HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kasprj@isaac.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak)
Subject: Re: Niven's blunders (was:Superconductors + the 2nd law)
Reply-To: kasprj@rpi.edu
Organization: The Big Wedge 
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 18:45:28 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.162711.10639@linus.mitre.org>, m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
|> In article <8-ty74#@rpi.edu> kasprj@rpi.edu writes:
|> }Another bad assumption: that the
|> }first close approach to a neutron star would be by a manned probe. GP hull 
|> }or no GP hull, it makes sense to send a few robotic probes first. Let _them_
|> }get ripped apart by the tide before risking any human lives.
|> 
|> I was under the impression that the first ship to zip past this particular
|> neutron star wasn't a GP hull.  Didn't the Brennan-Monster and his breeder
|> captive use it to do a "right turn in space"?  They waited OUTSIDE for the
|> transit (low tidal stress when the entire body is only a couple of meters
|> long).
 
 You know, it'd entirely slipped my mind that the neutron star used by 
Brennan was, in fact, the same one that turned up as BVS-1 in "Neutron 
Star". And here I am claiming to be a Known Space fanatic. (-:
 
 Still, I think this misses the point in two ways. First, since Brennan
and Truesdale never told humanity-at-large about the neutron star, the 
puppeteer-sponsored expedition may as well have been the first as far as
most of the sentient creatures in Known Space are concerned. Besides, they
came to the star out of necessity rather than as a scientific exploration.
 
 Second, they didn't come anywhere near as close to the neutron star as 
Shaeffer and his ill-fated predecessors did. Remember the inverse-square
law - if they were a hundred times further away, the gravitational effects
were only one ten-thousandth as strong. 
------------------------------------------------------------------
     __  Live from Capitaland, heart of the Empire State...
 ___/  | Jim Kasprzak, computer operator @ RPI, Troy, NY, USA
/____ *| Pro-Environment. Pro-Education. Pro-Family. Pro-Choice. 
     \_| Pro-Change. Pro-America. Pro-Clinton.
      ====  e-mail: kasprj@rpi.edu or kasprzak@mts.rpi.edu
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Niven's blunders (was:Superconductors + the 2nd law)
Date: 1 Sep 1992 18:32:06 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: concertina

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.

If the flux is high enough, they are.

Apparently, if you're in a solar system whose star goes supernova (bad luck!),
the neutrino flux will cook you before any other evidence of the explosion
has time to get to you.

Sort of an extreme case, but...

You could hide from the core explosion inside a stasis field, maybe inside a
scrith hull (I forget if it stops neutrinos).

>   Several answers here have presumed that the wavefront would
>   be quite discrete and last only a short period of time.  How
>   long was it supposed to take before the radiation passed?  I
>   would guess years.  A revolving ringworld isn't going to 
>   be of much use.

The figures I've seen on the core explosion (30K ly from Ringworld) indicate
that the apparent angle subtended by the explosion would be a couple times
more than the apparent subtended angle of the far side of the ring.

Even lined up properly, the far side of the ring won't shield you.

All are toast.

Alas.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of making many books there is no end...  |  What's wrong with chasing 
                       -- Eccl. 12:12    |  nebulae till 3 am?  |-(
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.science:2812 rec.arts.sf.written:11743
From: schrey@oak.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Timothy M. Schreyer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Date: 4 Sep 92 16:15:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: gvl.1992Sep4.161540.28523
Reply-To: schrey@prc.unisys.com
Distribution: na
Organization: Paramax Systems

In article <1992Sep4.141309.1688@news.acns.nwu.edu>, myboy@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Lewis Murtaugh) writes:
|> This is getting off the topic a bit, but one of my organic chemistry
|> instructors has a letter to Science (published a few years ago) posted on the
|> wall outside her office.  It seems some enterprising researchers searched the
|> database of all human genomic DNA sequences for the DNA sequence corresponding
|> to the amino acid sequence "ELVIS".  They found that the sequence they
|> searched for came up a few orders of magnitude more often than it would have
|> been expected to, randomly.
|> 
|> Then they rearranged the amino-acid "letters" to spell "LIVES", and found it
|> came up disappointingly few times.
|> 
   Did they try "EVIL"?  Just curious. :-)

        TIM
-- 
 Timothy M. Schreyer                         schrey@prc.unisys.com
 Center for Advanced Information Technology  (215) 648-2475 
 Paramax Systems Corporation                 FAX: (215) 648-2288
 PO Box 517, Paoli, PA 19301
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: holland@geop.ubc.ca (Stephen Holland)
Subject: Re: Ringworlds
Reply-To: holland@geop.ubc.ca
Organization: Geophysics & Astronomy, U.B.C. Vancouver, Canada
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 18:19:23 GMT

In article 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.
>
>            Elf !!!
There is a way to make a Dyson Sphere work with-out artificial gravity.  Just 
spin the sphere.  That way you get Earth-normal (or whatever) gravity near the
sphere's equator and a steadily decreasing gravity field as you move further away
from the equator.  At the poles you have no gravity, which migh be useful for the
ball-bearing industry.

steve holland




Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: trip@cco.caltech.edu (Trip)
Subject: Re: Ringworlds
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 01:44:44 GMT

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.

No, it doesn't require gravity generators. You should have read about
two pages further.

For the unenlightened, I refer to the Alderson Double Dyson Sphere,
which uses an inner shell to hold the atmosphere in place. ("Bigger than
Worlds", Larry Niven. Page 122 in the Del Rey edition of _A Hole in
Space_.)

It may turn out that humans can't live without gravity, but modifying
humans is something we're starting to do now. By the time we can build
Dyson Spheres, it's not going to be difficult to modify humans to live
in microgravity.

Oh, and the original Dyson Sphere wasn't the solid shell so popularized
by miscellaneous SF writers. It was a shell of independent bodies
(O'Neill colonies, inflated asteroids, whatever). (I may be wrong on
this; does anyone have a solid reference?)

Trip				|   Never stay a minute too long
President, ECNG			|   Don't forget the best will go wrong
(trip@cobalt.cco.caltech.edu)	|   Nobody's on nobody's side
				|			-_Chess_
From: majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu (Salamander~)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Ringworlds
Date: 27 Aug 92 02:52:24 GMT
Organization: UB


	Okay, call me a heretic, call me ignorant, call me what you
will, but I've never read any SF that deals with a ringworld.  (Aside
from a few of Elf Sternberg's Journal Entries, that is...)  Could
someone take a few minutes and give me a _really_ fast rundown on
exactly how one is supposedly constructed, what it looks like, and
what the benefeits of living on one are?  (Or at least give me a
pointer or two to where I could check it out...)

Thanks,
Marc


-- 
  majcher@acsu.buffalo.edu     *  The meek shall inherit the earth,   *
  Marc Majcher@P.O. Box 156          and the wise keep moving on...
     Amherst, NY  14226        *   The Earth is our Mother, but how   *
    Voice: (716) 834-1648       many of us still live with our mother?
From: dillard@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Alex Dillard)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Hydro energy storage systems
Keywords: fourth law
Date: 30 Aug 92 01:03:35 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <1992Aug26.192018.13472@pbhya.PacBell.COM> whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.070643.4420@bb1t.monsanto.com>, bjgaed@bb1t.monsanto.com writes:
>> 
>> To which I should probably add:
>> 
>> 4)  There is always someone more clever than you on the Net. 8{)  
>
>I always heard the 4th law as:
>
>4.  Everything costs more and takes longer.
>
>But yours is a good one, too.
>
   My thermo professor told us it was:

4)  There are more horse's asses in the world than horses.  

   Let me hope that I don't provide too good an example of this law.

-- 
 \ _
 - 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: francis@dogwood.atl.ga.us (John Stracke)
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Organization: National Science Center Foundation
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 20:47:40 GMT

In article <a3m-DW+@engin.umich.edu> ingles@rootbeer.engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:

> On the other hand, you could posit them as designed beings,
>perhaps a biotech counterpart to Fred Saberhagen's Berserkers.
>This makes it more belieavable, but I'd want to know *why*
>anmy race would build such a thing...

Masters of Krikkit.

--
/===========================================================================\
|John (Francis) Stracke         |My opinions are my own.                    |
|Natl. Science Center Foundation|===========================================|
|Augusta, GA                    | Earth: love it or leave it.               |
|francis@galois.nscf.org        |                                           |
\===========================================================================/
(Formerly francis@dogwood.atl.ga.us,francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu)
-- 
/===========================================================================\
|John (Francis) Stracke         |My opinions are my own.                    |
|Natl. Science Center Foundation|===========================================|
|Augusta, GA                    | Earth: love it or leave it.               |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: wiml@milton.u.washington.edu (William Lewis)
Subject: Re: Donaldson's _Gap Cycle_: does this add up?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:24:16 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.191013.9965@news2.cis.umn.edu> alberti@mudhoney.micro.umn.edu (Albatross) writes:
>Having just finished the first two books in Donaldson's Gap cycle, I have a
>couple of basic Sf/Science questions about what I read:
>
>A the engine of a given ship is stated to be capable of accelerating the
>ship to "50%" of lightspeed.  Care is taken to explain how, although it may
>accelerate indefinitely, the engine will cease to significantly affect the
>velocity of the ship when the ship has reached 50% of lightspeed.
>
>Later, the same ship is accelerated by external forces (I'll remain vague
>to avoid spoilers) to "90%" of lightspeed.  "Significant dopplering" of the
>background starfield occurs.
>
>This ship then _decelerates_ to "rest" (it docks with an object which it was
>formerly approacing at 90% of lightspeed).
>
>My first question is, does Donaldson have a clue?

  Maybe. I haven't read the books, but it's possible to design an
engine which has variable efficacy depending on the ship's speed
relative to some fixed frame of reference. Bussard ramjets have this
property, with the external frame being that of the interstellar medium.
In effect, your ramjet has to pick up the interstellar gas, accelerate
it to the ship's speed, and then accelerate it some more so that it
gives some propulsion. If you're trying to *ac*celerate it gets harder
and harder the faster you go. Deceleration becomes easier the faster
you go.

  OTOH, unless Donaldson is actually using a Bussard ramjet, or explains
that his drive has to interact with nearby matter somehow, or something,
I'd guess that he just forgot about that little detail. =8)


-- 
email: wiml@u.washington.edu             |  Home:  Seattle, Washington   |
     (William Lewis)                     |  47 41' 15" N   122 42' 58" W | 
NeXTmail: wiml@ingalls.cs.washington.edu `-------------------------------'
        --*-- Member, Coalition to Preserve Semantic Vacuity --*--
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: clark@daffy.tmc.edu (Matthew Clark)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Evolution under High Gravity
Date: 22 Aug 92 15:19:20 GMT
Organization: University of South Florida, Department of Computer Science and Engineering

In article <1992Aug17.093847.1@skcla.monsanto.com> jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com writes:
>Sure the tendency will be for ground hugging, but remember that anything which
>DOES overcome the height limitations will have an advantage (as well as a
>vantage), in that it can spot enemies and prey, can expand to absorb more
>radiation, etc.
>
>Besides, look at our own world.  We have creatures that hug the ground, and
>hundreds-feet high trees.  What is tall or short?  Why aren't there
>40-foot-high dinos anymore?  We can't blame that on gravity.

We would also have to keep in mind that since there is a higher gravity,
then the rate of acceleration due to gravity is likewise increased.  So,
tripping on a 2G world is inherently more harmful than a 1G world.

As a result, it would seem to me that a creature indiginous to a higher
gravity (at least one with any 'height') would either have to be
more "sturdy" or more agile.

But that's just how I see it...^_^


 _Release 8.21.92 _   Kimi_wa,_Hontou no_TMN_wo_Mada Shiranai_  
|_   _|  \/  |  \| |O|  _| _ | | | _ | __| __| __| | | |  \/  | 1
  | | |      | |\  | | |_||_|| |_||_||__ |__ | __| |_| |      | &
  |_| |_|\/|_|_| \_|O|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|_____|_|\/|_| 2
  clark@daffy.csee.usf.edu         clark@galadriel.csee.usf.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: francis@dogwood.atl.ga.us (John Stracke)
Subject: Re: Laser weapons
Organization: National Science Center Foundation
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 19:44:13 GMT

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.

Possibly sonics (anybody know feasibility here?).

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

--
/===========================================================================\
|John (Francis) Stracke         |My opinions are my own.                    |
|Natl. Science Center Foundation|===========================================|
|Augusta, GA                    | Beware of wizards, for you are            |
|francis@galois.nscf.org        |   crunchy and good with ketchup.          |
\===========================================================================/
(Formerly francis@dogwood.atl.ga.us,francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu)
-- 
/===========================================================================\
|John (Francis) Stracke         |My opinions are my own.                    |
|Natl. Science Center Foundation|===========================================|
|Augusta, GA                    | Beware of wizards, for you are            |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.sf.written
From: cash@convex.com (Peter Cash)
Subject: Re: Something Nasty in the Human Genome
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 03:18:44 GMT
Organization: The Instrumentality
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

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...





-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
             |      Die Welt ist alles, was Zerfall ist.     |
Peter Cash   |       (apologies to Ludwig Wittgenstein)      |cash@convex.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: mvp@hsv3.lsil.com (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: Laser weapons
Organization: LSI Logic/Headland Technology
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:44:14 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.140001.12624@alw.nih.gov> singley@helix.nih.gov (Erick D. Singley) writes:
>>Do they make a noise when fired?
>Not by themselves; but your rechargeing unit (whatever high tech capaciter you
>use) might if you want. ;-)

Actually, high-powered pulsed lasers make a "crack" sound from
heat expansion of the air along the path of the beam, and from
explosive vaporization of material at the target.

>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.

Another bit on mirrors:  According to Dr. Kantrowitz, in a talk I
heard him give about 10 years ago, if the energy density is over some
threshold (~ 2 megawatts per square centimeter, I think) it doesn't
matter what the surface reflectance is.  You get a laser-propagated
detonation in the atmosphere, starting from the impact point and
travelling up the laser beam.  (At this point it is a good idea to
turn off the laser.  Very quickly.)  This applies a good bit of force
to the target, and is the principle behind the "laser launcher" idea.

He said that people who invoke mirrors as a defense against very high
power lasers just don't understand this effect.

If Jordin Kare is reading this and is so inclined, I believe he can
expand on this at fascinating length.
-- 
Mike Van Pelt          | What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth?
LSI Logic/Headland     | Judging from realistic simulations involving a
mvp@hsv3.lsil.com      | sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we
sun!indetech!hsv3!mvp  | can assume it will be pretty bad. -- Dave Barry
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: beede@sctc.com (Mike Beede)
Subject: Re: dragons were dinosaurs?
Organization: SCTC
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 14:55:30 GMT

ccw@prefect.uucp (26554-wood) writes:

>What cars have you driven?  Think about it... The brakes on a car exert
>enough force on the tires to cause them to skid, at any speed.  The
>engine can only break the tires loose at the very slowest speeds, or for
>a very brief moment.  Most automotive engineers would describe this feat
>as "impossible".  That's why I asked you about what you think this word
>means.

Brakes fade--engines don't.

Regards,

	Mike Beede
-- 
Mike Beede         Secure Computing
beede@sctc.com     1210 W. County Rd E, Suite 100           
------------------ Arden Hills, MN  55112
                    (612) 482-7420
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Subject: Re: Laser weapons
Organization: SPSS Inc.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:45:58 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.213233.7293@spss.com> I write:
>I'd like to throw some laser weapons into an sf story, but I find I don't
>know enough about lasers.  

Many thanks to all who responded, both by post and by e-mail.  It's been
fascinating reading, even though now I have to rewrite my story.  :)

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?