Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_6/V16NO633.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 33KB

Date: Fri, 28 May 93 10:55:13
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #633
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Fri, 28 May 93       Volume 16 : Issue 633

Today's Topics:
              Detecting planets in other system (3 msgs)
                             for (a) man
                            Hubble vs Keck
               Kepler's dream of space travel (3 msgs)
                    Magellan Aerobraking Underway
                              Moon Base
             Tom Wolfe's THE RIGHT STUFF (Russian books)
           Tom Wolfe's THE RIGHT STUFF - Truth or Fiction?
                       Two Hairs Past a Freckle
           Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan? (3 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: Wed, 26 May 1993 15:51:17 GMT
From: Leigh Palmer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Detecting planets in other system
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> Stupendous Man,
[e-mail] writes:
>    Why space-based?  The main problem on the ground is scintillation
>noise due to the atmosphere.  Borucki estimates that one needs a
>9-m scope and 8 hour exposure on the ground to reduce scintillation
>noise to 1 part in 100,000, but only a 1 to 2-m scope and 30-minute
>exposure in space.
>
>    Assuming a solar-type star, Borucki finds the expected signal
>to be a 1% decrease in light for Jupiter, 0.1% for Uranus and 0.01%
>for Earth.  These are really tough limits; solar-type stars themselves
>tend to vary by ~ 0.1% or so (= 0.001 mag = 1 millimag) on short time
>scales, which makes looking for Earth-sized planets very hard indeed.
>
>    Why so many systems (tens of thousands quoted above)?  Because
>you expect to see very few events per year in an individual system;
>the numbers Borucki quotes are between 10^(-2) per year (for planets
>with orbital radii 0.3 AU) to 10^(-6) per year (10 AU).  So you have
>to look at lots and lots of systems to see more than a very few
>events.

I understand all of that. A quick geometric calculation will show that,
for the parameters of the Jupiter-sun system, the chance of catching an
alignment capable of producing a 1% occultation is about one in five
million! If we (I think optimistically) assume that ten measurements
are necessary on each of ten thousand stars to establish satisfactory
signal-to-noise ratio, then using your figures above the survey would
require five hours per star, or 50,000 hours = six years in all, running
at a 100% duty cycle. If everything worked perfectly, and every star had
just one Jupiter, the chance for a "hit" during that six years would be
about two percent!

I sure wouldn't want to devote a significant fraction of my life to a
project with so little promise of even marginal scientific return. I
don't think I'd want my tax money spent that way, either. I bet there
are lots of more productive ways to use a 1-2 m scope in space.

Leigh

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 1993 15:59:15 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Detecting planets in other system
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:
>I vaguely remember seeing a discription of a satellite with extremely long
>antennas (hundreds or maybe even thousands of meters long) ten or fifteen
>years ago.  Don't remember if it actually flew, or was just a proposal.
>It was to do observations of very low frequency radio radiation from
>natural sources in the sky.

One or two such missions have flown, but I don't know very much about them.
(The long-antenna technology was pioneered by Canada's Alouette satellites,
but the Alouettes' attention was directed downward -- they did ionospheric
science rather than radio astronomy.)
--
SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
between SVR3 and SunOS.    - Dick Dunn  |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 93 18:06:07 BST
From: Ata Etemadi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Detecting planets in other system
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:
-| In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
-| >G'Day Dave
-| >
-| >Its coherent meaning a kilometric laser (kaser ?) as opposed to polarisation.
-| >Sorry I didn't make it clearer. Its a matter of the scale-length on which the
-| >effect occurs. Not all planets would exhibit this lasing effect. On stars the
-| >scale-lengths are too large I guess. This is a guess since no one to my
-| >knowledge has done science at this wavelength. If they did, they sure kept it
-| >quiet. Hopefully some planets would stand out really well over the background.
-|
-| I vaguely remember seeing a discription of a satellite with extremely long
-| antennas (hundreds or maybe even thousands of meters long) ten or fifteen
-| years ago.  Don't remember if it actually flew, or was just a proposal.
-| It was to do observations of very low frequency radio radiation from
-| natural sources in the sky.
-| Henry?

Hi Robert

I now have it on good authority that the interplanetary medium would not
significantly affect this radiation hence the Moon observatory looks good.
Unfortunately I have found out that stars can emit at these wavelengths.
Although, as I pointed out, no research has been done at these wavelengths so
we don't really know what will be observed. The Kilometric signature of stars
may be completely different to that of planets.

It maybe that you are probably referring to the recent Italian-American
project to experiment with a tethered satellite as launched from the shuttle.
I was told it was shown on TV in the States. As always the US is a 100 years
ahead of Europe when it comes to access to information. But I also vaguely
remember another similar project proposal (sans the satellite). The currents
in the wire due to the Earth's magnetic field would mean it would not be
feasible to have the satellite orbiting the Earth, but around the Moon would
be perfect. Anybody want to fund a feasibility study ?

    best regards
        Ata <(|)>.

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 93 13:30:52 EDT
From: "Darryl O. Cottle" <[e-mail]>
Subject: for (a) man

In response to my off-the-cuff analysis Roger Noe writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> ("Darryl O. Cottle")
> writes:
>> One poster stated that the "a" WAS said but too softly for the radio
>> equipment to pick it up.
>
> It was spoken, although hurriedly, and is easy to miss because of
> radio interference.  I can hear it.
>

And I can't hear it.  Of course my ears have suffered from being near
6" gun mounts off 'nam and rock music and rock concerts which may be
a reason why.  Paul Simon said "a man hears what he wants to hear and
disregards the rest."  Perhaps I WANT to hear it as a mistake?  Don't
know but its possible.  (I notice the increase in mis-spellings on this
and other networks during "flame wars").  I should've been a proof
reader I guess.  To my ear the "for man" or "for a man" was as tight
to the ear as if someone had said format.  And yes, there is a crackle
of interference in between.  Shall we agree to disagree??

>> If my memory serves Neil himself was the FIRST one to say that he had
>> not said what he had intended to say.
>
> You have a reference for that?

After more than half a lifetime (nearly a quarter century)?  Not likely.
Just my memory and its none to certain at times.

>                                   I've heard Armstrong speak on this
> subject (albeit many years ago) and what I recall him saying is that
> he did say "for a man", as intended.

>> Now to the question of whether or not Neil said "for a man."  I'm
>> not a speech pathologist
>
> To my midwestern ear, Neil's "for a man" is clear as day.  Perhaps to
> others, it's more like "fera man".  I can understand why those not
> accustomed to the many varieties of midwestern speech patterns
> continue to mishear these words.

Again I distinctly hear "for" rather than "fer" or "fera".  And don't
let my sig file fool you.  True I'm a briar-hopper by birth and current
residence but I spent the first 14 years of my life in/around Dayton
Ohio.  I'm familiar with at least some midwestern speech patterns.

>> To say the word "a"
>> n the middle, however, requires a shift of the jaw, tongue, and
>> lips all three.
>
> Not true, not at all.  Keep in mind this is a schwa, an unstressed

Is that that little upside down "e" that is in dictionaries anymore?

> vowel with a sound like "uh".  Also, the o vowel in "for" is schwa'd
> (phoneticists have a real term for this, I don't recall what it is) so
> that it's almost the very same vowel as the "a".  If you want to speak
> like Neil, you run these two together with a little r in between.

Sometimes I say "a" as in say, sometimes "uh" as in "duh!"  I covered
that later in my "article."  (I wouldn't've dignified it with THAT title.)
>
>> reproduce my interpretation of what I heard.
>>
>> "That's one small step" <pause> "for man" <pause> "a giant leap for
>> mankind."
>
> This doesn't help your argument to get another word wrong in the
> "quote".  That's "ONE giant leap" and there's a smaller pause between
> "one" and "giant".

I realized that goof after I left the office and first thing the next
morning sent a correction. SOMEHOW my acknowledgement of my misquote
wound up immediately AFTER your posting.  Now how'd THAT happen? ;-)

I'm not subscribed to this list (and that was my first post to it after
"lurking" for a couple of years - didn't feel qualified to say anything
until a question about audio came up) and I can't bring all the fancy
tricks to bear that I could if I WERE subscribed (considering all the
flame wars I'll probably pass on THAT idea) so composing a reply to any-
thing is a bit cumbersome.  I had to copy your posting to a separate
file and then "retrieve" it into my response so I could add all the
little greater than symbols to designate who said what and when.

I can't hear enough space in the audio recording for an extra syllable
but it certainly doesn't mean that it isn't there.  I appreciate your
response and now I'll have to go listen to it several more times.  I
promise to TRY to hear an "a" ok?

> --
> Roger Noe                           [e-mail]
     etc.

p.s.  I didn't hear the alarm clock in the Beatles "A day in the life"
      immediately either but later I did.  It was great fun to play it
      and watch people's faces to see if THEY heard it!

+- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -+
|     (snail mail)         |"I don't know what I'm doin'!|   (voice)    |
|*Darryl O. (Doc) Cottle   |  If I ever DO figure it out,| 606-257-7577 |
| Agricultural Economics   |   I'll prob'ly go HIDE!!"   |     or       |
|*431 Ag Engineering Bldg 2|   "Brother" Dave Gardner    | 606-254-8914 |
| University of Kentucky   |-----------------------------|--------------|
|*Lexington, KY 40546-0276 | "Where were you born?"                     |
| - - - - - <> - - - - - - | "Oh, are you one of them astrology dudes?  |
|* = short form of address |  I'm a Cancer with a bad moon risin'!"     |
|--------------------------|         Cheech Marin (Born in East L.A.)   |
|    (electronic)          +--------------------------------------------+
| [e-mail]    or else try    [e-mail]          |
+- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -+

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 1993 16:09:16 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hubble vs Keck
Newsgroups: sci.space

I wrote:
>>...write off the Hubble program entirely and build 2.5 more Keck...
>
>It wouldn't give you Hubble's UV or faint-object capabilities...

Actually, there are two or three more Hubble capabilities it wouldn't
duplicate either, although they're secondary issues.  Hubble is in a far
better position to do high-speed photometry, although that's about to
become academic, at least for a while, since the photometer is being
sacrificed for the mirror fix.  It's also in a much better position for
deep infrared work, although it'll be a few years before it gets an IR
instrument (the IR people lost out on the initial instrument selection,
but there's an IR instrument slated to go up on the next Hubble revisit,
scheduled for 1997 or so).  And I'm under a vague impression that the
astrometry work, which will use the fine-guidance sensors after the mirror
fix, is also not possible from the ground, although I don't know details.
--
SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
between SVR3 and SunOS.    - Dick Dunn  |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 26 May 93 15:34:47 GMT
From: Robert Coe <[e-mail]>
Subject: Kepler's dream of space travel
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space

[e-mail] (John C. Baez) writes:

> I ... just CAN'T resist giving you all this little puzzle.  To WHOM did
> Kepler write a letter in 1610 saying:
>
> Who would have believed that a huge ocean could be crossed more peace-
> fully and safely than the narrow expanse of the Adriatic, the Baltic Sea
> or the English Channel?  Provide ship or sails adapted to the heavenly
> breezes, and there will be some who will not fear even that void.... So,
> for those who come shortly to establish this journey, let us establish
> the astronomy....

I'd have to guess Galileo Galilei.

   ___            _                                           -  Bob
   /__) _   /    / ) _   _
(_/__) (_)_(_)  (___(_)_(/_______________________________________ [e-mail]
Robert K. Coe ** 14 Churchill St, Sudbury, Massachusetts 01776 ** 508-443-3265

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 1993 17:12:58 GMT
From: Jack Sarfatti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Kepler's dream of space travel
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert Coe) writes:
> [e-mail] (John C. Baez) writes:
>
> > I ... just CAN'T resist giving you all this little puzzle.  To WHOM did
> > Kepler write a letter in 1610 saying:
> >
> > Who would have believed that a huge ocean could be crossed more peace-
> > fully and safely than the narrow expanse of the Adriatic, the Baltic Sea
> > or the English Channel?  Provide ship or sails adapted to the heavenly
> > breezes, and there will be some who will not fear even that void.... So,
> > for those who come shortly to establish this journey, let us establish
> > the astronomy....
>
> I'd have to guess Galileo Galilei.
>
>    ___            _                                           -  Bob
>    /__) _   /    / ) _   _
> (_/__) (_)_(_)  (___(_)_(/_______________________________________ [e-mail]
> Robert K. Coe ** 14 Churchill St, Sudbury, Massachusetts 01776 ** 508-443-3265

All of this can be rationally understood and tested if we drop the requirement
of invariance of the inner bra-ket product in time evolution. This can be done
and still not violate conservation of local probability current. There is a
lot of evidence, like the above, that our "wetware" is able to operate beyond
standard "unitary" quantum mechanics in this precise sense.

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 1993 17:39:06 GMT
From: Jack Sarfatti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Kepler's dream of space travel
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John C. Baez) writes:
> I have just begun reading "Kepler's Dream" by John Lear, and while I
> haven't gotten too far yet, I highly recommend it to everyone who likes
> the little mind-blowing nooks and crannies of history.  Kepler's
> "Dream," or "Somnium," was a book he died before publishing, and which
> seems to have remained fairly obscure.  It is written in the form of a
> fantasy about space travel, but its subject is apparently mostly lunar
> geography.  (Selenography, perhaps?)
>
> I will describe it more when I have read it all, but for now I just
> CAN'T resist giving you all this little puzzle.  To WHOM did Kepler
> write a letter in 1610 saying:
>
> Who would have believed that a huge ocean could be crossed more
> peacefully and safely than the narrow expanse of the Adriatic, the Baltic
> Sea or the English Channel?  Provide ship or sails adapted to the
> heavenly breezes, and there will be some who will not fear even that
> void.... So, for those who come shortly to establish this journey, let
> us establish the astronomy....
>
> I had been a fan of Kepler ever since reading the details of how he
> found that planetary orbits were elliptical, etc. (an incredible train
> of thought and lots of hard work!), but this really bowls me over.
>
>
>

The lesson is that precognitive remote viewing is the quantum mechanism of
creative genius and inspiration!

In technical terms, the bra-ket is not time translation-invariant. This
may connect with Roger Penrose's idea that "one graviton" collapses the
wave function so that there is a curious connection between gravity and mind
after all as I intuitied in my 1975 best seller SPACE TIME AND BEYOND.
EP Dutton. I am now revising it for multimedia CD ROM in interactive game
version.

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

Date: 26 May 1993 17:04 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Magellan Aerobraking Underway
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary,sci.geo.geology

Paula Cleggett-Haleim
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                                May 26, 1993
(Phone:  [phone])

Franklin O'Donnell
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
(Phone:  [phone])

RELEASE:  93-98

MAGELLAN AEROBRAKING, GRAVITY STUDIES UNDERWAY

    Having successfully completed its original mission of radar-mapping the
planet Venus, NASA's Magellan spacecraft is embarking on a new experiment
that will give scientists glimpses into the planet's interior and a better
understanding of its atmosphere.

    On May 25, the spacecraft completed its fourth 8-month cycle of
orbiting Venus, during which it collected data on the planet's gravity field,
particularly close to the equator.

    On that same day, Magellan executed the first in a series of
aerobraking maneuvers to be conducted over the next 80 days in which Magellan
dips into Venus' atmosphere, taking advantage of drag on the spacecraft to
lower its orbit.  The maneuvers are designed to place Magellan in a circular
orbit, allowing it to get better gravity data at the planet's north and south
poles.

    "This experiment is a scientific bonus for what is already a highly
successful mission," said Dr. R. Stephen Saunders, Magellan Project Scientist
at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.

    According to Saunders, the gravity data that Magellan is collecting
allow scientists to "see" into the interior of the planet because they can
gauge the density of the material underlying various parts of the planet.

    In recent weeks, for example, Magellan passed over a region dominated
by three volcanoes -- Hathor, Innini and Ushas.  "They occupy a broad swelling
of the Venusian crust believed to result from upwelling of hot material from
the deep interior, a phenomenon known on Earth as a `hot spot,'" Saunders added.

    In other ways, Venus seems to be distinctly different from Earth.
While Earth's surface geology is largely created by tectonic motion -- enormous
continental plates that move slowly over an underlying magma -- the Magellan
team found little evidence of plate tectonics on Venus.  One possible exception
is the Ovda region at the western end of the equatorial Aphrodite Terra
highlands.

    "In this region we see what appear to be the closest thing on Venus to
Earth's continents," said Saunders.  "It has features that seem to have been
formed by compression of the Venusian crust in a process that may resemble
some plate tectonic regions on Earth."

    Saunders said that Ovda and similar terrains -- called tesserae, are
intensely fractured regions that are pushed upward compared with most of the
planet -- may represent ancient crustal materials on Venus.  "They could, in
fact, be fragments of the oldest rocks on the planet," he said.

    During Magellan's fourth 8-month orbital cycle which ended May 25,
flight controllers collected gravity data by monitoring the frequency of the
signal sent to Earth from the spacecraft.  Changes in the gravity field would
make Magellan speed up or slow down slightly, causing the frequency of its
signal to change by tiny fractions.

    During that cycle, however, Magellan was in a widely looping elliptical
orbit, a 100 miles (170 kilometers) by 5,300 miles (8,500 kilometers).  Because
of the varying distance, Magellan could collect high-resolution gravity data
at the equator but not near the poles.

    If successful, the aerobraking maneuver will put Magellan into an orbit
125 by 375 miles (200 by 600 kilometers) above Venus.  The change will be
made gradually over the course of about 80 days.

    The change in orbit also will provide important new data about Venus'
atmosphere which can be studied through its effect on the spacecraft.  The
upper atmosphere varies with the 11-year cycle of sun activity.  "We currently
are approaching a solar minimum which means that the number of sunspots and
solar storms will be at a minimum," said Saunders.

    Magellan has fulfilled all of its prime mission objectives, mapping 98
percent of the surface of Venus with many areas covered up to three times.
"This provides us with stereo imaging," said Saunders, "as well as a long-time
base so that we can search for surface changes in the high-resolution images."
-end-

EDITORS NOTE:  Photographs are available to the media from NASA's Broadcast
and Imaging Branch, 202/358-1900.  B&W:  93-H-195 thru 1204  Color:  93-
HC-182 thru -189
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Never laugh at anyone's
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | dreams.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |

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

Date: 26 May 1993 09:16 PDT
From: "Horowitz, Irwin Kenneth" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Moon Base
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes...
(in reference to optical interferometry from the Moon)
>It's highly unlikely it could be done on Earth, but for the more mundane
>reason of atmospheric turbulence. In space it could be done by using
>laser beam interferometers as a reference for the interferometer element
>spacings.  This would allow arbitrarily fine post processing correction
>depending only on computational power available.
>
I'm sorry, Mr. Coffman, but you are wrong on this.  The capabilities of such
a system are limited primarily on the spacing between the elements in the
interferometer, and trying to properly align a space-based interferometer that
is more than a few hundred meters across is a daunting technological task.
On the lunar surface, there is no such problem.

And as for the best place to do astronomy, I quote from a 1986 NASA study on
Lunar-based astronomy (ed. Wendell Mendell):
    "...we conclude that the Moon is very possibly the best location
     within the inner solar system from which to perform front-line
     astronomical research."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irwin Horowitz                        |
Astronomy Department                  |"Whoever heard of a female astronomer?"
California Institute of Technology    |--Charlene Sinclair, "Dinosaurs"
[e-mail]                |
[e-mail]                 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 1993 14:54:48 GMT
From: Dennis Newkirk <[e-mail]>
Subject: Tom Wolfe's THE RIGHT STUFF (Russian books)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,rec.arts.books

In article <1tvphg$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeffrey A. Del Col) writes:
>Does anyone know whether people associated with the Russian space program have
>published books about its early days?

Well, there aren't too many widely available in the US, but these are a good
start.

SURVIVAL IN SPACE, By YURI GAGARIN and VLADIMIR LEBEDEV,  1969
Pioneers of Space,1985/89 Progress Publishers Moscow
Three Paces Beyond the Horizon, by V. Lysenko translated by  G. Egorov, 1989

The last two have the earliest setting and will introduce readers to
some of the important personalities and are very truthful. They consist
of chapters written by those directly involoved.

There are also books by Titov (Our Blue Earth?), Tereshkova (I am Seagull),
and Bykovsky (Cosmonaut No.5) about their experiences. Titovs was translated
by NASA long ago (its some "NASA-TT-F?" series book). I don't remember
much about Titov's or Tereshkova's book, so its a good bet they are mostly
old propaganda.

Korolev's biographer is working on a big book but I don't know if any
release date is planned. Glushko's name appeared on some books, but
I don't know of any about the early days that are translated.

Cosmonaut Georgi Grechko is looking for serious funding to do a years work
collecting data on the N1 lunar landing project. He knows most of the people
who were involoved and is afraid their knowledge will be lost. Any
wealthy volunteers? Contact me and I'll FAX him the good news.

Dennis Newkirk ([e-mail])
Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector
Schaumburg, IL

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 1993 15:56:31 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Tom Wolfe's THE RIGHT STUFF - Truth or Fiction?
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,rec.arts.books

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Michelson) writes:
>>... The mission they were to fly was approximately that flown by Apollo 7.
>
>Note that "Apollo 1" was to use a Block I command module which didn't
>incorporate many of the features required for a lunar mission...   I don't
>believe that a Block I CM was even capable of docking with a lunar module.
>Its main function was to get *something* flying so that at least some
>of the systems could be checked out...

Indeed, the block 1 CM had no docking tunnel.  It was one of those things,
like the Saturn I, that looked like a good idea early on but ended up
being bypassed in the end.
--
SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
between SVR3 and SunOS.    - Dick Dunn  |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 1993 16:23:21 GMT
From: "Dale M. Greer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Two Hairs Past a Freckle
Newsgroups: sci.space

For those on the net who don't like the American units of measurement, i.e.,
inches, feet, etc., because they are too much related to real things.

Aviation Week & Space Technology / May 24, 1993 reports on the Hubble mission:

"Hubble's mirror is too flat by 2 micrometers, or about 1/40 the thickness
 of a human hair."
 and
"The total stroke of the actuators [to adjust the Costar mirrors] is equal
 to the length your hair grows in 15 minutes."

The article also stated that the Costar unit is "about the size of a
telephone booth" and its ten corrective mirrors range from "about the size
of a U.S. quarter dollar" to "as big as a dime."

For the humor challenged, please note that I'm not criticizing the Hubble
folks for coming up with these analogies, but I still think they sound
funny.

_____________
Dale M. Greer, whose opinions are not to be confused with those of
  The Center for Space Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas
   UTSPAN::UTADNX::UTDSSA::GREER or [e-mail]
"Do a good day's work, and be Somebody." - Andy Taylor

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 1993 15:53:40 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>I don't like him because he usually lets his politics dictate his
>science. His nuclear winter theory was bogus scientifically but he
>pushed it because it agreed with his politics. He opposed human
>exploration of space saying it wasn't good science. Then he decided
>the cold war would end if the US and USSR went to Mars together...

The way I read Sagan is that maybe ten years ago, he decided that preventing
nuclear war was his *highest* priority and everything else was secondary.
Out of that flowed most everything he's done since (well, in the popular
eye anyway -- he is still doing planetary science now and then).

Nuclear winter actually wasn't "bogus"; there is room for real concern
about the climate effects of a major nuclear war, and the problem had
not previously been recognized.  However, the TTAPS (the S being Sagan)
paper's estimates of the effects were either overenthusiastic (if one
is being kind) or blatantly overdone for maximum PR effect (if one is
being cynical).  Certainly the doomsday-for-humanity tone of the book
that followed does nothing to discourage the cynical interpretation.
--
SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
between SVR3 and SunOS.    - Dick Dunn  |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 26 May 93 12:21:15 EDT
From: "John F. Woods" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan?
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>Then [Sagan] decided
>the cold war would end if the US and USSR went to Mars together.
>Suddenly, humans in space was GREAT science.

And note, of course, that it was "humans in space ONCE" that was "GREAT
science"; Sagan didn't want a long, drawn-out program of permanent exploration,
just a quick one-shot that would kill the cold war and then get out of the
way of the unmanned craft he favors.

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

Date: 26 May 1993 12:49 EST
From: "Robert S. Hill" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Alan Carter) writes...
>In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Robert S. Hill) [that's me] writes:
>|> I think the combination of jealousy and suspicion of popularizers with
>|> some obvious breaches of taste in Sagan's public self-presentation are

[... my nattering deleted and lots of good discussion by Alan deleted ...]

Me:
>|>                                                      Jealousy of
>|> popularizers is one of those unfortunate things that happens in any
>|> specialized profession, but Sagan did nothing to disarm it.
>
Alan:
>He goes and gets the funding *and doesn't even apologise*? The swine.

You're right, of course, about the need for popularization, and I'm not
arguing with that; I think it's a highly legitimate professional
activity.  And, Cosmos was remarkably successful in reaching a broad
audience.  And, even though I groaned at a lot of stuff, I pretty much
liked the show.  Mostly, I was trying to explain What Some Other People
Were Saying (tm).

Still, perhaps I am allowed a few mild worries. The gee whiz approach
can backfire.  People in general are smart enough to know that science
isn't magic, and that we slog away at a desk or bench every day like any
other white-collar worker.  So when we try make ourselves look like
alchemists who are in search of the philosopher's stone, or perhaps even
worse, the `face of God,' they know perfectly well that we are talking
like idiots or snake-oil salesmen.

Did Sagan contribute to this problem, or did he help fight it, or
was he neutral?  Or did he make a negative contribution that was
outweighed by the positive one?  This last I think is likely, but
we have no way of knowing for sure.

          Bob Hill
----------------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail]
In no way representing any of the following:
Hughes STX Corp.
Code 681, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 633
------------------------------