Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_3/V15NO371.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 32KB

Date: Tue,  3 Nov 92 05:00:02
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #371
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Tue,  3 Nov 92       Volume 15 : Issue 371

Today's Topics:
    "average" underground nuclear explosion (was : moving comets)
              "Earth Gains a Retinue of Mini-Asteroids"
                 Automated space station construction
                           Comet Collision
                              esa symbol
                             HRMS for ETI
                           Man in space ...
                            Moving comets
                             NASA Coverup
                Presidential Election Survey (2 msgs)
                    Putting volatiles on the moon
                   Scenario of comet hitting Earth
            Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth? (2 msgs)
                          Why Vote? (4 msgs)

    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, 2 Nov 92 10:00:03 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering)
Subject: "average" underground nuclear explosion (was : moving comets)

>I read once that the average underground nuclear explosion created spaces
>in rock half a mile across.  (Anyone confirm this?)
>Andy.

Average underground nuclear explosion? This implies that they're
naturally occuring or something...

I think it's a lot less than this, otherwise the underground testing
ranges in Nevada would be running out of rock...

In fact, don't they reuse some of the caverns?

>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>| Haveland-Robinson Associates   | Email: [e-mail]         |
>| 54 Greenfield Road, London     |        [e-mail] |
>| N15 5EP England. 081-800 1708  | Also:  0621-88756 081-802 4502       |

--
Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
---------------------

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 13:34:04 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: "Earth Gains a Retinue of Mini-Asteroids"

> Not really screwy.  The number of 50 meter objects is enhanced by
> about 10 times and the Tunguska type events probably happen once
> or a few times per century.  Remember, 3 out of 4 enter over water
> and may be less likely to be detected.  Also, perhaps a large
>


I wonder... Could this be the explanation for the non-radioactive
mushroom cloud seen by airline pilots in the Pacific one day in the
late 70's - early 80's? It was never connected to any source that I
am aware of.

Some theorized it was caused by an undersea volcanic explosion, but
no one succeeded in associating it with one. It was not a nuclear
explosion, although some at first suggested that. It is unlikely to
have been a non-nuclear explosion, ie no ships disappeared and I'm
not sure I see a motive for an experimental blast in that part of the
world.


Just a thought, although I would not expect a mushroom cloud from
such a comet strike. I'm not sure I can even see a mechanism for
creating one from a Tunguska class strike.

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 11:49:28 GMT
From: mike <[e-mail]>
Subject: Automated space station construction
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andrew Haveland-Robinson) writes:
>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (I am a terminator.) writes:
>
>>Can robots be launched to build the space station? They can work overtime.
>>
>
>Of course they could - this is just another area where Virtual Reality
>will come into its own...
>
>Virtual space travel and construction is much safer than the real thing!
>Major cock-ups needn't involve loss of life, so I think this should
>justify more VR space research...
>


The original poster asked if robots could be used to build the space station.
The answer is yes, they could, but they won't.  The technology is too young
to be trusted yet.  Virtual Reality is not viable because of long transmission
lags (up to 7 seconds, I hear) from down to up and back.  If we designed Space
Station for robotic compatibility, AND we had a closet full of replacement
robots, the technology is there, and it would be a lot cheaper (albeit slower).
I hear it takes $55000/hour of support to have an astronaut in a spacesuit.
Much cheaper to have some guy on the ground coaxing a robot through a series
of mind-numbingly boring routines.  Then again, some of NASA's funding comes
from the romance of humans being there, not robots (IMHO).

--
******************************** [e-mail] *****
* Michael L. Ross/C33 | Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co.   *
* Robotics Department | 2400 Nasa Rd. 1, Houston, TX 77062    *
*[phone] voice,[phone] fax**********boring, eh?****

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 15:46:45 GMT
From: Dave Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Comet Collision
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary

Carl J Lydick ([e-mail]) wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave Jones) writes:
> >One day, I'm going to sit down and work out if Asimov's Martian Way really
> >would have worked....soft land a chunk of Saturns Rings on Mars, when just
> >getting into Earth orbit takes 90% of your starting mass?  Hmmm.......
>
> Ah, but if you aerobrake to get into a nearly circular orbit and use your
> spacefaring iceberg for reaction mass in your descent, then you don't CARE if
> you use up 100% of it in soft-landing it.  After all, you've now got it in the
> Martion atmosphere, where it would've ended up had you soft-landed 100% of the
> mass (unless, of course, you increase the Martian atmospheric pressure
> considerably).

Good point.  However, Asimov had them soft-landing it using their "micropile
driven steam jets", and that's what needs to be addressed!

--
||Halloween Candy: the office snack    |
||from Nov. 1st onwards............... |Puff the Magic Dragon
||-------------------------------------|Lived by the sea
||Dave Jones ([e-mail])|Who knows what's in the autumn mists
||Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY      |In the mind of Yadallee?

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 17:24:30 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: esa symbol
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1992Oct30.4287.21313@dosgate> "donald simmons" <[e-mail]> writes:
>      Recently in a space magazine I saw the logo for the European Space
>Agency, and I wondered what it was suposed it mean. It consists of a
>blue circle with a lowercase 'e' inside it on the right hand side, and a
>small white dot on the left. My best guess is that the 'e' stands for
>Europe, and also represents the Earth, while the white dot is supposed
>to be the Moon. Anyone know for certain?

Nope.  But if you want to see for yourself, it's available via anonymous FTP:
  ames.arc.nasa.gov:pub/SPACE/LOGOS/esa.gif

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      [e-mail]  [phone]

     "NASA turns dreams into realities and makes science fiction
      into fact" -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 10:46:41 GMT
From: "M.D. O'Leary" <[e-mail]>
Subject: HRMS for ETI
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.bio

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Dietz) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Stanley Friesen) writes:
>
> >|Au contraire!  Our ignorance about origin of life is profound, and
> >|very little progress has been made in dispelling it.  There is no
> >|really plausible model for the origin of life.  We're missing at least
> >|one, and possibly several, fundamental ideas.
>
> > Have you read Cairns-Smith's "Seven Clues to the Origin of Life"?
> > I consider that to be an extremely plausible model (though the best
> > reasons are not in that, now out-of-date, book).
>
>Cairns-Smith's ideas are very imaginative, but are supported by almost
>no evidence.  In particular, no one has ever demonstrated that clays
>-- or any other crystals -- can propagate genetic information.  The
>fact that such speculations are taken seriously shows how blocked the
>field has become.
>     0


Just a note: It is extremely hard to estimate absolute numbers, or even viable
species representatives in a clay soil by 'genetic' methods (ie pcr) because
clay stabilises extracellular DNA to a great degree. The leap from stably
maintained DNA to stably maintained *replicating* DNA is perhaps not so great.
But not having read the book, I guess this is not what you were talking about.
Sorry.

> > Also, one could argue, based on the usual defnitions of life, that the
> > recently produced self-replicatinf RNA molecule *is* alive, and thus
> > we *have* made life in the laboratory. (Of course the exact definition
> > of life in the boundry cases is decidedly difficult, so one could also
> > make a case that it is not alive).
>
>Sure, we've made RNAs in the laboratory -- using purified, chiral
>tri(?)phosphorylated nucleotides, which (correct me if I'm wrong)
>are extracted from biological sources.  Prebiotic Miller-Urey type
>experiments have not, to my knowledge, ever produced nucleotides, nor
>have they produced anything but racemic mixtures of mostly
>biologically irrelevant molecules.  The monomers of RNA are
>sufficiently complicated that it is quite implausible they could have
>arisen without some prior evolution.
>

I don't have references to hand, but I did understand (undergrad level) that
some oligonucleotides had been produced in 'primal sou' expts.
Have I been misled?

If so *what* was evolving prior to the RNAs?


>    Paul F. Dietz
>    [e-mail]

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 17:37:14 GMT
From: Nick Floros <[e-mail]>
Subject: Man in space ...
Newsgroups: sci.space

   Hello dear netters ,

   Here in my office we have an argument  :

   What will happen if the space suite of an austronaut gets ripped in space ?

   Some of us recon that he will explode while others that he will end up
with lots of bruises!!. One thing that all of us agree, is that it is not
going to be a very healthy activity.

   Is there anyone out there who can shed some light on this subject ? .

   Thank you

   Nick

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 14:30:57 GMT
From: "Michael K. Heney" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Moving comets
Newsgroups: sci.space

>-From: [e-mail] (Henry Spencer)
>
>-Bombs are actually a relatively good way to move asteroids.  Comets
>-are a difficult case, because they are probably fragile and because they
>-probably have a thin crust with concentrated volatiles underneath.  A
>-small nearby nuclear explosion would blow off the crust on one side, and
>-the result would be a tremendous spill of gas from the comet itself.
>-If you knew what you were doing, and did it carefully, this could permit
>-steering a comet with far less effort than the brute-force approach.
>

Could you use a large laser for "steering" a comet?  I don't know how tight
you can keep a beam over planetary distances, but if the idea is delivering
energy "gently" to a comet to cause it to outgas in a preferred direction
without shattering it, a well-placed energy beam seems like an interesting
candidate.
--
Mike Heney                |   Senior Systems Analyst and     |  Reach for the
[e-mail]   |  Space Activist / Entrepreneur   |  Stars, eh?
Kensington, MD (near DC)  |     * Will Work for Money *      |

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 15:19:39 GMT
From: Dillon Pyron <[e-mail]>
Subject: NASA Coverup
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>
>                snarfy to NASA Physicists -  "YOU'RE ALL BUSTED!"
>
>    According to conventional theories of science , the Moon (Luna) has only
  incoherent babblings deleted

You know, it is dangerous to scarf that many peyote buttons in one sitting!
--
Dillon Pyron                      | The opinions expressed are those of the
TI/DSEG Lewisville VAX Support    | sender unless otherwise stated.
[phone] (when I'm here)     |
[phone] (when I'm home)     |"Pacts with the devil are not legally
[e-mail]          |binding!"
PADI DM-54909                     |-Friar Tuck   _Robin Hood:The Hooded Man_

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

Date: 1 Nov 1992 11:21:08 -0500
From: MIT Presidential Information Service <[e-mail]>
Subject: Presidential Election Survey
Newsgroups: sci.space

Explanation: Have you ever been called on the phone to answer a
survey for an electoral poll?  Well, here is a chance to express your
views.

Please answer this survey and return it to:

                 [e-mail]

Results: The sooner you return this survey, the sooner you can find out
how your answers square with other participating members of the Internet
community.  We will post the results to those who respond as soon as
the returns become significant.

Directions: Try to answer all the questions as best you can in order
make this survey as accurate as possible.  The answers to questions will
complete from your input, so you need only provide enough characters to
distinguish your answer from the alternatives.  For multiple choice
questions with letter or numeric labels, you need only provide the
letter or number for your answer.

If you are unsure how to complete this survey, you can learn how to fill
out our computerized forms by sending mail to:

                 [e-mail]

Eligibility: Feel free to circulate this survey to your friends.  Anyone
able to send electronic mail is eligible to participate, even if they
have never taken advantage of the MIT Presidential Information Servers
at:

                [e-mail]
                [e-mail]
                [e-mail]
                [e-mail]
                [e-mail]

Document Searches:  We recently introduced a document search tool that
makes it easy to search the campaign literature to find documents
discussing specific issues that concern you.  If you have not used the
WAIS document retrieval system, you may wish to try it before the
election in order to find out exactly what the candidates are saying.

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

Required form identifier and specifier below -- don't delete them.
:FORM: PRESIDENTIAL-ELECTION-SURVEY

Question: What are the chances of your voting in the election for
President this November?
Answer:  Select one:  1  Almost certain
                      2  Probably
                      3  50-50
                      4  Will not vote
                      5  Dont-know
:VOTING-CHANCES:

Question: There will be a number of elections in November this year.
Which candidates in the general election for president have you heard of?
Answer:  Select some of:  1  George Bush  - Republican
                          4  Andre Marrou - Libertarian
                          2  Bill Clinton - Democrat
                          3  Ross Perot   - Independent
                          5  John Hagelin - Natural Law Party
:PRESIDENTIAL-CANDIDATES:

Question: If the election were held today, who would you for?
Answer:  Select one:  Bill Clinton - Democrat
                      Andre Marrou - Libertarian
                      John Hagelin - Natural Law Party
                      Ross Perot   - Independent
                      George Bush  - Republican
                      Undecided
:VOTE-FOR:

Question: Answer this question only if you are undecided.
If the election were held today and  you had to decide right now,
which candidate would you lean to?
Answer:  Select one:  Ross Perot   - Independent
                      George Bush  - Republican
                      John Hagelin - Natural Law Party
                      Andre Marrou - Libertarian
                      Bill Clinton - Democrat
                      Undecided
:UNDECIDED-LEANING:

Question: How do you rate job performance of President George Bush?
Answer:  Select one:  1  Excellent
                      2  Good
                      3  Only Fair
                      4  Poor
                      5  Dont-know
:PRESIDENT-JOB-APPROVAL:

Question: Which of the following best describes your views?
Answer:  Select one:  1  Ross Perot is sending an important message,
                           but he should NOT be President
                      2  Ross Perot would be a good President
                      3  Ross Perot just should not be President
                      4  Dont-know
:PEROT-ASSESSMENT:

Question: Who would do the best job of improving the Nation's economy?
Answer:  Select one:  A  All
                      P  Perot
                      C  Clinton
                      B  Bush
                      N  None
                      D  Dont-know
:IMPROVE-THE-ECONOMY:

Question: Who would do the best job of dealing with taxes?
Answer:  Select one:  A  All
                      C  Clinton
                      N  None
                      P  Perot
                      B  Bush
                      D  Dont-know
:DEALING-WITH-TAXES:

Question: Who would gives you the most hope for the future?
Answer:  Select one:  A  All
                      C  Clinton
                      P  Perot
                      N  None
                      B  Bush
                      D  Dont-know
:FUTURE-HOPE:

Question: Who would make the changes that the country needs?
Answer:  Select one:  P  Perot
                      N  None
                      A  All
                      B  Bush
                      C  Clinton
                      D  Dont-know
:NECESSARY-CHANGES:

Question: And who does this best describe - Steady Leader?
Answer:  Select one:  C  Clinton
                      B  Bush
                      A  All
                      P  Perot
                      N  None
                      D  Dont-know
:STEADY-LEADER:

Question: And who does this best describe - Would worry you if he were in the
White House for the next four years?
Answer:  Select one:  P  Perot
                      B  Bush
                      N  None
                      A  All
                      C  Clinton
                      D  Dont-know
:WORRISOME-LEADER:

Question: Which of the following best describes how you think of yourself with
regards to political parties?
Answer:  Select one:  1  Democrat
                      2  Independent but leaning Democrat
                      3  Independent
                      4  Independent but lean Republican
                      5  Republican
                      6  Libertarian
                      7  Natural Law Party
                      6  Other
:PARTY-AFFILIATION:

Question: What is your age?
Answer:  Select one:  A  18 - 24
                      B  25 - 29
                      C  30 - 34
                      D  35 - 39
                      E  40 - 44
                      F  45 - 49
                      G  50 - 54
                      H  55 - 64
                      I  65 and over
                      J  Refused/Dont-know
:AGE:

Question: What is the last year of schooling that you have completed?
Answer:  Select one:  A  1 - 11th grade
                      B  High school graduate
                      C  Non-college after high school
                      D  Some college or junior college
                      E  College graduate
                      F  Post-graduate school
                      G  Dont-know
:SCHOOLING-COMPLETED:

Question: What is your gender?
Answer:  Select one:  Male or Female.
:GENDER:

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

The Presidential Campaign Information Service is a non-partisan
service operated at M.I.T to make campaign information available,
facilitate electronic discussion of the issues, and to study the
use of electronic mail as a component of a presidential campaign.
The service can neither control who reads what you write in public,
nor how they may use your written words.  For our part, we store
most messages, and we will make them available after the election
for scientific study.  Names and any other identifiers will not be
released; they will be omitted or replaced with random symbols.

Eric Loeb and John Mallery
M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Laboratory

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 15:14:04 GMT
From: "J. Lewis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Presidential Election Survey
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> MIT Presidential Information Service <[e-mail]> writes:
>
<questionnaire deleted>
>
>Eric Loeb and John Mallery
>M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Laboratory

Artificial intelligence, real stupidity, and unmitigated gall.

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 19:44:16 GMT
From: Greg Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Putting volatiles on the moon
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John A. Weeks III) writes:
>
>Eeek! I was looking for a smiley at the end of your post, but I didn't
>find one.  While I don't know about using nukes to nudge comets, I have
>recently heard a few stories about the Soviet Union using nuclear bombs
>for peaceful purposes.  They reportedly dug canals with a-bombs, seriously
>polluting several rivers in the process.  They also used a-bombs as a
>mining explosive--then sent unprotected workers into the mine only hours
>after the explosion.  Please try to refrain from using nukes for anything
>other than blowing up people, and I really hope we don't use them for
>that purpose either.
>
>-john-
>
    Eek! I was looking for a smiley... :-)  Seriously though...
Yes, there are reports that the Soviets used nuclear bombs for
engineering projects.  A couple of comments though.  Part of the problem
with the rivers was not so much radioactivity (as I recall) but the fact
that they reversed the direction of a few, and completely changed
the eco-systems on them and others.  Not that we haven't done the same.
Take a look at the mouth of the Colorado.  It's litereally a trickle.
And VERY polluted.

    As for using them as mining explosions, it would seem the smart
thing to do is NOT let unprotected workers into the mine.  ANd
radioactivity in a mine is not uncommon, there is a lot of
Radon in coal mines.  Also, my understanding (several eyars old)
is taht they were creating large underground fuel resoivoirs... not mines.

    The big trick is developing CLEAN nuclear weapons, i.e. ones with
a minimal amount of fallout.  It can be done to some extent.


>--
>==============================================================================
>John A. Weeks III        [phone]            [e-mail]
>Newave Communications, Ltd.                ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john

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

Date: 1 Nov 92 15:32:03 GMT
From: Mal Logan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Scenario of comet hitting Earth
Newsgroups: sci.space

 > a forest was hit by the downward moving shockwave and was
 > leveled for
 > a distance of 50 miles in every direction. In other words, a
 > 100-mile
 > circle of trees was laid flat. The evidence leading to the

I thought it was only 20kms in all directions from ground zero, not 50 miles.


NOT THAT IT MAKES A WHOLE LOT OF DIFFERENCE.


Mal Logan

 * Origin: Ground Zero BBS - 61-3-314-7107 (3:635/546)

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 13:56:38 GMT
From: Paul Leyland <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes:

> You're the astronomer, so you may have taken this into account in your
> estimates, but it's important to remeber that as a comet, S/T has a much lower
> mass and is much more fragile than a similarly sized asteroid.  As such, it's
> much less dangerous than an asteroid of the same size.


Not much less.  Let's take extreme values: density of asteroid 5
(solid metal); density of comet 0.5 (fluffy ice).  Ratio of masses is
10:1

[Before everyone jumps on me, the units are tonnes per cubic metre,
and I'm deliberately choosing extreme values to make a point.  Real
numbers are probably closer to 3 and 1 respectively]

Right, my asteroid dumps ten times the kinetic energy on the earth as
my comet.   Now, mass goes as the cube of the radius and cube-root (10)
is 2.15.  Therefore, if our radius estimates are out by a factor of
two or so, the kinetic energy can be an order of magnitude wrong.

Likewise, kinetic energy scales as the square of the radius.  The
range of velocities quoted (60-70 km/s) gives a 1.4 variation in
kinetic energy.

What I'm saying, is that the errors in the size estimates and velocity
estimates outweigh differences in composition,  so far as damage is
concerned.

Fragility arguments don't hold much water either.  If the comet is in
one piece when it's a few thousand km up, it will be in one piece when
it hits.  The quoted size is about the thickness of the dense bit of
our atmosphere, and it will go through that in about a quarter second.
It will not break up significantly until it hits something solid.

Even if it did break up, it wouldn't matter.  All that kinetic energy
gets dumped on the earth's surface in a few seconds anyway.


Hot Fudge Wednesdae, anyone?


Paul
--
Paul Leyland <[e-mail]>          | Hanging on in quiet desperation is
Oxford University Computing Service      |     the English way.
13 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 6NN, UK     | The time is come, the song is over.
Tel: [phone]  Fax: [phone] | Thought I'd something more to say.

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 18:03:06 GMT
From: Robert Sheaffer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

But assuming that it is possible to fragment the nucleus of the comet,
this imparts a transverse velocity to the fragments that they did not
previously have. If they previously were exactly on the "right" path
to strike earth, by imparting motion to them along a right-angle to
that path, won't even a relatively small delta to their previous path
cause the vast majority of the fragments to miss earth?

--

        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - [e-mail]

 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!

       "Beware when the great God lets loose a thinker on this planet.
        Then all things are at risk. It is as when a conflagration has
        broken out in a great city, and no man knows what is safe, or
        where it will end."
                               - Emerson: Essay, "Circles"

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 14:56:19 GMT
From: David Knapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why Vote?
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.motss,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> writes:
>                              WHY VOTE?
>
>The reward of a thing well done
>is to have done it.
>          --Emerson
>                                      One never notices what has been done;
>                                      One can only see what remains to be done.
>                                                      --Marie Curie

Etc.

Voting is really only useful for getting those people off your back who
believe that if you *don't* vote, you shouldn't complain about the
current state of goverment.

Clearly, an individual's vote doesn't matter at all as evidenced by the
way the election turns out whether they vote or not. Voting is a symbolic,
not a functional, act.

Until we get rid of the electoral college, the individual vote will *always*
be discounted and we will not be living in a democracy.

It is very true that we live in a _democratic republic_, but which do *you*
value more, the democratic part, or the republic part?





--
David Knapp                                      University of Colorado, Boulder
Perpetual Student                                   [e-mail]

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 16:35:47 GMT
From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why Vote?
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.motss,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(David Knapp) writes:
|> Clearly, an individual's vote doesn't matter at all as evidenced by the
|> way the election turns out whether they vote or not. Voting is a symbolic,
|> not a functional, act.

This has a minute amount of truth if you discount any election below the
presidential level.

Which reminds me:

California voters: even if a projection is made before you vote... VOTE!  There
are still two senate races to be decided.  A failure to vote for Clinton if he
is projected the winner, for instance (or even if he has already accepted), is
not unlike a vote for Herschensohn...

|> It is very true that we live in a _democratic republic_, but which do *you*
|> value more, the democratic part, or the republic part?

Both equally, of course: the former to keep us from the tyranny of the minority,
and the latter, from the tyranny of the majority.
--
ROGER B.A. KLORESE                                              +1 415 ALL-ARFF
[e-mail]              {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!sgiblab!unpc!rogerk
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from."
                                                                   -- J. Foster

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 17:27:30 GMT
From: "Tracy E. Finifter" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why Vote?
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.motss,sci.space

You forgot this one:

Democracy is the worst form of government
known to man, except for all the others.

            - Winston Churchill

(or something to that effect)

--
* Tracy E. Finifter              * "Anyone who is capable of getting *
*  [e-mail]          *  themselves made President should *
*  Douglass College, Rutgers University   *  on no account be allowed to do   *
*  New Brunswick, New Jersey          *  the job."  - Hitchhikers Guide   *

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 17:44:30 GMT
From: Jim Mann <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why Vote?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (David Knapp) writes:
> Until we get rid of the electoral college, the individual vote will
*always*
> be discounted and we will not be living in a democracy.

How does that follow?  Who gets the electoral votes in a
state is determined by the popular vote in the state.

>
> It is very true that we live in a _democratic republic_, but which
do *you*
> value more, the democratic part, or the republic part?

Both, actually.  One reason we are a Republic (or Democratic
Republic, to use your term) is to, at least in part, to prevent
the government from becoming government by popular opinion
poll. When things are working right, our representatives can
refine the will of the people, and look toward long term solutions
that are good for the country as a whole, not just what seems
right at this particular minute, for this particular local
interest.

--
Jim Mann
Stratus Computer   [e-mail]

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 371
------------------------------