HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ppalmer@oskar.uchicago.edu (Patrick Palmer)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.bio,sci.chem,sci.geo.fluids,sci.math,sci.physics,sci.research,sci.geo.meteorology
Subject: Re: Basic research in peril at NSF: Update
Date: 30 Sep 92 17:52:11 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics

In article <1992Sep29.101249.17256@meteor.wisc.edu> stvjas@meteor.wisc.edu (Stephen Jascourt) writes:
>UPDATE   UPDATE   UPDATE   ---29 September 1992---    UPDATE   UPDATE   UPDATE
>
>***   BASIC  RESEARCH  IN  PERIL  at the  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION (NSF)  ***
>
>The Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF), Walter Massey, has
>expressed clear intent to redirect the NSF away from its mission in basic
>research toward a new mission to "accept a major role in fostering links
>between research and technology" to foster product development and assist
>industry. As a result of his efforts, Congress passed a report with language
>similar to the original Senate report appearing below (at the bottom). This
>was attached to a large VA/HUD/IA appropriations bill, consequently receiving
>very little attention, and was not publicized. 
>
  (much important info deleted)

If you are hoping for some relief when the House and Senate bills are
reconciled, you should read the guest editorial by Rep. George Brown
(the chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology) in the
September issue of American Journal of Physics. He has consistently
been one of our good friends.  It is difficult to try to summarize
such a clear argument, so I will just paraphrase some conclusions.  He
argues that the societal benefits of science have largely been
illusory (rather, serving as bridges from one problem to the next),
that scientists need to acquire a greater objectivity about science.
that science does not exist in a vacuum and must consider the larger
goals of society such as justice and the deficit, and that scientists
must use this objectivity to work out with policy makers a new system
for planning expenditures on basic research.  If such a thoughtful,
knowledgeable friend is making such arguments, what can we expect from
the rest?

Pat Palmer (email: ppalmer@oskar.uchicago.edu)
From: frank@hsr.no (Frank A Stevenson)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Observing Venus in daylight
Date: 6 Oct 92 09:21:57 GMT
Organization: Rogaland University Centre


	Venus now as a solar elongation of more than 30 degrees, and a visual
magnitude of app. -3.3. I have been trying to observe Venus in broad daylight
with 12x50 binoculars and after sunset. I live 59 degrees north and Venus has an
altitude of only 3.9 degrees at sunset, and sets 30 minutes after the Sun. I
think that conditions are unfavourable for observing after sunset.

	I would like to hear from people who have observed Venus in daylight
under similar conditions in order to find out what I am doing wrong. Have I
simply overlooked Venus or is the apperature to small. Any help would be
appreciated.

-- 
\\     Frank Andrew Stevenson
 \\ // Rogaland University Centre
  \X/  Norway (frank@hsr.no) <><
From: newberry@astro.as.arizona.edu (Mike Newberry)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Help.Analemma question???
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:14:03 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

In article <1992Sep29.124748.244252@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> f004@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu writes:
>I am looking for the answer to a basic question regarding the analemma.
>If you look at a picture of the analemma you notice that the top part of
>the figure eight is smaller than the bottom part. This top part represents
>when the sun reaches its highest point in this part of the sky during the
>summertime. However, summertime is the longest season lasting 94 days. Why
>isn't this shown in the analemma as a larger part of the figure eight??
>Please try to keep explanation basic (I am probably overlooking something,
>anyhow) this is for high school astronomy students.
>Thanks... Bill

It's a little too involved to go the gory into here, but you can understand
the analemma using the following basic concepts:

1) the earth's orbit is elliptical with the sun at one focus
2) the earth travels faster around perihelion and slowest around aphelion.
   The first two points state Kepler's first two laws of planetary motion.
3) The rotation rate of the earth on it's axis is constant (for all intents
   and purposes) over all parts of its elliptical orbit.
4) The mean solar day is the average time required for the earth to rotate
   once on its axis *relative to the Sun*. Hence the earth travels a shorter
   distance ruring one solar day near aphelion than during one solar day
   near perihelion.
   
   The first 4 facts will cause the position of the Sun in the sky (the
   "solar clock") to vary around its daily average value (for example,
   the position of the Sun at noon according to solar time clocks will
   wobble from east to west of the meridian during the course of the year).`
   Now add another fact:

5) The time of perihelion IS NOT synchronized with the time of the winter
   solstice (January 17(?) vs. December 21, respectively).

The addition of item 5 is what really defines the shape of the analemma.
Make a drawing, indicating the times of aphelion, perihelion, and points
where the mean solar clock and the mean sun are synchronized. Then indicate
the length of orbit traveled in one solar day at aphelion and perihelion
and add the date of the solstice and perihelion.  The analemma will thus 
become clear.

Mike Newberry
Steward Observatory
newberry@astro.as.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: hathaway@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: Wealth in Space ... 
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:48:06 GMT

gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes: 

>In article <TOM.92Sep30113234@amber.ssd.csd.harris.com> tom@ssd.csd.harris.com (Tom Horsley) writes:
>>See, I have proven it is possible. Now there are just a few little piddling
>>details to work out :-).
> 
>Well golly Mr. Wizard, what's the hold up? :-)
>
>>+==== Censorship is the only form of Obscenity ======================+
>>|     (Wait, I forgot government tobacco subsidies...)               |
>>+====================================================================+
>
>You knew I wasn't going to let this pass. Tobacco, the one crop grown
>by US farmers where the producers receive NOT ONE DIME from the 
>government. Unlike soybeans, peanuts, cotton, sugar, corn, milk, etc,
>the government does not pay tobacco producers in order to bolster
>income. Instead, in the only farm program that works, the government
>issues permits to producers restricting the amount of crop they can
>market, thus assuring a good price *without* subsidy. 
>
>Gary


First I should probably post this response to rec.humour as it is a 
continuing :-) topic, but this is where I found the above.  
That being said, ... 

I've read of other crop grown "by US farmers where the producers receive 
NOT ONE DIME from the government."  Indeed the government _outlaws_ production 
of such "restricting the amount of crop they can market, thus assuring a(n) 
(astronomical) good price *without* subsidy."   Some states have been 
reported to receive the majority of their cash harvest from such.  And 
the death rate from its designed use is claimed to be _much_ less than 
from tobacco.   

Again, ->  :-) !!!  (I suppose I could add a pun about 'flames' and 
                    their applicability to these crops, but I'll leave 
                    that to others.)  

--------------- (you think I'd .sig this???) -------------------------
From: warren.taylor@f635.n713.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Warren Taylor)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Saturn Observations,
Date: 30 Sep 92 08:45:00 GMT
Organization: Fidonet. Gate admin is fido@socs.uts.edu.au

Original to: Youngs@Ccu.Umanitoba.Ca
YO>youngs@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Scott D. Young), via *IXgate 3:713/602


YO>   Regarding Saturn, is it just me or is the equatorial band a *lot*
YO>   easier to see lately?

I observe from a suburb of Sydney Australia, with a 25cm dob.
I thought it was me!  Yes over the last two weeks the band has been much
easier to see.  I hope someone knows why...
___
 X SLMR 2.0 X 

--- Maximus 2.01wb
 * Origin: Vulcan's World -Sydney Australia 02 635-1204 (3:713/635)
From: hotka@strife.dr.att.com (BL054626-HotkaMA(DR2143)253)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Curious about Coulter Mirror
Date: 2 Oct 92 18:32:03 GMT

I was curious about the observational quality of your mirror.  How are the views
thru the telescope using this mirror?  What do you like about the mirror?
what don't you like about the mirror?

I purchased a 12.5 inch f/8 Coulter mirror almost 30 yrs ago and love it.  I
would like to go bigger 17.5 in or 18 inch.  I have heard many opinions lately
that Coulter doesn't make quality mirrors anymore.  My 30 year old mirror has
quality, but what about today???

:-(

Mike
From: ecu@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: CCD photometry software
Date: 28 Sep 92 11:26:07 -0300
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Hello all:

	I'm looking for software which can be used to process CCD images
to determine BVRI photometry data.  The software should run on a PC or
a Mac.  It will be used as part of an Graduate level observational
astronomy course.  I already know of PC-Vista.

Thanks, Dave Lane, Dept of Astronomy, St. Mary's University


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
David Lane - Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada --- Email: ECU@ac.dal.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: hathaway@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: Atmospheric light scattering outcomey
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 03:30:41 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.174839.2375@sfu.ca>, palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer) writes:
  ... [description of recent observing session with students] ...

> 
> I conclude that it is valuable to hold sky sessions even when observing 
> conditions are not very good. If they are kept short there are plenty of 
> things to see. 
> 
> Leigh

I strongly second this conclusion.  Most nights are not perfect and 
avoiding all but the best will result in many, many lost opportunities 
which will never return.   I've even looked at a comet on full moon 
nights.  Sure it was washed out compared to what it would have been 
with no moon, but its appearance that night will never be repeated, 
so I probably saw things that others missed because they thought of 
the moon as a total wipeout. 

Except for the totally overcast times there always plenty of things to see. 

Perhaps this attitude comes from being trapped in such a light-polluted 
region.  - One game we played was determining ones bearing in the sky 
from the minimum number of stars visible.  Too often it was no more 
than the Summer Triangle.  ...  If it weren't for the 'scopes above 
the clouds we got here to look through it would be a lot tougher. 

---- cheers -- Wm. Hathaway ---- 
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer)
Subject: Re: Satellite of the Month
Organization: Simon Fraser University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:08:26 GMT

In article <28014@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
writes:

>UARS is roughly a sphere 4.6m in diameter and 9.8m long.

Part of it is revolving in a different dimension, I guess. :<)

Leigh
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: mccreary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Dave Devine)
Subject: Brochi's cluster (the coat hanger)
Summary: any information needed
Keywords: coat hanger, brochi
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:50:06 GMT

Any information on Brochi's cluster (the coat hanger) is appreciated.
RA = 19h 25m    
DEC = +20
thanks, and happy trails

devine@pprince.colorado.edu

-- 
Science, like Nature/ Must also be tamed/ With a view towards its preservation
Given the same/ State of integrity/ It will surely serve us well -- Neil Peart
Sean McCreary   University of Colorado at Boulder   mccreary@ucsu.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.astro.fits
From: dbriggs@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Daniel Briggs)
Subject: Re: FITS to GIF Image Conversion?
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 05:51:27 GMT

In article <193@neftis.CSS.GOV>
  stevem@neftis.CSS.GOV (Steve Masters) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.043951.13504@news.iastate.edu> F1.DAO@isumvs.iastate.edu (David Oesper) writes:
>>Is there a FITS to GIF conversion program available for the IBM or
>>Macintosh?
>
>The PBMPLUS suite of programs can get you from FITS to GIF.  I believe
>there is a port for the IBM-PC...perhaps others on the net can verify
>this.

Well, the FITS reader built into the PBM+ package is very primitive.  I
have a slightly enhanced version that I wrote for my own purposes.  In
particular, it handles floating point values for machines which use
IEEE-754, (I think that the 80x87 hardware uses this, so unless the byte
order is screwed up, it might work on a PC with hardware floating point.)
I added a prescan for scaling constants, in the absence of DATAMIN &
DATAMAX, forceable min and max, and cleaned up the scaling code, which was
incorrect for non-identity BZER & BSCALE.

I make no claim that this code is suitable for any purpose other than that
for which I wrote it.  Eventually I'll get around to sending it back to Jef,
but I wanted to see if routine use turned up any more problems.  However, if
anyone wants the code now, I'll send it to them.

-- 
| Daniel Briggs  (dbriggs@nrao.edu)                      |        USPA B-14993
| New Mexico Tech / National Radio Astronomy Observatory |            DoD #387
| P.O. Box O / Socorro, NM 87801   (505) 835-7391        |
Support the League for Programming Freedom  (info from league@prep.ai.mit.edu)
From: metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern)
Subject: Re: Progress with New Cosmologies (& discrete redshifts)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 05:27:02 GMT


Earlier, I wrote:

>> The following meeting report is reprinted from the Sept. 15, 1992 issue
>> of the Meta Research Bulletin, for which I serve as editor.

and fischer@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Phil Fischer) replied:

> How does one receive copies of this bulletin?

     The Meta Research Bulletin, issued quarterly, is currently distributed
free to contributors of $25 or more in any year to support the astronomy
research activities of Meta Research.  The organization is a tax-emempt,
non-profit, scientific research group based in Washington, DC.  A sample copy
of the Bulletin is available on request.  Address: P.O. Box 15186, Chevy
Chase, MD 20815.

     Article contents of the current issue:
     Recent Meetings: 13th Krakow Summer School of Cosmology
     New Object Found Beyond Pluto
     The Cyrillid Meteors
     A Followup to the Twins Paradox

     -|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: sfadden@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (Steve Fadden)
Subject: Books UPDATE:  Burnham's, Comets
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: SOLD! 
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 03:49:00 GMT

Well, the Burnham's Celestial Handbooks and Comets books seem to have been 
sold...I hope!  Thanks to all who responded. 

- Steve

...............................................................................
: Steve Fadden                                    sfadden@ucsvax.ucc.umass.edu :
: University of Massachusetts, Amherst                              Psychology :
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: p257shu@fs1.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Susanne Huettemeister)
Subject: Pulsar in SN 1987A ???????
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 16:00:07 GMT

There are some rumours circulating in our institute that a pulsar
* might * have been discovered in the remnant of the famous Supernova
1987A in the LMC.
Has anybody on the net heard anything about this? Might it be
true this time after several disappointments? Obviously, the
discoveres are very careful about announcing anything before 
being 101% sure...

Xref: sparky sci.astro:10465 sci.physics:16076
From: metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Progress with New Cosmologies (& discrete redshifts)
Date: 7 Oct 92 03:03:55 GMT
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link


fischer@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Phil Fischer) writes:

> How about a free sample issue [of the Meta Research Bulletin] to a
> cash-strapped Grad student?

     I'm happy to oblige, Phil.  Since your address was enclosed, I'll get it
in the mail this weekend.  For others who would like the same, drop me your
snail-mail address in an E-note.

     I'll be away the next few days, so I must ask those awaiting replies
from me in sci.astro, sci.physics, and E-mail to also wait for the weekend.
     -|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: j.jahn@abbs.hanse.de (Jost Jahn)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Sunspots at 27.09.1992.
Reply-To: j.jahn@abbs.hanse.de
Date: 27 Sep 92 11:59:00 MET
Distribution: sci
Organization: ABBS AstroMail, D-W 2121 Dahlenburg / Germany
X-Version: ZerUU V6.45c

Sunspots at 27.09.1992., 0 h UT.

No.    Pos.  Cl.  Ar.  Mag. SF  F  M  X
---------------------------------------
7283 16S 76W Hsx   50   a
7288 17S 61W Bxo   20   b
7289 09S 13W Cao  210   b
7291 09S 42W Bxo   10   b    1
7292 20N 21E Axx   10   a
7293 07S 25E Dao   80   b    1
7294 11S 44E Hhx  240   a
7295 13N 68E Hsx  100   a    6
7296 07N 68E Bxo   20   b


No optical or x-ray flares yesterday observed.


 
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABBS AstroMail, the first and most popular German astronomical bulletin board
------------------------- for amateur astronomers ----------------------------
    + 49 5851 7896 / V.21, V.22, V.22bis, V.32, V.42, V.42bis and MNP5
    ------------------------------------------------------------------
From: stefan@helios.physics.utoronto.ca (Stefan Mochnacki)
Subject: Re: magnetic breaking
Organization: University of Toronto Physics/Astronomy/CITA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 06:29:31 GMT

Stan Ryckman <sgr@alden.uucp> notes, regarding my
contribution:

> Uhh, I really hope that the sun is braking, and not breaking!  :-)

Oh boy, looks like my spelling at 2am has just won sci.astro's
first annual Dan Quayle Award...

But what the heck, the Sun is so tame it must be well broken in.


					Stefan Mochnacki


-- 
Stefan W. Mochnacki          INTERNET - stefan@centaur.astro.utoronto.ca
Astronomy, U. of Toronto     UUCP - {uunet,pyramid}!utai!helios.physics!stefan
Ph. (416) 884-9562           BITNET - mochnacki@utorphys.bitnet 
FAX (416) 884-2672	     LOCATION - David Dunlap Observatory
From: scw@cam-orl.co.uk (Stuart C Wray)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Shape of telescope mirror?
Date: 30 Sep 92 07:00:48 GMT
Organization: Olivetti Research Ltd, Cambridge, England.

In article <3244@ariel.its.unimelb.EDU.AU>, mjb@mulka.ph.unimelb.edu.au (Michael Beeching) writes:
|> 
|> In a number of sources that I have, it says that
|> you need to "...deepen the centre of the mirror" Now from all the
|> calculations that I have done, it seems clear that you need to grind
|> out the mirror more away from the centre! 

A spherical mirror has a range of focal lengths, long at the centre and
short at the edge. The purpose of parabolising a mirror is to make all
parts have the same focal length --- the question is which focal length?
You could flatten the edge of the mirror to increase its focal length and
make it the same as the centre, or you could deepen the centre to reduce
it's focal length and make it the same as the edge. Either way you could
end up with a paraboloid.

However, there's more glass to remove at the edge than at the centre, so
I guess that's why it's conventional to "...deepen the centre of the mirror".

Stuart Wray

E-mail:    scw@cam-orl.co.uk     |      Olivetti Research Limited,      
                                 |      24a Trumpington Street,  
Telephone: +44 223 343204        |      Cambridge CB2 1QA     
Fax:       +44 223 313542        |      ENGLAND
From: nair@quasar.astro.ufl.edu (Damo Nair)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Help with CCD buying
Date: 27 Sep 92 20:38:54 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Astronomy, University of Florida


  Hi,

    I'm sure this is an FAQ & many people have written hundreds
    of words about it, but I'm sorry I've missed all that.

    We are thinking buying a CCD for our Quasar monitoring program
    & any help with vendors & what to look for while buying one etc.
    will be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Damo Nair
Dept.of Astronomy
Univ.of Florida
nair@quasar.astro.ufl.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: thomaspj@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Orbital elements for Chiron and Pholus
Date: 29 Sep 92 14:11:07 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire


Does anyone have the orbital elements for 2060 Chiron and
5145 Pholus? I'd appreciate even being pointed in the
right direction for a source.

				--Paul J. Thomas
				  University of Wisconsin
				  Eau Claire, WI
From: j.jahn@abbs.hanse.de (Jost Jahn)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Sunspots at 30.09.1992.
Reply-To: j.jahn@abbs.hanse.de
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:54:00 MET
Distribution: sci
Organization: ABBS AstroMail, D-W 2121 Dahlenburg / Germany
X-Version: ZerUU V6.45c

Sunspots at 30.09.1992., 0 h UT.

No.    Pos.  Cl.  Ar.  Mag. SF  F  M  X
---------------------------------------
7289 10S 53W Cao  130   b
7293 07S 15W Eao  110   gd
7294 11S 04E Hsx  280   a
7295 14N 27E Cso  150   b
7296 06N 28E Dao  110   b
7298 16N 62E Bxo   20   b
7299 12N 75E Hrx   30   a


No optical or x-ray flares yesterday observed.


 
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABBS AstroMail, the first and most popular German astronomical bulletin board
------------------------- for amateur astronomers ----------------------------
    + 49 5851 7896 / V.21, V.22, V.22bis, V.32, V.42, V.42bis and MNP5
    ------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hayim@locus.com (Hayim Hendeles)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Progress with New Cosmologies (& discrete redshifts)
Date: 6 Oct 92 16:37:25 GMT
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California

>	...
>
>-- 
>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.


Nothing to do with anything, but I thought I would ask Tom:

A while ago, you wrote an article about the possible existence of
a 10th planet. If I recall correctly, your premise was 
based on the residuals of Neptune's orbit. To be more specific,
it seems impossible to reconcile 19th century observations
with 20th century observations of Neptune. 

However, in a recent article (in Time magazine), there was a statement
that recent studies (by someone in Canada) make it extremely unlikely
that there is a 10th planet - at least based on observed residuals.
I think the argument was based on the accuracy of 20th century
observations, along with the fact that no perturbations have been
detected in any of the spacecraft.

Therefore, I am curious, if you have seen this study and if
you agree with its conclusions.

Hayim Hendeles