waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
matthew@phantom.gatech.edu (Matthew DeLuca) writes:  >In article <1993Apr21.024423.29182@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> wdwells@nyx.cs.du.edu (David "Fuzzy" Wells) writes:  >>I hear <insert favorite rumor here> that it will supposedly coincide >>with the Atlanta Olympics.   >Even worse, the city of Atlanta has a proposal before it to rent space on this >orbiting billboard.  Considering the caliber of people running this city,  >there's no telling what we're going to have leering down at us from orbit.  I would just like to point out that it is much easier to place an object at orbital altitude than it is to place it with orbital velocity.  For a target 300 km above the surface of Earth, you need a delta-v of 2.5 km/s.  Assuming that rockets with specific impulses of 300 seconds are easy to produce, a rocket with a dry weight of 50 kg would require only about 65 kg of fuel+oxidizer. A small dispersal charge embedded in about 20 kg of sand or birdshot (depending on the nature of the structure) would be the payload.  I am sure the whole project is well within the capability of the amateur rocketry community.  It sounds like a good Science Fair project--'Reduction of Light Pollution Through Applied Ballistics'. Or, it could be part of the Challenge Prize being discussed here: $1 billion for the first person to spend 1 year on the moon, $1 million for the first erradication of an orbital eyesore/CCD burner.  I wouldpledge $1000 for the first person to bring it down, and I am sure there are at least 999 other astronomers, nature lovers, or just plain people of good taste who would do likewise.  Of course, a  Gerald Bull solution might be simpler. (Either the solution Gerald Bull would apply--the use of a large caliber gun; or the solution which was applied to Gerald Bull--the use of a small caliber gun.)
In article <1r46o9INN14j@mojo.eng.umd.edu> sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes: >In article <C5tEIK.7z9@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > >>Apollo was done the hard way, in a big hurry, from a very limited >>technology base... and on government contracts.  Just doing it privately, >>rather than as a government project, cuts costs by a factor of several. > >So how much would it cost as a private venture, assuming you could talk the >U.S. government into leasing you a couple of pads in Florida?  > Why use a ground launch pad. It is entirely posible to launch from altitude. This was what the Shuttle was originally intended to do! It might be seriously cheaper.   Also, what about bio-engineered CO2 absorbing plants instead of many LOX bottles? Stick 'em in a lunar cave and put an airlock on the door.
Jeff.Cook@FtCollinsCO.NCR.COM (Jeff Cook) writes:  >In article <C5t05K.DB6@research.canon.oz.au> enzo@research.canon.oz.au (Enzo Liguori) writes:  >>Now, Space Marketing  >>What about light pollution in observations? (I read somewhere else that >>it might even be visible during the day, leave alone at night).  >I can't believe that a mile-long billboard would have any significant >effect on the overall sky brightness.  Venus is visible during the day, >but nobody complains about that.  Besides, it's in LEO, so it would only  When I was at the Texas Star Party a few years ago, the sky was so dark that Venus did, indeed, cause light pollution until it set.  Even if the billboard were dark it could cause a problem.  Imagine observing an object and halfway through your run, your object was occulted!  I would guess that most of the people stating positive opinions are not  fanatically serious observers.  It is so typical that the rights of the minority are extinguished by the wants of the majority, no matter how ridiculous those wants might be.   George Krumins --
In article <C5sx3y.3z9.1@cs.cmu.edu> 18084TM@msu.edu (Tom) writes: >On the other hand, if Apollo cost ~25billion, for a few days or weeks >in space, in 1970 dollars, then won't the reward have to be a lot more >than only 1 billion to get any takers?  Apollo was done the hard way, in a big hurry, from a very limited technology base... and on government contracts.  Just doing it privately, rather than as a government project, cuts costs by a factor of several.
Being wierd again, so be warned:  Is there a plan to put a satellite around each planet in the solar system to keep watch? I help it better to ask questions before I spout an opinion.  How about a mission (unmanned) to Pluto to stay in orbit and record things around and near and on Pluto.. I know it is a strange idea, but why not?? It could do some scanning of not only Pluto, but also of the solar system, objects near and aaroundpluto, as well as SETI and looking at the galaxy without having much of the solar system to worry about..
In article <1993Apr29.201036.11256@den.mmc.com> zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com (Michael Corvin) writes: >I expect that retrieving HST would involve 'damaging' it considerably in >order to return it to its cradle in the cargo bay.  Most of the deployed >items (antennas and, especially, the solar arays) probably are not >retractable into their fully stowed position, even by hand...  No, the thing is designed to be retrievable, in a pinch.  Indeed, this dictated a rather odd design for the solar arrays, since they had to be retractable as well as extendable, and may thus have indirectly contributed to the array-flapping problems.  The retrieval problems are exactly as stated:  it would be costly, would involve extensive downtime (and the worry of someone finding a reason not to re-launch it), and would unnecessarily expose the telescope to a lot of mechanical stresses and possibilities for contamination.
In article <C69C9K.9FA.1@cs.cmu.edu>, STK1203@VAX003.STOCKTON.EDU writes: > I am taking a course entitled "Exploring Science Using Internet". > For our final project, we are to find a compendium of Internet resources  > dealing with a science-related topic. I chose Astronomy. Anyway, I was  > wondering if anyone out there knew of any interesting resources on Internet > that provide information on Astronomy, space, NASA, or anything like that.  Do you know of the world-wide-web?  This is a global hypertext (well,  hypermedia) network running on the internet.  One of the nice things about it is that is understands and incorporates virtually all of the other systems being used, like WAIS, Gopher, FTP, Archie, etc.  It is usually quite easy to add existing resources to the web.  If you'd like to explore, I'd suggest getting the XMosaic program, written at the NCSA.  It's an X-windows web browser, and is pretty slick.  It can understand and cope with more than text: gif, jpeg, mpeg, audio, etc.  There are other browsers, including a text-mode browser for people stuck on a text terminal, but I'm most familliar with mosaic.  Under the page "The World-Wide Web Virtual Library: Subject Catalogue" (this is available under the Documents menu in mosaic, or by any browser via the URL  http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/DataSources/bySubject/Overview.html ) there is a subject "Space Science."  Currently this points to a page under construction, with only the NASA JPL FTP archive.  I've volunteered to take over this page, and in fact I have a replacement with all sorts of information pointers (mostly gleaned from the sci.space FAQ).  As soon as the overworked "Subject Catalogue"  maintainer switches the "Space Science" pointer, it'll be visible.  I'll post a short note when this happens.  --  Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research e-mail: roeber@cern.ch or roeber@caltech.edu | work: +41 22 767 31 80 r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: +33 50 20 82 99
If you brighten up the dark part of CV043015.GIF with your viewer you  will see two other objects near the upper left part of the moon. One is actually between the weather satellite and the moon.
In article <C5x86o.8p4@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <1r6rn3INNn96@mojo.eng.umd.edu> sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes: >>You'd need to launch HLVs to send up large amounts of stuff.  Do you know  >>of a private Titan pad?  > >You'd need to launch HLVs to send up large amounts of stuff *if* you assume >no new launcher development.  If you assume new launcher development, with >lower costs as a specific objective, then you probably don't want to >build something HLV-sized anyway. > >Nobody who is interested in launching things cheaply will buy Titans.  It >doesn't take many Titan pricetags to pay for a laser launcher or a large >gas gun or a development program for a Big Dumb Booster, all of which >would have far better cost-effectiveness.  Henry, I made the assumption that he who gets there firstest with the mostest wins.   Ohhh, you want to put in FINE PRINT which says "Thou shall do wonderous R&D rather than use off-the-shelf hardware"? Sorry, didn't see that in my copy. Most of the Pournellesque proposals run along the lines of <some dollar amount> reward for <some simple goal>.    You go ahead and do your development, I'll buy off the shelf at higher cost (or even Russian; but I also assume that there'd be some "Buy US" provos in there) and be camped out in the Moon while you are launching and assembling little itty-bitty payloads in LEO with your laser or gas gun.  And working out the bugs of assembly & integration in LEO.   Oh, hey, could I get a couple of CanadARMs tuned for the lunar environment?  I wanna do some teleoperated prospecting while I'm up there...
Joint Press release ESA/UN No 18-93 Paris, 19 April 1993  UN/ESA joint training course on satellite applications to be held in Italy, 19-30 April  The United Nations and the European Space Agency (ESA) are jointly organising a training course on the applications of satellite data gathered by the European Remote Sensing Satellite (ERS-1), to be held in Frascati, Italy, from 19 to 30 April. The training course will discuss the applications of satellite data concerning natural resources, renewable energy and the environment.  The training course, organised for the benefit of francophone African experts, will be hosted by ESRIN, the European Space Agency's establishment in Frascati, which is responsible for coordination with the users of data from ESA's remote sensing satellite. Twenty-four experts in the field of remote sensing, selected from 19 francophone countries from northern, western and central Africa, and three regional African centres, will attend the two-week session. The course will focus on remote sensing techniques and data applications, particularly ERS-1 data.  The ERS-1 satellite, developed by ESA and launched in 1991 with the European Ariane launcher, carries an advanced radar instrument and is the first in a series of radar remote sensing missions that will ensure availability of data beyond the year 2000. The aim of the training course is to increase the potential of experts using the practical applications of radar remote sensing systems to natural resources, renewable energy and the environment, with particular emphasis on applications to geology and mineral prospecting, oceanography and near- coastal areas, agriculture, forestry and meteorology.  The education and practical training programme was developed jointly by the United Nations and ESA. The facilities and the technical support, as well as lecturers and information documents for the training course, will be provided by the Agency. Lecturers at the training course will include high-level experts from other European and African organisations active in remote sensing applications. Funds for the training course are being provided by the United Nations    Trust Fund for New and Renewable Sources of Energy; the primary contributor to that Fund is the Government of Italy.
In article <19930419.062802.166@almaden.ibm.com> nicho@vnet.ibm.com writes: |In <1q77ku$av6@access.digex.net> Pat writes: |>The Work is privately funded,  the DATA belongs to SBV.  I don't see |>either george or Fred,  scoriating IBM research division for |>not releasing data. |   We publish plenty kiddo,you just have to look.   Never said you didn't publish, merely that there is data you don't publish,  and that no-one scoriates you for those cases.    IBM research  publishes plenty, it's why you ended up  with 2 Nobel prizes in the last 10 years,  but that some projects are deemed company confidential.  ATT Bell Labs,  keeps lots of stuff private, Like Karamankars algorithm.  Private moeny is entitled to do what it pleases, within the bounds of Law,  and For all the keepers of the temple of SCience,  should please shove their pointy little heads up their Conically shaped Posterior Orifices.     pat
jmcocker@eos.ncsu.edu (Mitch) writes:    >effect that one of the SSRBs that was recovered after the >recent space shuttle launch was found to have a wrench of >some sort rattling around apparently inside the case.
In article <1r96hb$kbi@access.digex.net>, prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: > In article <1993Apr23.001718.1@aurora.alaska.edu> nsmca@aurora.alaska.edu writes: >>In article <1r6b7v$ec5@access.digex.net>, prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >>>  Besides this was the same line of horse puckey the mining companies claimed >>> when they were told to pay for  restoring land  after strip mining. >>=== >>I aint talking the large or even the "mining companies" I am talking the small >>miners, the people who have themselves and a few employees (if at all).The >>people who go out every year and set up thier sluice box, and such and do >>mining the semi-old fashion way.. (okay they use modern methods toa point). >  >  > Lot's of these small miners  are no longer miners.  THey are people living > rent free on Federal land,  under the claim of being a miner.  The facts are > many of these people do not sustaint heir income from mining,  do not > often even live their full time,  and do fotentimes do a fair bit > of environmental damage. >  > These minign statutes were created inthe 1830's-1870's  when the west was > uninhabited  and were designed to bring people into the frontier.  Times change > people change.  DEAL.  you don't have a constitutional right to live off > the same industry forever.  Anyone who claims the have a right to their > job in particular,  is spouting nonsense.   THis has been a long term > federal welfare program,  that has outlived it's usefulness. >  > pat >   Hum, do you enjoy putting words in my mouth?  Come to Nome and meet some of these miners.. I am not sure how things go down south in the lower 48 (I used to visit, but), of course to believe the media/news its going to heck (or just plain crazy).  Well it seems that alot of Unionist types seem to think that having a job is a right, and not a priviledge. Right to the same job as your forbearers, SEE: Kennedy's and tel me what you see (and the families they have married into). There is a reason why many historians and poli-sci types use unionist and socialist in the same breath. The miners that I know, are just your average hardworking people who pay there taxes and earn a living.. But taxes are not the answer. But maybe we could move this discussion to some more appropriate newsgroup..
In article <1r6rn3INNn96@mojo.eng.umd.edu> sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes: >You'd need to launch HLVs to send up large amounts of stuff.  Do you know  >of a private Titan pad?   You'd need to launch HLVs to send up large amounts of stuff *if* you assume no new launcher development.  If you assume new launcher development, with lower costs as a specific objective, then you probably don't want to build something HLV-sized anyway.
And one of my profs is the chief engineer for the project (Dr. Ron Humble, Univ. Colorado at Colorado Springs).  I love the idea of an inflatable 1-mile long sign.... It will be a really neat thing to see it explode when a bolt  (or even better, a Westford Needle!) comes crashing into it at 10 clicks a sec.    <BOOM!>  Whooooooooshhhhhh......  <sputter, sputter>  <okay, PRETEND it would make a sound!>  I hear <insert favorite rumor here> that it will supposedly coincide with the Atlanta Olympics.
In article <1qjs1j$306@access.digex.net> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: > > >In the old days,  their used to be Arbitron stats'  that analyzed >the readership and posting volumes  by group  and user. > >They were available from UUNET.   That's how you check the >readership of Sci.space,  not some stupid  unscientific attempt >to  flood the newsgroup. > >I have abetter idea.  WHy don't we all reply directly to the >origanator  of this post,  and tell him we read sci.space ;-) > > >pat  	Sigh. 	I try to make a little joke, I try to inject some humour here and what happens?  In the immortal words of Foghorn Leghorn:  	"I say, that was a _joke_, son."  	I thought that the bit about McElwaine, not to mention the two smileys, would indicate to even the most humour impaired that I was JOKING. 	Sigh. 	(And will everyone who pat's suggestion (thanks bunches, pat) *please* stop sending me email.)  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  I shot a man just to watch him die;    |     Ross Borden                   | |  I'm going to Disneyland!               |     rborden@ra.uvic.ca            |
Gene Wright (gene@theporch.raider.net) wrote: : Announce that a reward of $1 billion would go to the first corporation  : who successfully keeps at least 1 person alive on the moon for a year.  : Then you'd see some of the inexpensive but not popular technologies begin  : to be developed. THere'd be a different kind of space race then!  I'm an advocate of this idea for funding Space Station work, and I throw around the $1 billion figure for that "reward."  I suggest that you increase the Lunar reward to about $3 billion.  This would encourage private industry to invest in space, which  should be one of NASA's primary goals.  -- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office       kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368
It has been known for quite a while that the earth is actually more pear shaped than globular/spherical.  Does anyone make a "globe" that is accurate as to actual shape, landmass configuration/Long/Lat lines etc.? Thanks in advance.  --  bill@xpresso.UUCP                   (Bill Vance),             Bothell, WA rwing!xpresso!bill
In article <26APR199310105388@csa2.lbl.gov> sichase@csa2.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE) writes:  >In article <pgf.735606045@srl02.cacs.usl.edu>, pgf@srl02.cacs.usl.edu (Phil G. Fraering) writes... >>Jeff.Cook@FtCollinsCO.NCR.COM (Jeff Cook) writes: >>.... >>>people in primitive tribes out in the middle of nowhere as they look up >>>and see a can of Budweiser flying across the sky... :-D >>  >>Seen that movie already... > >Actually, the idea, like most good ideas, comes from Jules Verne, not >_The Gods Must Be Crazy._...  My comment was off the top of my head; I wasn't aware that it had already been thought of.  Guess it's true that there's nothing new under the sun (or in this case, the flying billboards.)   --
In article <C5t05K.DB6@research.canon.oz.au> enzo@research.canon.oz.au (Enzo Liguori) writes:  >Now, Space Marketing >is working with University of Colorado and Livermore engineers on >a plan to place a mile-long inflatable billboard in low-earth >orbit.  NASA would provide contractual launch services. However, >since NASA bases its charge on seriously flawed cost estimates >(WN 26 Mar 93) the taxpayers would bear most of the expense. This >may look like environmental vandalism, but Mike Lawson, CEO of >Space Marketing, told us yesterday that the real purpose of the >project is to help the environment! The platform will carry ozone >monitors he explained--advertising is just to help defray costs.  How could this possibly be "environmental vandalism" when there is no "environment" to vandalize up there?  Since the advertising "is just to help defray costs", it's certainly no surprise that "the taxpayers would bear most of the expense".  Sounds like a good idea to me, since the taxpayers would bear _all_ of the expense if they didn't do the advertising.  >What do you think of this revolting and hideous attempt to vandalize >the night sky?  Great idea, they should have done it long ago.  >What about light pollution in observations? (I read somewhere else that >it might even be visible during the day, leave alone at night).  I can't believe that a mile-long billboard would have any significant effect on the overall sky brightness.  Venus is visible during the day, but nobody complains about that.  Besides, it's in LEO, so it would only be visible during twilight when the sky is already bright, and even if it would have some miniscule impact, it would be only for a short time as it goes zipping across the sky.  >Are protesting groups being organized in the States?  No doubt.  People are always looking for something to protest about, so it would be no surprise.  >Really, really depressed.  Well, look on the, er, bright side.  Imagine the looks on the faces of people in primitive tribes out in the middle of nowhere as they look up and see a can of Budweiser flying across the sky... :-D  --
In article <1pr5u2$t0b@agate.berkeley.edu>, ghelf@violet.berkeley.edu (;;;;RD48) writes: > The taste is hard to describe, although I remember it fondly.  It was > most certainly more "candy" than say a modern "Power Bar."  Sort of > a toffee injected with vitamins.  The chocolate Power Bar is a rough > approximation of the taste.  Strawberry sucked. >   Peanut butter was definitely my favorite. I don't think I ever took a second bite of the strawberry.  I recently joined Nutri-System and their "Chewy Fudge Bar" is very reminicent of the chocolate Space Food. This is the only thing I can find that even comes close the taste. It takes you back... your taste-buds are happy and your intestines are in knots... joy!  --   mark ---------------------------- (adam@paix.sw.stratus.com)	|	My opinions are not those of Stratus. 				|	Hell! I don`t even agree with myself!
prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes:  >AW&ST  had a brief blurb on a Manned Lunar Exploration confernce >May 7th  at Crystal City Virginia, under the auspices of AIAA.  >Does anyone know more about this?  How much, to attend????  A good summary has been posted (thanks), but I wanted to add another comment. I remeber reading the comment that General Dynamics was tied into this, in  connection with their proposal for an early manned landing.  Sorry I don't  rember where I heard this, but I'm fairly sure it was somewhere reputable.  Anyone else know anything on this angle?  Hrumph.  They didn't send _me_ anything :(
Besides this was the same line of horse puckey the mining companies claimed when they were told to pay for  restoring land  after strip mining.  they still mine coal in the midwest,  but now it doesn't look like the moon when theyare done.
In article <1qn044$gq5@access.digex.net>, prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >I thought that under emergency conditions,  the STS  can >put down at any good size Airport.  IF it could take a C-5 or a >747, then it can take an orbiter.   You just need a VOR/TAC > >I don't know if they need ILS.  DFW was designed with the STS in mind (which really mean very little).  Much of their early PR material had scenes with a shuttle landing and two or three others pulled up to gates.  I guess they were trying to stress how advanced the airport was.  For Dallas types:  Imagine the fit Grapevine and Irving would be having if the shuttle WAS landing at DFW. (For the rest, they are currently having some power struggles between the airport and surrounding cities).
In article <1993Apr21.140804.15028@draper.com> mrf4276@egbsun12.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Matthew R. Feulner) writes: >|> Need to find atleast $1billion for prize money. > >My first thought is Ross Perot.  After further consideration, I think he'd >be more likely to try to win it...but come in a disappointing third. >Try Bill Gates.  Try Sam Walton's kids.  When the Lunar Society's $500M estimate of the cost of a lunar colony was mentioned at Making Orbit, somebody asked Jerry Pournelle "have you talked to Bill Gates?".  The answer:  "Yes.  He says that if he were going to sink that much money into it, he'd want to run it -- and he doesn't have the time."  (Somebody then asked him about Perot.  Answer:  "Having Ross Perot on your board may be a bigger problem than not having the money.")