Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V09_3/V9_325.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 18KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/MYAkcPy00UkZA=dU55>;
          Fri, 31 Mar 89 00:18:20 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <8YAkcCy00UkZ0=[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 89 00:18:07 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #325

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 325

Today's Topics:
        Re: Success with cold fusion reported
              Re: Tilenius paper
           Re: Using the Shuttle for higher orbits
    Financing arranged for ammonium perchlorate plant (Forwarded)
             Human Immune System
               Fusion news implications
    space vs. immune system (was Room Temperature fusion)
           Space salvage, and the Paradox of Firsts
              Fusion Spacecraft?
           Pickle-jar fusion spurs palladium prices
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 28 Mar 89 16:30:54 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu![e-mail]  (Siddarth Subramanian)
Subject: Re: Success with cold fusion reported

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Miroslav Kocic) writes:
>
>The discussion in this newsgroup has so far been about the authenticity of the
>Utah breakthrough, but I have two different concerns.  First, what if fusion
>turns out to create problems we don't foresee?  We didn't foresee radioactive
>waste or meltdowns back when fission was at this stage, and, if history teaches
>anything, it teaches that every benefit has a proportional price.  Second, what
>if cold fusion becomes the crack-cocaine of energy production?  I can imagine
>a thousand fanatics in 750 terrorist cells making an H-bomb in their kitchen.

Wow. Some people really love to  pour cold water on  things before they even
get off the  ground. Here we're  discussing a method  that  has not even been
well  documented yet. We don't know if it's  economically feasible or even
theoretically   sound. To  go from here  to H-bombs  in one step does take
a lot of  imagination.

While  I agree  with  the need for  caution  in  looking at any new process
or technique, I believe  that  something as important as room-temperature
fusion  should first be studied for its merits as an  energy source. As
for H-bombs, note  that many  do-it-yourself  guides  have been  written for
producing fission bombs  already. Fortunately  for  mankind, few people
combine both genocidal instincts and the intelligence  required   to make
such a bomb. Even  the worst terrorist groups have not  resorted to bomb
production. There's no  reason to think they're  going to now.


-------
SIDDARTH SUBRAMANIAN
[e-mail]     "$#$#^&^*())*&&^hghg@44*&^##[][]" - R2D2

------------------------------

Date: 28 Mar 89 23:39:49 GMT
From: thorin!zeta![e-mail]  (Jonathan Leech)
Subject: Re: Tilenius paper

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>    Economics on the Space Frontier: Can We Afford It
>        Gordon Woodcock
>    (try asking through the NSS office if they can get copies of
>     it. My copy is a prepublication draft Gordon gave me and I
>     don't remember where it was eventually published)

    _SSI Update_, May/June 1987.
    Back issues may be available directly from SSI (PO Box 82,
Princeton, NJ 08540). The intro also mentions that this paper was
presented at the AAAS (presumably, also in 1987).
--
    Jon Leech ([e-mail])    __@/
    ``Thus Mathematics helps / our brains and hands and feet
      and can make / a race of supermen out of us.''
    - The Education of T. C. Mits

------------------------------

Date: 25 Mar 89 00:04:52 GMT
From: attcan!lsuc!ncrcan!ziebmef![e-mail]  (Matthew Francey)
Subject: Re: Using the Shuttle for higher orbits

[e-mail] writes:

>                                                  Think of all the LEM type
> vehicles a fully loaded shuttle could hold in lunar orbit.

  Think of how many more it could hold if the wings and other aerodynamic
stuff was removed.  Well, it couldn't hold *more* of them, but it would be
able to get them there more efficiently.

  The shuttle IS a "shuttle".  It goes up, and it comes down.  For tasks like
going to the Moon, a new vehicle is in order.
--
Name: Matthew Francey             Address: N43o34'13.5" W79o34'33.3" 86m
[e-mail]          uunet!utgpu!{ontmoh!moore,ncrcan}!ziebmef!mdf

------------------------------

Date: 28 Mar 89 20:50:19 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Financing arranged for ammonium perchlorate plant (Forwarded)

Sarah Keegan
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                     March 28, 1989


RELEASE:  89-40

FINANCING ARRANGED FOR AMMONIUM PERCHLORATE PLANT


     Western Electrochemical Company, Cedar City, Utah, has
finalized arrangements for private financing through Security
Pacific Bank Washington, Seattle, for construction of an ammonium
perchlorate (AP) production plant to be located in Cedar City.

     Western Electrochemical Company is a subsidiary of Pacific
Engineering and Production Company (PEPCON) and an AP
subcontractor to Morton Thiokol Inc., manufacturer of the Space
Shuttle solid rocket motor.  Construction of the Cedar City plant
is underway and production is expected to begin in the summer of
1989.  Western Electrochemical plans to repay the privately
financed capital investment in the new plant within 7 years.

     AP is an oxidizing chemical used in virtually all solid
propellant rocket motors, including the Space Shuttle's solid
rocket motor.  NASA and the Department of Defense have agreed to
combined purchases of 20 million pounds a year of AP for 7 years
from Western Electrochemical Company.

------------------------------

Date: 29 Mar 89 03:35:01 GMT
From: pdn!rnms1![e-mail]  (0000-Alan Lovejoy(0000))
Subject: Human Immune System

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (bill davidsen) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (0000-Alan Lovejoy) writes:
>
>| Then we also need either very advanced AI, very advanced biotechnology,
>| or artificial gravity: It appears that low gravity fields shut down the
>| human immune system in a way similar to the AIDS virus.  Humans will NOT
>| be spending any appreciable percentage of their lives in space until we
>| can fix our immune systems so that they tolerate low gravity,  or until
>| we can provide gravity artificially.  As things stand, a career as an
>| asteroid miner would not last long...
>
>  What are the parameters on this? I know the Russians had people in
>orbit for almost a year (didn't they?) and didn't seem to have problems.
>They were visited by other cosmonauts during the time so they weren't in
>a sterile atmosphere.

Since several people have asked, here is a bibliography on this issue:


References: Effects of Hypogravity on the Human Immune System

1. "Microorganisms in the Space Environment,"
   Horneck et al., Science, July 1984, pg. 226

2. "Humoral Immunity at Zero G,"
   Voss et al., Science, July 1984, pg. 214

3. "Effect of Hypogravity on Human Lymphocyte Activation,"
   Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine, Jan., 1980, pg. 30

4. "Effects of Simulated Weightlessness on IFN Production,"
   Sommerfield et al., Journal Of IF Research, 1982, pg. 462

5. "Influence of Spaceflight on RBC,"
   Talbot et al., FASEB Proceedings, Aug 1985, vol. 45 No. 9

6. "Results Of Space Experiment Program Interferon,"
   Talas et al., Acta Microbiologia Hungarica, 1983, vol. 30

7. "The Immune System and Effect of Hyper- and Hypogravity,"
   Caren et al., Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine, Nov. 1984, pg. 1063

8. "The Effect of Space Flight on Immunocompetence,"
   Cogoli et al., Immunology Today, 1985, vol. No. 6, pg. 1

9. "The Effects of Space Flight on Immunocompetence,"
   Immunology Today, Vol. 8, No. 7, 1987, pg 197

10. Biomedical Research Program, NASA
    =================================

    Chief, Space Medicine Branch/EB
    Life Sciences Division
    NASA Headquarters,
    Washington D.C. 20546
    USA

I am not a biologist or medical doctor, so please don't ask me for any
professional opinions on this stuff!  Hope this helps.

Alan Lovejoy; alan@pdn; 813-530-2211; AT&T Paradyne: 8550 Ulmerton, Largo, FL.
Disclaimer: I do not speak for AT&T Paradyne.  They do not speak for me.
__American Investment Deficiency Syndrome => No resistance to foreign invasion.
Motto: If nanomachines will be able to reconstruct you, YOU AREN'T DEAD YET.

------------------------------

Date: 29 Mar 89 04:52:48 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Kevin William Ryan)
Subject: Fusion news implications

   Looking at the traffic concerning the announcements of possible room
temp fusion, I noticed a couple of common threads which I thought could
use some comment.

1)  FUSION ENGINES
   I suspect that we may _never_ get a fusion torch with this method.
Room temp fusion (henceforth RTF) requires that the fusion take place in
a palladium matrix.  High power densities would, first, melt the
palladium electrode, not to mention boil the surrounding water, and
second, would still be IN the palladium - not spitting reation mass out
the back.  I see RTF as a great power source, which could drive more
conventional electric or thermal engines.  High efficiency rockets
require high velocity exhaust - RTF implies low temperatures and hence
slow moving particles.  The only thing that might be moving fast is the
neutron flux, which is non-directional and highly unpleasant.

2)  CHEAP NUKES!!
   This requires comment from the particle physics folks out there.  Are the
neutrons emitted from RTF sufficient to create fussionable materials?  Please
post some knowledge for us poor untutored ones who know not the nuclear
cross section of common elements.

3)  UNLIMITED CHEAP POWER
   The age-old promise of nuclear fission, and the holy grail of fusion.
This one sounds good, folks, that's for certain.  Possible show inhibitors
(but not stoppers) are: neutron flux; lower than expected according to first
reports, but still there, tritium as waste; tritium falls into that unpleasant
class of isotopes with a half-life (12 years) long enough to be tough to
contain and short enough to cause damage - show me an isotope with a 500K year
half-life, and I'll build a bed out of it :-), and finally the apparent need
for D-D reactions.  Deuterium is not too hard to get, but neither is it
exactly common.  It will cost something to produce it on large scale basis.
   First reports on RTF claim that the process will be easily scaled to
produce power, which I tend to believe based on what I've heard so far.  If
everything works out as stated I can see large pressurised deuterium-enriched
vessels heating the first stage of steam turbine power plants, essentially
replacing the core of a nuclear reactor with a rather cleaner and much cheaper
heat source.


   All in all, I'm tickled pink by the news.  Hope it all works out.  With our
experience in fission plants, perhaps our grain of salt is big enough to
prevent some of the difficulties we've had with those.
                                                    kwr

   "Jest so ya know..."
P.S.  Anyone out there have decent information on RTF being possible with
     D-H reactions vs. D-D reactions?

------------------------------

Date: 29 Mar 89 22:51:43 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: space vs. immune system (was Room Temperature fusion)

>References: Effects of Hypogravity on the Human Immune System

Note that of the ten references, all but #9 and #10 (which is an address
rather than a publication) are badly dated, since most of the really
long-flight space experience has been accumulated in the last few years.
--
Welcome to Mars!  Your         |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
passport and visa, comrade?    | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date:     Wed, 29 Mar 89 17:44 CST
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Space salvage, and the Paradox of Firsts
Original_To:  SPACE


Peter Yee (trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]) posted a NASA press
release by Sarah Keegan and Jeffrey Carr about Capt. Frederick Hauck, USN.

     "In November 1984, Hauck was STS-51A mission commander, the
first space salvage mission in history.  Hauck and crew retrieved
and returned to Earth the Palapa B-2 and Westar VI communications
satellites after deploying Anik D-2 and LEASAT-1 satellites."

Apollo 12 landed on the Moon near the old Surveyor 3 spacecraft, and Bean
and Shepard removed a few parts for study on Earth.  Doesn't this count
as "the first space salvage mission?"  I think if you try to deny it, you'll
find yourself getting real fussy about the definition of "salvage."

I'm a little disturbed that the people writing NASA's press releases still
emphasize "firsts" so often, despite all the criticism lobbed at such practices
over the years.

The 14 March release (by Charles Redmond and James Hartsfield) Peter posted in
Space Digest v9 n301 was even worse: "DISCOVERY'S RETURN-TO-FLIGHT PHOTOGRAPHS
RECORD MANY FIRSTS...For the first time in Shuttle history, Africa's Niger
river was photographed in full flood and out of its banks...for the first time,
an aircraft was photographed generating a contrail..."

There's a basic dichotomy that Space Cadets suffer.  Space flights should be
Special Events, and we should drop everything else and watch them, and soak up
every detail we can find, because we want to share in the great adventure.
(Remember getting a TV in your classroom to watch Mercury and Gemini launches?)
But space flights should be Routine Events, a part of everyday life, a casually
accepted reminder that our race can get people and hardware into orbit any time
it really wants to.

We love to hear about every detail of this stuff, but we also want our world to
become a "spacefaring civilization," and in a spacefaring civlization one more
launch or one more landing would be no big deal.  Our press seems to have come
down mostly on the side of No Big Deal, leaving us space freaks to scramble for
information wherever we can get it.  Reporters don't cover every moment of a
transatlantic marine voyage.  And if you hung out at the airport, interviewing
pilots, crew, and mechanics about this afternoon's upcoming flight to Podunk,
and asking them their opinion about the future of aviation (sometimes known as
"the U.S. manned air program")-- well, you'd be considered dotty at best.  See
the paradox?

I suppose we should be grateful for NASA Select, and sci.space, and the few
magazines that do cater to the likes of us.  And to those NASA publicists
tirelessly searching for new "firsts."

                      ______meson   Bill Higgins
                   _-~
     ____________-~______neutrino   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
   -   -         ~-_
 /       \          ~----- proton   Bitnet: [e-mail]
 |       |
 \       /  NEW!  IMPROVED!         SPAN/Hepnet/Physnet: 43011::HIGGINS
   -   -    Now comes with Free
     ~  Nobel Prizewinner Inside!   Internet: [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 28 Mar 89 17:57:50 GMT
From: att!mcdchg!ddsw1!corpane![e-mail]  (John Sparks)
Subject: Fusion Spacecraft?

If this cold fusion process is for real, I was wondering what it would mean
for space craft? Is there anyway to convert such power into a motive force
for a space craft?

Basically, you get heat out from the reaction, correct? But you have to keep
the heat low enough not to melt the electrodes. How could this be converted
into a 'rocket'?

Using the 'old' method of thermonuclear fusion, you would have a far more
intense reaction that you could use for propulsion, if you could find a way
to contain the reaction. But with this new version of fusion (if it is for
real and efficient enough to be practical), you don't need sophisticated
containments such as magnetic bottles, just enough shielding from the
radiation. But the reaction basically generates heat, so the question is
how do you convert that [relatively small] heat energy into propulsion for a
space craft?

Could this revolutionalize the space industry?



--
John Sparks   |  {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks  | D.I.S.K. 24hrs 1200bps
______________|          [e-mail]          | 502/968-5401 thru -5406

If a town has one lawyer, he starves; if it has two lawyers, they both get rich

------------------------------

Date:     Wed, 29 Mar 89 14:47 CST
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Pickle-jar fusion spurs palladium prices
Original_To:  SPACE

[e-mail]  (Arthur P. Goldberg) wrote:
"The closing quotes Thursday March 23 on the commodities exchange
were platinum $546/troy oz and palladium $146/troy oz."

On Monday, March palladium went up to $150.35, a gain of about 3%... but it only
gained about thirty cents in Tuesday's market.

Caveat: This is the first time I ever looked up palladium commodities, so
there may be error in my reading of the listings.  Particle beams, I
understand, but commodities... (-:

                      ______meson   Bill Higgins
                   _-~
     ____________-~______neutrino   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
   -   -         ~-_
 /       \          ~----- proton   Bitnet: [e-mail]
 |       |
 \       /  NEW!  IMPROVED!         SPAN/Hepnet/Physnet: 43011::HIGGINS
   -   -    Now comes with Free
     ~  Nobel Prizewinner Inside!   Internet: [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V9 #325
*******************