HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Automated space station construction
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 06:42:56 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.160447.12613@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>But wouldn't the robots been discussed here be operated remotely by
>>ground based people.  This way, there is no need to program much AI
>>into the system.  

>That isn't robotics, it's teleoperation. That's available now. The
>Shuttle has the Canadarm and so will Freedom. They're operated on
>site because the maximum 7 second communications delay through the
>relay satellites is too much for real time assembly from the ground.
>Robots have autonomy, at least of a limited kind. 

Is anyone looking into robots with very limited autonomy? That is,
under direction from a human, but able to execute instructions on
their own for periods of, say, ten seconds?

                                         Frank Crary
                                         CU Boulder
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: NASA coverup
Date: 14 Nov 92 02:47:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxoqG5.JAo.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU


-From: elling.olsen@thcave.no (Elling Olsen)
-Subject: NASA COVERUP
-Date: 11 Nov 92 18:09:00 GMT
-Organization: Thunderball Cave BBS - Oslo, Norway  (47 2) 56 70 18

-EO>Why don't you do some work and disprove the claim that the
-EO>earth/moon neutral point have changed from 20,000-25,000 miles
-EO>to 43,495 miles from the center of the moon?

-HS>I have too much real, worthwhile work to do already.

-EO>Or is it more
-EO>confortable to sit in your couch judging and laughing?

-HS>"They laughed at Fulton."
-HS>
-HS>"Yes, but they also laughed at Rube Goldberg."

-With limited time, I understand and respect peoples need to do
-what they consider real and worthwhile.  What I feel rather
-strongly about is someones need to laugh at what they know
-little about and do not care to look at.  

Henry knows a lot about the moon. When one can immediately think of
several dozen counterexamples (and in fact some of them were discussed in
sci.space a few months ago), then one may not feel a very strong incentive
to go to the trouble to disprove yet another wild theory.

-I do not know about
-Fulton or Rube Goldberg, so please enlighten me.  My current
-interpretation of Henry Spencers comment is that he finds it OK
-to laugh at Fulton because Rube Goldberg was wrong.  I find that
-kind of attitude very saddening, more so when it comes from one
-interested in science and even more so if the person happens to
-be a scientist.  

This analysis assumes there's a shortage of crackpot theories - in fact,
they're abundant. There are plenty of more plausible theories that can
be analyzed - when a post comes along that contradicts an enormous number
of prior observations, and the analysis used to support the new theory is
very incomplete, it's reasonable to suggest the poster go back to the 
drawing board and work through the analysis again. Henry has very gracefully
shot down many less outrageous theories (including some of mine :-).
Anyway, snarfy got plenty of technical replies.

-Such a person may be useful in science, but it
-is not likely he will do anything outrageous for his time.  He
-will not invent the telephone, build an airplane, ask the
-doctors to wash their hands after touching a corpse or (read my
-lips) find a cure for AIDS.

Among other things, Henry has done considerable work on an innovative
solar sail. Many people who posted sarcastic replies to snarfy have done
extensive serious work on improving space exploration.

(What's that quote about keeping an open mind?)

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: "Earth Gains a Retinue of Mini-Asteroids"
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:58:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxAxsL.LLC.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

> By the way, the Tuguska event was observed by residents of the 

> region and their description of the explosion matchs that of a  
nuclear
> bomb blast quite closely.
> 


Thanks. I had not heard that. I was thinking in terms of small icy  
objects with a downward moving shockwave shattering and spreading  
their energy over a wide region rather than a fireball with the  
energy density necessary to create a rapidly rising column with  
entrained air/debris. The photos and information I had previously  
been aware of seemed to indicate an effect more like the mother of  
all downbursts for Tunguska. :-)

With objects sized on the order of Barringer I can well imagine the  
mushroom cloud occuring: the energy is released very rapidly and in a  
very small area. Although at a certain size the explosion simply  
blows a hole in the atmosphere, ie it is a circular curtain rather  
than a mushroom cloud. 
Xref: sparky sci.space:15680 alt.conspiracy:12108
From: hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack)
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: NASA Coverup
Keywords: snarfy concedes
Date: 11 Nov 92 00:17:13 GMT
Organization: Lockheed ESC, Houston

In article <4608@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes:
>    I  rented  a  videotape  called "Man to the Moon" ,produced by CBS news.
>   Timing Buzz Aldrin's leap from the 3 foot bottom rung of the Lunar Module
>   ladder , I come up with about 1 second ,which would be consistent with  a
>   lunar  gravity  of  1/6. Although he still to be holding on to the ladder
>   throughout the leap , it seems that it is just to steady himself , not to
>   slow the fall.
>
>    On this basis then, I concede that the lunar gravity is 1/6 .
>   ______________________________________________________________

Good. It would have been unfortunate and embarassing for us to have been
found out right now.  The AmAzIng NEUTRAL PARTICLE BEAMS were about
ready for testing.  :-)

>    I  apologize  ,publicly  ,  over the net, to the general class of people
>   known as "NASA Scientists" who I accused of concealing  the  truth  about
>   the lunar gravity.

Thanks.
>
[munch]
>    I  will  continue , however to point out alternative theories to account
>   for various facts  of  nature.  Theories  are  not  science,  but  merely
>   suggestions  of  possible  explanations  for  observed  phenomena  .   An
>   alternate theory need only be logically and mathematically consistent  to
>   be as viable as relativity , or any other theory.

No, what you have is necessary, but not sufficient.  It must also be
testable and make some predictions about the universe to be as viable as
relativity (General or Special). (This is true to first order.  I am
aware that there is some discussion in philosophy of science about
falsifiability, as well as other nits.)
>
>    I  am  , at least,gratified to learn that Velikovsky's idea of planetary
>   collisions , long scorned and ridiculed by the scientific community ,  is
>   now the prevailing theory explaining the origin of the moon.

No, no, no. NONE of Velikovsky's ideas are (at least as explained in the
copy of "Worlds in Collision" I have) accepted in the mainstream of
planetary and lunar science.  They are, in general, WRONG. Very wrong.
As wrong as the Question to the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life,
the Universe and Everything.

>   More on this later.

Do tell......


-- 
Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov - I speak only for myself, unless blah, blah..
NAR 12256 TRA 2004 (dang, 3 too late, Hal.....)
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Automated space station construction
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 05:02:18 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Nov3.013132.25461@access.usask.ca> choy@skorpio.usask.ca (I am a terminator.) writes:
>Gimme a few hours worth of money (n x 55000) and some rockets and I bet
>I can whip up robots that'll put together a space station...

Same way you can "whip up" hardware to grapple with an Intelsat?  That one
didn't work, remember?  The test of your hardware is not whether it can do
what you expect, but whether it can cope with the unexpected... which *will*
happen.

>... I can cut costs by
>not worrying about paperwork and all that. I can follow standard procedure
>to avoid colliding with satellites and such stuff. Don't those people at NASA
>have skunkworks?

Nope.  Congress won't allow it.  Doesn't cost enough.
-- 
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
Xref: sparky sci.space:15855 alt.sci.planetary:314
From: butler@cluster.gps.caltech.edu (Bryan Butler)
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check
Keywords: mercury, ice
Date: 13 Nov 92 03:16:40 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: cluster.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Nov11.002243.20606@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy) writes:
>Henry Spencer writes:
>#Even so, nobody would have been rash enough to *predict* ice there.
>#Recent radar-mapping work shows strong echos from Mercury's poles which are
>#very difficult to explain as anything but ice deposits.
>
>The late Axel Firsoff has predicted ice on the caps of Mercury. 
>

do you have a reference for this?  people did consider the trapping
of volatiles in shaded regions of Mercury (see e.g. Kumar, and
Gibson), and ice was even suggested in permanently shaded regions
(see Thomas), but i think the point was that nobody really _strongly
predicted_ detectable amounts of ice at the poles of Mercury.

Gibson, E. K., Jr., Phys. of Earth and Plan. Int., 15, 303-312, 1977
Kumar, S., Icarus, 28, 579-591, 1976
Thomas, G. E., Science, 183, 1197-1198, 1974


>However, Firsoff was known to have some "non-mainstream" ideas also. 
>
>--
>-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
> USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
> Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
> UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w

	-bryan
	 butler@cluster.gps.caltech.edu
      or butler_b@caltech.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject:  Edit your newsgroup header, please  was Re: Lunar "colony" reality check and Apollo fire
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 05:46:46 GMT

In article <BxIzDp.6q2@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> mechalas@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (John Mechalas) writes:
>In article <lg0co3INNh1i@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes:
>>In article <roelle.721413660@uars_mag> roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle) writes:

There is no reason to have a thread going exactly and totally into two 
different newsgroups. If you see this happening, please edit your headers 
so we can limit the thread to one group or the other.




-- 
David Knapp                                   University of Colorado, Boulder
Perpetual Student                                 knapp@spot.colorado.edu
Looks like hate *is* a family value after all and Colorado families are for it.

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Plant growth
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: [via International Space University]
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 13:17:06 GMT

I'm aware of several studies. There was a group at (I think)  
University of Arizona that had a rotating chamber with lettuce and  
such growing on the inside.

There was at least one paper presented at the second Lunar Base  
Symposium.... (I'm STILL waiting for my proceedings on that. Anyone  
else heard anything?)

There also have been experiments on MIR and some seed germination  
experiments on the shuttle.

(I'll bet Henry has already responded with a bibliography. Just  
*WAIT* until I get my file cabinet on line Henry!!! :-)

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Man in space ... 
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 00:59:56 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Nov5.062650.20243@ils.nwu.edu> eric@ils.nwu.edu (Eric Goldstein) writes:
>I vividly remember a NASA publication entitled "14 seconds of useful
>consciousness."  The claim was that, in case of rapid decompression, a
>human had 14 seconds to fasten a helmet, close a door, throw a switch, or
>whatever.  Not that you were seriously injured in that time, but you would
>be incapable of taking whatever actions were necessary to save your life
>after 14 seconds.

I haven't seen this publication.  I would suspect that the number assumes
you are taken by surprise, and is based on how much consciousness you can
expect before anoxia starts taking your brain down.  As Clarke has pointed
out, if you *expect* the decompression, you can boost your internal oxygen
supply considerably by hyperventilating first.
-- 
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
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent)
Subject: Re: Addr: SPACWE FOOD
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Distribution: sci
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 20:17:40 GMT

In article <Bxo3r3.9I.1@cs.cmu.edu> KEVIN@VM.CC.FAMU.EDU ("Kevin R. Cain") writes:
>Nigel Allen posted:
>
>>The standard Shuttle menu supplies each crew member with three
>>balanced meals, providing 2,800 kilocalories each day.  Diets are
>
>WOW! No wonder they say that the shuttle glides like a brick. At 2,800
>kilocalories a day per I'm not suprised!  :-)
>
>As the saying goes, what's a order of magnitude among friends.

The original article was correct.  A calorie is defined as the amount of heat
required to raise one milliliter of water one Celsius degree.  A kilocalorie
is 1000 such beasts.  The "calorie" listed on food packaging is really the
kilocalorie with the "kilo" dropped for convenience.

Otherwise, can you imagine a blond fashion model reading a diet Coke can
saying "only 1000 calories per serving"?

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Subject: Re: Nylon
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:44:21 GMT


-From: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu (Doug Mohney)
-Subject: Re: reality check
-Date: 10 Nov 92 15:33:40 GMT
-Organization: Computer Aided Design Lab, U. of Maryland College Park

-In article <BxHHnI.B2o.1@cs.cmu.edu>, roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:
->So ship it in the form of nylon. Plenty of hydrogen, nitrogen, and carbon,
->and able to withstand high impact velocity, which should save considerably
->on delta-v to land it on the moon.

-How difficult is it to break down nylon into useable components? Burn it or
-shove some ozone at it? 

I mentioned nylon because it contains nitrogen, and because I believe it's
one of the materials used to make sabots for subcaliber ammunition, thus
demonstrating that it can withstand accelerations of up to hundreds of
thousands of G's (thus it can hit the moon *very* hard and still be recovered -
I don't think it would withstand free-fall from infinity, but it could still
save quite a bit on landing costs).

I don't know the best way to break down nylon - I can't even find it in the
CRC Handbook (though I presume it's there). If nothing else, brute-force
methods like heating and electrolysis ought to break it down into more
easily-managed compounds. If the cost is less than the incremental cost of
soft-landing the constituents in more fragile form (still very expensive,
by all accounts), then you come out ahead.

Some other form of plastic might be better - I'm not an expert in organic
chemistry. The only one I understand reasonably well is polyethylene,
and that doesn't contain any nitrogen.

Plastic is one of the propellants proposed for laser launchers. One could
imagine small payloads launched by laser from Earth, with small rockets to
kill enough of the reentry velocity for the plastic payload to survive
impact on the moon. Perhaps even better in the long run, you could make
the entire rocket out of plastic - use a laser lander on the moon to kill
some of the velocity and to direct it to a specified landing site.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov

Xref: sparky sci.space:15427 sci.astro:11738 sci.physics.fusion:2629
From: bobp@hal.com (Bob Pendleton)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: clarke's law
Date: 7 Nov 92 01:16:15 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.

From article <L_A=lF#@engin.umich.edu>, by hillig@U.Chem.LSA.UMich.EDU (Kurt Hillig):
> In article <1992Nov4.220319.29777@cs.ucf.edu> clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke) writes:
> 
>>Someone recently posted Clarke's law.  The one about
>>if a senior scientist says possible he's probably right,
>>if he says impossible he's probably wrong.
>>
>>Could you e-mail me the exact quotation?  I need to cite it
>>in a paper and don't want to go digging in the library.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>--
>>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
>>
>>no relation
> 
> Funny, the one I learned as "Clarke's Law" is:
> 
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
> 
> -- 
> Kurt Hillig
> Dept. of Chemistry                     khillig@umich.edu
> University of Michigan           Telephone (313)747-2867
> Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1055      hillig@chem.lsa.umich.edu

Clarke is allowed to have many laws. Both of these are known as
"Clarke's Law."


-- 
Bob Pendleton             | As an engineer I hate to hear:
bobp@hal.com              |   1) You've earned an "I told you so."
Speaking only for myself. |   2) Our customers don't do that.
                   <<< Odin, after the well of Mimir. >>>
From: chris@spuddy.uucp (Chris Allen)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Positioning Satellites?
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:38:43 GMT
Organization: Spuddy's Public Usenet Domain


Can anybody help me? (perhaps by telling me which group this *should* be in :)

I have heard people mention a satellite or satellites whose signal enables
you to find your position wherever you happen to be.

Can anybody tell me more - or point me to papers or references?

many thanks,


chris allen.

-- 

 * Meeeow ! Call Spuddy on (0203) 638780/682331 for FREE mail & Usenet access *
From: mcginnis@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Looking for FTP site to get pictures
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:00:05 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

I'm looking for an FTP site that accepts ANONYMOUS logins.

I'd like to get space images... telescope images, etc.  I
have heard that NASA has such public access sites.

Email replies preferred.

Michael McGinnis                Internet: mcginnis@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Computer Center                   Bitnet: mcginnis@ukanvax
University of Kansas               Voice: (913)864-0413
Lawrence, KS  66045                  FAX: (913)864-0485

Rust never sleeps.
From: kwp@wag.caltech.edu (Kevin W. Plaxco)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Mars Simulation in Antarctica
Date: 11 Nov 1992 22:43:36 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: sgi1.wag.caltech.edu

In article <1992Nov10.224620.15116@news.arc.nasa.gov>, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes...
>"Dante" to Descend into Volcanic "Inferno"
> 
>	Later this season, NASA plans to send an eight-legged robot into the
>crater of Antarctica's Mount Erebus, the world's only easily-reached volcano
>with a permanent lava lake.  

This is obviously some new definition of the phrase "easily-reached".
Where are there lava lakes that are harder to reach?  Unless, of
course, there are political considerations I am unaware of.

Come to think of it, Mars will be rather easier to explore than our 
planet; no tricky visa's to obtain or obstinate customs agents (yet).

-Kevin




Xref: sparky sci.space:15585 sci.astro:11810
From: ephillip@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Earl W Phillips)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: imdisp
Date: 10 Nov 92 02:04:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: magnus.CMM.0.90.4.721361081.ephillip
Organization: The Ohio State University

Does anyone know what images are used for the imdisp
software, and where to get 'em?

*****************************************************************
*                                    | ====@====      ///////// *
* ephillip@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu|     ``________//         *
*                                    |       `------'           *
*                 -JR-               | Space;........the final  *
*                                    | frontier...............  *
*****************************************************************
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Hartmut Frommert)
Subject: Re: N-1 giant Moon rocket photo in *AvLeak*
Organization: Dept. of Physics, University of Constance
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 09:02:40 GMT

higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:

>The new 9 November issue of *Aviation Week* just hit my mailbox.  On
>page 65 is a nice photograph of the Soviet N-1 rocket on its pad with
>service tower.   The N-1 was the "Soviet Saturn V," the BIG rocket
>whose failure doomed their manned lunar landing program.

Could someone, please, make a .GIF and post on a ftp-server ?
--
 Hartmut Frommert                 <phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de>
 Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany
                                           -- Eat whale killers, not whales --
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy
From: kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent)
Subject: Re: NASA Coverup
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:58:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.154726.21410@pixel.kodak.com> dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
>snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us wrote:
>> 
>>    Who's Henry?
>> 
>Nothing could more clearly demonstrate Attention Deficit Syndrome.
>Try reading something other than your own postings for a while.

Don't be so quick to flame.  This thread is cross-posted to sci.space and
alt.conspiracy.  Although we on sci.space may know Henry on a first name
basis, the rest of the net probably does not.

For those on alt.conspiracy:  Henry is an artificial intelligence (AI) project
at the University of Toronto whose job is to keep the signal to noise ratio
of sci.space from getting too low.  :)

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!
Newsgroups: sci.space