Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_3/V15NO372.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 29KB

Date: Tue,  3 Nov 92 05:02:31
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #372
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Tue,  3 Nov 92       Volume 15 : Issue 372

Today's Topics:
    "average" underground nuclear explosion (was : moving comets)
                 Automated space station construction
                           Comet collision
                  Fluid Measurement/Instrumentation
                        HRMS for ETI (3 msgs)
                             Ice hardness
                        NASA Coverup (2 msgs)
                   Scenario of comet hitting Earth
 Surveyor landings (was Re: QUESTIONS: Apollo, Earth, Moon) (2 msgs)
            Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth? (4 msgs)
         Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?  -- typo fixed
                        the Happyface on Mars
                  very small astro science sensors??
                              Why Vote?

    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 1992 18:50:06 GMT
From: Dillon Pyron <[e-mail]>
Subject: "average" underground nuclear explosion (was : moving comets)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] ("Phil G. Fraering") writes:
>
>>I read once that the average underground nuclear explosion created spaces
>>in rock half a mile across.  (Anyone confirm this?)
>>Andy.
At one time, in the "good old days", there were some huge cavern rippers.  Most
test now are fairly small yield.  Maybe 200-400 metres diameter, 300 or metres
high, due to debris on the floor.  All this is guess work based on previously
published.
>
>Average underground nuclear explosion? This implies that they're
>naturally occuring or something...
Implication comes from what?
>
>I think it's a lot less than this, otherwise the underground testing
>ranges in Nevada would be running out of rock...
As a matter of fact ...
>
>In fact, don't they reuse some of the caverns?
Yup, depends on what they want to test.  This is one way of doing "atmospheric"
testing.
>
>>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>>| 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
>---------------------
>
Attention alt.conspiracy fans:
In 1980, we accidentally blew a 1200 km diameter hole in the center of the
earth.  This result in the Mt. St. Helens eruption and the increased seismic
activity since then.  This is the real coverup, not some NASA coverup about the
moon being bigger than it is   :-)  do I need it?
--
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: 2 Nov 92 23:12:36 GMT
From: Paul A Daniels <[e-mail]>
Subject: Automated space station construction
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <[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.
>>
>>Henry Choy
>>[e-mail]

>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...

>(They don't need feeding or oxygen and don't produce any awkward waste
>either... )

>Anyone know what's going on?

    One thing that has always had me wondering about construction in space,
Is it feesable to blow bubbles in space? Ie blow a large bubble out of some
plastic/foam/whatever compound so that you end up with a nice pressurised module
without much hassle, and if you could design the bubble maker such that it
connects to some sort of airlock you wouldn't have to cut a hole in the
surface of the bubble.
    Basicly inflate, check that it is aok, then start work on the interior.

Im sure someone must have tried some experiments along this line in the past,
so why can't we do this type of thing....

Paul.

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 21:56:46 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Comet collision

-From: [e-mail] (Robert Sheaffer)
-Subject: Re: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
-Date: 2 Nov 92 18:03:06 GMT
-Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

-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?

And of course if you weren't sure the comet would hit the Earth, you've
just greatly increased the probability of *some* impact...

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 22:33:02 GMT
From: Marcos Ortiz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fluid Measurement/Instrumentation
Newsgroups: sci.engr,sci.research,sci.energy,sci.aeronautics,sci.misc,sci.space,sci.environment

I am looking for fluid flow instrumentation that may
allow me to measure very low flow velocities, in liquid
and in vapor (it would be if it could measure 2-phase, but
i'm not holding my breath), with little or no disturbance to
the flow.  I've heard of micro-turbines and "plume" flowmeters,
but heard nothing about who makes them or what their capabilities
and limitations are.  If you have any ideas or information
please share with me.  I do ask that you send me your response
directly to ensure that i will get it.

Thanks,

Marcos Ortiz


========== long legal disclaimer follows, press n to skip ===========

Neither the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory or any of their employees, makes any warranty, whatsoever,
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility regarding any
information, disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights.  No specific reference constitutes or implies
endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States
Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.  The views and
opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the
United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 19:39:01 GMT
From: Paul Dietz <[e-mail]>
Subject: HRMS for ETI
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.bio

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (M.D. O'Leary) writes:

> 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?

Yes, you've been misled.  There have been experiments in how
oligonucleotides could have formed.  They start with nontrivial
concentrations of purified nucleotides and various condensing
agents.

For some insight into the difficulty of forming RNA, see Shapiro's
article in Origins of Life (volume 18) on prebiotic ribose synthesis
(punchline: it's hard, is poisoned by the presence of cyanide, which
is necessary for the creation of bases, and the ribose is unstable in
solution and so cannot readily accumulate.)  Or, read his book
"Origins" for a layman's level critique of the field.  I think he even
mentions an undergrad-level text make a bogus claim such as the one
you relate.

    Paul F. Dietz
    [e-mail]

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 17:34:46 GMT
From: Stanley Friesen <[e-mail]>
Subject: HRMS for ETI
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.bio

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Dietz) writes:
|
|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.

The *key* point is that we have made one that is *self-reproducing*,
not merely that it was RNA.

|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.

I am fairly sure I heard about the production of nucleotides, and even short
poly-nucleotides, in Meller-Urey type experiments.  True, they were still
racemic.
--
[e-mail]            (formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
[e-mail]

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 17:36:57 GMT
From: Stanley Friesen <[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:
| > Have you read Cairns-Smith's "Seven Clues to the Origin of Life"?
|
|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.

Have you read the more recent symposia on the clay-life hypthesis?
There is more evidence that you might think.  I was fairly impressed by
some of the studies done since "Seven Clues ..." was published (that is
why I characterized it as out of date).
--
[e-mail]            (formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 21:49:16 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ice hardness

-From: [e-mail] (John F. Woods)
-Subject: Re: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
-Date: 2 Nov 92 17:28:43 GMT

[e-mail] (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
->I should think that, given that a comet consists largely of ice and
->other volatiles, even one good-sized H-bomb placed directly into the
->nucleus would pretty much eliminate any "threat to earth". Seems it
->would be mostly vaporized and scattered.

-The thermal mass of a several-km-diameter comet is quite a bit larger than
-you think.  Furthermore, most of it is "ice" at just a few Kelvin (depending
-on how far out its orbit takes it, and how long it spends there), which means
-that "ice" is going to be every bit as hard as the formerly-molten silicate
-you're standing on...

A number of science fiction writers seem to assume that water ice at
cryogenic temperatures would be many times stronger than ice at slightly
below freezing. Is there any indication that this is true?

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 00:35:57 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NASA Coverup
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy

   snarfy charges,

>>  NASA  physicists.....  YOU  ARE  withholding  the truth from the American
>>  People...

    In message-ID: <[e-mail]> (Henry Spencer) responds:

>Oh, come now.  A conspiracy that large, held together for that long?  In
>a government that couldn't suppress Watergate or Iranscam?  Come now.
>This is laughable.

   You  must  think  that  what  you  see on TV news is the entirety of what
   really is going on in the world .  Now  some  might  find  such  naivete'
   laughable, but I actually feel sorry for you.

   Watergate  and Iranscam are the tips of some very large icebergs. Some of
   us have a difficult time figuring out why ,now that the "cold  war  "  is
   supposedly  over, we need to have a National Security Agency in charge of
   keeping an estimated 8 million secrets from the American public. What ,in
   principle ,is to be gained by keeping the JFK Assasination  files  closed
   until  well  into  the  next century, when all the likely participants in
   this disgusting political takeover will have died of old age?  I  am  not
   the  first  to  make  such  allegations  about  the moon landing charade,
   therefore , suppression is attempted but fails.

>I also note that the conspiracy must extend to Japan, since their first
>near-Moon navigation efforts, for Hiten, worked flawlessly.

   The issue is not necessarily whether we landed on the moon , but  how  we
   did it. The Japanese have this knack for doing anything we can do  ,  and
   with better quality and precision.

>>If you want  to  argue  about  the  merits  of  my  calculations...

>What merits?  Just for starters, your calculations assume that the Earth
>and Moon are motionless with respect to each other.

   No  they  don't  .  Abell's lunar gravity figure of 1/6 assumes the earth
   and moon rotate around a common barycenter. The neutral point  figure  is
   a direct derivation of that result.

   My  calculations  assume the neutral point to be motionless with respect
   to the earth and moon . What do your calculations assume?

 snarfy

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 21:53:07 GMT
From: "John S. Novak III" <[e-mail]>
Subject: NASA Coverup
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>   My  calculations  assume the neutral point to be motionless with respect
>   to the earth and moon . What do your calculations assume?

> snarfy

That you're related to McElwaine.


--
"Look at Every Lit-tle Symbol."
          -Shrijay Dalal, 11-03-91
John S. Novak, III        [e-mail]
"Dave's Black Box Theory:
     You just worry about the input and the output; you don't worry about
     the sh*t in between."
John S. Novak, III        [e-mail]

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 12:14:49 EST
From: "John F. Woods" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Scenario of comet hitting Earth
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Cameron Newham) writes:
>So, we nuke the comet which in turn would cause lots of radioactive
>debris to fall to earth over a large area.

Wrong.  There would be very little induced radiation, and most of the
radioactive material from the bomb would expand in space and miss the Earth.

>Besides - nuclear explosions in space are currently banned.

Since the World Court would cease to exist as a functioning body (and possibly
their building as well) if a sufficiently large comet hit the earth, it can
be rationally argued that they should not have jurisdiction.  ;-)

If you think humanity should just lie down and whimper if a comet really
does come by, you are invited to stand in front of a truck on the nearest
freeway (or a comet, if one is handy).  Evolution in action, and all that.

>Anyway, all this talk of nuking comets is fine (if it works).  What about
>asteroids?  They present a rather more difficult problem.

As has been pointed out, yes and no.  They aren't going to outgas (so no
trick shots) but they'll hold together under a significantly firmer "push"
(so you could detonate the nuke quite close for a larger delta-V).

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 17:55:54 GMT
From: Chris Kostanick 806 1044 <chris@kbsw1>
Subject: Surveyor landings (was Re: QUESTIONS: Apollo, Earth, Moon)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>further  reduce the descent velocity.  At 4.3 km above the surface, the
>three thrusters were shut off, and the spacecraft simply dropped the
>remainder of the way down, landing at a velocity of 11 km/hour.
>


If I understand you correctly, this means that I could drop over
a mile on the moon and walk away from the landing. (I can walk into
a wall at better than 6 miles an hour and not get hurt.) This
opens up the possibility for some _outrageous_ trampoline action
on the moon. Drop a mile, hit the trampoline and bounce almost a
mile back up. This sounds like big action fun. We need to go back
to the moon NOW.


--
Chris Kostanick
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog
it's too dark to read." - Groucho Marx

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 11:45:12 PDT
From: Michael Rivero <[e-mail]>
Subject: Surveyor landings (was Re: QUESTIONS: Apollo, Earth, Moon)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
|> I recall a big solid-fuel motor and small liquid-fuel "vernier"
|> engines.  Was there a computer playing Lunar Lander on board?  Was
|> there a radar altimeter?  Or did they just get the probe to
|> *approximately* zero velocity with the big motor, and build it
|> extra-sturdy to survive a drop?

  The big solid fueled engine slowed the Surveyor to almost a stop
over the lunar surface, then was jettisoned, leaving the vernier engines
to complete the final descent. The throttles on the engines were operated
from a simple radar altimeter, and were shut off slightly before landing to
minimize equipment contamination from dust blowback. On one occasion, the
shutoff signal failed (and had to be manually sent from Earth) resulting
in the lander "bouncing" across the lunar surface for a short distance.
On another occasion, the verniers were used to move a lander.  Later,
the Lunar Orbiter mission was able to photograph some of the landers from
orbit, and still later, portions of one of the landers (#2, I think) were
returned to earth by the crew of Apollo 12.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero [e-mail]  "Middle-aged Mutant Ninja Animator" |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|      If Thomas Jefferson were alive today, he'ld be ASSASSINATED!      |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 12:28:43 EST
From: "John F. Woods" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

[e-mail] (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
>I should think that, given that a comet consists largely of ice and
>other volatiles, even one good-sized H-bomb placed directly into the
>nucleus would pretty much eliminate any "threat to earth". Seems it
>would be mostly vaporized and scattered.

The thermal mass of a several-km-diameter comet is quite a bit larger than
you think.  Furthermore, most of it is "ice" at just a few Kelvin (depending
on how far out its orbit takes it, and how long it spends there), which means
that "ice" is going to be every bit as hard as the formerly-molten silicate
you're standing on...

(Perhaps by "good-sized" you mean "a few orders of magnitude larger than
any built so far"...)

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 12:30:52 EST
From: "John F. Woods" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Holger Stegemann) writes:
>[e-mail] (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Thorsten Altenkirch) writes:
>>   I understand that it is pretty unlikely that Swift-Tuttle will hit
>>   earth in 2126. However, I would like to know what would happen in the
>>   case such a big object would collide with our planet? I am not sure
>>You die, I die, Everybody dies!
>Calm down. Do you expect to live until 2126? OK.
>IF the comet will really hit the earth (and it's not sure it does),
>we and the next generations have about 120 years to think it over.

On the other hand, it currently takes NASA about that long to plan and
execute a major mission ;-).

[My apologies to any actual NASA folks reading this.]

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 12:38:48 EST
From: "John F. Woods" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

[e-mail] (David B. Snyder) writes:
>>that is in this case. While fallout would be non-radioactive, there'll
>                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I am under the impression that the Mt. St Hellen's volcano released a
>detectable amount of radio-active fallout, dosages much more than
>Three Mile Island, and over a much larger area.

Yes, it did; and it landed on radioactive ground; everything is radioactive
to some degree.  The radiation from TMI was much more concentrated when
released, but presumably dispersed quite nicely anyway; I wouldn't expect
the ash from a typical volcano to be much more radioactive than rocks in
general (hmm; radon in houses is a particular problem in areas with lots of
granite rocks, a famous volcano byproduct.  Maybe I'm a little off on that).
Anyway, that sort of looks like a sound bite from the middle of a scream-fest
between unthinking opponents of nuclear power and unthinking supporters... ;-)

>I would expect that much of the
>fallout would be from the earth's crust (and at 25km deep) the mantle.
>Is this component significantly radioactive or not?

I wouldn't expect the radiation to be significantly more than average until
you got down to the metal part of the core, since heavier metallic elements
have more radioactive isotopes than the lighter elements.  If the comet digs
a hole THAT deep, I think a slight increase in background radiation will be
the LAST thing we need to worry about :-).

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 20:19:52 GMT
From: Paul Dietz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John F. Woods) writes:

>>I would expect that much of the
>>fallout would be from the earth's crust (and at 25km deep) the mantle.
>>Is this component significantly radioactive or not?
>
>I wouldn't expect the radiation to be significantly more than average until
>you got down to the metal part of the core, since heavier metallic elements
>have more radioactive isotopes than the lighter elements.  If the comet digs
>a hole THAT deep, I think a slight increase in background radiation will be
>the LAST thing we need to worry about :-).


Actually, uranium is a lithophile, not a chalcophile, so it ends
up in the silicate part of the earth.  It is further concentrated
in granite (continental crust) over ultramafic rocks (mantle).
These chemical effects swamp any minute effect due to its high
atomic mass.

    Paul F. Dietz
    [e-mail]

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 19:06:30 GMT
From: Paul Leyland <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?  -- typo fixed
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Leyland) writes:

...

   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.

OOOPS!  Brain-failure on my part.  I meant *velocity* of course.

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: Mon,  2 Nov 1992 15:33:59 -0500
From: Kevin William Ryan <[e-mail]>
Subject: the Happyface on Mars
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

>Well, I'm happy, I received my Mars CDROMs in just the other
>day.  I like to find the images that show the "Happyface" on
>mars and the Kermit the Frog.  If anyone has either the Lat/Long.
>or the image id of the pics, I'd appreciate hearing from you.

    The picture id's of the mars face images are 35a72 and 70a13. They
look best after median filtering and contrast enhancement. Enjoy...

    Sorry, I don't know what the id of the Kermit pic is.

                                                        kwr

Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: 28 Oct 92 19:04:35 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: very small astro science sensors??
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Les Degroff) writes:
>    Day dreaming; thinking about writing a SF story I hit upon
> an interesting "creative" problem which I would appreciate any
> non proprietary ideas on.
>    What kind of measurements could be made by sensors or
> systems of sensors that would fit through a 1 mm hole in 10 milliseconds.
> (measurements must be completed in 10 milliseconds)
>   Is there any way one could expect to locate the probes location with
> sensors of that size in that short of time. (assume the location is within
> the local galactic cluster, and you can post process data as much as
> needed.)   Les DeGroff
>    (I may try to write this story if I can find or figure out some
> plausible solutions to the technical problem)

Does the sensor platform have to do the data reduction?

Does the data reduction have to be conducted in realtime (i.e. during the
10msec interval)?

Conceivably you could have something like a CCD sample the entire
EM spectrum over a 10 msec interval, but you would need something
to convert this to meaningful data.


--

   Jim Batka  | Always remember ...                        | Buckaroo
   Modemman   |    No matter where you go, there you are!  |   Bonzai
--------------+--------------------------------------------+--------------
              | Work Email:  [e-mail] | Elvis is
              | Home Email:  [e-mail]      |   DEAD!
--------------+--------------------------------------------+--------------
              | 64 years is 33,661,440 minutes ...         | Beatles:
              |    and a minute is a LONG time!            |   Yellow Submarine

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

Date: 2 Nov 92 18:28:20 GMT
From: Jim Wood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why Vote?
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.motss,sci.space

[e-mail] (David Knapp) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> writes:
>>                              WHY VOTE?

>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?

You could not be more wrong.  Every single vote is important.  VOTE.

--
Jim Wood [[e-mail]] [phone]
"Rise up on the wings of eagles, and two step among the stars.
 You are not forgotten.  Your smile will echo forever."
   -- Ryerson Schwark, to our friend Rob Bernardo.

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


From: Ed Russell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space
Subject: Re: Swift-Tuttle Comet a threat to earth?
Keywords: swift-tuttle
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Nov 92 17:01:59 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Distribution: na
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.; Austin, Texas
Lines: 7
Sender: [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

I bet the Perseids will be great even if the comet doesn't hit.  I wonder
how much jeopardy we are in from the near miss itself.   What size pieces
are likely to be following this comet?

==========================================================================

Ed Russell  [e-mail]

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 372
------------------------------