From owner-starship-design Thu Jul 25 19:09 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["309" "Thu" "25" "July" "1996" "19:10:55" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@efn.org" nil "8" "starship-design: the new list" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA14395 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:08:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from haus.efn.org (haus.efn.org [198.68.17.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA14353 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tzadkiel.efn.org (stevev@tzadkiel.efn.org [198.68.17.19]) by haus.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA06984 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:11:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by tzadkiel.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA11245; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:10:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607260210.TAA11245@tzadkiel.efn.org> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 308 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: the new list Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:10:55 -0700 Mail postings to the starship-design list to starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu. All current members of the CC: list were automatically subscribed to the starship-design list when I finished creating it. You do not need to subscribe yourself unless you want to receive list postings at a different address. From owner-starship-design Thu Jul 25 19:20 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["351" "Thu" "25" "July" "1996" "22:19:58" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" nil "10" "starship-design: testing testing..." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA16413 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:20:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA16393 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp1-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.128]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA19667 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 22:19:58 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607260219.WAA19667@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 350 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: testing testing... Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 22:19:58 -0400 im trying this out.. if you guys get this, i guess it worked. if the creator of this group (i cant remember if its Tim or Steve) sees this, could they explain that replying thing they wrote about in the last letter? I dont understand. Do you mean that if David writes a letter, and I reply to it, it will ONLY go to david, and NOT the whole group? From owner-starship-design Thu Jul 25 21:25 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["252" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "00:24:12" "-0400" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "8" "Re: starship-design: testing testing..." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA05912 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 21:25:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout13.mail.aol.com (emout13.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.39]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA05899 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 21:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout13.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA16170 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 00:24:12 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960726002411_442296323@emout13.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 251 From: KellySt@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: testing testing... Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 00:24:12 -0400 Ben, If you hit Reply, it will only reply to the origionator. If you hit reply all it will send to the origionator, and the group for forwarding to everyone. The origionator will get two copies unles you cut his name out of the address list. Kelly From owner-starship-design Thu Jul 25 23:48 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["388" "Thu" "25" "July" "1996" "23:50:44" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@efn.org" nil "11" "Re: starship-design: testing testing..." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA28061 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 23:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from haus.efn.org (haus.efn.org [198.68.17.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA28050 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 23:48:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tzadkiel.efn.org (stevev@cisco-ts15-line1.uoregon.edu [128.223.150.184]) by haus.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA26673; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 23:51:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by tzadkiel.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA00489; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 23:50:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607260650.XAA00489@tzadkiel.efn.org> In-Reply-To: <960726002411_442296323@emout13.mail.aol.com> References: <960726002411_442296323@emout13.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 387 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: KellySt@aol.com Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: testing testing... Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 23:50:44 -0700 KellySt@aol.com writes: > The origionator will get two copies unles you cut his name out of > the address list. lists.uoregon.edu is running sendmail 8.7.5, which is typically configured to not send duplicate copies of messages to someone who is named more than once (directly or indirectly) in the recipient list of a message. You should get only one copy of this message, I think. From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 06:12 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1330" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "08:09:03" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "40" "Re: starship-design: testing testing..." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA16952 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 06:12:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA16941 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 06:12:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06461; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:12:00 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI006310; Fri Jul 26 08:09:39 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02784; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:09:37 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma002781; Fri Jul 26 08:09:04 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05006; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:09:01 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1329 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: Steve VanDevender Cc: KellySt@aol.com, starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: testing testing... Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 08:09:03 -0500 At 11:50 PM 7/25/96, Steve VanDevender wrote: >KellySt@aol.com writes: > > The origionator will get two copies unles you cut his name out of > > the address list. > >lists.uoregon.edu is running sendmail 8.7.5, which is typically >configured to not send duplicate copies of messages to someone who is >named more than once (directly or indirectly) in the recipient list of a >message. > >You should get only one copy of this message, I think. But, since I was getting two addresses listed in the meassage "reply to" list, one being the origionator and one being the list. Eudora would address both paths. The origionator would get one reply forwarded from the list server, and another sent directly. This has been a problem on other list servers I've been on. Or are you saying your sender cross checks the CC lists for duplicates to someone on the list, and doesn't send to them? Kelly P.S. I guess this message should be a test. It lists you and my home account directly, and the list itself. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 06:16 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["711" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "08:13:47" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "22" "starship-design: keep old copy." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA17123 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 06:16:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA17112 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 06:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06716; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:16:06 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI006612; Fri Jul 26 08:14:31 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02858; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:14:28 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma002856; Fri Jul 26 08:13:48 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05530; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:13:46 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 710 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: keep old copy. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 08:13:47 -0500 Just as a hint. You might want to keep and old copy of the address list. That way if you want to correspond to one of us, you'll have some way to find our individual address after we are absorbed into the annonimity of starship-design. I.E. we'll no longer have any way of knowing whos in the SSD com link. Hum, I guess that throws out my member list section of LIT. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 06:24 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1998" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "09:24:40" "-0400" "David Levine" "David@interworld.com" nil "75" "RE: starship-design: keep old copy." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA18028 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 06:24:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www1.interworld.com (www.InterWorld.Com [165.254.130.4]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA18014 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 06:24:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by www1.interworld.com with Microsoft Exchange (IMC 4.0.837.3) id <01BB7AD4.465CC180@www1.interworld.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:24:41 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.837.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Levine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1997 From: David Levine Sender: owner-starship-design To: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" , "'kgstar@most.fw.hac.com'" Subject: RE: starship-design: keep old copy. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:24:40 -0400 Majordomo will, if I remember correctly, allow you to request a list of currently subscribed members. You send a message with "who starship-design" in the body to majordomo@lists.uoregon.edu The results I get from this are: -- >>>> who starship-design Members of list 'starship-design': # list of addresses for starship-design stevev@darkwing.uoregon.edu David@InterWorld.com stevev@efn.org KellySt@aol.com hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl rddesign@wolfenet.com lparker@destin.gulfnet.com DotarSojat@aol.com 101765.2200@compuserve.com kgstar@most.fw.hac.com neill@foda.math.usu.edu pbakelaar@exit109.com mkshp@ionet.net >>>> BTW, excellent work, Steve. This is terrific news. Is there any way to get majordomo to archive automatically? I know you can get a list of files associated with a group by sending a command to majordomo (i.e. "index starship-design") and then get those files (i.e. "get starship-design filename.txt") but don't know how we get them created.... -David >---------- >From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com[SMTP:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com] >Sent: Friday, July 26, 1996 9:13 AM >To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu >Subject: starship-design: keep old copy. > >Just as a hint. You might want to keep and old copy of the address >list. >That way if you want to correspond to one of us, you'll have some way >to >find our individual address after we are absorbed into the annonimity >of >starship-design. I.E. we'll no longer have any way of knowing whos in >the >SSD com link. > >Hum, I guess that throws out my member list section of LIT. > >Kelly > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com >Sr. Systems Engineer >Magnavox Electronic Systems Company >(Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 06:51 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2126" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "08:48:22" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "74" "RE: starship-design: keep old copy." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA20285 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 06:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA20274 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 06:51:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08911; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:50:50 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI008815; Fri Jul 26 08:49:12 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03610; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:49:08 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma003594; Fri Jul 26 08:48:23 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09566; Fri, 26 Jul 96 08:48:20 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2125 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: David Levine Cc: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" , "'kgstar@most.fw.hac.com'" Subject: RE: starship-design: keep old copy. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 08:48:22 -0500 At 9:24 AM 7/26/96, David Levine wrote: >Majordomo will, if I remember correctly, allow you to request a list >of currently subscribed members. > >You send a message with "who starship-design" in the body to >majordomo@lists.uoregon.edu > >The results I get from this are: > >-- > >>>>> who starship-design >Members of list 'starship-design': > ># list of addresses for starship-design >stevev@darkwing.uoregon.edu >David@InterWorld.com >stevev@efn.org >KellySt@aol.com >hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu >T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl >jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu >zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl >rddesign@wolfenet.com >lparker@destin.gulfnet.com >DotarSojat@aol.com >101765.2200@compuserve.com >kgstar@most.fw.hac.com >neill@foda.math.usu.edu >pbakelaar@exit109.com >mkshp@ionet.net >>>>> Thats useful for surveys, but hardly for addressing an E-mail, unless I keep a copy of the list. (and remember which address is for who.) For example I have 101765.2200@compuserve.com in the curent members list, but I have no idea who they are. Nor did they answer when I asked people to check their name in the list. >BTW, excellent work, Steve. This is terrific news. Agreed! Assuming we don't dismantle LIT. This would be a big help in puting automatic subscription to the group into the site. >Is there any way to get majordomo to archive automatically? >I know you can get a list of files associated with a group >by sending a command to majordomo (i.e. "index starship-design") >and then get those files (i.e. "get starship-design filename.txt") >but don't know how we get them created.... > >-David Does this function store these messages? I thought it just forwarded them. If so, you could just subscribe an account for the newsletter, from whoever winds up maintaining the newsletter site. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:04 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1277" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "10:52:24" "-0700" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "31" "starship-design: Re: Weekly newsletter" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA11088 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:04:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub0.tc.umn.edu (mhub0.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.50]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA11066 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:03:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub0.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:03:25 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-161.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:03:22 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <31F905D8.1D17@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 1276 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: David Levine CC: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Re: Weekly newsletter Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:52:24 -0700 David Levine wrote: > > >Sure, but there are a lot of people who cruise Usenet far more than > >Websites, > >and there is an easy way to post and reply. If someone wasn't "getting > >it", > >they could be directed to the website and steve's e-mail list. i think > >it would > >be a good adjunct to our website and mailing list. but not a > >replacement for > >it. And it should have the name > >alt.interstellar.laser.sail.fry.fry.fry ;) > > I'm just afraid that it would eventually wind up replacing the mailing > list, > BECAUSE of the ease and number of potential users. And I'd worry that > someone on the list -right now- wouldn't have access eventually, because > we'd move fully to usenet. This is the "next-step" argument. it says we can't do step A because of the bad conseguences if carried to it's logical next step B. the answer to this is of course not to do step b if it has bad consequences. Sorry to be pendantic about it, but starting a usenet group in no way implies getting rid of the mailing list. Yes, we will have to contend with Crossposts, Spam and Flames. So what? I still think that the benefits of having a usenet group outwiegh the hassles of having a usenet group. -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:06 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1608" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "10:55:25" "-0700" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "37" "starship-design: Re: Weekly newsletter" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA11758 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:06:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub2.tc.umn.edu (mhub2.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.52]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA11739 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:06:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub2.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:06:27 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-161.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:06:23 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <31F9068D.1425@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <199607252245.SAA07249@hiway1.exit109.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 1607 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Philip Bakelaar CC: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Re: Weekly newsletter Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:55:25 -0700 Philip Bakelaar wrote: > > At 10:03 AM 7/25/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > >>Please help me out here, I'm not sure what both of you (and others) mean > >>with a "weekly digest". > >> > >>- Do you mean you don't want daily letters anymore? > >>- Do you still want daily letters but also a big letter at the week-end > >> composed of all the smaller letters? > >>- Do you still want daily letters but also at the end of the week some > >> handy summary/abstract of everything (useful) that has been discussed? > >> > >>Timothy > > > > > >P.S. > >A summary abstract of the interesting bits in our correspondence would be > >great!! We cover so much stuff in the various newsletter, we could write > >text books on the subject (assuming we could hire a librarian!). But its a > >pain to search all that (even just the weeklies), and I doubt we could get > >anyone to spend the time. If anyone has an Idea on how to do it let me > >know. What could we do, set up alt.space.starships? > > > >Kelly > > Guys, I would be willing to be your librarian! Seriously, I'm the ONLY > candidate for this, because every one else has jobs. I am great at > summing up and sorting info, and I could make programs to help me... > Guys, i would LOVE this job! If anyone has objections, tell me.. Ben, just do it. when you're finished, let us know, and and if you do a bad job, or the list is too long, then we'll let you know. If you go for a couple of months and no one says good job, try skipping a week and see if anyone complains. ;) -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:10 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1557" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "10:59:44" "-0700" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "37" "starship-design: Re: Weekly newsletter" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA13205 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub2.tc.umn.edu (mhub2.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.52]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA13189 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:10:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub2.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:10:45 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-161.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:10:43 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <31F90790.4029@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <199607252257.SAA07879@hiway1.exit109.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 1556 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Philip Bakelaar CC: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Re: Weekly newsletter Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:59:44 -0700 Philip Bakelaar wrote: > > At 03:36 PM 7/25/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > >Quick check. ah hum. DOES ANYONE OUT THERE NOT GET ALT.* ACCESS? WAKE UP > >OUT THERE. > > > >I think we can assume if we get no responces, eiather everyone gets it, or > >they don't care one way or the other. > > > >If nothing else it might expand our submiter base, and get the overhead off > >our backs. On the other hand it would pull interest away from the LIT > >site. > > > >Kelly > > Make sure you read my last letter, Kelly. I know.. I use newsgroups alot, and > what I said would most likely happen. But, is there a way to have a password > or something on a newsgroup? In my opinion, in view of the facts i stated > before, that would be the only way. > > ben Ben, a password on the group (or having to send all posts through a moderator would defeat the purpose. That purpose being to catch the people who are just skimming the titles, and say "hey, that sounds interesting." When they come in, they should find a FAQ and instrustions on how to join the mailist. flames and crossposts can be easily ignored. -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html Every time a third party candidate comes up, both major parties say: "You can't vote for him, you'll just be handing the election to the other guy" Well, Democrat and Republican are just two different names for the same thief, So what does it really matter? This time I'm voting Libertarian. Harry Browne for President. http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/ (800) 682-1776 From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:35 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil t nil nil nil nil] ["228" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "11:23:56" "-0700" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" "<31F90D3C.2D21@maroon.tc.umn.edu>" "9" "starship-design: Mailing list" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA18411 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:35:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub0.tc.umn.edu (mhub0.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.50]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA18398 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub0.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:34:55 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-161.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:34:54 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <31F90D3C.2D21@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 227 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Mailing list Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:23:56 -0700 Steve, I am getting copies of every mail I send. Is this the default behavior? Also, I've sent several mails using the list, has anyone gotten more than one copy -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:42 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["11" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "18:41:44" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "2" "starship-design: New test - ignore..." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA20060 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA19988 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:42:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00992; Fri, 26 Jul 96 18:41:44 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9607261641.AA00992@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 10 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa Subject: starship-design: New test - ignore... Date: Fri, 26 Jul 96 18:41:44 +0200 New test. From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:49 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["338" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "18:48:56" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "11" "starship-design: Thanks to Steve" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA21299 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:49:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA21260 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:49:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01001; Fri, 26 Jul 96 18:48:56 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9607261648.AA01001@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 337 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa Subject: starship-design: Thanks to Steve Date: Fri, 26 Jul 96 18:48:56 +0200 Thank you for setting the list! It will help us both technically as well as spiritually - boosts morale to have something up and running, not only rigged up like during the last months... Now only to have again a nice WWW site (Kelly - how's with my proofread page?) and we may start again to think about starships... ;-)) -- Zenon From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:56 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1170" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "11:53:25" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "30" "starship-design: RE: Dave's great idea..." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA23070 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:56:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA23056 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:56:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21068; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:55:57 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI020982; Fri Jul 26 11:54:20 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06653; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:54:13 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma006644; Fri Jul 26 11:53:25 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02511; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:53:23 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1169 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: RE: Dave's great idea... Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:53:25 -0500 I guess what worries me about breaking LIT down into individual parts, is thinking of who were the big contributers 2 years ago. I mean people who wrote up a lot of the FAQ sheets and 'lessons' and stuff. Most are long gone now. Going through the lists of old members web pages. About a third of those personal web sites are gone. So if we beak LIT up into parts on various servers. As people drop out or lose interst those sections could drop off. In a year or two LIT could disapear. Also internet service providers vary in access. So parts of lit could be avalible while others drop out. So having a central 'production site', like SunSite or Kevin's server, that everyone loads finished stuff on would seem to be an advantage. Or with Kevin's system, everyone could get an account to their section of the site. Thoughts? Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:56 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["577" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "11:45:29" "-0700" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "14" "starship-design: Kelly's new design" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA23184 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub0.tc.umn.edu (mhub0.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.50]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA23168 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:56:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub0.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:56:28 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-161.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:56:27 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <31F91249.7B3@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 576 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Kelly's new design Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:45:29 -0700 Kelly, First off, I saw the new web site and it looks good. I was thinking about your idea to use lithium as the sail material, and I was wondering if you had considered the fact that lithium absorbs hydrogen? I'm pretty sure that at any speed we'd be going, any hydrogen that came in contact with the lithium would absorb into the sail, possibly changing it's reflectivity and other properties (such as tensile strength etc.) This is a separate issue from the "erosion" problem that was identified earlier -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:56 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["303" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "09:38:20" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@darkwing.uoregon.edu" nil "10" "starship-design: Mailing list" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA23195 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA18895; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:38:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607261638.JAA18895@darkwing.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: <31F90D3C.2D21@maroon.tc.umn.edu> References: <31F90D3C.2D21@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 302 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Cc: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Mailing list Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Kevin Houston writes: > Steve, > > I am getting copies of every mail I send. Is this the default behavior? > Also, I've sent several mails using the list, has anyone gotten more > than one copy It is normal to receive copies of postings you make to the list when the list is run by Majordomo. From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 09:58 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["653" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "11:55:55" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "26" "Re: starship-design: Mailing list" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA23558 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:58:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA23534 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 09:58:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21283; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:58:24 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI021112; Fri Jul 26 11:56:39 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06703; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:56:34 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma006682; Fri Jul 26 11:55:55 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02804; Fri, 26 Jul 96 11:55:53 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 652 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Cc: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: Mailing list Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:55:55 -0500 At 11:23 AM 7/26/96, Kevin 'Tex' Houston wrote: >Steve, > >I am getting copies of every mail I send. Is this the default behavior? >Also, I've sent several mails using the list, has anyone gotten more >than one copy > >-- >Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html Yes I'm getting echos of your stuff. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 10:14 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1116" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "12:08:48" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "36" "Re: starship-design: Thanks to Steve" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA27116 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:14:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA27067 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:13:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22555; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:12:59 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI022376; Fri Jul 26 12:10:45 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07193; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:10:37 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma007137; Fri Jul 26 12:08:49 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04988; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:08:46 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1115 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, zkulpa@darkwing.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Thanks to Steve Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:08:48 -0500 At 6:48 PM 7/26/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >Thank you for setting the list! >It will help us both technically as well as spiritually - >boosts morale to have something up and running, >not only rigged up like during the last months... > >Now only to have again a nice WWW site >(Kelly - how's with my proofread page?) >and we may start again to think about starships... ;-)) > >-- Zenon True! Your proofed version looks good (I changed the clink colors to stand out more), and I've done some clean up of the Library web links page (Bens taking a look at it now). This has been a bad week for me, but next week I should be able to get that all cleaned up, and add a subscription option. If we can get Newsletters sorted out I can add a hook to that in the Starship design home page. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 10:20 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1610" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "12:15:15" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "43" "Re: starship-design: Kelly's new design" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA29105 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:20:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA29048 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:19:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22849; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:17:52 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI022732; Fri Jul 26 12:15:59 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07282; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:15:40 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma007275; Fri Jul 26 12:15:17 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05952; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:15:13 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1609 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Cc: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: Kelly's new design Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:15:15 -0500 At 11:45 AM 7/26/96, Kevin 'Tex' Houston wrote: >Kelly, > >First off, I saw the new web site and it looks good. > >I was thinking about your idea to use lithium as the sail material, and I was >wondering if you had considered the fact that lithium absorbs hydrogen? I'm >pretty sure that at any speed we'd be going, any hydrogen that came in contact >with the lithium would absorb into the sail, possibly changing it's >reflectivity >and other properties (such as tensile strength etc.) This is a separate issue >from the "erosion" problem that was identified earlier > >-- >Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html Thanks, glad you liked it. Lithium absorbs H? That has a good side to it. Lithium is burned in a two stage catalitic fusion reaction with hydrogen. I was woundering about a safe place to store it. I never thought of just letting it combine chemically with the lith! :) As to the rest. That could cause weakening. But the sail would only be let out, much less under load, for the early part of the trip accelerating out of Sol. After that it can be pulled in and cast into a solid blockj. If the sail wound stay strong and reflective enough for that long, we could coat it. The added weight should effect the performance that much. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 10:23 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2225" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "12:11:52" "-0700" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "57" "starship-design: Capitalist and socialist Hell" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA29889 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:23:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub0.tc.umn.edu (mhub0.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.50]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA29848 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:23:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub0.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:22:51 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-161.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:22:50 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <31F91878.79CD@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 2224 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 CC: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Capitalist and socialist Hell Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:11:52 -0700 Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > > At 6:40 PM 7/26/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: > >> From hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu Fri Jul 26 18:33:01 1996 > >> > >> Ric & Denisse Hedman wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi; > >> > Just wondering if any of my posts are getting through. I have become a > >> > veritable e-mail "demon" the last few days but haven't seen any > >>responses to > >> > my comments......Everything seems to transmit OK. > >> > > >> > RicRic, > >> > >> I'm showing one post on tuesday, one on wed. two on thur and this one. > >> > >The same at my place. > >Does this qualify as "e-mail demon"? ;-)) > > > >-- Zenon > > Well, people are very laid back in California. Perhaps they have a very > mellow vision of hell? ;) > Reminds me of a joke, Two friends, from the old east and west germany died on the same day and wound up in the line to hell together. After talking about their lives, they finally got to the front of the line, only to discover that there were separate Hells for Socialist and Capitalist peoples. They agreeed to meet again in one year to compare notes. The Capitalist said: The days are awful, we are boiled in hot sulfur and tar, and the demons are really sadistic. But the nights are our own, and we have parties and dances and all the girls are pretty and all the men are fit, so it's a lot of fun. The Socialist said: We don't have any parties or dances, but most of the time we have no coal for the fires, if we have coal, then there is no tar, if we have coal and tar, then we are surely out of sulfur. Only once did it happen that all three items were in stock, at the same time,and then the comrade demons had to attend a meeting about it, and they were gone all day, so there was no torture. So you see, he said, even our Hell is better. :) -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html Every time a third party candidate comes up, both major parties say: "You can't vote for him, you'll just be handing the election to the other guy" Well, Democrat and Republican are just two different names for the same thief, So what does it really matter? This time I'm voting Libertarian. Harry Browne for President. http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/ (800) 682-1776 From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 10:31 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["543" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "12:19:59" "-0700" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "12" "starship-design: Mail list" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA02498 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:31:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub0.tc.umn.edu (mhub0.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.50]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA02482 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub0.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:30:58 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-161.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:30:57 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <31F91A5F.14B3@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 542 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Steve VanDevender CC: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Mail list Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:19:59 -0700 Steve, I'm getting duplicate messages. I think you will get two of these. You should get one, because you are on my To: line. You'll get the other because the mail list will send it to you. I've noticed this in mailings I've gotten from others. Your reply to my question about Majordomo's default behavior showed up twice. Is there anything you can do about this at your end, or should we make the practice of removing the author's name from the mail before we send it? -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 10:40 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2901" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "12:37:34" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "82" "starship-design: Returned mail: User unknown" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA05177 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:40:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA05054 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:40:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA24595; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:40:39 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI024455; Fri Jul 26 12:38:17 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07630; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:38:14 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma007627; Fri Jul 26 12:37:35 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09317; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:37:32 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2900 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Returned mail: User unknown Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:37:34 -0500 If at first you don't succeed... >Date: Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:12:59 EST >From: mailer-daemon@most.fw.hac.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem) >Subject: Returned mail: User unknown >To: > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- >Connected to darkwing.uoregon.edu: >>>> RCPT To: ><<< 550 ... User unknown >550 ... User unknown > > ----- Unsent message follows ----- >Return-Path: >Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) > id AA22555; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:12:59 EST >Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) > id smI022376; Fri Jul 26 12:10:45 1996 >Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) > id AA07193; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:10:37 EST >Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) > id sma007137; Fri Jul 26 12:08:49 1996 >Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) > id AA04988; Fri, 26 Jul 96 12:08:46 EST >X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com >Message-Id: >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:08:48 -0500 >To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) >From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) >Subject: Re: starship-design: Thanks to Steve >Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, zkulpa@darkwing.uoregon.edu > >At 6:48 PM 7/26/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >>Thank you for setting the list! >>It will help us both technically as well as spiritually - >>boosts morale to have something up and running, >>not only rigged up like during the last months... >> >>Now only to have again a nice WWW site >>(Kelly - how's with my proofread page?) >>and we may start again to think about starships... ;-)) >> >>-- Zenon > > >True! > >Your proofed version looks good (I changed the clink colors to stand out >more), and I've done some clean up of the Library web links page (Bens >taking a look at it now). This has been a bad week for me, but next week I >should be able to get that all cleaned up, and add a subscription option. >If we can get Newsletters sorted out I can add a hook to that in the >Starship design home page. > >Kelly > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com >Sr. Systems Engineer >Magnavox Electronic Systems Company >(Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 10:41 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["3476" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "19:40:41" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "75" "starship-design: Newsgroup/list/newsletter/digest or not?" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA05618 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA05495 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:41:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01155; Fri, 26 Jul 96 19:40:41 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9607261740.AA01155@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3475 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt Subject: starship-design: Newsgroup/list/newsletter/digest or not? Date: Fri, 26 Jul 96 19:40:41 +0200 > From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" > > Philip Bakelaar wrote: > > > > At 03:36 PM 7/25/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > > >Quick check. ah hum. DOES ANYONE OUT THERE NOT GET ALT.* ACCESS? WAKE UP > > >OUT THERE. > > > > > >I think we can assume if we get no responces, eiather everyone gets it, or > > >they don't care one way or the other. > > > > > >If nothing else it might expand our submiter base, and get the overhead off > > >our backs. On the other hand it would pull interest away from the LIT > > >site. > > > > > >Kelly > > > > Make sure you read my last letter, Kelly. I know.. I use newsgroups a lot, and > > what I said would most likely happen. But, is there a way to have a password > > or something on a newsgroup? In my opinion, in view of the facts i stated > > before, that would be the only way. > > Seems I have somehow not received the letters quoted above. Was it because of switching to the mailing list mode, or something? > Ben, a password on the group (or having to send all posts through > a moderator would defeat the purpose. > That purpose being to catch the people who are just > skimming the titles, and say "hey, that sounds interesting." > When they come in, they should find a FAQ and instrustions on how to join > the mailist. flames and crossposts can be easily ignored. > Yeah, I have used to be for some time on a mailing list linked to a newsgroup (i.e., all messages to one of them were also automatically posted on the other) and it worked fine. I personally do not like newsgroups, preferring mailing lists, for a variety of reasons - if something goes to the newsgroup only, I am sure to lose interest fast... But with such linked arrangement I think it might be interesting, though mostly as a means of publicity (though the old LIT site was able to attract quite a number of members without it...). Pity it became defunct in such a way. Concerning the individual mail versus weekly bundled newsletter: I am for the latter. It worked fine at the old LIT days, and certainly cuts down redundant or irrelevant chit-chat (you have a whole series of arguments at one time and in one piece, you have a week to thoroughly think out the response(s), etc.), not to say about saving space for long message headers in your mailfile... Subject threads do not help much - for them to work well, the posters should observe certain discipline in changing subject fields when changing the subject of their responses - a discipline not visible on any discussion list or newsgroup I have seen... However, the weekly newsletter is incompatible with a newsgroup, so they should have to be separate, and it means that in our case the members will probably split into two separate groups too... Concerning digests - I do not believe them to be either practical or possible at a weekly basis without a special hired staff ;-0 The periodical digests, say once (half) a year or so, in the form of Status Report which we started (just started...) some time ago - that is certainly another thing, very useful and desirable. The problems are: - time & effort needed to do that (ah, Ben, are you ready?? ;-) - objectivity: it is easy to make the attempted Status Report to become a personal view of its author instead of fair assesment of ideas and arguments appearing in the posts (sorry, Kelly, I think that this applies to at least half of your version of the Report :-( -- Zenon From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 11:04 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["729" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "14:04:18" "-0400" "David Levine" "David@interworld.com" nil "23" "RE: starship-design: minor stuff" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA12236 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www1.interworld.com (www.InterWorld.Com [165.254.130.4]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA12206 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by www1.interworld.com with Microsoft Exchange (IMC 4.0.837.3) id <01BB7AFB.568B99B0@www1.interworld.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:04:19 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.837.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Levine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 728 From: David Levine Sender: owner-starship-design To: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" Subject: RE: starship-design: minor stuff Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:04:18 -0400 >wondered why it was not made from the beginning of this >"mini-LIT" list (I still really do not understand why the old >newsletter arrangement became defunct, as the WWW pages on SUNsite >are accessible all the time...). > >-- Zenon >From a while ago... The old (OLD) arrangement was all done by hand. At the time I hadn't the knowledge to set up a real automated mailing list. I wrote a few perl routines to help me sort the mail, then I compiled them by hand into digests every few days, edited out extraneous characters or what-not, and sent them out. It was time consuming. At one point I accidentally overwrote the mailing list address file (without a backup) and that's when we switched to normal email. -David From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 11:07 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["4325" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "13:03:33" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "111" "Re: starship-design: Newsgroup/list/newsletter/digest or not?" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA14026 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:07:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA14010 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26383; Fri, 26 Jul 96 13:07:33 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI026165; Fri Jul 26 13:04:23 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08005; Fri, 26 Jul 96 13:04:18 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma007994; Fri Jul 26 13:03:32 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12436; Fri, 26 Jul 96 13:03:30 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 4324 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, zkulpa@ippt.most.fw.hac.com Subject: Re: starship-design: Newsgroup/list/newsletter/digest or not? Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 13:03:33 -0500 At 7:40 PM 7/26/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >> From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" >> >> Philip Bakelaar wrote: >> > >> > At 03:36 PM 7/25/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: >> > >Quick check. ah hum. DOES ANYONE OUT THERE NOT GET ALT.* ACCESS? >>WAKE UP >> > >OUT THERE. >> > > >> > >I think we can assume if we get no responces, eiather everyone gets it, or >> > >they don't care one way or the other. >> > > >> > >If nothing else it might expand our submiter base, and get the >>overhead off >> > >our backs. On the other hand it would pull interest away from the LIT >> > >site. >> > > >> > >Kelly >> > >> > Make sure you read my last letter, Kelly. I know.. I use newsgroups a >>lot, and >> > what I said would most likely happen. But, is there a way to have a >>password >> > or something on a newsgroup? In my opinion, in view of the facts i stated >> > before, that would be the only way. >> > >Seems I have somehow not received the letters quoted above. >Was it because of switching to the mailing list mode, or something? Hum, it looks like we have not completly worked out the bugs in this list thing. >> Ben, a password on the group (or having to send all posts through >> a moderator would defeat the purpose. >> That purpose being to catch the people who are just >> skimming the titles, and say "hey, that sounds interesting." >> When they come in, they should find a FAQ and instrustions on how to join >> the mailist. flames and crossposts can be easily ignored. >> >Yeah, I have used to be for some time on a mailing list >linked to a newsgroup (i.e., all messages to one of them were >also automatically posted on the other) and it worked fine. >I personally do not like newsgroups, preferring mailing lists, >for a variety of reasons - if something goes to the newsgroup only, >I am sure to lose interest fast... But with such linked arrangement >I think it might be interesting, though mostly as a means >of publicity (though the old LIT site was able to attract >quite a number of members without it...). Pity it became defunct >in such a way. True. Even in its current state it baits in occasional participants. >Concerning the individual mail versus weekly bundled newsletter: >I am for the latter. It worked fine at the old LIT days, >and certainly cuts down redundant or irrelevant chit-chat >(you have a whole series of arguments at one time and in one piece, >you have a week to thoroughly think out the response(s), etc.), >not to say about saving space for long message headers >in your mailfile... Very true. >Subject threads do not help much - for them to work well, >the posters should observe certain discipline in changing >subject fields when changing the subject of their responses - >a discipline not visible on any discussion list >or newsgroup I have seen... >However, the weekly newsletter is incompatible with a newsgroup, >so they should have to be separate, and it means that in our case >the members will probably split into two separate groups too... > >Concerning digests - I do not believe them to be either practical >or possible at a weekly basis without a special hired staff ;-0 >The periodical digests, say once (half) a year or so, >in the form of Status Report which we started (just started...) >some time ago - that is certainly another thing, very useful >and desirable. The problems are: >- time & effort needed to do that (ah, Ben, are you ready?? ;-) Just doing the few bits I worked up took me quite a bit of time, and they still arn't on the main server. >- objectivity: it is easy to make the attempted Status Report > to become a personal view of its author instead of fair > assesment of ideas and arguments appearing in the posts > (sorry, Kelly, I think that this applies to at least half of your > version of the Report :-( > >-- Zenon Oppionions varry. Alternate opinions that are not written up and submitted by their spoaks person, are consigned to cyber space hell. :) Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 11:37 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1163" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "20:36:25" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "34" "RE: starship-design: minor stuff" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA22592 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:37:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA22560 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01500; Fri, 26 Jul 96 20:36:25 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9607261836.AA01500@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1162 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: RE: starship-design: minor stuff Date: Fri, 26 Jul 96 20:36:25 +0200 > From: David Levine > > >wondered why it was not made from the beginning of this > >"mini-LIT" list (I still really do not understand why the old > >newsletter arrangement became defunct, as the WWW pages on SUNsite > >are accessible all the time...). > > > >-- Zenon > > >From a while ago... > > The old (OLD) arrangement was all done by hand. At the > time I hadn't the knowledge to set up a real automated > mailing list. I wrote a few perl routines to help me sort > the mail, then I compiled them by hand into digests every > few days, edited out extraneous characters or what-not, > and sent them out. It was time consuming. At one point > I accidentally overwrote the mailing list address file > (without a backup) and that's when we switched to normal > email. > Ahh, now it's clear... And a moral from that is: "Either backup it, or else throw it away from the start" ;-)) But certainly the arrangement back then was very handy to us over (t)here - thank you Dave for your work! -- Zenon P.S. Hope now Majordomo will not send all around the world its complaints that zkulpa is unknown at darkwing... -- ZK From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 11:49 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1330" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "20:48:57" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "35" "starship-design: Digest or not?" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA26280 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA26258 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:49:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01518; Fri, 26 Jul 96 20:48:57 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9607261848.AA01518@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1329 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: starship-design: Digest or not? Date: Fri, 26 Jul 96 20:48:57 +0200 > From kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Fri Jul 26 20:07:17 1996 > > >- time & effort needed to do that (ah, Ben, are you ready?? ;-) > > Just doing the few bits I worked up took me quite a bit of time, and they > still arn't on the main server. > > >- objectivity: it is easy to make the attempted Status Report > > to become a personal view of its author instead of fair > > assesment of ideas and arguments appearing in the posts > > (sorry, Kelly, I think that this applies to at least half of your > > version of the Report :-( > > > >-- Zenon > > Oppionions varry. Alternate opinions that are not written up and submitted > by their spoaks person, are consigned to cyber space hell. :) > Well, well. I DID write my alternate opinions in my postings to the list but you somehow subjectively overlooked them when making the digest... So who should go to hell, I wonder? ;-) Anyway, Kelly or not Kelly, the problem remains. The problem of time too - I had still no time to assess and comment on Kelly's Report and prepare my alternate version (if Kelly would have taken it into account, is quite another matter... ;-( Not to speak about that the Report, though quite extensive, covers may be no more than one-third of the issues discussed before. Folks, are we going to write a best-selling book on starhips soon? -- Zenon From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 11:57 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1432" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "13:54:15" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "44" "starship-design: Re: To the Hell with (semi-intelligent) computers..." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA28819 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:57:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA28803 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 11:57:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29778; Fri, 26 Jul 96 13:57:10 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI029659; Fri Jul 26 13:54:52 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08898; Fri, 26 Jul 96 13:54:48 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma008890; Fri Jul 26 13:54:14 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18940; Fri, 26 Jul 96 13:54:12 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1431 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa), starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Subject: starship-design: Re: To the Hell with (semi-intelligent) computers... Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 13:54:15 -0500 At 8:28 PM 7/26/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >> From kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Fri Jul 26 20:11:41 1996 >> >> >Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:08:48 -0500 >> >To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) >> >From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) >> >Subject: Re: starship-design: Thanks to Steve >> >Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, zkulpa@ >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >> I kept geting this one bounced back at me. >> >Ohh, how do I hate those wise computers... > >Try to delete from your header any unwanted address(-es) >before sending a message... The Reply All buttons >produce such effects, especially when our Majordomo >adds to the headers of messages he distributes out >every piece of an address it finds in the incoming >messages, and if it is not full, it adds - guess what? >ITS OWN domain - darkwing.uoregon.edu - to it... > >Half the intelligence (that is, half-the-machine-intelligence) >seems surely to be much worse than none ;-(( > >-- Zenon (still sane, but...) Agreed. It can be just cleaver enough to drive you crazy! Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 12:20 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2250" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "14:17:14" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "62" "Re: starship-design: Digest or not?" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA05765 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:20:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA05736 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01837; Fri, 26 Jul 96 14:19:45 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI001687; Fri Jul 26 14:18:02 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09215; Fri, 26 Jul 96 14:18:00 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma009210; Fri Jul 26 14:17:14 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22330; Fri, 26 Jul 96 14:17:12 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2249 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Digest or not? Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:17:14 -0500 At 8:48 PM 7/26/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >> From kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Fri Jul 26 20:07:17 1996 >> >> >- time & effort needed to do that (ah, Ben, are you ready?? ;-) >> >> Just doing the few bits I worked up took me quite a bit of time, and they >> still arn't on the main server. >> >> >- objectivity: it is easy to make the attempted Status Report >> > to become a personal view of its author instead of fair >> > assesment of ideas and arguments appearing in the posts >> > (sorry, Kelly, I think that this applies to at least half of your >> > version of the Report :-( >> > >> >-- Zenon >> >> Oppionions varry. Alternate opinions that are not written up and submitted >> by their spoaks person, are consigned to cyber space hell. :) >> >Well, well. >I DID write my alternate opinions in my postings to the list >but you somehow subjectively overlooked them when making the digest... >So who should go to hell, I wonder? ;-) Hey I summarized as best I could. You want more, you write your ideas up in web format. :P >Anyway, Kelly or not Kelly, the problem remains. >The problem of time too - I had still no time >to assess and comment on Kelly's Report and prepare >my alternate version (if Kelly would have taken it into account, >is quite another matter... ;-( > >Not to speak about that the Report, though quite extensive, >covers may be no more than one-third of the issues discussed before. >Folks, are we going to write a best-selling book on starhips soon? > >-- Zenon I've been half seriously suggesting that. We have covered a lot of ideas in these posts. Even came up with a couple of seemingly new ideas. That should be marketable. Asuming we had the nerve to dig through all those back E-mails to fish it out, and we would finish all the rough ideas we throw around. If we would do that, we could have a very good book on the subject. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 13:28 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1071" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "22:27:37" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "27" "starship-design: Re: Archiving LIT..." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA24171 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 13:27:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA24149 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 13:27:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA26544 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 26 Jul 1996 22:27:51 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607262027.AA26544@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1070 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Re: Archiving LIT... Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 22:27:37 +0100 Ben wrote: >Actually, I was not considering doing neural-net programming! :) >The program I plan to make is this: > 1) Get all LIT mailings for week in one folder (already done) > 2) Make a program to: > 3) Read my Eurdora Light file > 4) Archive EVERY SINGLE message > 5) Make a database with index tables and stuff > 6) Make the program to .ZIP the database when finished, > unZIP when starting. > 7) The program would be searchable, etc. etc. Eudora can do a search itself, but regardless of that, I think that a private program would be of little use, people just want a form that is accessable from the web and uses the data(letters) stored on the web, not on their own computer. >Guys, let me know whatcha think about my proposal. I will probably do it >just for me anyway (#1, as a programming exercise, #2 because it will help >me keep track of lit) but if you guys say go i will probably have more >of an incentive to finish quicker. :) If you want to test your programming skills, I can think of some nice puzzles... Timothy From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 13:28 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["29434" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "15:25:13" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "575" "starship-design: A paper on low cost launchers from earth." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA24259 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 13:28:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA24188 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 13:28:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07016; Fri, 26 Jul 96 15:27:48 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI006932; Fri Jul 26 15:26:05 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10051; Fri, 26 Jul 96 15:25:54 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma010040; Fri Jul 26 15:25:13 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02442; Fri, 26 Jul 96 15:25:11 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 29433 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: A paper on low cost launchers from earth. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 15:25:13 -0500 Thought you might find this old paper interesting. If your not interested in the current argument about how to reduce launch costs. Sorry I bothered you. Kelly =============================================================================== A Rocket a Day Keeps the High Costs Away ======================================== by John Walker September 27, 1993 There's a pretty general consensus that one of the greatest barriers to the exploration and development of space is the cost of launch to low earth orbit. The incessant and acrimonious arguments among partisans of the Shuttle, DC-*, NASP, TSTO, Big Dumb Boosters, bringing back the Saturn V, buying launches from the Russians and/or Chinese, or of developing exotic launch technologies (laser, electromagnetic, skyhook, etc.) conceal the common premise of all those who argue--that if we could launch payloads for a fraction of today's cost, perhaps at a tenth to a thousandth of today's rates of thousands of US$ per kilogram, then the frontier would open as the great railway to orbit supplanted the first generation wagon trains. The dispute is merely over which launch technology best achieves this goal. Conventional wisdom as to why industry and government choose not to invest in this or that promising launch technology is that there aren't enough payloads to generate the volume to recoup the development cost and, in all likelihood, there never will be. How much would it cost to find out if this is true? What we pay today ----------------- Could we take a moment's pause from debating which is the best successor to the outrageously expensive way we launch now and, as engineers, ask ourselves just why it is that rockets have to cost tens or hundreds of million of US$ per shot. Space FAQ space/launchers gives approximate per-launch costs of representative systems on which commercial launches can be purchased as: Vehicle Mission cost, US$ millions ------- -------------------------- Scout G1 12 Pegasus 13.5 Soyuz 15 Long March 3 33 Titan II 43 Delta 45 - 50 Proton 35 - 70 Zenit 65 Atlas 45 - 85 Ariane 4 65 - 115 Energia 110 H-2 110 Titan III 158 Titan IV 315 - 360 I've deliberately not included data on performance, reliability, or anything else because that would distract us from the most striking observation about these vehicles; each and every one of them, whatever the technology, country of origin, original design intent, launch history, fuel and oxidiser, success or failure in the commercial launch market, have mission costs in ranging from tens to hundreds of millions of US$. Why is this? Why do rockets cost so much? What's in a launcher? --------------------- Let's simplify the problem by focusing entirely on expendable boosters built with current technologies--those used in the existing launchers named above. Further, let's consider only pure liquid-fueled launchers (with the exception of Scout and Pegasus, the core stages of each of the above launchers are liquid rockets). From an engineering standpoint, then, what is a rocket? Well, it consists of a collection, often vertically stacked, of: Cylindrical fuel and oxidiser tanks Rocket engines (including turbopumps, gas generators, etc.) Guidance mechanisms (gimbal joints, hydraulic actuators, APUs) Guidance and navigation system (IMU, GPS, radio command receiver) plus other ancillary details like range safety receivers and telemetry sensors and transmitters and the like, and that's about it, isn't it? Now the question that comes to mind is this: why should something like that cost tens to hundreds of millions of US$? Cylindrical fuel tanks aren't that expensive, and they make up most of the rocket. (Sure, if you're striving for every last gram of throw-weight in an ICBM, you can push the tankage cost as high as you like, but in a commercial launcher?) And rocket engines are finicky, complicated, and intolerant of defects. Well, yes...but so is a DOHC 4 valve per cylinder turbocharged, intercooled V-8 internal combustion engine, and nonetheless one can purchase such an engine, integrated into a ground transportation vehicle, from a number of manufacturers at a cost three orders of magnitude less than that charged for the rocket, and expect it to function without catastrophic failures or extensive maintenance, for five years, tens of thousands of kilometers, and thousands of mission cycles. Guidance? Again, as long as we aren't gram-shaving, this is pretty mundane stuff--the hydraulics can mostly be adapted from airliners, and the electronics from a PC--"mem'ry for nothin', chips for free". (For an LEO launcher we don't need radiation-hardened electronics.) The first mass-produced launcher -------------------------------- We've seen from the "standing army" argument for launchers requiring minimal (airline-scale) ground mission support the impact of fixed costs on per-mission costs when the number of missions is limited. But the presence or absence of a "standing army", and the frequency of flights over which fixed costs are spread, isn't fundamentally linked to whether the launcher is reusable or expendable. Consider the following mass-produced expendable rocket. Number manufactured: 6,240 Number launched: 3,590 Successes: 2,890 (81%) Failures: 700 (19%) In inventory: 2,100 Work in progress: 250 Expended in development: 300 Development program cost: US$ 2 billion Development cost per launcher: US$ 350,512 Total manufacturing cost per launcher: US$ 43,750 Marginal cost, launchers 5000+: US$ 13,000 (Yes, 13K!) These are actual figures for the first mass-produced rocket vehicle, the V2 (A4)--fifty years ago. Prices are in US wartime dollars. Stating the obvious.... The V2 was a suborbital vehicle, intended to lob high explosive over relatively short distances. Quantity production of the V2 at Mittelwerk was accomplished with unpaid slave labour under the brutal rule of the SS. And the failure rate was unacceptable by current standards. And yet...consider that this was the very first space-capable rocket ever built. That it was manufactured under the constraints of a war that Germany was losing, subject to aerial bombardment by night and by day, with continual supply shortages. That, as a consequence of Nazi slave-labour, the desperate war situation, and the state of current technology, no significant automation was applied to its manufacture. In February 1945 the underground Mittelwerk V2 factory delivered 800 ready-to-launch V2s; after the war U.S. intelligence expert T. P. Wright estimated that at full production, unconstrained by wartime shortages, the Mittelwerk plant could have produced 900 to 1000 V2s per month. One thousand rockets per month...fifty years ago. Think about that. A Rocket a Day -------------- Suppose we translate these figures, almost incomprehensible by modern standards (*three hundred* launch vehicles expended in the development program!) into quasi-modern terms. Consider an orbital launch vehicle two-stage, say, clean and green thanks to LH2/LOX propulsion in all stages. Engines: J2 or RL10s or follow-on uprated versions (we'll have plenty of opportunity to develop them and phase them in). A simple two stage cylindrical stack like Titan II, with GPS or ground-commanded navigation. Payload interface is a big ring with bolt-holes and a standard fairing with plenty of volume inside. Sounds a lot like NLS/SpaceLifter, doesn't it? STMEs may have marginal advantages over sea-level-optimised derivatives of RL10 or J2, but otherwise what's the difference? What if we launch one every day? Three hundred and sixty-five a year. That would be less than one twenty-fifth the production rate of the V2 under concentrated Allied bombardment in 1945. How much would each one cost? Assume we expense the development cost or amortise it over a sufficiently large number of vehicles that it can be ignored. Further, assume that our bigger, more complicated (two-stage), and higher tech (LH2/LOX instead of Ethanol/LOX), launcher costs ten times as much as the V2, and that 1945 wartime dollars convert into current dollars at 10 to 1. Then, starting with the US$13,000 marginal cost of a V2, we arrive at a cost of US$1.3 million per launch vehicle. If we launch one a day our total vehicle budget will be US$475 million per year--comparable to a single shuttle flight (no, I don't want to re-open *that* debate again; let's just say it's the same order of magnitude, OK?). If our mass produced LH2/LOX launcher equals the performance of the Delta 6925 by placing 3900 kg in LEO, the cost to LEO is US$333/kg; if we achieve better throw-weight, this figure goes down accordingly. If we build the thing so cheap, dumb, and heavy that its payload is only 1000 kg--one metric ton--the cost rises to US$1300/kg, which is still a factor of ten lower than the comparable cost to LEO for Ariane, Atlas, Delta, and Titan. Logistics and Ground Support ---------------------------- Okay, you say, suppose mass production in these absurd quantities could actually drive the hardware cost down to less than a million and half per bird, we still haven't accounted for the standing army that launch operations require. If it takes thousands or tens of thousands of people to launch tens of vehicles per year, won't it take hundreds of thousands to launch one every day? Well, why should it? Again consider the V2. In the two weeks from September 18-30 1944, a total of 127 V2s were launched from five different launch sites. That's an average of almost ten a day. This was accomplished by two mobile groups totaling about 6,300 men and 1600 vehicles, forced to relocate frequently due to the Allied advance, and subjected to frequent aerial bombardment. It was estimated that, given adequate supply, one hundred V2s could be launched per day in a "maximum effort" by the mobile units, and that a rate of half that, 350 per week, was sustainable. Parkinson's law notwithstanding, why, after fifty years of technological progress and experience in launch operations, should it take tens of thousands of people and hundreds of millions of dollars to achieve a launch rate one fiftieth that of a V2 group launching the very first operational ballistic missile from a launch site with tanks and infantry advancing toward it and airplanes flying over dropping bombs on them? Yes, LH2 is trickier to handle; a multistage rocket requires a more complicated launch and service facility, and so on. But if we design up-front for a sustained launch rate of one per day, can we not find ways around these problems? Perhaps a mobile transporter / erector / launcher like SS24 or Pershing II, with fuel and oxidiser delivered by underground pipes that attach to the launch truck. Or something.... Let's tell the engineers to go figure it out and see if they come up with something that works. It can't be impossible; the Soviet R-7 series launchers (Vostok / Voskhod / Soyuz) almost furnish an existence proof. These launchers, despite their mechanical complexity (4 liquid boosters and 20 first stage engines), are typically launched one to two days after horizontal delivery to the pad. On several occasions beginning in 1962, two manned launches were made from the same pad less than 24 hours apart. On October 11-13 1969, three manned missions (Soyuz 6, 7, and 8) were launched from the same pad within 48 hours. If we use contemporary sensors and computers to automate the fueling and checkout, why does the "launch team" need to be huge? Bob drives the launcher out to the middle of the circle of concrete, hooks up the hoses, then goes back to the blockhouse and presses the green "Start" button. An hour later, or so, the "Ready" light comes on, and at High Noon he pushes the red "Go" button. Sitting immediately to his right Fred, in the blue suit, follows the proceedings on a laptop computer with his index finger on the orange "Oops" button. Assuming things go OK, ten minutes after the ship lifts, Bob goes out and drives the launch truck back to the garage where it's reloaded with the next rocket (assume we have ten trucks, or so, to pipeline the setup process and account for attrition). Then it's off the cafeteria for lunch. Excess Capacity --------------- Every proposal, prosaic or exotic, for a high-capacity, fast-turnaround launch system immediately runs into the objection, "There just aren't enough payloads to make the system pay. Other than a few established markets for satellites, there just aren't that many profitable, useful, or interesting things to do in space right now, and we already have too many launchers chasing too few launch customers." This is the heart of the chicken-and-egg problem that is blocking the development and exploration of space. As long as launches cost tens or hundreds of millions of US$ each, only governments and the very largest corporations will be able to afford them, and only for the most obvious and essential purposes, such as communication, earth resource, navigation, and reconnaissance satellites. And as long as the number of such payloads is less than a hundred per year, who is realistically going to pay to develop a launcher capable of sustained rates many times as great, however cheap it ends up being? You'd just end up with a huge pile of rockets gathering dust waiting for payloads, wouldn't you? Would you? Consider the following scenario. The Agency announces a procurement in which bidders are invited to provide launches, one per day, of 2000 kg or more to a standard Low Earth Orbit, mating with a specified payload and shroud interface and to a prescribed set of services on a flat concrete pad. A suitably derated payload is specified for polar orbit. Bids of more than US$1.25 million per successful launch will be returned unread. The winner of the bid will be awarded a fixed-price contract for 1000 launches at the agreed price. The first 100 launches will be considered development flights and will be purchased at the bid price regardless of success or failure; afterward only successful launches will be purchased. The procurement will be re-competed every 1000 launches; if a new vendor wins with a substantially lower cost per launch, they will be granted the same development period for the first 100 flights. The vendor retains all rights to the launcher design and is free to offer it on the open market independent of the Agency. Immediately the launch contract awarded, the Agency announces the availability of daily flights of 2000 kg to LEO or 1500 kg to polar orbit. Commercial enterprises may purchase launches for whatever purpose they wish at a price equal to the Agency's cost per launch plus 25%. Unsold flights are offered on a first-come, first-served basis to researchers, government agencies, and individuals. In the event of excess demand, non-commercial proposals will be selected by a peer review process similar to that used to allocate telescope time at astronomical observatories. All risks of launch failure are borne by the provider of the payload; clients should note historical failure rates and build appropriate spares. Provider of the payload assumes all liability for it once it separates from Agency's rocket. Payloads shall be delivered by truck to the loading dock of the Agency's Rocket Garage. All payloads must be supplied with adequate documentation to verify their content and safety. The payload interface specification handbook is available for US$5 from the Agency's toll-free order line; payload test and integration jigs are available in the Agency's regional centres and many major universities around the world. Plans for building your own are available for US$5. Payloads delivered to the Rocket Garage are inspected to ensure they are not nuclear bombs, sacks of gravel, or otherwise unacceptable. Payloads containing propulsion hardware are reviewed especially closely. Assuming no big no-nos, the payload is bolted to the top of the next free rocket, the requested orbit inclination is dialed into the rocket's guidance system, and it moves down the queue toward the pad. The adventurous will recall that the Project Mercury capsule had a launch weight of 1935 kg. If fewer than one payload a day arrives at the Rocket Garage (as is certain at the outset), the Agency will store the excess rockets in the Rocket Warehouse out back, while continuing to launch at least one per week with an inert concrete payload (in a rapidly decaying orbit) to maintain launch team proficiency and verify the continuing quality of rockets supplied by the vendor. This procurement and offering of launch services is explicitly intended to punch through the chicken-and-egg problem. In essence, the Agency would be spending US$475 million a year on a flock of 365 hens, then waiting to see if eggs started to show up. This runs the risk, of course, of ending up with egg all over one's face. Suppose it isn't possible to build a rocket that will orbit half the payload of a Delta, launched 50 times less frequently than the V2, at a cost ten times greater than that primitive fifty year old missile. In that case nobody responds seriously to the Agency's bid, and the Agency goes and blows the money on something else, vowing to try again in ten years. Now suppose the rockets do start showing up one a day, and departing on schedule with a success rate that makes the supplier's profit margin juicy enough to fund further R&D, but the payloads don't appear. The Agency rapidly becomes the butt of every stand-up comic and a motion is introduced in the Legislature to re-name it the "Orbital Ready-Mix Delivery Agency". Well, if that's how it plays out, I guess we all ought to pack up and go home then, shouldn't we? Because that would demonstrate, in a real-world test, than there really aren't very many useful things to do in space, after all. That even if we push the marginal cost of launches down to zero, nobody will be able to think of anything to use them for, not for Venus probe science fair projects, personal spysats, hypersonic surfing demonstration/validation flights, nor microgravity research, material processing, life sciences, remote sensing, VLBI radio astronomy, optical astronomy, or anything else. That other than the existing big-market space applications, there's no earthly reason to leave the Earth, that much of the "space age" was based on faulty premises, that the "final frontier" isn't worth exploring. Is this likely to be the case? Loose Ends ---------- Naturally, things aren't as easy to accomplish in the real world as they are to bandy about on paper. Special relativity limits the velocity with which one can wave one's arms, and the UNDO button doesn't remove a hole you've just bored the wrong place into an expensive piece of metal. Many things might go wrong in an attempt to jump-start the exploitation of space this way. The two real biggies are discussed above: "it won't work", or "space isn't worth it". Here are some others I'm concerned about as well. Range Capacity. Given current low launch rates, configuring a range is complicated and takes a long time which couldn't accommodate daily launches, especially to a variety of inclinations. And most existing spaceports can't handle both equatorial and polar launches. Maybe we should plan on Hawaii or Cape York from the outset and get the paperwork started to declare an appropriate air and sea exclusion zone (for two hours per day around the scheduled launch time). Any rocket that meets the launch rate and cost criteria cannot require complex or expensive ground infrastructure. Environmental Issues. One reason for insisting on LH2/LOX rather than Kerosene/LOX, hypergolics, or solids/hybrids is that it's clean. We could launch one every minute and contribute less to global warming, ozone layer depletion, and other varieties of atmospheric pollution than 747s crossing the Atlantic every day. Also, exhaust and/or fluffy white clouds resulting from the occasional really bad day aren't harmful to anybody who happens to be downwind. On the solid waste issue, clearly dropping big chunks of aluminum and steel into the ocean every day isn't a particularly elegant way to break the bonds of gravity, not compared to all those sleek paper spaceplanes on the magazine covers. But I suspect if one were to compare the total mass wasted in expended stages to that of non-recycled aluminum cans and automobile engines, it would be an insignificant percentage. It's worth noting that what we're throwing away every day consists basically of aluminum and iron with a dash of silicon, and that these are three of the four most abundant elements in the Earth's crust. Besides, outside the two-hour launch period, salvage boats are welcome to recover the expended stages and sell them for scrap. Space Junk. So many launches may run the risk of unacceptably polluting the near-Earth environment. Clearly, as noted above, care will be required not to launch payloads likely to explode or otherwise misbehave in orbit. Payloads will probably have to be released in orbits which guarantee the timely decay and burn-up of expended upper stages. We need to make sure the upper stage always burns up completely, leaving no chunks to go "thump" in the night. Payloads intended for high-traffic or high-risk final orbits will require special certification that they will dispose of themselves in a responsible manner. Fuel cost. It may be that if we succeed in pushing the hardware cost down, we'll end up with an airline-like situation where fuel cost becomes a major component of the expense. I don't know how much liquid hydrogen goes for today, and I haven't tried to predict what it would cost when purchased in the quantities a launch a day would require. This needs to be worked out. Even daily launches should be a minor consumer in the market for liquid oxygen. Payload pyrotechnic servicing. In the discussion of payload delivery and integration, I confess to glossing over the issue of pre-launch payload servicing. You can't just take a satellite with a solid kick motor and a hundred kilograms of hydrazine on board down to the DHL counter and ship it to the spaceport. The hazardous aspects of payload processing must be done in a thoroughly professional manner at a facility close to the launch site, and the design of these aspects of payloads must be subjected to design reviews comparable to those currently used for commercial launches. This increases the payload cost, but not the launch cost. It will probably promote the emergence of standard spacecraft buses which provide these components of the payload, which can be serviced for launch for a flat fee by their vendors. Tracking and control. The daily launch rate envisioned here would overwhelm existing ground control facilities. Yet the experience of AMSAT and UOSAT proves that sophisticated and expensive gear isn't required to manage a satellite, at least in LEO. Without access to TDRSS or a global tracking network, most satellites are going to have be very autonomous, communicating with their makers in occasional high-bandwidth gabfests as they pop above the horizon. Since it's very likely that one or more manufacturers will offer a standard satellite bus compatible with the launcher, providing power, communications, etc., perhaps they will also market access to an uplink and downlink as a value-added service. From your nearest ISDN jack or Internet site, you could send and receive packets to your satellite and let the bus vendor worry about how and when they were delivered. Deep space missions are a problem; those who propose them are going to have to obtain time on a big dish as part of their grant proposal. One hopes that if many missions with clear scientific merit are proposed, money might be forthcoming to expand the existing deep space communication facilities. NASA/Congress will never do it. Who said anything about NASA or the U.S. Congress? A total budget of US$475 million per year is within the reach of many industrialised nations, especially at a time when defence spending is being curtailed, aerospace companies are suffering from excess capacity, engineering and manufacturing people are suffering lay-offs, and policy makers worry about how to convert defence industries without harming readiness by eroding the industrial base. US$475 million per year represents the following percentage of the early 1990's defence budgets (CIA World Factbook 1992) of the following countries: Country % Defence Budget --------- ---------------- South Africa 13.6% Switzerland 10.3% Sweden 7.7% Australia 6.3% Israel 6.3% Spain 5.5% China 4.0% (approx) Italy 2.1% France 1.4% Japan 1.3% Germany 1.2% United Kingdom 1.1% United States 0.15% Any country whose government became convinced that a scheme like this might give it a long-term (literal) leg up in the world and beyond, eventually, could implement it by reprogramming a small percentage of its existing military spending, much of which would flow right back into its own industries and economy and might be seen to have military value it its own right. For that matter, US$475 million is just about what Microsoft will spend on R&D in fiscal year 1993 and a third of their pre-tax profit, and it's less than 3% of Motorola's sales for the same year, so well-heeled and forward-looking companies (or consortium of such) could play as well. Conclusion ---------- The near-term development of space is constrained by excessive costs of launching payloads to low Earth orbit. The development of innovative launch technologies is discouraged by an apparent over capacity of existing launchers, "where will the payloads come from?", while development of payloads for new space applications isn't affordable given current launch costs. Rocketry was originally developed as a branch of artillery. Proponents of various reusable launch technologies argue that as long as an artillery-like model is maintained, affordable launches will never be possible. But to be effective, artillery must not only have adequate throw-weight, it must also provide a rapid rate of fire while minimising the cost of expended rounds. Today's space launch "artillery" costs tens to hundreds of millions of US$ per shot and fires at intervals measured in weeks or months. Yes, expendable launchers are artillery, and the ones we have today are, as artillery pieces, extremely overpriced and under-performing. The last time liquid rockets were truly treated as artillery was the very first time they were used in war, the A4/V2, fifty years ago. Despite an increasingly desperate war situation, constant supply problems, and aerial bombardment, V2s were manufactured at rates of up to 800 per month, launched at a comparable pace, and produced at a marginal cost of US$13,000 (1945 dollars) for each additional rocket after the first 5000. Making allowances for all the differences between Nazi Germany and the modern world, between a not very militarily useful nor reliable weapon and a viable space launcher, between a one-stage Ethanol/LOX missile and a multistage LH2/LOX launcher, between 1945 wartime dollars and current currency, still one must ask why, after 50 years of technological progress and rocket experience, our current rockets cost not five, not ten, not twenty times as much as a V2, but between one hundred (Pegasus) and two thousand four hundred (Titan III/SRM) times as much. Is what a Delta 6925 does, lobbing 3900 kg into LEO, fundamentally three hundred times more expensive than what a V2 did fifty years ago? It is interesting to observe that current launchers are bought and launched in quantities about a thousand times less than those of the V2 at peak production. In no sense are they mass-produced, and therefore they do not benefit from either the means of mass production (investment in highly-automated manufacturing), nor from the learning curve that results when one builds hundreds and thousands of an identical product. Could it be that a large component of the present unacceptably high launch cost is both cause and effect of the present low rate of launches? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 14:13 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["3670" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "23:12:34" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "78" "RE: starship-design: keep old copy." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA07031 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA07008 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA27770 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 26 Jul 1996 23:12:48 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607262112.AA27770@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 3669 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: RE: starship-design: keep old copy. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 23:12:34 +0100 >Majordomo will, if I remember correctly, allow you to request a list >of currently subscribed members. > >You send a message with "who starship-design" in the body to >majordomo@lists.uoregon.edu I think we should turn this option off, just to be save. I've been on other mailing lists and usually they don't allow that option anymore because it often has been misused (adverticements?) If some of us (the main members) are interested in that list, then Steve could easely substract that list and sent it to us. People that write to the list reguarly, will probably use their own name (or at least some alias that doesn't change often) We could also set up some rules that people have to obey when they are writing to the list, one of those rules could be that they would need to use their name. Other rules could be to no create havoc or not to flame. Usually those rules are in the subscription letter: Rules: 1. Ridicule, debunkery and believer/skeptic flamewars are banned. Let's just say that freenrg-list is a big nasty nest of "true believers" (having maybe a bit of rational skepticism,) and let the skeptics leave in disgust. The tone should be one of legitimate disagreements and respectful debate. 2. Heavy on experimentalism. Or theory-led experiments. Or theoretical implications of experiments. This is not a forum for all those controversial physics theories being ignored by mainstream science. Try NEOTECH for this. But if your theory leads directly to interesting, testable, real-world phenomena, then by all means discuss the experimental possibilites. If your experiments reveal anomalies not predicted by ANY theory, definitely jump right in and discuss your findings. Also it's very acceptable to publish theoretical work on a web page and announce its presence here. 3. Flamewars are banned. If you believe you've been insulted and wish to respond in kind, don't do it on freenrg-list. Use private email. Even better, ask the person if the insult was intentional, since the low- bandwidth of email frequently causes misunderstandings. 4. Small email files please. The limit is set to 40K right now, those exceeding the limit will be forwarded to Bill Beaty. Some members are on limited service, or have to pay for received email. Larger diagrams and graphics can be mailed to me directly and posted on the webpage for viewing. 5. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE: when you reply to a message DON'T include the ENTIRE message in your reply. Always edit it and delete as much as possible. The entire message should only be included if: (A) you are replying to a message that is several days old, or (B) you are doing a point-by-point reply to many parts of a message. Several users must pay by the kilobyte for receiving message traffic, and large amounts of redundant messages are expensive and of little use. So, when including a quoted message in your reply, ALWAYS DELETE SOMETHING. 6. "Junkmail" email advertizing will not be tolerated. While not illegal, widecasting of junk email ads to listserv sites is against the Unwritten Rules of the Internet. Anyone who spams freenrg-list with junkmail will be referred to the Internet Vigilante Justice team. ;) Occasional on-topic advertizing by regular freenrg-list users is acceptable. Regarding a newsgroup, why not have two mailing lists, one weekly and one continuous list? One could make both lists so that all letter are directly published on the web (or with one or two days in delay, to sift out some weird stuff if needed). Timothy From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 14:13 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["193" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "23:12:39" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "7" "starship-design: Common error" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA07040 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:13:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA07013 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:12:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA27775 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 26 Jul 1996 23:12:53 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607262112.AA27775@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 192 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Common error Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 23:12:39 +0100 Zenon wrote: >Seems I have somehow not received the letters quoted above. >Was it because of switching to the mailing list mode, or something? I didn't get them either, so you're not alone! From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 14:30 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["4428" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "16:27:55" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "104" "RE: starship-design: keep old copy." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA13352 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:30:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA13225 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 14:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11624; Fri, 26 Jul 96 16:30:28 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI011530; Fri Jul 26 16:28:36 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10975; Fri, 26 Jul 96 16:28:26 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma010972; Fri Jul 26 16:27:57 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09918; Fri, 26 Jul 96 16:27:55 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 4427 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: RE: starship-design: keep old copy. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 16:27:55 -0500 At 11:12 PM 7/26/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >>Majordomo will, if I remember correctly, allow you to request a list >>of currently subscribed members. >> >>You send a message with "who starship-design" in the body to >>majordomo@lists.uoregon.edu > >I think we should turn this option off, just to be save. I've been on other >mailing lists and usually they don't allow that option anymore because it >often has been misused (adverticements?) Good point. >If some of us (the main members) are interested in that list, then Steve >could easely substract that list and sent it to us. We could list the member on the web page. Thats probably to much trouble for an advertizer to bother with. >People that write to the list reguarly, will probably use their own name (or >at least some alias that doesn't change often) >We could also set up some rules that people have to obey when they are >writing to the list, one of those rules could be that they would need to use >their name. >Other rules could be to no create havoc or not to flame. >Usually those rules are in the subscription letter: > > > >Rules: > >1. Ridicule, debunkery and believer/skeptic flamewars are banned. > Let's just say that freenrg-list is a big nasty nest of "true > believers" (having maybe a bit of rational skepticism,) and let the > skeptics leave in disgust. The tone should be one of legitimate > disagreements and respectful debate. > >2. Heavy on experimentalism. Or theory-led experiments. Or theoretical > implications of experiments. This is not a forum for all those > controversial physics theories being ignored by mainstream science. Try > NEOTECH for this. But if your theory leads directly to interesting, > testable, real-world phenomena, then by all means discuss the experimental > possibilites. If your experiments reveal anomalies not predicted by ANY > theory, definitely jump right in and discuss your findings. Also it's > very acceptable to publish theoretical work on a web page and announce its > presence here. I think we could cut this one. Thou keeping things close to topic would be good. >3. Flamewars are banned. If you believe you've been insulted and wish to > respond in kind, don't do it on freenrg-list. Use private email. Even > better, ask the person if the insult was intentional, since the low- > bandwidth of email frequently causes misunderstandings. > >4. Small email files please. The limit is set to 40K right now, those > exceeding the limit will be forwarded to Bill Beaty. Some > members are on limited service, or have to pay for received email. > Larger diagrams and graphics can be mailed to me directly and > posted on the webpage for viewing. > >5. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE: when you reply to a message DON'T include the > ENTIRE message in your reply. Always edit it and delete as much as > possible. The entire message should only be included if: (A) you are > replying to a message that is several days old, or (B) you are doing > a point-by-point reply to many parts of a message. Several users > must pay by the kilobyte for receiving message traffic, and large > amounts of redundant messages are expensive and of little use. So, > when including a quoted message in your reply, ALWAYS DELETE SOMETHING. > >6. "Junkmail" email advertizing will not be tolerated. While not illegal, > widecasting of junk email ads to listserv sites is against the > Unwritten Rules of the Internet. Anyone who spams freenrg-list with > junkmail will be referred to the Internet Vigilante Justice team. ;) > Occasional on-topic advertizing by regular freenrg-list users is > acceptable. > > >Regarding a newsgroup, why not have two mailing lists, one weekly and one >continuous list? One could make both lists so that all letter are directly >published on the web (or with one or two days in delay, to sift out some >weird stuff if needed). > > >Timothy Thats true. I (or whoever maintains the weekly summaries loaded on the web could handel this easy enough. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Fri Jul 26 15:55 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2699" "Fri" "26" "July" "1996" "18:54:56" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" nil "76" "starship-design: im saving email!! ;)" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA08628 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 15:55:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA08550 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 15:54:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp18-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.145]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA14078 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 1996 18:54:56 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607262254.SAA14078@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2698 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: im saving email!! ;) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 18:54:56 -0400 well, now that i cant remember what even one of the 43(!) letters i got today are about, i will try to say something. my newsgroup opinion, was, in all essence, mine! :) really, i guess you guys are right, though, and that seems to be the general concensus. but i think it was zenon who said he doesn't like newsgroups, well, its the same with me.. just too much to sort through. but MHO doesnt really matter much. a newsgroup would be great for publicity, i didnt even think of that. well, about my program, i'll develop it anyway as a test, and like kevin said, it'll just be there for anyone who wants to get it. i usually end up rejecting all ideas for programs that i wont use. that way, if no one else wants to use them, hey, at least i will! :) tim, you mentioned some programming puzzles? as long as they don't involve screen mode x or windows, im game... does anyone know how hard it is to have your own computer hooked up to the inet through a web server? i am talking about me buying a computer and setting up the software and all, and just letting the web server connect me. please don't tell me about how its impossible, i already know that! :) just if anyone has any info, especially on operating systems, and the type of processor and computer to use.. (i have been on someone's homepage that was hosted on a 486 notebook with a 28.8 modem, and it was not THAT slow even, so this is why i am asking.) like, should i get a motorola processor, a intel, an IBM AIX, should i use Unix, or windows, or something else? just any knowledge you might have. kelly, you should check out: http://www.cyberspyder.com it has a program, LinkChek, that will tell ya what links are broken etc. etc. its not the best, but its like the only demo out there, except for the up and coming personal agent at http://www.hpp.com/1gofetch.html. btw, what exactly do ya want me to do, kelly, on those pages you sent me? check the links? update.. search for more links.. yea, that was one of the things.. more linx.. im workin on that one. uh.. i cant remember anymore. oh... about davids satellite idea, i think it would be a good idea to have a central server, but as someone suggested, give out the password to us and let us update our own sections... much less maintenance, and on one server. you guys are seriously going to publish a book? (i know, your not sure, just one of those dumb questions).. well, lemme know if i could contribute somehow.. one thing i am very good at is proofing (and even correcting certain times).. i helped my dad proof and type and edit his share of a cd-rom project, it was something like "famous speeches".. anyway, lemme know. id be glad to help. ben From owner-starship-design Sat Jul 27 08:25 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2163" "Sat" "27" "July" "1996" "17:24:56" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "57" "Re: starship-design: im saving email!! ;)" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA12722 for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 08:25:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA12706 for ; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 08:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA20377 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Sat, 27 Jul 1996 17:25:11 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607271525.AA20377@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2162 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: im saving email!! ;) Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 17:24:56 +0100 >well, about my program, i'll develop it anyway as >a test, and like kevin said, it'll just be there >for anyone who wants to get it. i usually end up >rejecting all ideas for programs that i wont use. >that way, if no one else wants to use them, hey, >at least i will! :) Ha, ha did you check my little creations near my homepage? >tim, you mentioned some programming puzzles? as >long as they don't involve screen mode x or >windows, im game... You can solve this one just inside the memory of the computer, however a text-output would make it easier for you (and others) to understand though. The problem is the following game that you probably already have seen somewhere: "Solitaire" not the card game, but the game where you have pegs which have to jump over eachother in such a way to minimize the amount of pegs that are left over. There are a few forms in which this game comes, a triangle or a cross. I suggest you try making a computer program that finds one or more solutions to be left with only one peg: O This is the starting situation: O O All the O's are pegs and the X is the only hole without a peg. O O O Of course the algorithm for a cross would be the same, only O O O O the amount of holes would be larger (causing the calculations O O X O O to take more time) So far I won't give any clues, unless the problem is not clear yet. I can tell you that the programme isn't very big (fits easely on two pages). >does anyone know how hard it is to have your >own computer hooked up to the inet through >a web server? I don't think it is really hard, but I think it is more expensive (at least the setup). However I too am interested in what it takes to get what you suggested. >kelly, you should check out: >http://www.cyberspyder.com >it has a program, LinkChek, that will tell ya >what links are broken etc. etc. its not the >best, but its like the only demo out there, >except for the up and coming personal agent at >http://www.hpp.com/1gofetch.html. Check out Tucows, "Win software" -> "browser add ons" http://cwis.auc.dk/tucows Sorry Kelly, again no Macintosh software. Timothy From owner-starship-design Sat Jul 27 08:25 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["539" "Sat" "27" "July" "1996" "17:25:00" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "20" "RE: starship-design: keep old copy." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA12737 for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 08:25:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA12719 for ; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 08:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA20380 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Sat, 27 Jul 1996 17:25:14 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607271525.AA20380@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 538 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: RE: starship-design: keep old copy. Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 17:25:00 +0100 Kelly replied: >>If some of us (the main members) are interested in that list, then Steve >>could easely substract that list and sent it to us. > >We could list the member on the web page. Thats probably to much trouble >for an advertizer to bother with. I'm not so sure about that... >>2. Heavy on experimentalism. Or theory-led experiments. Or theoretical >> implications of experiments. This is not a forum for all those > >I think we could cut this one. Thou keeping things close to topic would be >good. I agree. Timothy From owner-starship-design Sat Jul 27 08:26 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1632" "Sat" "27" "July" "1996" "17:25:20" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "44" "RE: starship-design: keep old copy." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA12780 for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 08:25:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA12770 for ; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 08:25:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02290; Sat, 27 Jul 96 17:25:20 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9607271525.AA02290@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1631 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: RE: starship-design: keep old copy. Date: Sat, 27 Jul 96 17:25:20 +0200 > From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) > > >Majordomo will, if I remember correctly, allow you to request a list > >of currently subscribed members. > > > >You send a message with "who starship-design" in the body to > >majordomo@lists.uoregon.edu > > I think we should turn this option off, just to be save. I've been on other > mailing lists and usually they don't allow that option anymore because it > often has been misused (adverticements?) > Do not see a problem. Majordomo sends the list ONLY to the list subscribers, otherwise it refuses. I have tested it, while fixing my e-mail address problems on this list... > Other rules could be to no create havoc or not to flame. > Usually those rules are in the subscription letter: > > Rules: > > [...] > Yes, such rules are good, though on our list I see most of them are observed most of the time (possibly except occassional extensive quotations of whole letters, long header and sig included...) > Regarding a newsgroup, why not have two mailing lists, one weekly and one > continuous list? One could make both lists so that all letter are directly > published on the web (or with one or two days in delay, to sift out some > weird stuff if needed). > But then the letter/answer cycle will be still short-term (on the continuous list - which causes most of the irrelevant chit-chat), and the weekly on-the-Web "newsletter" in fact can (and will) be used rather as an easy accessible archive only. So, it seems to me we will get disadvantages of both solutions and forfeit their advantages... -- Zenon From owner-starship-design Sat Jul 27 16:11 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1640" "Sun" "28" "July" "1996" "01:11:15" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "39" "starship-design: Majordomo chat" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA05662 for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 16:11:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA05649 for ; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 16:11:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA29555 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Sun, 28 Jul 1996 01:11:29 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607272311.AA29555@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1639 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Majordomo chat Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 01:11:15 +0100 Zenon wrote: >> I think we should turn this option off, just to be save. I've been on other >> mailing lists and usually they don't allow that option anymore because it >> often has been misused (adverticements?) >> >Do not see a problem. Majordomo sends the list >ONLY to the list subscribers, otherwise it refuses. >I have tested it, while fixing my e-mail address problems >on this list... Yes, but what matters is that bad-willing people have access to names that they in theory only few should have access to. >Yes, such rules are good, though on our list I see most of them >are observed most of the time (possibly except occassional extensive >quotations of whole letters, long header and sig included...) These days the rules may not be necessary, but believe me, when this list one day will have over a hundred participants, this may become different. >> Regarding a newsgroup, why not have two mailing lists, one weekly and one >> continuous list? One could make both lists so that all letter are directly >> published on the web (or with one or two days in delay, to sift out some >> weird stuff if needed). >> >But then the letter/answer cycle will be still short-term >(on the continuous list - which causes most of the irrelevant chit-chat), >and the weekly on-the-Web "newsletter" in fact can (and will) be used >rather as an easy accessible archive only. No, don't think so, some of the people will be in both lists, and mail the important things to the once-a-week group. Of course people could also chit-chat besides the group when some uncertainties are present, I guess that even now that happens. Timothy From owner-starship-design Sun Jul 28 06:43 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2102" "Sun" "28" "July" "1996" "15:43:04" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "66" "" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA23789 for starship-design-outgoing; Sun, 28 Jul 1996 06:43:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA23757 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 1996 06:43:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA13193 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Sun, 28 Jul 1996 15:43:18 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607281343.AA13193@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2101 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 15:43:04 +0100 To all, My copy of the "argossi" document we got from Brian has some strange (erronous) cut and pastes in it. Am I the only one? If so would someone sent me a good copy (ASCII preferred). Here are some of the strange cut and pastes: (The [BLEEP] are mine) Reflective Sail Just what is this reflective sail? It is a super-thin, highly reflective she[BLEEP]The Argosy-class Starship by Brian V. Mansur Posted July 27, 1996 [Figure 1: Labeled External View of ARGOSY Interstellar Cruise Mode] ============================================================================== Contents Design Overview payload and the drive module remain as one unit. Both the habitat and the payload/drive modules are tethered to the mast module on the end opposite to the sail cable connection. The mast module acts as a connector between the huge, but comparatively light-weight sail and the rotating hab and payload/drive modules. The centrifugal force from the rotation gives the crew [BLEEP]Mass kilogram kg Time second s Electric current ampere A Temperature kelvin K Some SI Derived Units ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Physical Quantity Name of Unit Symbol SI Unit ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Frequency hertz Hz s^-1 Energy joule J kg-m^2/s^2 Force newton N kg-m/s^2 Pressure pascal Pa kg/m-s^2 Power watt W kg-m^2/s^3 Electric charge coulomb C A-s Electric potential volt V kg-m^2/A-s^3 {The document ends suddenly with} SI Base Units ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Physical Quantity Name of Unit Symbol ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Length meter m[BLEEP] From owner-starship-design Sun Jul 28 08:00 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2320" "Sun" "28" "July" "1996" "11:00:23" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" nil "72" "starship-design: Re: " "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA23317 for starship-design-outgoing; Sun, 28 Jul 1996 08:00:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA23281 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 1996 08:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp53-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.182]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA02473; Sun, 28 Jul 1996 11:00:23 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607281500.LAA02473@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2319 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden), starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Re: Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 11:00:23 -0400 At 03:43 PM 7/28/96 +0100, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >To all, > >My copy of the "argossi" document we got from Brian has some strange >(erronous) cut and pastes in it. Am I the only one? If so would someone sent >me a good copy (ASCII preferred). > >Here are some of the strange cut and pastes: >(The [BLEEP] are mine) > >Reflective Sail > >Just what is this reflective sail? It is a super-thin, highly reflective >she[BLEEP]The Argosy-class Starship >by Brian V. Mansur > >Posted July 27, 1996 > >[Figure 1: Labeled External View of ARGOSY Interstellar Cruise Mode] > >============================================================================== >Contents > >Design Overview > > > > > > >payload and the drive module remain as one unit. Both the habitat and the >payload/drive modules are tethered to the mast module on the end opposite to >the sail cable connection. The mast module acts as a connector between the >huge, but comparatively light-weight sail and the rotating hab and >payload/drive modules. The centrifugal force from the rotation gives the crew >[BLEEP]Mass kilogram kg >Time second s >Electric current ampere A >Temperature kelvin K > >Some SI Derived Units >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Physical Quantity Name of Unit Symbol SI Unit >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Frequency hertz Hz s^-1 >Energy joule J kg-m^2/s^2 >Force newton N kg-m/s^2 >Pressure pascal Pa kg/m-s^2 >Power watt W kg-m^2/s^3 >Electric charge coulomb C A-s >Electric potential volt V kg-m^2/A-s^3 > > > > > > >{The document ends suddenly with} > > >SI Base Units >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Physical Quantity Name of Unit Symbol >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Length meter m[BLEEP] I didn't even recieve a copy, so if anyone sends one to Tim, please send one to me! Thanx. Ben From owner-starship-design Mon Jul 29 06:52 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["3596" "Mon" "29" "July" "1996" "08:49:54" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "103" "Re: starship-design: im saving email!! ;)" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA05868 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 06:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA05858 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 06:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08092; Mon, 29 Jul 96 08:52:30 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI007969; Mon Jul 29 08:50:41 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04209; Mon, 29 Jul 96 08:50:40 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004201; Mon Jul 29 08:49:55 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04467; Mon, 29 Jul 96 08:49:52 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 3595 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: Philip Bakelaar Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: im saving email!! ;) Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 08:49:54 -0500 At 6:54 PM 7/26/96, Philip Bakelaar wrote: >well, now that i cant remember what even one >of the 43(!) letters i got today are about, >i will try to say something. > >my newsgroup opinion, was, in all essence, mine! :) >really, i guess you guys are right, though, and >that seems to be the general concensus. but i think >it was zenon who said he doesn't like newsgroups, >well, its the same with me.. just too much to sort >through. but MHO doesnt really matter much. a >newsgroup would be great for publicity, i didnt >even think of that. It would get use out into the great sea of alt.'s. Certainly good for visibility. >well, about my program, i'll develop it anyway as >a test, and like kevin said, it'll just be there >for anyone who wants to get it. i usually end up >rejecting all ideas for programs that i wont use. >that way, if no one else wants to use them, hey, >at least i will! :) > >tim, you mentioned some programming puzzles? as >long as they don't involve screen mode x or >windows, im game... > >does anyone know how hard it is to have your >own computer hooked up to the inet through >a web server? i am talking about me buying >a computer and setting up the software and all, >and just letting the web server connect me. >please don't tell me about how its impossible, >i already know that! :) just if anyone has any >info, especially on operating systems, and the >type of processor and computer to use.. >(i have been on someone's homepage that was > hosted on a 486 notebook with a 28.8 modem, > and it was not THAT slow even, so this is > why i am asking.) like, should i get a >motorola processor, a intel, an IBM AIX, >should i use Unix, or windows, or something >else? just any knowledge you might have. > >kelly, you should check out: >http://www.cyberspyder.com >it has a program, LinkChek, that will tell ya >what links are broken etc. etc. its not the >best, but its like the only demo out there, >except for the up and coming personal agent at >http://www.hpp.com/1gofetch.html. > >btw, what exactly do ya want me to do, kelly, >on those pages you sent me? check the links? >update.. search for more links.. yea, that >was one of the things.. more linx.. im workin >on that one. More links, and helping to sort them out. I've done a bit more work, and I'll try to upload a new set in a day or two. Definatly more links, especially for ocean stuff. >uh.. i cant remember anymore. oh... > >about davids satellite idea, i think it would >be a good idea to have a central server, but >as someone suggested, give out the password >to us and let us update our own sections... >much less maintenance, and on one server. > >you guys are seriously going to publish a book? >(i know, your not sure, just one of those dumb >questions).. well, lemme know if i could >contribute somehow.. one thing i am very good at >is proofing (and even correcting certain times).. >i helped my dad proof and type and edit his share >of a cd-rom project, it was something like >"famous speeches".. anyway, lemme know. id be >glad to help. > >ben Haven't seriously discussed a book. It would take a lot of work striping out and condence it down into a book, but we do have the material and a book would reach a lot of people a web site wouldn't. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Mon Jul 29 06:55 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1257" "Mon" "29" "July" "1996" "08:52:23" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "37" "Re: starship-design: Majordomo chat" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA06043 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 06:55:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA06034 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 06:55:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08347; Mon, 29 Jul 96 08:55:03 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI008143; Mon Jul 29 08:53:05 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04262; Mon, 29 Jul 96 08:53:01 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004235; Mon Jul 29 08:52:24 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04875; Mon, 29 Jul 96 08:52:21 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1256 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Majordomo chat Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 08:52:23 -0500 At 1:11 AM 7/28/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >Zenon wrote: >>> Regarding a newsgroup, why not have two mailing lists, one weekly and one >>> continuous list? One could make both lists so that all letter are directly >>> published on the web (or with one or two days in delay, to sift out some >>> weird stuff if needed). >>> >>But then the letter/answer cycle will be still short-term >>(on the continuous list - which causes most of the irrelevant chit-chat), >>and the weekly on-the-Web "newsletter" in fact can (and will) be used >>rather as an easy accessible archive only. > >No, don't think so, some of the people will be in both lists, and mail the >important things to the once-a-week group. So whats wrong with that? Thats how we handeled stuf for the first year. >Of course people could also chit-chat besides the group when some >uncertainties are present, I guess that even now that happens. > >Timothy Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Mon Jul 29 07:08 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["765" "Mon" "29" "July" "1996" "09:04:37" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "27" "starship-design: Re: " "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA07075 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 07:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA07066 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 07:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09732; Mon, 29 Jul 96 09:08:09 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI009448; Mon Jul 29 09:05:31 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04543; Mon, 29 Jul 96 09:05:36 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004527; Mon Jul 29 09:04:39 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07116; Mon, 29 Jul 96 09:04:36 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 764 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Re: Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 09:04:37 -0500 At 3:43 PM 7/28/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >To all, > >My copy of the "argossi" document we got from Brian has some strange >(erronous) cut and pastes in it. Am I the only one? If so would someone sent >me a good copy (ASCII preferred). Your doing better than me. I got 5 fragments of a UU file. When I find where I let a UUdecode utility I'll see what it looks like. Brian, please send ascii, or at least uncompressed. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Sr. Systems Engineer Magnavox Electronic Systems Company (Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Mon Jul 29 16:25 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["601" "Mon" "29" "July" "1996" "19:24:49" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" nil "19" "Re: starship-design: im saving email!! ;)" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA17132 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 16:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA17018 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 16:25:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp24-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.151]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA20892; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:24:49 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607292324.TAA20892@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 600 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: im saving email!! ;) Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:24:49 -0400 At 08:49 AM 7/29/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: >>btw, what exactly do ya want me to do, kelly, >>on those pages you sent me? check the links? >>update.. search for more links.. yea, that >>was one of the things.. more linx.. im workin >>on that one. > >More links, and helping to sort them out. I've done a bit more work, and >I'll try to upload a new set in a day or two. > >Definatly more links, especially for ocean stuff. Oh.. in that case, I will get right to work. I was sitting in limbo here wondering "duh.. whadda i do?".. I'll send you something tonite most likely. Ben From owner-starship-design Mon Jul 29 16:31 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["479" "Mon" "29" "July" "1996" "19:31:17" "-0400" "David Levine" "David@interworld.com" nil "15" "starship-design: Out Of Touch" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA21106 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 16:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www1.interworld.com (www.InterWorld.Com [165.254.130.4]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA20992 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 16:31:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by www1.interworld.com with Microsoft Exchange (IMC 4.0.837.3) id <01BB7D84.85564840@www1.interworld.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:31:20 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.837.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Levine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 478 From: David Levine Sender: owner-starship-design To: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" Subject: starship-design: Out Of Touch Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:31:17 -0400 I may be out of touch for the next few days. As you may know, we're working on a multiplayer realtime game. Big demo for prospective clients coming up in a few days, so its crunch time for me. Let me just say that I'm learning how beautiful java is. I prototyped a lot of our server-side stuff in java because of the ease of programming threads and network stuff compared to C or C++. Now that I have to do the damn thing in C++, I'm learning what a pain it can be. David From owner-starship-design Tue Jul 30 02:10 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["444" "Tue" "30" "July" "1996" "11:10:23" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "16" "starship-design: Double replies with reply-to-all" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA03166 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 02:10:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA03141 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 02:10:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA13115 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Tue, 30 Jul 1996 11:10:39 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607300910.AA13115@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 443 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Double replies with reply-to-all Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 11:10:23 +0100 To Kelly (and Steve), Kelly, when you reply to me and hit the reply-to-all button, I get double messages, apparently majordomo isn't as smart as we would have hoped. This is what the significant part of the header says: To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject: Re: starship-design: Majordomo chat Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Timothy From owner-starship-design Tue Jul 30 05:48 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1004" "Tue" "30" "July" "1996" "07:45:50" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "32" "Re: starship-design: Double replies with reply-to-all" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA07215 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 05:48:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA07172 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 05:48:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09554; Tue, 30 Jul 96 07:47:49 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI009486; Tue Jul 30 07:46:49 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02132; Tue, 30 Jul 96 07:46:43 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma002120; Tue Jul 30 07:45:53 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23543; Tue, 30 Jul 96 07:45:50 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1003 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Double replies with reply-to-all Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 07:45:50 -0500 At 11:10 AM 7/30/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >To Kelly (and Steve), > >Kelly, when you reply to me and hit the reply-to-all button, I get double >messages, apparently majordomo isn't as smart as we would have hoped. > >This is what the significant part of the header says: > >To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) >From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) >Subject: Re: starship-design: Majordomo chat >Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu > > >Timothy Yeah we're all geting double copies. Sometimes even if we we don't reply to all. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Jul 30 06:30 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1813" "Tue" "30" "July" "1996" "09:30:37" "-0400" "David Levine" "David@interworld.com" nil "47" "starship-design: FW: Interesting thought" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA24140 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 06:30:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www1.interworld.com (www.InterWorld.Com [165.254.130.4]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA24087 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 06:30:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by www1.interworld.com with Microsoft Exchange (IMC 4.0.837.3) id <01BB7DF9.C5ADC8D0@www1.interworld.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 09:30:39 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.837.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Levine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1812 From: David Levine Sender: owner-starship-design To: "'Berman, Andrea'" , "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" , "'Levine, Howard'" , "'Brian_Levine_at_pnpur1@mail.brodeur.com'" , "'Harris, Craig'" , "'Faye, Hillary'" To: "'Jackson, Kelly'" , "'Rosenthal, Matt'" , "'Levine_M'" , Mark Miles External Subject: starship-design: FW: Interesting thought Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 09:30:37 -0400 I thought this was humorous. Well, okay, frightening is more like it. -David >---------- >From: DaVe McComb >Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 1996 9:16 AM >To: Development >Subject: FW: Interesting thought > >From a friend of mine at Microsoft (just what you would expect). > >>>> > Michael Jordan makes over $300,000 a game or $10,000 a minute >>>> > (assuming 30 minutes/game). Assuming $40 million in endorsements next >>>> > year, he'll be making $178,100 a day(working or not)! If he sleeps 7 >>>> > hours a night, he makes $52,000 every night while visions of sugarplums >>>> > dance in his head. If he goes to see Independence Day, it'll cost him >>>> > $7.00, but he'll make $18,550 while he's there. He makes >>>>$7,415/hr more >>>> > than minimum wage and $3,710 while watching each episode of Friends. >>>> > If he wanted to save up for a new Acura NSX ($90,000) it would take him >>>> > only 12 days. If someone were to hand him his salary and endorsement >>>> > money, they would have to do it at the rate of $2.00 every second. >>>> > He could take 1/100,000th of his income and buy some poor college >>>> > student 5200 packages of Ramen. If you were given a tenth of a penny >>>> > for every dollar he made, you'd be living comfortably at $65,000 a >>>>year. >>>> > Next year, he'll make more than twice as much as all of our past >>>> > presidents for all of their terms combined, and if you win the lottery, >>>> > you will still only get 1/100th of his salary each year. >>>> > >>>> > *****BUT***** >>>> > >>>> > Jordan will STILL have to earn this income for 270 more years to have a >>>> > net worth equivalent to that of Bill Gates! >>>> > >>>> > MORAL: STAY IN SCHOOL, GET AN EDUCATION, and BUY MICROSOFT PRODUCTS >> >>> GO GEEKS! >>> >>> >> > > > From owner-starship-design Tue Jul 30 08:00 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1550" "Tue" "30" "July" "1996" "09:44:06" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "37" "starship-design: Re: Rich and super rich." "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA01291 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:00:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA01219 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17807; Tue, 30 Jul 96 09:46:48 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI017715; Tue Jul 30 09:45:23 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04618; Tue, 30 Jul 96 09:45:18 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004587; Tue Jul 30 09:44:09 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09807; Tue, 30 Jul 96 09:44:06 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1549 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: Mark Schlegel Cc: Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 , sdudley@ix.netcom.com, JohnFrance@aol.com, mark_jensen@cpqm.mail.saic.com, DTaylor648@aol.com Subject: starship-design: Re: Rich and super rich. Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 09:44:06 -0500 At 10:31 AM 7/30/96, Mark Schlegel wrote: >> > >> >From a friend of mine at Microsoft (just what you would expect). >> > >> >>>> > Michael Jordan makes over $300,000 a game or $10,000 a minute >> >>>> > (assuming 30 minutes/game). Assuming $40 million in endorsements next >> >>>> > year, he'll be making $178,100 a day(working or not)! If he sleeps 7 >> >>>> > hours a night, he makes $52,000 every night while visions of >>sugarplums >> >>>> > dance in his head. If he goes to see Independence Day, it'll cost him >> >>>> > $7.00, but he'll make $18,550 while he's there. He makes >> >>>>$7,415/hr more >> >>>> > than minimum wage and $3,710 while watching each episode of Friends. >> >>>> > If he wanted to save up for a new Acura NSX ($90,000) it would >>take him > ^^^^^ >> >>>> > only 12 days. If someone were to hand him his salary and endorsement > ^^^^^^ > >trust a microserf to get the math wrong, if he makes $52,000 every 7 hrs, >how can it take 12 days to buy a $90,000 acura? Yes, it does explain a few things about Microsoft quality problems. ;) Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Jul 31 05:35 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["697" "Wed" "31" "July" "1996" "14:34:41" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "22" "starship-design: Re: Double replies with reply-to-all" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA06987 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 05:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA06976 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 05:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA24760 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:34:55 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607311234.AA24760@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 696 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Re: Double replies with reply-to-all Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:34:41 +0100 To Kelly, Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com) by dinkel.civ.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA08522 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Tue, 30 Jul 1996 14:48:02 +0200 Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA07172 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 05:48:27 -0700 (PDT) Why is it than that I get one Email directly from most.fw.hac.com (first) and the other via darkwing.uoregon.edu (last)? I've two solutions either you hit the reply-to-all button, or darkwing is able to remove any trace of ever having received that message. Tim From owner-starship-design Wed Jul 31 07:43 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil t nil nil nil nil] ["1228" "Wed" "31" "July" "1996" "09:41:15" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" "" "37" "Re: starship-design: Re: Double replies with reply-to-all" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA19198 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:43:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA19182 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14303; Wed, 31 Jul 96 09:43:48 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI014162; Wed Jul 31 09:41:36 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05598; Wed, 31 Jul 96 09:41:29 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma005596; Wed Jul 31 09:41:17 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08096; Wed, 31 Jul 96 09:41:15 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1227 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: Double replies with reply-to-all Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 09:41:15 -0500 At 2:34 PM 7/31/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >To Kelly, > >Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com) by >dinkel.civ.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA08522 > (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Tue, 30 Jul >1996 14:48:02 +0200 > > >Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) >by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA07172 for >; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 05:48:27 -0700 (PDT) > > >Why is it than that I get one Email directly from most.fw.hac.com (first) >and the other via darkwing.uoregon.edu (last)? > >I've two solutions either you hit the reply-to-all button, or darkwing is >able to remove any trace of ever having received that message. > >Tim I'ld bet on #1. I'm not sure I trust darkwing. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Jul 31 10:07 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2048" "Wed" "31" "July" "1996" "10:07:47" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@darkwing.uoregon.edu" nil "51" "Re: starship-design: Re: Double replies with reply-to-all" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA19500 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:07:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA19464; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:07:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199607311707.KAA19464@darkwing.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2047 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: Double replies with reply-to-all Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:07:47 -0700 (PDT) Kelly Starks writes: > At 2:34 PM 7/31/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: > >Why is it than that I get one Email directly from most.fw.hac.com (first) > >and the other via darkwing.uoregon.edu (last)? > > > >I've two solutions either you hit the reply-to-all button, or darkwing is > >able to remove any trace of ever having received that message. > > > >Tim > > I'ld bet on #1. All right, here's the deal. If you reply to a starship-design list message and the headers look like this: To: stevev@efn.org Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Then stevev@efn.org will get two copies of the message -- one because the message was directly addressed to him, and another because stevev@efn.org is a member of the starship-design list. (I love talking about myself in the third person.) I would encourage people on the list to always check the headers of replies to list messages. A moment of editing the headers to just look like: To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu will keep people from getting duplicate list messages. My earlier comment about sendmail eliminating duplicate recipients applies to normal sendmail aliases but doesn't apply to Majordomo lists, because Majordomo lists are handled by piping incoming mail messages into the majordomo program for redistribution. sendmail can only eliminate duplicate recipients within the recipient list of a single message; when you address a message to a Majordomo list as well as to an individual it invokes sendmail twice, once to deliver to the addressed individual and again when Majordomo expands the mailing list recipient. > I'm not sure I trust darkwing. Why not? I think there is some confusion because the Majordomo list works differently than the old Cc:-everybody method in some ways, but so far the Majordomo list works exactly as it should. I think the real payoff will be when we get more subscribers or when people need to change email addresses. With a real mailing list manager people will have much more control over how they get their mail. From owner-starship-design Wed Jul 31 18:18 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["483" "Wed" "31" "July" "1996" "21:17:26" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" nil "18" "Re: starship-design: Re: Engineers Explained" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA00945 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA00858 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:18:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp8-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.135]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA28126; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:17:26 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608010117.VAA28126@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 482 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39), zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: Engineers Explained Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:17:26 -0400 At 09:44 AM 7/31/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: >Ah, yes we need more Bobs to threaten us with. You know if we don't >hurry up, ISP (Interstellar Propulsion Society) will finish before us. > > > >Kelly Interstellar Propulsion Society? Try IPS, Kelly! :) BTW, whats the INet address? I think I might join them instead. I'll even bet their leader is a guy named... Bob! (Seriously, whats the INet address, though?) Ben From owner-starship-design Thu Aug 1 03:20 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["390" "Thu" "1" "August" "1996" "12:19:44" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "16" "Re: starship-design: Double replies with reply-to-all" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id DAA21674 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 03:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA21650 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 03:20:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA12747 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 1 Aug 1996 12:19:30 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608011019.AA12747@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 389 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Double replies with reply-to-all Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 12:19:44 +0100 >I would encourage people on the list to always check the headers of >replies to list messages. A moment of editing the headers to just look >like: > > To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu > >will keep people from getting duplicate list messages. Thanks Steve, this shows that not I but Kelly is crazy ;) Timothy P.S. Yes, I'm crazy but only in the right way. (what ever that is) From owner-starship-design Thu Aug 1 05:58 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["697" "Thu" "1" "August" "1996" "14:57:34" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "24" "Re: starship-design: Re: Engineers Explained" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA02750 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 05:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA02717 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 05:58:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11961; Thu, 1 Aug 96 14:57:34 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9608011257.AA11961@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 696 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: Engineers Explained Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 14:57:34 +0200 > From pbakelaar@exit109.com Thu Aug 1 03:17:46 1996 > > At 09:44 AM 7/31/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > >Ah, yes we need more Bobs to threaten us with. You know if we don't > >hurry up, ISP (Interstellar Propulsion Society) will finish before us. > > > > > > > >Kelly > > Interstellar Propulsion Society? Try IPS, Kelly! :) > > BTW, whats the INet address? I think I might join them > instead. I'll even bet their leader is a guy named... Bob! > > (Seriously, whats the INet address, though?) > Look at the list of space links I have sent you! In case you are too lazy ;-) , here goes: http://www.tyrian.com/IPS/ -- Zenon From owner-starship-design Thu Aug 1 06:06 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1126" "Thu" "1" "August" "1996" "08:01:27" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "37" "Re: starship-design: Re: Engineers Explained" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA03871 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA03857 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06649; Thu, 1 Aug 96 08:03:53 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI006550; Thu Aug 1 08:02:08 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02688; Thu, 1 Aug 96 08:01:56 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma002684; Thu Aug 1 08:01:28 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23185; Thu, 1 Aug 96 08:01:25 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1125 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: Philip Bakelaar Cc: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39), zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa), starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: Engineers Explained Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:01:27 -0500 At 9:17 PM 7/31/96, Philip Bakelaar wrote: >At 09:44 AM 7/31/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: >>Ah, yes we need more Bobs to threaten us with. You know if we don't >>hurry up, ISP (Interstellar Propulsion Society) will finish before us. >> >> >> >>Kelly > >Interstellar Propulsion Society? Try IPS, Kelly! :) > >BTW, whats the INet address? I think I might join them >instead. I'll even bet their leader is a guy named... Bob! > >(Seriously, whats the INet address, though?) > >Ben Its in the library web pages. The ones you've been working on? ;) http://www.tyrian.com/IPS/ They have a good table of contents, but last time I checked, few contents. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Thu Aug 1 15:31 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["942" "Thu" "1" "August" "1996" "18:31:31" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" nil "34" "Re: starship-design: Re: Engineers Explained" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA21780 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:31:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA21679 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp42-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.171]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA07559; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:31:31 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608012231.SAA07559@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 941 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: Engineers Explained Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:31:31 -0400 At 02:57 PM 8/1/96 +0200, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >> From pbakelaar@exit109.com Thu Aug 1 03:17:46 1996 >> >> At 09:44 AM 7/31/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: >> >Ah, yes we need more Bobs to threaten us with. You know if we don't >> >hurry up, ISP (Interstellar Propulsion Society) will finish before us. >> > >> > >> > >> >Kelly >> >> Interstellar Propulsion Society? Try IPS, Kelly! :) >> >> BTW, whats the INet address? I think I might join them >> instead. I'll even bet their leader is a guy named... Bob! >> >> (Seriously, whats the INet address, though?) >> >Look at the list of space links I have sent you! >In case you are too lazy ;-) , here goes: > > http://www.tyrian.com/IPS/ > >-- Zenon You actually thought I wasn't lazy, Zenon?!? :) Kelly, I'm real sorry about those pages. I will do something RIGHT THIS SEC! :) I will try to get back to ya l8r tonite. Ben From owner-starship-design Sat Aug 3 09:35 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["359" "Sat" "3" "August" "1996" "12:35:12" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" nil "13" "starship-design: ben's questions..." "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA17932 for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:35:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA17912 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp14-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.141]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA20217 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 12:35:12 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608031635.MAA20217@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 358 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: ben's questions... Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 12:35:12 -0400 ok guys i have several questions for yall... #1 does anyone know anything about going to school in europe, how to find out info, etc etc? #2 does anyone know anything about generating fractal landscapes (tim?)? especially equations and source code (i already know about fractint and povray, i need source or equations) thanx ben From owner-starship-design Sun Aug 4 12:08 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["5451" "Sun" "4" "August" "1996" "15:07:19" "-0400" "DotarSojat@aol.com" "DotarSojat@aol.com" nil "135" "starship-design: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA15972 for starship-design-outgoing; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 12:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout07.mail.aol.com (emout07.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.22]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA15962 for ; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 12:07:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout07.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA04893 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 15:07:19 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960804150718_252570175@emout07.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DotarSojat@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 5450 From: DotarSojat@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: The Size of the Problem Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 15:07:19 -0400 MEMORANDUM TO: The Starship Design Group FROM: Rex Finke SUBJECT: The Size of the Problem INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY A challenge has been identified to convey to the SD group the size of the problem of providing the energy required for inter- stellar flight. Let us consider an example mission to deliver 100 tonnes to a distance of 8 light-years at a continuous acceleration/ deceleration of 1 g, a mission for which we have some numbers. Calculations below indicate that this mission, if powered by antimatter, requires a mass of antimatter that represents an investment in energy equivalent to at least 105,500 years of the rate of production of electric energy in the entire US in 1987. CALCULATIONS A. ENERGY CONTENT of ANTIMATTER The specific energy of annihilation (also creation) of 1 kg of matter-plus-antimatter (m+am) is mc^2 = 1 kg x (2.9979 x 10^8 m/sec)^2 = 8.9874 x 10^16 kg m^2/sec^2 .......(1 kg m^2/sec^2 = 1 joule = 10^-6 Mw-sec) = 8.9874 x 10^10 Mw-sec .......(1 yr = 3.156 x 10^7 sec) = 2,847.7 Mw-yr (per kg of m+am) B. ELECTRIC ENERGY PRODUCTION in the US My 1994 Grolier Encyclopedia says, under "power, generation and transmission of," "In 1987, production of electric energy by utilities in the United States totaled 2,570 billion kilowatt-hours." 2,570 x 10^9 kw-hr x 3600 sec/hr / (1000 kw/Mw x 3.156 x 10^7 sec/yr) = 293,156 Mw-yr Let us call 293,156 Mw-yr 1 "USE." Then 1 USE = 293,156 Mw-yr / 2,847.7 Mw-yr/kg m+am = 102.94 kg m+am = 51.47 kg am C. ANTIMATTER MASS REQUIREMENT In my email memo of 4/4/96 at 13:26 EST to the SD Group, "Optimum Interstellar Rockets (Minimum Antimatter Fuel)," I gave the cal- culated values of the ratios of the minimum antimatter mass to the burnout mass (minMam/Mbo) and the minimum antimatter mass to the initial mass (minMam/Mi) required for various values of the final proper velocity (Uend) up to a Uend of 5 light-years/year. The assumptions in the calculations were-- 1. 100 percent conversion of annihilation energy to exhaust kinetic energy, and 2. The exhaust velocity was that giving the maximum conver- sion of exhaust kinetic energy to vehicle kinetic energy, i.e., that requiring the minimum mass of matter+antimat- ter, for each final velocity. For acceleration to a Uend of 5, the value of minMam/Mbo given in the memo is 3.357 and the value given for minMam/Mi is 0.2210. With these numbers, and recognizing that the method used there to calculate the minimum is approximate, the mass ratio for the acceleration phase given by minMam/Mbo divided by minMam/Mi is about 15.2, including the exhaust mass and the matter annihilated with the antimatter. The overall mass ratio for acceleration plus deceleration is (15.2)^2, or about 231. The ratio of antimatter mass to burnout mass is about 23.6 percent (3.357/14.2) of the "fuel ratio" (the mass ratio minus one). The overall ratio of antimatter mass to burnout mass is therefore about 54.3. A Uend of 5 lt-yr/yr is achieved at an acceleration of 1 g over a distance of 3.97 lt-yr (see my 4/4 memo). So, a peak proper vel- ocity of 5 lt-yr/yr is reached halfway to a destination about 8 lt-yr away, and the antimatter requirement is about 54.3 kg of antimatter for each kg of mass delivered to that distance. With one more assumption-- 3. 100 percent efficiency of conversion of electric energy to antimatter, the minimum energy requirement to create the antimatter to deliver 1 kg to a distance of 8 lt-yr at 1-g continuous acceleration/ deceleration becomes 54.3 kg am / 51.47 kg am/USE = 1.055 USE . So the energy requirement to deliver an example final mass of 100 tonnes (10^5 kg) to an example distance of 8 lt-yr at an accel- eration/deceleration of 1 g is 1.055 x 10^5 USE, or 105,500 years of the rate of electric energy production in the entire US in the year 1987, if the efficiency of conversion of electric energy to antimatter is 100 percent. IMPLICATIONS Similar considerations could be applied to relate to the USE the fusion-powered-rocket energy requirement, the sail/beam energy requirement, etc. All will certainly be about as much beyond current power-generation capabilities as antimatter creation is. Human interstellar flight in a human lifetime is even further beyond current physics/economics than I had imagined. Orders of magnitude reduction in payload and increase in transit time are required to reduce the energy problem to a "manageable" size, to only a few USEs, say. What to do about the energy problem for human starflight? A few plausible ways around the problem (requiring extensions of physics, however) come to mind: 1. Find some process to make antimatter which does not require creation energy, such as changing matter to anti- matter through some kind of quantum manipulation (trans- mutation). On 3/27/96 at 9:06 p EST, Lee Parker quoted Kelly Starks (private email of 3/22 at 8:40 a EST), para- phrased, "So physicists are talking about the possibility of rotating the quantum particles to convert a particle of matter to antimatter." 2. Discover some ultra-cheap source of energy (cold fusion?). 3. Tunnel through space ("warp drive"?). The group might think of others. From owner-starship-design Sun Aug 4 16:20 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["6448" "Sun" "4" "August" "1996" "18:07:33" "-0700" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "150" "Re: starship-design: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA17834 for starship-design-outgoing; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 16:20:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub2.tc.umn.edu (mhub2.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.52]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA17822 for ; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 16:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub2.tc.umn.edu; Sun, 4 Aug 96 18:20:47 -0500 Received: from dialup-4-76.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Sun, 4 Aug 96 18:20:44 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <32054955.5EFC@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <960804150718_252570175@emout07.mail.aol.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 6447 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: The Size of the Problem Date: Sun, 04 Aug 1996 18:07:33 -0700 DotarSojat@aol.com wrote: > > MEMORANDUM > TO: The Starship Design Group > FROM: Rex Finke > SUBJECT: The Size of the Problem > > INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY > > A challenge has been identified to convey to the SD group the > size of the problem of providing the energy required for inter- > stellar flight. > > Let us consider an example mission to deliver 100 tonnes to a > distance of 8 light-years at a continuous acceleration/ > deceleration of 1 g, a mission for which we have some numbers. > > Calculations below indicate that this mission, if powered by > antimatter, requires a mass of antimatter that represents an > investment in energy equivalent to at least 105,500 years of > the rate of production of electric energy in the entire US in > 1987. > > CALCULATIONS because I do not have the tools to argue them. I will accept them as givens > the minimum energy requirement to create the antimatter to deliver > 1 kg to a distance of 8 lt-yr at 1-g continuous acceleration/ > deceleration becomes > > 54.3 kg am / 51.47 kg am/USE = 1.055 USE . So at about 91 Kg, I'm looking at 95 USE's > IMPLICATIONS > > Similar considerations could be applied to relate to the USE the > fusion-powered-rocket energy requirement, the sail/beam energy > requirement, etc. All will certainly be about as much beyond > current power-generation capabilities as antimatter creation is. > Human interstellar flight in a human lifetime is even further > beyond current physics/economics than I had imagined. Orders of > magnitude reduction in payload and increase in transit time are > required to reduce the energy problem to a "manageable" size, to > only a few USEs, say. > > What to do about the energy problem for human starflight? > > A few plausible ways around the problem (requiring extensions of > physics, however) come to mind: > > 1. Find some process to make antimatter which does not > require creation energy, such as changing matter to anti- > matter through some kind of quantum manipulation (trans- > mutation). On 3/27/96 at 9:06 p EST, Lee Parker quoted > Kelly Starks (private email of 3/22 at 8:40 a EST), para- > phrased, "So physicists are talking about the possibility > of rotating the quantum particles to convert a particle > of matter to antimatter." My (limited) understanding is that unless Quarks are made up of even smaller particles (hints of which have been bandied about) this is not possible. The quarks in matter are not enough to make the quarks in antimatter > 2. Discover some ultra-cheap source of energy (cold fusion?). Most likely case. Consider that for the last 200 years, the amount of energy commanded by each person (in US since you use USE's) has steadily increased, and that the rate of increase is also increasing. There will come a time when each of us commands the energy to cover the cost of interstellar travel. I don't know when it will happen, but the day will come. > 3. Tunnel through space ("warp drive"?). > > The group might think of others. The best possibility I can think of is self-replicating robots. Let's look at using solar panels for the energy for the ship. > Let us call 293,156 Mw-yr 1 "USE." Well, Ok. But I do prefer round numbers. Now you (Rex) say that it's gonna take 105,500 years to fuel the ship, and in the meantime we all shiver in the dark. Kelly says: (to paraphrase) "given that length of time, and that mass of anti-matter, the chance of an accident is near 100%" so let's try to fuel that ship in one year OK? So a simple calculation yeilds a total of 30,927,958,000,000,000 Watts per year for the whole ship. At the earth's orbit, the solar flux is 1 kilowatt/m^2 second. however, the best soalr cells can only achieve .10% conversion, so we are left with 100 watts/m^2 second. But there are 60*60*24*365=31,536,000 seconds in a year so we can get 100*31,536,000=3,153,600,000 watts per m^2 per year. So, the solar collecting area "only" needs to be 30,927,958,000,000,000/3,153,600,000 =9,807,191 sq meters (at earth's orbit remember) Now let's suppose a "magical" robot with the following abilities: 1) Able to gather and refine lunar materials into stock elements (Si, Al, Ti, O ...) 2) Able to build a copy of itself from such stock materials in one week's time. 3) Able to make one square meter of solar cell in one week's time (for the sake of argument, I'll assume that it can only do one or the other at a given time, not both) Now the problemn gets tricky, do we have the robots reproduce until we have 9,807,190 of them and then set them to make the solar cells, or do we stop after some amount of time and start making solar cells and produce at a steady rate. Let's look at option a: it will take 23.225 weeks to replicate 9,807,190 Robots at which time they can make the required number of solar cells one week later. If they stop after only 22 weeks, there will only be 4,903,595 (half as many) so they will need to work two weeks to make the required amount of solar panels. But if they stop even one week earlier, there will be half again as many, and then it will require four weeks to make the solar panels, which would be one week later than any senario mentioned thus far. So we can seee that 22.225 weeks of reproduction followed by 2 weeks of production will give us all the power needed. the best part is that by picking up a few hundred of these robots prior to lift-off, we can be assured of being able to make the return trip just as painless. Now you can question the reasonableness of these robots, but I really think that they will be built soon. Ability #1 could be done now. There are prototype models that can pick up sand and deliver it to a central point. Ability #2 is tricky, but not unbearably so (say ten to twenty years from now) Ability #3 is subsumed under #2, because each of these robots will itself run on solar cells. In fact, if you gave each robot a solar "footprint" of 1 m^2, then they would become the collection grid. no doubt, three similar "colonies" would need to be deployed around the moon (or other body) to ensure that daylight was always on the grid. Some general notes, I would suggest mercury as a better collection site, due to its proximity to our star. -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 5 06:59 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["6920" "Mon" "5" "August" "1996" "08:55:28" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "168" "Re: starship-design: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA09769 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:59:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA09495 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:58:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10441; Mon, 5 Aug 96 08:58:18 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI010300; Mon Aug 5 08:56:17 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04900; Mon, 5 Aug 96 08:56:14 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004881; Mon Aug 5 08:55:31 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02507; Mon, 5 Aug 96 08:55:27 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 6919 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: DotarSojat@aol.com Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: The Size of the Problem Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:55:28 -0500 At 3:07 PM 8/4/96, DotarSojat@aol.com wrote: >MEMORANDUM >TO: The Starship Design Group >FROM: Rex Finke >SUBJECT: The Size of the Problem > >INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY > >A challenge has been identified to convey to the SD group the >size of the problem of providing the energy required for inter- >stellar flight. > >Let us consider an example mission to deliver 100 tonnes to a >distance of 8 light-years at a continuous acceleration/ >deceleration of 1 g, a mission for which we have some numbers. > >Calculations below indicate that this mission, if powered by >antimatter, requires a mass of antimatter that represents an >investment in energy equivalent to at least 105,500 years of >the rate of production of electric energy in the entire US in >1987. > >CALCULATIONS > >A. ENERGY CONTENT of ANTIMATTER > > >B. ELECTRIC ENERGY PRODUCTION in the US > >My 1994 Grolier Encyclopedia says, under "power, generation and >transmission of," >"In 1987, production of electric energy by utilities in the United >States totaled 2,570 billion kilowatt-hours." > = 51.47 kg am > >C. ANTIMATTER MASS REQUIREMENT > >the minimum energy requirement to create the antimatter to deliver >1 kg to a distance of 8 lt-yr at 1-g continuous acceleration/ >deceleration becomes > > 54.3 kg am / 51.47 kg am/USE = 1.055 USE . > >IMPLICATIONS > >Similar considerations could be applied to relate to the USE the >fusion-powered-rocket energy requirement, the sail/beam energy >requirement, etc. All will certainly be about as much beyond >current power-generation capabilities as antimatter creation is. >Human interstellar flight in a human lifetime is even further >beyond current physics/economics than I had imagined. Orders of >magnitude reduction in payload and increase in transit time are >required to reduce the energy problem to a "manageable" size, to >only a few USEs, say. > >What to do about the energy problem for human starflight? > >A few plausible ways around the problem (requiring extensions of >physics, however) come to mind: > > 1. Find some process to make antimatter which does not > require creation energy, such as changing matter to anti- > matter through some kind of quantum manipulation (trans- > mutation). On 3/27/96 at 9:06 p EST, Lee Parker quoted > Kelly Starks (private email of 3/22 at 8:40 a EST), para- > phrased, "So physicists are talking about the possibility > of rotating the quantum particles to convert a particle > of matter to antimatter." > 2. Discover some ultra-cheap source of energy (cold fusion?). > 3. Tunnel through space ("warp drive"?). > >The group might think of others. A few come to mind. ;) 1) Don't use anti-matter. 2) Don't try for a constant 1 g acceleration for the full durration of the flight. 3) Scale up your power systems. Space travel always involves rediculas amounts of power. Actually most forms of travel do. The Saturn-V's supposedly put out more power than the whole eastern seaboard. To quote myself in the numbers I worked up for the 500,000 ton dry weight Explorer class: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Assuming we're go to accelerate to 1/3rd of light speed (100 million meters per second, a.k.a. 1. E8 m/s). At 1 Ship_g (10m/s^2) our ship will take. E7 seconds to get to speed. That's 115.7 days or about 16.5 weeks. All that time its out accelerating a Corvette (The Explorer class starship has a 0-60mph time of 2.7 seconds.). All that time the home fuel launchers are sending us care packets of fuel. How much fuel? To accelerate a 25,000,000 ton loaded ship at 10m/s, with a fusion engine with a specific impulse of 2,500,000 we will need to 'burn' about 10 TONS! of fusion fuel per second! You'll need 100,000,000 tons (that's a hundred million tons!) of fuel to accelerate it up to 1/3rd light speed." ------------------------------------------------------------ Fortunatly Lithium is extramly plentifull on Earth (i.e. cheap) So the fuel should only cost us a couple dozen billion dollars. Building a fusion reactor that can process fuel in those quantities is scaling problem (an extream scaling problem) but not unprecidented considering the scale of the ships were talking about. If we have the infastructure to build the ship, and the space platforms to construct it at, we can build the power systems. If we assume we don't have extensive space platforms and infastructure. We should assume we wouldn't be launching maned or unmaned interstellar missions. I realize we're talking about unprecidented power levels, but theirs no fundamental reason we can't generate those amounts of power. We just never had a reason to before. (After all, how much has the U.S. energy levels gone up in the last half century? How much growth could we expect in the next half century?) Frankly, the cost is a more serious concern. That of course is complicated to figure out. But critical to a project like this. Who in 1910 U.S.A. would have beleaved we'ld dump the equivalent to a couple hundred billion $ into the Apollo program, just to plant a flag and show up the Russians? Assuming we can work out a technically practical system, and figure out the types of advancements we'ld need to implement it, we could then try to figure out cost assumption. Would we do it this way? No. As you later imply their are big holes in physics current understanding of things. Since were talking about a half century from now. We can assume tremendous advances in physics and science. (Nuclear power for example was only developed in about the last 50 years.) By the time were talking about, the technology were discusing would seem as ludicrus as a supersonic aircraft designed with wood and fabric, and a piston propeler engine. On the other hand coming up with a possible system using the tech we're using could stimulate others to seriously consider the topic, and come up with better ideas. By the way. What could you do with a 100 ton interstellar space probe? Assuming it could generate enough power to transmit back what it saw. It sounds like little more then a camera platform. That hardly seems worth the bother of sending. I.E. you could get that degree of info from here via big scopes. I'm assuming your not considering majic tech like Nano? )If you were willing to consider that, the power levels wouldn't have concerned you. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 5 11:16 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2225" "Mon" "5" "August" "1996" "13:12:51" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "87" "Re: starship-design: ben's questions..." "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA27826 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:16:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA27776 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00572; Mon, 5 Aug 96 13:15:26 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI000418; Mon Aug 5 13:13:30 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09479; Mon, 5 Aug 96 13:13:27 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma009474; Mon Aug 5 13:12:53 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13068; Mon, 5 Aug 96 13:12:50 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2224 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: Philip Bakelaar Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: ben's questions... Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 13:12:51 -0500 Did you ever check these? Kelly ----------------------------------------------------- X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 10:40:31 -0500 To: pbakelaar@exit109.com From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject: Re: your LIT page Cc: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, kellyst@aol.com (Kelly Starks AOL account) >Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 09:52:15 -0500 >To:pbakelaar@exit109.com >From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re: your >LIT page >Hi Ben, >here's Rics recomendations. Let me know if you want to check them. >Thanks >Kelly >>Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 11:04:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: rddesign@wolfenet.com >>Mime-Version: 1.0 >>To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) From: >>rddesign@wolfenet.com (Ric & Denisse Hedman) Subject: Re: your LIT page >>>Any marine or navy web pages you'ld recomend? Zenon and I had a ton of >>>space relateds. But little wet stuff. Since you and Dave are the only >>>ones in the group with a formal relationship with the ocean... >>Kelly; >>>From my Flasher page connect to Ron Martini's page or Rod Rodregiez page >>both these connect to Hundreds of other pages... >>Ric >>Visit RD Designs Home Page >>at:..http://www.wolfenet.com/~rddesign/Rddesign.htm Ok, so maby knowing that the Flasher page is at: http://www.wolfenet.com/~rddesign/Flasher.htm would help. Other two pages are at http://wave.sheridan.wy.us/~rontini/ronpage.html http://www.gnatnet.net:80/~hotrod/ You also might like http://oceania.org/ http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/~bat/sea-city.html http://www.millennial.org/~jwills/InfoGuide/ http://www.arcosanti.org/ Happy surfing. Might hit alta-vista or Yahoo too. Or you might tell me you don't want todo any of this, and I should buzz off. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 06:37 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1738" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "08:33:22" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "44" "starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA19772 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 06:37:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA19763 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 06:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14929; Tue, 6 Aug 96 08:36:34 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI014686; Tue Aug 6 08:33:49 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04059; Tue, 6 Aug 96 08:33:44 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004056; Tue Aug 6 08:33:24 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03209; Tue, 6 Aug 96 08:33:21 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1737 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:33:22 -0500 Hey folks, I've uploaded the next draft of the LIT stuff I was working on. The bannor gifs have been cleaned up a bit. The map gif for bouncing around LIT has larger characters (hope it helps Zenon). The List of WEB links in the Library has been sorted out more, and the text colors have been adjusted for more visibility. I think I'm about done on the Main LIT page and the entry pages for Marine, near earth Development, and Solar system Dev (theirs not much content, but their good entry pages for when we get something to put in there. The Librarys not in bad shape, But the Starship Design section needs a bit of tweeking. I still havn't gotten a readable copy of Brains Argosey stuff. If anyone else has, please send it to me for inclusion. If not I'll try to get a copy of a UUencode decoder. Dave! Please, delete the Project directory from inside the interstellar directory. I moved the contents down into Interstallar, but couldn't delete the directory and subdirectories. Ben. Library and Marine now have the latest stuff of what I have. I'll leave it alone. If you get stuff to add let me know. (No more coordination foul ups I hope.) Did we ever make a decision about who was going to handel Newsletters? If no one else was planing to, I'll handel collecting them. More later when I think of it. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 07:29 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["806" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "16:28:10" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "23" "Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA25080 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:29:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA25038 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20949; Tue, 6 Aug 96 16:28:10 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9608061428.AA20949@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 805 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT Date: Tue, 6 Aug 96 16:28:10 +0200 > From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) > > I've uploaded the next draft of the LIT stuff I was working on. The bannor > gifs have been cleaned up a bit. The map gif for bouncing around LIT has > larger characters (hope it helps Zenon). > Yes, now it looks OK. However, the imagemap does not work properly - with my Netscape 2.0 (on UNIX) instead of jumping to appropriate page, I get a request to download the .map file... > The List of WEB links in the > Library has been sorted out more, and the text colors have been adjusted > for more visibility. > Yes, now they look much nicer. May I indulge my appetites for proofreading of other pages too? ;-)) (when time permits - just now I am rather busy, writing a veeery learned paper for a conference in Germany...) -- Zenon From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 07:41 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["221" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "16:40:25" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "7" "Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA26322 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:41:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA26310 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:41:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20972; Tue, 6 Aug 96 16:40:25 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9608061440.AA20972@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 220 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT Date: Tue, 6 Aug 96 16:40:25 +0200 Kelly, look at the banner GIF of Solar Development page!! You wrote there with BIG letters Systen instead of System! I am quite forgiving for spelling in e-mails, but in such a place? Shame to you, Kelly... -- Zenon From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 08:36 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1467" "Sun" "6" "August" "1995" "17:35:47" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "37" "starship-design: Re: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA04762 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:36:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA04751 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA10706 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:34:58 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608061534.AA10706@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1466 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Re: The Size of the Problem Date: Sun, 06 Aug 1995 17:35:47 +0100 Kevin Replied: >> A few plausible ways around the problem (requiring extensions of >> physics, however) come to mind: >> >> 1. Find some process to make antimatter which does not .... > >My (limited) understanding is that unless Quarks are made up of even smaller >particles (hints of which have been bandied about) this is not possible. Only 2 months ago I saw a report from I believe the Fermilab that they had some minor clues that quarks might have a substructure (it must be on the web somewhere). However, why is a substructure necessary? It is already known that quarks can change flavour under influence of the weak force. Take for example: n -> p + e- where a down-quark is changed in an up-quark >> Let us call 293,156 Mw-yr 1 "USE." Well, Ok. But I do prefer round numbers. This doesn't say 293,156 Mw PER year, but say TIMES year! (Joules instead of Watts) So instead of a lousy 9 square kilometers of solar panels you are talking about: 3600*24*365*9,807,191=3.1E14 m^2 That roughly means 48 weeks of robot creation. However, those robot should create their own power supplies, so that would mean they could use no more than about 100 to 400 Watt (pretty efficient machines!!) >Some general notes, I would suggest mercury as a better collection site, due to >its proximity to our star. Unluckely mercury doesn't have a moon. While its gravity is about 2.2 moon gravities I wonder if our robots like the climate on the surface. Timothy From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 08:41 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1532" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "10:36:19" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "47" "Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA06013 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:41:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA05990 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:40:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23276; Tue, 6 Aug 96 10:40:06 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI023132; Tue Aug 6 10:37:51 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06450; Tue, 6 Aug 96 10:37:47 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma006413; Tue Aug 6 10:36:22 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20189; Tue, 6 Aug 96 10:36:19 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1531 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:36:19 -0500 At 4:28 PM 8/6/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >> From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) >> >> I've uploaded the next draft of the LIT stuff I was working on. The bannor >> gifs have been cleaned up a bit. The map gif for bouncing around LIT has >> larger characters (hope it helps Zenon). >> >Yes, now it looks OK. >However, the imagemap does not work properly - >with my Netscape 2.0 (on UNIX) instead of jumping to appropriate page, >I get a request to download the .map file... True, I forgot to mention those maps woun't work untill loaded into the final SunSite (or whatever) area and set to their config. (Which is one reason I made one central map that is called by all the subpages.) >> The List of WEB links in the >> Library has been sorted out more, and the text colors have been adjusted >> for more visibility. >> >Yes, now they look much nicer. Great. >May I indulge my appetites for proofreading of other pages too? ;-)) >(when time permits - just now I am rather busy, >writing a veeery learned paper for a conference in Germany...) > >-- Zenon Proof to your hearts content. :) Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 08:43 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["797" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "10:40:05" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "28" "Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA06457 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA06443 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:43:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23566; Tue, 6 Aug 96 10:43:22 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI023366; Tue Aug 6 10:41:08 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06514; Tue, 6 Aug 96 10:41:05 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma006493; Tue Aug 6 10:40:07 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20702; Tue, 6 Aug 96 10:40:04 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 796 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:40:05 -0500 At 4:40 PM 8/6/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >Kelly, look at the banner GIF of Solar Development page!! >You wrote there with BIG letters Systen instead of System! >I am quite forgiving for spelling in e-mails, but in such a place? >Shame to you, Kelly... > >-- Zenon AHHHHHH! Yes, I also made the same (stupid) misspelling in the text of the main LIT home page. Will correct ASAP. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 09:04 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1726" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "10:57:02" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "46" "Re: starship-design: Re: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA10318 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA10298 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:04:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA24824; Tue, 6 Aug 96 11:00:24 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI024695; Tue Aug 6 10:58:01 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06803; Tue, 6 Aug 96 10:57:58 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma006791; Tue Aug 6 10:57:05 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23308; Tue, 6 Aug 96 10:57:02 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1725 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: The Size of the Problem Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:57:02 -0500 At 5:35 PM 8/6/95, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >Kevin Replied: > >>> A few plausible ways around the problem (requiring extensions of >>> physics, however) come to mind: >>> >>> 1. Find some process to make antimatter which does not .... >> >>My (limited) understanding is that unless Quarks are made up of even smaller >>particles (hints of which have been bandied about) this is not possible. > >Only 2 months ago I saw a report from I believe the Fermilab that they had >some minor clues that quarks might have a substructure (it must be on the >web somewhere). > >However, why is a substructure necessary? It is already known that quarks >can change flavour under influence of the weak force. Take for example: >n -> p + e- where a down-quark is changed in an up-quark Interesting, I'll have to remenber that. I heard (and partially understand/remember) that their was some thought that if you do an N-space rotation to convert quarks from up to down you could convert the partical they form from matter to anti-matter. Never heard of 'fliping' the quarks via the weak force. (How do you generate the weak force?) Thanks for the info. I was going to assume a trick like the forst one was used by the systems in my next SF book. (I'm glad it wasn't disproved or something!) ;) ===> >Timothy Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 09:21 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["495" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "18:20:24" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "17" "Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA13191 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:21:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA13157 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21111; Tue, 6 Aug 96 18:20:24 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9608061620.AA21111@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 494 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT Date: Tue, 6 Aug 96 18:20:24 +0200 > From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) > > Yes, I also made the same (stupid) misspelling in the text of the main LIT > home page. Will correct ASAP. > Yesss! And what a proofreader you think you are, Zenon, overlooking THAT? Shame to you, Zenon! ;-( I wonder why you have missed such an opportunity to indulge in some Zenon-bashing, Kelly? ;-) -- Zenon P.S. By your usual disregard for mail headers, your replies to me came in three copies each... -- Zzz From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 09:31 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2648" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "11:18:22" "-0500" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "69" "Re: starship-design: Re: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA14915 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:31:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub1.tc.umn.edu (mhub1.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.51]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA14897 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:31:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub1.tc.umn.edu; Tue, 6 Aug 96 11:31:38 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-87.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Tue, 6 Aug 96 11:31:36 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <3207704E.22F6@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <199608061534.AA10706@driene.student.utwente.nl> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 2647 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: The Size of the Problem Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 11:18:22 -0500 Timothy van der Linden wrote: > > Kevin Replied: > > >> A few plausible ways around the problem (requiring extensions of > >> physics, however) come to mind: > >> > >> 1. Find some process to make antimatter which does not .... > > > >My (limited) understanding is that unless Quarks are made up of even smaller > >particles (hints of which have been bandied about) this is not possible. > > Only 2 months ago I saw a report from I believe the Fermilab that they had > some minor clues that quarks might have a substructure (it must be on the > web somewhere). > > However, why is a substructure necessary? It is already known that quarks > can change flavour under influence of the weak force. Take for example: > n -> p + e- where a down-quark is changed in an up-quark _ Okay, but how do you change a d quark into a d quark for example. My (again, limited) understanding was that not enough of the right type of quarks are in a sample of matter to allow one to create a sample of anit-matter. I would be happy to learn that I am wrong on this. what are the quark triplets needed for: Protons Electrons Neutrons Anti-Protons Anti-Electrons Anti-Neutrons > > >> Let us call 293,156 Mw-yr 1 "USE." Well, Ok. But I do prefer round > numbers. > > This doesn't say 293,156 Mw PER year, but say TIMES year! (Joules instead of > Watts) So instead of a lousy 9 square kilometers of solar panels you are > talking about: 3600*24*365*9,807,191=3.1E14 m^2 Ooops, OK, I see it. still, the solution is workable. The next paragraph you wrote shows that a (rough) doubling of reproduction time is all that is needed. > That roughly means 48 weeks of robot creation. However, those robot should > create their own power supplies, so that would mean they could use no more > than about 100 to 400 Watt (pretty efficient machines!!) The main jobs of the Robots would be gathering material, and putting pieces together. The job of converting raw material into refined stocks would be the job of a central machine, (which would be fed by several tens of m^2 of solar panels. This is why I think that there might be some lower limit to the number of Robots needed to start a new colony > > >Some general notes, I would suggest mercury as a better collection site, due to > >its proximity to our star. > > Unluckely mercury doesn't have a moon. While its gravity is about 2.2 moon > gravities I wonder if our robots like the climate on the surface. They could be constructed out of materials that could handle the heat load. -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 10:05 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["598" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "11:49:40" "-0500" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "23" "starship-design: possible toolbar map error?" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA22608 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub1.tc.umn.edu (mhub1.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.51]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA22583 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub1.tc.umn.edu; Tue, 6 Aug 96 12:02:56 -0500 Received: from dialup-5-87.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Tue, 6 Aug 96 12:02:54 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <320777A4.7E75@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 597 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: possible toolbar map error? Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 11:49:40 -0500 Kelly, I checked the image map code and it looks strange to me. you have: [image-map] I see two possible reasons for it not working. 1) The line has a .GIF and a .MAP this could be confusing the server 2) I have found that somethimes, in order to get maps to work, you must give the complete URL. Using the base href doesn't always work. 2a) you might have to put it in a sub-directory called cgi-bin. hope this helps -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 10:40 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1124" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "12:33:45" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "36" "Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA03293 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:39:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA03178 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:38:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03346; Tue, 6 Aug 96 12:38:12 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI003018; Tue Aug 6 12:34:42 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08510; Tue, 6 Aug 96 12:34:36 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma008488; Tue Aug 6 12:33:48 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09212; Tue, 6 Aug 96 12:33:45 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1123 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Update to the dev. LIT Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:33:45 -0500 At 6:20 PM 8/6/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote: >> From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) >> >> Yes, I also made the same (stupid) misspelling in the text of the main LIT >> home page. Will correct ASAP. >> >Yesss! >And what a proofreader you think you are, Zenon, >overlooking THAT? Shame to you, Zenon! ;-( > >I wonder why you have missed such an opportunity >to indulge in some Zenon-bashing, Kelly? ;-) No chalenge, no interets. (Besides I missed it too.) I can wait until we debate Kamakazi missions. ;) >-- Zenon > >P.S. By your usual disregard for mail headers, your replies to me > came in three copies each... -- Zzz The same three it came with. I thought you might prefer it. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 10:47 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1510" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "12:43:39" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "47" "Re: starship-design: possible toolbar map error?" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA05945 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:46:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA05788 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:46:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04042; Tue, 6 Aug 96 12:45:38 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI003888; Tue Aug 6 12:44:21 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08636; Tue, 6 Aug 96 12:44:22 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma008632; Tue Aug 6 12:43:42 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10893; Tue, 6 Aug 96 12:43:39 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1509 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Cc: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: possible toolbar map error? Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:43:39 -0500 At 11:49 AM 8/6/96, Kevin 'Tex' Houston wrote: >Kelly, > >I checked the image map code and it looks strange to me. > >you have: > >[image-map] > > >I see two possible reasons for it not working. > >1) The line has a .GIF and a .MAP this could be confusing the server > >2) I have found that somethimes, in order to get maps to work, you must > give the complete URL. Using the base href doesn't always work. > >2a) you might have to put it in a sub-directory called cgi-bin. > > >hope this helps >-- >Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html Thanks. The other maps worked outside of a sub directory (when converted for Daves system) and gave the same error before conversion. So I'm hoping It'll work when instaled. If not, well at least they all reference the same central map and Gif. I really wish I could test it on my system before I upload it. Or even completly test it on Daves before Its uploaded to LIT. (The Map standards need to get settled in HTML land.) Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 14:52 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2115" "Tue" "6" "August" "1996" "17:52:18" "-0400" "David Levine" "David@interworld.com" nil "56" "starship-design: FW: Statement from Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA13087 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www1.interworld.com (www.InterWorld.Com [165.254.130.4]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA13038 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:52:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by www1.interworld.com with Microsoft Exchange (IMC 4.0.837.3) id <01BB83C0.04334910@www1.interworld.com>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:52:21 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.837.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Levine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2114 From: David Levine Sender: owner-starship-design To: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" , InterWorld , "'Brian_Levine_at_pnpur1@mail.brodeur.com'" , "'Harris, Craig'" , "'Faye, Hillary'" , "'Jackson, Kelly'" To: "'Rosenthal, Matt'" , "'Levine_M'" , "'Levine, Howard'" Subject: starship-design: FW: Statement from Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:52:18 -0400 Amazing stuff. -David >---------- >From: Berman, Andrea[SMTP:andrea.berman@spmail.jsc.nasa.gov] >Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 1996 5:50 PM >To: David Levine; David Morgan; georg; Janet M. LoCastro; Marge; Matt >R.; Matthew Bertrand; Phieng; Hwang, Erica; Minton, Jacquie; Norris, >Lena >Subject: FW: Statement from Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator > >Wow... >________________________________________________________________________ >_______ >From: NASA HQ Public Affairs Office on Tue, Aug 6, 1996 3:45 PM >Subject: Statement from Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator >To: press-release-nasa@venus.hq.nasa.gov > >Laurie Boeder >Headquarters, Washington, DC August 6, 1996 >(Phone: 202/358-1898) > >RELEASE: 96-159 > >STATEMENT FROM DANIEL S. GOLDIN, NASA ADMINISTRATOR > > "NASA has made a startling discovery that points to the >possibility that a primitive form of microscopic life may >have existed on Mars more than three billion years ago. The >research is based on a sophisticated examination of an ancient >Martian meteorite that landed on Earth some 13,000 years ago. > > The evidence is exciting, even compelling, but not >conclusive. It is a discovery that demands further >scientific investigation. NASA is ready to assist the >process of rigorous scientific investigation and lively >scientific debate that will follow this discovery. > > I want everyone to understand that we are not talking >about 'little green men.' These are extremely small, single- >cell structures that somewhat resemble bacteria on Earth. >There is no evidence or suggestion that any higher life form >ever existed on Mars. > > The NASA scientists and researchers who made this >discovery will be available at a news conference tomorrow to >discuss their findings. They will outline the step-by-step >"detective story" that explains how the meteorite arrived >here from Mars, and how they set about looking for evidence >of long-ago life in this ancient rock. They will also >release some fascinating images documenting their research. > > -end- > From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 16:05 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2965" "Mon" "7" "August" "1995" "01:04:26" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "60" "Re: starship-design: Re: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA03710 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:05:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA03641 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA27983 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 7 Aug 1996 01:04:10 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608062304.AA27983@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2964 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: The Size of the Problem Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 01:04:26 +0100 To Kevin and Kelly, >> However, why is a substructure necessary? It is already known that quarks >> can change flavour under influence of the weak force. Take for example: >> n -> p + e- where a down-quark is changed in an up-quark > > _ >Okay, but how do you change a d quark into a d quark for example. My (again, limited) >understanding was that not enough of the right type of quarks are in a sample >of matter to allow one to create a sample of anit-matter. I would be happy to >learn that I am wrong on this. I'm not sure what you mean with the right type of quarks, but in ordinary matter you only have normal (non-anti) quarks. In fact from the six normal quarks only the 2 with the lowest energy are in ordinary matter, namely the up and down quarks. To change quarks to anti-quarks one needs theoretical particles called Lepto-quarks. The theories that predict these particles are not proofed and of course these particles are not found yet. Clearly these particles are not everywhere around us, unless they are somehow savely locked away (maybe we could unlock them?). The latter is the only thing that would be really useful, one could almost call it Zero point energy (ZPE). >What are the quark triplets needed for: Quark triplets are present in: Protons, Neutrons, Anti-Protons, Anti-Neutrons, these are called "Baryons". Electrons and Anti-Electrons are "Leptons" and have no know substructure, they do not react to the strong force (which glues quarks together). How to make the weak-force? I'm not sure, to me it's of the strangest forces, since it actually can change particles, unlik other forces that mainly do some gluing or repelling. One thing is sure, the weak force is doing some real work in making an unstable nucleus stable (beta decay, see the equation above). So in general making unstable "normal" particles will invoke the weak force, or the electromagnetic force (gamma-rays). However keep in mind that it can only change quark flavour (up, down etc.), not change quarks into anti-quarks. >> That roughly means 48 weeks of robot creation. However, those robot should >> create their own power supplies, so that would mean they could use no more >> than about 100 to 400 Watt (pretty efficient machines!!) > >The main jobs of the Robots would be gathering material, and putting pieces >together. The job of converting raw material into refined stocks would be >the job of a central machine, (which would be fed by several tens of m^2 of >solar panels. This is why I think that there might be some lower limit to >the number of Robots needed to start a new colony But how much power would be needed to lift all that mass from the Moon or Mercury? On Earth making solar panels is a rather expensive procedure, essentially because so much high grade silicium is needed. I'm not sure what makes it expensive; energy or processing-time. I hope for you it is the latter. Timothy From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 6 16:06 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1929" "Mon" "7" "August" "1995" "01:04:22" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "62" "starship-design: Re: Statement from Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA04176 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA03570 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:05:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA27909 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 7 Aug 1996 01:03:06 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608062303.AA27909@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1928 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Re: Statement from Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 01:04:22 +0100 >Amazing stuff. >>Wow... Get a look at that august issue of Science... Timothy ----------------------------------------------------------------- Donald Savage Headquarters, Washington, DC August 6, 1996 (Phone: 202/358-1727) James Hartsfield Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX (Phone: 713/483-5111) David F. Salisbury Stanford University, CA (Phone: 415/723-2558) NOTE TO EDITORS: N96-53 NASA BRIEFING WEDNESDAY ON DISCOVERY OF POSSIBLE EARLY MARTIAN LIFE A team of NASA and Stanford scientists will discuss its findings showing strong circumstantial evidence of possible early Martian life, including microfossil remains found in a Martian meteorite, at a news conference scheduled for 1:00 p.m. EDT, August 7, at NASA Headquarters, 300 E. St. SW, Washington, DC. The team's findings will be published in the August 16 issue of Science magazine. Panelists will be: - Dr. Wesley Huntress, Jr., NASA Assoc. Administrator for Space Science, Washington, DC - Dr. David McKay, principal author, NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC), Houston, TX - Dr. Everett Gibson, NASA JSC, Houston, TX - Dr. Richard N. Zare, Professor of Chemistry, Stanford University, CA - Kathy Thomas-Keprta, Lockheed-Martin, JSC, Houston, TX - Dr. William Schopf, Professor, Department of Earth and Space Sciences, Univ. of California, Los Angeles The briefing will be carried live on NASA TV with two- way question-and-answer capability for reporters covering the event from participating NASA centers. Audio of the broadcast will be available on voice circuit at the Kennedy Space Center by calling 407/867-1260. NASA Television is broadcast on Spacenet 2, transponder 5, channel 9, C-Band, located at 69 degrees West longitude, with horizontal polarization. Frequency will be on 3880.0 megahertz, with audio on 6.8 megahertz. - end - From owner-starship-design Thu Aug 8 06:13 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["12399" "Tue" "8" "August" "1995" "15:12:13" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "263" "starship-design: Meteorite Yields Evidence of Primitive Life on Early Mars" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA15535 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:13:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA15499 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA02514 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:12:01 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608081312.AA02514@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 12398 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Meteorite Yields Evidence of Primitive Life on Early Mars Date: Tue, 08 Aug 1995 15:12:13 +0100 Hi all, I assume that the US media is just about as crazy about this as in Holland, anyhow this may be some additional more precise info. Zenon are the Polish also making it big news? Timothy ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Donald L. Savage Headquarters, Washington, DC August 7, 1996 (Phone: 202/358-1727) James Hartsfield Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX (Phone: 713/483-5111) David Salisbury Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA (Phone: 415/723-2558) RELEASE: 96-160 METEORITE YIELDS EVIDENCE OF PRIMITIVE LIFE ON EARLY MARS A NASA research team of scientists at the Johnson Space Center (JSC), Houston, TX, and at Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, has found evidence that strongly suggests primitive life may have existed on Mars more than 3.6 billion years ago. The NASA-funded team found the first organic molecules thought to be of Martian origin; several mineral features characteristic of biological activity; and possible microscopic fossils of primitive, bacteria-like organisms inside of an ancient Martian rock that fell to Earth as a meteorite. This array of indirect evidence of past life will be reported in the August 16 issue of the journal Science, presenting the investigation to the scientific community at large for further study. The two-year investigation was co-led by JSC planetary scientists Dr. David McKay, Dr. Everett Gibson and Kathie Thomas-Keprta of Lockheed-Martin, with the major collaboration of a Stanford team headed by Professor of Chemistry Dr. Richard Zare, as well as six other NASA and university research partners. "There is not any one finding that leads us to believe that this is evidence of past life on Mars. Rather, it is a combination of many things that we have found," McKay said. "They include Stanford's detection of an apparently unique pattern of organic molecules, carbon compounds that are the basis of life. We also found several unusual mineral phases that are known products of primitive microscopic organisms on Earth. Structures that could be microsopic fossils seem to support all of this. The relationship of all of these things in terms of location - within a few hundred thousandths of an inch of one another - is the most compelling evidence." "It is very difficult to prove life existed 3.6 billion years ago on Earth, let alone on Mars," Zare said. "The existing standard of proof, which we think we have met, includes having an accurately dated sample that contains native microfossils, mineralogical features characteristic of life, and evidence of complex organic chemistry." "For two years, we have applied state-of-the-art technology to perform these analyses, and we believe we have found quite reasonable evidence of past life on Mars," Gibson added. "We don't claim that we have conclusively proven it. We are putting this evidence out to the scientific community for other investigators to verify, enhance, attack -- disprove if they can -- as part of the scientific process. Then, within a year or two, we hope to resolve the question one way or the other." "What we have found to be the most reasonable interpretation is of such radical nature that it will only be accepted or rejected after other groups either confirm our findings or overturn them," McKay added. The igneous rock in the 4.2-pound, potato-sized meteorite has been age-dated to about 4.5 billion years, the period when the planet Mars formed. The rock is believed to have originated underneath the Martian surface and to have been extensively fractured by impacts as meteorites bombarded the planets in the early inner solar system. Between 3.6 billion and 4 billion years ago, a time when it is generally thought that the planet was warmer and wetter, water is believed to have penetrated fractures in the subsurface rock, possibly forming an underground water system. Since the water was saturated with carbon dioxide from the Martian atmosphere, carbonate minerals were deposited in the fractures. The team's findings indicate living organisms also may have assisted in the formation of the carbonate, and some remains of the microscopic organisms may have become fossilized, in a fashion similar to the formation of fossils in limestone on Earth. Then, 16 million years ago, a huge comet or asteroid struck Mars, ejecting a piece of the rock from its subsurface location with enough force to escape the planet. For millions of years, the chunk of rock floated through space. It encountered Earth's atmosphere 13,000 years ago and fell in Antarctica as a meteorite. It is in the tiny globs of carbonate that the researchers found a number of features that can be interpreted as suggesting past life. Stanford researchers found easily detectable amounts of organic molecules called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) concentrated in the vicinity of the carbonate. Researchers at JSC found mineral compounds commonly associated with microscopic organisms and the possible microscopic fossil structures. The largest of the possible fossils are less than 1/100 the diameter of a human hair, and most are about 1/1000 the diameter of a human hair - small enough that it would take about a thousand laid end-to-end to span the dot at the end of this sentence. Some are egg-shaped while others are tubular. In appearance and size, the structures are strikingly similar to microscopic fossils of the tiniest bacteria found on Earth. The meteorite, called ALH84001, was found in 1984 in Allan Hills ice field, Antarctica, by an annual expedition of the National Science Foundation's Antarctic Meteorite Program. It was preserved for study in JSC's Meteorite Processing Laboratory and its possible Martian origin was not recognized until 1993. It is one of only 12 meteorites identified so far that match the unique Martian chemistry measured by the Viking spacecraft that landed on Mars in 1976. ALH84001 is by far the oldest of the 12 Martian meteorites, more than three times as old as any other. Many of the team's findings were made possible only because of very recent technological advances in high- resolution scanning electron microscopy and laser mass spectrometry. Only a few years ago, many of the features that they report were undetectable. Although past studies of this meteorite and others of Martian origin failed to detect evidence of past life, they were generally performed using lower levels of magnification, without the benefit of the technology used in this research. The recent discovery of extremely small bacteria on Earth, called nanobacteria, prompted the team to perform this work at a much finer scale than past efforts. The nine authors of the Science report include McKay, Gibson and Thomas-Keprta of JSC; Christopher Romanek, formerly a National Research Council post-doctoral fellow at JSC who is now a staff scientist at the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory at the University of Georgia; Hojatollah Vali, a National Research Council post-doctoral fellow at JSC and a staff scientist at McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; and Zare, graduate students Simon J. Clemett and Claude R. Maechling and post-doctoral student Xavier Chillier of the Stanford University Department of Chemistry. The team of researchers includes a wide variety of expertise, including microbiology, mineralogy, analytical techniques, geochemistry and organic chemistry, and the analysis crossed all of these disciplines. Further details on the findings presented in the Science article include: * Researchers at Stanford University used a dual laser mass spectrometer -- the most sensitive instrument of its type in the world -- to look for the presence of the common family of organic molecules called PAHs. When microorganisms die, the complex organic molecules that they contain frequently degrade into PAHs. PAHs are often associated with ancient sedimentary rocks, coals and petroleum on Earth and can be common air pollutants. Not only did the scientists find PAHs in easily detectable amounts in ALH84001, but they found that these molecules were concentrated in the vicinity of the carbonate globules. This finding appears consistent with the proposition that they are a result of the fossilization process. In addition, the unique composition of the meteorite's PAHs is consistent with what the scientists expect from the fossilization of very primitive microorganisms. On Earth, PAHs virtually always occur in thousands of forms, but, in the meteorite, they are dominated by only about a half-dozen different compounds. The simplicity of this mixture, combined with the lack of light- weight PAHs like napthalene, also differs substantially from that of PAHs previously measured in non-Martian meteorites. * The team found unusual compounds -- iron sulfides and magnetite -- that can be produced by anaerobic bacteria and other microscopic organisms on Earth. The compounds were found in locations directly associated with the fossil-like structures and carbonate globules in the meteorite. Extreme conditions -- conditions very unlikely to have been encountered by the meteorite -- would have been required to produce these compounds in close proximity to one another if life were not involved. The carbonate also contained tiny grains of magnetite that are almost identical to magnetic fossil remnants often left by certain bacteria found on Earth. Other minerals commonly associated with biological activity on Earth were found in the carbonate as well. * The formation of the carbonate or fossils by living organisms while the meteorite was in the Antarctic was deemed unlikely for several reasons. The carbonate was age dated using a parent-daughter isotope method and found to be 3.6 billion years old, and the organic molecules were first detected well within the ancient carbonate. In addition, the team analyzed representative samples of other meteorites from Antarctica and found no evidence of fossil-like structures, organic molecules or possible biologically produced compounds and minerals similar to those in the ALH84001 meteorite. The composition and location of PAHs organic molecules found in the meteorite also appeared to confirm that the possible evidence of life was extraterrestrial. No PAHs were found in the meteorite's exterior crust, but the concentration of PAHs increased in the meteorite's interior to levels higher than ever found in Antarctica. Higher concentrations of PAHs would have likely been found on the exterior of the meteorite, decreasing toward the interior, if the organic molecules are the result of contamination of the meteorite on Earth. Additional information may be obtained at 1 p.m. EDT via the Internet at http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/flash/ -end- ------------------------------------------------------------------ David E. Steitz Headquarters, Washington, DC August 7, 1996 (Phone: 202/358-1730) RELEASE: I96-6 MARS METEORITE IMAGES AVAILABLE VIA THE INTERNET Photographs that support today's briefing at which a team of NASA and Stanford scientists will discuss their findings showing strong circumstantial evidence of possible early Martian life, including microfossil ramains found in a Martian meteorite, are available via the Internet. Real time audio of today's briefing also will be available from these sites. The Internet World Wide Web URLs are: http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/flash http://cu-ames.arc.nasa.gov/marslife http://rsd.gsfc.nasa.gov/marslife - end - NASA press releases and other information are available automatically by sending an Internet electronic mail message to domo@hq.nasa.gov. In the body of the message (not the subject line) users should type the words "subscribe press-release" (no quotes). The system will reply with a confirmation via E-mail of each subscription. A second automatic message will include additional information on the service. NASA releases also are available via CompuServe using the command GO NASA. From owner-starship-design Thu Aug 8 06:29 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["393" "Thu" "8" "August" "1996" "15:27:07" "+0200" "Zenon Kulpa" "zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl" nil "11" "Re: starship-design: Meteorite Yields Evidence of Primitive Life on Early Mars" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA16949 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:29:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (zmit1.ippt.gov.pl [148.81.53.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA16664 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA24676; Thu, 8 Aug 96 15:27:07 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <9608081327.AA24676@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 392 From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Cc: zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl Subject: Re: starship-design: Meteorite Yields Evidence of Primitive Life on Early Mars Date: Thu, 8 Aug 96 15:27:07 +0200 > From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) > > I assume that the US media is just about as crazy about this as in Holland, > anyhow this may be some additional more precise info. Zenon are the Polish > also making it big news? > As yet, I have seen yesterday a short spot at main news on TV. Did'n look at the press - I read some weekly papers only... -- Zenon From owner-starship-design Thu Aug 8 06:55 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["699" "Thu" "8" "August" "1996" "08:52:04" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "24" "Re: starship-design: Meteorite Yields Evidence of Primitive Life on Early Mars" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA20289 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA20278 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09882; Thu, 8 Aug 96 08:54:05 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI009803; Thu Aug 8 08:52:46 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03842; Thu, 8 Aug 96 08:52:44 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma003839; Thu Aug 8 08:52:05 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22655; Thu, 8 Aug 96 08:52:02 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 698 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Meteorite Yields Evidence of Primitive Life on Early Mars Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 08:52:04 -0500 At 3:12 PM 8/8/95, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >Hi all, > >I assume that the US media is just about as crazy about this as in Holland, >anyhow this may be some additional more precise info. Zenon are the Polish >also making it big news? > >Timothy Oh, theres a bit of interest. ;) Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Thu Aug 8 11:44 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["375" "Thu" "8" "August" "1996" "14:46:36" "-0400" "DotarSojat@aol.com" "DotarSojat@aol.com" nil "15" "Re: starship-design: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA23521 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 11:44:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout14.mail.aol.com (emout14.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.40]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA23485 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 11:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout14.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA13385 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 14:46:36 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960808144634_174300416@emout14.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DotarSojat@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 374 From: DotarSojat@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: The Size of the Problem Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 14:46:36 -0400 I quote myself: >A few plausible ways around the problem (requiring extensions >of physics, however) come to mind: > > 2. Discover some ultra-cheap source of energy > (cold fusion?). Note that 1 cubic mile of (sea) water contains enough deuterium to provide about 5,400 USEs from the fusion reaction(s)-- D + D + D --> He4 + n + p + 21.6 MeV . Rex From owner-starship-design Sun Aug 11 21:52 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["4875" "Mon" "12" "August" "1996" "00:50:15" "-0400" "DotarSojat@aol.com" "DotarSojat@aol.com" nil "145" "starship-design: Re: Re: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA14168 for starship-design-outgoing; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 21:51:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout18.mail.aol.com (emout18.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.44]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA14153 for ; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 21:51:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout18.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA22879 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 00:50:15 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960812005014_176760039@emout18.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DotarSojat@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 4874 From: DotarSojat@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Re: Re: The Size of the Problem Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 00:50:15 -0400 At 09:58 8/5/96, Kelly Starks wrote: >At 3:07 PM 8/4/96, DotarSojat wrote: >>SUBJECT: The Size of the Problem >>The minimum energy requirement to create the antimatter to >>deliver 1 kg to a distance of 8 lt-yr at 1-g continuous >>acceleration/deceleration becomes >> >> 54.3 kg am / 51.47 kg am/USE = 1.055 USE . >>IMPLICATIONS >> >>.... >>Orders of magnitude reduction in payload and increase in >>transit time are required to reduce the energy problem to a >>"manageable" size, to only a few USEs, say. >> >>.... >>A few plausible ways around the problem...come to mind: >> >>.... >> >>The group might think of others. >A few come to mind. ;) > >1) Don't use antimatter. And use at least 250 times the mass of energy fuel? :( >2) Don't try for a constant 1 g acceleration for the full >durration of the flight. >.... While I believe Kelly had a coast phase in mind, his comment suggested to me trying values of constant acceleration/ deceleration less than 1 g. With some improvements in the cal- culation from my 4/4/96 memo to the Group, I get the following reductions in energy requirement, in USE per kilogram of burnout mass, as the accel/decel value is decreased from 1 g (included in the table are the peak proper velocity Uend in lt-yr/yr, the trip time in yr and the mass ratio for the acceleration phase alone): Accel/decel Uend Energy/Mbo trip time mass ratio(accel) (g) (lt-yr/yr) (USE/kg) (yr) Distance = 8 (actually 7.941) lt-yr 1.0 5.000 1.0510* 4.480 15.11 Distance = 4.35 lt-yr (alpha Centauri) 1.0 3.088 0.4067 3.576 10.58 0.9 2.851 0.3476 3.810 10.03 0.8 2.611 0.2925 4.087 9.47 0.7 2.369 0.2415 4.421 8.91 0.6 2.124 0.1946 4.835 8.35 0.5 1.872 0.1518 5.366 7.79 0.4 1.613 0.1132 6.083 7.22 0.3633 1.516 0.1000 6.417 7.01 0.3 1.342 0.0786 7.128 6.65 0.2 1.049 0.0483 8.867 6.08 0.1 0.707 0.0220 12.751 5.50 0.0476 0.475 0.0100 18.653 5.19 ----------- *was 1.055 in my 8/4/96 memo. A plot of energy vs trip time shows an elbow at about 0.5 or 0.4 g, where additional expense in energy starts to reach diminishing returns in reduction in trip time. The point at 0.3633 g for the alpha Centauri trip represents a reduction in USE/kg by about an order of magnitude from the example trip in my 8/4/96 memo. The point at 0.0476 g (for alpha Centauri) represents two orders of magnitude reduction, but at a signif- icant increase in trip time (to 18.653 yr). Rex P.S. For the record, I include below the Fortran program that did the calculations (incidentally, I regard a Fortran program as essentially not much more than an ASCII rendering of the equations): PROGRAM TRIP !8/11/96 101 FORMAT(2X, 21H Acceleration (gs) = ) 102 FORMAT(2X, F8.4, F8.3) 103 FORMAT(2X, F5.3, 4F8.4, F8.3, F8.4, F8.4, F7.2) DIST = 4.35 XACC = 0.5 * DIST ETA = 1. 2 CONTINUE WRITE(*,101) READ(*,*) AG IF(AG .EQ. 0.) GO TO 99 ACC = 1.0324 * AG UEND = SQRT(ACC * XACC * (ACC * XACC + 2.)) GAMEND = SQRT(1. + UEND*UEND) VEND = UEND/GAMEND THETA = LOG(UEND + GAMEND) !asinh(Uend) TACC = THETA/ACC X1 = 0.05 X2 = X1 1 CONTINUE X3 = X2 X2 = X1 X1 = X1 + 0.01 GAMEX = 1./SQRT(1. - X1*X1) R = 1.01 IF(X1 .GT. .05) R = EXP(THETA*(GAMEX-1.+ETA)/(ETA*GAMEX*X1)) Y3 = Y2 Y2 = Y1 Y1 = (GAMEND - 1.) * (GAMEX - 1. + ETA)/((R - 1.) * ETA * & (GAMEX - 1.)) IF(Y1 .LT. Y2 .AND. X1 .GT. 0.1) THEN A = ((Y1-Y2)*(X2-X3)-(Y2-Y3)*(X1-X2))/ & ((X1*X1-X2*X2)*(X2-X3)-(X2*X2-X3*X3)*(X1-X2)) B = ((Y1-Y2) - A*(X1*X1-X2*X2))/(X1-X2) XOPT = -B/(2.*A) GO TO 3 END IF GO TO 1 3 CONTINUE OPTVEXH = XOPT OPTUEXH = OPTVEXH/SQRT(1. - OPTVEXH*OPTVEXH) GEXHOPT = SQRT(1. + OPTUEXH*OPTUEXH) ROPT = EXP(THETA * (GEXHOPT - 1. + ETA)/(ETA * GEXHOPT * & OPTVEXH)) EFFMAX = (GAMEND - 1.)*(GEXHOPT - 1. + ETA)/((ROPT - 1.) * & ETA * (GEXHOPT - 1.)) URATIO = UEND/OPTUEXH AMMBO = (GAMEND - 1.)/(2.* EFFMAX * ETA) AMMI = (GAMEND - 1.)/(2.* EFFMAX * ETA * ROPT) WRITE(*,103) UEND, VEND, OPTVEXH, OPTUEXH, EFFMAX, URATIO, & AMMBO, AMMI, ROPT ROVER = ROPT * ROPT FRAM = AMMBO/(ROPT - 1.) OVAMMBO = FRAM * (ROVER - 1.) USE = OVAMMBO/51.47 TTRIP = 2. * TACC WRITE(*,102) USE, TTRIP GO TO 2 99 STOP END From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 12 06:23 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["6700" "Mon" "12" "August" "1996" "08:20:03" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "187" "Re: starship-design: Re: Re: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA18674 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 06:23:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA18536 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 06:23:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09377; Mon, 12 Aug 96 08:23:14 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI009263; Mon Aug 12 08:21:19 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04345; Mon, 12 Aug 96 08:21:16 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004315; Mon Aug 12 08:20:04 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22364; Mon, 12 Aug 96 08:20:02 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 6699 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: DotarSojat@aol.com Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: Re: The Size of the Problem Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 08:20:03 -0500 At 12:50 AM 8/12/96, DotarSojat@aol.com wrote: >At 09:58 8/5/96, Kelly Starks wrote: > >>At 3:07 PM 8/4/96, DotarSojat wrote: > >>>SUBJECT: The Size of the Problem > >>>The minimum energy requirement to create the antimatter to >>>deliver 1 kg to a distance of 8 lt-yr at 1-g continuous >>>acceleration/deceleration becomes >>> >>> 54.3 kg am / 51.47 kg am/USE = 1.055 USE . > >>>IMPLICATIONS >>> >>>.... >>>Orders of magnitude reduction in payload and increase in >>>transit time are required to reduce the energy problem to a >>>"manageable" size, to only a few USEs, say. >>> >>>.... >>>A few plausible ways around the problem...come to mind: >>> >>>.... >>> >>>The group might think of others. > >>A few come to mind. ;) >> >>1) Don't use antimatter. > >And use at least 250 times the mass of energy fuel? :( The problem you listed was the difficulty in manufacturing (not to mention storing) the "fuel". Given that mining and using more conventional fuels (like Lithium, duterium, etc..) don't have the heavy power costs and system complexity problems. Hell yes I'ld rather have hundreds of times the fuel weight! (Obviously due to the weight of the fuel you'ld need more than 250 times as much, but it would be a lot easier to carry!) Thought. What is the relative weight of an Anti-matter tank to the weight of the anti-matter? Would its weight added to the ship start outweighing the advantages of the lighter fuel? Also you would need to carry (and store) a full round trip worth of anti-matter since you couldn't refuel in the target system. >>2) Don't try for a constant 1 g acceleration for the full >>durration of the flight. >>.... > >While I believe Kelly had a coast phase in mind,--- True. The higher speed and longer burn times both dramatically increase fuel consumption. (Well beyond what seems technically feasable.) Also... > -- his comment suggested to me trying values of constant acceleration/ >deceleration less than 1 g. With some improvements in the cal- >culation from my 4/4/96 memo to the Group, I get the following >reductions in energy requirement, in USE per kilogram of burnout >mass, as the accel/decel value is decreased from 1 g (included >in the table are the peak proper velocity Uend in lt-yr/yr, the >trip time in yr and the mass ratio for the acceleration phase >alone): > > Accel/decel Uend Energy/Mbo trip time mass ratio(accel) > (g) (lt-yr/yr) (USE/kg) (yr) >Distance = 8 (actually 7.941) lt-yr > 1.0 5.000 1.0510* 4.480 15.11 >Distance = 4.35 lt-yr (alpha Centauri) > 1.0 3.088 0.4067 3.576 10.58 > 0.9 2.851 0.3476 3.810 10.03 > 0.8 2.611 0.2925 4.087 9.47 > 0.7 2.369 0.2415 4.421 8.91 > 0.6 2.124 0.1946 4.835 8.35 > 0.5 1.872 0.1518 5.366 7.79 > 0.4 1.613 0.1132 6.083 7.22 > 0.3633 1.516 0.1000 6.417 7.01 > 0.3 1.342 0.0786 7.128 6.65 > 0.2 1.049 0.0483 8.867 6.08 > 0.1 0.707 0.0220 12.751 5.50 > 0.0476 0.475 0.0100 18.653 5.19 >----------- >*was 1.055 in my 8/4/96 memo. > >A plot of energy vs trip time shows an elbow at about 0.5 or >0.4 g, where additional expense in energy starts to reach >diminishing returns in reduction in trip time. The point at >0.3633 g for the alpha Centauri trip represents a reduction in >USE/kg by about an order of magnitude from the example trip in >my 8/4/96 memo. The point at 0.0476 g (for alpha Centauri) >represents two orders of magnitude reduction, but at a signif- >icant increase in trip time (to 18.653 yr). > >Rex .... You'ld probably get shorter trip times if you had used the same power in higher boosts at the start and end of the trips, with a coast phase in the middle. Same power consumption, but higher average speed. > >P.S. For the record, I include below the Fortran program that >did the calculations (incidentally, I regard a Fortran program >as essentially not much more than an ASCII rendering of the >equations): Thanks for including the code! ?? You still use goto's in your code! Bad Rex, Bad. Whap, whap, whap. ;) > PROGRAM TRIP !8/11/96 > 101 FORMAT(2X, 21H Acceleration (gs) = ) > 102 FORMAT(2X, F8.4, F8.3) > 103 FORMAT(2X, F5.3, 4F8.4, F8.3, F8.4, F8.4, F7.2) > DIST = 4.35 > XACC = 0.5 * DIST > ETA = 1. > 2 CONTINUE > WRITE(*,101) > READ(*,*) AG > IF(AG .EQ. 0.) GO TO 99 > ACC = 1.0324 * AG > UEND = SQRT(ACC * XACC * (ACC * XACC + 2.)) > GAMEND = SQRT(1. + UEND*UEND) > VEND = UEND/GAMEND > THETA = LOG(UEND + GAMEND) !asinh(Uend) > TACC = THETA/ACC > X1 = 0.05 > X2 = X1 > 1 CONTINUE > X3 = X2 > X2 = X1 > X1 = X1 + 0.01 > GAMEX = 1./SQRT(1. - X1*X1) > R = 1.01 > IF(X1 .GT. .05) R = EXP(THETA*(GAMEX-1.+ETA)/(ETA*GAMEX*X1)) > Y3 = Y2 > Y2 = Y1 > Y1 = (GAMEND - 1.) * (GAMEX - 1. + ETA)/((R - 1.) * ETA * > & (GAMEX - 1.)) > IF(Y1 .LT. Y2 .AND. X1 .GT. 0.1) THEN > A = ((Y1-Y2)*(X2-X3)-(Y2-Y3)*(X1-X2))/ > & ((X1*X1-X2*X2)*(X2-X3)-(X2*X2-X3*X3)*(X1-X2)) > B = ((Y1-Y2) - A*(X1*X1-X2*X2))/(X1-X2) > XOPT = -B/(2.*A) > GO TO 3 > END IF > GO TO 1 > 3 CONTINUE > OPTVEXH = XOPT > OPTUEXH = OPTVEXH/SQRT(1. - OPTVEXH*OPTVEXH) > GEXHOPT = SQRT(1. + OPTUEXH*OPTUEXH) > ROPT = EXP(THETA * (GEXHOPT - 1. + ETA)/(ETA * GEXHOPT * > & OPTVEXH)) > EFFMAX = (GAMEND - 1.)*(GEXHOPT - 1. + ETA)/((ROPT - 1.) * > & ETA * (GEXHOPT - 1.)) > URATIO = UEND/OPTUEXH > AMMBO = (GAMEND - 1.)/(2.* EFFMAX * ETA) > AMMI = (GAMEND - 1.)/(2.* EFFMAX * ETA * ROPT) > WRITE(*,103) UEND, VEND, OPTVEXH, OPTUEXH, EFFMAX, URATIO, > & AMMBO, AMMI, ROPT > ROVER = ROPT * ROPT > FRAM = AMMBO/(ROPT - 1.) > OVAMMBO = FRAM * (ROVER - 1.) > USE = OVAMMBO/51.47 > TTRIP = 2. * TACC > WRITE(*,102) USE, TTRIP > GO TO 2 > 99 STOP > END Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 13 11:07 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil t nil nil nil nil] ["1939" "Tue" "13" "August" "1996" "13:00:37" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" "" "50" "starship-design: Software cycle" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA13132 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:07:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA13102 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29272; Tue, 13 Aug 96 13:07:09 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI028848; Tue Aug 13 13:02:54 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08974; Tue, 13 Aug 96 13:02:51 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma008876; Tue Aug 13 13:00:39 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02711; Tue, 13 Aug 96 13:00:36 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1938 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, KellySt@aol.com, sdudley@ix.netcom.com, schlegel@rmc1.crocker.com, JohnFrance@aol.com, mark_jensen@cpqm.mail.saic.com, DTaylor648@aol.com, Kryswalker@aol.com Subject: starship-design: Software cycle Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 13:00:37 -0500 Software doesn't just appear on the shelves by magic. That program shink-wrapped inside the box along with the indecipherable manual and 12-paragraph disclaimer notice actually came to you by way of an elaborate path, through the most rigid quality control on the planet. Here, shared for the first time with the general public, are the inside details of the program development cycle: 1. Programmer produces code he believes is bug-free. 2. Product is tested. 20 bugs are found. 3. Programmer fixes 10 of the bugs and explains to the testing department that the other 10 aren't really bugs. 4. Testing department finds that five of the fixes didn't work and discovers 15 new bugs. 5. See 3. 6. See 4. 7. See 5. 8. See 6. 9. See 7. 10. See 8. 11. Due to marketing pressure and an extremely pre-mature product announcement based on over-optimistic programming schedule, the product is released. 12. Users find 137 new bugs. 13. Original programmer, having cashed his royalty check, is nowhere to be found. 14. Newly-assembled programming team fixes almost all of the 137 bugs, but introduce 456 new ones. 15. Original programmer sends underpaid testing department a postcard from Fiji. Entire testing department quits. 16. Company is bought in a hostile takeover by competitor using profits from their latest release, which had 783 bugs. 17. New CEO is brought in by board of directors. He hires programmer to redo program from scratch. 18. Programmer produces code he believes is bug-free. 19. See step 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 13 11:55 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["612" "Tue" "13" "August" "1996" "11:21:43" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@darkwing.uoregon.edu" nil "10" "starship-design: Software cycle" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA27816 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:54:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA16766; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:21:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608131821.LAA16766@darkwing.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 611 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Software cycle Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:21:43 -0700 (PDT) I said that I'm not going to exercise any editorial control over the content of postings to the starship-design list, but I will strongly encourage starship-design list members to avoid sending non-topical material to the list, like general humor postings. The reason for having this mailing list is to discuss starship design and space travel, and I believe all subscribers will appreciate it remaining limited to those topics. I also ask that subscribers avoid cross-posting material to other mailing lists or individual recipients if those postings could generate non-topical followups to starship-design. From owner-starship-design Wed Aug 14 06:01 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["779" "Wed" "14" "August" "1996" "07:58:36" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "23" "starship-design: Europa" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA26475 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 06:01:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA26449 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 06:00:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06485; Wed, 14 Aug 96 08:00:45 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI006448; Wed Aug 14 07:59:37 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03738; Wed, 14 Aug 96 07:59:31 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma003711; Wed Aug 14 07:58:38 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07134; Wed, 14 Aug 96 07:58:35 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 778 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Europa Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 07:58:36 -0500 In case anyone missed it, NASA anounced yesterday that Galaleo photos of Europa show what looks like signed of a under ice liquid water ocean. I.E. a life zone. All in all their having a good month! Kelly P.S. Am I the only one who wasn't particularly suprized or impresed by the Marian fossil discovery? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Aug 14 12:03 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["841" "Wed" "14" "August" "1996" "12:02:59" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@darkwing.uoregon.edu" nil "22" "starship-design: Europa" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA10862 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:03:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA10848; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:02:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608141902.MAA10848@darkwing.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 840 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Europa Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:02:59 -0700 (PDT) Kelly Starks writes: > In case anyone missed it, NASA anounced yesterday that Galaleo photos of > Europa show what looks like signed of a under ice liquid water ocean. I.E. > a life zone. All in all their having a good month! > > Soon the alien starships will enter the Solar System and remove all doubt :-) We could then pick their brains for design concepts. > Kelly > > P.S. > Am I the only one who wasn't particularly suprized or impresed by the > Marian fossil discovery? I actually wasn't that shocked by the concept; my reaction to "Extraterrestrial life found" would be "Well, duh." Considering the tenuous nature of their evidence, I'm waiting to hear about further results and analysis of that meteorite to see if anything more conclusive develops. From owner-starship-design Wed Aug 14 12:30 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1681" "Wed" "14" "August" "1996" "14:28:10" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "46" "Re: starship-design: Europa" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA18511 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA18447 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:30:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04228; Wed, 14 Aug 96 14:29:48 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI004145; Wed Aug 14 14:28:35 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11032; Wed, 14 Aug 96 14:28:33 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma011026; Wed Aug 14 14:28:13 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06819; Wed, 14 Aug 96 14:28:10 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1680 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: Steve VanDevender Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Europa Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 14:28:10 -0500 At 12:02 PM 8/14/96, Steve VanDevender wrote: >Kelly Starks writes: > > In case anyone missed it, NASA anounced yesterday that Galaleo photos of > > Europa show what looks like signed of a under ice liquid water ocean. I.E. > > a life zone. All in all their having a good month! > > > > > >Soon the alien starships will enter the Solar System and remove all >doubt :-) We could then pick their brains for design concepts. If they're big disks, hovering over our major cities, I'm going to be pissed! ;) > > Kelly > > > > P.S. > > Am I the only one who wasn't particularly suprized or impresed by the > > Marian fossil discovery? > >I actually wasn't that shocked by the concept; my reaction to >"Extraterrestrial life found" would be "Well, duh." Considering the >tenuous nature of their evidence, I'm waiting to hear about further >results and analysis of that meteorite to see if anything more >conclusive develops. Agreed. It looks likely. By then it always did. It might at least get NASA to consider the possibility of active life forms in their designs. (Admin desision was that we proved nothing alive is at Mars. And people wounder why D.C. shouldn't be trusted with hard questions.) Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Aug 14 13:43 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2443" "Wed" "14" "August" "1996" "15:39:47" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "71" "Re: starship-design: Europa" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA08734 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 13:43:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA08703 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 13:43:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09376; Wed, 14 Aug 96 15:42:35 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI009189; Wed Aug 14 15:40:37 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12395; Wed, 14 Aug 96 15:40:31 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma012392; Wed Aug 14 15:39:49 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18141; Wed, 14 Aug 96 15:39:46 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2442 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: Philip Bakelaar Cc: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39), Steve VanDevender , starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Europa Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 15:39:47 -0500 At 4:25 PM 8/14/96, Philip Bakelaar wrote: >At 02:28 PM 8/14/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: >>At 12:02 PM 8/14/96, Steve VanDevender wrote: >>>Kelly Starks writes: >>> > In case anyone missed it, NASA anounced yesterday that Galaleo photos of >>> > Europa show what looks like signed of a under ice liquid water ocean. >>>I.E. >>> > a life zone. All in all their having a good month! >>> > >>> > >>> >>>Soon the alien starships will enter the Solar System and remove all >>>doubt :-) We could then pick their brains for design concepts. >> >>If they're big disks, hovering over our major cities, I'm going to be >>pissed! ;) > >Remember guys, all you need is a Macintosh, and we can all save the world! Was there ever a doubt? >(Let's just hope The Brain is a faithful IBM user!) ;) >>> > Kelly >>> > >>> > P.S. >>> > Am I the only one who wasn't particularly suprized or impresed by the >>> > Marian fossil discovery? >>> >>>I actually wasn't that shocked by the concept; my reaction to >>>"Extraterrestrial life found" would be "Well, duh." Considering the >>>tenuous nature of their evidence, I'm waiting to hear about further >>>results and analysis of that meteorite to see if anything more >>>conclusive develops. >> >>Agreed. It looks likely. By then it always did. > >I wonder if their announcement was a little premature? (Surely they >didn't have the Martian single-cell action figures made yet?) :) >But seriously... ??? They did too!, and they're doing great in the ameoba-are-us stores! 8) >>It might at least get NASA to consider the possibility of active life forms >>in their designs. (Admin desision was that we proved nothing alive is at >>Mars. And people wounder why D.C. shouldn't be trusted with hard >>questions.) > >They really said that, huh? Amazing... > >Ben The policy was (and probably still is) that the question of current life on Mars is closed. Thats why they only talk about discovering fossil life. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Sun Aug 18 14:20 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1032" "Sun" "18" "August" "1996" "17:18:26" "-0400" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "25" "starship-design: Scramjet/rocket launchers?" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA04046 for starship-design-outgoing; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 14:18:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout08.mail.aol.com (emout08.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.23]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA04035 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 14:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout08.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA12053 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 17:18:26 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960818171825_388192991@emout08.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1031 From: KellySt@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Scramjet/rocket launchers? Date: Sun, 18 Aug 1996 17:18:26 -0400 Just read NASA going to spend some money developing anmd testing scramjet/rockets. (Ever notice an external burning scramjet looks about the same as an aerospike rocket? ;) ) The idea is the craft would boost as a rocket up to mach 3, then cut back the oxegen flow and work as a scramjet up to Mach 8, then switch back to a rocket and boost out of the atmosphere. So you don't have the big problem of carrying the weight of an extra set of engines to orbit. For refernce a SSTO at launch would be. 20 tons cargo 80 tons ship 100 tons liguid hydrogen fuel 800 tons of Oxegen to burn the fuel! By geting about Mach 5 worth of boost without onboard air you could save a lot of launch weight. According to some charts in Zubrins Black Horse artical, that might be good enough to let a propane or kerosine fueled version of the ship single stage to orbit. Problem I worry about is that you might lose enough delta-V plowing through the air to overcome the savings from the smaller lighter ship. Sounds interesting though! From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 19 22:56 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["6926" "Tue" "20" "August" "1996" "01:53:50" "-0400" "DotarSojat@aol.com" "DotarSojat@aol.com" nil "147" "(Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil "(Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem" nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA20759 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 22:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout10.mail.aol.com (emout10.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.25]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA20747 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 22:54:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout10.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA17611 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 01:53:50 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960820015349_263881579@emout10.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DotarSojat@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 6925 From: DotarSojat@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: (Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 01:53:50 -0400 At 3:08 PM 8/4/96, I sent the memo "The Size of the Problem." At 2:47 PM 8/8/96, I wrote: >Note that 1 cubic mile of (sea) water contains enough deuterium >to provide about 5,400 USEs from the fusion reaction(s)-- > > D + D + D --> He4 + n + p + 21.6 MeV . At 9:23 AM 8/12/96, Kelly Starks wrote: >The problem you listed was the difficulty in manufacturing (not >to mention storing) the "fuel". Given that mining and using more >conventional fuels (like Lithium, duterium, etc..) don't have the >heavy power costs and system complexity problems. Actually it wasn't the "difficulty in manufacturing" the antimat- ter I listed, it was merely the equivalent energy content in USEs (units equal to the total production of U.S. Electricity in 1987 = 51.47 kg antimatter). I assumed the manufacturing method (unspec- ified) of antimatter was 100 percent efficient. My 8/8 note gave the volume of water (1/5400 of a cu mi) that would have to be pro- cessed to extract the deuterium to give 1 USE via the specified fusion reaction. >Hell yes I'ld rather have hundreds of times the fuel weight! >(Obviously due to the weight of the fuel you'ld need more than >250 times as much, but it would be a lot easier to carry!) Using antimatter fuel, the example mission to 8 lt-yr at 1-g con- tinuous acceleration/deceleration is calculated (see my 8/12 note) to require a mass ratio of at least 15.11 for the acceleration phase alone. Using deuterium fuel in the above fusion reaction (with a Timothy "f" factor of 261) for the same mission, the cal- culated required mass ratio for the acceleration phase is at least 3.84E12 kg D for each kg delivered to the peak velocity half way to the destination. (Note to Timothy: This mass ratio is for an "optimum" exhaust velocity of 0.09580 c. One of the reaction products is a neutron, which can't be used as reaction mass.) With 1.44E8 kg D per cubic mile of ocean, this mass ratio says you have to extract all the deuterium from more than 26,000 cubic miles of ocean to provide the fusion fuel to accelerate 1 kg at 1 g over 4 lt-yr, half way to the destination. But there is a dramatic reduction in required mass ratio as the g-level is reduced (and the trip time is increased). The follow- ing table shows that the required mass ratio is reduced by about 9 orders of magnitude while the trip time is increased by about a factor of five: accel/decel Uend trip time mass ratio(accel) (g) (lt-yr/yr) (yr) 1.0 5.000 4.480 3.842E12 0.5 2.881 6.897 4.869E09 0.2 1.520 11.692 3.659E06 0.1 0.994 16.991 5.929E04 0.05 0.672 24.401 2.675E03 0.0132 0.333 48.064 6.057E01 For the last line, the mass ratio for the full trip would only be about 3,600 kg D for each kg of final mass, so one would only have to process about 2.5E-5 cubic miles of water for each kg delivered to 8 lt-yr in a continuous-g trip time of about 48 yr (24 yr with 1-g accel/coast/1-g decel; see below). To de- liver Kelly's 500,000-ton-dry-weight Explorer-class starship on this mission would require extracting all the deuterium from about 12,500 cubic miles of water. This may be a more "down-to-Earth" measure of the size of the problem. Now we're addressing the "difficulty in manufacturing." >Thought. What is the relative weight of an Anti-matter tank to >the weight of the anti-matter? Would its weight added to the >ship start outweighing the advantages of the lighter fuel? If the deuterium for the fusion engine is carried in a tank made of an alloy of lithium and aluminum, the anti-hydrogen could be carried in a tank made of an alloy of anti-lithium and anti- aluminum, with a mass fraction similar to that of the deuterium tank. ;) ["mass fraction" = (mass of contents)/(sum of masses of tank and contents)] >Also you would need to carry (and store) a full round trip worth >of anti-matter since you couldn't refuel in the target system. Kelly beware! I'm on Zenon's side regarding "kamikaze" missions. ;) >You'ld probably get shorter trip times if you had used the same >power in higher boosts at the start and end of the trips, with >a coast phase in the middle. Same power consumption, but higher >average speed. Kelly, go to the blackboard and write 100 times "Power is the rate of use of energy." Whap, whap, whap. ;) If you replace the word "power" with "energy" you're right on. The table below shows the comparative trip times (to alpha Cen- tauri: distance = 4.35 lt-yr) for continuous accel/decel at g- levels below 1, with trip times for 1-g accel/coast/1-g decel with the same peak velocity (same energy requirement). The values of peak velocity, Energy/Mbo and mass ratio (accel alone) for each entry are given in the table in my note of 8/12 (and Kelly's response of 8/12). Accel/decel trip time | 1-g accel/decel w/coast (g) (yr) | trip time (yr) coast time (yr) 1.0 3.576 | 3.576 0.000 0.9 3.810 | 3.582 0.152 0.8 4.087 | 3.603 0.334 0.7 4.421 | 3.646 0.551 0.6 4.835 | 3.720 0.819 0.5 5.366 | 3.845 1.162 0.4 6.083 | 4.051 1.619 0.3 7.128 | 4.407 2.269 0.2 8.867 | 5.091 3.317 0.1 12.751 | 6.813 5.537 For acceleration periods that become a smaller fraction of the trip time, the average speed tends toward twice the average speed for continuous accel/decel, leading to cutting the trip time just in half. Note: For a reduction in energy requirement by a factor of 10 from the 1-g-all-the-way trip (an accel/decel g of about 0.17, from the 8/12 table), the trip time for 1 g with coast for the same energy is increased by less than a factor of 2. A factor of 10 reduction in energy requirement (for antimatter fuel) for less than a factor of 2 increase in time says the coast phase is worth considering. On the down side, however, are the requirements for heavier thruster (and power-system) weight for 1 g vs. reduced g, and increased complexity for artificial-gravity provisions during the coast time (the last column). >?? You still use goto's in your code! Bad Rex, Bad. Whap, >whap, whap. ;) I can't imagine how to avoid them. Also, my Fortran compiler is dated May 1988 and doesn't allow ENDDO's, so it may not allow whatever gets around GOTO's. BTW, the code I provided in my 8/12 note had to be modified to cover fusion energy. But the size of the numbers above indicates to me that possibly nobody would be interested in using the modi- fied code (except to show I'm wrong). ;) Rex From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 19 23:37 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["3725" "Mon" "19" "August" "1996" "23:37:54" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@efn.org" nil "78" "(Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil "(Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem" nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA00989 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 23:37:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from haus.efn.org (haus.efn.org [198.68.17.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA00976 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 23:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tzadkiel.efn.org (stevev@cisco-ts10-line6.uoregon.edu [128.223.150.104]) by haus.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA16122; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 23:40:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by tzadkiel.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA06993; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 23:37:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608200637.XAA06993@tzadkiel.efn.org> In-Reply-To: <960820015349_263881579@emout10.mail.aol.com> References: <960820015349_263881579@emout10.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3724 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: DotarSojat@aol.com Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: (Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 23:37:54 -0700 While I haven't had time to do a more complete write-up, I thought I would also mention an interesting corollary to Rex's analysis of the energy requirements of beaming power to accelerate a relativistic spacecraft. Not only is a large amount of power required, but the beaming equipment must be capable of (typically) output at a rate that can be over two orders of magnitude larger than is needed to accelerate the spacecraft at the start of the trip. I'm going to present some of the math without proof or demonstration at this time, but I'm sure it will be interesting fodder for discussion (either because Timothy or Rex will find any mistakes I might have made or because it shows another facet of difficulty to the problem of beaming power). I've recently been working on the physics of light signals between a "stationary" object and an object undergoing relativistic acceleration relative to it. Consider an object undergoing uniform accleration relative to itself; its frame position at its proper time t1 is: [ t x ] = [ 1/a * sinh(a * t1) 1/a * cosh(a * t1) ] At time t1 = 0, its position is [ 0 1/a ] (note again that for simplicity I am using geometrized units where c = 1 and acceleration has units 1/s (acceleration is fraction of c per unit time)). Consider an object beaming power to the object to accelerate it that also starts at that position, so that at time t=0 it coincides with the accelerated object at its proper time t1=0. If energy (light) from the beamer is emitted at time t, then the time t1 at which the accelerated object receives the energy is: t1 = -(ln(1 - a*t))/a Note that this is an asymptotic relationship -- as the frame time t of the beamer approaches 1/a, the object proper time t1 approaches infinity. This consequently means that the beamer must send energy for any possible trip within a time 1/a, no matter how far the acclerated object goes, and that the rate at which power is sent increases asymptotically to infinity as t approaches 1/a. The relative rate of time passage between the beamer and the accelerated object at frame time t has the relationship dt1 / dt = 1/(1 - a*t) In the case where a = 9.8 m/s^2 (or in geometrized units, 3.267e-8 c/s), the asymptote is reached within about year of beamer time (3.06e8 s). The good news is that to boost an object at 1 g up to its turnaround point and then provide deceleration power to its destination, you beam power for no more than two years, no matter how far away you send the object. The bad news is that at the turnaround point you are beaming some large multiple of the power needed to keep the object accelerating at 1 g at the beginning and end of the trip, because of the relative rate of time lapse between the beamer and the accelerated object. In fact, given the relationship between t1 and t, we can characterize just what this multiple is based on halfway trip time of the object. Solving t1 = -(ln(1 - a * t))/a for t, we get: t = (1 - e^(-a*t1))/a Substituting into 1/(1 - a*t), we get: dt1 / dt = e^(a*t1) In other words, the maximum power output at turnaround is exponentially related to trip time for the object. Perhaps the worse news is that because the relative rate of time lapse is asymptotic, even the schemes proposed for exponentially self-reproducing power generation equipment ultimately run up against the asymptotic limit; the asymptotic relationship always reaches a point where it is growing faster than the exponential function. Hopefully this makes sense to at least some of you. I hope to have time to cover more of the background soon, as I'm sure this is confusing without it. Timothy knows I've been working on analysis of accelerated objects in From owner-starship-design Tue Aug 20 07:07 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["10071" "Tue" "20" "August" "1996" "09:05:13" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "216" "(Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil "(Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem" nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA18390 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 07:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA18366 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 07:06:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11137; Tue, 20 Aug 96 09:06:38 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI011064; Tue Aug 20 09:05:49 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03562; Tue, 20 Aug 96 09:05:45 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma003557; Tue Aug 20 09:05:13 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29703; Tue, 20 Aug 96 09:05:12 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 10070 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: DotarSojat@aol.com Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: (Re:)^4 starship-design: The Size of the Problem Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 09:05:13 -0500 At 1:53 AM 8/20/96, DotarSojat@aol.com wrote: >At 3:08 PM 8/4/96, I sent the memo "The Size of the Problem." > >At 2:47 PM 8/8/96, I wrote: > >>Note that 1 cubic mile of (sea) water contains enough deuterium >>to provide about 5,400 USEs from the fusion reaction(s)-- >> >> D + D + D --> He4 + n + p + 21.6 MeV . > >At 9:23 AM 8/12/96, Kelly Starks wrote: > >>The problem you listed was the difficulty in manufacturing (not >>to mention storing) the "fuel". Given that mining and using more >>conventional fuels (like Lithium, duterium, etc..) don't have the >>heavy power costs and system complexity problems. > >Actually it wasn't the "difficulty in manufacturing" the antimat- >ter I listed, it was merely the equivalent energy content in USEs >(units equal to the total production of U.S. Electricity in 1987 = >51.47 kg antimatter). I assumed the manufacturing method (unspec- >ified) of antimatter was 100 percent efficient. My 8/8 note gave >the volume of water (1/5400 of a cu mi) that would have to be pro- >cessed to extract the deuterium to give 1 USE via the specified >fusion reaction. May I inquire what unspecified technology you expected to be able to generate anti-mater with 100% efficency? I wasn't particularly interested in the energy costs. Assuming high efficency systems that wouldn't melt the nieghborhood, power generation in a fixed installation is mainly a cost issue. We could build power plant hundreds thousands of times the size and capacity of the current ones, but what would be the point? MOre importantly to this project, what would be the cost!? >>Hell yes I'ld rather have hundreds of times the fuel weight! >>(Obviously due to the weight of the fuel you'ld need more than >>250 times as much, but it would be a lot easier to carry!) > >Using antimatter fuel, the example mission to 8 lt-yr at 1-g con- >tinuous acceleration/deceleration is calculated (see my 8/12 note) >to require a mass ratio of at least 15.11 for the acceleration >phase alone. Using deuterium fuel in the above fusion reaction >(with a Timothy "f" factor of 261) for the same mission, the cal- >culated required mass ratio for the acceleration phase is at least >3.84E12 kg D for each kg delivered to the peak velocity half way >to the destination. (Note to Timothy: This mass ratio is for an >"optimum" exhaust velocity of 0.09580 c. One of the reaction >products is a neutron, which can't be used as reaction mass.) >With 1.44E8 kg D per cubic mile of ocean, this mass ratio says you >have to extract all the deuterium from more than 26,000 cubic >miles of ocean to provide the fusion fuel to accelerate 1 kg at >1 g over 4 lt-yr, half way to the destination. > >But there is a dramatic reduction in required mass ratio as the >g-level is reduced (and the trip time is increased). The follow- >ing table shows that the required mass ratio is reduced by about >9 orders of magnitude while the trip time is increased by about a >factor of five: > > accel/decel Uend trip time mass ratio(accel) > (g) (lt-yr/yr) (yr) > 1.0 5.000 4.480 3.842E12 > 0.5 2.881 6.897 4.869E09 > 0.2 1.520 11.692 3.659E06 > 0.1 0.994 16.991 5.929E04 > 0.05 0.672 24.401 2.675E03 > 0.0132 0.333 48.064 6.057E01 > >For the last line, the mass ratio for the full trip would only >be about 3,600 kg D for each kg of final mass, so one would >only have to process about 2.5E-5 cubic miles of water for each >kg delivered to 8 lt-yr in a continuous-g trip time of about >48 yr (24 yr with 1-g accel/coast/1-g decel; see below). To de- >liver Kelly's 500,000-ton-dry-weight Explorer-class starship on >this mission would require extracting all the deuterium from about >12,500 cubic miles of water. > >This may be a more "down-to-Earth" measure of the size of the >problem. Now we're addressing the "difficulty in manufacturing." You and I are starting to get into and apples vrs oranges argument here. I've pretty well droped considering continuous G missions, or a Tau Ceti Mission, due to the extream power/fuel requirements. As your table above shows, you eiather wind up with unusably long flight times or rediculas fuel mass ratios. Note. I'm not clear if the fule ratios listed above are for acceleration/deceleration, or even if they are the fule weight on the ship vrs fuel needed to fuel the anti-mater generators. >>Thought. What is the relative weight of an Anti-matter tank to >>the weight of the anti-matter? Would its weight added to the >>ship start outweighing the advantages of the lighter fuel? > >If the deuterium for the fusion engine is carried in a tank made >of an alloy of lithium and aluminum, the anti-hydrogen could be >carried in a tank made of an alloy of anti-lithium and anti- >aluminum, with a mass fraction similar to that of the deuterium >tank. ;) ["mass fraction" = (mass of contents)/(sum of masses >of tank and contents)] I might have some technical issues with Lithium and aluminum tanks, I flat cant take seriously anti-Lithium and anti-aluminum! How does one attach and anti-matter tank to a ship? How do you manufacture it? And most importantly do you seriously expect to see any of this technology by 2050?! >>Also you would need to carry (and store) a full round trip worth >>of anti-matter since you couldn't refuel in the target system. > >Kelly beware! I'm on Zenon's side regarding "kamikaze" >missions. ;) A bizzar and politically unastute mindset to put it mildly! Oddly this issue may get public debate soon. I ran into someone on the sci.space.tech (or something board) that is working up a paper for presentation at the next Case for mars conference. He is going to propose that NASA consider one way missions. His analysis was that it was cheaper to send one exploration crew and yearly supply flights 30 years, than to cycle back crews every year or two. >>You'ld probably get shorter trip times if you had used the same >>power in higher boosts at the start and end of the trips, with >>a coast phase in the middle. Same power consumption, but higher >>average speed. > >Kelly, go to the blackboard and write 100 times "Power is the >rate of use of energy." Whap, whap, whap. ;) >If you replace the word "power" with "energy" you're right on. >The table below shows the comparative trip times (to alpha Cen- >tauri: distance = 4.35 lt-yr) for continuous accel/decel at g- >levels below 1, with trip times for 1-g accel/coast/1-g decel >with the same peak velocity (same energy requirement). The >values of peak velocity, Energy/Mbo and mass ratio (accel alone) >for each entry are given in the table in my note of 8/12 (and >Kelly's response of 8/12). > > Accel/decel trip time | 1-g accel/decel w/coast > (g) (yr) | trip time (yr) coast time (yr) > 1.0 3.576 | 3.576 0.000 > 0.9 3.810 | 3.582 0.152 > 0.8 4.087 | 3.603 0.334 > 0.7 4.421 | 3.646 0.551 > 0.6 4.835 | 3.720 0.819 > 0.5 5.366 | 3.845 1.162 > 0.4 6.083 | 4.051 1.619 > 0.3 7.128 | 4.407 2.269 > 0.2 8.867 | 5.091 3.317 > 0.1 12.751 | 6.813 5.537 > >For acceleration periods that become a smaller fraction of the >trip time, the average speed tends toward twice the average speed >for continuous accel/decel, leading to cutting the trip time just >in half. > >Note: For a reduction in energy requirement by a factor of 10 >from the 1-g-all-the-way trip (an accel/decel g of about 0.17, >from the 8/12 table), the trip time for 1 g with coast for the >same energy is increased by less than a factor of 2. >A factor of 10 reduction in energy requirement (for antimatter >fuel) for less than a factor of 2 increase in time says the coast >phase is worth considering. On the down side, however, are the >requirements for heavier thruster (and power-system) weight for >1 g vs. reduced g, and increased complexity for artificial-gravity >provisions during the coast time (the last column). Your right about the heavyier drive systems, but your stuck with the heavy artificial G systems regardless. As you've shown you cant sustain a continuous 1g during flight, and obviously need to stop once you reach the starsystem. So the only way to give the crew a 1 G environment is to make your own. Actually it doesn't really cost any extra mass to provide the 1G environment. The only exception might be if you shielding mass is spread out due to the larger centrafuge tourus. But give the fuel masses we'ld need anyway. Shielding may just be a repackaging of the fuel mass. >>?? You still use goto's in your code! Bad Rex, Bad. Whap, >>whap, whap. ;) > >I can't imagine how to avoid them. Also, my Fortran compiler is >dated May 1988 and doesn't allow ENDDO's, so it may not allow >whatever gets around GOTO's. Strange. Structured extensions were added to FORTRAN by the late '70's and structured code was the standard I was using when I stoped programing profesionally in '86. (Did you get a really cheap compiler? ;) ) >BTW, the code I provided in my 8/12 note had to be modified to >cover fusion energy. But the size of the numbers above indicates >to me that possibly nobody would be interested in using the modi- >fied code (except to show I'm wrong). ;) > >Rex Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Aug 21 14:57 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1107" "Wed" "21" "August" "1996" "16:54:30" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "30" "starship-design: New draft of site" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA11567 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 14:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA11542 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 14:57:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18777; Wed, 21 Aug 96 16:57:05 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI018683; Wed Aug 21 16:55:19 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14865; Wed, 21 Aug 96 16:55:17 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma014863; Wed Aug 21 16:54:32 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05647; Wed, 21 Aug 96 16:54:29 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1106 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: New draft of site Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 16:54:30 -0500 I uploaded updates to the LIT beta site (Daves w/s). Marine now has a bunch of web links to interesting (I hope) sites. A few corrections here and there (like the correction to the Solar system Dev Banor. Argosey/tradewinds, M.A.R.S., and fuel sail now have token pages loaded for them. (Just what I could rattle off on the top of my head. I still didn't get a readable copy of Brains draft of his Argosey/tradwinds page, and since none of you forwarded one to me. I guess you didn't eiather. BRIAN!! Mail it to me on a floppy (I'll refund postage!!), ftp it to Daves, whatever. Needs some link fixes and I have to do the Newsletter function, but otherwise its about down from my end. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 26 06:58 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1383" "Mon" "26" "August" "1996" "08:54:00" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "31" "starship-design: Web update." "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA19232 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 06:57:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA19205 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 06:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10959; Mon, 26 Aug 96 08:57:25 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI010793; Mon Aug 26 08:55:11 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04044; Mon, 26 Aug 96 08:55:06 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004029; Mon Aug 26 08:54:02 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03885; Mon, 26 Aug 96 08:53:59 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1382 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Web update. Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 08:54:00 -0500 I uploaded the latest drafts of LIT web stuf. Mainly some error corrections, and I added a newsletter section (including subscription instructions). I have high confidence in the completness of the newsletters going back about 3 months, and I have loaded all the back letters and clipping I have. This gives fairly good coverage back to February 96 (the old site crashed last October). If anyone else has better coverage you can talk to me or Dave about it. M.A.R.S and Argosy folks. If you have more worked up, or need help I'm here. Given that the new semester is starting, and I'ld like to have the new LIT up and runing pretty soon for the collage crowd, so unless I find something broken, someone has a complaint, (or Argosey or M.A.R.s need help) I'm not intending to do any more updates for a few months. Dave, I will under no cercomstance upload anything more without checking with you in advance. I don't want to over write something your working on. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 26 14:39 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2191" "Mon" "26" "August" "1996" "16:35:04" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "52" "starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA16885 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:39:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA16745 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:39:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14879; Mon, 26 Aug 96 16:38:10 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI014726; Mon Aug 26 16:35:22 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14064; Mon, 26 Aug 96 16:35:18 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma014061; Mon Aug 26 16:35:05 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17214; Mon, 26 Aug 96 16:35:02 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2190 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:35:04 -0500 Hi all, I was runing through some numbers, and it looks like if you have matter conversion the "fuel mass" needed to get to half of lightspeed is .42 (42%) of the the ships unfueled mass. (That doesn't include the deceleration fuel!). Then I started to run some cost numbers. A kilogram of mass converts to 25 E9 kilowatt hours worth of power. e=mc^2 e (in joules) = M(in kilos) C^2 = 9e16 joules per kg. 1 joule = 10^-6 Mw-sec = 3,600,000 kilowatt hours Electricity costs about 4-10 cents per kilowatt hour. If you could convert the energy directly into antimatter. Antimater would (at $0.05 a KwHour) cost $1.25 E9 per kilogram. Thats one and a quarter billion dollars a kilo! Given that an Explorer class ship has a mass of 500,000 tons. That comes to a fuel mass of 210,000 tons. Half of which is anti-matter. Thats 105,000,000 kg of anti-matter for a cost of roughly $130 E15 or about 130 thousand trillion dollars, or a bit under 100,000 times the federal budget. 8( For comparison a Li-6 fueled fusion craft would take 4,570 times its dry weight in fuel to get to half light speed. For an Explorer class thats 2.23 E9 tons of lithium-6. (Which is about 8% of the mass of a given mass of mined Lithium. Maybe we can seel back the other isotopes of lithium after we remove the isotope we want?) At current comercial rates ( priced at about $300/lb. Or $660/Kg) for Lithium (ignoring procesing fees) that tonage would cost about $1,470 Trillion dollars, or 1 thousand times the federal budget. Nearly a hundred fold improvement. 8( To get to 1/3rd C thou an Explorer Class only needs 25,000,000 tons or about 16.5 trillion dollars worth. A meer dozen federal budget years! ~~~~8( Then again, we should be able to get a substantial bulk discount. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 26 16:02 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil t nil nil nil nil] ["479" "Mon" "26" "August" "1996" "19:01:08" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" "<199608262301.TAA16857@hiway1.exit109.com>" "16" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA12592 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA12536 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:01:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp42-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.171]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.7.4/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA16857; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:01:08 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608262301.TAA16857@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 478 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39), starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:01:08 -0400 (EDT) At 04:35 PM 8/26/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: >To get to 1/3rd C thou an Explorer Class only needs 25,000,000 tons or >about 16.5 trillion dollars worth. A meer dozen federal budget years! >~~~~8( > >Then again, we should be able to get a substantial bulk discount. > >Kelly My question is: at what % of the speed of light does aging slow down? (I believe this slowing of aging is still theoretical, so if it is, answer my question theoretically! :D) Ben From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 26 16:33 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["821" "Mon" "26" "August" "1996" "16:32:46" "-0700" "John Holmstrom" "johnh@gladstone.uoregon.edu" nil "16" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA26287 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gladstone.uoregon.edu (johnh@gladstone.uoregon.edu [128.223.142.14]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA26265 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:32:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from johnh@localhost) by gladstone.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA14251; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:32:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f In-Reply-To: <199608262301.TAA16857@hiway1.exit109.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Precedence: bulk Reply-To: John Holmstrom Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 820 From: John Holmstrom Sender: owner-starship-design To: Philip Bakelaar cc: Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 , starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:32:46 -0700 (PDT) >My question is: at what % of the speed of light does aging slow down?=20 > (I believe this slowing of aging is still theoretical, so if it is, =20 > answer my question theoretically! :D) =20 Well, any speed will slow down aging, it just isn't worth calculating=20 'til probably .1c or so. If you move at 5m/s, you will age somewhat,=20 according to {delta}t=3D{delta}t{sub 0}*{gamma} when=20 {gamma}=3D1/{sq-root}[1-(v^2/c^2)] ------------------------------------------------------------------- =A6 johnh@gladstone.uoregon.edu =A6All science is either physics=A6 =A6-----------------------------------=A6or stamp collecting =A6 =A6http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~johnh=A6 -Ernest Rutherford =A6 ------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 26 17:28 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1372" "Mon" "26" "August" "1996" "16:32:59" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@darkwing.uoregon.edu" nil "31" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA14266 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 17:28:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA26286; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:32:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199608262332.QAA26286@darkwing.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: <199608262301.TAA16857@hiway1.exit109.com> References: <199608262301.TAA16857@hiway1.exit109.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1371 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: Philip Bakelaar Cc: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39), starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:32:59 -0700 (PDT) Philip Bakelaar writes: > At 04:35 PM 8/26/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > >To get to 1/3rd C thou an Explorer Class only needs 25,000,000 tons or > >about 16.5 trillion dollars worth. A meer dozen federal budget years! > >~~~~8( > > > >Then again, we should be able to get a substantial bulk discount. > > > >Kelly > > My question is: at what % of the speed of light does aging slow down? > (I believe this slowing of aging is still theoretical, so if it is, > answer my question theoretically! :D) > > Ben It's not theoretical, and it doesn't magically appear above some certain speed; the effect is present, but difficult to measure, at low speeds. If an object is moving relative to you with a speed v (as a fraction of c, the speed of light), then a clock attached to it runs at the rate sqrt(1 - v^2) relative to your clock. This effect is quite small for speeds in our normal experience -- moving at 60 mph, your clock runs 1 part in 2.5e14 slower than a clock at rest on the road. At about 1/7 c, your clock will run about 1% slower than a clock on Earth. This effect has been observed experimentally many times, such as in slower decay half-lives for rapidly moving subatomic particles and in atomic clocks flown around in airplanes (at around 300 mph, the clocks slow by one part in 1e13 due to the aircraft's velocity). From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 26 19:00 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["3274" "Mon" "26" "August" "1996" "21:00:53" "-0500" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "95" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA09857 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 18:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub0.tc.umn.edu (mhub0.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.50]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA09840 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 18:59:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub0.tc.umn.edu; Mon, 26 Aug 96 20:59:55 -0500 Received: from dialup-2-161.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Mon, 26 Aug 96 20:59:53 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <322256D5.54DD@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Organization: sadly lacking X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <199608262301.TAA16857@hiway1.exit109.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 3273 From: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 21:00:53 -0500 Philip Bakelaar wrote: > > At 04:35 PM 8/26/96 -0500, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > >To get to 1/3rd C thou an Explorer Class only needs 25,000,000 tons or > >about 16.5 trillion dollars worth. A meer dozen federal budget years! > >~~~~8( > > > >Then again, we should be able to get a substantial bulk discount. > > > >Kelly > > My question is: at what % of the speed of light does aging slow down? > (I believe this slowing of aging is still theoretical, so if it is, > answer my question theoretically! :D) > > Ben Ben, Your aging *Never* slows down, no matter how fast you travel. You will always experience one day at a time, and will never have more days than you are allotted. While this might not be exactly the question you were asking, it is nonetheless one way to interpret your question. Your question seemed to imply that while your "mind" might experience a month, your "body" might only experience one day. This, of course, never happens. That is to say, your clock will never slow down. it is all the other clocks in the universe that speed up. If you ask nicely, I'm sure Steve will be happy to pose some relativity puzzles for you. }8^)> Here's one to get you started... It's quite old, and I'm sure many of our members will recognize it. I trust they will keep to themselves until those younger members of this list have had a chance to ponder the possiblities. Assume for the moment, that this "clock-slowing" process is real. (I can assure you that it is, but even if that isn't enough for you, just accept it for the moment as a hypothetical) and that as you approach the speed of light, your local time slows down. (relative to the rest of the universe of course) Now consider the plight of two twins: Twin A (whom I'll call Kelly ;) stays at home (due to a severe lack of antimatter) Twin B (named Kevin) Sails away on a maser-powered sail-ship. The flight distance is 11.9 light-years, and Kevin accelerates the whole way until turn-around, and then deccelerates at the same rate into the target system. After some amount of time (let's say ten years), Kevin gets back into his maser-sail driven ship, and heads back. Accelerating at a constant rate until turn around whereupon he deccelerates again until coming to a rest in our own solar system. How long does the flight take? Consider that Kevin left on the twin's 40th birthday. According to Kevin's clock, the trip takes about 20 years (5 years there, 5 years back, and ten years in the system), But according to Kelly's clock, the trip takes something closer to 45 years. 13 years there, 13 years back, and ten years in the system. Now this seems normal, considering that as you move closer to the speed of light your time slows down. But just who is doing the moving here? According to Einstein, there is no privileged point of reference, it is just as accurate to say that Kelly (and the rest of the universe) moved while Kevin and his magical sail-ship stayed at rest. So why is Kelly the doddering old fool in the nursing home, (at 85 yrs) while Kevin, (at 60) isn't even ready to collect social security? Big hint: the problem is not with Einstein, nor with the ages of the men as I've stated them. Kevin (snickering silently to himself) From owner-starship-design Mon Aug 26 21:05 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["656" "Tue" "27" "August" "1996" "00:04:31" "-0400" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "22" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA12216 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 21:05:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout13.mail.aol.com (emout13.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.39]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA12203 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 21:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout13.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA08375; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:04:31 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960826234553_269601195@emout13.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 655 From: KellySt@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: pbakelaar@exit109.com, kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:04:31 -0400 >>To get to 1/3rd C thou an Explorer Class only needs 25,000,000 tons or >>about 16.5 trillion dollars worth. A meer dozen federal budget years! >>~~~~8( >> >>Then again, we should be able to get a substantial bulk discount. >> >> Kelly > My question is: at what % of the speed of light does > aging slow down? > (I believe this slowing of aging is still theoretical, so > if it is, answer my question theoretically! :D) > > Ben Good news. Its not a theory, it has been tested and shown to work. Bad news. You don't really see much effect untill over 90% of light speed or so. The exact numbers are at the end of my Explorer overview page. Kelly From owner-starship-design Mon Sep 2 05:40 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1376" "Mon" "2" "September" "1996" "14:40:35" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "28" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA28088 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 2 Sep 1996 05:40:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA28073 for ; Mon, 2 Sep 1996 05:40:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slp10048.slip.utwente.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA05240 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 2 Sep 1996 14:40:25 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199609021240.AA05240@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1375 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 14:40:35 +0100 Kelly wrote: >Electricity costs about 4-10 cents per kilowatt hour. If you could convert >the energy directly into antimatter. Antimater would (at $0.05 a KwHour) >cost $1.25 E9 per kilogram. Thats one and a quarter billion dollars a >kilo! Given that an Explorer class ship has a mass of 500,000 tons. That >comes to a fuel mass of 210,000 tons. Half of which is anti-matter. Thats >105,000,000 kg of anti-matter for a cost of roughly $130 E15 or about 130 >thousand trillion dollars, or a bit under 100,000 times the federal budget. >8( > > >For comparison a Li-6 fueled fusion craft would take 4,570 times its dry >weight in fuel to get to half light speed. For an Explorer class thats >2.23 E9 tons of lithium-6. (Which is about 8% of the mass of a given mass >of mined Lithium. Maybe we can seel back the other isotopes of lithium >after we remove the isotope we want?) At current comercial rates ( priced >at about $300/lb. Or $660/Kg) for Lithium (ignoring procesing fees) that >tonage would cost about $1,470 Trillion dollars, or 1 thousand times the >federal budget. Nearly a hundred fold improvement. 8( This is still "raw" energy, the processing costs needed for normal electrical energy are now inside the design of the starship. I think your comparison should include the power plants (and the maintaining of them) inside the starship. Timothy From owner-starship-design Tue Sep 3 06:06 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2032" "Tue" "3" "September" "1996" "08:00:07" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "45" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA18057 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 06:06:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA18027 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 06:06:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20545; Tue, 3 Sep 96 08:03:07 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI020365; Tue Sep 3 08:00:57 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02503; Tue, 3 Sep 96 08:00:51 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma002497; Tue Sep 3 08:00:11 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02874; Tue, 3 Sep 96 08:00:07 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2031 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 08:00:07 -0500 At 2:40 PM 9/2/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >Kelly wrote: >>Electricity costs about 4-10 cents per kilowatt hour. If you could convert >>the energy directly into antimatter. Antimater would (at $0.05 a KwHour) >>cost $1.25 E9 per kilogram. Thats one and a quarter billion dollars a >>kilo! Given that an Explorer class ship has a mass of 500,000 tons. That >>comes to a fuel mass of 210,000 tons. Half of which is anti-matter. Thats >>105,000,000 kg of anti-matter for a cost of roughly $130 E15 or about 130 >>thousand trillion dollars, or a bit under 100,000 times the federal budget. >>8( >> >> >>For comparison a Li-6 fueled fusion craft would take 4,570 times its dry >>weight in fuel to get to half light speed. For an Explorer class thats >>2.23 E9 tons of lithium-6. (Which is about 8% of the mass of a given mass >>of mined Lithium. Maybe we can seel back the other isotopes of lithium >>after we remove the isotope we want?) At current comercial rates ( priced >>at about $300/lb. Or $660/Kg) for Lithium (ignoring procesing fees) that >>tonage would cost about $1,470 Trillion dollars, or 1 thousand times the >>federal budget. Nearly a hundred fold improvement. 8( > >This is still "raw" energy, the processing costs needed for normal >electrical energy are now inside the design of the starship. I think your >comparison should include the power plants (and the maintaining of them) >inside the starship. > >Timothy But the power plants arn't in the starship, or to be carried with it. They will be at the supposed anti-mater production platform (way out in the outer solar system). Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Sep 3 06:07 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["687" "Tue" "3" "September" "1996" "08:03:48" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "25" "starship-design: link exchange" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA18116 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 06:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA18101 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 06:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20798; Tue, 3 Sep 96 08:06:51 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI020648; Tue Sep 3 08:04:55 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02608; Tue, 3 Sep 96 08:04:39 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma002592; Tue Sep 3 08:03:50 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03649; Tue, 3 Sep 96 08:03:48 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 686 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: link exchange Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 08:03:48 -0500 Hi, I ran across the following free link advertizing service. Perhaps we should ask them to flash LIT up? http://www.linkexchange.com/ Kelly P.S. Oh, two (non LIT) people have E-mailed me about the new site on Daves W/S and had comments. Guess were geting some visability. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 10:51 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["3702" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "10:52:28" "-0700" "Steve VanDevender" "stevev@efn.org" nil "77" "starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA08808 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 10:51:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from haus.efn.org (haus.efn.org [198.68.17.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA08774 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 10:51:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tzadkiel.efn.org (stevev@tzadkiel.efn.org [198.68.17.19]) by haus.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA11136 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 10:54:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stevev@localhost) by tzadkiel.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA02444; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 10:52:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199609041752.KAA02444@tzadkiel.efn.org> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Steve VanDevender Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3701 From: Steve VanDevender Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 10:52:28 -0700 Rex (DotarSojat@aol.com) and I have been having a private discussion on my assertion that if you are beaming power to a starship to give it a fixed ship-frame acceleration, you have only a finite amount of time during which you can send power to the ship, no matter how long the ship's trip time is. For example, if you are beaming power to accelerate a ship at 1 g, you have just short of a year after its departure to beam power to it, no matter how far away you are sending it, and you must beam increasing amounts of power towards the end of that time to sustain the 1 g ship-frame acceleration. I presented Rex with the derivation that led me to that conclusion. Unfortunately, my derivation was based on the solution to a substantially more complicated problem (where does an observer at an arbitrary spacetime location see an accelerated object travelling in an arbitrary direction?), which we agreed is not particularly accessible to the uninitiated. Rex came up with a simpler derivation specific to this problem that is much easier to understand, which I will quote below. DotarSojat@aol.com writes: > Actually, the description of the > space-time diagram in your 8/26 email was more effective in con- > veying the relation to my intuition. Having gone through that > thought process, I can now rewrite the derivation more succinctly: > > The distance, x, of the sail after accelerating at a level, a, for > a proper time, t', is > x = [cosh(a * t') - 1]/a . > > The apparent (Earth) time, t, at which the sail reaches x is > t = [sinh(a * t')]/a . > > The time, delta-t, that it takes light from Earth to reach the > sail at x is > delta-t = t - te > = x/c > or = x for c = 1 lt-yr/yr, > > where te is the Earth time at which the light was emitted. > > Solving for te gives > te = t - x > = [1 + sinh(a * t') - cosh(a * t')]/a . > > Replacing sinh and cosh with their exponential forms gives > te = [1 - exp(-a * t')]/a . > > And solving for t' gives > t' = -[ln(1 - a * te)]/a . Q.E.D. Note that as the quantity (a * te) approaches 1, the quantity -ln(1 - a * te) approaches infinity; in other words, as the Earth time te approaches 1/a, the ship time t' approaches infinity. If constant acceleration of the ship is maintained, communication from Earth to the ship after Earth time 1/a is impossible. (For solution in conventional units, replace a with aconv/c, where aconv is acceleration in conventional units.) My description of the spacetime diagram that inspired this, for those who are interested, was: Steve VanDevender writes: > The parametric equation [ t, x ] = 1/a * [ sinh(a * t'), (cosh(a * t')-1) ] > describes a hyperbola with asymptotes t = x + 1/a and t = x - 1/a > approached as t' goes to infinity. So draw this hyperbola and its > asymptotes on paper, putting t on the y-axis and x on the x-axis; the > hyperbola represents the worldine of the receiver. Also draw a heavy > line up the y-axis representing the worldline of the emitter. Now you > can draw lines with slope 1 (or parallel to the upper asymptote) between > the worldline of the emitter and the worldline of the receiver > representing light rays sent from the emitter in the direction of of the > receiver. Note that because of this asymptote rays that leave the > emitter after time 1/a can never reach the receiver (they all travel > above the asymptote), and that as the emitter time approaches 1/a > photons emitted quite close together in emitter proper time are received > with a much larger difference in receiver proper time. From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 11:17 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["4508" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "13:14:41" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" "" "100" "Re: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA20346 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 11:17:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA20225 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 11:17:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00447; Wed, 4 Sep 96 13:17:26 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI000247; Wed Sep 4 13:15:41 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11349; Wed, 4 Sep 96 13:15:39 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma011297; Wed Sep 4 13:14:43 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11305; Wed, 4 Sep 96 13:14:40 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 4507 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: Steve VanDevender Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:14:41 -0500 At 10:52 AM 9/4/96, Steve VanDevender wrote: >Rex (DotarSojat@aol.com) and I have been having a private discussion on >my assertion that if you are beaming power to a starship to give it a >fixed ship-frame acceleration, you have only a finite amount of time >during which you can send power to the ship, no matter how long the >ship's trip time is. For example, if you are beaming power to >accelerate a ship at 1 g, you have just short of a year after its >departure to beam power to it, no matter how far away you are sending >it, and you must beam increasing amounts of power towards the end of >that time to sustain the 1 g ship-frame acceleration. I beleave the english translation of the following; is that after about a year of 1G acceleration, the ships moving at near light speed. Since the microwaves are moving at exactly lightspeed. At some point the beam can't really catch up with the ship in time to be usefull. Kelly > >I presented Rex with the derivation that led me to that conclusion. >Unfortunately, my derivation was based on the solution to a >substantially more complicated problem (where does an observer at an >arbitrary spacetime location see an accelerated object travelling in an >arbitrary direction?), which we agreed is not particularly accessible to >the uninitiated. Rex came up with a simpler derivation specific to this >problem that is much easier to understand, which I will quote below. > >DotarSojat@aol.com writes: > > Actually, the description of the > > space-time diagram in your 8/26 email was more effective in con- > > veying the relation to my intuition. Having gone through that > > thought process, I can now rewrite the derivation more succinctly: > > > > The distance, x, of the sail after accelerating at a level, a, for > > a proper time, t', is > > x = [cosh(a * t') - 1]/a . > > > > The apparent (Earth) time, t, at which the sail reaches x is > > t = [sinh(a * t')]/a . > > > > The time, delta-t, that it takes light from Earth to reach the > > sail at x is > > delta-t = t - te > > = x/c > > or = x for c = 1 lt-yr/yr, > > > > where te is the Earth time at which the light was emitted. > > > > Solving for te gives > > te = t - x > > = [1 + sinh(a * t') - cosh(a * t')]/a . > > > > Replacing sinh and cosh with their exponential forms gives > > te = [1 - exp(-a * t')]/a . > > > > And solving for t' gives > > t' = -[ln(1 - a * te)]/a . Q.E.D. > >Note that as the quantity (a * te) approaches 1, the quantity >-ln(1 - a * te) approaches infinity; in other words, as the Earth time >te approaches 1/a, the ship time t' approaches infinity. If constant >acceleration of the ship is maintained, communication from Earth to the >ship after Earth time 1/a is impossible. (For solution in conventional >units, replace a with aconv/c, where aconv is acceleration in >conventional units.) > >My description of the spacetime diagram that inspired this, for those >who are interested, was: > >Steve VanDevender writes: > > The parametric equation [ t, x ] = 1/a * [ sinh(a * t'), (cosh(a * t')-1) ] > > describes a hyperbola with asymptotes t = x + 1/a and t = x - 1/a > > approached as t' goes to infinity. So draw this hyperbola and its > > asymptotes on paper, putting t on the y-axis and x on the x-axis; the > > hyperbola represents the worldine of the receiver. Also draw a heavy > > line up the y-axis representing the worldline of the emitter. Now you > > can draw lines with slope 1 (or parallel to the upper asymptote) between > > the worldline of the emitter and the worldline of the receiver > > representing light rays sent from the emitter in the direction of of the > > receiver. Note that because of this asymptote rays that leave the > > emitter after time 1/a can never reach the receiver (they all travel > > above the asymptote), and that as the emitter time approaches 1/a > > photons emitted quite close together in emitter proper time are received > > with a much larger difference in receiver proper time. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 11:29 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["399" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "14:29:10" "-0400" "David Levine" "David@interworld.com" nil "11" "RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA23644 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 11:29:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www1.interworld.com (www.InterWorld.Com [165.254.130.4]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA23616 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 11:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by www1.interworld.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5) id <01BB9A6D.71711610@www1.interworld.com>; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 14:29:12 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Levine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 398 From: David Levine Sender: owner-starship-design To: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" Subject: RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 14:29:10 -0400 >I beleave the english translation of the following; is that after about a >year of 1G acceleration, the ships moving at near light speed. Since the >microwaves are moving at exactly lightspeed. At some point the beam can't >really catch up with the ship in time to be usefull. And I suppose the red-shifting of the beam (relative to the ship) makes it too weak to do any good, anyway. -David From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 11:56 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["920" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "13:48:44" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "26" "RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA29948 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 11:55:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA29891 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 11:55:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03752; Wed, 4 Sep 96 13:55:38 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI003316; Wed Sep 4 13:49:59 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12592; Wed, 4 Sep 96 13:49:55 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma012567; Wed Sep 4 13:48:47 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17501; Wed, 4 Sep 96 13:48:43 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 919 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: David Levine Cc: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" Subject: RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:48:44 -0500 At 2:29 PM 9/4/96, David Levine wrote: >>I beleave the english translation of the following; is that after about a >>year of 1G acceleration, the ships moving at near light speed. Since the >>microwaves are moving at exactly lightspeed. At some point the beam can't >>really catch up with the ship in time to be usefull. > >And I suppose the red-shifting of the beam (relative to the ship) makes >it too weak to do any good, anyway. > >-David Down grades your microwaves down to radio or something. ;) Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 12:45 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1056" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "14:39:05" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "29" "RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA17412 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 12:45:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA17380 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 12:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07347; Wed, 4 Sep 96 14:42:43 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI007107; Wed Sep 4 14:40:09 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13812; Wed, 4 Sep 96 14:40:04 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma013794; Wed Sep 4 14:39:06 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25583; Wed, 4 Sep 96 14:39:03 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1055 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: David Levine Cc: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" Subject: RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 14:39:05 -0500 At 2:29 PM 9/4/96, David Levine wrote: >>I beleave the english translation of the following; is that after about a >>year of 1G acceleration, the ships moving at near light speed. Since the >>microwaves are moving at exactly lightspeed. At some point the beam can't >>really catch up with the ship in time to be usefull. > >And I suppose the red-shifting of the beam (relative to the ship) makes >it too weak to do any good, anyway. > >-David Ah, if you try to decel into a microwave beam. How much blue shift would you get at what speeds? Could you blue shif the beam to the point it would pass through the mesh of the microwave sail? Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 12:48 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["377" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "15:48:22" "-0400" "David Levine" "David@interworld.com" nil "14" "RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA17977 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 12:48:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www1.interworld.com (www.InterWorld.Com [165.254.130.4]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA17928 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 12:48:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by www1.interworld.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5) id <01BB9A78.84740690@www1.interworld.com>; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 15:48:29 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Levine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 376 From: David Levine Sender: owner-starship-design To: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" Subject: RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 15:48:22 -0400 If you are decellerating into the beam, you make sure the people providing the beam are putting out a "red" enough beam so that when it shifts up, it's okay. -David >Ah, if you try to decel into a microwave beam. How much blue shift would >you get at what speeds? Could you blue shif the beam to the point it would >pass through the mesh of the microwave sail? > >Kelly From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 13:10 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1037" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "15:05:43" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "31" "RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA23395 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:10:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA23329 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:10:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09016; Wed, 4 Sep 96 15:09:06 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI008889; Wed Sep 4 15:06:45 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14432; Wed, 4 Sep 96 15:06:32 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma014405; Wed Sep 4 15:05:45 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29407; Wed, 4 Sep 96 15:05:42 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1036 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: David Levine Cc: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" Subject: RE: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 15:05:43 -0500 At 3:48 PM 9/4/96, David Levine wrote: >If you are decellerating into the beam, you make sure the people >providing the beam are putting out a "red" enough beam so >that when it shifts up, it's okay. >-David > > >>Ah, if you try to decel into a microwave beam. How much blue shift would >>you get at what speeds? Could you blue shif the beam to the point it would >>pass through the mesh of the microwave sail? >> >>Kelly Can you get a maser transmitter to red shift that far? How much drift can you take? You have to assume a bit of uncertainty of the ships incoming speed given it might be a light year or two out. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 13:28 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["544" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "15:24:46" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "18" "starship-design: The UFO buffs list LIT" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA03059 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:28:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA03042 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:28:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09985; Wed, 4 Sep 96 15:28:43 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI009835; Wed Sep 4 15:26:02 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14748; Wed, 4 Sep 96 15:25:50 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma014725; Wed Sep 4 15:24:48 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01656; Wed, 4 Sep 96 15:24:45 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 543 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: The UFO buffs list LIT Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 15:24:46 -0500 I noticed the Internet UFO group Links pages lists our LIT Exo biology page? http://www.schmitzware.com/IUFOG/iufog-links.shtml Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 13:31 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["306" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "16:31:06" "-0400" "David Levine" "David@interworld.com" nil "14" "RE: starship-design: The UFO buffs list LIT" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA03380 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:31:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www1.interworld.com (www.InterWorld.Com [165.254.130.4]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA03339 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:30:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by www1.interworld.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5) id <01BB9A7E.799DC480@www1.interworld.com>; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 16:31:07 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Levine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 305 From: David Levine Sender: owner-starship-design To: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" , "'kgstar@most.fw.hac.com'" Subject: RE: starship-design: The UFO buffs list LIT Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 16:31:06 -0400 >I noticed the Internet UFO group Links pages lists our LIT Exo biology page? > > >http://www.schmitzware.com/IUFOG/iufog-links.shtml > >Kelly You'd be surprised how many paranormal pages it and the Contact Project are listed on. You can use Alta Vista to check which pages link to your pages. -David From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 14:00 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["849" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "15:58:06" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "29" "RE: starship-design: The UFO buffs list LIT" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA10121 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 14:00:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA10109 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 14:00:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12101; Wed, 4 Sep 96 16:00:28 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI012022; Wed Sep 4 15:59:26 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15441; Wed, 4 Sep 96 15:59:21 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma015413; Wed Sep 4 15:58:08 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06194; Wed, 4 Sep 96 15:58:05 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 848 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: David Levine Cc: "'starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu'" , "'kgstar@most.fw.hac.com'" Subject: RE: starship-design: The UFO buffs list LIT Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 15:58:06 -0500 At 4:31 PM 9/4/96, David Levine wrote: >>I noticed the Internet UFO group Links pages lists our LIT Exo biology page? >> >> >>http://www.schmitzware.com/IUFOG/iufog-links.shtml >> >>Kelly > >You'd be surprised how many paranormal pages it and the Contact Project >are listed on. You can use Alta Vista to check which pages link to >your pages. > >-David I was thinking of doing an Alta vista check. I imagine it would get boggling. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 18:09 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1002" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "21:08:58" "-0400" "Philip Bakelaar" "pbakelaar@exit109.com" nil "28" "starship-design: Being smart..." "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA04971 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 18:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hiway1.exit109.com (root@hiway1.exit109.com [205.164.176.32]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA04892 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 18:08:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pbakelaar.exit109.com (ppp24-tr.exit109.com [205.164.179.151]) by hiway1.exit109.com (8.7.4/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA25222 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 21:08:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199609050108.VAA25222@hiway1.exit109.com> X-Sender: pbakelaar@hiway1.exit109.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Philip Bakelaar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1001 From: Philip Bakelaar Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Being smart... Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 21:08:58 -0400 (EDT) OK guys... I've been reading the letters over the past weeks. They are so way complicated. Now, I know that I pretty much have to go to college to learn all this stuff, and sure, eventually I will. But what I would like to know is: course names book names important people Or, if you guys learned from something else, please let me know. What I'm talking about is all this space stuff, like using hyperbolas to solve communication problems with spaceships and solar sails problems. If possible, I want specific info (i.e. the NAME of the course) and any other info you guys have. Thanx alot And hopefully, if I get response, I can start immediately learning this stuff. Also, any info on WHERE to start learning all this is a great help. BTW, if you think it is too hard, please ignore that. Send me any info, regardless of impossibility for me to learn, got that? :) Ben P.S. Kelly, how come you aren't using the starship-design mailing list sometimes? Is there a prob I should know of? From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 4 19:00 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2519" "Wed" "4" "September" "1996" "20:59:24" "-0500" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "66" "Re: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA18206 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 19:00:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub0.tc.umn.edu (mhub0.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.50]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA18183 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 19:00:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub0.tc.umn.edu; Wed, 4 Sep 96 21:00:17 -0500 Received: from dialup-1-78.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Wed, 4 Sep 96 21:00:10 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <322E33FC.27EB@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Organization: Sadly lacking X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 2518 From: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 20:59:24 -0500 Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > > At 10:52 AM 9/4/96, Steve VanDevender wrote: > >Rex (DotarSojat@aol.com) and I have been having a private discussion on > >my assertion that if you are beaming power to a starship to give it a > >fixed ship-frame acceleration, you have only a finite amount of time > >during which you can send power to the ship, no matter how long the > >ship's trip time is. For example, if you are beaming power to > >accelerate a ship at 1 g, you have just short of a year after its > >departure to beam power to it, no matter how far away you are sending > >it, and you must beam increasing amounts of power towards the end of > >that time to sustain the 1 g ship-frame acceleration. > I found another way to note the same thing. A constant 1 G thrust profile mission, takes about 5years ship time and 13.25 years earth time, to go 11.9 light-years. so on the last day, as your ship coasts into target system, the light (microwaves) you are seeing left earth 11.9 years ago, and 13.25 years after the start of the mission. Thus that light must have been emmitted ~1.35 years after the start of the mission (from Earth's perspective) > I beleave the english translation of the following; is that after about a > year of 1G acceleration, the ships moving at near light speed. Since the > microwaves are moving at exactly lightspeed. At some point the beam can't > really catch up with the ship in time to be usefull. > But at turn-around the ship is only moving at a speed of .9905 C. This is because 11.9 light-years is too short a distance to get into the _really_ strange parts of the trip. The gamma for this is "only" 7.27 This is not really all that bad. The microwave wavelength will only shrink or stretch (depending on your direction) by this amount. Same with the the power drop, and the time dialation factor. How about a mission which has a constant beam power, the acceleration would drop off toward the turnaround point. In this case, the crew would start off with earth-like gravity, and towards the middle of the trip, the gravity would be more lunar-like. ( a little less actually, but not for long) The advantage would be simplified beaming requirements, and the disadvantage would be a slightly longer flight time. Questions: What would the top speed relative to Earth be? What is the total trip time. (crew time?) how much of this time is spent at less than 1/2 G? Kevin > Kelly > -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Thu Sep 5 04:59 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2434" "Thu" "5" "September" "1996" "13:59:18" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "52" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA21871 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 04:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA21858 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 04:59:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hgl3-4.worldaccess.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA25121 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 5 Sep 1996 13:59:08 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199609051159.AA25121@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 2433 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 13:59:18 +0100 >At 2:40 PM 9/2/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >>Kelly wrote: >>>Electricity costs about 4-10 cents per kilowatt hour. If you could convert >>>the energy directly into antimatter. Antimater would (at $0.05 a KwHour) >>>cost $1.25 E9 per kilogram. Thats one and a quarter billion dollars a >>>kilo! Given that an Explorer class ship has a mass of 500,000 tons. That >>>comes to a fuel mass of 210,000 tons. Half of which is anti-matter. Thats >>>105,000,000 kg of anti-matter for a cost of roughly $130 E15 or about 130 >>>thousand trillion dollars, or a bit under 100,000 times the federal budget. >>>8( >>> >>> >>>For comparison a Li-6 fueled fusion craft would take 4,570 times its dry >>>weight in fuel to get to half light speed. For an Explorer class thats >>>2.23 E9 tons of lithium-6. (Which is about 8% of the mass of a given mass >>>of mined Lithium. Maybe we can seel back the other isotopes of lithium >>>after we remove the isotope we want?) At current comercial rates ( priced >>>at about $300/lb. Or $660/Kg) for Lithium (ignoring procesing fees) that >>>tonage would cost about $1,470 Trillion dollars, or 1 thousand times the >>>federal budget. Nearly a hundred fold improvement. 8( >> >>This is still "raw" energy, the processing costs needed for normal >>electrical energy are now inside the design of the starship. I think your >>comparison should include the power plants (and the maintaining of them) >>inside the starship. >> >>Timothy > >But the power plants arn't in the starship, or to be carried with it. They >will be at the supposed anti-mater production platform (way out in the >outer solar system). > >Kelly I meant this for the Explorer design that uses the fusion fuel and thus may need a kind of powerplant. I understand that any (non-beamed) starship is some powerplant, however some fuels are easier to "ignite" than others (and have lighter engines). What you should have mentioned in the previous letter is that for fusion powered ships one needs only one powerplant (the one in the ship) while for anti-matter powered ships one needs two powerplants (one in the ship and one "on the ground"). What I am not so sure about is the difference in design, fusing fuel may need much more heavy equipment than "burning" anti-matter. However maybe it is the otherway around, only the future will tell. Therefore making comparisons like the above have little or no value. Timothy From owner-starship-design Thu Sep 5 07:06 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1631" "Thu" "5" "September" "1996" "16:06:35" "+0100" "Timothy van der Linden" "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" nil "32" "Re: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA15599 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 07:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from driene.student.utwente.nl (driene.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA15581 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 07:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hgl1-14.worldaccess.nl by driene.student.utwente.nl with SMTP id AA10125 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 5 Sep 1996 16:06:25 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-Id: <199609051406.AA10125@driene.student.utwente.nl> X-Sender: S9421793@mail.student.utwente.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3b4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1630 From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: the beamed power problem, again Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 16:06:35 +0100 Kelly replied to Steve: >At 10:52 AM 9/4/96, Steve VanDevender wrote: >>Rex (DotarSojat@aol.com) and I have been having a private discussion on >>my assertion that if you are beaming power to a starship to give it a >>fixed ship-frame acceleration, you have only a finite amount of time >>during which you can send power to the ship, no matter how long the >>ship's trip time is. For example, if you are beaming power to >>accelerate a ship at 1 g, you have just short of a year after its >>departure to beam power to it, no matter how far away you are sending >>it, and you must beam increasing amounts of power towards the end of >>that time to sustain the 1 g ship-frame acceleration. > >I beleave the english translation of the following; is that after about a >year of 1G acceleration, the ships moving at near light speed. Since the >microwaves are moving at exactly lightspeed. At some point the beam can't >really catch up with the ship in time to be usefull. No, this has nothing to do with what Steve meant. The light is still closing in on the starship while it accelerates, however it will take an infinite time to definately reach it, unless the ship stops accelerating (or accelerates less than before). Note that when the ship accelerates less, that after a while again the light cannot catch up with it. Also just stopping acceleration for a while (and cruising with the same speed) and the again accelerating like before will not help. Well, you could actually "recharge your batteries" while cruising. Then after they were recharged you could accelerate a while untill the batteries were drained. Timothy From owner-starship-design Thu Sep 5 19:25 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["299" "Thu" "5" "September" "1996" "22:24:35" "-0400" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "10" "Re: starship-design: Being smart..." "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA26398 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 19:24:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout07.mail.aol.com (emout07.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.22]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA26387 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 19:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout07.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA14081; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 22:24:35 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960905222435_278394489@emout07.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 298 From: KellySt@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: pbakelaar@exit109.com, starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Being smart... Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 22:24:35 -0400 > P.S. Kelly, how come you aren't using the starship-design > mailing list sometimes? Is there a prob I should know of? No, I just don't send non Starship design related through that. As for courses, general engineering and physics courses should get you most of what were babling about. Kelly From owner-starship-design Thu Sep 5 19:25 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2914" "Thu" "5" "September" "1996" "22:24:47" "-0400" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "69" "Re: starship-design: Fuel costs" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA26437 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 19:25:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout10.mail.aol.com (emout10.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.25]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA26427 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 19:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout10.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA17036; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 22:24:47 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960905222445_278394644@emout10.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2913 From: KellySt@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl, starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Fuel costs Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 22:24:47 -0400 >>At 2:40 PM 9/2/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >>>Kelly wrote: >>>>Electricity costs about 4-10 cents per kilowatt hour. If you could convert >>>>the energy directly into antimatter. Antimater would (at $0.05 a KwHour) >>>>cost $1.25 E9 per kilogram. Thats one and a quarter billion dollars a >>>>kilo! Given that an Explorer class ship has a mass of 500,000 tons. That >>>>comes to a fuel mass of 210,000 tons. Half of which is anti-matter. Thats >>>>105,000,000 kg of anti-matter for a cost of roughly $130 E15 or about 130 >>>>thousand trillion dollars, or a bit under 100,000 times the federal budget. >>>>8( >>>> >>>> >>>>For comparison a Li-6 fueled fusion craft would take 4,570 times its dry >>>>weight in fuel to get to half light speed. For an Explorer class thats >>>>2.23 E9 tons of lithium-6. (Which is about 8% of the mass of a given mass >>>>of mined Lithium. Maybe we can seel back the other isotopes of lithium >>>>after we remove the isotope we want?) At current comercial rates ( priced >>>>at about $300/lb. Or $660/Kg) for Lithium (ignoring procesing fees) that >>>>tonage would cost about $1,470 Trillion dollars, or 1 thousand times the >>>>federal budget. Nearly a hundred fold improvement. 8( >>> >>>This is still "raw" energy, the processing costs needed for normal >>>electrical energy are now inside the design of the starship. I think your >>>comparison should include the power plants (and the maintaining of them) >>>inside the starship. >>> >>>Timothy >> >>But the power plants arn't in the starship, or to be carried with it. They >>will be at the supposed anti-mater production platform (way out in the >>outer solar system). >> >>Kelly > I meant this for the Explorer design that uses the fusion fuel and thus may > need a kind of powerplant. I understand that any (non-beamed) starship is > some powerplant, however some fuels are easier to "ignite" than others (and > have lighter engines). > What you should have mentioned in the previous letter is that for fusion > powered ships one needs only one powerplant (the one in the ship) while for > anti-matter powered ships one needs two powerplants (one in the ship and one > "on the ground"). > What I am not so sure about is the difference in design, fusing fuel may > need much more heavy equipment than "burning" anti-matter. However maybe it > is the otherway around, only the future will tell. Therefore making > comparisons like the above have little or no value. > Timothy Well with the explorer class I did make some estimates about the engines thrust and weight (if we aren't going to try to do that, were not trying to figure out starships), as to the relative weight of an Antimater drive vrs a fusion on (and the unidentified weight of the antimater tanks!!) I can't realy guess, though for the purpose of the post I assumed (for no good reason) that they might be about the same. Kelly From owner-starship-design Tue Sep 10 08:09 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1071" "Tue" "10" "September" "1996" "10:06:28" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "28" "starship-design: No Text?" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA12303 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 10 Sep 1996 08:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA12288 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 1996 08:09:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21050; Tue, 10 Sep 96 10:09:15 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI021023; Tue Sep 10 10:08:31 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06173; Tue, 10 Sep 96 10:08:29 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma006101; Tue Sep 10 10:06:29 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20627; Tue, 10 Sep 96 10:06:26 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1070 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: No Text? Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:06:28 -0500 I stumbled into something. I have downloaded a copy of NetScape Navagator 3.0 and was using it to access the newsletter area. It doesn't recognize or open text. It eiather asks for the special application this would require, or suggests you link to them to pick up some applet. I tried the same thing on the old Newsletters on the SunSite server, and it mearly offers to download the .txt newsletter files to your harddrive. Charming upgrade. Kelly P.S. DAVE! I'm going to upload the last two weeks of newsletters to the newsletter area of your server, along with an updated newsletter listing page (projarc.html). Let me know if this will trip you up. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Tue Sep 10 16:31 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1115" "Tue" "10" "September" "1996" "18:28:01" "-0500" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "27" "starship-design: Re:No Text? No Problem!" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA03866 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 10 Sep 1996 16:29:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub1.tc.umn.edu (mhub1.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.51]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA03855 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 1996 16:29:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub1.tc.umn.edu; Tue, 10 Sep 96 18:29:30 -0500 Received: from dialup-4-b-162.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Tue, 10 Sep 96 18:29:29 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <3235F981.73BC@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Organization: Sadly lacking X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 1114 From: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Re:No Text? No Problem! Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 18:28:01 -0500 Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > > I stumbled into something. I have downloaded a copy of NetScape Navagator > 3.0 and was using it to access the newsletter area. It doesn't recognize > or open text. It eiather asks for the special application this would > require, or suggests you link to them to pick up some applet. I tried the > same thing on the old Newsletters on the SunSite server, and it mearly > offers to download the .txt newsletter files to your harddrive. Charming > upgrade. Kelly, Kelly, Kelly. You have to specify which program you want to use to display .txt files under OPTIONS/GENERAL PREFERENCES/HELPERS go down to the bottom of the list and select the text entry then instead of (unknown prompt user), put either (view in browser), or (launch application if you have a favorite text editor) You can do this with any type of file, just don't do it with .exe, or .bat (always prompt for these, so you don't execute someone's idea of a prank) Once you make this change here, it will always be in force until revoked. -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Tue Sep 10 23:56 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["6715" "Wed" "11" "September" "1996" "02:56:25" "-0400" "DotarSojat@aol.com" "DotarSojat@aol.com" nil "181" "starship-design: Motion of sail driven by constant-power beam" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA21556 for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 10 Sep 1996 23:56:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout01.mail.aol.com (emout01.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.92]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA21545 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 1996 23:56:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout01.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA04505 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 02:56:25 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960911025625_305797760@emout01.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DotarSojat@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 6714 From: DotarSojat@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Motion of sail driven by constant-power beam Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 02:56:25 -0400 Hi all Steve has written, on 9/1 to me (and Timothy), >I wonder what the worldline would look like for an object that >is accelerated by a constant-output emitter? In other words, >the emitter would send constant output power, meaning the re- >ceiver would experience gradually decreasing received power >and acceleration as its proper time increases. Kevin has written, on 9/4 to the Group, >How about a mission which has a constant beam power, the >acceleration would drop off toward the turnaround point. In >this case, the crew would start off with earth-like gravity, >and towards the middle of the trip, the gravity would be more >lunar-like. ... The advantage would be simplified beaming >requirements, and the disadvantage would be a slightly longer >flight time. > >Questions: >What would the top speed relative to Earth be? >What is the total trip time. (crew time?) >How much of this time is spent at less than 1/2 G?] DERIVATION For a power, Pe, sent out by an emitter, the power received by a sail (ignoring inverse-square effects) that is receding at an apparent velocity, beta lt-yr/yr, is Pr = Pe * sqrt[(1 - beta)/(1 + beta)] ....Doppler shift = Pe * gamma * (1 - beta) ....gamma = 1/sqrt(1 - beta^2) = Pe * [cosh(theta) - sinh(theta)] ....gamma = cosh(theta); beta = tanh(theta) (definition of velocity parameter, theta) = Pe * exp(-theta) ....using exp forms of hyp functions. (I believe this relation, with theta = a * t' for constant a, is the source of the logarithmic time dependence introduced by Steve in his email of 8/20 to the Group.) The velocity-parameter equation of motion for a thrust, T = Pr/c, applied to a mass, M, is T = M * d(theta)/dt' = Pr/c = Pe * exp(-theta) ....c = 1 lt-yr/yr, which gives the "differential equation" exp(theta) * d(theta) = (Pe/M) * dt' . Integrating from theta = 0 at t' = 0, with Pe constant, gives [exp(theta) - 1] = Pe * t'/M , so the description of the motion of the sail, in terms of the dependence of the velocity parameter, theta, on ship time, t', is theta = ln[(Pe * t'/M) + 1] . At the beginning of the flight, when thrust = To, acceleration = ao and the received power, Pr, equals the emitted power, Pe, To = M * ao = Pe/c , which leads to ao = Pe/(c * M) --> Pe/M (for c = 1 lt-yr/yr), which makes the description of the motion of the sail theta = ln(ao * t' + 1) . For one space dimension, dx/dt' = u = sinh(theta) = 0.5 * [exp(theta) - exp(-theta)] = 0.5 * [(ao * t' + 1) - 1/(ao * t' + 1)] . Integrating this from x = 0 at t' = 0 gives x = 0.5 * (0.5 * ao * t'^2 + t' - theta/ao) . The apparent (Earth) time, t, for the ship time, t', is obtained from dt/dt' = gamma = cosh(theta) = 0.5 * [exp(theta) + exp(-theta)] = 0.5 * [(ao * t' + 1) + 1/(ao * t' + 1)] . Integrating this from t = 0 at t' = 0 gives t = 0.5 * (0.5 * ao * t'^2 + t' + theta/ao) . The Earth time of emission, te, of the energy that arrives at the sail at t' is simply (for c = 1) te = t - x . The proper velocity, u, is given by u = sinh(theta) . The instantaneous proper acceleration, a, is given by the velocity-parameter equation of motion-- a = c * d(theta)/dt' = ao/(ao * t' + 1) (for c = 1). RESULTS Putting these relations together in the Fortran program COPOBM.FOR, which is appended, gives the following values of theta, distance, proper velocity, instantaneous acceleration, Earth time for t' and Earth time of emission for reception at t', as a function of ship time, t', for an initial acceleration of 1 g, Tship Theta Dist Prop Vel Accel TEarth Temit (yr) (rad) (lt-yr) (lt-yr/yr) (g) (yr) (yr) 0.0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.5 0.4162 0.1130 0.4283 0.6595 0.5161 0.4031 1.0 0.7092 0.4146 0.7702 0.4920 1.1016 0.6870 1.5 0.9355 0.8776 1.0781 0.3924 1.7838 0.9062 2.0 1.1200 1.4900 1.3693 0.3263 2.5748 1.0848 2.5 1.2756 2.2453 1.6509 0.2793 3.4809 1.2356 3.0 1.4103 3.1399 1.9266 0.2441 4.5059 1.3660 3.5 1.5290 4.1712 2.1983 0.2168 5.6522 1.4810 4.0 1.6350 5.3377 2.4673 0.1949 6.9215 1.5837 4.5 1.7309 6.6382 2.7343 0.1771 8.3148 1.6766 5.0 1.8184 8.0718 2.9999 0.1623 9.8332 1.7613 For an example trip to a star 4.4906 (= 2 * 2.2453) lt-yr from Earth, the ship would accelerate for 2.5 ship years, reach a maximum proper velocity* of 1.6509 lt-yr/yr at an apparent (Earth) time of 3.4809 yr, and at turnover receive power emit- ted from Earth at 1.2356 yr after the departure date, giving an instantaneous acceleration of 0.2793 g. __________ *For a proper velocity, u, the apparent velocity, v, is given by v = u/sqrt(1 + u^2) . __________ These results seem to confirm Kevin's intuitive estimates regard- ing acceleration levels. They also substantiate Steve's conclu- sion that the time of emission is limited (even for a constant- output emitter); from the table above, the duration of emission of the radiation accelerating a sail half way to a destination more than 16 lt-yr away (the last entry) is only about a year and three quarters. The deceleration phase (here assumed without justification to be a mirror image of the acceleration phase) needs to be addressed in a separate discussion. Timothy has already put a lot of thought into it. (Note: This exercise may turn out to be purely academic because the inverse-square effects, without unforeseeable advances in focusing abilities, would be much larger.) Rex ADDENDUM PROGRAM COPOBM !9/7/96 101 FORMAT(2X, 21H Initial Accel (g) = ) 102 FORMAT(1X, 6H Tship, 3X, 6H Theta, 5X, 5H Dist, 2X, & 9H Prop Vel, 3X, 6H Accel, 2X, 7H TEarth, 2X, 6H Temit) 103 FORMAT(3X, F4.1, 3X, F6.4, 3X, F7.4, 4X, F7.4, 3X, F6.4, & 3X, F6.4, 2X, F6.4) 1 CONTINUE WRITE(*,101) READ(*,*) AGO IF(AGO .EQ. 0.) GO TO 99 AO = 1.0324 * AGO WRITE(*,102) DO 10 IT = 1, 11 FT = IT - 1 TIM = 0.5 * FT ARG = AO * TIM + 1. THET = LOG(ARG) DIST = 0.5 * (0.5 * AO * TIM*TIM + TIM - THET/AO) PVEL = 0.5 * (ARG - 1./ARG) ACC = AGO/ARG TAPP = 0.5 * (0.5 * AO * TIM*TIM + TIM + THET/AO) TEM = TAPP - DIST WRITE(*,103) TIM, THET, DIST, PVEL, ACC, TAPP, TEM 10 CONTINUE GO TO 1 99 STOP END From owner-starship-design Wed Sep 11 06:21 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1742" "Wed" "11" "September" "1996" "08:17:18" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "47" "Re: starship-design: Re:No Text? No Problem!" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA05231 for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 06:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA05219 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 06:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08829; Wed, 11 Sep 96 08:21:08 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI008599; Wed Sep 11 08:18:31 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04731; Wed, 11 Sep 96 08:18:25 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004707; Wed Sep 11 08:17:19 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07310; Wed, 11 Sep 96 08:17:16 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1741 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Cc: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: Re:No Text? No Problem! Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 08:17:18 -0500 At 6:28 PM 9/10/96, Kevin \"Tex\" Houston wrote: >Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: >> >> I stumbled into something. I have downloaded a copy of NetScape Navagator >> 3.0 and was using it to access the newsletter area. It doesn't recognize >> or open text. It eiather asks for the special application this would >> require, or suggests you link to them to pick up some applet. I tried the >> same thing on the old Newsletters on the SunSite server, and it mearly >> offers to download the .txt newsletter files to your harddrive. Charming >> upgrade. > >Kelly, Kelly, Kelly. > >You have to specify which program you want to use to display .txt files >under OPTIONS/GENERAL PREFERENCES/HELPERS go down to the bottom of the >list >and select the text entry then instead of (unknown prompt user), put >either (view in browser), or (launch application if you have a favorite >text editor) You can do this with any type of file, just don't do it >with .exe, or .bat (always prompt for these, so you don't execute >someone's >idea of a prank) Once you make this change here, it will always be in >force until revoked. > > >-- >Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html ~~~~:( Your right. I forgot to set the default for text or .txt files. One askes for an applet, the other defaulted to download to disk. Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Thu Sep 12 04:49 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["8382" "Thu" "12" "September" "1996" "06:47:13" "-0500" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "193" "starship-design: Motion of sail driven by constant-power beam -- Excellent work Rex!" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA25623 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 04:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub2.tc.umn.edu (mhub2.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.52]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA25614 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 04:49:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub2.tc.umn.edu; Thu, 12 Sep 96 06:49:10 -0500 Received: from dialup-1-b-23.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Thu, 12 Sep 96 06:49:06 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <3237F841.7D26@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Organization: Sadly lacking X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <960911025625_305797760@emout01.mail.aol.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 8381 From: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: starship-design: Motion of sail driven by constant-power beam -- Excellent work Rex! Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 06:47:13 -0500 DotarSojat@aol.com wrote: > > Hi all [Snip] > Kevin has written, on 9/4 to the Group, > > >How about a mission which has a constant beam power, the > >acceleration would drop off toward the turnaround point. In > >this case, the crew would start off with earth-like gravity, > >and towards the middle of the trip, the gravity would be more > >lunar-like. ... The advantage would be simplified beaming > >requirements, and the disadvantage would be a slightly longer > >flight time. > > > >Questions: > >What would the top speed relative to Earth be? > >What is the total trip time. (crew time?) > >How much of this time is spent at less than 1/2 G?] > > DERIVATION [snipped for brevity, but a first-class job] > RESULTS > > Putting these relations together in the Fortran program > COPOBM.FOR, which is appended, gives the following values of > theta, distance, proper velocity, instantaneous acceleration, > Earth time for t' and Earth time of emission for reception at > t', as a function of ship time, t', for an initial acceleration > of 1 g, > > Tship Theta Dist Prop Vel Accel TEarth Temit > (yr) (rad) (lt-yr) (lt-yr/yr) (g) (yr) (yr) > 0.0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 > 0.5 0.4162 0.1130 0.4283 0.6595 0.5161 0.4031 > 1.0 0.7092 0.4146 0.7702 0.4920 1.1016 0.6870 > 1.5 0.9355 0.8776 1.0781 0.3924 1.7838 0.9062 > 2.0 1.1200 1.4900 1.3693 0.3263 2.5748 1.0848 > 2.5 1.2756 2.2453 1.6509 0.2793 3.4809 1.2356 > 3.0 1.4103 3.1399 1.9266 0.2441 4.5059 1.3660 > 3.5 1.5290 4.1712 2.1983 0.2168 5.6522 1.4810 > 4.0 1.6350 5.3377 2.4673 0.1949 6.9215 1.5837 > 4.5 1.7309 6.6382 2.7343 0.1771 8.3148 1.6766 > 5.0 1.8184 8.0718 2.9999 0.1623 9.8332 1.7613 > > For an example trip to a star 4.4906 (= 2 * 2.2453) lt-yr from > Earth, the ship would accelerate for 2.5 ship years, reach a > maximum proper velocity* of 1.6509 lt-yr/yr at an apparent > (Earth) time of 3.4809 yr, and at turnover receive power emit- > ted from Earth at 1.2356 yr after the departure date, giving an > instantaneous acceleration of 0.2793 g. > __________ > *For a proper velocity, u, the apparent velocity, v, is given > by > v = u/sqrt(1 + u^2) . > __________ So, let me see if I understand this. For a trip to Tau Ceti (12 Lt-yrs away), (interpolating from above 6 is almost halfway in between 5.3 and 6.6) The ship accelerates for 4.25 years crew time to turnaround. It achieves a final velocity of .933 C and the acceleration felt by the crew is .186 Earth's transmitters have been on for 1.63 years (as measured by earth) and turnaround would be achieved at 7.618 years earth time. Doubling these numbers (where appropriate) gives for a one-way trip: 15 earth years for travel. 8.5 crew years for travel. 3.5 earth years of transmitter time. With 10 years for in-system study (and return maser construction), This gives a crew time of 27 years for the entire mission. and an earth time of 40 years. This is not too bad. The crew would be able to see earth again, the time differential upon return is not so horrendous that all your family would be dead. your twin would be "only" 13 years older than you. I think this is even favorable in terms of "political return" A politician who voted for this would expect to see results in about 30 years (travel time plus transmission time back to earth) Long enough to be forgetable if it goes bad, short enough to hope to be alive to see it if it works. > > These results seem to confirm Kevin's intuitive estimates regard- Can I say "I told you so"? Aw, come on be a sport. ;-) > ing acceleration levels. They also substantiate Steve's conclu- > sion that the time of emission is limited (even for a constant- > output emitter); from the table above, the duration of emission > of the radiation accelerating a sail half way to a destination > more than 16 lt-yr away (the last entry) is only about a year > and three quarters. > > The deceleration phase (here assumed without justification to > be a mirror image of the acceleration phase) needs to be > addressed in a separate discussion. Timothy has already put > a lot of thought into it. I thought Tim's treatsy on the subject of deceleration with a beamed poser source showed that it will work. That is to say that the ship receives ennough power via the antenna to power an ion engine with a fairly decent mass ratio. =============begin included text ============================= Calculations for the deceleration phase of the MARS design. by Timothy van der Linden (T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl) Last modified April 14th, 1996 [derivation snipped] Vstart Vexh optimal Fuel:ship-ratio Energy per kg of ship (in Joules) 0.1 0.062 5.36 7.45E14 7.73E14 0.2 0.121 5.84 3.25E15 3.50E15 0.3 0.180 6.40 8.11E15 9.08E15 0.4 0.240 7.06 1.64E16 1.91E16 0.5 0.300 7.87 2.99E16 3.64E16 0.6 0.364 8.91 5.23E16 6.69E16 0.7 0.433 10.38 9.21E16 1.25E17 0.8 0.512 12.72 1.73E17 2.53E17 0.9 0.615 17.75 4.04E17 6.62E17 0.99 0.803 52.00 3.12E18 7.02E17 0.9996 0.906 238.81 2.91E19 9.26E19 Note that the power of the maser-beam is NOT constant during the decelerating phase, it is supposed that it decreases while the ship gets lighter (because it repulses mass). ======================End included text============================== By repluses mass, I think Tim means the beam tends to accelerate the ship more than the engine can compensate. this was supposed to be a minimum energy solution, perhaps a constant energy beam will raise the costs. But turning down a power beam is very easy. (think dimmer switch) Also Fuel:ship ratio is Reaction Mass:Dry Mass ratio I think. For a top speed of .9333 C, we are looking at a mass ratio of "only" 30.4 (interpolated). this seems to me to much better than any other mission discussed so far. > > (Note: This exercise may turn out to be purely academic because > the inverse-square effects, without unforeseeable advances in > focusing abilities, would be much larger.) I think we can make some advances here using : 1) Coherent energy (masers instead of microwaves) 2) Large focusing elements in outer solar system (ala Robert Foreward) 3) Phased array transmitters to simulate large arperature ~ 400km With proper microwave optics (moptics? :) yeah, Moptics!) I think we can make the beam nearly non-divergent. Not totally, but enough to make this mission possible. Remember, Tim's derivation requires a diminished beam during deceleration. Inverse square is too much diminished certainly, but at least it's the right direction for a change. I think this mission profile is looking more and more doable. the high energy costs were (mostly) due to: 1) The extremely large ship 1 E 09 Kg when I calculated that number. 2) The desire to accelerate at 1G the entire time. 3) The foolish notion of increasing the exhaust velocity to save mass. #1 can be changed any time we wish. We just have to settle on a mass that seems reasonable (although in this group, the very word is open to debate) #2 has been shown by Rex and others for the folly it is. A gradual decline into lunar gravity, and a gradual climb back out will certainly be doable for the astronauts. no clumsy swiveling sections, no artificial gravity generators (although if we had those, we could do this mission easily ;) #3 Was shown by Tim to be foolish. According to the above chart, the optimum Vexh is .685 (interpolated) A beamed mission is safer than anti-matter (and easier); it is faster and less costly than a fusion fuel mission (excepting perhaps the hybrid mission Kelly has proposed). It only requires one major advance (self replicating machines to make the solar collectors.) Other than that, the technology is all present day. -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Thu Sep 12 06:29 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["8819" "Thu" "12" "September" "1996" "08:26:39" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "206" "Re: starship-design: Motion of sail driven by constant-power beam -- Excellent work Rex!" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA18341 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 06:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA18323 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 06:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15152; Thu, 12 Sep 96 08:29:25 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI015047; Thu Sep 12 08:27:50 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03329; Thu, 12 Sep 96 08:27:48 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma003305; Thu Sep 12 08:26:40 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07876; Thu, 12 Sep 96 08:26:37 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 8818 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: "Kevin \"Tex\" Houston" Cc: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: Motion of sail driven by constant-power beam -- Excellent work Rex! Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 08:26:39 -0500 At 6:47 AM 9/12/96, Kevin \"Tex\" Houston wrote: >DotarSojat@aol.com wrote: >> >> Hi all >[Snip] >> Kevin has written, on 9/4 to the Group, >> >> >How about a mission which has a constant beam power, the >> >acceleration would drop off toward the turnaround point. In >> >this case, the crew would start off with earth-like gravity, >> >and towards the middle of the trip, the gravity would be more >> >lunar-like. ... The advantage would be simplified beaming >> >requirements, and the disadvantage would be a slightly longer >> >flight time. >> [aggresive sniping] > >So, let me see if I understand this. For a trip to Tau Ceti (12 Lt-yrs >away), >(interpolating from above 6 is almost halfway in between 5.3 and 6.6) > >The ship accelerates for 4.25 years crew time to turnaround. It >achieves >a final velocity of .933 C and the acceleration felt by the crew is .186 >Earth's transmitters have been on for 1.63 years (as measured by earth) >and turnaround would be achieved at 7.618 years earth time. > >Doubling these numbers (where appropriate) gives for a one-way trip: > >15 earth years for travel. >8.5 crew years for travel. >3.5 earth years of transmitter time. > >With 10 years for in-system study (and return maser construction), > >This gives a crew time of 27 years for the entire mission. and an earth >time of 40 years. This is not too bad. The crew would be able to see >earth again, the time differential upon return is not so horrendous that >all your family would be dead. your twin would be "only" 13 years >older than you. I think this is even favorable in terms of "political >return" A politician who voted for this would expect to see results >in about 30 years (travel time plus transmission time back to earth) >Long enough to be forgetable if it goes bad, short enough to hope to >be alive to see it if it works. Nit, politicians generally arn't interested in effects past 4 years. For example. Social security is expected to melt down in 20 years, but the problem was considered 'solved' when that number was upped from 10 years. On the other hane a 27 year service life is short enough to be reasonable for realistic ships systems, and the professional lives of the crew. >> >> These results seem to confirm Kevin's intuitive estimates regard- > >Can I say "I told you so"? Aw, come on be a sport. ;-) > >> ing acceleration levels. They also substantiate Steve's conclu- >> sion that the time of emission is limited (even for a constant- >> output emitter); from the table above, the duration of emission >> of the radiation accelerating a sail half way to a destination >> more than 16 lt-yr away (the last entry) is only about a year >> and three quarters. >> >> The deceleration phase (here assumed without justification to >> be a mirror image of the acceleration phase) needs to be >> addressed in a separate discussion. Timothy has already put >> a lot of thought into it. > >I thought Tim's treatsy on the subject of deceleration with a beamed >poser source showed that it will work. That is to say that the ship >receives ennough power via the antenna to power an ion engine with >a fairly decent mass ratio. > >=============begin included text ============================= >Calculations for the deceleration phase of the MARS design. >by Timothy van der Linden (T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl) >Last modified April 14th, 1996 >[derivation snipped] > >Vstart Vexh optimal Fuel:ship-ratio Energy per kg of ship (in Joules) > 0.1 0.062 5.36 7.45E14 7.73E14 > 0.2 0.121 5.84 3.25E15 3.50E15 > 0.3 0.180 6.40 8.11E15 9.08E15 > 0.4 0.240 7.06 1.64E16 1.91E16 > 0.5 0.300 7.87 2.99E16 3.64E16 > 0.6 0.364 8.91 5.23E16 6.69E16 > 0.7 0.433 10.38 9.21E16 1.25E17 > 0.8 0.512 12.72 1.73E17 2.53E17 > 0.9 0.615 17.75 4.04E17 6.62E17 > 0.99 0.803 52.00 3.12E18 7.02E17 > 0.9996 0.906 238.81 2.91E19 9.26E19 > >Note that the power of the maser-beam is NOT constant during the >decelerating >phase, it is supposed that it decreases while the ship gets lighter >(because it repulses mass). >======================End included text============================== > >By repluses mass, I think Tim means the beam tends to accelerate the >ship more than the engine can compensate. this was supposed to be a >minimum energy solution, perhaps a constant energy beam will raise the >costs. But turning down a power beam is very easy. (think dimmer >switch) >Also Fuel:ship ratio is Reaction Mass:Dry Mass ratio I think. This is a key point, and I'm not sure we ever decided one way or the other. But obviously if you can't stop a MARS configuration, the rest is irrelavant. >For a top speed of .9333 C, we are looking at a mass ratio of "only" >30.4 (interpolated). this seems to me to much better than any other >mission discussed so far. Certainly beats the Explorer or Fuel/Sail mass ratios, probably come close to a anti-matter too. But of course you have to figure out how to make it work. Thats a lot of power to transmit, and a lot for a ship to swallow and process. >> (Note: This exercise may turn out to be purely academic because >> the inverse-square effects, without unforeseeable advances in >> focusing abilities, would be much larger.) > >I think we can make some advances here using : > >1) Coherent energy (masers instead of microwaves) >2) Large focusing elements in outer solar system (ala Robert Foreward) >3) Phased array transmitters to simulate large arperature ~ 400km > >With proper microwave optics (moptics? :) yeah, Moptics!) I think we >can make the beam nearly non-divergent. Not totally, but enough to >make this mission possible. Remember, Tim's derivation requires a >diminished beam during deceleration. Inverse square is too much >diminished certainly, but at least it's the right direction for a >change. Agreed. Acceptable optics should be doable, thou you still would need to 'pad' by boosting the transmisionm power level up a couple orders of magnitude. After all, most of the beam (and power) won't hit the sail. >I think this mission profile is looking more and more doable. the high >energy costs were (mostly) due to: > >1) The extremely large ship 1 E 09 Kg when I calculated that number. >2) The desire to accelerate at 1G the entire time. >3) The foolish notion of increasing the exhaust velocity to save mass. > >#1 can be changed any time we wish. We just have to settle on a mass >that seems reasonable (although in this group, the very word is open to >debate) We really do neeed to get a handel on what the ship would need to carry and how big it will need to be. Still I dobt you could scale down the ship by a factor of 10 from my Explorer numbers (about 500,000 tons) without seriously cripliing an mission potential. >#2 has been shown by Rex and others for the folly it is. A gradual >decline into lunar gravity, and a gradual climb back out will certainly be >doable for the astronauts. no clumsy swiveling sections, no artificial gravity >generators (although if we had those, we could do this mission easily ;) I don't follow this? Low grav is still bad for you, and spending a decade parked in orbit in zero-g is REAL bad for you. Given that the centrafuges don't have a serois weigh problems (well possibly shielding) I think we'ld have to carry them. >#3 Was shown by Tim to be foolish. According to the above chart, the >optimum Vexh is .685 (interpolated) > >A beamed mission is safer than anti-matter (and easier); it is faster >and less costly than a fusion fuel mission (excepting perhaps the hybrid >mission Kelly has proposed). It only requires one major advance (self >replicating machines to make the solar collectors.) Other than that, >the technology is all present day. We're a very long way from self replicating machines or systems. So I wouldn't jump over that so quickly. It is definatly faster then a fusion system. Even Fuel/Sail couldn't get past .4C without rediculus deceleration fuel masses. >-- >Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html Kelly ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Thu Sep 19 23:47 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["14196" "Fri" "20" "September" "1996" "02:46:46" "-0400" "DotarSojat@aol.com" "DotarSojat@aol.com" nil "374" "starship-design: Deceleration of sail pushed by constant-power beam" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) id XAA12834 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 19 Sep 1996 23:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout17.mail.aol.com (emout17.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.43]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA12823 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 1996 23:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout17.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA03340 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Fri, 20 Sep 1996 02:46:46 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960920024644_526406079@emout17.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DotarSojat@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 14195 From: DotarSojat@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Deceleration of sail pushed by constant-power beam Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 02:46:46 -0400 Hi all In my note of 9/11, "Motion of sail driven by constant-power beam," I wrote-- >The deceleration phase (here assumed without justification to >be a mirror image of the acceleration phase) needs to be >addressed in a separate discussion. Timothy has already put a >lot of thought into it. The deceleration phase is not a mirror image of the acceleration phase. In the acceleration phase, the sail/ship is driven by the beam's radiation pressure alone; in the deceleration phase, the radiation pressure of the beam continues to provide a for- ward thrust, but the power of the beam is collected and convert- ed into a retro-thrust "jet" of, say, protons ejected forward to slow down the sail/ship. Timothy, in his 3/29 note, solved the problem of bringing the sail/ship to a halt with the "jet's" retro-thrust overcoming the beam's radiation pressure to give a constant deceleration level, allowing the beam power to take on any variable value required for the constant deceleration. He found the optimum exhaust velocity that gives a minimum energy expenditure, but did not consider the requirement to bring the sail/ship to a halt in a given distance. This analysis considers a beam from a constant-output emitter with the same power that accelerated the sail/ship to a peak velocity half way to the destination star (per my 9/11 note). The analysis selects the exhaust velocity that brings the sail/ship to a halt in the remaining half of the distance. ANALYSIS Following the notation of my 9/11 note, the power radiated from the emitter is Pe, and the power received by the sail, ignoring inverse-square effects, is Pr. The thrust exerted by the radia- tion pressure is Pr/c. At the start of the acceleration phase when Pr = Pe, the mass of the sail/ship is Mo, the initial acceleration is ao, and the required emitted power is Pe = T * c = Mo * ao * c . When the sail/ship has been accelerated to an apparent velocity, beta lt-yr/yr, having the velocity parameter, theta, from the relation: beta = tanh(theta), the received power is reduced by the Doppler shift according to Pr = Pe * exp(-theta) , and the thrust, Tb, of the received beam's radiation pressure is Tb = Pr/c = (Pe/c) * exp(-theta) = Mo * ao * exp(-theta) . The beam power is collected and converted with an efficiency, eta, to the power, Pex, of a retro-thrust exhaust "jet," , or Pex = eta * Pr . The exhaust-jet power is the rate of ejection of kinetic energy, or Pex = (dM/dt') * (gexh - 1) * c^2 , where (dM/dt') is the rate of ejection of propellant mass (made up of protons, say), and gexh is the jet's energy factor, (gamma) = 1/sqrt(1 - Vexh^2), derived from the jet's exhaust velocity, Vexh (lt-yr/yr). The thrust, Tex, of the exhaust jet is given by Tex = (dM/dt') * gexh * Vexh * c . Substituting the dM/dt' derived from the equation for Pex above gives Tex = [Pex * gexh * Vexh * c]/[(gexh - 1) * c^2] = eta * (Pr/c) * [factor] , where [factor] = gexh * Vexh/(gexh - 1) . Note that the exhaust-jet retro-thrust exceeds the radiation- pressure thrust, making deceleration of the sail/ship possible, when eta * [factor] is greater than 1. For Vexh = 0.9, for example, the value of [factor] is 1.5954, and deceleration is possible only if the efficiency, eta, of conversion of received power to exhaust power is greater than 1/1.5954 = 0.6268. The acceleration, a, of the sail/ship (hopefully, negative) is given by a = (Tb - Tex)/M where M is the mass of the sail/ship at the ship time, t'. The rate of change of the mass of the sail/ship as propellant is ejected is obtained from the Tex equation above-- dM/dt' = Tex/(gexh * Vexh * c) . The rate of change of the velocity parameter is given by the velocity-parameter equation of motion-- d(theta)/dt' = a/c = (Tb - Tex)/(M * c) . We thus have two simultaneous differential equations, with dM/dt' involving exp(-theta) through the dependence of Tex on Pr, and with d(theta)/dt' involving 1/M. The coupling therefore is non-linear, and the method of solution I find in my math book is for linear simultaneous differential equations. Not being a "mathochist" (one who enjoys suffering in the solution of higher math problems), I chose to integrate these equations numerically; see the appended Fortran program SAILTRIP. The implemented difference equations are M(n+1) = M(n) - [Tex(n)/(gexh * Vexh)] * [t'(n+1) - t'(n)] theta(n+1) = theta(n) + [(Tb(n) - Tex(n))/M(n)] * [t'(n+1) - t'(n)] . (The SAILTRIP program also includes the acceleration-phase calculation outlined in my 9/11 note, allowing the program to cover the whole trip from start to destination.) Results become consistent to better than three significant figures for time steps, [t'(n+1) - t'(n)], smaller than 0.01 yr, with insignificant computation time (about one second for the deceleration phase) for a time step of 0.001 yr. The decelera- tion phase is repeated with trial values of the exhaust velocity until interpolation yields the desired deceleration distance within a tolerance of 0.0001 lt-yr. RESULTS Calculations with the SAILTRIP program were made for a trip to tau Ceti, whose distance was taken to be 11.9 lt-yr. It was found that, with the constant-output emitter, the deceleration grows to exceed 1 g near the destination, where the thrust increases as the velocity and therefore the Doppler shift decrease, and where the mass of the sail/ship decreases as the propellant is depleted. The deceleration is limited in the calculation to 1 g by the simple expedient of furling the sail. The calculated values of theta, distance, proper velocity, accel- eration, apparent (Earth) time, time of emission of radiation from Earth and mass ratio (ratio of initial mass to the instan- taneous mass), as functions of ship time, t', are given in the following table for the tau Ceti trip, for a conversion effic- iency of received power to exhaust power of 1.0. Also stated are the values of the exhaust velocity, in lt-yr/yr, that gives the desired deceleration distance, with the corresponding kinetic energy, in MeV, of protons having that velocity, and of the final relative area of the furled sail. Tship Theta Dist Prop Vel Accel TEarth Temit Mratio (yr) (rad) (lt-yr) (lt-yr/yr) (g) (yr) (yr) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.5000 0.4162 0.1130 0.4283 0.6595 0.5161 0.4031 1.0000 1.0000 0.7092 0.4146 0.7702 0.4920 1.1016 0.6870 1.0000 1.5000 0.9355 0.8776 1.0781 0.3924 1.7838 0.9062 1.0000 2.0000 1.1200 1.4900 1.3693 0.3263 2.5748 1.0848 1.0000 2.5000 1.2756 2.2453 1.6509 0.2793 3.4809 1.2356 1.0000 3.0000 1.4103 3.1399 1.9266 0.2441 4.5059 1.3660 1.0000 3.5000 1.5290 4.1712 2.1983 0.2168 5.6522 1.4810 1.0000 4.0000 1.6350 5.3377 2.4673 0.1949 6.9215 1.5837 1.0000 4.2418 1.6825 5.9500 2.5967 0.1859 7.5797 1.6297 1.0000 Exhaust Velocity = 0.88301; Proton MeV = 1060.5 4.5000 1.6483 6.6085 2.5029 -0.1337 8.2871 1.6786 1.0467 5.0000 1.5731 7.8121 2.3070 -0.1593 9.5904 1.7783 1.1570 5.5000 1.4818 8.9119 2.0867 -0.1971 10.7986 1.8867 1.3067 6.0000 1.3656 9.8934 1.8314 -0.2584 11.9003 2.0069 1.5254 6.5000 1.2058 10.7345 1.5199 -0.3750 12.8791 2.1446 1.8873 7.0000 0.9482 11.3959 1.0968 -0.6833 13.7090 2.3132 2.6602 7.5000 0.4669 11.7924 0.4840 -1.0011 14.3512 2.5588 5.0527 7.9516 0.0000 11.9000 0.0000 -1.0003 14.8195 2.9195 9.4145 Final sail furl = 0.160 Furling the sail to limit the deceleration to 1 g begins about 0.7 yr before arrival at the destination. Even with furling, the deceleration time is shorter than the acceleration time for the same distance. The average deceleration is greater than the average acceleration because the decreasing mass in the deceler- ation phase overrides the reduction in thrust that comes from the competition between radiation-pressure push and exhaust retro- thrust. Even though the trip takes about 8 years of ship time, or about 15 years of Earth time, the total job of the emitter is over in less than 3 Earth years (consistent with Steve's original predic- tion, even including the deceleration phase). I'm not totally comfortable with the calculated mass-ratio values; they seem too low. I haven't found any analytical or computational shortcomings, however. The approach laid out here should be regarded as exploratory, setting up the framework of the analysis so that future efforts need be devoted only to refining the details. There may be performance gains from changing the turnover point from the halfway point. For example, as the turnover point is moved earlier than the halfway point, a higher exhaust velocity (lower [factor] and lower thrust) is allowed, which, together with the lower peak velocity, calls for a lower mass ratio. The performance results tabulated above are for 100 percent conversion efficiency (eta = 1.0) from received power to exhaust power. The effects of reduced conversion efficiency (eta less than 1) on required exhaust velocity, final sail furl and, most importantly, required mass ratio are given in the table below: eta exhaust velocity final sail furl mass ratio 1.0 0.883 0.160 9.41 0.9 0.849 0.105 15.44 0.8 0.809 0.060 29.05 0.7 0.760 0.029 67.57 Producing high efficiency of conversion from received power to exhaust power may be as challenging (and as crucial to the success of the concept) as constructing the emitter or the sail. Rex ADDENDUM PROGRAM SAILTRIP !9/17/96 101 FORMAT(3X, 12HParameter = ) 102 FORMAT(2X, 5HTship, 4X, 5HTheta, 6X, 4HDist, 4X, & 8HProp Vel, 5X, 5HAccel, 4X, 6HTEarth, 4X, 5HTemit, 2X, & 6HMratio) 103 FORMAT(1X, F6.4, 3X, F6.4, 3X, F7.4, 4X, F8.4, 3X, F7.4, & 3X, F7.4, 2X, F7.4, F8.4) 104 FORMAT(2X, 19H Exhaust Velocity =, F8.5, & 14H; Proton MeV =, F7.1) 105 FORMAT(3X, 17HFinal sail furl =, F8.3) ETA = 1. AGO = 1. AO = 1.0324 * AGO DSTAR = 11.9 DTA = 0.01 DTS = 0.001 DTP = 0.5 1 CONTINUE WRITE(*,101) READ(*,*) PAR IF(PAR .EQ. 0.) GO TO 99 ETA = PAR C.....Acceleration Phase IT = -1 TIM = -DTA ACC = AGO WRITE(*,102) 2 CONTINUE IT = IT + 1 FT = IT TIMN = TIM TIM = DTA * FT ITSN = TIMN/DTP ITS = TIM/DTP IF(TIM .EQ. 0. .OR. ITS .NE. ITSN) THEN FITS = ITS TIMI = DTP * FITS ARG = AO * TIMI + 1. THETI = LOG(ARG) DISTI = 0.5 * (0.5 * AO * TIMI*TIMI + TIMI - THETI/AO) UI = 0.5 * (ARG - 1./ARG) AGI = AGO/ARG TEI = 0.5 * (0.5 * AO * TIMI*TIMI + TIMI + THETI/AO) TEMI = TEI - DISTI FMR = 1. WRITE(*,103) TIMI, THETI, DISTI, UI, AGI, TEI, TEMI, FMR END IF THET = LOG(AO * TIM + 1.) DISTN = DIST DIST = 0.5 * (0.5 * AO * TIM*TIM + TIM - THET/AO) IF(DIST .GT. 0.5*DSTAR) THEN DRAT = (0.5 * DSTAR - DISTN)/(DIST - DISTN) TST = TIMN + (TIM - TIMN) * DRAT ARG = AO * TST + 1. THETAT = LOG(ARG) DISTT = 0.5 * (0.5 * AO * TST*TST + TST - THETAT/AO) UT = 0.5 * (ARG - 1./ARG) AGT = AGO/ARG TET = 0.5 * (0.5 * AO * TST*TST + TST + THETAT/AO) TEMT = TET - DISTT FMT = 1. WRITE(*,103) TST, THETAT, DISTT, UT, AGT, TET, TEMT, FMT GO TO 10 END IF GO TO 2 C.....Deceleration Phase 10 CONTINUE IPRN = 0 ND = 0 VEXH = 0.9 11 CONTINUE ND = ND + 1 IF(ND .EQ. 2) VEXH = 0.85 GEXH = 1./SQRT(1. - VEXH*VEXH) RELF = (GEXH * VEXH)/(GEXH - 1.) TS = TST TE = TET FM = FMT THETA = THETAT X = 0. ACC = 1.0324 * AGT FURL = 1. 12 CONTINUE U = SINH(THETA) GAM = COSH(THETA) XN = X X = XN + U * DTS PR = FURL * FMT * AO * EXP(-THETA) TBM = PR TEX = ETA * PR * RELF FMN = FM FM = FMN - TEX * DTS/(GEXH * VEXH) TSN = TS TS = TSN + DTS TEN = TE TE = TEN + GAM * DTS ACCN = ACC ACC = (TBM - TEX)/FMN AGE = (ACC + (ACC - ACCN))/1.0324 IF(AGE .LT. -1.) FURL = -FURL/AGE THETAN = THETA THETA = THETAN + ACC * DTS ITSN = TSN/DTP ITS = TS/DTP IF(ITS .NE. ITSN) THEN FITS = ITS TSI = DTP * FITS TSIR = (TSI - TSN)/(TS - TSN) THETAI = THETAN + (THETA - THETAN) * TSIR UI = SINH(THETAI) XI = XN + (X - XN) * TSIR + DISTT AGI = (ACCN + (ACC - ACCN) * TSIR)/1.0324 TEI = TEN + (TE - TEN) * TSIR TEMI = TEI - XI FMI = FMN + (FM - FMN) * TSIR FMR = FMT/FMI IF(IPRN .EQ. 1) WRITE(*,103) TSI, THETAI, XI, UI, AGI, & TEI, TEMI, FMR END IF IF(THETA .LT. 0.) THEN THETR = THETAN/(THETAN - THETA) TSF = TSN + (TS - TSN) * THETR THETAF = 0. DVEXH = VEXHP - VEXH VEXHP = VEXH DISTFP = DISTF DISTF = XN + (X - XN) * THETR + DISTT IF(ND .GT. 1 .AND. IPRN .EQ. 0) THEN VEXH = VEXHP + (DSTAR-DISTF) * DVEXH/(DISTFP-DISTF) IF(ABS(DISTF-DSTAR) .LT. 0.0001) THEN IPRN = 1 GEXH = 1./SQRT(1. - VEXH*VEXH) PMEV = 938. * (GEXH - 1.) WRITE(*,104) VEXH, PMEV END IF GO TO 11 END IF PVEL = 0. AGF = (ACCN + (ACC - ACCN) * THETR)/1.0324 TEF = TEN + (TE - TEN) * THETR TEM = TEF - DISTF FMF = FMN + (FM - FMN) * THETR FMRAT = FMT/FMF IF(IPRN .EQ. 1) THEN WRITE(*,103) TSF, THETAF, DISTF, PVEL, AGF, TEF, TEM, & FMRAT WRITE(*,105) FURL GO TO 1 END IF GO TO 11 END IF GO TO 12 99 STOP END From owner-starship-design Fri Sep 20 06:59 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["11724" "Fri" "20" "September" "1996" "08:56:04" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "261" "Re: starship-design: Deceleration of sail pushed by constant-power beam" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA03734 for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 20 Sep 1996 06:59:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA03715 for ; Fri, 20 Sep 1996 06:58:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15770; Fri, 20 Sep 96 08:58:21 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI015694; Fri Sep 20 08:57:02 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04652; Fri, 20 Sep 96 08:56:57 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004625; Fri Sep 20 08:56:07 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04293; Fri, 20 Sep 96 08:56:04 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 11723 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: DotarSojat@aol.com Cc: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: Re: starship-design: Deceleration of sail pushed by constant-power beam Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 08:56:04 -0500 At 2:46 AM 9/20/96, DotarSojat@aol.com wrote: >Hi all > >In my note of 9/11, "Motion of sail driven by constant-power >beam," I wrote-- > >>The deceleration phase (here assumed without justification to >>be a mirror image of the acceleration phase) needs to be >>addressed in a separate discussion. Timothy has already put a >>lot of thought into it. > >The deceleration phase is not a mirror image of the acceleration >phase. In the acceleration phase, the sail/ship is driven by >the beam's radiation pressure alone; in the deceleration phase, >the radiation pressure of the beam continues to provide a for- >ward thrust, but the power of the beam is collected and convert- >ed into a retro-thrust "jet" of, say, protons ejected forward to >slow down the sail/ship. > >Timothy, in his 3/29 note, solved the problem of bringing the >sail/ship to a halt with the "jet's" retro-thrust overcoming the >beam's radiation pressure to give a constant deceleration level, >allowing the beam power to take on any variable value required >for the constant deceleration. He found the optimum exhaust >velocity that gives a minimum energy expenditure, but did not >consider the requirement to bring the sail/ship to a halt in a >given distance. > >This analysis considers a beam from a constant-output emitter >with the same power that accelerated the sail/ship to a peak >velocity half way to the destination star (per my 9/11 note). >The analysis selects the exhaust velocity that brings the >sail/ship to a halt in the remaining half of the distance. > >ANALYSIS > >Following the notation of my 9/11 note, the power radiated from >the emitter is Pe, and the power received by the sail, ignoring >inverse-square effects, is Pr. The thrust exerted by the radia- >tion pressure is Pr/c. At the start of the acceleration phase >when Pr = Pe, the mass of the sail/ship is Mo, the initial >acceleration is ao, and the required emitted power is > Pe = T * c > = Mo * ao * c . > >When the sail/ship has been accelerated to an apparent velocity, >beta lt-yr/yr, having the velocity parameter, theta, from the >relation: beta = tanh(theta), the received power is reduced by >the Doppler shift according to > Pr = Pe * exp(-theta) , > >and the thrust, Tb, of the received beam's radiation pressure is > Tb = Pr/c > = (Pe/c) * exp(-theta) > = Mo * ao * exp(-theta) . > >The beam power is collected and converted with an efficiency, >eta, to the power, Pex, of a retro-thrust exhaust "jet," , or > Pex = eta * Pr . > >The exhaust-jet power is the rate of ejection of kinetic energy, >or > Pex = (dM/dt') * (gexh - 1) * c^2 , > >where (dM/dt') is the rate of ejection of propellant mass >(made up of protons, say), and gexh is the jet's energy factor, >(gamma) = 1/sqrt(1 - Vexh^2), derived from the jet's exhaust >velocity, Vexh (lt-yr/yr). > >The thrust, Tex, of the exhaust jet is given by > Tex = (dM/dt') * gexh * Vexh * c . > >Substituting the dM/dt' derived from the equation for Pex above >gives > Tex = [Pex * gexh * Vexh * c]/[(gexh - 1) * c^2] > = eta * (Pr/c) * [factor] , > >where > [factor] = gexh * Vexh/(gexh - 1) . > >Note that the exhaust-jet retro-thrust exceeds the radiation- >pressure thrust, making deceleration of the sail/ship possible, >when eta * [factor] is greater than 1. For Vexh = 0.9, for >example, the value of [factor] is 1.5954, and deceleration is >possible only if the efficiency, eta, of conversion of received >power to exhaust power is greater than 1/1.5954 = 0.6268. > >The acceleration, a, of the sail/ship (hopefully, negative) is >given by > a = (Tb - Tex)/M > >where M is the mass of the sail/ship at the ship time, t'. > >The rate of change of the mass of the sail/ship as propellant is >ejected is obtained from the Tex equation above-- > dM/dt' = Tex/(gexh * Vexh * c) . > >The rate of change of the velocity parameter is given by the >velocity-parameter equation of motion-- > d(theta)/dt' = a/c > = (Tb - Tex)/(M * c) . > >We thus have two simultaneous differential equations, with >dM/dt' involving exp(-theta) through the dependence of Tex on >Pr, and with d(theta)/dt' involving 1/M. The coupling therefore >is non-linear, and the method of solution I find in my math book >is for linear simultaneous differential equations. Not being a >"mathochist" (one who enjoys suffering in the solution of higher >math problems), I chose to integrate these equations numerically; >see the appended Fortran program SAILTRIP. The implemented >difference equations are > M(n+1) = M(n) - [Tex(n)/(gexh * Vexh)] * [t'(n+1) - t'(n)] > theta(n+1) = theta(n) + [(Tb(n) - Tex(n))/M(n)] * > [t'(n+1) - t'(n)] . > >(The SAILTRIP program also includes the acceleration-phase >calculation outlined in my 9/11 note, allowing the program to >cover the whole trip from start to destination.) > >Results become consistent to better than three significant >figures for time steps, [t'(n+1) - t'(n)], smaller than 0.01 yr, >with insignificant computation time (about one second for the >deceleration phase) for a time step of 0.001 yr. The decelera- >tion phase is repeated with trial values of the exhaust velocity >until interpolation yields the desired deceleration distance >within a tolerance of 0.0001 lt-yr. > >RESULTS > >Calculations with the SAILTRIP program were made for a trip to >tau Ceti, whose distance was taken to be 11.9 lt-yr. It was >found that, with the constant-output emitter, the deceleration >grows to exceed 1 g near the destination, where the thrust >increases as the velocity and therefore the Doppler shift >decrease, and where the mass of the sail/ship decreases as the >propellant is depleted. The deceleration is limited in the >calculation to 1 g by the simple expedient of furling the sail. > >The calculated values of theta, distance, proper velocity, accel- >eration, apparent (Earth) time, time of emission of radiation >from Earth and mass ratio (ratio of initial mass to the instan- >taneous mass), as functions of ship time, t', are given in the >following table for the tau Ceti trip, for a conversion effic- >iency of received power to exhaust power of 1.0. Also stated are >the values of the exhaust velocity, in lt-yr/yr, that gives the >desired deceleration distance, with the corresponding kinetic >energy, in MeV, of protons having that velocity, and of the final >relative area of the furled sail. > > Tship Theta Dist Prop Vel Accel TEarth Temit Mratio > (yr) (rad) (lt-yr) (lt-yr/yr) (g) (yr) (yr) >0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 >0.5000 0.4162 0.1130 0.4283 0.6595 0.5161 0.4031 1.0000 >1.0000 0.7092 0.4146 0.7702 0.4920 1.1016 0.6870 1.0000 >1.5000 0.9355 0.8776 1.0781 0.3924 1.7838 0.9062 1.0000 >2.0000 1.1200 1.4900 1.3693 0.3263 2.5748 1.0848 1.0000 >2.5000 1.2756 2.2453 1.6509 0.2793 3.4809 1.2356 1.0000 >3.0000 1.4103 3.1399 1.9266 0.2441 4.5059 1.3660 1.0000 >3.5000 1.5290 4.1712 2.1983 0.2168 5.6522 1.4810 1.0000 >4.0000 1.6350 5.3377 2.4673 0.1949 6.9215 1.5837 1.0000 >4.2418 1.6825 5.9500 2.5967 0.1859 7.5797 1.6297 1.0000 > Exhaust Velocity = 0.88301; Proton MeV = 1060.5 >4.5000 1.6483 6.6085 2.5029 -0.1337 8.2871 1.6786 1.0467 >5.0000 1.5731 7.8121 2.3070 -0.1593 9.5904 1.7783 1.1570 >5.5000 1.4818 8.9119 2.0867 -0.1971 10.7986 1.8867 1.3067 >6.0000 1.3656 9.8934 1.8314 -0.2584 11.9003 2.0069 1.5254 >6.5000 1.2058 10.7345 1.5199 -0.3750 12.8791 2.1446 1.8873 >7.0000 0.9482 11.3959 1.0968 -0.6833 13.7090 2.3132 2.6602 >7.5000 0.4669 11.7924 0.4840 -1.0011 14.3512 2.5588 5.0527 >7.9516 0.0000 11.9000 0.0000 -1.0003 14.8195 2.9195 9.4145 > Final sail furl = 0.160 > >Furling the sail to limit the deceleration to 1 g begins about >0.7 yr before arrival at the destination. Even with furling, >the deceleration time is shorter than the acceleration time for >the same distance. The average deceleration is greater than the >average acceleration because the decreasing mass in the deceler- >ation phase overrides the reduction in thrust that comes from the >competition between radiation-pressure push and exhaust retro- >thrust. > >Even though the trip takes about 8 years of ship time, or about >15 years of Earth time, the total job of the emitter is over in >less than 3 Earth years (consistent with Steve's original predic- >tion, even including the deceleration phase). > >I'm not totally comfortable with the calculated mass-ratio >values; they seem too low. I haven't found any analytical or >computational shortcomings, however. The approach laid out here >should be regarded as exploratory, setting up the framework of >the analysis so that future efforts need be devoted only to >refining the details. > >There may be performance gains from changing the turnover point >from the halfway point. For example, as the turnover point is >moved earlier than the halfway point, a higher exhaust velocity >(lower [factor] and lower thrust) is allowed, which, together >with the lower peak velocity, calls for a lower mass ratio. > >The performance results tabulated above are for 100 percent >conversion efficiency (eta = 1.0) from received power to exhaust >power. The effects of reduced conversion efficiency (eta less >than 1) on required exhaust velocity, final sail furl and, most >importantly, required mass ratio are given in the table below: > > eta exhaust velocity final sail furl mass ratio > 1.0 0.883 0.160 9.41 > 0.9 0.849 0.105 15.44 > 0.8 0.809 0.060 29.05 > 0.7 0.760 0.029 67.57 > >Producing high efficiency of conversion from received power to >exhaust power may be as challenging (and as crucial to the >success of the concept) as constructing the emitter or the sail. > >Rex Nice work up Rex! Thou the numbers for the mass ratios do seem light? Oh, what is Mratio in the first table again? I beleave current microwave to electric converters can give over 90% efficency. Thou its been a while sine I've read about the solar powre sat microwave beam systems. Also I don't know how finiky the converters are to frequency shifts or phase disruptions in the beam. If we assume electric acceleration of the particals, thats also very effocent, but how large a drive system would we need to get that degree of acceleration? I remember I got a nasty suprise when time worked out how large my fuel launcher would need to be to get the Explorer's fuel packets up to 1/3rd c. Anyway we'ld need extream efficency to keep from melting the ship anyway. ;) Kelly P.S. Oh, dumb of me. If the microwaves are used to accelerate the reaction mass without conversion inside ship systems (like some varient off my plasma sail or something) then the efficency would not nessisarily imply that the lost power contributes to heat in the ship. P.S.S Speaking of M.A.R.S., where is Kevin? I sent E-mail to both his University and URLy account and got bad address returns from the first, and no responce from the secound. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-starship-design Sat Sep 21 07:00 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["444" "Sat" "21" "September" "1991" "08:53:08" "-0500" "Kevin Houston" "hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu" nil "15" "Re: starship-design: Deceleration of sail pushed by constant-power beam" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA19785 for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 21 Sep 1996 07:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhub0.tc.umn.edu (mhub0.tc.umn.edu [128.101.131.50]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA19776 for ; Sat, 21 Sep 1996 07:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maroon.tc.umn.edu by mhub0.tc.umn.edu; Sat, 21 Sep 96 09:00:28 -0500 Received: from dialup-3-b-25.gw.umn.edu by maroon.tc.umn.edu; Sat, 21 Sep 96 09:00:27 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <28DB4EB8.1B61@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Organization: sadly lacking X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 443 From: "Kevin 'Tex' Houston" Sender: owner-starship-design To: Starship design group Subject: Re: starship-design: Deceleration of sail pushed by constant-power beam Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1991 08:53:08 -0500 Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote: > > P.S.S > > Speaking of M.A.R.S., where is Kevin? I sent E-mail to both his University > and URLy account and got bad address returns from the first, and no > responce from the secound. > I'm here, I'm back on-line after a bit of trouble here. I'm still wading through the mail. Nice work guys. I'll respond to all my e-mail by Sunday. -- Kevin "Tex" Houston http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html From owner-starship-design Thu Sep 26 00:46 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2729" "Thu" "26" "September" "1996" "03:45:26" "-0400" "DotarSojat@aol.com" "DotarSojat@aol.com" nil "59" "starship-design: Current for electric retro-thruster for sail" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) id AAA22269 for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 00:45:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout17.mail.aol.com (emout17.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.43]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA22254 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 00:45:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout17.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id DAA14893 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 03:45:26 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960926034524_111246735@emout17.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DotarSojat@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2728 From: DotarSojat@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Current for electric retro-thruster for sail Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 03:45:26 -0400 Hi all On 9/20, Kelly wrote (regarding my note "Deceleration of sail pushed by constant-power beam"), >If we assume electric acceleration of the particals, thats also >very effocent, but how large a drive system would we need to get >that degree of acceleration? The efficiency of accelerators that I was familiar with as a graduate student was not very high; a 1 microamp proton current at 30 million volts (30 watts output) was the best I can remem- ber, while the input power was about 300 kilowatts. This gives an efficiency of only 0.01 percent. (Even if my memory is off by 2 orders of magnitude the right way, the efficiency would still be pretty poor by our standards.) For nuclear-research accelerators, there never has been a strong need for high current; a microamp gives lots of particles. Some of you may be more familiar than I am with contemporary accelerators. We can calculate the proton current required to give an apprec- iable thrust from relations in my 9/20 note. Using the notation from that note, the relation for the received power is Pr = Mo * ao * c * exp(-theta) , and the exhaust power, Pex = i * V (current times voltage), is given by (note: for ao = 1 g, ao * c = 2,940 Mw per kg thrust) Pex = eta * Pr = eta * Mo * ao * c * exp(-theta) = eta * Mo * (2,940 Mw/kgT) * exp(-theta) . Now the exhaust power will be increasing as theta is decreasing, in the deceleration phase, until the maximum allowable deceler- ation of 1 g is reached. Thereafter the power will be decreased by furling the sail as the mass decreases, to keep the deceler- ation at 1 g. The maximum exhaust power will therefore occur just as the deceleration reaches 1 g while the sail is still fully open. For the tau Ceti mission-history tabulated in my 9/20 note, the value of theta when 1 g is first reached is about 0.78. For eta = 1.0, the maximum proton current, i, for the cal- culated required proton energy of 1060 million volts, is i = [Mo * (2,940 Mw/kg) * exp(-0.78)]/1060 megavolts = 1.27 amps per kg of initial sail/ship mass * Mo . So, we're talking about roughly 1 amp of 1 GeV protons for each kg of initial sail/ship mass. That current is to be compared with the approximately 1 microamp of proton-accelerator current of today's state of the art. (Check that value; I'd be surprised if you find much higher currents than 1 microamp at 1 GeV today.) So, we need remarkable progress in improving both proton current and conversion efficiency before we can count on the beam-driven sail (or any other propulsion system requiring an electric thruster). I need to take another look at electron accelerators; they can produce much higher currents. Rex From owner-starship-design Sat Sep 28 17:20 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["7406" "Sat" "28" "September" "1996" "20:19:44" "-0400" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "145" "starship-design: Fwd: Politics in Space" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA21807 for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 28 Sep 1996 17:20:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emout07.mail.aol.com (emout07.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.22]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA21792 for ; Sat, 28 Sep 1996 17:20:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by emout07.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA08549 for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Sat, 28 Sep 1996 20:19:44 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f Message-ID: <960928201944_113433985@emout07.mail.aol.com> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 7405 From: KellySt@aol.com Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: Fwd: Politics in Space Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 20:19:44 -0400 --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Fwd: Politics in Space Date: 96-09-25 17:52:04 EDT From: Viper7997 To: Kelly St Here's the article I mentioned... ---Kristin --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Politics in Space Date: 96-09-24 22:03:17 EDT From: N Odin To: Viper7997 Forwarded from James Oberg: The Politics of Space by Alcestis "Cooky" Oberg (published in the Houston Chronicle, Sunday, Sept. 22, 1996 @Alcestis Oberg, All Rights Reserved, 1996) email : CookyOberg@aol.com If you watch t.v., you'd think that President Clinton is doing a great job with the space program. You'd see his administration basking in the glow of the heroic "Apollo 13" movie. You'd see cheerful handshakes between Russian cosmonauts and American astronauts. You'd see great excitement over the "life on Mars" discovery. You'd think Bill Clinton loved and supported the space program. And you'd be wrong. To date, Clinton has been the worst president America has ever had in space matters. For starters, you can forget about ever seeing people plant the American flag on Mars in your lifetime. Last week, Clinton said Mars exploration would be done by robots, not people -- a flip-flop that goes against the steady commitment of six presidents over 36 years to manned space exploration. Implicit in Clinton's shifted focus onto robotic exploration is the cancellation of the space station and possible the whole manned program. Why? The whole rationale for building the $120 billion space station and maintaining an expensive shuttle transportation system is to prepare people for long journeys in space. They are stepping stones to Mars and beyond. But on space policy, Bill Clinton has no rationale or coherence. He hasn't behaved like a president, but more like a child with a gun -- wantonly shooting at whatever grabs his fancy, not knowing or caring about what he has destroyed. Let's look at the record: Far from supporting the space program as he had promised in 1992, the Clinton White House tried to cancel the space station within two months of taking office. Failing that, Clinton reduced the NASA budget by 20 percent. He has laid off over a million high-tech workers in the defense and space industries in his term, nationwide. Worse, he took an industry in which America was pre-eminent -- aerospace -- and did what every American hates most : gave U.S. hi-tech jobs and pre-eminence away to foreign countries in the name of "friendship" and "cooperation." Worst of all, the unctious, positive television images we see of Clinton "supporting" the space program are the purest expression of presidential hypocrisy, cynicism, and political media manipulation that I have ever seen. Take, for example, the events surrounding the movie Apollo 13. Prior its release, Clinton's NASA chief, Daniel Goldin, had called the heroic spaceworkers who saved that mission "pale, stale males". Goldin wanted a younger, more "politically correct" NASA to please his masters in the White House. Even as he was pushing these brilliant, dedicated workers into early retirement or sending out their layoff notices, Goldin basked before television cameras and took credit for the glory of their Apollo 13 triumph. The hypocrisy was breathtaking. Breath-taking also is the hypocrisy involved in the joint Russian/American space ventures. The space program was reduced to a bargaining chip in Clinton's foolish foreign policy game, and the NASA budget became the cash cow of foreign aid to the corrupt Russian government of Boris Yeltsin. Under the mantra of "saving taxpayer money" by working with the Russians, Clinton and Gore handed $400 million of NASA's cash to the Russians for "services" it didn't need -- money that would fund 400 years of the current "life on Mars" research. Clinton and Gore also spent nearly $4 billion in unnecessary shuttle launches and equipment to repair the malfunctioning, obsolete Russian space station Mir -- enough to send 40 probes to Mars. What does the United States get back? Television pictures and the opportunity to have only four U.S. astronauts carry out experiments on Mir. The French are paying the Russians around $60 million -- not $4.4 billion -- to do the same thing. What are our congressmen doing about it? Prior to the 1994 elections, nothing. However, many local congressional seats were re-arranged by Houston's voters in the 1994 elections, and this was mostly for the good. When Goldin hatched a stupid management restructuring plan last year that would have moved 4000 jobs out of Houston to Alabama, Majority Whip Tom DeLay did a brilliant job of blocking it. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee was a refreshing change from all her predecessors -- a strong supporter of the space program. Her sole flaw seems to be that she is sometimes too focused on minority issues and not focused enough on the serious employment implications of Clinton's foreign policy. Representative Ken Bentsen, on the other hand, has taken his cue from the White House : he fights for the space program only when the cameras are rolling, and misrepresents his support of Clinton's policies as being "for" a strong space program. The strongest space program supporter has been Representative Steve Stockman. Despite the media criticism he gets on other issues, Stockman has been a tireless advocate for space, and the most vocal opponent to the wholesale export of aerospace jobs to Russia. And when Johnson Space Center workers received a new and disturbing workers' agreement from the shuttle prime contractor, Stockman voiced his constituents' protests to NASA chief Goldin within 24 hours -- a responsiveness voters in the 9th congressional district have never seen. But the White House remains in control of space policy, and no matter what our congressmen do or say, NASA will continue to be mired in Russian domestic politics as long as Clinton holds office. A day doesn't go by in the space program when the Russians aren't trying to squeeze U.S. taxpayers for more money here or ignore their deadlines and obligations there. And that doesn't seem to bother Clinton a bit. The U.S. space job situation will get bleaker too. Right after this November's election, a large aerospace facility in Downey, California -- employing thousands of space workers -- is being closed in the name of "downsizing". And if the grapevine is correct, Clinton is handing 60-day notices of lay-off to a large number space station scientists near San Francisco : he's shipping their high-tech, cutting-edge jobs to Japan. There is another secret plan -- only whispered before the election -- that there will be an additional 25-30% across-the-board cutback, resulting in several thousand more job losses in Houston. Is it possible to sell out American aerospace workers more completely than has been done in the last four years? Is it possible to throw away American leadership and future interests in space more relentlessly than Clinton and Gore have done with their foreign policy? If the space program is any indication of how President Bill Clinton builds his "bridge to the future", America's future will built on quicksand. Or worse. END From owner-starship-design Mon Sep 30 06:36 PDT 1996 X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1296" "Mon" "30" "September" "1996" "08:33:23" "-0500" "Kelly Starks" "kgstar@most.fw.hac.com" nil "40" "starship-design: NTR site" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA24385 for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 30 Sep 1996 06:36:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from most.fw.hac.com (gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com [151.168.2.3]) by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA24366 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 1996 06:35:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14075; Mon, 30 Sep 96 08:35:54 EST Received: from unknown(151.168.254.82) by gw1 via smap (V1.3mjr) id smI013890; Mon Sep 30 08:33:56 1996 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04053; Mon, 30 Sep 96 08:33:52 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma004045; Mon Sep 30 08:33:25 1996 Received: from [151.168.146.187] (kgstar) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA19240; Mon, 30 Sep 96 08:33:22 EST X-Authentication-Warning: darkwing.uoregon.edu: majordom set sender to owner-starship-design using -f X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 1295 From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Sender: owner-starship-design To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu Subject: starship-design: NTR site Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 08:33:23 -0500 FYI for new nuclear rocket concept. Kelly Starks > Subject: Re: Nuclear Rocket Engines?? >From: FilipPC.DeVos@rug.ac.be (Filip De Vos) >Date: 26 Sep 1996 03:27:50 GMT >Message-ID: <52ct7m$fev@infoserv.rug.ac.be> > >WillCarney (willcarney@aol.com) wrote: > >: Could you take this design and also incorporate oxygen in a special >: combustion chamber at the end? Wouldn't that also increase the thrust >: if you could get it to work. You not only have the heated hydrogen from >: the core, but the combustion as well. >: Just a thought. > >Check out >http://www-sn.jsc.nasa.gov/EXPLORE/DATA/LEONEWS/LEO295/NTRLUNOX.htm >for a review of that idea. It indeed increases the thrust, but lowers the >ISP. Using lunar oxygen makes it really worthwhile. > >-- >Filip De Vos Better, Faster, Cheaper means *NO SHUTTLE* >FilipPC.DeVos@rug.ac.be -Cathy Mancus- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks Phone: (219) 429-7066 Fax: (219) 429-6859 Sr. Systems Engineer Mail Stop: 10-39 Hughes defense Communications 1010 Production Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46808-4106 Email: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------