HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Let's be more specific (was: Stupid Shut Cost arguements)
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:30:48 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.140536.8295@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>In article <1993Jan10.171824.25105@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>>>Why does this have to wait for Freedom?  We could do that right now.  
>>>In fact, we'd save money launching Freedom on Energia instead of Shuttle.
>
>>The *redesign* (yet again) of Freedom required for it to be launched
>>by Energia would very likely cost more than any launch cost savings
>>that might be achieved.
>
>An internal NASA group examining that posibility a year ago came fo the
>opposite conclusion. They concluded that assembly costs could be cut
>in half if the orbit was changed to 51 degrees and Energia was used.

But how do assembly costs compare to *redesign* costs Allen? That's
the point I was raising. I'm *sure* assembly costs would be reduced
if less assembly were necessary. That's almost axiomatic.

Gary

-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Moon Dust For Sale
Keywords: U.S. Government funding
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 06:39:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.183139.3779@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>
>Of course, the preceding reasoning assumes that the sole function of
>the entire Moon program was to produce those rocks as a product.  I
>think there was just a BIT more to it than that.  Using the same
>logic, one could say that we paid $67 billion to develop Tang.

And worth every penny. Yum, yum. :-) :-)

Gary

-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu
Xref: sparky sci.space:18865 talk.politics.space:1676
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space
Subject: Re: Government-run programs Was: Re: Justification for the Space Program
Date: 6 Jan 93 21:34:30 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., 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.

In <1993Jan4.191800.12395@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:

>After the first Apollo landing, TV ratings for space coverage dropped
>sharply. The media took their cue from that. It's only climbed into
>the top 50 *once* after that, that was the launch after Challenger.

And Star Trek was always at the bottom of the ratings...
From: wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Orbital elements of junk in space wanted
Date: 4 Jan 93 19:59:00 GMT
Organization: Alpha Science Computer Network, Denver, Co.

In article <1i5ncmINNh0g@clinet.fi| jeppe@clinet.fi (Joachim Paganus) writes:
|I'm looking for a '2-line orbital elements list' of junk, i.e. deceased
|satellites, rocket-bodies and other debris that is still in orbit.
|I have one very old list, but where could I get a list that is up to
|date? (I don't know from where I got the list I have)
|
Two-line orbital elements for every unclassified object in orbit
are available on the Reports and Information Dissemination Remote
Bulletin Board System by modem. Phone (301) 306-0010.
-- 
Bruce Watson (wats@scicom) Bulletin 629-49 Item 6700 Extract 75,131
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Space Questions and more..
Date: 6 Jan 93 18:20:51 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <SHAFER.93Jan6083034@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov> shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes:
>> When DCX flys, why not use it as a way to lift a small payload such as the
>> "solar Sail Race" contestants into space? That is if the contestants are
>> unmanned..
>
>Probably because DC-X is only going to 30,000 ft...

In fact, since that's about 10km, and solar sails don't function worth a
damn below about 1000km, we have another member for the what's-a-few-
orders-of-magnitude-between-friends club. :-)
-- 
"God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
       -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: question on privately funded space colonization
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:34:23 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <C0MBCs.EIA.1@cs.cmu.edu> roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:
>...Your complaint is that US citizens can't circumvent US safety
>regulations by going overseas. I don't see why they can't launch and also
>conform to the safety regulations.

John, are you under the impression that safety is the only reason why the
US government can refuse permission for a launch?  Would that it were so.
If you want to fly a plane, that's more or less true.  But if you want to
launch a rocket, they can refuse permission because it is "not in the
national interest", they don't have to explain, and there is no appeal.
For example, for some years it was government policy that any private
remote-sensing satellite with ground resolution better than 30m would
be denied launch permission.

One of the more interesting provisions of the late, lamented Commercial
Space Incentive Act was a clause exempting launches carried out under it
from DOT regulation *except* for safety.

>... And consider human rights issues - suppose
>US citizens set up a colony on the moon, and decide to revive the
>institution of slavery - would you say the US would have no legitimate
>interest in the matter?

Suppose we stack the deck the other way.  US citizens set up a lunar
colony.  The US then gets involved in a nasty little war in a country
named, say, Nam Viet, and reinstates the draft.  Some of the residents
of the lunar colony are draft-age, and they are ordered to report to
an induction center.  They refuse, noting that slavery was abolished
in the US over a century ago, and that the constitutional amendment
which did it made no exception for the US Army.  The colony's government
backs them, noting that the Neocommunist revolutionary movement in
Nam Viet presents no threat to the colony.  Does the US have a legitimate
interest in *this* matter?

The war gets worse.  Some of the colony residents were formerly members
of the Neocommunist party.  The US government decides that having such
people on the Moon is a security risk, and orders them returned to Earth.
The colony government refuses.  Does the US have a legitimate interest
in *this* matter?

The war becomes increasingly brutal.  A visiting US astronaut, who happens
to be a USAF officer, declares his opposition to the tactics being used
(on the grounds that they are illegal) and requests political asylum in
the colony.  The colony grants it.  The US demands his return for trial.
Does the US have a legitimate interest in *this* matter?  (Note, regarding
John's comments about "governments that ignore international laws and
agreements", that the colony is doing just that!  The Outer Space Treaty
requires return of astronauts, and makes no provision for political
asylum.)
-- 
"God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
       -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Xref: sparky sci.space:18803 news.answers:4962
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: question on privately funded space colonization
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Distribution: sci
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 13:40:19 GMT

In article <C0GxFn.9x.1@cs.cmu.edu> roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:

>If it's the principle of eminent domain that you're worried about, then
>yes, that could theoretically happen. But the same applies to activities
>on the Earth.

No, it's worse than that. For example, up untill a few weeks ago government
policy made it impossible to have a private remote sensing. Under the old
policy, the DoC could grant a licence for a satellite but then later
could revoke it for any reason. Nobody is going to invest in remote
sensing under these conditions.

BTW, the first private remove sensing licence was issued on Jan 4 to
Wroldview. This was made possible by the commercial space additions
to the NASA authorization. The commercial additions themselves where
made possible by the space activists who worked to get it and the
Omnibus Commercial Space Act passed.

  Allen
-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------106 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.optics,sci.physics
From: ellis@msl475a.erim.org (Ken Ellis)
Subject: Re: getting temperature from weather maps
In-reply-to: dls@wuee1.wustl.edu's message of Wed, 6 Jan 1993 20:53:37 GMT
Organization: Environmental Research Institute of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Distribution: usa
Date: 7 Jan 93 07:54:36


	Typically the temperature is found using a method similar to
what you suggested. The spectral response of each channel of the
satellite sensor is known (contact the manufacturer or the agency that
owns the satellite). The Planck blackbody spectrum is computed for a
range of temperatures. Each spectrum is then multiplied by the sensor
spectral response and integrated to obtain the total in-band radiance.
This generates a curve of measured radiance as a function of
temperature. The apparent temperature of the ground can then be
determined from this curve by looking for the temperature that
corresponds to a measured radiance. This method implicitly assumes
that the ground is a blackbody radiator (has unity emissivity).

	This may not give very accurate estimates of the true
temperature, since the emissivity typically varies between 0.8 and
1.0. If the true temperature is 300 K, the apparent temperature could
vary by as much as 13 C at 10 microns wavelength due to fluctuations
in emissivity. Separating emissivity variations from temperature
variations has been the big bugaboo of IR remote sensing almost from
the start. 

	There have been many attempts to work around this ambiguity.
We have recently developed a statistical technique at ERIM that looks
very promising under some conditions. It exploits the correlation
between different spectral bands to separate temperature and
emissivity information.

	-Ken


--
_____
\                                      |  Opinions expressed here are solely
 \   ERIM   Ken Ellis                  |  those of the author and do not
 /          ellis@erim.org             |  necessarily represent those of 
/____|                                 |  his employer.
From: scottcr@wkuvx1.bitnet
Newsgroups: sci.optics
Subject: 780 nm filters ?
Date: 13 Jan 93 02:32:27 GMT
Organization: Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY

I'm visiting from sci.electronics;
My application is a diode laser link
FM pulse modulated for high-speed DATA:

I am trying to optimise the sensitivity of
my IR photodetector (already lensed) with
a gel or optical filter to cut noise outside
the 780 nm wavelength.

Are these available? If so, what kind of
efficiency can be expected, where available?

Hope this is not too much a newbieQ.


-- 
Chris Scott,  C/E Public Radio,  Western KY Univ,  (502) 745-3834
SCOTTCR@WKUVX1.BITNET      fx off: 745-2084     fx hm: 781-1232  
Newsgroups: sci.optics
From: carl@aoa.aoa.utc.com (Carl Witthoft)
Subject: Re: High Index IR materials
Organization: Adaptive Optics Associates
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 12:55:51 GMT

In article <14048@ecs.soton.ac.uk> hnr@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Harvey Rutt) writes:
>Asside from tellurium with no~6.3 and ne~4.7 does anyone know of any
>other Ir 8-14 micron transparent materials with an index greater than
>that of germanium, n~4?
x
Not according to "The IR handbook."
But, then, there's more to life than high values of n :=) .
I'd be interested to know why you want big, n, given reflectivity
gets pretty high, and all that.



-- 
Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates
aoa!carl@bbn.com  carl@aoa.utc.com
54 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge,MA 02140 617-864-0201
"88 is 55 if you want to fly."
Xref: sparky sci.optics:1352 sci.physics:22260
From: bhoughto@sedona.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton)
Newsgroups: sci.optics,sci.physics
Subject: Re: getting temperature from weather maps
Date: 7 Jan 1993 23:18:12 GMT
Organization: Intel Corp., Chandler, Arizona
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: stealth.intel.com

In article <1993Jan7.161530.3383@midway.uchicago.edu> sweeney@dionheinz.uchicago.edu (Jeff Sweeney) writes:
>Regarding measurement of the temperature of the surface of the Earth:
>It seems to me that the intervening atmosphere would pose the greatest
>difficulty. The atmosphere is full of water vapor and CO2. This mix of
>gases is not equally transparent to all wavelengths of light. It is

IR is used primarily to detect cloud cover in poor-light
situations...

				--Blair
				  "...make lemonADE..."
Newsgroups: sci.optics
Subject: Re: UltraViolet Light Source
From: habersch@husc9.harvard.edu (Oren Haber-Schaim)
Date: 13 Jan 93 00:27:13 GMT

carl@aoa.aoa.utc.com (Carl Witthoft) writes:

>In article <1993Jan4.211536.6741@cs.tulane.edu> finnegan@navo.navy.mil writes:
>>I'm looking for a small UV source, the smaller the better.  I
>>would be thrilled to find one that operated on 12VDC or less,
>>though an AC source would be acceptable.  I would like as little
>>projection as possible in the visible light range.  I've found
>>a virtual truckload of 48" and 24" tube models, but these are
>>much too big.  Anyone have any supplier names they could provide?
>>x
>x
>I don't have the catalogs handy just now, but any manfacturer
>of UV-curing epoxy or optical cement will sell a small UV lamp.
>We've bought 4 - inch long tubes (with housing) and a 
>small flashlight-like device w/ a 1/4 " diameter output port.
>If you can't get anything from LaserFOcus or PhotonicsSPectra
>(or Newport or MellesGriot), email me and I'll do some digging.
>-- 
>Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates

Along the same lines, you can buy a fluorescent tube flashlight
at Radio Shack or any place that a variety of flashlights are sold,
and replace the tube with a same-sized UV tube.  Make sure that
that the tube designation includes "BLB", not "BL".  It stands
for "black light blue" which means that the visible emission
is filtered out (with barium silicate/nickel oxide or whatever).

For a source, you can look up "lamps" in the telephone Yellow Pages
and look under GE and Sylvania, where they will probably list
their major local retailers.

Oren Haber-Schaim                (habersch@husc.harvard.edu)
From: hnr@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Harvey Rutt)
Newsgroups: sci.optics
Subject: High Index IR materials
Date: 4 Jan 93 08:37:57 GMT

Asside from tellurium with no~6.3 and ne~4.7 does anyone know of any
other Ir 8-14 micron transparent materials with an index greater than
that of germanium, n~4?
Could be either bulk or thin film form.

Is there an 'amorphous' form of Te like amorphous Se? Can it be
prepared by evaporation? What is its index? Literature searches have
drawn pretty blank on this, suggesting it doesn't exist.

Harvey Rutt, Southampton University UK
From: hnr@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Harvey Rutt)
Newsgroups: sci.optics
Subject: Re: High Index IR materials
Date: 11 Jan 93 09:17:45 GMT

In <1993Jan8.202904.6013@EE.Stanford.EDU> siegman@EE.Stanford.EDU (Anthony E. Siegman) writes:

>>>Asside from tellurium with no~6.3 and ne~4.7 does anyone know of any
>>>other Ir 8-14 micron transparent materials with an index greater than
>>>that of germanium, n~4?
>>x
>>Not according to "The IR handbook."
>>But, then, there's more to life than high values of n :=) .
>>I'd be interested to know why you want big, n, given reflectivity
>>gets pretty high, and all that.

>   Sunds to me like the original poster should drop off the "high
>index" track, and start exploring the "dielectric coating" track to
>accomplish whatever it is that he/she wants to accomplish in the way
>of reflectivity/transmission at the material interfaces.  Less
>flexible and more expensive, yes; but Mother Nature just isn't very
>helpful in providing nice high index low loss IR materials.

Sorry, perhaps I should have explained a little more about the
requirement.
The need is indeed for reflectivity >36%, but with the added
constraint of a phase shift of very close to 0 or Pi (depending on
the high to low or low to high direction) **for a wide range of
wavelengths**. nPi wont do! Loss should be such that (1-a/(1-r)) is
better than 0.7 for reflectivity r and loss a, ie a+r+t=1.

This causes problems for multilayers (phase shift)
 & metal films, (loss).  Other suggestions have been InSb
 (just over 4, free carrier and temperature problems) PbSe
 (only a little higher) and PbTe at near 6,
a very good idea if only I could buy it! Another respondant suggested
the chalcogenide glasses, but these have indices less than Ge.

Incidentally I think I would have to disagree about "; but Mother
Nature just isn't very
>helpful in providing nice high index low loss IR materials."; as
compared to the visible where anything much above 1.9 is a problem in
the IR with Ge, ZnSe,Si,GaAs & CdTe all very low loss & Readily available
with very high indices by visible standards, I think she has been very
kind; its just me making unreasonable demands!,

If anyone has suggestions on how to achieve the requirement other than
with a bulk high index material I would be most interested.

Harvey Rutt Southampton Uk
From: vporguen@unlinfo.unl.edu (victor porguen)
Newsgroups: sci.optics
Subject: Re: High Index IR materials
Date: 5 Jan 1993 04:06:32 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln	
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: unlinfo.unl.edu

hnr@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Harvey Rutt) writes:

>Asside from tellurium with no~6.3 and ne~4.7 does anyone know of any
>other Ir 8-14 micron transparent materials with an index greater than
>that of germanium, n~4?
>Could be either bulk or thin film form.

Might arsenic trisulphide be of any use to you? It forms an amorphous
glass and can be ground and polished, possibly evaporated to form a 
film.
 
Newsgroups: sci.optics
From: siegman@EE.Stanford.EDU (Anthony E. Siegman)
Subject: Re: High Index IR materials
Organization: Stanford University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 20:29:04 GMT

>>Asside from tellurium with no~6.3 and ne~4.7 does anyone know of any
>>other Ir 8-14 micron transparent materials with an index greater than
>>that of germanium, n~4?
>x
>Not according to "The IR handbook."
>But, then, there's more to life than high values of n :=) .
>I'd be interested to know why you want big, n, given reflectivity
>gets pretty high, and all that.

   Sunds to me like the original poster should drop off the "high
index" track, and start exploring the "dielectric coating" track to
accomplish whatever it is that he/she wants to accomplish in the way
of reflectivity/transmission at the material interfaces.  Less
flexible and more expensive, yes; but Mother Nature just isn't very
helpful in providing nice high index low loss IR materials.
From: npchen@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Nien-Po Chen)
Newsgroups: sci.optics
Subject: small LCD controlled by a Mac or PC?
Date: 8 Jan 93 22:44:59 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department

Hi everybody,

I am not sure if this is a right group to ask.  If not, sorry about this.

My lab needs a small LCD as a mask for some optic experiments.  The pattern on
it should be controlled by a personal computer like a Mac or a PC.

My first thought is:
1) a commercial product for this purpose -- anybody has the company's info?

2) re-configer a cheap consumer electronic black-&-white Watchman or something
   like that and connect it to the personal computer.  Is there a way to have
   it emulate a computer display?
3) any other idea?

Thank you for your time.
Chen, Nien-Po           npchen@physics.purdue.edu
Jan. 8, 1993

P.S.    Replying to my e-mail address is preferred.
Newsgroups: sci.optics
From: minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky)
Subject: Re: Recommend Optics Course(s)?
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:36:28 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.184053.21684@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> monwel@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (douglas.w.monroe) writes:
>I'd like to find some "more intensive" short courses for classical optics 
>education and I am seeking net wisdom for recommendations 
>(More intensive than typical conference short courses)
>
>Such as:
>Burfsplt State University short course 101 May 5-8, 1992.

At a  relatively early age I read "Physical Optics" by Robert Wood,
one of the great optics hackers of all time.  After that the world was
never the same....

(I'm sure that it was because of this experience that, a long time
later, I occupied Lyman's former workspace at Harvard.)

.
Newsgroups: sci.optics
From: dongsung@iris.usc.edu (Dongsung Kim)
Newsgroups: sci.optics
Subject: Lens distortion question ??
Date: 10 Jan 1993 14:21:14 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: iris.usc.edu
Summary: geometrical distortion
Keywords: Lens distortion

Hello !


I have a question on lens distortion. The distortion that I concern
is a radial distortion. The less distortion is the better for our
purpose. However, We need certain amount of field of view(FOV).
I know the same amount of FOV is acquired with different combition
of CCD image size and focal lens. For example, 2/3 inch image format
size CCD and 9 mm focal length gives the same amount of FOV as
1/2 inch image format size CCD and 6.5 mm focal length does.
I also think the loger focal length is the better in terms of 
radial distortion. Therfore, I want to select 2/3 inch image format
size CCD and 9 mm focal length lens.


My question is :
Is really 2/3 inch image format size CCD and 9 mm focal length lens better
than 1/2 inch image format size CCD and 6.5 mm focal length lens
althout they have same field of view ?


Pleas send answer to 
		  dongsung@iris.usc.edu

Any other comments are appreciated.


Thank you in advance.

	     			Dongsung Kim

Newsgroups: sci.optics
From: finnegan@invader.navo.navy.mil (Kenneth Finnegan)
Subject: UltraViolet Light Source
Reply-To: finnegan@navo.navy.mil
Organization: Grumman Data Systems	
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 21:15:36 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-1633]: invader.navo.navy.mil

I'm looking for a small UV source, the smaller the better.  I
would be thrilled to find one that operated on 12VDC or less,
though an AC source would be acceptable.  I would like as little
projection as possible in the visible light range.  I've found
a virtual truckload of 48" and 24" tube models, but these are
much too big.  Anyone have any supplier names they could provide?

Thanks a million,

Kenneth
finnegan@navo.navy.mil

Newsgroups: sci.optics