HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: The Moat around God's Eye
Date: 26 Jul 92 18:15:28 GMT
Reply-To: swf@tdat.teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <1992Jul23.165114.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu> mzener@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
|rob@watney.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rob Carriere) writes:
|
|   Better put, K-strategists have very few offspring, which are very
|intelligent and easily taught, then train them to survive in the outside world,
|protecting them ferociously until that point.

Too restrictive.  K-strategist *plants* hardly *teach* their young anything.
The key difference is the allocation of relative extensive resources to
guarenteeing that individual offspring survive to reproduce.  Teaching
*may* be how this is done, but so could lots of endosperm in the seed.
Anything expensive that helps young survive is a 'K-strategy' activity.

|   r-strategists have hordes of small offspring, and pay them no attention. 

Yep, loads, and loads of kids, and who cares if they die - this is the
ultimate r-strategy.

|   What does this have to do with anything?  Well, it demonstrates that a
|space-faring race is not, cannot be, an r-strategist.  If intelligence is going
|to work AT ALL, it keeps creatures alive.  If two individuals give birth to ten
|thousand babies, all with the brains to learn and survive, the species will die
|out in no time at all -- certainly long before they develop space travel.

Essentially my point.  Any species requiring training, and extended parental
care, will, of necessity, be a K-strategist.

|   It's still bloody unlikely.  I prefer to chalk this nevertheless marvelous
|book up to a minor scientific flaw.  It's ahppened before.

Yep, or the suggestion that they were genetically engineered into thier
current state, that seems to me the most likely.


[Mind, Niven's aliens have always been rather marginally reasonable, at
best - he just doesn't understand the pluralistic nature of biological
systems well enough - the Puppeteers were his most realistic, *provided*
that they alway run *backwards*, otherwise the legs are on backwards].
-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: Sneaking into Star Systems
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 644-8135
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 10:02:16 GMT

How to slow down without the exhaust being noticed?  Take a
slightly indirect route, so that the decelerating spacecraft
as seen from Earth lines up with an interstellar source emitting
at the appropriate wavelength.  For example, a Bussard ramjet
would decelerate in front of a gamma-ray source, a magsail would 
line up with a microwave source, etc.  

A sufficiently advanced civilization would see the subtle change in 
the star's output; the propulsion system must then be optimized for 
mimickry instead of efficiency.


-- 
szabo@techbook.COM  Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Public Access UNIX and Internet at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400, N81) 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: wak4@ellis.uchicago.edu (Valentine)
Subject: Ringworld Attitute Jets
Reply-To: wak4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 03:30:30 GMT

Maybe I just haven"t grasped the scale.....

SW


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: The Moat around God's Eye
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:34:04 GMT
	<rwallace.712280599@unix1.tcd.ie> <xbmmnkc.dani@netcom.com>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: dani@netcom.com's message of 28 Jul 92 04:27:55 GMT

Also -- arguably the moties had done just what you suggest, i.e.,
colonized the whole system to the extent that materials permitted.
After all, the tunnelled-out asteroid in which MacArthur's crew found
the thermal-superconductor was apparently at one time a major habitat.
--
Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am he who walks the States with a barb'd tongue, questioning every
one I meet,/Who are you that wanted only to be told what you knew
before?/ Who are you that wanted only a book to join you in your
nonsense?"  _Leaves of Grass_ xxiii.4.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: stoodt@cis.umassd.edu (Michael Stoodt)
Subject: Re: Ringworld Attitute Jets
Organization: University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 02:46:52 GMT

In <RFowler.307@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> RFowler@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Robert A. Fowler) writes:
>These were a feature of the Niven Ringworld.  I seem to remeber them as 
>ramjets fed by induced solar flares.  This was in Ringworld Enginners I 
>think.

As designed, the attitude jets would work from the solar wind, no
flares necessary.  But the designers never thought that there would be
sentients around the jets that didn't intuitively understand the
design, and the need for the jets;  Halrloprillalar's race (yes, I had
to look up the spelling of that) dismantled most of them for use as
interstellar ramjets.  With the advanced condition of
off-centered-ness at the time of the Ringworld Engineers novel, and
the limited number of available attitude jets, induced flares were the
only way to prevent the disaster (and that was at the cost of about
1/20th of the Ringworld population subjected to those flares, as I
recall).

   Mike Stoodt                            stoodt@cis.umassd.edu
From: swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: The Moat around God's Eye
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:48:41 GMT
Reply-To: swf@tdat.teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <rwallace.712280599@unix1.tcd.ie> rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace) writes:
|Important point: the Moties are NOT r-strategists, they are
|K-strategists. They don't turn lots of kids loose to fend for
|themselves, they cherish them (as is observed a couple of times in the
|book, Moties value their kids more than anything else).

I have been thinking, and I suspect you may be right here.

However, the complete lack of any plasticity, any environmental adjustment
in reproductive rates is downright *bizarre*.  I know of no animal om
Earth that does not have *some* adjustment mechanisms, and K-strategists
generally tend to have *more* *sophisticated* adjustment mechanisms than
r-strategists.

So either way, the Moties are out of line biologically.
-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: charless@sco.COM (charles stross)
Subject: Re: speed of light
Organization: The Somewhat Contagious Operation, Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 10:46:28 GMT


In article <1992Jul20.174752.22428@acd4.acd.com> dwj@sedv1.acd.com ( Dan Johnson) writes:
>In article <rEqmr*kb1@laosinh.stgt.sub.org> Gerrit@laosinh.stgt.sub.org (Gerrit_Heitsch) writes:
>>Ok, now my idea: The kinetic energy of the ship at a given speed
>>is W = 0.5*m*v^2, with v = c it would be W = 0.5*m*c^2.
>>If you could transform the whole mass m of the ship into energy
>>you would get W = m*c^2.
>
>Actually, 0.5*m*v^2 is an approximation that holds only at low speeds.  The
>correct relativistic formula is:
>W = (m*c^2/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)) - m*c^2
>If you compute the kinetic energy at the speed of light using this, you
>see that the rest of your argument falls apart.

This is correct. It also opens up some interesting cans of worms.
For example, supposing you have a ramscoop (one that works!) or a 
matter/anti-matter rocket that manages to get up to .788 C. At about
that relative speed, the tau factor is in the region of 0.5 and 
half the rest-mass of the ship is available as kinetic energy.
Using a ratio of 1kg mass == 21.6 megatons of energy in nuclear
weapon equivalents (thank you, Dave Langford!) we see that a
1000 tonne starship -- not a very big one -- would yield the
equivalent of 10.8 teratons of explosive force if it managed to
hit a stationary object. For comparison, the xUSSR and USA
at the height of the cold war were pointing <10 gigatons
at each other; so we are talking about 1000 third world war
equivalents in one handy parcel.

Niven's law states that a space drive is a weapon of lethality
proportional to its efficiency. Dead right.

This concept (the starship as planet-busting torpedo) was
explored by Mike Scott Rohan in ``Run to the Stars'', and
described quantitatively by Dave Langford in ``War in 2080''.
Because of the square-cube law the fireball resulting from the 
direct impact of a relativistic missile won't be much bigger 
than that of a _very_ big H-bomb, but the amount of energy 
dissipated will have, uh, interesting effects on the environment.
Does anyone have any information on the possibility of
igniting a planetary atmospheric firestorm in which the
free oxygen in the vicinity of the explosion would be converted
into NO2, like the effects of the firestorms over Dresden and
Hamburg during WW2?

(Hint: I'm currently working on a novel in which just such
a missile strike occurs. This is the prelude to _real_
hostilities breaking out. Nasty ...)

-- 
Charlie Stross aka charless@scol.sco.com ..... UNIX oriented text mangler
WARNING: The opinions voiced in the preceding electronic document are the
product of a warped mind. Take two before meals. 
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.science:2339 comp.ai.philosophy:5684
From: dg1v+@andrew.cmu.edu (David Greene)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: How do computers fare on scholastic achievement tests?
Date: 24 Jul 92 05:51:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.seQ0fSK00V87Q1JPd7
	<1992Jul22.204427.7681@techbook.com>
Organization: Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

22-Jul-92 Re: How do computers fare o.. Nick Szabo@techbook.com (1086)
>  On the other hand, I challenge any computer to a
> contest on the SAT test.  I suggest that no computer can score
> better than 500 on the verbal and 700 on the math 

A 1200 on the SAT's would get that computer into quite a few colleges...
the question is, once in college what would it learn :-)
From: richc@iplmail.orl.mmc.com (Rich Cherry)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: speed of light
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:35:42 GMT
Organization: Martin Marietta


It has been a long time since I took modern physics but I have a question.

E = mc^2 for resting matter. I have forgotton the extra terms for none resting
         matter.


Now as you approach the speed of light doesn't your mass become greater. So
doesn't the amount of energy produced for a given piece of matter also increase


Rich
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: The Moat around God's Eye
From: jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
Date: 23 Jul 92 09:55:10 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.science
 <714@tdat.teradata.COM> <1992Jul23.060316.14661@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu>
Organization: Searle, Skokie, IL
Nntp-Posting-User: jjfink

In article <1992Jul23.060316.14661@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu>, rob@watney.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rob Carriere) writes:
> For the rec.arts.sf.science people who don't read .written:
>    We have been discussing Niven and Pournelle's _The Mote in God's Eye_ and
>    this particular thread is on the possibilty, or lack thereof, of the Moties
>    evolving in the form presented in the book.  
...
> Glossary (taken from the post by Stanley Friesen quoted below):
>    [T]he terms [...] are standard population biology terms:
>    r-strategy refers to a reproductive strategy that optimizes for lots
>    of really cheap offspring and relatively long range dispersal ('weeds');
> 
>    K-strategy refers to a reproductive strategy that optimizes for raising
>    a few maximally fit, healthy offspring, often with considerable parental
>    input in each one ('dominants').

I'm afraid I don't remember what the motie 'litter size' was.  R-strategy would
usually require lots of children.  Of course the 'required' reproduction,
meaning quick turnover, does offset this.

>>Yeah, but how did they *get* *here*.
> 
> I have no idea, I didn't create Mote Prime.  Maybe the Moties are only
> r-strategists in the presence of adequate food supply, so their
> pre-intelligent ancestors were K-strategists.  

Here's a few theories to add:
1) There has been life on Mote Prime for a LOOOONG time, giving them more tiem
to evolve to their present state.  They certainly have been in space for a heck
of a long time compared to the humans in the CoDominium.

2) The fact that all life on the planet appears to be subspecies of moties
indicates that at some point, lots of the species were killed, most likely by
calamity (whether planned or natural).

3) The asymmetry was attributed to a long time in space.  But just _wanting_
something doesn't make it so.  Either (a) they had genetic engineering (same
people who came up with the birth control, who were wiped out), or (b) they
were out in space long enough that an asymmetric mutant appeared and they bred
that feature into their population because it was useful.

Joel
-- 
jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Portions of the preceding were recorded.  As for the rest, I quite fear that
 it was all in your mind" -- Alfred Hitchcock
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: bob@castle.ed.ac.uk (Bob Gray)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Sneaking into Star Systems
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:13:28 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:
>A sufficiently advanced civilization would see the subtle change in 
>the star's output; the propulsion system must then be optimized for 
>mimickry instead of efficiency.

And the civilisation would then start overhauling their
stellar interior models trying to account for the changes.

Even if the propulsion system was detected, an approaching
starship is not the first thing invoked by most people to
explain the anomolous readings.
	Bob.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: mmhazewi@cs.ruu.nl (Maarten Hazewinkel)
Subject: Re: Human flight.
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 09:50:19 GMT
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science
Keywords: Spon

In <ins450m.711956075@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au> ins450m@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (T.F. Eccles) writes:


>
>Hullo.
>	I have been thinking about this for some time, and thought
>maybe I should get other people's opinions. What changes would you
>make to human physical makeup, to allow for flight. 
>
>	And I mean _what_ not _how_. 
>
>	Assuming this was Earth (not Windhaven), I would start by
>reducing height considerably - possibly 5' tall range. :) for any-
>one actually that height, but I'ma a foot taller, so its reducing 
>for me. 

Well, the main thing would be reduction of weight. I remember reading
somewhere that for an average weight human, the breastbone would need to be
almost a meter long (sticking out to the front), to allow sufficient
anchorage for the wing muscles.
So, hollow out bones, and cut down sharply on leg strength/weight.

>	For the wing structure, I think the best bet would be bat-
>like wings, that possibly may not allow true flight, but would allow
>gliding for some distance. In considering this, I was trying to 
>figure out whether completely adding new limns would be the go, or to 
>use the existing arms (much like bat evolution) and have the stretched
>skin attach to a certain distance down the torso.

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert, just bored.

Maarten Hazewinkel
mmhazewi@cs.ruu.nl
-- 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Sneaking into Star Systems
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 03:40:49 GMT

	Let's say there a hypothetical race with STL starships
who want to look at our planet without alerting us  to their 
presence. Most STL propulsion systems (ramjets, RAIRs, laser-
driven sails) are pretty obvious to observers, so how would the
ETs sneak insystem without being seen?

						James Nicoll
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.science:2337 comp.ai.philosophy:5683
From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: How do computers fare on scholastic achievement tests?
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:44:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: techbook.1992Jul22.204427.7681
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 644-8135

In article <NICKH.92Jul17110340@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU> nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes:

>But on the other hand SATs (maybe someone should explain what those
>are to the non-American readers of this group) and all other
>`standard' IQ tests seem much easier to pass than a rigorous Turing
>test. If a machine gets a score of 200 on a MENSA test but still can't
>carry on a conversation with me about (hmmm) the usefulness of the
>Turing test, 

I submit that software that discusses the Turing test would be
fairly straightfoward.  A computer scientist or an English
grammar expert might be able to bust it, but most laymen would
be fooled.  On the other hand, I challenge any computer to a
contest on the SAT test.  I suggest that no computer can score
better than 500 on the verbal and 700 on the math (and even that
would take massive amounts of real-world knowledge programmming), unless 
they have a crib sheet programmed in.


-- 
szabo@techbook.COM  Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Public Access UNIX and Internet at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400, N81) 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz)
Subject: Re: Human flight.
Keywords: Spon
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 18:08:50 GMT

In article <ins450m.711956075@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au> ins450m@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (T.F. Eccles) writes:
>
>
>Hullo.
>	I have been thinking about this for some time, and thought
>maybe I should get other people's opinions. What changes would you
>make to human physical makeup, to allow for flight. 
>
>	And I mean _what_ not _how_. 
>
>	Assuming this was Earth (not Windhaven), I would start by
>reducing height considerably - possibly 5' tall range. :) for any-
>one actually that height, but I'ma a foot taller, so its reducing 
>for me. 

Actually, you could probably go smaller--in _Freaks: We Who Are Not As
Others_, Daniel P. Mannix mentions a type of midget which is typically
3 1/2 to 4 feet tall and has good health and normal intelligence.

>	For the wing structure, I think the best bet would be bat-
>like wings, that possibly may not allow true flight, but would allow
>gliding for some distance. In considering this, I was trying to 
>figure out whether completely adding new limns would be the go, or to 
>use the existing arms (much like bat evolution) and have the stretched
>skin attach to a certain distance down the torso.

This would at least be simpler than adding wings. 
>
                             Nancy Lebovitz
                             calligraphic button catalogue availible
                                 by email  (170K)
                             nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu

The shorter the life of the particle, the more it costs to produce.
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Sneaking into Star Systems
Date: 23 Jul 92 13:54:48 GMT
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca's message of 23 Jul 92 03:40:49 GMT

The magnetic sail idea is interesting, but I wonder if a magnetic sail
wouldn't have a noticeable microwave emission from interaction with the
solar wind.

I suspect the best way to sneak into a solar system is to play comet --
come in at a plausible velocity in an orbit with eccentricity real close
to 1 on the plus side, make sure that if you want to course change in
the system that you have closest stellar approach be behind the primary
from the most likely inhabited planet.

How big are the ships anyway?
--

Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens. -- Schiller
Ergo bibamus! -- Goethe
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.marketplace:380 rec.arts.startrek.fandom:1103 rec.arts.startrek.misc:7419
From: phk@aristotle.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Pieter Kallemeyn)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.marketplace,rec.arts.startrek.fandom,rec.arts.startrek.misc
Subject: Need Address/Phone Number of New Eye Studios
Date: 21 Jul 92 15:30:27 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech

If anyone out there has the address or phone number of New Eye Studios,
Please e-mail it to me.  Thanks!


--
Pieter Kallemeyn                     |   phk@aristotle.jpl.nasa.gov
Jet Propulsion Laboratory            |          - or - 
California Institute of Technology   |   phk@cabrilho.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Computer Repair, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.marketplace
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:17:02 -0400 
From: "David M. Bartlett" <db0s+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Wanted:  Kirk Mitchell books

I am looking for a trilogy (and by now possibly more) by an author named
Kirk Mitchell.  The books (I have no titles at the moment) science
fiction, and the storyline concerns an alternate history where the Roman
Empire never fell, but survived until the present.  If you know where I
can order these books, or if you have them and are interested in
selling, please contact me.
 
Dave B.
aka Sheik Bahba rum Raysen
From: hilding@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com (Hilding Holroyd)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.marketplace
Subject: sf book dealer
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:13:00 GMT
Organization: Concurrent - Oceanport NJ

(I am new to the net ....)

I place this in response to request for information on books by Esther Friesner.

If you are looking for "older" sf books or rare sf books try:

Graham Holroyd
19 Borrowdale Drive
Greece, NY 14626
716-225-4879

(unfortunatley he is not on any net, as yet)
He specializes in pulp magazines and "specialty press" selections from before 
1970. He will be more than happy to send catalogues to anywhere. If you need
something for a collection, by all means, contact him.

(obviously plug for my brother.)

Good luck.
-- 

US MAIL: Hilding W. Holroyd - CONCURRENT COMPUTER CORP.(Ex MASSCOMP,Interdata)
FAX: 908-870-5952    2 Crescent Place, Oceanport NJ 07757   PH 908-870-4558 
UUCP:  rutgers.edu!ocpt!holroyd    or   Internet:  holroyd@ocpt.ccur.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.marketplace
From: pld@cthulhu.hq.ileaf.com (Peter L. DeWolf)
Subject: WANTED: Tim Powers's "The Drawing of the Dark"
Reply-To: pld@ileaf.com
Organization: Interleaf, Inc.
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 16:10:04 GMT

I'm an avid fan of Tim Powers.  Unfortunately, I have been
disappointed in my efforts to acquire a copy of his early work, "The
Drawing of the Dark."  If you have a copy you'd be willing to sell me,
send your asking price with a description of the book's condition to me
at pld@ileaf.com.

Thanks!

 - Peter
-- 
Peter L. DeWolf     |     Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu
pld@ileaf.com       |     R'lyeh wgah-nagl fhtagn.
From: davros@vesta.unm.edu (Seymour Butt)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.marketplace
Subject: Re: Star Trek tin for sale
Date: 23 Jul 92 15:45:58 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

>>  there is a place in las vegas that has tins  for 69.95 plus postage
>>   not smokeys
>>   i will get the 800 number soon


-ketan-
From: wixer!cactus.org!wixer!pro-smof.cts.com!shiva@cactus.org (System Smof)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.marketplace
Subject: Re: Antinomy -- Spider Robinson
Date: 30 Jul 1992 11:09:01 -0500
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Does the book still have its front cover?

Organization: Computer Repair, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA