT

I was speaking with a friend as of late, and we were wondering about the
positions/summed up discoveries/etc. of all the interplanetary spacecraft sent
out, and where they are now.  I know quite a bit about the voyagers, and the
recent Magellan, but after that, information is scarce around here.  Would
anyone have a condensed list of the type I'm looking for? Our library up here
is drastically out of date on the matter...much thanks for your help...-Scott
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
From: frazier@kona.cs.ucla.edu (Gregory Frazier)
Subject: Re: Lunar/Mars Rover Missions
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 22:36:15 GMT

soc1070 wrote:
: 
: Through all this, I have heard little mention of concuring lunar missions.
: Would'nt it make sence to to try a rover out on the moon before sending
: one all the way to Mars? Reasons being as follows:

Well, how about testing it out on Earth?  And if it passes the
Earth test, why test it on the Moon?

--
"They thought to use and shame me but I win out by nature, because a true
freak cannot be made.  A true freak must be born." - Geek Love

Greg Frazier	frazier@CS.UCLA.EDU	!{ucbvax,rutgers}!ucla-cs!frazier
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary,sci.physics,sci.geo.geology,sci.geo.meteorology,sci.astro
From: gerry@bluemoon.rn.com (Gerard M. Foley)
Subject: Re: Charter for alt.sci.planetary
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 08:00:39 EDT

How do newsgroups "not tolerate" certain kinds of comment?

gerry@bluemoon.rn whose home bbs has trouble getting the 
mail out sometimes, so it may go here instead.
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
From: shoham@ll.mit.edu (Daniel Shoham)
Subject: Terrain Elevation Distribution
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 00:12:10 GMT

Hi everybody.

I am not familiar with Earth Sciences very much, so this posting may be naive.

I am looking for a statistical model for the distribution and correlation of
terrain elevation.

Looking at  digitized elevation data of some (small number of) sites that were
far from the sea, and not TOO mountainous, I made the following observations:

1. Elevation follows a Gaussian distribution
2. The auto-correlation function is exponential [ c(x)=exp(-|x|/cleangth) ]
3. The correlation length (clength) is direction-dependent. A contour of the
   correlation lengths (or any equ-level contour of the auto-correlation func.)
   is well approximated by an ellipse.

None of the above approximations was universally excellent, but each was
preaty good for most sites (sometimes the approximations were REALLY good).

Knowing nothing of the relevent sciences, but being of a mathematics background,
I made the following "hand-waving" arguments for each of the observations:

1. Gaussian elevation would form if each terrain patch was formed by many
   successive depositions (or pushing from below) acting in an additive fashion.
2. Exponential auto-correlation function would form if the elevation at any
   point is directly correlated ONLY with its neighboring points (Markovian)
3. If the terrain was isotropic (no preferred direction) and homogenous (no
   preferred positions), the correlation lengths contour would be a circle.
   If we remove the isotropic requirement (as there IS a preferred direction)
   but keep the homogenous requirement - in effect stretching the terrain
   along the preferred direction - the correlation contour would become an
   ellipse.


Well, I am sure none of the above is of any news to the experts in the field.
In fact, I would not be surprised if some of what I said is simply wrong.
I would very much thank anyone who would like to point out the state-of-the-art
in terrain elevation statistical models.

- Well, thanks in advance.

Dan Shoham
shoham@ll.mit.edu
From: tes@nomad.uucp (Thomas E. Smith [LORAL])
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Landsat Images??
Date: 11 Sep 1992 22:06:47 GMT
Organization: Software Technology Branch - NASA/Johnson Space Center

I was wondering if anyone out there knows where I can find Landsat images
of all (or most of) Earth. If anyone knows I'd appreciate an e-mail note.

                                                       Thanks,
                                                         Tom
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary,sci.physics,sci.geo.geology,sci.geo.meteorology,sci.astro
From: soc1070                         
Subject: Lunar/Mars Rover Missions
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Minnesota CIS
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 19:27:00 GMT

Hello everyone!

I was glad to see this new group. I have an interest in planetary science
and exploration, and it was nice to see a splinter group dedicated to
that particular aspect.

Over the last few months, I have seen alot of attention being given
to Mars and Mars manned & unmanned missions in the early part of the
next century. One of the unmanned types being a rover with possible sample
return.

Through all this, I have heard little mention of concuring lunar missions.
Would'nt it make sence to to try a rover out on the moon before sending
one all the way to Mars? Reasons being as follows:

1. The rover itself could be tested on similar terrain while gathering
useful data.

2. Minimize risk of a long space flight and entry into an atmosphere while
at the same time working the bugs out of the vehicle in launch and landing
phases. 

3. The time frame is much shorter. A rover can get to the moon and testing
begun in a fraction of the time required to go all the way to mars.


Tim Harincar			"Always listen to experts.			
Central Minnesota 		They'll tell you what can't
Association of Rocketry		be done and why. Then do it."
soc1070@vx.acs.umn.edu			-Lazarus Long
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary,sci.physics,sci.geo.geology,sci.geo.meteorology,sci.astro
From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject: ARGHHHHH!!!Re: Charter for alt.sci.planetary
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 15:47:43 GMT


Don't you hate trying to get things done on a VMS machine!?!?

I received mail from Dr. Steer and my reply to him bounced. I am posting it
in hopes that he'll read it and attempt to get his mailer fixed.  Sorry
for the multiple postings but VAXes will be VAXes.


>
>From postmaster@ACC.FAU.EDU Wed Sep  9 09:05:24 1992
>Received: from acc.fau.edu by spot.Colorado.EDU with SMTP id AA27419
>  (5.65c+/IDA-1.4.4/CNS-2.1 for <knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU>); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 09:05:22 -0600
>Received: from ACC.FAU.EDU by ACC.FAU.EDU (PMDF #12250) id
> <01GOKTY096C08WW5Z9@ACC.FAU.EDU>; Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:03 EST
>Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:03 EST
>From: PMDF Mail Server <postmaster@ACC.FAU.EDU>
>Subject: Undeliverable mail: local delivery failure
>To: postmaster@ACC.FAU.EDU, knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU
>Message-Id: <01GOKTY096C08WW5Z9@ACC.FAU.EDU>
>Status: OR
>
>The message could not be delivered to:
>
>Addressee: steer%sea11
>Reason: 
>  %MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node SEA11
>  -SYSTEM-F-NOSUCHNODE, remote node is unknown
>
>----------------------------------------
>
>Received: from spot.Colorado.EDU by ACC.FAU.EDU (PMDF #12250) id
> <01GOKTX3KK4G8WW6RO@ACC.FAU.EDU>; Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:02 EST
>Received: by spot.Colorado.EDU id AA27047 (5.65c+/IDA-1.4.4/CNS-2.1 for
> steer%sea11@acc.fau.edu); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 09:02:13 -0600
>Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 9:02:13 MDT
>From: David Knapp <knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU>
>Subject: Re: Charter for alt.sci.planetary
>In-reply-to: <9209091451.AA02342@sea11.oe.fau.edu>; from "Barry Steer" at Sep
> 9, 92 10:51 am
>To: steer%sea11@ACC.FAU.EDU (Barry Steer)
>Message-id: <199209091502.AA27047@spot.Colorado.EDU>
>X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
>
>*> 
>*> 
>*> Greetings,
>*> 	Could we form a sub-group called
>*> 
>*>  alt.eng(ineering).planet who
>*> 
>*> wish to discuss planetary engineering issues.
>*> 
>*> Barry Steer. M.Sc., Ph.D.
>*> 
>
>
>Yes, that's possible. It is advised to discuss it on the net first, though
>to gauge interest etc.
>
>If you need more details, feel free to write.
>
>
>
>-- 
>David Knapp                                      University of Colorado, Boulder
>Perpetual Student                                   knapp@spot.colorado.edu


-- 
David Knapp                                      University of Colorado, Boulder
Perpetual Student                                   knapp@spot.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Re: Lunar/Mars Rover Missions
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:44:59 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.081332.16953@techbook.com>, szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes...
>One of the big problems is political: SEI is not coming out of JPL, but
>on the other hand NASA has been starving JPL projects, especially the
>planetary projects. 

Unmanned missions have always had to battle to get funding, and it not
something isolated specifically to JPL.  I could see it appearing that way 
since JPL is so heavily involved with the planetary missions.

>In turn, JPL has shown a lack of interest in coordinating 
>with projects such as SEI on missions.  

This is not true.  A Lunar Scout project office has been set up at JPL to
coordinate activities with Johnson Space Center.

>This has got to stop!  Artemis is a 
>close cousin to MESUR and Mars Sample Return, and they should share technology 
>to save costs and increase mission effectiveness.  Ditto for lunar orbiters 
>and Mars orbiters.  Given the further fact that SEI has Mars missions as 
>its major goal, it is completely ridiculous for this schism to 
>continue.  

What you are seeing is the adoption of the "smaller, faster, and cheaper"
concept which has evolved only recently over the last 2 or 3 years.
Because of this, there is a proliferation of new proposed missions following
this recent standard.  There is MESUR and the Pluto Fast Flyby from JPL, 
Lunar Scout and Artemis from SEI, and NEAR from John Hopkins.  The orbiter 
series  (Mars Observer and Lunar Observer) and the Mariner Mark II series 
(CRAF/Cassini, Pluto flyby, and Neptune orbiters) were proposed before the 
current trend and unfortunately do not fit in guidelines of the new concept.

>JPL needs to give up its claim of monopoly on planetary
>exploration, 

JPL's main charter is to manage all of the unmanned planetary missions as 
defined in the Memo of Understanding agreement with NASA.  But even so, JPL 
hasn't exactly had a monopoly on planetary exploration.  The Pioneer 10 & 11 
spacecraft were Ames missions, the Lunar Orbiters were done by Langley 
Research Center, and the Viking missions were also directed by Langley.

>and NASA needs to start funding planetary exploration again.  
>Stop the turf battles and get on with these projects!

NASA *is* trying to fund planetary exploration.  The problem
is getting Congress to start funding planetary exploration.
     ___    _____     ___ 
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Anything is impossible if
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you don't attempt it.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |
From: mehr@oskar.uchicago.edu (David Mehringer)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.astro.aips
Subject: is there a task ...
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:29:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics

Is there a task that takes the average of pixels (in a 2d box, say) 
and writes this quantity to a one pixel output image?  I have a cube.
I wuold like to calculate the mean in an RA-Dec box for each velocity
channel and have the output written to a 1 x 1 x n cube (where n is the
number of channels).
--
Dave Mehringer              | 
dmehring@smaug.aoc.nrao.edu |  "Resistance is futile." 
National Radio Astronomy    |     --Borg pickup line
Observatory, Socorro, NM    |
Newsgroups: alt.sci.astro.aips
From: khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM (Keith Bierman fpgroup)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.astro.aips
Subject: Re: Sparcstation 10 & AIPS 15APR92
Date: 10 Sep 92 21:50:18 GMT
Organization: Sun MegaSystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: chiba
In-reply-to: pmurphy@nrao.edu's message of Thu, 10 Sep 1992 13:23:53 GMT


It should be noted that SPARCstation 10's run SunOS 4.1.3 just fine.

Also, an intermediate step taken by many software providers (e.g.
Frame) is to follow the necessary rules (use shared system libs and
etc.) and to employ BCP mode under Solaris 2.0. This is not always as
trivial as one might hope (sometimes people relied on things outside
the ABI ;>) but it is often much easier than the native port.

Your local Sun Sales office should be able to provide you with the
right whitepapers, PIPELINE tool and other goodies.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Keith H. Bierman    keith.bierman@Sun.COM| khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM
SunPro 2550 Garcia MTV 12-33             | (415 336 2648) fax 964 0946
Mountain View, CA 94043  <speaking for myself, not Sun*> Copyright 1992
Newsgroups: alt.sci.astro.aips