HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Population here and elsewhere?
Date: 7 Oct 92 08:25:43 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <gdavis.718295859@griffin> gdavis@griffin.uvm.edu (Gary Davis) writes:
>
>     With the relatively low priority and lack of basic understanding
>of our environment shown by most on this board;it is indeed merciful
>that none are actively in this area.
>What does bringing back dinosaurs have to do with such a critical
>human dilemma as uncontrolled population growth. Persons who ecourage such
>must either be quite ignorant of the future consequences or so insensitive
>to the situation that reason eludes them.
>
>Rush Limbaugh was quoted recently as stating that population growth
>was a "phoney" issue since if we move the entire world pouplation
>as it exists presently, to the state of Texas the human density would
>equal that of New York City. Pooh.. Pooh.. population growth and the
>environment are a ploy of the liberals!
>
>Aside from the fact that Limbaugh is a pompus donkey;the truly frightening
>part is he has so many mindless idolators in his ranks.
>
>Yes, if he had his way I'm sure Earth would become the planet Gideon.

Linbaugh is correct that the entire Earth's population could fit in 
Texas with a density no higher than NYC, which is a lower density than
many other cities such as Toyko, Hong Kong, or Mexico City. Of course
no sane person would want to live in NYC. :-) So a Texas sized NYC would
likely be no more attractive.  Hooty Owl would have to give way to
Sam Starling and Pete Pigeon. Randy Rat would move in as well.

I've pointed out that if the entire world population produced garbage
at the rate of NYC dwellers, it would take 10,000 years to cover the
state of Nevada with it to a depth of 100 feet, incidentally turning
Nevada into the richest mine of primary metals and other resources
such as methane. We're not running out of physical space to meet our 
population demands. If every person on Earth used energy at the rate 
of NYC dwellers, that would only represent 1/2000th of the amount of 
solar energy that reaches the Earth each day. 3% of the US population 
produces an overabundance of food from 30% of our arable land using 
Green Revolution techniques and our soil is no richer than many other
country's soils. 

The Earth is not resource poor, energy poor, or short of space. What it
does lack in most of the world is suitable social freedom to properly use 
it's resources for the economic benefit of individuals.

Gary
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: overpopulation
Date: 14 Oct 92 14:15:54 GMT
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <1992Oct7.080014.19723@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>However, population density is not the source of Turkish poverty. The
>perfect counterexamples being Singapore and Hong Kong. 

Population density is not a source of poverty, but high population
growth is a factor in poverty.  If you have a place with 3%/year
population growth then you need 3%/year economic growth to keep things
the way they are.  The big problem is that without economic growth,
people just keep have the same number of kids and this leads to a
nasty cycle in which you have more and more people at the same
standard of living.

In Turkey's case, maladministration and ethnic tensions are a bigger
problem than population growth.


Xref: sparky sci.space:14522 talk.politics.space:1373
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Friday, 16 Oct 1992 10:01:49 CDT
From: <U57567@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space
Subject: Re: DC-X vote
 <rabjab.4.718402277@golem.ucsd.edu> <1992Oct6.211013.3728@iti.org>

Sorry for the ignorance, but whiat IS DC-X?

I missed the earlier posts on it.  I gather it's some star wars test, maybe a
target or interceptor?

Thanks,
Al
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dfegan@lescsse.jsc.nasa.gov (Doug Egan)
Subject: Re: Space.gifs
Organization: LESC
Distribution: sci
Date: 13 Oct 92 19:31:58 GMT

In <Bvyz3v.76r.1@cs.cmu.edu> XOUGROVE@idbsu.idbsu.edu (Micky Brus) writes:

>Just needing some help in reading gifs.  I have downloaded some space gifs
>from Ames, but can`t get them to work on my gif reader.  I am using Cshow and
>have not had trouble reading gifs until I tried the ones that are downloaded of
>f Internet.  I use binary mode instead of ascii.  Is there anything that I
>am missing?  Thanks for your help.


Perhaps you need to uudecode it...


--
=========================================================================
 Doug Egan                                   "...Engineers, they LOVE to
 Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Co.        change things!" 
 Houston, TX                                    Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy  
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Don't forget  Other Guy(was Re: Von Braun -- Hero, Villain, or Both?)
Organization: Tacoma Screw Products, Inc.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:55:49 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.183016.1@fnalf.fnal.gov> higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
Deletions...
>
>Coming from technologically behind, Sergei beat Wernher to the first
>satellite, the first man in orbit, the first woman in orbit, the first
>lunar flyby, the first space station, and other points in the "first"
>game.  
>

Isn't it true that the Redstone existed before the Vanguard, and that
Von Braun lobbied for using it to send a satelite into orbit, but since
the Redstone was "owned" by the Army, Eisenhower wanted to let NACA's
Vanguard have the first shot, especially since the launch was tied
into the International Geophysical Year observance.  After numerous
Vanguard failures, and after the Soviets slapped together the Sputnik
mission *in*order*to* beat the US into space, the US governemnt
agencies finally got together and agreed to let Von Braun use the
Redstone as a satellite launch vehicle to bolster space program morale.
If it hadn't been for inter-department politics in the US government,
the Soviets would have had the *second* satelite, but the US was (as
stated policy) in no hurry, and the Soviets wanted to be first at all
cost.  In fact, James Oberg (if I remember his name correctly) in his
book _Red Star in Orbit_, documented that all the "firsts" noted
above (except the space station) were done *primarily* to beat the
US and score propaganda coups.  The US announced a long-term goal,
and the Soviets rushed in with very little concern for safety,
scientific value, etc.

-- 
David Breneman     Sys Admin, Tacoma Screw Products, Inc. |  ____  ____  ____
dcb@tacoma.uucp           |   SCREWIE the TSP CLOWN sez-  |   /   /___  /___/ 
 ..!uunet!tacoma!dcb      |  "Nylok lock nuts lose their  |  /   ____/ / 
CompuServe: 75760,1232    | binding strength after 1 use!"|
Xref: sparky sci.space:14533 soc.history:8978
From: elliott@oliafd.shel.isc-br.com (Elliott Kleinrock)
Newsgroups: sci.space,soc.history
Subject: V-2's launched at Russia (was Re: V-2 anniversary)
Keywords: WWII, V-2
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:21:15 GMT
Organization: Olivetti Advanced Finance Development

In article <28404@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes:
>Successful V-2 combat launches (From 'The Rocket Team', Ordway and Sharpe, 
1979)

>UK
>   London     1359
>   Ipswich       1
>   Norwich      43

>Belgium
>   Antwerp    1610
>   Liege        86
>   Brussels   (See Other) 

>France
>   Paris        19

>Other
>   Continental 137 (including 11 at Remagen, the town whose bridge was
>                    captured before it could be blown up, Tournai, Hasselt
>                    Maastricht (been in the news lately), Lille, Arras, Mons,
>                    Cambrai, St. Quentin, and Tourning.)

>Total         3225


>Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.

Where any V-2's launched at Russia?
	- Elliott

	elliott@oliafd.shel.isc-br.com
	...!{ philabs | yale | oliveb | decvax | iscuva }!oliafd!elliott
From: ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (George Hastings)
Subject: ALSEP
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network (Richmond)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 17:47:42 GMT

			ALSEP

With all the world waiting, we turned our eyes skyward.
Remember that day when we all looked through
Our electric windows on the universe,
Seeing old spheres from a new point of view?

Three times again, and again, and again,
Descending on dancing flames,
They scurried, slow-motion, through ancient dust.
Who still now remembers their names?

We did the unthinkable, achieved the impossible,
Went where none had preceded, and more.
"Ho-hum! Another launch, you say?
Is football on Channel Four?"

Mechanical colonists left behind
When we blasted back home in our ships
Drew life in their bellies from shattering atoms,
Energizing electronic chips.

They sensed the heat of ancient fires:
Moon-embers banked deep inside.
They felt the star-bits streaming,
And the rumbling silent tide.

ALSEP voices, talking to Earth
In chattering bits and bytes,
Sent their colonial treasures back
Through the lunar days and nights.

They measured the limb-shocked solar winds
Changing the charges in sputtered lands,
And vibrating signals crossed the void,
Twitching inked fingers on metal hands.

The footprints and tire-tracks, unchanging, remain.
Like paths to the future, they glisten.
Solipsistic sentinals converse with themselves,
But there's nobody left who will listen!

			George Hastings
			10/1/77
-- 
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk
Subject: Re:Clinton and Space Funding
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: [via International Space University]
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 12:13:00 GMT

T> hat's true, but the entry cost for space is considerably higher  
than
> for a man with an ax and a gun trekking out on foot to find elbow 

> room. And likely to remain so for a long long time. Any space  
colonies
> are likely to have to be highly regimented in order to survive at  
all.
> When disident groups have colonized the ocean floor, nearly as  
difficult
> a place as space, then we'll see if colony life is really less  
oppressive
> than our lives here.
> 


Personally I want the stars over my head. And under my feet as well.  
Your statement is true if you take a very short view If government  
continues to develop and lead the way into space, it will come as no
surprise at all if the technologies developed are those requiring  
large central facilities. Bureaucracies need dependence to exist.  
They do not willing assist in creating options which make their  
existance unnecessary.

Fortuneately this situation is not going to last. Within 30-100 years  
molectular engineering is going to change the way we look at things,  
and as a side effect will give us the technologies of independance in  
space.

Even if this technology succeeds to only a fraction of what Eric  
Drexler thinks is possible, it will still change the equation  
drastically towards decentralization. We are coming into the age of  
the 3D copier. Our computers (by then another 10^6 or so more  
powerful) will then do to objects what has already been done to  
information. Want an injector? Just ship it over the net. Don't like  
the design? Then run the simulation locally, make your modification  
and output a new one.

The times they will be achangin'


Newsgroups: sci.space
From: collins@well.sf.ca.us (Steve Collins)
Subject: Re: All systems are what? (was Re: Mars Observer Update #2 - 10/07/92)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 04:10:48 GMT



Strange as it may seem to a grammerian, go, no-go calls are routinely
made on the MO operations net. During the countdown, the spacecraft
team systems lead polls all the SCT subsystems for their status. Each
subsystem typically responds with something like : "AACS is GO" or
"Propulsion is GO". The SCT systems lead is then polled in turn by a
guy ( or gal) called "MARS ACE" and responds: "Spacecraft Team is GO".
This process continues up the chain of command to the launch director
who formally authorizes the launch.  In the event that there was some
drastic problem, you might respond with something like: AACS is NO-GO, but
usually problems are worked and solved as you go along so, you hear
stuff like : "AACS is GO except for the high gyro temp". In a way this
is tradition from the early space program, but the formality of the
language serves to clarify communications on the net. Saying "Nine-er"
helps to distinguish "Five" from "Nine". For the most part, the
com nets are pretty clear, but people do have problems with headsets and
interference. I had the pleasure of being "on the console" during launch
at the AACS (attitude and articulation control system) position
for the Spacecraft team. The biggest problem is that you are listening to
about 5 different networks at one time and trying to pick out all the
information from all the conversations. By doing a formal GO, NO-GO poll,
you avoid people saying :"well - er - I guess AACS is pretty much ready..."
I've gotta say, after being into this space stuff since the time I
could talk, it was really a kick to be there saying "AACS is GO", and know
that there was a real spacecraft sitting on a pad at the cape pointed at
Mars, and I was "in the loop".
At liftoff, we lose telemetry from the spacecraft and most of the Spacecraft
team ran to the conference room to watch the ascent on NASA select. The
group was so proud and concerned and excited, it was like 40 people having
a baby at the same time... Then the TOS data didn't come in...
         but that's a different story,
              Steve Collins
              Mars Observer Spacecraft Team (AACS)
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: Bootstrap hardware for LunaBase
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 13:21:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.111921.29942@techbook.com> szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:

>1. No one is going to spend these amounts.  

Completely and totally irrelevant. You provided an estimate of the cost which
was totally based on unrealisticly high launch costs. This invalidates your
entire assessment. Untill you produce an assessment with reasonable costs
associated with it there is no point in anybody wasting any time reading
or thinking about your comments.

>Commerce would only spend 1/500-1/100 of that amount

Oddly enough, this is achieveable in all likelyhood with SSTO.

  Allen
-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they     |
|  aws@iti.org     |  put a man on the Moon?"                               |
+----------------------199 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
From: wa2ise@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (robert.f.casey)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Luna III images of the moon's farside
Date: 9 Oct 92 14:53:21 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <28478@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes:
>In article <28420@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM+, wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes:
>+ 33 years ago, on Oct 7, 1959, Luna III, launched on the 4th
>+ returned to earth the first images of the other side of the moon.
>
>They were pretty poor. Luna III took a b/w photo and then scanned it
>with a slow TV like process of 1000 lines/inch and transmitted to earth.
>The Dec, 1959 Sky&Telecope magazine calls it comparable in quality to
>1840's daguerreotypes. And what the rest of the world got was of poorer
>quality than what they got for a variety of reasons. Features on the
>earth side and far side features were included--only 3/4s of the previously
>unseen side were in the photo. But quite a few features are clearly
>seen. They were undeniably the first and got the privilege of naming them.
>The article goes on to say that the far side appears to be mainly 
>continental (as opposed to all the 'seas' we see on the earth side).
>They continue: "The Soviet photographs mark the first serious beginnings
>of what may be called _trans-selenography_, the science of the moon's
>hiterto hidden side." --definitely science.

I seem to remember that there were no follow-ups to that mission, like to
map the missing area on the far side (of the Moon, not the cartoons), and/or
to get better resolution pictures.  Did they try and fail, or just didn't
have budget or hardware to do it, or maybe they figured they already got
enough bragging rights out of the first one? :-)
==========================================================================
499.99 years ago, Columbus discovered America.
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Lecture Summary: What if SETI Succeeds, myth that we're prepared (
Date: 13 Oct 92 14:20:06 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <92285.195231SAG101@psuvm.psu.edu> SAG101@psuvm.psu.edu (stuart goldman) writes:
> an automobile.  Look at the amount of recklessness and stupidity that occurs
> on a daily basis there.  Between drunk driving, speeding (not that I have
> never speeded) and deaths on the road on a daily basis, and that's in two
> dimensions.  What would happen if everyone had access to an airplane?  Then
> they're succeptable to collision in three dimensions... then deal with space

The reason there are so few midair collisions is not the superhuman pilots,
sober as judges, or the omnipotent FAA. The reason is it's a lot harder to
hit something with three degrees of freedom than something confined to
two dimensions, and further confined by roads. It's the difference between
hitting a sitting duck and a duck on the wing. As we move into space, the
miss distances grow huge. You'd want to be more concerned about the beer
cans they throw overboard. Those could eventually pose a real debris 
problem for craft in other trajectories. The odds of collision would
be no greater than the odds that one ocean liner would run into the
garbage of another on a different track, but the collision velocities
would make the rare impacts spectacular.

Gary
From: john@newave.newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Sputnik I - 35th anniversary
Date: 7 Oct 92 03:37:42 GMT
Organization: Newave Communications, Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN

In <28242@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson):
> Today the earth has approximately 7000 moons.

How many of these moons have stable orbits?  In this case, I define stable
to mean that they will stay in orbit for 100+ years without expending any
fuel.  (I have a hard time considering something like Sputnik or Echo I to
be a "moon".)

What would it take to build a sattelite that would stay up for a long time
without having to be reboosted or carrying large amounts of fuel?  Could you
use large solar panels or RTG's to power an ion thruster?  Is there a stable
Earth orbit for a small sattelite?

-john-

-- 
==============================================================================
John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins)
Subject: Re: South Africa tests Satellite launch vehicle
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:22:38 GMT

glngar01@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:

> Don't know if it's known internationally *yet*, but South Africa successfully
> tested a solid-fuel rocket motor with ballistic potential recently...

> Comparable costs are half that of a similar US launch and South Africa hopes
> that within the next few years to be launching up to 70 satellites annually.

I'd be _very_ surprised to see them launching 70 satellites, especially if
they don't have any history to go on and can't reach GTO.  Do you know what the
cost figure was based on?                                    

-- 
Josh Hopkins                                          jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
	 The views expresed above do not necessarily reflect those of
ISDS, UIUC, NSS, IBM FSC, NCSA, NMSU, AIAA or the American Association for the
                      Advancement of Acronymphomaniacs
Xref: sparky sci.space:14180 sci.astro:10500
From: pacolley@ember.UUCP (Paul Colley)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: SETI positive?
Date: 8 Oct 92 01:23:49 GMT
Reply-To: pacolley@ember.UUCP (Paul Colley)
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: Ember---private system

In article <7OCT199215545204@csa2.lbl.gov> sichase@csa2.lbl.gov
(SCOTT I CHASE) writes:

>                                For example, using this detector at 100 light 
                                                                     ^^^
>years from Earth, you could not detect the random TV and radio signals that
                                                   ^^
>we have inadvertantly transmitted out into space.



Oh, drat.  All those fascinating 1890's television shows going unnoticed.
                                 ^^^^

I suppose I'd be more worried if somebody a 100 light-years from
Earth WAS currently watching our TV broadcasts!

-----

I know, I know, Scott meant "100 years from now.... this equipment
wouldn't detect our current radio and TV broadcasts at a 100
light-year distance".

- Paul Colley
University:  colley@qucis.queensu.ca
Home:        pacolley@ember.uucp   watmath!ember!pacolley  +1 613 545 3807
<Ring> [...] "Sorry, I'm all booked up." "Who was that?" "The library." - B.C.

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: millard@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Millard Edgerton)
Subject: Re: Math programs with arbitrary precision for the Mac?
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 23:06:20 GMT

i0c0256@rigel.tamu.edu (IGOR) writes:

>In article <seal.719016011@leonardo>, seal@leonardo.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (David Seal) writes...
>>Having been duly inspired by an episode of northern exposure i tried
>>fiddling with ramanujan's and borwein and borwein's formulas for 
>>computing pi on my mac.  however, the floating point accuracy
>>for MATLAB (which i was using) isn't settable and i can't get past
>>the sixteenth decimal place or so.  other mac programs or ways of computing
>>pi?  thanks.


>a very simple way of computing pi is as follows:
>pi/4=4*atan(1/4)+atan(1/239) i may actually mess up the argument in front
>of the atan so you would have to check on a calculator.

>The fancy thing about this instead of using pi=4*atan(1),  one can expand
>the atan in term of series atan =x -x^3/3+x^5/5-x^7/7 with a radius of 
>convergence of r=1, which means it this specific case that the acceleration of
>convergence will be tremendous if you are using arguments less than 1 such as
>1/4 and 1/239. With this formula, the problem of finding pi is to develop
>routines doing subtraction,addition and division of infinitely long numbers...\
>which is a problem that one probably solved in sixth grade...
>I think that after the third term computed i was able to get a seven digit 
>accuracy... not bad




>Igor
>Texas A&M University
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Its a nice bike
>	terminator 2
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The solution of 355/113 yields PI to with 10^-7.  Archemedies knew it close
enough for our use today, beyond that it is an academic exercise.

***************************************************************************
* When I examine myself and my methods of   | Standard disclaimers apply  *
* thought, I come to the conclusion that the| Millard J. Edgerton, WA6VZZ *
* gift of fantasy ment more to me than my   | millard@eos.arc.nasa.gov    *
* talent for absorbing positive knowledge. A. Einstein                    *
***************************************************************************
Newsgroups: sci.space