HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: SPS
Date: 12 Oct 92 01:02:19 GMT
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology
	formerly National Bureau of Standards


-From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
-Subject: Re: SPS
-Date: 10 Oct 92 15:02:17 GMT
-Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

-In article <9210070441.AA10031@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts) writes:
->
->- But how do you convert the laser light back into electricity?
->- Photovoltics? Does not sound very efficiant to me.
->
->I was referring to the following device (repost):
->...
->Essentially, the infrared radiation is treated as *very* short wavelength
->microwaves. Perhaps the beam needs to be polarized for best results.
->The article didn't mention applicability for power reception - that such a
->detector might be useful for this is speculation on my part. 

-While such a detector could approach 90% collection efficiency, the problem 
-is in the power handling capacity of the tiny antennas and with the junction
-capacitance of the rectifying diodes. A structure micrometers in size
-can't carry much current. More importantly, we don't know how to fabricate
-diodes with a small enough junction capacitance to be efficient rectifiers
-at infrared frequencies. So, because of current carrying limits, the
-beam intensity can't be high, probably not as high as normal sunlight,
-and because of rectifier junction capacitance, the diodes won't be very
-efficient, probably less than 1%. Great sensors, lousy power converters.

Could you please make an estimate of the desired characteristics of such a
device? I come across reports of some pretty spectacular electronic
components from time to time, so it would be useful to know what to look
for. I believe the fastest diode I ever read about could switch at about
10^14 Hz, which sounds like it would be in the right ballpark for far
infrared rectification, but I don't recall any of its other properties.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: markb@spock.dis.cccd.edu (Mark Bixby)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: A Brief History of Time (movie)
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:10:37 GMT
Organization: Coast Community College District, Costa Mesa, CA

In article <9210080216.AA16820@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts) writes:
>The literary reference reminds me - the long-awaited Sci-Fi Channel is now
>up and running. It's mostly fiction, but it also has some science fact shows,
>including "The Science Show" and "Inside Space" - the latter hosted by a 
>famous science fiction celebrity. Last week's episode included a segment on
>virtual reality (with interesting video), and a clip from the *movie*
>"A Brief History of Time", which is apparently narrated by the author. (!)

"A Brief History of Time" is a quite fascinating movie.  No extensive knowledge
of cosmology is required to enjoy it.  Stephen Hawking does a lot of "talking",
but doesn't actually narrate the film.
-- 
Mark Bixby                         Internet: markb@spock.dis.cccd.edu
Coast Community College District   1370 Adams Avenue
District Information Services      Costa Mesa, CA, USA  92626
Technical Support                  (714) 432-5064
"You can tune a file system, but you can't tune a fish." - tunefs(1M)
From: roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Telepresence
Date: 11 Oct 92 04:48:10 GMT
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology
	formerly National Bureau of Standards


-From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
-Subject: Re: Telepresence
-Date: 10 Oct 92 14:42:41 GMT
-Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

-In article <9210070147.AA09594@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts) writes:
->
->  Predictive Display for Teleoperation With Delay
->
->  ...The simulator displays a phantom
->  image of the robot superimposed on the delayed "real" monitoring image of
->  the robot. The phantom responds to control signals immediately -- that is,
->  without transmission delay. Its motion predicts that of the real robot.
->  After the transmission delay, the real image of the robot follows the motion
->  of the phantom image.

-After successfully maneuvering the phantom image, the operator sits back
-and watches the delayed image of the rover slowly fall into a subsidence
-hidden from the scan. The screen image is replaced by the words "GAME 
-OVER. INSERT $1 BILLION TO PLAY AGAIN"

-Gary

Which is why all the serious Mars rover designs have safety systems built
in - such as the wheel position sensors on Rocky IV, and a few even have
mechanisms to right themselves, such as Go-For.

There are also many envisioned applications of teleoperation which are
*not* rovers. The demonstration project described in the NASA Tech Briefs
article involved a robot arm. I think we all agree that juggling by 
teleoperation is going to be a formidable task for a long time. (On the other
hand, some dynamic operations are much simpler - judging from my very limited
experience playing with a time-delay teleoperation demonstrator, the "running
start" bulldozer maneuvers you've described in previous years might actually
be practical.)

It would be interesting to use this feedback system on a rover - the cameras
would be on the rover itself, so the control system would project a phantom
rover in front of you, then as the return signal comes back, the landscape
starts moving, and the phantom rover moves from background to foreground
in the image, approaching the "screen" until it vanishes. (That's for a
long feedback path such as a Mars mission - an experienced operator of a
lunar rover might be able to maintain continuous motion much of the time,
so the phantom would be continually in sight.)

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: wpns@miki.pictel.com (Willie Smith)
Subject: Re: Telepresence
Organization: PictureTel Corporation
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:38:35 GMT

In article <9210110448.AA29189@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts) writes:

>an experienced operator of a
>lunar rover might be able to maintain continuous motion much of the time,
>so the phantom would be continually in sight.)

After an hour or two of driving my simulated lunar teleop vehicle
around, it's easy to do the 'forward estimation' in your head and
anticipate enough to move at a few feet per second.  Of course it
helps to have a bit of leeway, and any tricky stuff quickly
degenerates into "move-wait-move", but the human brain is pretty
adaptable.  Don't drive or operate heavy machinery immediately
afterwards though. :+)

Willie Smith
wpns@pictel.com
From: Frederick.A.Ringwald@dartmouth.edu (Frederick A. Ringwald)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Math programs with arbitrary precision for the Mac?
Date: 14 Oct 92 01:27:10 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <seal.719016011@leonardo>
seal@leonardo.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (David Seal) writes:

>  other mac programs or ways of computing pi?

You mean like this?

N[Pi, 1000]
3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749\
 
  4459230781640628620899862803482534211706798214808651328230\
 
  6647093844609550582231725359408128481117450284102701938521\
 
  1055596446229489549303819644288109756659334461284756482337\
 
  8678316527120190914564856692346034861045432664821339360726\
 
  0249141273724587006606315588174881520920962829254091715364\
 
  3678925903600113305305488204665213841469519415116094330572\
 
  7036575959195309218611738193261179310511854807446237996274\
 
  9567351885752724891227938183011949129833673362440656643086\
 
  0213949463952247371907021798609437027705392171762931767523\
 
  8467481846766940513200056812714526356082778577134275778960\
 
  9173637178721468440901224953430146549585371050792279689258\
 
  9235420199561121290219608640344181598136297747713099605187\
 
  0721134999999837297804995105973173281609631859502445945534\
 
  6908302642522308253344685035261931188171010003137838752886\
 
  5875332083814206171776691473035982534904287554687311595628\
 
  6388235378759375195778185778053217122680661300192787661119\
 
  590921642

This was done in about 4 seconds just now, read by me from a clock
on-screen, so it might be better, on a Mac II with 5 Megs of RAM, a
68030 chip with a 68881 coprocessor (which I'm not sure is even used),
under System 7.0.0 with virtual memory disabled, because it has never
worked on this machine - i.e., not the greatest Mac around, probably
slower than a new Classic II - with Mathematica 2.0.3 Enhanced. 

It's no wonder Mathematica is rapidly emerging as the standard, at
least in academia. Not only was I able to redo all the math I had in
all of high school, college, and grad school in an afternoon (my
favorite command is still InverseLaplaceTransform[expr, s, t]), but
it's also frighteningly easy to use. Pricey, but well worth it, and no,
Steven Wolfram didn't pay me to write this. (Perhaps he should...)

E-mail me if you're interested in 10,000 or more places,
fred.ringwald@dartmouth.edu
From: rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: SETI positive?
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 22:40:15 GMT
Organization: ucsd
NNTP-Posting-Host: lutherlab.ucsd.edu


>   I keep hearing rumors and there's this story in Newsweak (that our lackwit
>bookstore can't get til friday).  Allegedy we have a potential hit on a SETI
>search and a multi-telescope confimation is planned Oct 12-???

Well, why don't you just get on the phone and call NewsWeek about it???

Jeff Bytof
rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent)
Subject: Re: (none)
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:17:06 GMT

In article <Bvv7q6.KL9@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>
>You seem to have missed my other postings on this topic.  I, and many others,
>have been advocating that the government allow private space expenditures AS
>THOSE WISHING TO SPEND THE MONEY WANT TO.  At this time, it is illegal for
>an American to launch anything anywhere in the world without US government
>approval. 

This isn't that unusual if you think about.  I can't drive a car without the
government's permission (driver's liscence), my car can't be driven off my
property w/o govt's permission (lisence plates).  I can't get married, go
fishing or hunting (or flying!!) either.  I can't do much of anything that
might endanger society or some subgroup thereof.

The difficulty of obtaining the proper lisence is proportional to the damage
that could be done if something went wrong.  Marriage and fishing lisences
are easy to get, driver's lisences a bit harder, and pilot's lisences harder
still.  It shouldn't surprise anyone a lisence to launch several tons of
high explosives over people's heads is even harder.

Those who prove they can launch rockets safely can get a lisence.  Both 
General Dynamics and McDonnell Douglas have one, and they can launch payloads
without much further trouble.  Sounds reasonable to me.  It certainly has
ample precedent.

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
All facts in this post are based on publicly available information.  All
opinions expressed are solely those of the author.    Apple II Forever !!
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: DC-X vote
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 15:53:27 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <92290.100149U57567@uicvm.uic.edu> <U57567@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>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?

Wrong.  See the sci.space FAQ list, where I believe it is discussed.  Real
quick summary:  it is a suborbital test vehicle for a radically new orbital
launch concept, one that could bring costs down enormously and really open
up space.  It is funded through SDIO simply because they're the only agency
interested in space that is young enough to be open-minded.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: nicho@VNET.IBM.COM
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Re : Carl Sagan
Date: 9 Oct 92 11:49:17 GMT
Reply-To: nicho@vnet.ibm.com

In <BvtuMy.DGD.1@cs.cmu.edu> "Phil G. Fraering" writes:
>\>A glance at American Men and Women of Science shows Carl Sagan with:
>/>AB - 1954, BS - 1955, MS - 1956, PhD - 1960 (Astron,Astrophys)
>\>all granted by the University of Chicago.
>/Doesn't he also have a medical degree from Stanford?
>I don't think so, but I think there's a degree from Cornell
>missing somewhere in there.

  Seems that I owe the gentleman an apology then. He's obviously
been the victim of some _very_ unkind gossip.

 -----------------------------------------------------------------
               ** Of course I don't speak for IBM **
Greg Nicholls ... nicho@vnet.ibm.com or nicho@cix.compulink.co.uk
                  voice/fax: 44-794-516038
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Drop nuc waste into sun
Date: 9 Oct 92 22:37:37 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester

In article <138588@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> roberts@phoenix.ocf.llnl.gov (Don Roberts) writes:

> Are there serious technical objections to dumping suitably "leak-proof"
> bcontainers (i.e., whatever they plan to use in a Yucca Mt.-type repository)
> into a subduction zone at the bottom of the ocean?

It's a non-starter.  First of all, subduction is very slow.  Plates
only move maybe 5 cm per year.  So, in 10,000 years, the stuff has
moved only 500 meters.  It's not quickly sucked down into the mantle.

Second, the sediments at a subduction zone are very active.  They
get scraped off and form "mud volcanoes" on the ocean floor.  Not
where you want to put waste.

It would make more sense to put them far away from subduction zones,
in the ocean floor, so that by the time they are subducted they
are decayed away.  But this is just sea-bed disposal, which has
been considered for years.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins)
Subject: Re: Bootstrap hardware for LunaBase
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 04:43:45 GMT

szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:

>In article <1992Oct6.203214.336@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>>For the amounts we are talking about it would be cost effective to develop
>>any of several ideas which would reduce launch costs to the moon by one
>>to two orders of magnitude.

>2. We should develop these ideas to reduce launch costs, instead of
>assuming them.

Nick, think for a minute.  Isn't it a little silly to tell _Allen Sherzer_ that
we need to develop this instead of assume it?  I kinda get the impression he 
knows that.

>  At one order of magnitude
>drop, it would make economic sense to move practically every radio
>and TV broadcast tower to Clarke orbit, for example.

Excuse me?  Where did _this_ come from?

>>SSF to construction only runs $30 billion. A second set for a lunar base
>>would run far far less.

>It is ridiculous to count only construction costs.  We must also include
>launch and life-cycle costs.  That brings us to $150 billion.
>Furthermore, we need to develop Apollo-style launch hardware, but larger
>and from scratch, so we add on the $120 billion Apollo costs, bringing
>us to $270 billion.

Nick, these are some of the least useful numbers I've seen since Bush's campaign
ads.  They don't mean _anything_.  How long a life-cycle are you assuming?  What
launch cost did you use?  What level of experience did you assume?

>>It looks like there is no point analyzing Nick's post...

>True, there is no point in analyzing my posts if you are not willing
>to be open minded to the facts, instead of wishes like
>"one or two orders of magnitude drop on launch costs" which 
>magically benefit your pet project and nobody else's.

1) Expressing one's opinions and quoting statistics should not be concluded with
adversarial remarks about avoiding "the facts."

2) Drops in launch costs will not benefit everyone equally.  I don't know off
hand which of you gets the biggest benefit, but please don't assume out of 
hand that he's wrong.

-- 
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
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Galileo Update - 10/07/92
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  Galileo, JPL
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 02:18:48 GMT

Forwarded from:
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIF. 91109.  TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011

                     GALILEO MISSION STATUS
                         October 7, 1992

The Galileo spacecraft is less than 61 million kilometers (38
million miles) from Earth.  It is just over two months to the
second and final Earth Gravity Assist that will set its course
leading to Jupiter arrival on December 7, 1995.

The spacecraft health and performance are excellent.  Yesterday
the telemetry data rate was switched from 40 to 1200 bits per
second.  This was the first time since June 1991 that the
spacecraft position allowed high-rate engineering telemetry. 
Today the spacecraft reads out cruise-science data collected over
the last two and a half weeks.

Friday, October 9, Galileo will execute a small trajectory
correction maneuver, slightly increasing its speed and bending
its flight path to refine the Earth flyby conditions.

                              ##### 
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Einstein's brain is stored
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | in a mason jar in a lab
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | in Wichita, Kansas.
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: UFO EVIDENCE VS. Carl Sagan
Date: 7 Oct 92 12:28:12 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com

In article <rabjab.12.718419379@golem.ucsd.edu> rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu  
(Jeff Bytof) writes:
> Robert E. McElwaine, Esq., states:
> 
> >          It's too bad that so many people accept his [Dr. Carl  
Sagan's] 
> >          pronouncements without question.  
> 
> I agree with Bob, but only on this one, *small*,  point.
> 
> Jeff Bytof
> rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu
> 
> (I am of course referring to Dr. Sagan's hobby interests - "ethical
>  macaques" and the thesis that Patrick Buchanan is a "baboon" -
>  not to his well-founded and exciting work modeling the chemistry  
of 
>  Saturn's moon, Titan!)

Why?  Because it is unfair to the baboons?


--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
From: agc@bmdhh286.bnr.ca (Alan Carter)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: X-Ray Maps of Earth ?
Date: 15 Oct 92 09:37:18 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: BNR-Europe-Limited, Maidenhead, England

In article <965529.16757@ABBS.zer.sub.org>, m.breunig@abbs.hanse.de (Max Breunig) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> From: UUCP/Sci/Astro
|> >Betrifft         : X-ray map of N. California
|> >Erstellungsdatum : 07.10.92 18:08
|> >
|> >From: J103680@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
|> >Message-Id: 92279.49812.J103680@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
|> >Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
|> >
|> >I am searching for an X-ray map of Northern California to
|> >reveal caves and caverns underground.  Know of any sources?
|> >
|> Sounds interesting !
|> I have never heard of any X-ray maping of earth.
|> Knows anyone of such a project and some details on it ?

Er... Guys, how *hard* are these X-rays going to be? 
Should I hide the family jewels behind the moon, or would 
a small asteroid be sufficient :-)

   Alan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Maidenhead itself is too snobby to be pleasant. It is the haunt of the
   river swell and his overdressed female companion. It is the town of showy
   hotels, patronized chiefly by dudes and ballet girls. 

   Three Men In A Boat, Jerome K. Jerome, 1889
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Re: Luna 10
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 23:14:58 GMT

In article <Bw778M.IBB@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes...
>In article <n0c2dt@ofa123.fidonet.org> David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org writes:
>>However, the Soviet Union launched a spacecraft that carried a gamma
>>spectrometer into a polar lunar orbit (71 degrees inclination), back
>>in 1966. Has anyone ever seen the data from this instrument? ...
>

Luna 10 carried an instrument called a gamma ray detector and it recorded
natural radioactivity in the lunar soil and showed it to be similar to
terrestrial basalt.  It also detected that the cosmic ray background was
higher than expected at five particles/cm^2/sec.  The actual data from the
instrument probably hasn't been released because the data was collected
during the time of Moon race.

>I doubt that this was a gamma-ray spectrometer in the sense that the term
>is now usually used, i.e. something useful for surface mapping.  If it was,
>the data has never been released; Lunar Sourcebook, the authoritative
>source on virtually everything known about the Moon, doesn't even mention
>Luna 10.

The Lunar Sourcebook is a very good book and very thorough, but it does
have a couple of holes.  Hopefully, there will be a second edition to 
include more data from the Soviet lunar missions and the recent lunar
data collected by Galileo.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | If God had wanted us to 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | have elections, he would 
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | have given us candidates.
From: sl25@cus.cam.ac.uk (Steve Linton)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Gallileo's antenna
Keywords: gallileo
Date: 16 Oct 92 04:04:07 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <u926135.719198093@tasman>, u926135@tasman.cc.utas.edu.au (Adrian Hassall Lewis) writes:

|> Would it be feasible to send a small robot after Gallileo that would
|> clamp itself onto antenna pole and then push in the pins that are
|> holding the ribs shut?
|> I can see several problems - revendous (damn, how do you spell it?), and
|> making an antenna small enough for the robot.
|> However, it also seems to me that control is not a problem as you wouldn't
|> need real time control.  This also seems a helluva lot simpler than sending
|> an entirely new high-gain antenna.

A whole range of fixes based on extra space-flights have been proposed, some to
fix Gallilileo as it comes past Earth, others to dispatch a communications relay
to Jupiter to retransmit high-speed telemetry from Gallileo's LGA. All
essentially foundered on the problem of designing a new piece of hardware and
getting it ready to fly in the available time. Anything intended to work near
Jupiter would also have had to be nuclear powered and the generators needed are
in very short supply, and would have to survive the very hostile environment
around Jupiter.
Newsgroups: sci.space