HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Merpeople
Date: 18 Aug 92 10:19:24 GMT
Organization: Aston University

bjgaed@bb1t.monsanto.com writes:
: >>However, your original problem would presumably be that gills could
: >>not support a mammal the size of a human, underwater.  (Correct me if
: >>not)
: > 
: > Better would be to look at *fish* with a mass larger than or equal to
: > a human, for exampes sharks. What percentage of a shark's volume is
: > gills? Could you fit that volume into a human neck/ribcage? Would a
: > "human" survive on a shark's metabolic rate?
: > 
: Perhaps the issue is not just size when it comes to metabolism.  Large 
: sharks are certainly very active in the water and can be much larger 
: than humans.  Perhaps the issue is one of intelligence.  Whales and 
: dolphins are probably more "intelligent" (don't ask me to define that) 
: than sharks, and a warm-blooded, while sharks and other large fish are 
: cold-blooded.  Is warm-blooded-type metabolism necessary for the 
: evolution of higher brain functions?  Is air-breathing a prerequisite 
: for warm-blooded metabolism?  If the answer to both of these is yes, 
: then merpeople will have to be warm-blooded air-breathers.  This, of 
: course, assumes only known biochemistry of metabolism and neural 
: processes.  Are the neural processes of cold-blooded animals 
: qualitatively different from those of warm-blooded animals?  Need a 
: physiologist or zoologist here.  I'm just a dumb chemist.

The terms warm vs cold blooded are confusing.
Better terms are Endo-therm and Ecto-therm
Warm blooded creatures have their body temperature kept constant by their
metabolic processes.
Cold blooded creatures must rely on external heat sources.
A high body temperature is needed for fast reactions, both in terms of
muscles and the nerveous system.
Spieces such as land living reptiles can be very active, at the expense
of having to sunbathe all morning.

For an animal to generate heat internaly the metabolic cost is quite high,
thus a mammal will require a much larger food/oxygen intake than a reptile
or fish of the same body weight.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans                                   |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 565 1979 (Home)                     |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)             |
From: jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: dragons were dinosaurs?
Date: 18 Aug 92 10:16:47 GMT
Organization: Searle, Skokie, IL
Nntp-Posting-User: kvitek

In article <auwen.714089675@starman>, auwen@convex.com (John David Auwen) writes:
> I've always been curious about the origin of various dragon myths.
> I've always read that the dinosaurs were all dead by the time man
> walked the Earth.  But could some of them have survived longer?
> Is this where the concept of dragons and sea monsters came from?

It seems unlikely that the nearly universal dragon myths all come from
fossil evidence.  I don't know, though.

Sea monsters could be influenced by whales and the occasional really big
squid.

For some genre ideas, watch "Lair of the White Worm" for an excavated dragon
skull (good fun film, don't take it too seriously).

Also, I recall a book I read years ago, that might have been "Boris Karloff
Presents" or something like that,  which featured stories about dragons.  The
one that stuck in my mind is one where a biologist surgically changes a
crocodillian heart from two to four chambers, enabling its metabolism to
crank up to its genetic dragon potential.

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
From: wixer!cactus.org!wixer!pro-smof.cts.com!rfletcher@cactus.org (Robert Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Hydro energy storage systems
Date: 22 Aug 1992 09:13:55 -0500
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

  Is there or is there not a loss of energy when water is pumped up a hill
in the day and the letting it run down at night.
----
ProLine:  rfletcher@pro-smof
Internet: rfletcher@pro-smof.cts.com
UUCP:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher
ARPA:     crash!pro-smof!rfletcher@nosc.mil
From: mss2@quads.uchicago.edu (Michael S. Schiffer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: DNA garrotte
Date: 22 Aug 92 17:23:45 GMT
Reply-To: mss2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <gapdrr.714500597@gsusgi1.gsu.edu> gapdrr@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Daniel R T Rothman) writes:
>On the other hand, if you're considering a molecular-level technology being
>employed by techno/wiz-bang assassins, there are a LOT of other possibilities
>you could look into. 
>I think it's not unreasonable to have a mono-filament diamond garotte that
>contains a virus on one end that eats the garotte away relatively quickly 
>after use, leaving only carbon concentrations, and thus being relatively
>untraceable/undetectable. Release of said buggies could be activated
>by the pressure of use. These'd be a LOT easier to mass-produce than the
>DNA stuff, if not as "personal"

	Um... what's the advantage of this over a standard garotte?
Slightly easier to get rid of the evidence, I'll grant, but if you've
got time for the garotte to be eaten away by viruses, you've got time
to go off somewhere and drop the thing in a random dumpster, or
possibly burn it, or drop it in the woods.  Sure, it _might_ be found,
but a piece of cord isn't the most obvious murder weapon, and there's
a lot of area to hide it in, or it can be destroyed by non-nanotech
means (fire, acid, whatever).  Conversely, if the police come in and
see someone's windpipe crushed, the fact that they can't find the
murder weapon won't keep them from pinning it on you if there's
evidence linking you to the crime-- while if there isn't, having to
dispose of a garotte won't make that big a difference.  Especially
since something like what was described would have to be well-planned
(assuming that they're not selling Vanishing Strangling Cords (tm) in
the local drug store).  If one can plan things that far in advance,
it's hardly going to be a challenge to come up with a non-nanotech
method that's simpler and more reliable.

Mike


-- 
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS	"Workers of the world, forgive me.
mss2@midway.uchicago.edu	 You had more to lose than I thought."
mike.schiffer@um.cc.umich.edu	 -- Karl Marx (1990) as imagined by
mss2@usite-next.uchicago.edu     Jim Koncz (konc@midway.uchicago.edu)
From: auwen@convex.com (John David Auwen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: dragons were dinosaurs?
Date: 17 Aug 92 22:14:35 GMT
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
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.

I've always been curious about the origin of various dragon myths.
I've always read that the dinosaurs were all dead by the time man
walked the Earth.  But could some of them have survived longer?
Is this where the concept of dragons and sea monsters came from?

Dave
auwen@convex.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Niven's blunders (was:Superconductors + the 2nd law)
From: ecmtwhk@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Thomas Koenig)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 01:48:33 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

wiml@milton.u.washington.edu (William Lewis) writes:

>In article <1992Aug11.101042.16489@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz> ecmtwhk@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Thomas Koenig) writes:
>>Has anyone compiled a list of Niven's non-deliberate blunders and
>>other misconceptions?
[...]
>>Rotation in Neutron Star will kill Schaeffer (he owned up to that one
>>himself).

>  I've only ever heard vague hints about this one, never anything actually
>explainingthe problem. What's the catch?

I haven't done the calculations myself, but a good guess would be -
tides.

If the ship is not perfectly in line with the centre of mass of the
neutron star, there will be a torque resulting from the different
gravitational attraction on the different parts of the ship (provided
it is not a perfect sphere, but I seem to remember it was roughly
cylindrical). That torque will presumably leave the ship spinning
after it has left the immediate vicinity of the neutron star.

Anybody up to doing the calculations on that?

-- 
Thomas Koenig, ecmtwhk@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz, ib09@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de
The joy of engineering is to find a straight line on a double logarithmic
diagram.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: baylor@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com
Subject: Re: merpeople
Reply-To: baylor@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 18:54:41 GMT

In article <199208171901.AA27762@natinst.com>, kathrynw@radian.UUCP (Kathryn Whitworth) writes:
>*Superluminal*, hmm?  I'll go back and take a look at it.  Though I have not 
>been greatly impressed by McIntyre's science in the past.
Actually, one of her more recent works would be better. I forget the
name, but it's something like Star*ers. It goes a lot more into how the
divers (her mer-folk) are constructed. Also the sequel, "Transition" which 
has a young diver trying to adapt to a space-station environment.

RB
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Dinosaurs and Dragons, (mostly dinos)
From: jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com
Date: 21 Aug 92 09:37:12 GMT
Organization: Searle, Skokie, IL
Nntp-Posting-User: jjfink

In article <1992Aug20.165800.6811@u.washington.edu>, kellmer@milton.u.washington.edu (Brent Kellmer) writes:
> Well, I'm glad we finally dropped the idea that dragons came from Dinosauers
> Romantic--yes, likely--'fraid not.
> 
> ...The generally accepted reason for 
> this is that a meteorite hit the earth at that time.  The impact (which, 
> according to the _Science News_ I received yesterday has been almost positively
> pinpoints the impact crater as being on the north part of the Yucatan penninsulaand into the gulf -- 180 km in diameter!) fried much of the vegetation in the
> Americas and between the ash from the fires and the dust kicked up by the
> meteorite, gave the Earth a night that lasted at least 3 years (the original
> nuclear winter).  What this also did was to kill every land mammal (and most
> sea animals)                         [this should be land animal^^]
> over about 10-20 kg in body weight.  Larger than this could not survive without
> their food sources, even if they survived the impact itself.  

This is not entirely true.  A number of the crocodillians (alligators, etc.),
and possibly some large turles and toroise species.  Note that these are
long-lived, low-metabolism creatures, though.

Many of the surviving species and genera were scavengers and omnivores.

> As for man, the earliest forms of _homo_ that can be accounted for are about
> 4 million years ago, as Johansen and the Leakeys have found in the Olduvai
> gorge in sub-saharan Africa  (see _Lucy_ by D. Johanson et al.)  

But one of the unanswered questions is whether the FOSSILS of dinosaurs and
other large creatures (such as cave bears -- those skulls are SCARY) could
have been inspirations for the dragon myth.

-- 
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: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: general relativity
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 19:35:13 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Aug20.030919.23726@u.washington.edu> wiml@milton.u.washington.edu (William Lewis) writes:
>In article <1992Aug15.224133.9709@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>>In article <5755@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> phl@fiveg.icl.co.uk ( Peter H Liyanage) writes:
>>>		(I ask this cause in a science program I saw a few
>>>weeks ago, it said that the object would go through the building
>>>without damaging either its self or the building)

>>What was the science program?  Because whoever produced it had his
>>head firmly inserted about two feet up his anus.

>  Are you sure? There was an article in _Scientific American_ maybe 4 years
>ago which mentioned this. Of course, they were talking about heavy 
>nuclei, and they *did* interact to the point of heating each other
>up (whatever that means for an isolated nucleus...?), but it seems
>reasonable to assume that the science program was extrapolating this
>to larger objects.

Extrapolations from the sub-atomic to the macroscopic rarely work.  If
I shoot an individual atom at a sheet of gold foil I stand a fair
chance of sending it through without doing any damage to the foil.
Now try it with a golf ball.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
From: m1phm02@fed.frb.gov (Patrick H. McAllister)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Superconductors
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:26:03 GMT
Reply-To: m1phm02@fed.frb.gov (Patrick H. McAllister)
Organization: Federal Reserve Board, Wash, DC

In article <Bt6yD6.AGn@helios.physics.utoronto.ca>, neufeld@helios.physics.utoronto.ca (Christopher Neufeld) writes:
> In article <1992Aug18.145005.7655@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> ccw@prefect.uucp (26554-wood) writes:
> >I've read about hydro energy storage systems.  During the night, they
> >run separate pumps to put more water back into the reservoir from down
> >below.  During peak demand, they can run more water through the
> >turbines, and generate more electricity.
> >
>    Yes. I knew some had been approved for construction, but are there any
> which are actually being used for that purpose by utilities at the
> moment, as opposed to prototype or proof of concept plants?

PG&E has a very large such installation in the Sierra Nevada; I forget the name. Generating capacity is about the same as a large natural hydro installation, hundreds of MW. Water is transferred back and forth between two lakes that are -- I think -- about a thousand feet different in height. In contrast to the original description above, there is no need for separate pumps for moving the water uphill. The generators can also function as electric motors and apply power to run the turbine blades in reverse.
From: wiml@milton.u.washington.edu (William Lewis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: general relativity
Date: 20 Aug 92 03:09:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Aug20.030919.23726
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Aug15.224133.9709@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>In article <5755@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> phl@fiveg.icl.co.uk ( Peter H Liyanage) writes:
>>		(I ask this cause in a science program I saw a few
>>weeks ago, it said that the object would go through the building
>>without damaging either its self or the building)
>
>What was the science program?  Because whoever produced it had his
>head firmly inserted about two feet up his anus.

  Are you sure? There was an article in _Scientific American_ maybe 4 years
ago which mentioned this. Of course, they were talking about heavy 
nuclei, and they *did* interact to the point of heating each other
up (whatever that means for an isolated nucleus...?), but it seems
reasonable to assume that the science program was extrapolating this
to larger objects.


-- 
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: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Subject: Re: Dinosauers and Dragons, (mostly dinos)
Originator: nickh@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 19:15:47 GMT


In article <1992Aug20.165800.6811@u.washington.edu>
kellmer@milton.u.washington.edu (Brent Kellmer) writes a good
explanation of why dragons and dinosaurs are not related. Two comments
on the K-T boundary event:

- it seems extremely likely now that the Yucatan impact was
responsible for the mass extinction. The exact effects of this ("fried
much of the vegetation in the Americas and between the ash from the
fires and the dust kicked up by the meteorite, gave the Earth a night
that lasted at least 3 years") is based on our best models of that
kind of event, and seems very likely to be true.

- The Nemesis hypothesis (that the impact was of an object thrown out
of the Oort cloud by a small companion star to the sun) is _very_ much
in doubt, and relies mainly on a correlation between dates of mass
extinctions which many experts claim is bogus. The idea is that the
companion (Nemesis) intersects the cloud every 70 million years or so
and that this sends a great shower of large (radius of several
kilometres) objects down into the inner system. When one hits the
earth there is a mass extinction event. Thus these events are more
likely around these times, and that is the claimed correlation.
Nemesis is being hunted (by examining old starfield photos, as I
recall).

Nick
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: drenze@icaen.uiowa.edu (Douglass J. Renze)
Subject: Re: Evolution under High Gravity
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 01:53:31 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

daynem@byron.u.washington.edu (Dayne Miller) writes:

>>}   Hello, I am interested in getting the net.consensus (as if there ever
>>}is one) on the effects of living in a high gravity environment. I have noted
>>}that in *most* SF (at least the I have read), humanoids who live on high
>>}gravity worlds (relative to earth gravity anyway) are typically shorter,
>>}stockier, and stronger.
>>
>>Add effects on living in LOW gravity, and cross-post to talk.origins.
>>Velikovsites and Talbottians think that EARTH was once a low-g planet!

>     It seems to me that there was a story in some anthology dealing with
>representatives from a bunch of different planets being brought together
>by some "superior" alien race to test their mettle in a competitive environ-
>ment, or to fight a battle for them, or some such plotline. Anyway, the 
>rep from the humans found that his chief rival was some dude from a high-
>gravity world. His race was slightly shorter than the average human, but fairly thin, though quite strong. The single most notable effect of evolving in high
>gravity, though, was shit-hot reflexes. The alien could move in a blur when
>he wanted to. This makes sense, because in a high-gravity situation, acceler-
>ation is much higher, and any evolved beings that deal with ballistics (such
>as throwing rocks, swinging from trees, avoiding falling obstacles, etc.) 
>would have to have the reflexes to deal with it.

>     Anybody know what story this was?

>     Dayne Miller
>       daynem@u.washington.edu

Sounds like an old Buck Rogers' episode I remember watching way back when.



-- 
| Douglas J Renze            | "Jerry [Brown] is the equivalent of a          |
| drenze@icaen.uiowa.edu     |  drive-by shooting."                           |
| drenze@chop.isca.uiowa.edu |                                                |
| drenze@aol.com             |         * NPR's Morning Edition, 13 July 1992  |


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: malmberg@umsa8.umd.edu (Norwin Malmberg)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re^2: Niven's blunders (was:Superconductors + the 2nd law)
Date: 14 Aug 92 03:23:36 GMT

martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>ecmtwhk@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Thomas Koenig) writes:
>   neufeld@helios.physics.utoronto.ca (Christopher Neufeld) writes:

>   >   Niven strikes again. Superconductors, at least the ones we know about,
>   >are *poor* conductors of heat relative to the normal metals around.

>Not to be petty or anything, but in Mote in Gods Eye (at least -- does
>it show up anywhere else?), the heat-superconductor is quite
>specifically described as a HEAT superconductor, and is a wonderous
>thing for just that reason.  The 2nd Empire is quite aware of electrical
>superconductivity. 

Heat Superconductivity does exist.  The "super fluid" form of helium
is a heat superconductor.  No-one has (as far as I know) discovered
a high temperature form of this.

Norwin Malmberg
malmberg@umsa.umd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: ccw@prefect.uucp (26554-wood)
Subject: Re: Simultaneous events and frames of reference?
Reply-To: ccw@prefect.UUCP ()
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 13:11:02 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.211935.17309@bert.eecs.uic.edu> artn@bert.eecs.uic.edu
(Ellyn Sandor) writes:

>	There's two things to relativity I don't get.

>1) The twin paradox.  Twin O (old) stays home and twin Y (young) goes
>for a ride.  Fine, time slows down for the person accelerating .  But wait!
>Motion, acceleration, etc. is relative, right?  

Motion is relative, but acceleration is absolute.

>So, relative to twin Y, twin O is moving. 

Yes, except for the time when twin Y is accelerating away from the
earth, and when accelerating to turn around, and accelerating to a halt
at the end.

>Or is it purely acceleration (which is relative over
>time to ones last frame of reference) which causes time dilation.

In addition to motion, acceleration causes time dialation.

>Anyway, my point is, if relativity means there are no
>priviledged (sp?) reference frames, why does the twin who goes away get to
>stay younger? 

Because s/he is the one who accelerated.

[I can't really answer the disc question.  The answer is probably "it
flies apart long before the circumference is spinning > c."  Accelerated
reference frames make things complicated; rotating frames even more so.
  
>Thanks for treating my ignorance gently.

You're welcome.

>		Stephan

Chris


Chris Wood     Bellcore     ...!bellcore!prefect!ccw
                         or ccw@prefect.cc.bellcore.com

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science