Newsgroup sci.astro 135450

Directory

Subject: Re: How To Create A Time Machine. -- From: Warren G Anderson
Subject: Re: Could intelligent extraterrestrial life exist in our galaxy? -- From: "Walter E. Shepherd"
Subject: Re: Anyone remembers Nancy? -- From: ladasky@leland.Stanford.EDU (John Ladasky)
Subject: Re: Hubble Const -- From: rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
Subject: Re: Could intelligent extraterrestrial life exist in our galaxy? -- From: "Walter E. Shepherd"
Subject: Re: Rotation of sun and planets -- From: rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
Subject: Re: When will the U.S. finally go metric? -- From: newt@avatar.uwaterloo.ca (Jonas Mureika)
Subject: Re: REDSHIFT ?? -- From: George Dishman
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution -- From: Judson McClendon
Subject: Re: NEO's & Asteroids -- From: willner@cfa183.harvard.edu (Steve Willner)
Subject: Re: Evidence of Life Found in 2nd Mars Meteorite -- From: billa@znet.com (Bill Arnett)
Subject: Re: Could intelligent extraterrestrial life exist in our galaxy? -- From: "Walter E. Shepherd"
Subject: Live From Mars - Update #9 -- From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution -- From: cc16712@cdsnet.net
Subject: Re: Light slowing down? -- From: Serendipity@home (Chester)
Subject: Re: analemna ? -- From: Rodney Small
Subject: $ -- From: "RoadKill"
Subject: New Hubble Findings on Quasars Presented on Nov 19 -- From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Extrasolar planetary systems chart, posted in alt.binaries.p.astro -- From: wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey)
Subject: And the barycentre ... -- From: abg21@dial.pipex.com (Nick Hunter)
Subject: And the barycentre ... -- From: abg21@dial.pipex.com (Nick Hunter)
Subject: Help Volunteer, -- From: Rick Mitchell
Subject: Re: When will the U.S. finally go metric? -- From: william.hamblen@nashville.com.(william@nashville.com (William.hamblen@nashville.com (william)
Subject: Hale Bopp -- From: Mark
Subject: Re: Hale Bopp photos -- From: Mark
Subject: Re: REDSHIFT ?? -- From: egibson407@pipeline.com (Eric Gibson)
Subject: Mars Meteorite Auction -- From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Re: RUSSIAN AMATEUR WANTS TO MEET AUSTRALIAN OBSERVERS - PLEASE ASSIST -- From: perryasv@melbpc.org.au (Perry Vlahos)
Subject: *NEWS FLASH* Object Near Hale-Bopp -- From: Florin Clapa
Subject: Re: Moon Phases Inverted in S. Hemisphere??? -- From: fore057@canterbury.ac.nz
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution -- From: Mark & Susan Sampson
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution -- From: edconrad@prolog.net (Ed Conrad)
Subject: Anomalous object near Hale-Bopp? -- From: west@sonic.net (Wes Thomas)
Subject: Re: REDSHIFT ?? -- From: Jean-Joseph JACQ
Subject: Re: Sirius C??? - dogon.jpg (0/1) -- From: bb089@scn.org (James Conway)
Subject: Re: Hubble Const -- From: Sean Stanley-Adams
Subject: Re: When will the U.S. finally go metric? -- From: kskim@hyowon.cc.pusan.ac.kr (kim kyongsok)
Subject: Re: How To Create A Time Machine. -- From: ikastan@alumnae.caltech.edu (Ilias Kastanas)
Subject: Re: Rotation of sun and planets -- From: pit@uni-sw.gwdg.de (Peter Suetterlin)
Subject: Re: REDSHIFT ?? -- From: garret@ast.cam.ac.uk (Garret Cotter)

Articles

Subject: Re: How To Create A Time Machine.
From: Warren G Anderson
Date: 14 Nov 1996 14:51:59 -0800
Bingham (Baggins@burgoyne.com) wrote:
: The logical way to create a time machine is to accually cause one to
: create itself.  Simply look in you filing cabinet under the heading of
: Time machine.  There you will find all the plans you need to build a
: time machine.  Just make sure that when you have made it, go back in
: time five minutes before you looked into your filing cabinet and deposit
: the plans under a heading called Time machine.
Believe it or not, serious research has been done into "time travel" within
the context of general relativity. There exist, in relativity, solutions
that have what are called "closed timelike loops". These are paths through
spacetime which intersect the same spacetime event (point in space and
time) more than once with a tangent vector that is always timelike (ie they
are curves along which massive particles can move). 
In this version of time travel, which is the only that I know of that
presents itself as part of physics and which applies to macroscopic
objects, there is no way to access times before the creation of the time
machine. Suppose that you could create a device that would create a closed
timelike loop in some region of spacetime. By causality, this device could
affect spacetime only within its future lightcone. That means the earliest
time that could be part of the timelike loop would be the moment of
creation of the time machine itself.
Time machines create a number of possible logical dilemmas, of course, but
it is also possible to imagine time travel that is logically consistent.
There has been a bit of research into determining if there is some physical
principle which enforces a restriction to only selfconsistent closed timelike 
curves, but it is inconclusive at the moment, and of course it is difficult
to get funding if your grant proposal reads "investigating logical
consistency of time travel" when it goes to a national science funding
agency. For an interesting read on these subjects, I recommend Kip Thorne's
popular book "Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy".
+-----------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Warren G. Anderson    |"And one need never wish to see it, for its truth |
| Dept. of Physics      | does not matter, and is unimaginable." +---------+
| University of Alberta +----------+ -J. Ashbery, The New Spirit |  ``"''/ |
| Email: anderson@phys.ualberta.ca +-----------------------------+  |@ @ | |
| WWW:   http://fermi.phys.ualberta.ca/~anderson/Homepage.html      ( ^  ) |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------\O_/\-+
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Could intelligent extraterrestrial life exist in our galaxy?
From: "Walter E. Shepherd"
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 14:35:08 -0700
JHOLL4@ wrote:
> 
> In <3288B7EB.4F8F@courier6.aero.org>, "Walter E. Shepherd"  writes:
> >JHOLL4@ wrote:
> >>   However, once a species becomes tool-using and
> >> starts using tools to make better tools, a binary separation *does* form.
> 
> >But... I still think that even tool use comes in various shades.
> >Chimpanzees use sticks to dig out termites... sea otters use rocks to
> >crack shells... Moose use tree bark to help the shedding of their antlers.
> 
>   Reread my quote.  Once a species starts using tools *to make better
> tools*, exponential growth occurs and quickly changes the behavior
> of the toolmaker.  The examples you give don't involve tools-to-make-
> tools.  A hammer, or a bellows, or a flint-and-steel are better examples
> than a club or spear.
> .....
> 
>   --Cathy Mancus 
Absolutely...I agree.  My only point (which I failed to articulate
clearly) was that it's as difficult to define "tools" just as much as
it's difficult to come up with a definition of "intelligence"... it's
easy to get "anal retentive" when trying to do so.  I tried to make the
point that perhaps my cat was using tools when he held onto the door
knob and threw his weight back to open the door.  One might interpret
the door knob as a tool... or one might claim that his body weight was
serving as a tool... I claim it is only a matter of how liberal your
definitions before you find something which can qualify as a tool.
I do know that what my cat was up to was "problem solving"... and that
is the skill which is clearly a good measure of intelligence... and it
is a skill clearly linked to survival. Let's see now... how do I define
"problem"....and then what about "solving"?.... hmmmm!... excuse me
while I get retentive. :-).
I absolutely agree with you that using "tools" to make better "tools" is
an effective strategy... and it probably does alter future development
of the tool maker... it surely must have a marked effect on problem
solving efficiency and survivability... all I was trying to articulate
it's that it's all on a continuum... and the details depend on your
perspective.  I see details on a "log scale" that are often missing, or
suppressed on a "linear scale."  If I try to look at "intelligence" and
"tools" from a "log scale" perspective, it tends to make me feel more
humble about the achievements of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and considerably
more respectful of those of our fellow creatures.  Thanks for your
thoughts.
--Walt Shepherd
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Anyone remembers Nancy?
From: ladasky@leland.Stanford.EDU (John Ladasky)
Date: 14 Nov 1996 13:02:57 -0800
In article <328B3F19.1DC5@sni.de>, Volker Hetzer   wrote:
>Sorry for beeing off topic, but I miss her in this thread.
>Has anybody heard, what happened to her?
	I don't miss her at all.
	I hope that you drew a pentagram on the ground and put your compu-
ter in the middle of it before you typed this post.  Many a Usenet Kook has 
switched from posting to lurking for a while, only to reapppear and wreak
havoc when someone invokes their name.
	People are finally ignoring RCHMDS PLTNM (learned my lessons well
from the Hebrews!), and he is posting less and less.
-- 
Unique ID : Ladasky, John Joseph Jr.
Title     : BA Biochemistry, U.C. Berkeley, 1989  (Ph.D. perhaps 1998???)
Location  : Stanford University, Dept. of Structural Biology, Fairchild D-105
Keywords  : immunology, music, running, Green
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Hubble Const
From: rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 23:44:18 GMT
>> Ronald Jaynes (t3r7h3nb@abaco.coastalnet.com) wrote:
>> : I need to know what the hubble const is and how it is calculated.
>Christopher Michael Jones wrote:
>> Its somewhere between 35 and 55 (one group says about 42) and it is
>> calculated using math :-)
Jeff Wilson  wrote:
>This is quite an ... uh... creative definition!  The Hubble constant
>is *actually* somewhere between 50 km/s/Mpc and 90 km/s/Mpc.
It would not be wise to eliminate the range 35 to 50 as many recent
measurements have been in that range including some gravitational
lensing measurements which are relatively free of systematic errors.
>Hubble himself measured the value to be 50, with others duplicating his
>work and getting a variety of answers ranging up to 90.
Hubble's early measurements were around 600.  It has come down in leaps
and bounds since then.
-- Ray Tomes -- rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz -- Harmonics Theory --
http://www.vive.com/connect/universe/rt-home.htm
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Could intelligent extraterrestrial life exist in our galaxy?
From: "Walter E. Shepherd"
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:36:54 -0700
Peter Kwangjun Suk wrote:
> 
> In article <32873F4C.7AA0@courier6.aero.org>, "Walter E. Shepherd"
>  wrote:
> 
> [deleted]
> > deal... nothing magical... but we are impressive... we are the
> > cumulative experience of natures experiment... we stand on the shoulders
> > of all species which have struggled to survive on this planet.
> 
> You lost me right there.  There's been too much evolution going on in
> parallel for this to be true.  (i.e. not all other species are our
> precursors.)
> 
> --PKS
Chill out man... relax.  Jeeze!
-- WES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
_   /|   DISCLAIMER: Disclaimant is a hireling who speaks for himself.
\'o.O'               He is as bothered and bewildered as you, and he
=(___)=   Ack!       probably didn't mean or say what you might have
   U     Thppft!!    thought he meant or said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Rotation of sun and planets
From: rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 23:44:15 GMT
devens@uoguelph.ca (David L Evens) wrote:
>However, most of the matter still ends up in the star.  The quiestion 
>that arises is how does the momentum get partitioned THAT differently 
>from the mass, since even most of the high angular momentum material 
>probably ought to fall into the star.
>There is also the problem of how the planets could possibly have been 
>spun up to their currect rotational speed by their satellites, most of 
>whih carry only a tiny fraction of the angular momentum of the parent 
>body, which usually has a much higher rotation rate than the moons have 
>revolution rate.
These two are the same problem, not different ones.
Consider a disk or dust that collapses under its own gravity.
It has a certain average rotation due to the random velocities present.
The rotation is faster near the middle and slower further out.
Those particles that have very different velocities to the average are
much more likely to collide and therefore combine or scatter.
When two particles scatter, the slower one falls towards the centre and
the faster one moves outward.  The falling one gathers speed again as it
falls (but not angular momentum) while the rising one slows.
If they scatter again they may move further in or out.
Some matter is permanently lost by being scattered beyond escape
velocity.  The scattering is more frequent near the centre because the
density is higher there (due to the volume enclosed in any radius being
smaller).  Therefore the process of scattering and combination is
completed more rapidly there.  Every scattering event is sorting things
by their angular momentum.  Those with smaller angular momentum head
towards the middle, those with larger momentum outwards.
Scattering and combination cannot complete until there are a small
number of objects at relatively large spacings because otherwise
gravitational scattering continues.  This means that many protoplanets
have elliptical orbits which are made more elliptical and so they end up
inside the protostar.  The most important thing is that when a smaller
object once touches a larger one it is then consumed by it.  Therefore
the large grow very rapidly.
The sun necessarily has a small angular momentum because the matter that
forms it must lose its angular momentum to get where the sun is.  It is
always transferred to other bodies that necessarily end up forming the
planets and other bodies or leaving the solar system permanently.
-- Ray Tomes -- rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz -- Harmonics Theory --
http://www.vive.com/connect/universe/rt-home.htm
Return to Top
Subject: Re: When will the U.S. finally go metric?
From: newt@avatar.uwaterloo.ca (Jonas Mureika)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 22:05:30 GMT
In article <328B589B.7952@cs.purdue.edu>,
Markus Kuhn   wrote:
>
>On September 30, 1996, the California Department of Transportation has
>completed its transition to the metric system.  As all plans for new
>highways are now drawn in metric units, it only makes sense to give
>metric distances on road signs.  You'll probably see soon many more
>metric road signs, not only in California, as most other departments of
>transportations have already converted, too.  The U.S. government is
>clearly going metric.
>
Does this mean that cars will now be sold with km/h speedometers,
with mph relegated to a smaller font?
Return to Top
Subject: Re: REDSHIFT ??
From: George Dishman
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 00:43:47 +0000
In article: <56d8kn$k0p@eagle1.cc.GaSoU.edu>
  ZELLNER@GSVMS2.CC.GASOU.EDU (BENJAMIN_H. ZELLNER) writes:
> 
> In <566a8j$tb2@camel4.mindspring.com> egibson407@pipeline.com writes:
> 
>  > 	1.   If the universe started out very dense after the Big Bang, though
>  > physically very small,   How much expansion has occurred?  What
>  > velocity is our Galaxy traveling outward from the point of the 'Bang"?
>  > How far has our galaxy travelled?
>  > 
>  > 	2.    If the light from these images comes from objects with a small
>  > fraction of the universe's age ( 12 - 18 Billion years) then has this
>  > light been traveling for 10.2 - 15.3 billion years? and if so, HOW DID
>  > WE GET HERE AHEAD OF IT to 'see' it?
> 
> Well, we've always been right here.  Where else would we have been?
> It makes absolutely no sense to pick a direction and distance in space,
> and say "We used to be over there."  ...
Very true (ignoring our peculiar motion of course).
> ... The same applies for every other
> co-moving observer.
Then what does it mean to say that, for omega= 1, D(t)/D_o = (t/t_o)^(2/3)
Rather than just criticising the poster, how about trying to explain things 
for those of us (me included) who are less well informed.  It is not a simple 
subject!
>  > Is the velocity of our galaxy +
>  > the expansoin rate of the universe close to  c?
>  >  
>  > 	3.   Is it possible that the high Redshifted "proto - galaxies' in the
>  > Hubble deep field photos ( and all high redshifted objects) could
>  > actually be on the other side of the point of the 'Bang' and therefore
>  > be much further away?
> 
> So long as you keep thinking of the Big Bang as objects "traveling
> outward" from a definite point in space with a "this side" and an
> "other side", you are going to keep stumbling over logical paradoxes.
> You are trying to sneak in the concept of a "center of expansion" at
> some definite, uniquely defined physical location relative to some 
> hypothetical absolute space, and that's a non-physical concept.
> 
> The expansion rate can only be described in a differential sense:
> the Hubble constant in km per sec per megaparsec, as a function of
> time.  But a question like "is the expansion rate of the universe
> close to c?" makes no sense.
> 
> Ben
It makes more sense to consider the _surface_ of an expanding ballon as a 2-D 
map of (co-moving observers in) the universe with the radius representing 
(their proper) time.  The surface has no centre and all points on it are 
moving away from all others.  Of course this implies a closed universe which 
is not necessarily true!
-- 
George Dishman
Give me a small laser and I'll move the sun.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution
From: Judson McClendon
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 16:57:53 -0600
IG (Slim) Simpson wrote:
> 
> Judson McClendon  wrote:
> 
> >> Judson McClendon wrote:
> [big snip]
> >So the God who created this vast universe, and us, has put up with a
> >rebellious bunch of humans for thousands of years, watching us kill,
> >steal, lie, cheat and so on.  So He sends His own Son Jesus to take our
> >sins upon Himself and die a horrible death on a Roman cross to pay the
> >penalty for those sins.  Then He tells us that all we have to do is
> >believe on Jesus and receive Him as Savior and Lord and God will
> >completely forgive us all our sins and give us eternal life as a
> >reward.  And you call that God a 'kill-joy'.
> 
> Judson, god hasn't told *me* anything of the sort! If your post,
> including the snip, were to have "God" replaced with ET, you would be
> judged insane by many people. Myths hold no compulsion with me.
Romans 1:18-32:
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all
ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in
unrighteousness,
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has
shown it to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His
eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God,
nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their
foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made
like corruptible man-- and birds and four-footed animals and creeping
things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of
their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and
served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever.
Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their
women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned
in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is
shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which
was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God
gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not
fitting;
29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,
wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife,
deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of
evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful;
32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice
such things are worthy of death, not only do the same but also approve
of those who practice them.
-- 
Judson McClendon
Sun Valley Systems    judsonmc@ix.netcom.com
Return to Top
Subject: Re: NEO's & Asteroids
From: willner@cfa183.harvard.edu (Steve Willner)
Date: 15 Nov 96 00:37:06 GMT
Others know a lot more about this than I do, but I'll take a first
stab at it.  Interesting questions!
In article <328954A0.4850@interpath.com>, MW Gunnar
 writes: 
> 1) What forces/factors are involved (if any) which "push" an asteroid
> out of the belt?
If I understand your question, the answer is perturbations from
planets, especially Jupiter.  A reasonably close encounter or
repeated, distant encounters may lower the perihelion of the orbit,
and the aphelion can later be lowered by an encounter with an inner
planet.  Further encounters are likely to occur for millions of years
before a collision happens, and it typically is not possible to
retrace the asteroid's path back beyond its most recent planetary
encounter -- if that.  In fact, I doubt orbits of any NEO's are known
beyond a few hundred years, but I could be wrong.
> 2) What terminology would be used in the discovery of a new NEO? (ie:
> images, instrumentation, reporting...)
Could be discovered by accident but more likely would be discovered
by Spacewatch or one of the other dedicated asteroid searches.  After
the asteroid is discovered, positions are sent to the Central Bureau
for Astronomical Telegrams.  (Brian Marsden, Dan Green, and co.--
Maybe it's the Minor Planet Center, but it's the same people!)  Once
three positions are known, MPC calculates an orbit.  The initial
determination would be very crude, but the orbit is refined as
further observations come in.
Now I'm guessing, but it would likely be at least a couple of weeks
before the orbit was good enough that people would consider whether
there might be a collision.  It would be a couple of more (or
longer!) before a collision would be more than a faint possibility.
I'm not sure just when an announcement would be made, but it probably
would be when the probability of collision is 1/1000 or 1/100.
Certainly the first announcement would be couched in terms of a very
low probability, "Don't get excited, it will probably miss, but we
need to get some more measurements.  It will be a nice scientific
opportunity when it comes close."  _Certainty_ of a collision might
take a very long time -- years or even until just before the
collision.  Space is big, and small errors in the observations add
up.  I'd suggest that a plot element might be the political debate
between those who want to "Do Something Now!" and those who say "Wait
and it will probably miss; doing something is too expensive."
The time interval from discovery to collision could be anything from
months to a century; feel free to put in whatever your plot requires.
The decision to Do Something would likely have to be made _before_ a
collision is certain, perhaps at 10% or even 1% probability.
> 3) Is it true that an asteroid tends to travel approx. 3 million km in
> one twenty four hour period?
The ones that are most dangerous are travelling in orbits much like
the Earth's.  Let's see, 2 pi AU per year is about 6*1.5E13/365 =
2.5E11 cm per day or 2.5E6 km/day, so your estimate is just about
right.  Could easily be different by a factor of two or three, of
course.
-- 
Steve Willner            Phone 617-495-7123     swillner@cfa.harvard.edu
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA                 
(Bad news service; please email your reply if you want to be sure I see it)
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Evidence of Life Found in 2nd Mars Meteorite
From: billa@znet.com (Bill Arnett)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 17:02:17 -0800
In article , S Krueger  wrote:
>...
> And all this assumes that a search for ancient life on Mars (the
> atmosphere is not compatible with life today) is worth the billions it
> would cost
I can imagine few things of higher scientific importance.  If THIS isn't
worth a few billion bucks then publicly funded science is in REAL trouble.
> even for a low-budget sample retrieval mission, never mind the
> astronomical cost of a manned mission. You seem to forget that we have
> been unable to balance the federal budget since we decided to send a man
> to the moon.
We could probably send a manned mission to Mars for only a few billion per
year over a 10 year period.  Arguments about the federal budget are silly. 
Even NASA's entire budget (less than $10 billion) is less than 1% of the
total budget.   If you want to pick at the "research" budget go after the
DoD portion (which is more than 3 times NASA's total and equal to all the
real science combined).
> Perhaps we should attempt such earthly goals before we start
> sending men to other worlds to "see what's out there". Just a thought.
A poor thought.  Funding priorities are not either/or decisions.   We spend
almost all of our money on "earthly goals"; surely a tiny bit for space is
worthwhile, too.
-- 
Bill Arnett     billa@znet.com       http://www.seds.org/billa/
"I know that I am mortal and the creature of a day; but when I
search out the massed wheeling circles of the stars, my feet no
longer touch the earth, but, side by side with Zeus himself, I
take my fill of ambrosia, the food of the gods." -- Ptolemy
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Could intelligent extraterrestrial life exist in our galaxy?
From: "Walter E. Shepherd"
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 15:20:45 -0700
jw wrote:
> 
> In <569t27$191u@rtpnews.raleigh.ibm.com> JHOLL4@ writes:
> >
> >In <32873F4C.7AA0@courier6.aero.org>, "Walter E. Shepherd"
>  writes:
> >>I suggest that we stop thinking of intelligence in
> >>binary terms... i.e., intelligent/not intelligent.  I think
> >>intelligence, like most everything else, is a continuum...
> 
> >  Well put!  However, once a species becomes tool-using and
> >starts using tools to make better tools, a binary separation *does*
> >form.  It doesn't take very many generations for the tool-using
> >species to build a society qualitatively different from even
> >the most intelligent non-tool-users.
> 
> Yes: when a positive feedback arises in a system,
> there's a kind of explosion.
> The continuum metaphor (though not untrue) does not capture
> the essence of it: it is like saying that dynamite explosion
> is oxidation, or that war is politics by
> another means. It is, but that is not all it is.
> 
> And (as I suggested before) the open-ended,
> self-reinforcing toolmaking process has its counterparts in
> the open-ended, self-referential language process;
> and in self-referential, self-aware thinking process.
> 
> Human intelligence is a recursive explosion.
GACK!!... I'm sorry if I impolitely make light of this, it is not
personal, but I can't help myself... I just saw the parallel with our
species latest tool... the Internet.  It is obvious now... and everyone
should be warned... the Internet is an "open-ended, self-referential
language process".  It is becoming a self referential, self-aware
thinking process.  The INTERNET IS ALIVE and it is about to consume us
in an entropic explosion.  Oh Lord, save us, our tools have turned
against us.
Sometimes human intelligence seems like a nervous tic.
--Walter Shepherd
Return to Top
Subject: Live From Mars - Update #9
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 00:13 UT
L I V E   F R O M   M A R S   -   A Passport to Knowledge Project
UPDATE   # 9 - November 14, 1996
PART 1: Please register your LFM participation
PART 2: Internet coverage of the live television program
PART 3: Challenge question catch-up: Ms. Stickney
PART 4: Very cool websites: Mars 96 launch, pick a Mars picture
PART 5: The Mars team answers your questions
PART 6: The Magnificent Launch of Mars Global Surveyor
______________________________________________________________________
PLEASE REGISTER YOUR LFM PARTICIPATION
In a project like Live From Mars (free to the user, without formal
registration), it is sometimes hard to determine who our customers
are, and how well we are serving them. To address these issues, we
are registering people for an eventual evaluation.
At this time, we are ONLY interested in hearing from classroom
teachers who are or plan to use Live from Mars in their classroom(s).
The profile is for research use and individual information will not be
shared publically. Please take a moment to fill in the profile. This
replicates the pre-paid postcard included with the print teacher
materials. Please do not send in the postcard if you complete the
form here.
To help us, please complete the online survey at
http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/mars/teachers/survey.html
It will only take a few minutes. Thank you deeply.
______________________________________________________________________
INTERNET COVERAGE OF THE LIVE TELEVISION PROGRAM
By now, you probably know that our first television program is
rapidly approaching: "Countdown" airs on November 19 from 1-2 PM
Eastern. See http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/mars/video or the previous
update-lfm message (LFM #8) for more details.
Various Internet service will be offered as part of this program
- Sound from the broadcast via Real Audio.
- Sound and pictures from the broadcast via CU-SeeMe and MBONE.
- A web page that updates once per minute with a snapshot of what's
  on TV at that moment.
- The ability to ask questions via the onair-lfm@quest.arc.nasa.gov
  address. It won't be active until just before the program starts.
  A select few questions will be read live on TV.
- After the program we'll have an unmoderated chat in the LFM
  unmoderated chatroom: http://quest/webchat/mars2.html.
  This is for students to talk with students, not to experts.
The addresses for all of this stuff will be shared by Monday at this
address: http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/mars/video/online11-19.html
To clear up some confusion, there are no plans to provide live chat
with Internet experts during the TV show.
But there are lots of opportunities to chat with the Mars experts.
See http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/mars/events/interact.html for the
latest schedule.
As well, there is also a service in which we'll have Mars experts
answer all email questions within a week or two of receipt. See below.
______________________________________________________________________
CHALLENGE QUESTION CATCH-UP: MS. STICKNEY
Slowly, we've fallen behind in the Challenge Question schedule.
So here is Challenge Question #5.
The largest crater on the larger of the two Martian moons, Phobos, is
named Stickney. Ms. Stickney was not an astronomer but she played a
critical role in the discovery of the Martian moons. Who was
Ms. Stickney and why did she have this prominent surface featured
named after her?
You are invited to send original student answers to us. We will list
the names of these folks online and token prizes will be given out to
a small number of the students with the best answers. Send your
answers to Jan Wee at jwee@mail.arc.nasa.gov. Please include the
words "CHALLENGE QUESTION" in the subject of the email.
______________________________________________________________________
VERY COOL WEBSITES: MARS 96 LAUNCH, PICK A MARS PICTURE
Ken Edgett, of Arizona State's Mars Outreach program recently
alerted us to some great Mars Web resources. Ken says:
The Mars 96 mission is getting ready to launch from Kazakhstan,
hopefully this Saturday. They are doing a REALLY GREAT job of
updating the countdown, including COOL pictures of the Proton
Rocket, on a Web site at: http://www.iki.rssi.ru/mlaunch.html
The Mars Explorer allows you to get an image map of any area on
Mars at a variety of zoom factors, image sizes, and map projections.
These images are created using data from NASA's Viking missions.
To access the Mars Explorer, web over to:
http://pdsimage.wr.usgs.gov/PDS/public/mapmaker/mapmkr.htm
______________________________________________________________________
THE MARS TEAM ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS
The opportunity to send email questions to the men and women of
the Mars team is available now until December of 1997. In most
cases, you will receive a direct reply within 10 days to two weeks.
We are grateful to the Mars folks for generously volunteering
their time to support this service.
The sections below will describe some guidelines and procedures
for the process.
K-12 students and teachers can email questions to researchers,
engineers and support staff. This interaction will be supported by
a "Smart Filter" which protects the professional from Internet
overload by acting as a buffer. The actual email addresses of these
experts will remain unlisted. Also, repetitive questions will be
answered from an accumulating database of replies; thus the
valued interaction with the experts will be saved for original
questions. (More information about how you can directly search
this database will follow later).
TIPS FOR ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS
Each and every expert is excited about connecting with
classrooms. But it is important to remember that the time and
energy of these people is extremely valuable. If possible,
please review the materials available online to gain an overall
understanding of the basics. It would be best to ask
questions that are not easily answered elsewhere. For
example, "What is the Mars Global Surveyor?" would not be an
appropriate question. Questions which arise from reading a expert's
biography or Field Journal are encouraged.
We recognize that this creates a gray area about whether or not a
question is appropriate. Simply use your best judgment. Since the
main idea is to excite students about the wonders of science and
research, please err on the side of having the students participate.
If you are not sure whether or not to send a question, send it.
Some teachers have used a group dynamic to refine the questions
that they email to experts. For example, after first studying LFM
material, students divide into groups and create a few questions
per group. All of the questions are then shared, and students are
given an opportunity to find answers to their classmates'
questions. Those that remain unanswered are sent to the LFM
team.
Ideally, the act of sending questions will further engage the
student in their learning. It may help to think back to an early
stage of development when the 3-year-old learns that repeating the
word "why" can get parents to do most of the work in a
conversation The wise parent will try to get child involvement by
asking "Why do you want to know?" The same is true in the
classroom. Teachers might want to help students to learn to ask
good questions. Here are three questions the students might ask
themselves as they submit their questions:
      What do I want to know?
      Is this information to be found in a resource I could
      easily check (such as a school encyclopedia)?
      Why do I want to know it? (What will I do with the
      information? or How will I use what I learn?)
The last question is the most interesting. Student reflection on
why they want to know something is a very valuable learning
experience.
LOGISTICS OF SENDING IN QUESTIONS (ADDRESS AND FORMAT)
Questions will be accepted from now through December 1997.
To submit a question, mail it to the following email address:
      question-lfm@quest.arc.nasa.gov.
We will acknowledge all questions immediately and answer as
quickly as possible. In most cases we should be able to provide an
answer within ten days to two weeks.
In the subject field, please put the letters "QA:" before a
descriptive subject. Also, provide a sentence of background
information to help the experts understand the grade level of your
students. The following example should illustrate this idea.
TO:             question-lfm@quest.arc.nasa.gov
FROM:           your email address
SUBJECT:        QA: People in control room
Hello,
I am an 8th grader from Mt.View, California. In the television
program,
it seemed like there were a lot of people in the control center to
control the mission to Mars. How many people normally work in this
room?
Thanks, Kelly Valentine
ONE QUESTION PER MESSAGE
If you or your class have several questions which are unrelated,
we ask that you please send each unrelated question in a separate
email message rather than as one message with many different
questions. While this may be inconvenient, it is important because
it will help us to keep track of the questions and ensure that no
question remains unanswered. Messages that do not follow this
request will be unnecessarily delayed as we go through the extra
step of splitting up the messages ourselves.
TWENTY QUESTION LIMIT
Any individual teacher will be limited to submitting a total of
twenty (20) questions every three months. Hopefully this will
encourage more classroom discussion about what students want
to know and will lead to research done before asking questions.
THE QUESTION ARCHIVE
All of the question/answer pairs will accumulate online for your
browsing or searching pleasure. To visit this archive, use
http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/mars/ask/index.html as the starting point.
______________________________________________________________________
[Editor's note: Donna, as manager of the Mars Exploration Program,
oversees three flight projects and studies of future missions to
Mars. Everyday she deals with scientists trying to understand Mars,
and with the technology we need to go to Mars without costing a
lot. Recently she went to Florida to see the MGS spacecraft blastoff.]
THE MAGNIFICENT LAUNCH OF MARS GLOBAL SURVEYOR
Donna Shirley - http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/mars/team/shirley.html
November 11, 1996
I arrived at "the Cape," as Cape Canaveral is known, a couple
of days before the launch. There are two parts to the Cape: an
air force facility at Cape Canaveral, and the Kennedy Space
Center, which is NASA's launch facility. The space shuttle
launches from the Kennedy Space Center, but most of the
smaller rockets are launched from the air force facility which
is closer to the ocean than Kennedy (known as KSC). MGS
was to be launched from the air force side, on launch pad 17A.
The first day we had a review to make really sure that
everything was ready for the launch. A review is when the
project people present the status of the spacecraft, the mission,
the launch vehicle, and the launch facilities to a review board
of senior people who aren't connected with the project so they
can be really objective.
There had been a few small problems with the launch vehicle,
the Delta II 7925, built by McDonnell Douglas Corporation in
Huntington Beach, California. The review board mainly
wanted to be sure that all the problems had been fixed, and
they had. There were some bugs in some new software for
steering the vehicle, but the programmers had tracked them
down and "patched" them. There were some actuators
(mechanisms that move things) which were suspected of
having been contaminated, but inspection proved that they
weren't. So the review board agreed that it was OK to launch.
That afternoon John Callas, Wayne Lee (from the MGS
project) and I made a series of speeches at the KSC visitor's
center (called "Spaceport U.S.A."). We told people about the
MGS mission and the Mars Exploration Program.
That night, Glenn Cunningham, the MGS project manager,
and I gave a talk to members of the Planetary Society. Tony
Spear and I will be giving a similar presentation on November
30 just before the Mars Pathfinder launch at 2 a.m. on
December 2 (Tony is the Pathfinder project manager).
The next day was a briefing to family and friends of the MGS
project people by the deputy director of KSC, by Ed Stone the
director of JPL, by Wes Huntress the associate administrator
for NASA's Office of Space Science, and by Glenn
Cunningham. There was also the unveiling of a large mural
which was painted by students at the Ypres School of Art in
Los Angeles. The mural depicts the god Mars in a chariot
drawn by four horses, led by the MGS spacecraft as it
approaches the planet Mars. The god Mars is holding out his
hand, inviting the students of the world to learn about the
planet Mars. On the right side of the mural is a view of the
planet Mars. Three of the children who worked on the mural
were there for the unveiling. They ranged from 14 to 16 years
old. The manager of the mural project, who is only 11,
couldn't be there, but everyone was impressed with the
quality of the work.
Finally, November 6, we were ready to attempt the launch. At
about 4 a.m. the Delta launch vehicle with the MGS spacecraft
tucked into the shroud on top, was rolled away from the
structure that had supported it while it was being put together.
The vehicle stood, shining with artificial light, and then in the
rays of the morning sun, next to its "gantry" which allows
liquid oxygen fuel to be loaded at the last minute before
launch. MGS project people came out to the pad at 7 a.m. to
admire the vehicle and to get a group photo taken. On the
rocket was painted NASA, JPL and the names of the
companies who built the spacecraft and launch vehicle. The
gantry was painted with a big MGS.
In a very sad note, the name of Mary Kaye Olsen was painted
below the MGS on the gantry. Mary Kaye had died suddenly,
at the age of only 37, a couple of weeks before the launch.
You can read Mary Kaye's bio on the Live From Mars Team
page. She was the person at NASA Headquarters who
oversaw the MGS project, and everyone on the team liked and
respected her. We kept a seat in the launch viewing area, full
of flowers, in memory of Mary Kaye for the actual launch.
By 9 a.m. many of us "looky-loos" were crowded into the
viewing area behind the consoles of the people controlling the
launch vehicle as the countdown wound toward launch time
(12:11 p.m. EST). The consoles are like the ones you see
when a space shuttle is flying. There are computer screens
with a lot of buttons that you can push to see different views
of the launch vehicle, or to bring up information - like on the
weather. Everyone wears earphones so that they can hear the
countdown and listen to the engineers talking to each other to
make sure that everything is OK. Glenn Cunningham, the
MGS project manager, and George Pace, the MGS spacecraft
manager were "on console," as was Bud McAnally, the
manager of the MGS spacecraft project at Lockheed Martin
Astronautics in Denver, Colorado. Lockheed Martin is our
industrial partner and is building the two Mars Surveyor 98
spacecraft as well as MGS.
Everyone was watching the weather. At a press briefing the
day before the weather expert had said that he thought the
weather would be fine for the launch, but the day was
clouding over rapidly. Every hour or so weather balloons
were sent up to measure the winds "aloft." If the clouds were
too thick there was danger of lightning striking the rocket.
And if the winds were too strong it could get blown off
course. Our eyes were glued to a large TV screen in front of
the consoles that displayed weather maps and plots of the
winds. At four minutes to noon there was a 10-minute "hold"
while we waited for the weather to clear. But it didn't.
There were two times each day when the rocket could be
launched, when the trajectory could be lined up just right to
get to Mars. The first opportunity passed at 12:11 and we all
waited anxiously for the next opportunity, which was at 1:15.
The launch vehicle controllers quickly loaded new software
parameters into the vehicle's computer to account for the
different launch time. The countdown resumed. Every now
and then we'd go outside to peer at the clouds. Suddenly, the
clouds looked as if they were breaking up. Everyone thought -
"We're going to make it." But suddenly, at about a minute
before 1:15 a loud voice shouted "HOLD, HOLD, HOLD"
over the loud speakers. The launch had been canceled at the
last minute because the winds aloft were too strong.
Disappointed, everyone straggled away and the launch vehicle
people began to "safe" the rocket and store it for a try again
the next day.
That night there was a big party, originally planned for a
post-launch party, but which turned into a pre-launch party.
The next morning, everything was repeated, but this time the
weather was beautiful. At about 10 minutes to noon some of
us ran outside and were bussed over to a viewing area a
couple of miles from the launch pad. The loudspeaker counted
down, joined by the crowd, "Ten, nine, eight, seven, six,
five, four, three, two, one, zero." And at exactly noon there
was a brilliant flash and a roar and the loudspeakers
announced "We have ignition!" The rocket rose on a column
of smoke and flame and arced through the cloudless sky. We
could see six solid rocket motors fall away in little trails of
smoke at just the right time. We cheered until the rocket
disappeared into the blue, then we ran back to the bus and
went back to the control room.
Every event was tracked by different tracking stations around
the Earth. When the rocket passed over the Indian Ocean it
was too far from any land stations to be "heard," so two
aircraft were flown to listen for the radio signals. Then we
cheered when the tracking stations in Australia acquired the
signal. Everything happened exactly on time. The solid
rockets burned out and dropped away. The first and second
stages ignited and then shut off. The rocket "coasted" in a
"parking orbit" for almost an hour before the third stage
burned to send the spacecraft on its way to Mars. Then the
spacecraft separated from the launch vehicle and was on its
own. There were several anxious minutes until the Deep
Space Network tracking antennas heard the spacecraft's own
signals...but then there they were! The launch was successful!
There was an orgy of handshaking and hugs all around.
Glenn Cunningham and George Pace had huge grins. The
spacecraft team was now in charge and they began studying
the telemetry from the spacecraft to make sure that everything
was as planned. Some of the early results were puzzling and
the spacecraft team determined that one of the solar panels
hadn't unfolded completely. It was at an angle about 20
degrees from where it was supposed to be. This was no
problem yet because there was plenty of power being
provided by the solar arrays this close to the sun. Everything
else was working perfectly and the engineers began
diagnosing the solar array situation. They concluded that it
was probably not a serious problem, and they had plenty of
time to fix it before the first trajectory correction maneuver
scheduled for 13 days after launch.
Then there was a press briefing by Glenn, Wes Huntress,
Bud McAnally, and people from the Goddard Space Flight
Center (managers of the launch vehicle contract). Finally,
there was an impromptu party organized by Mike Malin,
principal investigator of the MGS camera, where a lot of
chicken wings and shrimp were eaten. That night I was
interviewed on MSNBC for an "online chat" on the Internet.
People sent in questions to the "chat room" and I dictated the
answers to Melinda, who typed them in. It was an odd
experience - say - ing - ever - y - thing - ver - y - slow - ly - so
- Mel - in - da - could - type.
Well, MGS is on its way to Mars. The next big event is the
launch of the Russian Mars 96 mission on November 16.
Then Pathfinder launches on December 2. Since that's a night
launch it will be spectacular. Our fleet will be getting ready to
invade Mars starting in July.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
If this is your first message from the updates-lfm list, welcome!
To catch up on back issues, please visit the following Internet URL:
http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/mars/updates
To subscribe to the updates-lfm mailing list (where this message
came from), send a message to:
   listmanager@quest.arc.nasa.gov
In the message body, write these words:
   subscribe updates-lfm
CONVERSELY...
To remove your name from the updates-lfm mailing list, send a message to:
   listmanager@quest.arc.nasa.gov
In the message body, write these words:
   unsubscribe updates-lfm
If you have Web access, please visit our "continuous construction" site at
http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/mars.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution
From: cc16712@cdsnet.net
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 1996 10:28:44 GMT
Dave Monroe  wrote:
>People believe in evolution because there's a huge body of evidence
>that points in that direction.  People believe in creationism because
>they were told to. 
...without any supporting evidence.  Another double non-standard.
>--
>David S. Monroe                          David.Monroe@cdc.com
>Software Engineer
>Control Data Systems
>2970 Presidential Drive, Suite 200
>Fairborn, Ohio 45324
>(937) 427-6385
Regards,
Stoney
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Light slowing down?
From: Serendipity@home (Chester)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 02:01:56 GMT
Interesting question.
According to Einstein, time and space are flexible...but only in 
relation to one another. Speed is only a measure of time and space. 
When one is traveling away from a light source, the speed of light 
passing by is the same as measured when one is traveling towards the 
same light source. This at first may seem odd but when one considers 
relativity of time and space you see that time and space have changed 
and not the speed of light. While time and space are constant to you at 
all times the measure of the speed of light will always be constant to 
you.
Therefore, even if space expands so will time change, and the 
measurement will remain constant.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: analemna ?
From: Rodney Small
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 21:34:51 -0800
Bill Wyatt wrote:
> 
> : >> There is a short answer, with reference to a longer answer, in the
> : >> FAQ:
> : >> http://astrosun.tn.cornell.edu/students/lazio/sci.astro.3.FAQ
> : >>
> : >> Note that both obliquity of the ecliptic and eccentricity of Earth's
> : >> orbit contribute to the shape of the analemma, with the former being
> : >> slightly the larger effect.
> 
> : >I disagree with the word "slightly" -- the obliquity (tilt of the
> : >earth on its axis relative to the plane of the earth's orbit) component
> : >is actually much greater than the eccentricity (orbital speed of the
> : >earth) component, but for some reason the former seems to be unknown even
> : >to many astronomers.
> 
> [description of length of day deleted]
> 
> In terms of the equation of time, 'slightly' is the correct word. The
> effect (and they're not in phase) is 9.9 minutes for the obliquity and
> 7.7 minutes for the eccentricity.
> [Eric Werme's highly informative 1993 article deleted]
When I said I disagreed with the word "slightly," I was referring to the maximum 
daily effect of the two components of the equation of time.  At the June solstice, 
approximately 13 days before the earth reaches aphelion, an apparent solar day is 
about 13 seconds longer than 24 hours.  At the December solstice, approximately 13 
days before the earth reaches perihelion, an apparent solar day is about 30 seconds 
longer than 24 hours.  Therefore, it seems to follow that the maximum daily effect on 
the equation of time attributable to the obliquity component is about (13 seconds + 
30 seconds)/2 = 21.5 seconds.  That means that at the solstices, the effect of the 
eccentricity component is about 8.5 seconds; i.e, -8.5 seconds at the June solstice 
and +8.5 seconds at the December solstice.  The maximum daily eccentricity effect 
on the equation of time occurs about 13 days after the solstices when an apparent 
solar day is, respectively, about 10 seconds longer than 24 hours on July 4 
(aphelion) and about 28 seconds longer than 24 hours on January 3 (perihelion).  
While I have not worked this out precisely, it appears that the daily effect of the 
obliquity component is about 19 seconds at both aphelion and perihelion.  Therefore, 
the maximum daily eccentricity effect is about 9 seconds; i.e. -9 seconds at aphelion 
and +9 seconds at perihelion.  Accordingly, the approximately 21.5 second maximum 
daily effect of the obliquity component is more than twice as great as the 
approximately 9 second maximum daily effect of the eccentricity component.
Return to Top
Subject: $
From: "RoadKill"
Date: 14 Nov 1996 17:21:14 GMT
> >>Taking 5 minutes to readwhat follows could be one of the best
> >>decisions you have ever made .
> 
> >>READ THIS !!!
> 
> >>I saw an article in a newsgroup that I could make about $50,000 within
> >>a month for an investment of only $5 . I thought it was a joke and
> >>everyone besides me think it was a scam . But soon , my friend told me
> >>that within 4 weeks , he received about $45,000 from everyone around
> >>the world after invest $5 .
> 
> >>Anyone interested can join us .It is NOT ILLEGAL , NOT A CHAIN
> >>LETTER-PERFECTLY LEGAL .
> 
> >>Just follow these three simple steps.
> 
> >>1) Write your name and address on 5 sheets of papers . Below that
> >>write the words "Please add me to your mailing list. " Include $1 note
> >>in each piece of paper and mail them to the following address.
> 
> >>#1 Stephanie Newsome 
> >>     3037 Crystal Springs #914
> >>     Beyford , TX76021
> 
> >>#2 Andres Linares
> >>     7801 , NW. 37th.St. EPS#F-1365
> >>     Miami , FL , 33166
> 
> >>#3 Cuong Ho
> >>      35-15 , 149th Place
> >>      Flushing , NY11354
> 
> >>#4 Micheal Strahan
> >>     4520 - 18th Ave. So.
> >>     Minneapolis , MN55407
> 
> >>#5 Peter Harris
> >>    RR#1
           Fournier, Ont.
                KOB-1G0
> >>      >>2) Now remove the top name (or #1) from your list and move the
others
> >>four names up. In other words , #5 become #4 , and so on . Put your
> >>name on the #5 by simply retyping the article or reposting it to other
> >>newsgroup with the edited addresses .
> 
> >>3) Post them to at least 200 newsgroup .There're 7000 , so it
> >>shouldn't be hard to find that many . Try to post more because you may
> >>earn more . 
> 
> >>Now , Here's how the system works 
> 
> >>Of every 200 posts I made , I received 5 responses . You make $5 from
> >>every 200 posts with your name at #5 . 
> 
> >>Each person who sent you $1 now also make 200 additional posting with
> >>your name at #4 .ie.1000 postings .On average , 50 poeples will send
> >>you $1 with your name at #4 and you earn extra $50 .From here , you
> >>already earn $50 but you are earning more than that.
> 
> >>Your 50 new agent make 200 postings each with your name at #3 or
> >>10,000 posting . Average return is 500 people = $500 . They make
> >>another 200 postings with your name at #2=100,000 postings = 5000
> >>return at $1 each = $5000. 
> 
> >>Finally , 5000 peoples make 200 postings with your name at #1 and you
> >>get $50,000 before your name drop off the list . You may reenter this
> >>investment again after your name is not on the list .
> 
> >>Let's review why you should do this . THE COST IS ONLY $5 , AND 5
> >>STAMPS , 5 PAPERS AND 5 ENVOLOPES . Anyone can afford $5 for such an
> >>effortless investment with such SPECTACULAR RETURNS .
> 
> >>Start making your plans now , it's a wise investment. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Return to Top
Subject: New Hubble Findings on Quasars Presented on Nov 19
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 00:25 UT
Don Savage
Headquarters, Washington, DC              November 14, 1996
(Phone:  202/358-1547)
Tammy Jones
Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD
(Phone:  301/286-5566)
Ray Villard
Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, MD
(Phone:  410/338-4514)
NOTE TO EDITORS:  N96-76
NEW HUBBLE FINDINGS ON QUASARS PRESENTED AT BRIEFING NOV. 19
       Dramatic Hubble Space Telescope images, which show 
that quasars live in a remarkable variety of galaxies, many 
of which are violently colliding, will be presented at a 
Space Science Update (SSU) on Tuesday, Nov. 19, at 9 a.m. 
EST.  Noted astronomers John Bahcall and Mike Disney will 
present their significant new findings which suggest there 
may be a variety of mechanisms causing quasars -- the 
universe's most energetic objects -- to "turn on" and that 
quasars may be relatively short lived phenomena which many 
galaxies, including the Milky Way, experienced long ago. 
       The SAU will be carried live on NASA Television, with 
two-way question-and-answer capability for reporters 
covering the event from participating NASA Centers.  NASA 
Television is carried on Spacenet-2, transponder 5, channel 
9, at 69 degrees West longitude, frequency 3880.0 MHz, audio 
6.8 Megahertz.
       The 9 a.m. EST start time of the SSU is due to 
coverage of the STS-80 Space Shuttle mission, scheduled to 
launch at 2:53 p.m. EST Nov. 19.  Live coverage and launch 
commentary on NASA TV will begin at the conclusion of the 
SSU at 10 a.m. EST.  Audio of the SSU will be available on 
an audio circuit via telephone by calling 407/867-1260.  
During the SSU, pre-launch Shuttle activities will be 
carried live on the audio circuits via telephone on 407/867-
1220 and 407/867-1240.
Panelists for the SSU will be:
   Dr. John Bahcall, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ
   Dr. Mike Disney, University of Wales, Cardiff
   Dr. Alex Filippenko, Center for Particle Physics, University of CA, Berkeley
   Dr. Bruce Margon, University of Washington, Seattle
   Dr. Stephen Maran, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, panel moderator.
                    - end -
Return to Top
Subject: Extrasolar planetary systems chart, posted in alt.binaries.p.astro
From: wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 02:36:43 GMT
I made up, and posted in the newsgroup  alt.binaries.pictures.astro
a comparitive map of the various known extrasolar planetary systems,
and our inner solar system thrown in too.  The systems with very
eccentric orbits and massive planets probably cleaned out other
planets in their orbital region.  So they might be thought as
nearly complete systems.  Anyway, this map is intended to give 
an approx impression of the size and shape of the new planets'
orbits.  Also, I listed, next to each orbit, the star, mass (M(sin i)),
and orbital period.  
Might be useful as a "Wow!, look at that, other "solar systems"
display at the planetarium.  It's public domain, enjoy.  
Return to Top
Subject: And the barycentre ...
From: abg21@dial.pipex.com (Nick Hunter)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 04:09:07 +0000
Dieter Schmitt  wrote:
> any idea where the Center of Gravity is located?
> 
> ... of the universe, of course.
Also, in terms of RA, declination and distance from the centre of the
sun, where is the solar system barycentre at present?
And what cyclic periodicities have been observed/calculated in its
perambulation?
Return to Top
Subject: And the barycentre ...
From: abg21@dial.pipex.com (Nick Hunter)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 04:09:07 +0000
Dieter Schmitt  wrote:
> any idea where the Center of Gravity is located?
> 
> ... of the universe, of course.
Also, in terms of RA, declination and distance from the centre of the
sun, where is the solar system barycentre at present?
And what cyclic periodicities have been observed/calculated in its
perambulation?
Return to Top
Subject: Help Volunteer,
From: Rick Mitchell
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 19:46:32 -0800
Dear Volunteer,
		I am doing a science fair project and I need volunteers 
to do this project.  The project is to see whether the rhythm of body 
temperature differs between "Morning People"  and "Night People".  This 
experiment will require you to take your body temperature when you get up 
in the morning and every two hours after that until the time you go to 
bed.  If you would like to volunteer for this experiment please fill out 
the questionnaire below and e-mail your answers to: rm2@ocsnet.net       
	If selected I will send you a volunteer package so that you can 
complete this experiment.  Thanks for your help -  *Link*
Volunteer Questionnaire
Name:________________________________
Sex:_______
Age:_______
Mailing Address:______________________________________
1. I am most alert in the morning.		A	B	C	D	
E
2. I am most alert at night.			A	B	C	D	
E
3. I get up early when I can.			A	B	C	D	
E
4. I sleep in  when I can.			A	B	C	D	
E
5. I get things done early in the morning.	A	B	C	D	
E
6. I get things done late at night.		A	B	C	D	
E
7. I go to sleep early when possible.		A	B	C	D	
E
8. I stay up late when I can.			A	B	C	D	
E
A: Always	B: Most of the time    C: Sometimes   D: Almost never   
E: Never
Return to Top
Subject: Re: When will the U.S. finally go metric?
From: william.hamblen@nashville.com.(william@nashville.com (William.hamblen@nashville.com (william)
Date: 14 Nov 96 20:48:02
From: william.hamblen@nashville.com (William R. Hamblen)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: When will the U.S. finally go metric?
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 02:48:02 GMT
Organization: Utterly Disorganized
Reply-To: william.hamblen@nashville.com
References: <14631.623@nashville.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lines: 24    
newt@avatar.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
>Along I-15 between LA and Las Vegas (and I assume further?), distances
>are given both in miles and km.  Is there a reason for this
>(e.g. military purposes?  The Mojave Desert is full of bases).
>Also, the mileage sign for Pasadena as you get off the 110 freeway
>at Orange Grove Blvd. says "<- Pasadena 2  (3.2 km)", for
>all metric people at Caltech?
The state of Alabama has kilometer posts all over the place.  Now I
know it is 352 km from Ardmore, Alabama, to whatever is at the other
end of State Highway 53.  Huntsville, Alabama, (home to the Marshall
Space Flight Center) for a time posted speed limits both in miles/hour
and kilometers/hour.  The km/hr signs are gone now, I suppose because
the good-old-boys were excited to see all the speed limits raised by
60% and drove accordingly.
Of course engineers don't apply SI rationally, either.  I've seen too
many pressure gages calibrated in kg per square cm to think
differently.
Return to Top
Subject: Hale Bopp
From: Mark
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 21:04:35 -0800
WHAT THE HALE IS GOING ON???
Why has NASA not posted any HST Hale Bopp pics since last year???
Mark
P.S. I had heard that NASA had "bought" HST time to view HB in 
July, August, September, and October 1996.....yet no pics.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Hale Bopp photos
From: Mark
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 21:13:48 -0800
Jonathan Silverlight wrote:
> In article <01bbd061$06d8d7a0$89462399@default>, "Ray Laliberty" (ssoft@gte.net) writes:
> > it appears that ALL Hubble Space Telescope datasets are subject to a wait
> >period of
> >1 year. So exactly 1 year from the time the data was collected, NASA will
> >release the
> >data to the public, not necessarily including the finished photograph.
> This can't be right. The pictures of a Martian dust storm that were
> released recently were taken in September and October 1996, and
> the pictures of Neptune were taken in August.
I agree Jonathan. If memory serves me right HST pics of comet
Hyuatake (butchered the spelling) were IMMEDIATELY made available
on the web, and not crappy low-res .jpgs either.  If you doubt me
check out NASA web sight, over 1,000 comet Hyuatake pics.  Again I 
am just curious what's up????  The amateur pics posted on the web
are very interesting, numerous "jets" shooting from the comet etc.
It would be nice to see what the HST is seeing of this very peculiar
comet.
Mark
Return to Top
Subject: Re: REDSHIFT ??
From: egibson407@pipeline.com (Eric Gibson)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 06:39:08 GMT
ZELLNER@GSVMS2.CC.GASOU.EDU (BENJAMIN_H. ZELLNER) wrote:
>In <566a8j$tb2@camel4.mindspring.com> egibson407@pipeline.com writes:
> 	2.    If the light from these images comes from objects with a small
> >      fraction of the universe's age ( 12 - 18 Billion years) then has this
> >      light been traveling for 10.2 - 15.3 billion years? and if so, HOW DID
> >      WE GET HERE AHEAD OF IT to 'see' it?
>So long as you keep thinking of the Big Bang as objects "traveling
>outward" from a definite point in space with a "this side" and an
>"other side", you are going to keep stumbling over logical paradoxes.
>You are trying to sneak in the concept of a "center of expansion" at
>some definite, uniquely defined physical location relative to some 
>hypothetical absolute space, and that's a non-physical concept.
Perhaps the problem I have is in my understanding (or lack thereof) of
the expansion of the universe.
>The expansion rate can only be described in a differential sense:
>the Hubble constant in km per sec per megaparsec, as a function of
>time. 
 I can find this statement everywhere, but cannot find anything which
explains it.  The concept of 3-dimensional space expanding, every atom
getting further away from one another is difficult to grasp. The
analogy of 2-D on the surface of a balloon is ok, but when translated
into 3-D, it implies that everything is expanding in 3 dimensions.  Is
the earth's radius larger now than when I was born? Is the length of a
covalent bond between Carbon atoms longer than it was 1000 yrs ago?
If so, will there come a time when certain chemical bonds no longer
work?  Will water cease to exist someday?
> But a question like "is the expansion rate of the universe
>close to c?" makes no sense.
>Ben
The question was: How did we get 14Billion light years away from
something before the light from that object overtook us? 
Your help is appreciated.  I feel that I am coming Closer to an
understanding.  Bear with me for a moment while I try to apply what I
have learned...
 The expansion of the universe causes the physical path that the
photon travels to increase in distance at a constant rate (55-90 km/s
/ Mpc).  Ok, you say we've always been right here.  That implies that
WE Are not moving (except for our small peculiar motion of a few
hundred km/sec).  Then the galaxy that emitted the 4.55 redshifted
photon is the same place it has always been( except for its peculiar
motion).  The Universe, which started with a Big Bang from a single
point ,  cannot be thought of as an expanding Sphere in 3 dimensions
because it has no borders or boundries.  Yet the photon still took 14
BILLION years travelling at 186,282 miles/sec to cross the portion of
the universe (which was expanding constantly) between us.  The age of
the universe is 18 Billion years.  This photon has been travelling for
85% of the time which has passed since the Big Bang.  We all started
from the same spot.  We've always been right here.  The source galaxy
has always been right here too .  Therefore the photon was emitted by
our galaxy , and has been traveling some unknown path for 14 Billion
years, only to return here.  ????
I dont think that is right.
I'm sure that I am not the only one who has'nt gotten the concept yet,
but those of you who have, if you can Help, I would sincerely
appreciate it. 
                                 Eric D Gibson
                                  EGibson407@pipeline.com
Return to Top
Subject: Mars Meteorite Auction
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 04:16 UT
Martians for Sale
Maine Antique Digest
November 14, 1996
http://www.maineantiquedigest.com/other/ht111296.htm
Photographs Courtesy Guernsey's, Kenneth Gabrielson Photography
NASA's announcement this past summer that life may have existed on Mars as
evidenced by fossil remains in a known Mars meteorite specimen has done more
than just pump up NASA's budget. It has spawned a frenzy among collectors of
Martian and other meteorite material.
At least so hope Guernsey's auction house and an unnamed consignor who, on
November 20 at the 7th Regiment Armory in New York City, will put up
specimens of the three known types of Martian meteorites at a one-lot
auction. Guernsey's said that of the 90 pounds of known Martian meteorite
material, only about eight pounds are in private hands. The auction will
offer slightly over a pound of the material; the estimate is $1.5 million to
$2 million.
Ron Farrell, whose company Bethany Sciences of Woodbridge, Connecticut, is
one of the leading brokers in meteorites, said, "People all through history
have paid a lot of money for all meteorites. The announcement by NASA has
driven up the price of the Martian material. There's so little of it, and a
worldwide demand." Farrell may well be the consignor of the material at
auction. His company is credited with the copyright to a color picture on a
Web site of a rock identical in shape and chips to the largest rock
Guernsey's is offering. Both Farrell and Arlan Ettinger, president of
Guernsey's, declined comment on the identity of the consignor, although
Farrell admitted it was fair to say that the large meteorite piece had
"probably" passed through his hands.
 [Image of]  The large rock is known as Zagami, from the location Zagami,
 [Zagami]    Katsina Province, Nigeria, where it fell on October 3, 1962. Its
composition is Shergotitte called after a stone of similar composition that
fell in 1865 in Shergotty, India) and it weighs 420 grams from a stone of
18,000 grams that fell in Zagami, Nigeria in 1962.
(According to Ron Baalke's Web site (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/zagami.html),
"It landed about 10 feet away from a farmer who was trying to chase crows
from his corn field. The farmer heard a tremendous explosion and was
buffeted by a pressure wave. After a puff of smoke and a thud, the meteorite
buried itself in a hole about 2 feet deep. Weighing at about 18,000 grams
(40 pounds), the Zagami meteorite is the largest single individual Mars
meteorite ever found.
"The meteorite was sent to the Kaduna Geological Survey and placed in a
museum. Some years later, Robert Haag, a meteorite dealer, traded for a
large portion of the Zagami meteorite. The Zagami meteorite is the most
easily obtainable SNC meteorite available to collectors."
The big mystery is whether any of the specimens being offered at auction
will contain signs of life. Ettinger says the composition of the Zagami
meteorite is the same as the specimen found in Antarctica in which NASA
scientists claim to have found signs of life.
Admission to a gala preview on November 18 from 6 to 8 p.m. is $50, and
tickets may be reserved from the American Cancer Society at (212) 237-3890.
Admission to the sale and public previews on November 19, 10 a.m. to 10
p.m., and November 20, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., is by $20 catalog only. The sale
will be held at 7 p.m. Catalogs ($25 by mail) may be ordered from Guernsey's
at (212) 794-2280 or fax (212) 744-3638.
 [Image of ] Chassignite, 13.5 grams from a stone of 4000 grams that fell in
 [Chassigny] Chassigny, France in 1815
 [Image of ] Nakhlite, 65 grams from a group of stones estimated to total 40
 [Nahkla   ] kilograms that fell in 1911 at El Nakhla el Baharia, Egypt.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: RUSSIAN AMATEUR WANTS TO MEET AUSTRALIAN OBSERVERS - PLEASE ASSIST
From: perryasv@melbpc.org.au (Perry Vlahos)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 08:21:47 GMT
andromed@atm.dal.ca (Michael Boschat) wrote:
>Hello;, I am sending this for a Russian amateur, please contact him at his
>address...
>Thank you 
>Clear skies...
>__________________________________________________________________
>Michael Boschat ( Astronomer )    E-mail: andromed@atm.dal.ca
>Atmospheric Sciences              Lab Phone: (902) 494-7060
>Dept. of Oceanography             Fax: (902) 494-2885
>Dalhousie University              
>Halifax, Nova Scotia     
>CANADA, B3H 4J1         My ASTRONOMY Web Page: http://www.atm.dal.ca/~andromed
>                          
>==============================================================================
>                  MESSAGE AS FOLLOWS:                                           
>Hello , Australians!
> 
>I'm living in Moscow (Russia) but at the end of November I will be in
>Australia (Sydney and Melbourne) for a few days. 
> 
>I'm looking for amateur astronomers in Australia to view deep-sky objects
>of Southern Sky together.
> 
>My address:  stargaz@mx.iki.rssi.ru
> 
>Stanislav Axenov
> 
Hi 
Return to Top
Subject: *NEWS FLASH* Object Near Hale-Bopp
From: Florin Clapa
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 00:21:59 -0800
A photograph of Hale-Bopp taken very recently by an amatuer astronomer,
shows a huge anomalous saturn-like object near the comet.  If anybody
has any more information, please post it!
Here is a link to the photo:
http://www.artbell.com/art/space.html
-- 
 _________________________________
 Florin Clapa
 fclapa@engr.csulb.edu
 http://www.engr.csulb.edu/~fclapa
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Moon Phases Inverted in S. Hemisphere???
From: fore057@canterbury.ac.nz
Date: 15 Nov 1996 08:34:23 GMT
In <567lfc$2g7@lori.albany.net>, rsmith@clysmic.com writes:
>This has been diving me crazy! I need astronomical advise ...
>
>My question: are moon phases really "inverted" in the southern hemisphere?
Nah.  The moon phases are inverted for you guys in the northern 
hemisphere.  We've got it the right way up down here. 
Regards,
Euan
================================================================== 
Dr Euan G. Mason                    Silviculture, Modelling and    
Senior Lecturer                     Decision-support systems
School of Forestry                                                 
University of Canterbury            New Zealand's professional     
Christchurch, New Zealand           Forestry School                
Ph: 64 3 3642584                    Fax: 64 3 3642124
     Home page: http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/fore/EUAN.HTM
------------------------------------------------------------------ 
                Running at Warp speed with OS/2                    
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Sane people did what their neighbours did, so that if any 
lunatics were at large, one might know and avoid them."
                - George Eliot, in "Middlemarch"
==================================================================
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution
From: Mark & Susan Sampson
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 01:35:11 -0500
Who cares how God created the universe???  All that matters is that he
did.  However he accomplished it, is beyond my need to know.  He did
that is all that matters.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution
From: edconrad@prolog.net (Ed Conrad)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 10:45:57 GMT
alweiner@presstar.com (Alan Weiner) wrote:
>Name and publisher of book pls.  What evidence do they use to support 
>this conjecture?
>In article <32853A38.38E7@gte.net>, ashes@gte.net says...
>>
>>I read in a science book that there is a greater posibility of a
>>printinng press exploding and forming webster's dictionary completly by
>>accident; as opposed to the world being created from some dead matter.
Ashes to ashes,
Dust to dust.,
Got to correct you,
THAT I must!
T'wasn't that book
you're referring to.
An ENCYCLOPEDIA,
If you want to know.
Return to Top
Subject: Anomalous object near Hale-Bopp?
From: west@sonic.net (Wes Thomas)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 11:15:31 GMT
Art Bell show reporting right now that an amateur astronomer has
sighted a giant strange object visually near the Hale-Bopp comet. The
object mysteriously appeared Wednesday night and resembles Saturn, but
is "sefl-illuminating" with anomalously-even illumination, according
to Chuck Shramek, an amateur astronomer in Houston. 
See http://www.artbell.com/art/images/halebopp5.jpg and
http://www.artbell.com/art/images/halebopp6.jpg
Is anyone else seeing this?
Return to Top
Subject: Re: REDSHIFT ??
From: Jean-Joseph JACQ
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:21:12 -0800
Eric Gibson wrote:
> 
> ZELLNER@GSVMS2.CC.GASOU.EDU (BENJAMIN_H. ZELLNER) wrote:
> 
> >In <566a8j$tb2@camel4.mindspring.com> egibson407@pipeline.com writes:
> 
> >       2.    If the light from these images comes from objects with a small
> > >      fraction of the universe's age ( 12 - 18 Billion years) then has this
> > >      light been traveling for 10.2 - 15.3 billion years? and if so, HOW DID
> > >      WE GET HERE AHEAD OF IT to 'see' it?
> 
> >So long as you keep thinking of the Big Bang as objects "traveling
> >outward" from a definite point in space with a "this side" and an
> >"other side", you are going to keep stumbling over logical paradoxes.
> >You are trying to sneak in the concept of a "center of expansion" at
> >some definite, uniquely defined physical location relative to some
> >hypothetical absolute space, and that's a non-physical concept.
> 
> Perhaps the problem I have is in my understanding (or lack thereof) of
> the expansion of the universe.
> 
> >The expansion rate can only be described in a differential sense:
> >the Hubble constant in km per sec per megaparsec, as a function of
> >time.
>  I can find this statement everywhere, but cannot find anything which
> explains it.  The concept of 3-dimensional space expanding, every atom
> getting further away from one another is difficult to grasp. The
> analogy of 2-D on the surface of a balloon is ok, but when translated
> into 3-D, it implies that everything is expanding in 3 dimensions.  Is
> the earth's radius larger now than when I was born? Is the length of a
> covalent bond between Carbon atoms longer than it was 1000 yrs ago?
> If so, will there come a time when certain chemical bonds no longer
> work?  Will water cease to exist someday?
> 
> > But a question like "is the expansion rate of the universe
> >close to c?" makes no sense.
> 
> >Ben
> The question was: How did we get 14Billion light years away from
> something before the light from that object overtook us?
> 
> Your help is appreciated.  I feel that I am coming Closer to an
> understanding.  Bear with me for a moment while I try to apply what I
> have learned...
> 
>  The expansion of the universe causes the physical path that the
> photon travels to increase in distance at a constant rate (55-90 km/s
> / Mpc).  Ok, you say we've always been right here.  That implies that
> WE Are not moving (except for our small peculiar motion of a few
> hundred km/sec).  Then the galaxy that emitted the 4.55 redshifted
> photon is the same place it has always been( except for its peculiar
> motion).  The Universe, which started with a Big Bang from a single
> point ,  cannot be thought of as an expanding Sphere in 3 dimensions
> because it has no borders or boundries.  Yet the photon still took 14
> BILLION years travelling at 186,282 miles/sec to cross the portion of
> the universe (which was expanding constantly) between us.  The age of
> the universe is 18 Billion years.  This photon has been travelling for
> 85% of the time which has passed since the Big Bang.  We all started
> from the same spot.  We've always been right here.  The source galaxy
> has always been right here too .  Therefore the photon was emitted by
> our galaxy , and has been traveling some unknown path for 14 Billion
> years, only to return here.  ????
> 
> I dont think that is right.
> 
> I'm sure that I am not the only one who has'nt gotten the concept yet,
> but those of you who have, if you can Help, I would sincerely
> appreciate it.
> 
>                                  Eric D Gibson
>                                   EGibson407@pipeline.com
Well I too have problems in logic with this notion, I've come up with
another way of looking at the problem. The whole concept is that as the
universe (and by this most experts mean spacetime) expands, the wave
length of the photon is stretched by the same proportions which does not
explain what happens to its lost energy. It also does not explain why we
can detect it as , if one wants to be logical, the time scale having
been  also stretched by the same amount, then we should still detect the
same frequency.
Worse still is the thought that maybe the photon is like a snapshot of
the past universe and whilst it is travelling at the speed of light,
time stands still for it and nothing changes. So in fact, the atom that
sent the photon  was vibrating slower, or had a larger wave length then
than it has now. In which case  our length and time scales are smaller
now than they were then and the universe is not expanding at all but is
in fact collapsing. We are headed for the big crunch!....
Oh well, I guess it won't happen tomorrow so why worry about it.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Sirius C??? - dogon.jpg (0/1)
From: bb089@scn.org (James Conway)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 01:52:01 GMT
In a previous article, mmd@zuaxp0.star.ucl.ac.uk (Michael Dworetsky) says:
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 10:41:27 GMT
>In article <19961109184400.NAA19493@ladder01.news.aol.com>
>> irkiller@aol.com writes:
>>As I recall Sky and Telescope had a small article in an issue about 6
>>months ago indicating that a 3rd star had been detected in the Sirius 
>>star system. I have not heard anything further since
>
>It was the December 1995 issue, p 14, reporting a study by two French 
>astronomers published in the July II 1995 issue of Astronomy & 
>Astrophysics.  However, while the original posting in sci.astro said 
>the Dogon described Sirius C as having the twice the period of Sirius B 
>(if I recall this correctly), the published study concluded that the 
>most likely orbit was a 6.3-year period of a low-mass star or brown 
>dwarf orbiting Sirius A.  The study said, in effect, that such an 
>object was likely to exist but the level of confidence in this 
>conclusion was statistically marginal (90%).
Marginal at 90%?
     The Dogon indicate Sirius C is at a greater distance from the
primary than B, but I do not recall if they state it is 'twice'
that distance.  More important is that the period for both is the
same not twice according to the Dogon which indicates that this
information was not introduced by westerners.  As for the study
it only analizes what _one_ possible mass and period would be 
required to satisfy the observed disturbances of Sirius B.  If
the mass of the object was greater it would have a greater
distance from its primary to substain the same quality to perturb
all other bodies.  The Dogon claim Sirius C (and B) have a period
of 50 earth years or as they put it twice around Sirius A every 
one century of our time.  The orbital mass calculation for the
Sirius system is 3.34 solar masses with Sirius A making 2.35
solar masses and Sirius B at 0.99.  But this indicates Sirius A
at 1.76 diameters of the Sun to have a density of less than half
the Sun's which is not what should be expected as like stars ot
to have the same density if not greater in this case.  If Sirius 
had the same density as the Sun it would have a mass of 5.5 solar 
masses.  Our solar system's greatest mass, besides the primary,
is Jupiter that has an orbit of 176 rotations of the Sun with the
next greatest mass object being Saturn with a distance less than
but about twice Jupiter's and an orbit of 437 Sun rotations.  The
comparable numbers would be the Sun with a rotation period of
2.125 million seconds and Sirius with a 3.75 million seconds
rotation.  If Sirius B is its Jovian position and Sirius C is at
its Saturnian position, the period for Sirius C would be 51.9
earth years.
Peace
--
James Conway bb089@scn.org
Seattle Washington USA
Chronology:  http://www.knowledge.co.uk/xxx/cat/kjh/
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Hubble Const
From: Sean Stanley-Adams
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 12:07:58 -0800
>Christopher Michael Jones wrote:
>> Its somewhere between 35 and 55 (one group says about 42) 
I bet Douglas Adams is having a quiet chuckle to himself :)
For those poor souls who have never read the 5 part Hitchiker's Guide To
The Galaxy trilogy, he has a character pose the Ultimate Question to a
computer : What is the meaning of Life, the Universe and Everything?
Millenia pass and the machine comes back with the answer : 42 !
Return to Top
Subject: Re: When will the U.S. finally go metric?
From: kskim@hyowon.cc.pusan.ac.kr (kim kyongsok)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 11:09:41 GMT
Chris Keenan (chris@usma.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: On Sat, 2 Nov 1996 02:54:39 GMT, dik@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter) wrote:
: >In article <681@farncombe.win-uk.net> jonathan@farncombe.win-uk.net (Jonathan Barnes) writes:
: 'cc'??!! have you been in a time warp? They are labelled 'ml', though
: I would prefer the proper SI unit of cm3.
what's the difference between cm3 and ml.
is it o.k. to say that 1 ml is equal to 1 cm3 
  - or do you see any problem here?
also what's the difference between cc and cm3?
kim, kyongsok; dept. of computer science, pusan national univ., south korea
#include 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: How To Create A Time Machine.
From: ikastan@alumnae.caltech.edu (Ilias Kastanas)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 12:03:56 GMT
In article <56cs32$hrt@agate.berkeley.edu>,
Richard Auer  wrote:
>In article <56afd6$10cu@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>, Bingham  writes:
>|> The logical way to create a time machine is to accually cause one to
>|> create itself.  Simply look in you filing cabinet under the heading of
>|> Time machine.  There you will find all the plans you need to build a
>|> time machine.  Just make sure that when you have made it, go back in
>|> time five minutes before you looked into your filing cabinet and deposit
>|> the plans under a heading called Time machine.
	And then spare yourself the toil; go forward in time to five minutes
   after you have finished building it.
>This is what you call a perpetuo mobile: creating order out of disorder.
	Or maybe mobilis in mobile.
	Just remember not to plug it into any time-dependent electric sockets.
   And avoid exploring the relationship of placing yourself in time and timing
   yourself in space.
	After all, the second Recursion Theorem allows you to define a recur-
   sive function f by using the code of f.  This should allay any doubts.  Eh,
   have a good time.
							Ilias
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Rotation of sun and planets
From: pit@uni-sw.gwdg.de (Peter Suetterlin)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 12:19:35 GMT
In article <56fmrp$gg4@speedy.rz.uni-leipzig.de>,
	 writes:
> Ich glaube nicht, da� das so m�glich ist, wie Du
> schreibst. Die Sonne wird eher noch abgebremst, indem durch die
> Einwirkung der Planetenkr�fte die Sonnenmaterie gezeitenartig
> verschoben wird, �hnlich wie der Mond die Erde bremst.
Genauer: Die Gezeitenkraefte tendieren dazu, die Rotations- der
Umlaufperiode anzugleichen.  Da sich die Sonne schneller dreht, als
die Planeten umlaufen, waere es in der Tat eine Bremsung, und deshalb
*kann* der Drehimpuls so nicht aufgebaut worden sein.
Ueberhaupt ist die Frage bei der Sonne nicht, wie sie beschleunigt
wurde, sondern wie sie abgebremst wurde.  Da sich ein Stern aus einer
kollabierenden Gaswokle bildet kann man (aus der mittleren Dichte
einer solchen Wolke) recht gut abschaetzen wie viel Drehimpuls da
drinnen steckt, und das ist um Groessenordnungen mehr als im
Planetensystem heute noch drinsteckt.
Eine moegliche Erklaerung bietet dabei das Magnetfeld der Sonne.
Ueber dieses Magnetfeld wirkt auf den (elektrisch geladenen)
Sonnenwind eine azimutal beschleunigende Kraft, die noetige Energie
fuer diese Beschleunigung wird der Sonnenrotation entzogen.
  Peter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peter "Pit" Suetterlin                      http://www.uni-sw.gwdg.de/~pit
Universitaets-Sternwarte Goettingen
Tel.: +49 551 39-5048                       pit@uni-sw.gwdg.de
 -- * -- * ...-- * -- * ...-- * -- * ...-- * -- * ...-- * -- * ...-- * --
Come and see the stars!             http://www.kis.uni-freiburg.de/~ps/SFB
Sternfreunde Breisgau e.V.          Tel.: +49 7641 3492
__________________________________________________________________________
Return to Top
Subject: Re: REDSHIFT ??
From: garret@ast.cam.ac.uk (Garret Cotter)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 10:53:01 -0000
In article <56h093$5i1@camel0.mindspring.com>,
Eric Gibson  wrote:
>because it has no borders or boundries.  Yet the photon still took 14
>BILLION years travelling at 186,282 miles/sec to cross the portion of
>the universe (which was expanding constantly) between us.  The age of
>the universe is 18 Billion years.  This photon has been travelling for
>85% of the time which has passed since the Big Bang.  We all started
>from the same spot.  We've always been right here.  The source galaxy
>has always been right here too .  
No. The photon was emitted at a time when the universe was already 
\sim a billion years old, at which time ``we'' and the other galaxy 
were already substantially separated.
Return to Top

Downloaded by WWW Programs
Byron Palmer