Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_0/V15NO063.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 13KB

Date: Tue,  4 Aug 92 05:00:08
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #063
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Tue,  4 Aug 92       Volume 15 : Issue 063

Today's Topics:
              Energiya's role in Space Station assembly
              Final CFP: Physics of Computation Workshop
                       Hubble used for spying?
          ReEe: aA 12 mile tether that gernerates 5000v?
                            Soyuz as ACRV
                      What does ASTV stand for?
                          What is the ASRM??

    Welcome to the Space Digest!!  Please send your messages to
    "[e-mail]", and (un)subscription requests of the form
    "Subscribe Space <your name>" to one of these addresses: listserv@uga
    (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle
    (THENET), or [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 92 13:07:06 BST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Energiya's role in Space Station assembly

> but could we have them ship a complete (unfueled)
> Energiya rocket to Kennedy and we launch it from there?  Do we have
any
> launch pads that could hancle it?  Or taken out of mothballs?
>


Lets go one better. Launch it from Australia. There was discussion
some time back of firing Proton's from there. You still get a penalty
in putting it into Fred's non-equatorial orbit, but I suspect that
for private purposes the higher mass to equatorial for the same price

would make that a more economically justifiable location for many
private space stations. (Earth observation business excluded)

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

Date: 31 Jul 92 21:22:38 GMT
From: Steve Ford <[e-mail]>
Subject: Final CFP: Physics of Computation Workshop
Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.theory,sci.astro,sci.bio,sci.logic,sci.math,sci.philosophy.meta,sci.psychology,sci.physics,sci.space,comp.parallel,comp.arch

            The Symbiosis of Physics and Computation
                 Call for Participation
             Physics of Computation Workshop
               October 2 - 4, 1992, Dallas, Texas
            Sponsored by Dallas IEEE Computer Society
            Corporate Sponsor: Texas Instruments Incorporated

The Physics  of  Computation  Workshop  is  an  opportunity for participants to
better understand and contribute to the intimate relationship  emerging between
Modern Physics  and  Computation  Theory.   One  commonly  held  view  is  that
information laws are dependent on the  laws of physics.  Another emerging  view
is that the universe would  not work without information  primitives underlying
physical laws.  Both of these views  conclude that physics and computation  are
linked together at a very fundamental level.  Understanding the convergence  of
computation and physics will lead to  a better understanding of using  physical
mechanisms as computing engines, and also lead to a better understanding of how
the universe is organized.   This field will  become increasingly important  as
the complexity and computational horsepower requirements continually exceed the
available computing engines we are able to design or build.

The keynote speaker for this workshop  will be Rolf Landauer, who  co-organized
the first  conference  on  the  Physics  of Computation.  Creative thinkers are
welcome from  any  background,  but  basic  interest  or  expertise in physics,
computer sciences, mathematics, philosophy and/or psychology will contribute to
the discussions.   You  are  not  expected  to  come  with answers, but with an
interest in exploring the  questions.  We are  interested in papers  that unify
Computation (Information  Theory,  Communication  Theory,  Algorithms, Cellular
Automata, Automatic Learning, Neural  Networks, Architecture, Simulation,  etc)
and Physics (Entropy, Thermodynamics, Complexity, Quantum Theory,  Energy/mass,
Relativity, Gravity, etc).   The goal  of this  workshop is  to establish links
between participants from various backgrounds.

BACKGROUND: The first conference on the Physics of Computation was held in 1981
at MIT.  The papers from that conference were printed in the 1982 International
Journal for  Theoretical  Physics,  Vol  21,  April, June, and December issues.
Work in this field  has focused on  how energy consumption  and computation are
related.   Many  excellent  papers   on  reversible  computation,   and  energy
costs/limits  of  computation,  and  quantum  models  of  computation   provide
introductions to the subject.  We are assembling a bibliography for this field.

SUBMISSION: Each prospective attendee is  requested to submit a  position paper
of 1-4 pages (plus 1 page of  references).  Please send your submission by  Aug
7, both by surface mail (3 copies) and also electronically (if possible) to:

     Douglas Matzke                      EMAIL:  [e-mail]
     Texas Instruments Incorporated      PHONE:  [phone]
     PO BOX 655621,  MS 369                FAX:  [phone]
     Dallas, Texas 75265

Notification of acceptance  (limit of  100 people)  will be  mailed by  Aug 24,
1992.  The technical committee will group submissions into relevant topics, and
select papers  and  panel  members.   Time  for  questions  after each talk and
breakout  sessions   will   provide   structured   time   for   discussion  and
participation.   Copies  of   the  position   papers  will   be  distributed at
registration.

REGISTRATION (if  position  paper  is  accepted):  A  block  of  rooms is being
reserved at  a  North  Dallas  Area  Hotel.   Full registration details will be
mailed with acceptance notification.  The room rate will be $59 flat rate.  The
workshop fee will be $100, payment by check or credit card.  Transportation  to
hotel: Supershuttle  or  Taxi.   Free  hotel shuttles for transportation around
Addison.

SCHEDULE: Friday August 7:  Position papers due
          Monday August 24: Notification of acceptance and final schedule
          Thursday Oct 1:   Out of town arrival, early registration,& Reception
          Friday Oct 2 thru Sunday Oct 4(noon): Physics of Computation Workshop

--
Steve Ford                                      Net: [e-mail]
Texas Instruments                               Tel: [phone]
Computer Science Laboratory                     Fax: [phone]
PO Box 655474, MS 238, Dallas, TX 75265         MSG: SFRD

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

Date: 3 Aug 92 11:42:17 GMT
From: "E.J. du Toit" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hubble used for spying?
Newsgroups: sci.space

Can the Hubble telescope be rotated to view the earth's surface and what could
be seen (resolution)?

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

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 92 12:58:16 BST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: ReEe: aA 12 mile tether that gernerates 5000v?

> I can see that this will work, though it's practicality may be
limited
> as it would start to slow down the shuttle if any serious power
could
> be drawn.
>


I would hardly call it "limited practicality" when you can change
orbit to a lower one by storing the orbital energy in a battery for
later reuse (less entropies bill) for reboost to higher orbit.
Reaction mass need only be used for recharging this "orbital battery"
after some number of cycles.

It might also be useful for re-entry. Maybe add on a small electric
thruster to make it a bit quicker.

And you could move cargo (slowly) to higher orbits. But you probably
want something that won't mind spending a bit of time in the Van
Allen Belts...

If you limit your definition to "for an internal power source", I
would agree with your statement though.

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

Date: 3 Aug 92 13:14:23 GMT
From: George William Herbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Soyuz as ACRV
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>There's more than just the launcher-capsule interface to consider.  Power
>systems, communications protocols, computer interfaces, et cetera may all
>need some work.  I don't know all the details, but I would be surprised
>if you can just modify the launcher a bit and use a Soyuz in the U.S.

    Actually, the adapter systemw would fit nicely in the orbital
module where they normally fly some science instruments.  Alternatively,
you could leave the OM off (and lose a couple of tons mass) and figure out
some alternative.  Such as running the Soyuz on its own solar panels
for its on-orbit lifetime 8-) (horrors...).  Communications is no biggie;
just  radios.  Computer interfaces is a disaster, but there's no real
need to handle that.  Just have some standard low-rate telemetry
(on some radio perhaps) to the station and relay it to the ground.

>I'm not referring to launch and landing certification, although if we do
>have to modify the internals we'd probably want to give it a few tests.  I
>am referring to the work needed to make sure the Soyuz can stay up for months
>and years as a lifeboat; it's not designed for that.  If we take the easy
>way out and swap capsules every few months, we're going to eat up our
>potential savings in repetitive launch costs and capsule procurment.  Using
>Soyuz is hardly a guaranteed cheap-and-easy solution to the question of
>guaranteed crew return.

    THAT is the rub; the Soyuz as is has a limited on-orbit lifetime.
What I've heard suggested quietly is to buy the capsules on-orbit
at the station, with no OM, prelaunched on russian boosters to keep it all
cheap.  If you delete the OM, they can just about put it into SSF  orbit
from their normal pads (one big dogleg...).  Overall cost, right now,
about $25-50m/launch, with four launches a year needed to keep 2 in good
shape on orbit (up to 6 crew returned: for 8 man crews, you need six
launches a year).
    Will it fly?  I've heard wierder things... like someone in the
shuttle program office talking to someone from NPO Energia about mating
the US Shuttle Sans SSME's to a Energia (Why?  Ask the Shuttle Office
about refurbishment prices on SSME's sometime...).  Not likely, but
anything's possible...


-george william herbert
[e-mail]  [e-mail]  [e-mail] until 28 aug
++  copyright 1992 george william herbert.       All rights except usenet   ++
++ transmission/use and inclusion in followup/reply articles/mail reserved. ++

Current Freedom Gripe: The Solar Panels are Buckling!  The Solar Panels
are Buckling!

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

Date: 3 Aug 92 08:45:22 GMT
From: Frederic Chalot <[e-mail]>
Subject: What does ASTV stand for?
Newsgroups: sci.space

AOTV and AFE are well known projects. But what is exactly the ASTV about
which I heard recently?

                           -------*****-------
    Frederic Chalot, Scientific Computing & Computational Mathematics
           Division of Applied Mechanics, Stanford University
   "Il n'est pas defendu d'attendre et il est toujours doux d'esperer!"

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

Date: 3 Aug 92 12:00:09 GMT
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: What is the ASRM??
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brent Butler) writes:
>If anybody has some info on NASA's Advanced Solid Rocket Motor could
>you please post/send it to me.

Don't bother; it's dead Jim.

Last week the House voted to kill the program largely due to a blunder by
House proponents [1]. The Senate Appropriations subcommittee also zeroed
funds (but left a small loophole in the report language). Odds are about
90% that it is dead.

   Allen

[1] For those interested in the blunder, the proponents brought out Jamie
    Lee Whitten, chair of the Appropriations Committee to speak for ASRM
    (also known as the Jamie Whitten Memorial Pork Launcher). Normally, this
    very powerful person strikes terror into the hearts of pork loving
    congresscritters everywhere and they cross him at their peril. Now
    however, he is in his 80's and sounded pretty senile before the House.
    This may have convinced members that Whitten is history and they could
    vote any way they wanted.

--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they     |
|  [e-mail]     |  put a man on the Moon?"                               |
+----------------------263 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 063
------------------------------