Subject: Re: Hale Bopp photos
From: minnie@mail.pe.net (Gary/Robyn Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 20:31:04 -0800
In article ,
pcp2g@karma.astro.Virginia.EDU (Twisted STISter) wrote:
> In article <01bbd0cf$ef55b5c0$98462399@default>,
> Ray Laliberty wrote:
> >Gary/Robyn Goodwin wrote in article
> >...
> >> In article <01bbd061$06d8d7a0$89462399@default>, "Ray Laliberty"
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > From what I found by browsing through the Hubble datasets at
> >> > http://marvel.stsci.edu,
> >> > 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.
> >>
> >> there is a discrepancy in what you are saying. Last year the august,
> >> september series of HB taken by the HST was posted within weeks. I agree
> >> with Mark, the postings this year stop in May and those this year are
> >> from ground based scopes.
> >
> >That may be true, but if you check the website, there is a release date of
> >1 year after the date of observation. I think it's a dumb idea myself,
> >but that's what I found.
>
> Data taken by HST is indeed held private for 1 year. This 'embargo' gives
> the astronomer that made the proposal a chance to reduce and analyze the data.
> Time (and money!) on HST is very competitive, so it is in the community's
> best interest to put the data on hold for a year. Getting a proposal passed
> to observe on HST is an arduous and time-consuming task. If they simply
> released the data immediately no one would ever propose anything!
>
Maybe I'm confused here... you're saying that knowledge is postponed in
favor of competition?
Subject: Re: Could intelligent extraterrestrial life exist in our galaxy?
From: jwas@ix.netcom.com(jw)
Date: 14 Nov 1996 05:58:07 GMT
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.
Subject: U.S. Soil Experiment Ready For Launch Aboard Russia's Mars '96
From: kcowing@reston.com (Keith Cowing)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 01:41:21 -0500
RELEASE: 96-236
U.S. SOIL EXPERIMENT READY FOR LAUNCH ABOARD RUSSIA'S MARS `96
An instrument developed by the United States to measure
the rate at which metals and organics corrode when exposed to
the Martian environment is set for launch on Nov. 16, aboard
two small landing stations on the Russian Mars '96 spacecraft.
The instrument, called the Mars Oxidant Experiment
(MOx), was built at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena,
CA, and is part of expanding U.S.-Russian cooperative
efforts in space exploration.
Integration and final testing of the experiment on the
Russian landers, also referred to as "small autonomous
stations," was completed in late October at the Lavochkin
Research and Production Association in Moscow, where the
landers were designed and assembled, said Mark Herring,
manager of the experiment at JPL. Two of the MOx instruments
will fly on the mission, one on each of its two landers.
"This was a major engineering milestone for the U.S.
experiment, culminating a development effort which started
in 1992," Herring said. "In the course of integration on the
landers, the U.S. team was required to take numerous trips to
Helsinki and Moscow during the past year. We've gained
valuable experience in what is involved with participation on
an international mission."
The goal of the Mars '96 mission, set for launch aboard
a Russian Proton launch vehicle from Baikonur Cosmodrome in
Kazakstan, is to investigate the evolution of the Martian
atmosphere, surface and interior by acquiring comprehensive
measurements of the physical and chemical processes that
occur on Mars today and those that may have taken place in
the past.
The Mars Oxidant Experiment was developed to further
investigate the presence of a strong oxidizing agent in the
Martian soil that was inferred from the results of the
biology experiments onboard the NASA Viking landers in the
mid-1970s.
"We hope MOx will be able to tell us more about the
surprisingly reactive properties of the Martian soil first
detected by the Viking biology experiments and tell us if
this reactivity is the cause of the complete absence of
organics in the surface soil on Mars," said
Dr. Christopher McKay, project scientist at NASA's Ames
Research Center, Mountain View, CA.
"If we plan to search for the organic remnants of early
life on Mars with future missions, then we have to understand
the processes that are destroying these organics on the
surface so that we know how deep we have to dig to reach
unoxidized material," he added. "Viking, for instance, dug
under a rock as deep as 4 inches (11 centimeters) but found
only oxidized sand."
MOx uses chemical sensor technology originally developed
at the Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM. The
instrument measures the oxidizing power of the Martian soil
and atmosphere using a detector that monitors the change in
reflectivity of a thin chemical film that is exposed to the
Martian environment. The instrument, which weighs only three
pounds, relies on its own power source -- a set of batteries
-- to carry out the measurements.
Upon landing and deployment, MOx will operate
autonomously, Herring said, according to a sequence that is
programmed into its internal "read-only memory." While the
mission is designed for a one-year lifetime, the operating
life of MOx will be limited by its battery power source.
Depending on the actual conditions on the surface of Mars,
the operating time will be between 80 and 160 days.
"The instrument's sensor head is located on a petal of
each of the two Russian small stations and is comprised of
eight sensor cell assemblies, four of which are designed to
contact the soil and four that will be exposed to the
atmosphere," Herring said. "Within each cell assembly there
are six active sensing sites and six reference sites, for a
total of 96 sites.
"The active sites are protected by thin membranes of
silicon nitride, which protect the sensor films from
premature oxidation," he explained. "These membranes will be
broken upon deployment, exposing the active films. The
reference sites will remain permanently sealed. The sensor
films have been selected to provide a broad range of chemical
reactions. Each film type is duplicated in the air and soil cells."
Each of the 96 sensor sites is illuminated by two
light-emitting diodes (LEDs), one operating at a wavelength
of 590 nanometers and the other at 870 nanometers. The
reflected signal will be measured by a silicon photodiode
detector array. The sensor sites are coupled to the LEDs and
the detector array through fiber optics.
A key feature of the experiment's data transmission
sequencing is its ability to transmit data three times in
order to reduce the data loss associated with various
communications links. During the mission, the experiment team
will distribute calibration data and mission data sets in
which data from the instruments are merged with pertinent
mission information.
Another U.S. instrument aboard Mars '96 is the Tissue-
Equivalent Proportional Counter (TEPC). The TEPC instrument
was developed at NASA's Johnson Space Flight Center, Houston,
TX, to measure and store accumulated radiation spectra during
the interplanetary cruise phase of the mission, as well as
upon arrival in Mars orbit. This information should yield
important insight into the space radiation environment and
potential health risks involved in future human spaceflight.
Also aboard the spacecraft, attached to the MOx
electronics case, is a CD-ROM, entitled "Visions of Mars,"
produced by The Planetary Society, Pasadena, CA, which is
analogous to the records carried into space in 1977 by the
twin Voyager spacecraft. The Mars `96 CD-ROM contains a
collection of science fiction stories, sounds and artwork
which chronicle humanity's fascination with Mars over four
centuries of human history, 10 alphabets,
17 languages and 26 nations. The collection covers the
earliest references to Mars in science fiction to present day
stories about the red planet. A label pointing to the
location of the CD-ROM is mounted on the outside of the
spacecraft and includes a microdot of 100,000 names of
Planetary Society members and instructions on how to use the
CD-ROM.
If launched on time, Mars `96 will reach the orbit of
Mars in mid-September 1997, at about the same time as NASA's
Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) orbiter, which was launched
successfully on Nov. 7. Mars '96 will deploy the two small
stations and two penetrators on the surface of the planet
shortly after arriving in Mars orbit. On-time launches of
both spacecraft will enable MGS to assist in relaying data
from the Russian small stations once
the MGS primary mapping mission begins in March 1998.
-end-
Subject: Re: Leonides
From: carlm@chem.stanford.edu (Carl)
Date: 14 Nov 1996 06:40:44 GMT
In article , wayne.t.hally@tek.com says...
>
>In article <56abe4$m73@dodge.eng.sc.rolm.com> lewisk@clipper.robadome.com (Lew
Kurtz) writes:
>>From: lewisk@clipper.robadome.com (Lew Kurtz)
>>Subject: Re: Leonides
>>Date: 12 Nov 1996 17:16:51 GMT
>
>>In article <4OCpiXABtnhyEwvF@the-symposium.demon.co.uk>, Mandy Wright
>> writes:
>>>In article <32836F3B.631@platinum.com>, Phil Grainger
>>> writes
>>>>Hi all,
>>>>
>>>>Hopefully this is a relevant question for this newsgroup.......
>>>>
>>>>Last year my wife and I spent a few evenings, nights (and mornings)
>>>>watching the Leonides meteor showers (shooting stars) in mid-November
>>>>and we were wondering what the prospects were for this year.
>>>>
>>>>Aparrently they will be getting better and better each year for the next
>>>>few years, but I'd appreciate some 'professional' opinions.
>>>>
>>>>Also, if anyone can remind me of the appropriate dates I'd be very
>>>>grateful.
>>>>
>>>>TIA
>>>>
>>>>Phil & Nikki
>>>Peak occurs November 17/18 1996, at 0200 UTC: look North East.
>>>Estimated peak 60 per hour. Have it from John Mason that it will be a
>>>mediocre show this year. Wrap up warm :-)
>>>Regards
>>>Mandy
>
>
>>However:
>
>>>SKY & TELESCOPE NEWS BULLETIN
>>>NOVEMBER 8, 1996
>>>
>>>
>>>READYING FOR THE LEONIDS
>>>
>>>The annual Leonid meteor shower should peak on the morning of November
>>>17th. This year conditions will be ideal, weather permitting. The first-
>>>quarter Moon sets by about 11 p.m. local time on the night of November
>>>16th, and peak activity should come around 7:00 Universal Time on the
>>>17th. This is also when the Earth crosses the orbit plane of Comet
>>>55P/Tempel-Tuttle, the comet that is slowly crumbling apart to form the
>>>Leonid meteor stream. The timing is excellent for North America,
>>>especially the East. Next year a waning gibbous Moon will compromise the
>>>view, so now is the last good time to monitor the shower's behavior before
>>>1998 and 1999, years in which a Leonid meteor storm may return.
>>>
>
>>So is it the night of 16/17, or the night of 17/18?
>
>>Lew
>
>Lew,
>The peak will occur on the night of the 16-17th. Saturday night/Sunday
morning.
>The radiant rises around midnight for most of the US, so you can observe
>from then (0500 UT in EST time zone, 0800 UT for PST) until nearly 6AM (1100
>UT in EST, 1400 UT in PST zone).
>
>Wayne T Hally
>NAMN,IMO,ALPO (just so you know that I have some idea of what I'm talking
>about)
Gary Kronk's home page indicates that the peak occurs on Nov. 17/18. Can
anybody make a definitive statement about when the peak is supposed to happen?
Thanks
Carl Matthews
Subject: Re: SAC-B/HETE Spacecraft No Longer Operational
From: ladasky@leland.Stanford.EDU (John Ladasky)
Date: 13 Nov 1996 23:58:06 -0800
Mr. Baalke's press releases are one of the best things in sci.astro.
Thanks, Ron! So, now about this scientific applications satellite; is it a
candidate for a shuttle rescue? Could the vehicle be stabilized and separ-
ated from the stubborn upper stage of the booster rocket?
In article <13NOV199605501840@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>,
Ron Baalke wrote:
[snip]
>SAC-B/HETE SPACECRAFT NO LONGER OPERATIONAL
[snip]
>HETE (High Energy Transient
>Experiment) project officials at the Massachusetts Institute
>of Technology confirmed that because the HETE spacecraft was
>not separated from the Pegasus XL third stage, HETE was not
>able to deploy its solar arrays. HETE is designed to remain
>dormant until the solar arrays detect sunlight, an event
>unlikely to occur since HETE remains sealed in the interior
>of a dual payload support structure.
[snip!]
--
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
Subject: Re: Autodynamics
From: tim@franck.Princeton.EDU.composers (Tim Hollebeek)
Date: 14 Nov 1996 10:29:51 GMT
In article <56drbo$4pj@bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au>, dean@psy.uq.oz.au writes:
> Erik Max Francis writes:
>
> >Dean Povey wrote:
>
> >> In AD gravitation, the perihelion advance for each planet is
> >> proportional to the square root of the division of the solar mass by
> >> the orbital radius power 3.
> >>
> >> Tp = sqrt(M / r^3) [ditto: DGP]
>
> >Care to derive this?
>
> >> If the Mercury value is taken as 43" . . . .
>
> >Do you _actually_ mean that Autodynamics can't predict Mercury's perhelion
> >precession without being given it? That's not very impressive. Right
> >there general relativity has a head start on you.
>
> From what I can gather from the web pages, the AD equation uses a constant
> which indicates the quantity of mass received from pico-gravitons
> per each gram of mass present, per second. This is a universal constant which
> is the same for all celestial bodies. Hence, the input of Mecury's perhelion
> advance is merely a method to calculate this constant. (You could predict
> Mercury's perhelion advance by using accurate observations of another body to
> calculate the constant.)
>
> I don't see much wrong with this, you find constants throughout physics,
> (eg. the GR equation uses G and pi).
Your forget the Fundamental Rule of Physics:
He who dies with the least unexplained constants wins.
BTW, pi is just a number, not a measured constant. It's a good distinction
to keep in mind.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Hollebeek | Disclaimer :=> Everything above is a true statement,
Electron Psychologist | for sufficiently false values of true.
Princeton University | email: tim@wfn-shop.princeton.edu
----------------------| http://wfn-shop.princeton.edu/~tim (NEW! IMPROVED!)
Subject: Re: Beta Decay and the Speed of Light
From: znark@mildura.net.au (Bradley Kranz)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 10:45:39 GMT
dskadal@aol.com wrote:
>Dear Sir,
>Do you have a formula (equation) that might plot the decay of the speed of
>light. I would like to plot specific historical events with the estimate
>of scientist assumption of when an asteroid may have hit Yucatan. I would
>need the explanation of variables but I do have an understanding of
>derivation and integration. Does the equation fit a Calculus decay model,
>going from an infinite speed to approaching an assymptote?
>My Address is: DSkadal@aol.com
I presume you a refering to the theory proposed by Barry Setterfield
and Trevor Norman (School of Mathematical Sciences - Flinders Uni of
South Australia). The Setterfield c decay equation is a polynomial
with constants,
a=299792, b=0.01866, d=3.8E-19
where
c = a + bt^2 + dt^8
and t is the number of years before 1966. (NB t^2= t*t,
t^8=t*t*t*t*t*t*t*t)
(ref: "The Atomic Constants, Light and Time', August '87, p7
paragraph 2. ISBN 0-7258-0363-0)
This theory used to be accepted in Creationist circles, but now I
believe it has be superseded by a new theory which involves GR.
Subject: Re: Evidence of Life Found in 2nd Mars Meteorite
From: Louise White
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 01:03:54 -0500
This is exactly what Viking attempted to do, and people argued
> over the results for years. Did living organisms or zeolite clays effect
> the catalysis seen in the Viking results? There are too many unknowns
> involved in remote experimentation of this nature. If you send a package
> that looks for stereospecific amino acids and nothing else, how will you
> interpret a negative result? Life based on other chemistries might still
> be present, or might once have been present. The method of preparation
> used to obtain the sample from the soil by the robot might induce the
> loss of sterospecific structures. Given our current results with poly-
> aromatic hydrocarbons from the ALH meteorite (*not* stereospecific as I
> recall), I don't think that we would gain much from yet more tinkering at
> the margins with questionable results from a one-shot experimental appar-
> atus 100,000,000 kilometers away. It's much better at this point to bring
> the scientists and the rocks together, so that rigorous and flexible ex-
> periments can be performed.
> 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
Can we all keep our feet on the ground.
Deep mining on Earth for valuable resources is often economically
prohibited.
Yet that is what is will be needed to find any more evidence on Mars
that is
superior to the story that ALH84001 has to tell. This is the most
informative
object on Earth at the present time.
The analysis so far is good science, but this object needs to be
analyzed atom by atom, every electrical interaction, bonding forces,
gross structural integrity etc. needs to be recorded and explained.
So our first priority should be a complete upgrade to the JPL. Get some
of those toys Richard Zare has and spend the next 500 years analyzing
what impact events send our way.
The lets get real concept.
http://www.execulink.com/~louisew/chris.htm
Subject: Re: Hubble Const
From: mjh22@mrao.cam.ac.uk (Martin Hardcastle)
Date: 14 Nov 1996 11:58:00 GMT
In article <56dhjo$1nho@news.gate.net>,
Stephen Bennett wrote:
>It would seem reasonable that at greater distances the overall Hubble
>flow would be more accurately represented, but due to the greater
>distances the estimates would also be more uncertain.
Not necessarily, because the methods used at greater distances are
quite different; in particular the ladder of inferences that allows us
to use Cepheids or supernovae, say, has far more steps than the
corresponding argument for S-Z or lensed-quasar measurements.
>I have no idea how, as another respondent posted, an observational
>group could pin down the Hubble constant to even one decimal place,
>let alone five. I wonder what they were planning that could hope to
>improve so much over present methods?
Ah -- that was me, I think, and I may have been exaggerating for
effect, though the evangelists of COBRAS/Samba do make some quite wild
claims. The published documentation that I have found, which is quite
old and so may be out of date, claims a more reasonable accuracy for
H_0 (and q_0) of one to a few per cent. (Still quite impressive.)
The trick is to look at the structure of anisotropies in the CMBR.
You can look at this in more detail at
(there is also a site in the US that deals with the project, but it's
impossibly slow from where I am.)
Martin
--
Martin Hardcastle Mullard Radio Astronomy Observatory, Cambridge
Be not solitary, be not idle