Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V09_4/V9_446.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/0YQxiMG00UkZ06iE4y>;
          Fri, 19 May 89 05:17:13 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 19 May 89 05:17:02 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #446

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 446

Today's Topics:
            Re: Phobos replacement
           Re: citizens in space -- risk silliness
            Re: Sun Exploding (?)
       Re: SPACE Digest V9 #433 - Prediction Bulletins
            Re: New Orbiter Name Announced
            Re: New Orbiter Name Announced
            Re: asteroid almost hits earth
     NASA : Astronauts Named To 2 DOD Missions Scheduled for 1990
   Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs (was Re: asteroid almost hits earth)
   Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs (was Re: asteroid almost hits earth)
    Re: What ever happened to the Hubble Space Telescope?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 17 May 89 19:36:29 EDT
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender
    and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement.
Subject: Re: Phobos replacement


>From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
>Subject: Phobos replacement

>Advance peek at AW&ST:  there has been discussion of launching the third
>Phobos, previously earmarked as a ground test article, in either the next
>launch window (1990) or the one after (1992).

I believe I saw an article in the Washington Post in the last few weeks,
claiming that a Soviet spokesman had stated that the USSR has given up on
Phobos for the forseeable future and its next attempt in that part of the
system is to be a Mars probe in the early 1990's. (The US is planning one
around then too - will they use the same launch window?) Sorry, no hope of
finding the article again - the Post puts out ~10 pounds of news a week.

>It's pleasant to see that the Soviets are willing to consider using such
>hardware when it can no longer be of use to the original mission(s).
>The Smithsonian is full of the US equivalent, notably Viking 3 and
>Voyager 3.

It could be argued either way. Since these missions were for limited launch
windows, it probably made sense to build spares, and building three probably
did not cost a lot more than building two. Adding a third launch and all the
tracking and control to a mission that had already succeeded would raise
costs considerably. In any event. Voyager 3 (at least) is still useful to
the Voyager mission. I understand they take it down occasionally and run
tests on it to help diagnose bugs or estimate performance limits of the
other Voyager craft.
                                John Roberts
                                [e-mail]

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

Date: 15 May 89 17:49:26 GMT
From: hpfcdc!hpfcdj![e-mail]  (Bob Myers)
Subject: Re: citizens in space -- risk silliness

>I could understand not sending citizens into space due to the cost. All you
>readers out there opposed to sending citizens into space, suppose the cost
>was trivial, but the risk was still the same, would you still be against
>sending ordinary people into space??

An interesting question, but perhaps an irrelevant one.  The question is
basically "Should the U. S. Government (in the form of NASA) revive its
program to send ordinary citizens into space?"  If the costs were trivial,
United Airlines would be offering LEO as a tourist attraction, and you'd just
be faced with a stack of liability waivers to sign before you got aboard.


Bob Myers  KC0EW   HP Graphics Tech. Div.|  Opinions expressed here are not
                   Ft. Collins, Colorado |  those of my employer or any other
{the known universe}!hplabs!hpfcla!myers |  sentient life-form on this planet.

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

Date: 17 May 89 21:40:27 GMT
From: cfa!cfa250![e-mail]  (Steve Willner)
Subject: Re: Sun Exploding (?)

From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]
(Ken Arromdee):
> In _The Gods Themselves_, Asimov postulates the leakage of physical laws
> from another universe into ours.  If you're allowed to change the laws
> of physics, it's not wrong to say the sun can be made to blow up.

Sorry, since this wasn't the main point, I didn't clarify.  Asimov
postulated specifically that an increase in the strong interaction
coupling constant could make the Sun blow up.  That's nonsense.  (He
further postulated that the necessary increase was too small to be
detectable by terrestrial experiments.  Double nonsense; the strong
interaction coupling constant is easily measured, and any significant
variation would quickly be noticed.)  Of course, you are quite right
that allowing arbitrary changes in physical laws could perhaps make
the Sun blow up, but that's not what Asimov said.

(Though I personally enjoyed the book anyway, the blatant scientific
error was annoying.  Perhaps if this discussion continues, it should
be by e-mail or in rec.arts.sf-lovers.)
--
Steve Willner            Phone [phone]         Bitnet:   willner@cfa
60 Garden St.            FTS:      830-7123           UUCP:   willner@cfa
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA                 Internet: [e-mail]

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

Sender: "Charles_R._Garbowski.WBST102a"@Xerox.COM
Date: 17 May 89 10:43:32 PDT (Wednesday)
Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V9 #433 - Prediction Bulletins
From: "Charles_R._Garbowski.WBST102a"@Xerox.COM
Cc: "Charles_R._Garbowski.WBST102a"@Xerox.COM
Reply-To: "Charles_R._Garbowski.WBST102a"@Xerox.COM

I don't use the prediction bulletins, but if they are useful for others -
fine. I'm real handy with the delete key.

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

Date: 16 May 89 13:07:40 GMT
From: mcvax!ukc!acorn!ixi![e-mail]  (Clive Feather)
Subject: Re: New Orbiter Name Announced

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marc Bonin) writes:
> It's interesting to note that every shuttle orbiter except Columbia has
> a fictional counterpart

The *BIG* cannon in Jules Verne's "From Earth to the Moon" was called
the "Columbiad". Close enough ?
--
Clive D.W. Feather           [e-mail]
IXI Limited                  ...!mcvax!ukc!ixi!clive (riskier)
                             [phone]

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

Date: 17 May 89 19:29:43 GMT
From: concertina![e-mail]  (Steve Hix)
Subject: Re: New Orbiter Name Announced

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Clive Feather) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marc Bonin) writes:
> > It's interesting to note that every shuttle orbiter except Columbia has
> > a fictional counterpart
>
> The *BIG* cannon in Jules Verne's "From Earth to the Moon" was called
> the "Columbiad". Close enough ?

The ultimate reusable booster!!!

It never leaves the ground.  Needs no refurbishing before reuse.
No need for downrange recovery ships, aircraft, or crews.

Probably exceeds local noise limits, though.

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

Date: 17 May 89 14:06:08 GMT
From: xanth![e-mail]  (John K Hayes)
Subject: Re: asteroid almost hits earth



It just so happens there is an article in the current issue of Nat'l
Geographic (June, I think) that deals with mass extinctions.  It says that
most scientists now believe that the extinction of the dinasaurs was caused by
a single event as opposed to a gradual dying out.  They define the time
boundary of the Cretaceus (sp?) period (when there were dinasaurs) and the
Tertiary (sp?) period (when there weren't) as the K-T boundary.  There have
been samples of quartz crystals found that date to around the K-T boundary
that show signs of stress to a degree such as that caused by a nuclear
explosion or an impact of a very large meteor.
There has also been found a pencil thin layer in a chunk of rock of an element
commonly found in meteors but rarely on earth.  The layer in the rock where
this occurs corresponds roughly to the K-T boundary.  They estimate the meteor
to have been about 6 miles across which would produce the equivilent of
10,000 times all the world's nuclear explosives.

As for what happened after the impact, scientists differ.  Some propose that
90 % of the earth's forests caught fire.  Some say that if the impact were on
land it would produce a thick smog that would cause extreme cold; but if it
were at sea, it would send so much water vapor into the atmosphere that a
greenhouse effect would produce extreme heat.  One scientist who has been
studying the Yellowstone fire proposes that even if the impact were at sea
it would have produced an explosion so great that most of the world would have
caught fire (I forget the specifics she detailed, but they were very
interesting).

Still others (but a minority now, I believe) maintain that the cataclysm
can be explained by earthly causes such as ice ages, volcanic activity,
shifting of the continents, etc.  But, there seems to be evidence that
suggests otherwise.
--
    ---{john hayes}  Old Dominion University; Norfolk, Virginia USA
                     internet: [e-mail]
                     Home: [phone]     Work: [phone] ext 134

                      <++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++>
Are you a Have or a Have_Not?  Because if you're a Have_Not, you've probably
had it; whereas, if you're a Have, you've probably got it and are going to
give it away at some point in the future!       --- The Clash
                      <++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++>

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

Date: 17 May 89 22:58:35 GMT
From: ccnysci![e-mail]  (Patt Haring)
Subject: NASA : Astronauts Named To 2 DOD Missions Scheduled for 1990

Ported to USENET from UNITEX NETWORK via
  The Rutgers FidoGATEway
  UNITEX BBS: 201-795-0733

We want ** your ** news bulletins:
  (FAX: [phone] : Attention: James Waldron, Ph.D.)
or ...!uunet!rutgers!rubbs!unitex
or [e-mail]

*NASA: ASTRONAUTS NAMED TO TWO DOD MISSIONS SCHEDULED FOR 1990

     Shuttle crew members have been named for two Department of
Defense-dedicated Shuttle missions scheduled for mid-1990.

     USAF Col. Richard O. Covey will command STS-38, a classified
DOD mission aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis scheduled for
launch in May 1990.  Covey's pilot will be USN Cmdr. Frank L.
Culbertson.  Assigned as mission specialists are USMC Col. Robert
C. Springer, USAF Maj. Carl J. Meade and USA
Capt. Charles D. "Sam" Gemar.

     Named as mission specialists for Shuttle mission STS-39, an
unclassified DOD mission aboard Space Shuttle Discovery
scheduled for launch in July 1990, are USAF Col. Guion S.
Bluford, Jr., Richard J. Hieb and Charles Lacy Veach.

     The early assignment of mission specialists to STS-39 will
provide for long-range crew participation in payload training
and integration.

     The remainder of the flight crew will be assigned later.

     Covey has flown twice as pilot on missions STS-51I in August
1985 and STS-26 in September 1988.  He was born Aug. 1, 1946, in
Fayetteville, Ark., but considers Fort  Walton Beach, Fla., to be
his hometown.

     Culbertson will make his first space flight.  He was born
May 15, 1949, in Charleston, S.C., but considers Holly Hill,
S.C., to be his hometown.

     Springer has flown as a mission specialist on STS-29 in
March of this year.  He was born May 21, 1942, in
St. Louis, Mo., but considers Ashland, Ohio, to be his hometown.

     Meade will make his first flight in space.  He was born
Nov. 16, 1950, at Chanute Air Force Base, Ill.

     Gemar, also making his first space flight, was born Aug. 4,
1955, in Yankton, S.D., but considers Scotland, S.D., to be his
hometown.

     Bluford is a veteran of two Shuttle missions, STS-8 in
August 1983 and STS-61A in October 1985.  He was born Nov. 22,
1942, in Philadelphia, Pa.

     Hieb will make his first trip to orbit.  He was born
Sept. 21, 1955, in Jamestown, N.D.

     Veach also will make his first space flight.  He was born
Sept. 18, 1944, in Chicago, Ill., but considers Honolulu, Hawaii,
to be his hometown.

 * Origin: UNITEX --> Toward a United Species (1:107/501)
--
unitex - via FidoNet node 1:107/520
UUCP: ...!rutgers!rubbs!unitex
ARPA: [e-mail]

--
Patt Haring                  | My other site is a  Public Access UN*X
rutgers!cmcl2!ccnysci!patth  | system: The Big Electric Cat
[e-mail]         | 1-212-879-9031  [e-mail]

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

Date: 17 May 89 09:28:23 GMT
From: mcvax!inria!irisa![e-mail]  (saouter yannick)
Subject: Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs (was Re: asteroid almost hits earth)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jason) writes:
>
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Keith Dancey) writes:
> >>Sun for months or years, and causing mass extinctions of life -- including,
> >>many believe, the dinosaurs.
> >My understanding is that the demise of the dinosaurs extended over a period
> >of order of magnitude of a thousand years.
>
> ...etc....
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong, but is this one of the theories (proofs) behind
>  the "asteroid theory" of the extinction of the dinosaurs ?:
>
> Layers of Iridium were found deep into the earth's crust ( i.e. in the layers
> of the Grand Canyon).  Now, being that Iridium is rare on earth but found
> to be relatively more bountiful in asteroids and meteors, it is suggested
> that the layer of this element was put on our planet by an extremely large
> (or as previously mentioned a few extremely large) asteroid(s) which hit
> earth and caused the clouds of dust ...etc., which eventually killed off the
> dinosaurs.  This dust, if the theory is accurate, was filled with Iridium and
> when settled created a solid layer over years of rain, erosion ...etc...
>
I have heard about it,too. Dinosaurs might have been killed, in this theory for
few reasons :
- Herbivorous ones starved to death as the big forests burned with the energy
developped with the hit,and as the others plants died because of the Sun to be
darkened by the clouds. Then carnivorous ones starved to death,too.

- They might have choked with the carbonic anhydrid developped by the fires.

- The fishes died with the disappearance of the plancton, due to the first
reason.

- They could have died with the chill of the Earth due to the clouds.

- Moreover Iridium is poisonous.

However, all the dinosaurs would have been to disappear, that is to say, even
turtles and iguanes. And when all the creatures to be killed, then a great time
would be needed to repair this catastrophe (the first oxygen producers appears
in the sea 2 000 000 000 years ago, and this hit occurs 65 000 000 years ago).

[e-mail]

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

Date: 17 May 89 14:42:34 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx![e-mail]  (Ethan Tecumseh Vishniac)
Subject: Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs (was Re: asteroid almost hits earth)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (saouter yannick) writes:
>
> - Moreover Iridium is poisonous.

In sufficient quantities it is.  In this case the amounts are probably not
biologically significant.

>
> However, all the dinosaurs would have been to disappear, that is to say, even
> turtles and iguanes. And when all the creatures to be killed, then a great time
> would be needed to repair this catastrophe (the first oxygen producers appears
> in the sea 2 000 000 000 years ago, and this hit occurs 65 000 000 years ago).

Actually, turtles and iguanas are not dinosaurs, and they did not disappear
at the end of the Mesozoic.  My understanding is that the extinction of
terrestrial life can be summed up with the statement that everything weighing
more than 20kg died off.  However, the extinction was more sweeping than
this and many tiny  (and, of course, large) oceanic organisms died as well.
It is also true that this is not the most dramatic mass extinction in the
fossil record.
--
 I'm not afraid of dying     Ethan Vishniac, Dept of Astronomy, Univ. of Texas
 I just don't want to be     {charm,ut-sally,emx,noao}!utastro!ethan
 there when it happens.      (arpanet) [e-mail]
    - Woody Allen            (bitnet) [e-mail]

These must be my opinions.  Who else would bother?

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

Date: 17 May 89 17:19:30 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: What ever happened to the Hubble Space Telescope?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jason Gabler) writes:
>After the Challenger explosion I stopped keeping track of all the reasons
>for the delay with the H.S. Telescope.  Besides that tragedy, can anyone
>give me the other reasons behind its late arrival.

A combination of not wanting to fly it on the first post-Challenger mission,
not wanting to fly it until the TDRS network for returning data from it was
relatively complete, and not being able to fly it until after flying a
couple of military missions to shut the USAF up.
--
Subversion, n:  a superset     |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
of a subset.    --J.J. Horning | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #446
*******************