HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lew@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (lewis.h.mammel..jr)
Subject: Re: Lunar astronaut covers earth with thum
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 03:45:47 GMT
Summary: a quibble

In article <BxvyIs.9C4@world.std.com>, DPierce@world.std.com (Richard D Pierce) writes:
> The second is in the form of a gedanken (though experiment). Let's presume
> the moon subtends 1/2 degree at the zenith (pretty close to reality). That
> means that 720 of them must be placed side-by-side to stretch all the way
> from zenith to horizon to the "anit-zenith" and back again. Let's now
> assume that the moon near the horizon IS bigger, let's say by 50%. That
> means that simply rotating the plane of our circle of moon from vertical
> to horizontal must make some moon disappear, since they are larger,
> according to the assertion. 
> 
> You still have 720 moons in your circle. The circle is still 360 degrees,
> thus the diameter is not changed.
>
> There is a real optical effect near the horizon that cause rays from
> slightly below the horizon to be bent upwards, thus lengthening the day
> very slightly and making the sun and moon look a little squashed. This
> does not violate the gedanken above at all.

This last statement is not strictly true. The atmosphere raises a
circle about 1/2 degree below the horizon up to the horizon, thus
expanding it by a factor of sec(pi/360), or 1.00004 .

Lew Mammel, Jr.
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke)
Subject: Re: Supernova (Was Re: P/Swift-Tuttle at last!)
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 14:32:48 GMT

In article <1edk30INNbd7@transfer.stratus.com> tarl@sw.stratus.com (Tarl  
Neustaedter) writes:
> In article <1992Nov14.043817.3016@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>,  
ins894r@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Aaron Wigley [Wigs]) writes:
> > Then, all of a sudden I saw a very brief flash off centre from 
> > one of the Clouds. 
> >[,,,]
> > Until the next day, when I read about it in the newspaper. I happened to
> > have witnessed Supernova 1987A :-) 
> 
> From the smiley, I assumed you were making a joke, but someone else seems
> to have taken it seriously. So I'll comment:
> 
> If you saw a brief flash, it wasn't SN1987A. The neutrino flash was several
> seconds long, and the visual portion would have taken hours for the
> shockwave to arrive at the surface of the star. (Stellar atmospheres are
> not transparent). Once the shockwave did arrive, the brightness increase
> would be gradual, as larger and larger portions of the surface visible to
> you showed the effects (it's a sphere, and the closest portion is light-
> hours closer to you than the edge). After the effects hit the surface, the
> brightness would not fall back - the gas is still hot and size is still
> increasing due to the explosion.

I think his observation, if not smilied, might be important and 
interesting.  First I don't think the optically emitting sphere
would be light hours across - the sun is only about 5 light
seconds across and the imploding core or the SN must be much smaller.
There would be some problem with optical opacity, but attempting some
wild-ass-guess theorizing:  could the several second-long pulse of
neutrino's induce a pulse of optical emission from the outer envelope
of the star?  Neutrino's zap particles which then emit light via 
Bremstrahlung or Cerenkov radation etc.  

I wonder if anyone has ever thought real closely about what the first 
seconds of a SN explosion would look like since the probability of
having a detector aimed in the right direction is so small?  
Aaron Wigley's personal photodetectors might have made a unique
astronomical observation. 

--
Thomas Clarke
Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central FL
12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826
(407)658-5030, FAX: (407)658-5059, clarke@acme.ucf.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
From: beckmann@spot.Colorado.EDU (BECKMANN PETR)
Subject: Re: Gravity waves (Was: Galilean Electrodynamics)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 02:52:21 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.202755.22096@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>	Petr Beckmann, could you please reprint at least _some_ of
>Gerber's reasoning? Not everybody has century-old back issues of
>German-language physics journals handy.
>	I may add that it is _easy_ to "derive" Einstein's formula
>simply by adding some fudge-factor terms to the Newtonian Lagrangian,
>and finding out what fudge-factor combinations give the "right"
>result.
       Gerber's derivation is based only on the assumption that 
gravity propagates with velocity c, otherwise (understandably so,
in 1898) he uses only classical physics and Euclidian space.
      His formula has no fudge factor. It is not reminiscent of,
or similar to, Einstein's formula, but IDENTICAL with it. 
      As for century-old German physics journals, just send your butler
or maid to the library for an inter-library loan. The U of Colo., for
example, has the 1898 volume. As for Annalen d. Physik 1919, tell your
butler or footman to try your own college library.
>
>	If both Newton and Gerber's formulas have a fudge factor, then
>their "superior fit" is inevitable, since one has to fit one parameter
>to effectively one data point. However, Einstein's formula has _no_
>fudge factors. Either it's the right value, or it isn't.
        NO fudge factor in either. For Gerber see above, for Newton,
see Cure (quoted previously) as Newton's geometrical derivations are
often difficult to follow. I seem to remember you wrote under the name
of Master Buster. I now see what that means: Blabber first, look up 
later, if at all.
        Petr Beckmann



Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: hathaway@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: bushnell sportview binoculars?
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:10:29 GMT

In article <Bxqv1w.Gx3@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, vspicer@ccu.umanitoba.ca writes:
> hi again. i read in the latest telescope purchase FAQ that bushnell 
> sportview binoculars are listed as "a possibility" for astronomy use.
> 
> can anyone detail how (or if) these compare to more expensive units like
> celestron or orion astronomy binoculars? i was quoted a very low local
> price of about $60 cdn for 7x50 bushnell sportviews, about a third of
> what i'd pay for having an orion explorer 7x50 shipped here to the frozen
> north.
> 
> thanks in advance
> 	vic spicer
> 
> ------
> vic spicer, recent PERL convert/ data systems,instrument electronics and
> software person with the Time of Flight Mass Spec. Lab
> at the University of Manitoba Dept. of Physics


I've used some 7x50 Bushnell's (till I lost them or they were stolen?) 
and now use a pair of second-hand $20 7X35.  Most any binocs (less they 
are real junk) are a big help and allow you to see more stars than most 
charts plot.  Great for finding, scanning, sightseeing, even variable 
stars ... .   I like my inexpensive ones as I need be less careful about 
setting them down, carrying them around, worrying about losing, breaking, 
etc.  As with most optics advice, it depends on how you are going to use them. 
As an aide for finding, and quick and dirty spotting, there is a lot 
to be said for saving money on the economy models.  Avoid too cheap, 
unnamed brands though - they will go out of alignment right away and 
will be a nuisance.  But if binocs are going to be your primary instrument, 
and you will be stretching the limits, go with the $quality - and aperture. 

WHH -  (I found Swift-Tuttle last night with mine - then used them to line 
up the 12 1/2" on it.)
From: cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk (C.E. Thompson)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Swift_tuttle's orbit
Date: 16 Nov 92 00:35:04 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <1992Nov11.165126.10076@vax.oxford.ac.uk>, wgw@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
|> 
|>                                       In 2126 the Earth will intersect
|> the shower maximum on August 14.3, when it will have  r = 1.01338 au.
|> For the comet to be at its descending node ( r = 1.01001 au ) at the
|> same time requires that it have a perihelion passage time of July 26.43.

This raises a point that has been been worrying me in all these probability
estimates. With these figures, even if Swift-Tuttle arrives at the node at
exactly the right time, it *still* misses the earth by 80 earth radii, 
because the distances from the sun are not identical. Obviously the value
of r at the node for Swift-Tuttle is uncertain (how uncertain?) but there
must be a substantial factor in the odds due to this which seems to be being
ignored by all those treating the problem as a linear one.

(Note that because of the high relative velocity at which Swift-Tuttle will
be passing by, the capture cross-section does not significantly exceed the
geometrical cross-section of the earth.)

Chris Thompson
JANET:    cet1@uk.ac.cam.phx
Internet: cet1@phx.cam.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: saucc00@DMI.USherb.CA (Dudy)
Subject: Planets images
Organization: Universite de Sherbrooke departement Math-Info
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 05:28:41 GMT

This is probably a FAQ. Oh well...

Is there a FTP site where I can find nice color pictures of the planets and
major nebulas?

Thanx,

C.
-- 
Johnny take a dive with your sister in the rain        |
Let her talk about the things you can't explain        |
To touch is to heal, to hurt is to steal               |       U2
If you want to kiss the sky, better learn how to kneel | (Mysterious Ways)
From: johnl@amiganet.chi.il.us (John Liskey)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Questions About Nickel-Iron Meteorites
Date: 16 Nov 92 05:41:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: amiganet.johnl.0fla
Organization: Amiga Network Information Systems

In article <69421@cup.portal.com>, mmm@cup.portal.com (Mark Robert Thorson)
writes:
>
>I'd like to know whether all nickel-iron meteorites exhibit Wilmarstatten
>patterns, or whether only some of them do.  I know the stones at the
>
>I'd like to know if nickel-iron meteorites exhibiting Wilmarstatten patterns
>are monocrystalline, oligocrystalline, or polycrystalline.  

Iron meteorites ALWAYS contain some nickel.. It is the amount of nickel
relative to the amount of iron that determines the type or classification of
the iron meteorite and  also creates the crystalline pattern seen after etching
a cut surface with weak acid. This, the Widmanstatten pattern, can appear very
fine to coarse. Most Widmanstatten patterns are of 8 sided crystals and are
therefore known as octahedrites. Other varieties shows 6 sided crystals or
hexahedrite patterns also known as newman lines.. Yet another type, the very
nickel-rich ataxites, shows virtually  no pattern when etched.

Hope this helps some.

John Liskey
johnl@amiganet.chi.il.us
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke)
Subject: Re: Higgs Spotted? (really about Mars)
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 13:37:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.231844.28715@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>  
crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:
> 
> 
>       However, there *are* apparently pluvial formations on Mars.
>       We *do* believe that there is water somewhere (at least some
>       of us do), and there have been any number of proposals to use
>       that water for oxygen for humans to breathe while on a Mars
>       mission.
> 
Maybe we should be charitable to Mr. Quayle, but when I read his
Mars (mis?)statement, I immediately thought of books about Mars
I had read as a child in which scientists believed coniditions on
Mars were much as Mr. Quayle described. 

My thought was how sad that the head of our National Space Council
had not learned any planetary astronomy since elementary school.

Maybe Quayle really is quite intelligent and educated, but has bad 
foot in the mouth disease.  Then why is he a politician?

--
Thomas Clarke
Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central FL
12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826
(407)658-5030, FAX: (407)658-5059, clarke@acme.ucf.edu
From: Mike.Ditto@p0.f240.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Mike Ditto)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Good Schools?
Date: 19 Nov 92 21:31:00 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:104/240.0 - PASI, Golden CO

In a message to All <11-19-92 12:37> Stephen K Johnson wrote:

SK> I am looking for schools that have a good astronomy program
SK> since my
SK> school does not have one thank you.
SK>
SK>
SK>                                         Kelly
SK>
SK> ---------------------
SK> Stephen Kelly Johnson
SK> SKJOHN01@MIK.UKY.EDU
SK> ---------------------
SK>


Kelly-
        The University of Wyoming has a highly acclaimed astronomy program. 
they have an undergraduate degree in astronomy/astrophysics.  They 
specialize in infrared astronomy.  They have 2 infrared telescope facilities 
in Wyoming, Jelm Mountain Observatory has a 2.6? meter infrared telescope 
and what they call IRMA, the infrared optical interferometer.  The head of 
astronomy there is Ron Canterna, host of the 1991 annual meeting of teh 
Astronomical Society of the Pacific.  The campus is gorgeuos, facilities are 
very up to date, and dormitories are spectacular.  Faculty to student ration 
in the physical sciences department is around 1:15.  Very small classes, and 
humerous, witty, and very helpful professors.  And no, I don't work for the 
University of Wyoming.

        Another good place to consider for next year would be the University 
of Denver.  They just received a bequest of over 3.75 million dollars to 
build their astronomy program.  DU has had a program in cometary astronomy 
since 1866, and is now switching over to infrared.  They have the 13th 
largest refractor in the US, the 23rd largest in the world.  It is called 
Chamberlin Observatory, and is located on campus.  It houses a 100 year old 
20" Alvan Clarke refractor.  It was, in fact, the prototype instrument for 
the 40" at Yerkes Observatory.  They also have a 24" infrared observatory on 
Mt. Evans.  With the 3.75 million dollars they hope to build a 144" infrared 
observatory, which will become the highest observatory in the world, 
outdoing Keck by about 60'.  And yes, I do work for the University of 
Denver, but only on a volunteer basis.  Does this help?


                                        Mike Ditto  
 
--  
Mike Ditto - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Mike.Ditto@p0.f240.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
From: j.jahn@abbs.hanse.de (Jost Jahn)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Sunspots at 15.11.1992.
Reply-To: j.jahn@abbs.hanse.de
Date: 15 Nov 92 14:13:00 MET
Distribution: sci
Organization: ABBS AstroMail, D-W 2121 Dahlenburg / Germany
X-Version: ZerUU V6.45c

Sunspots at 15.11.1992., 0 h UT.

No.    Pos.  Cl.  Ar.  Mag. SF  F  M  X
---------------------------------------
7334 12N 51W Cso   70   b
7335 18S 42W Eho  390   b
7337 07N 28E Hax  100   a
7339 17S 16W Bxo   10   b    1
7340 09S 58E Axx    0   a
7341 16S 04E Bxo   10   b
7342 07S 36E Bxo   10   b    1
7343 11N 51E Axx    0   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
    ------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
From: gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy)
Subject: Re: Gravity waves (Was: Galilean Electrodynamics)
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:27:30 GMT

Tom Van Flandern writes:
#     But the gravity wave term is not uniquely separable from other
#parameters in the solutions (namely, periastron motion and the bending/delay
#term). 

But the gravity wave term is non uniquely separable in the same way
that the perihelion advance is not uniquely separable.

Since Beckmann (and 99.99 percent of all scientists) accept that the
perihelion advance is a sucessful test of GR, by the same logic the
grav radiation is also a sucessful test of GR, but a test that
Beckmann's theory does not pass.

#     I realize that Greg was quoting conventional wisdom.  Is it time to
#alter the conventional wisdom about gravity waves and binary pulsars?

Not on the basis if a single paper.

--
-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
 UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w
From: bob@kc2wz.bubble.org (Bob Billson)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGY For Spacecraft/Colonies
Keywords: oh no!
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:18:25 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Color Computer 3: Tandy's 'game' machine

mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu says:
>
>
>     The technologies described in the following article could be used to power
>spacecraft, space colonies, etc..

  [...much junk removed...]

Oh no!  Not AGAIN!
-- 
  Bob Billson, KC2WZ                          | internet: bob@kc2wz.bubble.org
  $nail:  21 Bates Way,  Westfield, NJ 07090  | uucp:     ...!uunet!kc2wz!bob

  "Professional ear piercing--while you wait!"  --sign in local jewelry store
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Distance of horizon
Date: 18 Nov 1992 22:40:35 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: concertina

Anyone have handy a function for figuring the distance of the
horizon from a viewer based on the viewer's height from the
surface?

This has to do with amusing my kids a bit during our next
science discussion.  Dad's got to stay ahead *some* way... :}


--
-------------------------------------------------------
| Some things are too important not to give away      |
| to everybody else and have none left for yourself.  |
-------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: richmond@spiff.Princeton.EDU (Stupendous Man)
Subject: Re: Supernova (Was Re: P/Swift-Tuttle at last!)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:21:49 GMT

TW > (Tarl Neustaedter) writes:
AW > (Aaron Wigley [Wigs]) writes:

AW > Then, all of a sudden I saw a very brief flash off centre from 
AW > one of the Clouds. 
AW > Until the next day, when I read about it in the newspaper. I happened to
AW > have witnessed Supernova 1987A :-) 

TW > If you saw a brief flash, it wasn't SN1987A. The neutrino flash was several
TW > seconds long, and the visual portion would have taken hours for the
TW > shockwave to arrive at the surface of the star. (Stellar atmospheres are
TW > not transparent). Once the shockwave did arrive, the brightness increase
TW > would be gradual, as larger and larger portions of the surface visible to
TW > you showed the effects (it's a sphere, and the closest portion is light-
TW > hours closer to you than the edge). After the effects hit the surface, the
TW > brightness would not fall back - the gas is still hot and size is still
TW > increasing due to the explosion.

   Actually, while Tarl has explained the slow, gradual brightening of a 
type II supernova nicely (except for the "light-hours bit" - the envelope
of even the largest star is only light-minutes in radius),
I believe that type II supernovae (like SN 1987A) may emit a very brief 
"flash" of energy soon after the core collapses.  If I recall correctly,
the "flash" is only a few seconds (minutes?) long and is composed of
very high-energy photons, mostly X-rays (of course, there would be some
visual photons emitted, too).  I guess the "flash" is powered by the
neutrino burst interacting with atoms in the outer envelope directly,
since nothing else can get out of the core so quickly.  

   This idea is based on a course I took with Richard Klein at UC Berkeley
some years ago - we were trying to make a hydrodynamical model of a supernova
explosion, and he mentioned this "flash" as an aside.  I believe he said
that he'd considered trying to find brief X-ray flashes in some satellite's
records, but I'm not sure.  In any case, we certainly do not have any
direct evidence for such a "flash" from a known supernova (apart from Aaron's
testimony, of course).  

   Can anyone else back me up on this?

-- 
-----                                                    Michael Richmond
"This is the heart that broke my finger."    richmond@astro.princeton.edu
From: gawne@stsci.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Moon Illusion (was Re: Lunar Astronaut ...)
Date: 17 Nov 92 22:48:39 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute

In article <1992Nov17.122236.26582@hemlock.cray.com>, 
dadams@cray.com (David Adams) writes:

> Let's see if I can get it right.  When the moon appears near the horizon
> it's light must traverse a greater amount of earths atmosphere.  The
> light rays are bent more and thus the atmosphere actually acts like
> a magnifying lense when the moon (or sun) is in this position.  (Did
> I get it right?)

Why not just do the experiment instead of speculating?  I had some students
a few years back who were interested in this so they photographed the full
moon just above the horizon and then again two hours later using the same
camera and 6" f/8 refractor.  They found that the diameter of the image on
film was the same BUT the apparent height of the moon at the horizon was 
LESS.  So the flattening of the lunar disk is not due to magnification of
width.  So what did atmospheric refraction do to the lunar image?  It caused
the part of the image closest to the horizon to be most distorted, but had no
effect on the width of the image.  So there is no magnification going on here,
as nothing is made to appear larger.

The only difference between the image of the moon well up in the sky and the
moon on the horizon was that the moon appeared round once it rose well above
the horizon.  The diameter (taken parallel to the horizon) was the same for
the moon at moonrise as it was later in the evening.

But you don't have to believe me.  Go do it yourself.

-Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute
Newsgroups: sci.astro.fits
From: herzog@ux5.lbl.gov (Hanan M. Herzog)
Newsgroups: sci.astro.fits
Subject: FITS compression -- best ratios
Followup-To: sci.astro.fits
Date: 16 Nov 1992 08:01:46 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux5.lbl.gov
Keywords: compression

Hi,
	What compression programs will provide me with the best
compression ratios for FITS?  FITS in the compressed format do not
necessarily have to be usable, until extraction (decompression).  
I am currently exploring FITSPRESS.

Any info on FITS compression would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Please reply by e-mail.

Hanan Herzog
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
herzog@lbl.gov
Newsgroups: sci.astro.fits
From: MAJUMDAR@ssl.msfc.nasa.gov
Subject: Read/write variable length array in Fits
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:01:57 GMT

Hi,
    I am currently working on variable length array using Fitsio routines
    for NASA/GRO/BATSE project. The array size is large - over 40000 elements.
    Any information on the use of variable length array in Fits would be 
    appreciated. Thank you.
                            Krishna Majumdar
                            BCSS/MSFC
    E-mail address :
          majumdar@ssl.msfc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.astro.fits