From VM Mon Jul  8 16:03:26 2002
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["914" "Monday" "8" "July" "2002" "15:43:36" "-0700" "Curtis Manges" "clmanges@yahoo.com" nil "22" "" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Content-Length: 914
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g68MhbfK006044
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 15:43:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g68MhbPr006039
	for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 15:43:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web13602.mail.yahoo.com (web13602.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.113])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id g68MhafK006023
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 15:43:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20020708224336.15356.qmail@web13602.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [206.148.24.201] by web13602.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 08 Jul 2002 15:43:36 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-803884910-1026168216=:15053"
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Curtis Manges <clmanges@yahoo.com>
From: Curtis Manges <clmanges@yahoo.com>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: starship-design <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 15:43:36 -0700 (PDT)

--0-803884910-1026168216=:15053
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


another nice image for wallpaper:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/08jul_underfoot.htm?list503653


get the facts! visit www.worldnews.com


---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access
--0-803884910-1026168216=:15053
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<P>another nice image for wallpaper:</P>
<P><A href="http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/08jul_underfoot.htm?list503653">http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/08jul_underfoot.htm?list503653</A></P><BR><BR>get the facts! visit www.worldnews.com<p><br><hr size=1><b>Do You Yahoo!?</b><br>
New! <a href="http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://rd.yahoo.com/sbcyahoo/consumer/evt=640/*http://sbc.yahoo.com" target="_blank">SBC Yahoo! Dial</a> - 1st Month Free &amp; unlimited access
--0-803884910-1026168216=:15053--
From VM Wed Jul 10 13:39:01 2002
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["2007" "Wednesday" "10" "July" "2002" "15:18:55" "-0500" "L. Parker" "lparker@cacaphony.net" nil "47" "starship-design: Farther and Faster out of this World: Glenn Demonstrates High-Power Electric Propulsion" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Content-Length: 2007
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6AKKGak012630
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6AKKGFc012629
	for starship-design-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6AKKFak012618
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:20:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user121.net241.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.208.121] helo=broadsword)
	by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 17SNwd-0006AX-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:20:15 -0700
Message-ID: <000601c2284f$04870480$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "Starship-Design List \(E-mail\)" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: Farther and Faster out of this World: Glenn Demonstrates High-Power Electric Propulsion
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:18:55 -0500

02-050
For Release: July 9, 2002
Katherine K. Martin
Media Relations Office
216/433-2406
katherine.martin@grc.nasa.gov
Lori J. Rachul
Media Relations Office
216/433-8806
lori.j.rachul@grc.nasa.gov


Farther and Faster out of this World: Glenn Demonstrates High-Power Electric
Propulsion

A giant leap toward enabling high power electric propulsion was recently
demonstrated. With power levels up to 72 kW and nearly 3 Newtons of thrust,
NASA's Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, has designed, built and
successfully tested a 50 kW-class Hall thruster.

Designated the NASA-457M, this new Hall thruster has shown more than a
factor of ten increase in the power and thrust levels over state-of-the-art
Hall systems. "This accomplishment strengthens Glenn's world class
leadership in Hall thruster research and development," asserts Robert
Jankovsky, Hall thruster team lead.

Such a high power propulsion device will revolutionize the next generation
of spacecraft; halving launch costs for ambitious NASA missions, enabling
future NASA missions to other planets, and more than doubling commercial
payload masses to geostationary orbit. Applications for the Hall thruster
include moving heavy payloads and more rapid travel into outer space. When
compared to ion thrusters, Hall thrusters are of greater benefit to
near-Earth orbit missions, because they have greater levels of thrust to
counter the forces of gravity of celestial bodies, like the Earth.

The NASA-457M is the largest Hall thruster ever built and tested. This
effort has significantly enhanced understanding of Hall thruster scaling and
will lead to the use of high power Hall thruster propulsion in future space
missions.

Results and findings of the Hall thruster's recent tests were discussed
yesterday at the 38th American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Joint Propulsion Conference in Indianapolis.

A photograph of the NASA-457M Hall thruster is available online:

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/pressrel/2002/02-050addm.html
From VM Thu Jul 11 16:06:56 2002
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["933" "Thursday" "11" "July" "2002" "16:02:19" "-0700" "Curtis Manges" "clmanges@yahoo.com" nil "28" "starship-design: russians plan mars mission" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Content-Length: 933
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6BN2dak011351
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:02:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6BN2ctc011346
	for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web13603.mail.yahoo.com (web13603.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.114])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id g6BN2bak011334
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:02:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20020711230219.27926.qmail@web13603.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [206.148.24.51] by web13603.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:02:19 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1319567298-1026428539=:26329"
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Curtis Manges <clmanges@yahoo.com>
From: Curtis Manges <clmanges@yahoo.com>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: starship-design <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: russians plan mars mission
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:02:19 -0700 (PDT)

--0-1319567298-1026428539=:26329
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


check it out --

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29564-2002Jul5.html

keep looking up,

Curtis


get the facts! visit www.worldnews.com


---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access
--0-1319567298-1026428539=:26329
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<P>check it out --</P>
<P><A href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29564-2002Jul5.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29564-2002Jul5.html</A></P>
<P>keep looking up,</P>
<P>Curtis</P><BR><BR>get the facts! visit www.worldnews.com<p><br><hr size=1><b>Do You Yahoo!?</b><br>
New! <a href="http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://rd.yahoo.com/sbcyahoo/consumer/evt=640/*http://sbc.yahoo.com" target="_blank">SBC Yahoo! Dial</a> - 1st Month Free &amp; unlimited access
--0-1319567298-1026428539=:26329--
From VM Mon Jul 15 11:37:42 2002
Content-Length: 2037
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["2037" "Thursday" "11" "July" "2002" "21:07:20" "-0500" "L. Parker" "lparker@cacaphony.net" nil "57" "starship-design: Virus Warning" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil "starship-design: Virus Warning" nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Content-Length: 2037
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6C28fak005088
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:08:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6C28eXX005087
	for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.49])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6C28eak005082
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user121.net241.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.208.121] helo=broadsword)
	by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 17SprL-0006Hf-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:08:39 -0700
Message-ID: <002201c22948$dbb372f0$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0023_01C2291E.F2DD6AF0"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <20020711230219.27926.qmail@web13603.mail.yahoo.com>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "'starship-design'" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: Virus Warning
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 21:07:20 -0500

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C2291E.F2DD6AF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Someone on the Starship Design list has Klez. I just received an email
purporting to be from Ben Franchuk, which only means that whomever is
infected has Ben in their email addresses file, and of course, myself also.
Kind of limits it to Starship Design.

Everyone please check your systems.

L. Parker
sometime Sysadmin, Chief Cook and Bottlewasher
cacaphony.net

------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C2291E.F2DD6AF0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">


<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2716.2200" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D687480302-12072002><FONT face=3DTahoma =
color=3D#0000ff>Someone on=20
the Starship Design list has Klez. I just received an email purporting =
to be=20
from Ben Franchuk, which only means that whomever is infected has Ben in =
their=20
email addresses file, and of course, myself also. Kind of limits it to =
Starship=20
Design. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D687480302-12072002><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
color=3D#0000ff></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D687480302-12072002><FONT face=3DTahoma =
color=3D#0000ff>Everyone=20
please check your systems.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D687480302-12072002><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
color=3D#0000ff></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D687480302-12072002><FONT face=3DTahoma =
color=3D#0000ff>L.=20
Parker</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D687480302-12072002><FONT face=3DTahoma =
color=3D#0000ff>sometime=20
Sysadmin, Chief Cook and Bottlewasher</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D687480302-12072002><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
color=3D#0000ff>cacaphony.net</FONT></SPAN></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C2291E.F2DD6AF0--
From VM Sun Jul 21 16:47:46 2002
Content-Length: 9401
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["9401" "Saturday" "20" "July" "2002" "13:51:31" "-0500" "L. Parker" "lparker@cacaphony.net" nil "151" "starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil "starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared" nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6KIqvaD015702
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 11:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6KIqvNU015701
	for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 11:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6KIquaD015695
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 11:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user121.net241.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.208.121] helo=broadsword)
	by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 17VzLb-0003LG-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 11:52:55 -0700
Message-ID: <002701c2301e$772fab00$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "Starship-Design List \(E-mail\)" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 13:51:31 -0500

The Spacefaring Web: 2.11
Writing in the Infrared

by John Carter McKnight
Scottsdale - Jul 04, 2002

Ideas and technologies that were recently only the wildest speculation now
are hotly, even violently, debated worldwide. But not the prospect of a
spacefaring future. While many address opportunities in space, their work
seems to fall into a cultural blind spot, present but unseen. It's as if
they were writing in the infrared: something is there, discernable by anyone
sufficiently attuned. The world at large, though, literally cannot see the
writing on the wall.

There is a chasm between innovation and adoption. On the one side there may
be a good idea whose time hasn't come (or a harebrained notion that'll never
amount to anything - they look the same from a distance). On the other side
lies ubiquitous application of the brilliant-but-seemingly-inevitable fruits
of the inventor's genius. How does an idea go from invisible to inevitable?

Some say that the innovation has to be honed to elegance before adoption.
While the fallacy here should be obvious to anyone who has ever used a
personal computer or a VCR, this argument has persisted. We haven't gone to
Mars, the argument goes, because rockets are kludgy; the day we have
nuclear-thermal propulsion the colony ships will leave.

At one of the early Case For Mars conferences, there was a marvelously
thought-provoking presentation entitled "Romans To Mars." The author
demonstrated that it would have been marginally possible for the Romans to
have discovered and settled the New World with staggered convoys of galleys,
but at immense cost. The argument was that, since using an adequate but
suboptimal technology was prohibitively expensive, rationally, the
settlement of the New World would have to wait upon the advent of the
deep-draught sailing ship. By analogy, Mars must await advanced propulsion.

That argument fails on several grounds. First, optimal sailing technology
was not necessary. A rational cost-benefit analysis might have sent Roman
galleys to Mexico. Romans had been great commercial explorers as late as
Caligula's time; a later emperor might rationally have chosen to revive the
enterprise in hopes of bringing new wealth into an over-extended,
cash-strapped empire. Likewise, the Elizabethan decision to explore and
settle North America was less technologically favorable and a greater
gamble. Rome had the resources and discipline to send a fleet into the
unknown; Elizabeth's backing of exploration by her quasi-pirates was a
high-stakes gamble by a third-rate power with, even by the standards of the
time, second-rate naval technology. A crewman on one of Henry Hudson's or
Martin Frobisher's ships likely would have traded a limb for a berth on a
Nova Roman galley, let alone a bare-bones Mars Direct hab.

Elegance is not likely to develop before an innovation suddenly appears
blindingly obvious. In the technological realm, an invention typically goes
from kludge to cool later in its lifetime, only after becoming widespread.
The early market entrants make a killing selling the Mark One; the laggards
can only turn a profit by cutting production costs, streamlining design,
offering advanced features to a market accustomed to the basic model and
ready for more. I won't shell out $200,000 for a Lamborghini if I still like
my horse and buggy just fine. A couple hundred for a Model T, maybe. Once
I'm sold on driving, then I'm ready for something sleeker, faster, redder,
and with cupholders. Sellers of computer networks may recall this mindset
among corporate customers in the 1980s.

With ideas, elegance won't get you across the chasm either. Copernicus
didn't enter the history books because he was the first person to look at
the tangled mess of Ptolemaic cosmology and see the beautiful simplicity of
a heliocentric alternative. Darwin was not the first to look at the breadth
of physical traits and conceive an active mechanism for their evolution:
we'd been selectively breeding plants and animals for millennia. Da Vinci's
notebooks epitomize writing in the infrared: if elegance were sufficient,
the Borgia Popes would have flown to church in helicopters.

No, "invention is the easy bit," as the Economist Technology Quarterly (June
23, 2001, p.3) observed. "It matters little whether some exciting new
technology has suddenly become available. If the market timing is wrong, the
innovation will most assuredly flounder." The Economist's editor draws a
distinction between need - would it be useful? and demand - will anybody pay
for it? Only demand gets you across the chasm. This explains the VCR: the
demand for home movies and timeshifted TV programs was so great that the
kludgy VCR sold like hotcakes. Twenty-five years later TiVO and the DVD
player finally provide an elegant means of filling that demand. Ptolemy's
teachings were tied to the authority of the medieval Church: when that
authority was unquestionable, there was no prospect of a heretical
heliocentrism catching on. Come the Renaissance, when "market conditions"
were ripe for free-thinking, an elegant idea could gobble market- (or mind-)
share.

Why isn't asteroid mining on the agenda at the World Economic Forum? Why
aren't protesters in the street denouncing Martian terraforming plans? Only
with demand does opposition come forth. Nobody fights either the impossible
or the inevitable, only the likely. Borderless commerce and genetic
engineering have vigorous champions and enemies: we see those innovations as
likely. A spacefaring civilization is needed but not demanded. It is not
seen as likely; it is not seen at all.

But what creates demand? One theory, historical determinism, seems more
descriptive than analytical. Science fiction writers have long spoken of
"railroading time" - when cultural forces align for railroads to be
ubiquitous, there will be railroads. When it's time for evolution, Darwin
and Wallace will submit simultaneous papers. Determinism is a nice
refutation of the "elegant technology" argument: if there's a
readily-perceived demand, any number of people will cobble together
something to fill it, as witnessed by the variety of early bicycle and
airplane designs, before those technologies matured to elegance. Yet
determinism can only explain after the fact: it doesn't account for why
railroads took off when they did, rather than a decade earlier or later. Nor
is it a guide to whether the next decade will be "human genetic engineering
time" or "nanotech time" - or, at last, spacefaring time.

The other approach to causation is the "great man" theory. Beloved of space
advocates who point to Henry the Navigator and John F. Kennedy, this claims
that an idea crosses the chasm into ubiquity when somebody big enough grabs
it and hurls it. It's true that new industries arise when one or a few
people see a newly-arisen demand and strike first to fill it. Marconi with
radio, Rockefeller with petroleum products, Gates with operating systems -
the early bird does get the worm. With ideas, a bold promoter matters:
Huxley did as much for evolution as Darwin; planetary astronomy was advanced
more by Percival Lowell's popularizing as by his critics' meticulous
accuracy. The key phrase above, though, was "see a newly arisen demand." The
"great man" only rises to dominate an existing, visible market. A
revolutionary leader can only come to power when there's a market for
revolution - otherwise, his head ends up on a pike outside the palace.
Likewise, Kennedy didn't create an American demand for a space-race
spectacular - that's the logic error committed by the "next Apollo"
advocates who invoke his name.

As Kim Stanley Robinson has observed ("A Sensitive Dependence," in Remaking
History and Other Stories, p.446), "the great man theory considers
particles; historical materialism considers waves. The wave/particle
duality, confirmed many times by experiment, assures us that neither can be
the complete truth. Neither theory will serve as the covering law." People
do shape events, individually as well as in the aggregate, creating those
"tipping points" that move innovation into exploitation.

Innovation, promotion and demand are intertwined, feeding back upon each
other in complex ways. No one alone is sufficient, nor can any one be
slighted. Von Braun went from dreaming to advocacy to building moon rockets.
Born promoters have found inspiration in the innovations of others and
spread the word: Saul of Tarsus got Christianity across the chasm, as Lenin
did Marxism and Zubrin in-situ resource utilization.

Had Tsiolkovskii and Goddard not pressed on despite being ignored, Korolev
and von Braun could never have gotten us into space. Ray Bradbury considers
a lifetime of space advocacy unwasted (Mars and the Mind of Man, p.133): "If
I seem to be beating a dead horse again and again, I must protest: No! I am
beating, again and again, living man to keep him awake and move his limbs
and jump his mind." Fanciful scheming, crackpot theorizing and howling in
the wilderness may not alone change today's reality. Today, it's not
spacefaring time. But tomorrow it might be. When that tomorrow comes, it
will be because, thanks to the subtle actions of innovators and advocates,
we awaken and open our eyes to discover that we can see, there on the wall,
The Case for Mars, The High Frontier and so many other works once written in
the infrared.
From VM Sun Jul 21 16:47:47 2002
Content-Length: 833
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["833" "Saturday" "20" "July" "2002" "15:24:05" "-0600" "Ben Franchuk" "bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca" nil "22" "Re: starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil "starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared" nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6KLROaD011900
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 14:27:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6KLRORD011899
	for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 14:27:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bach.ccinet.ab.ca (bach.ccinet.ab.ca [198.161.96.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6KLRNaD011884
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 14:27:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jetnet.ab.ca (gc-jet-199.jetnet.ab.ca [207.34.60.199])
	by bach.ccinet.ab.ca (8.12.5/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g6KLRxjo092299
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 15:27:59 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca)
Message-ID: <3D39D4F5.5000001@jetnet.ab.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020611
X-Accept-Language: en,ja
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <002701c2301e$772fab00$0201a8c0@broadsword>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>
From: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
CC: "Starship-Design List (E-mail)" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: Re: starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 15:24:05 -0600


 > Today, it's not
 > spacefaring time. But tomorrow it might be. When that tomorrow comes, it
 > will be because, thanks to the subtle actions of innovators and advocates,
 > we awaken and open our eyes to discover that we can see, there on the wall,
 > The Case for Mars, The High Frontier and so many other works once written in
 > the infrared.
 >


The time will come when people believe that they can get to space.
Projects like "The X prize" mean well but give rewards to the 'first'
but not people working together. Getting to space can't be a race,
but rather cooperation of skills and brains and $$$.
BTW http://users.bigpond.net.au/surfacesrendered/MCSEnter.html
Space the way Space Travel was ment to Be.
Moon  -- 1963
Mars  -- 1968

-- 
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
From VM Sun Jul 21 16:47:47 2002
Content-Length: 11141
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["11141" "Saturday" "20" "July" "2002" "22:00:59" "EDT" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "359" "Re: starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil "starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared" nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6L21BaD024626
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 19:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6L21Aae024625
	for starship-design-outgoing; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 19:01:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com (imo-d08.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.40])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6L219aD024610
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Sat, 20 Jul 2002 19:01:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from KellySt@aol.com
	by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.21.) id 4.190.a1622cb (4185);
	Sat, 20 Jul 2002 22:00:59 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <190.a1622cb.2a6b6fdb@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Mac sub 39
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com
From: KellySt@aol.com
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: lparker@cacaphony.net, starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
Subject: Re: starship-design: The Spacefaring Web: 2.11 Writing in the Infrared
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 22:00:59 EDT

A interesting, if wandering, essay.

In general I think the bottom line is things (tech, gadgets, colonization) 
are adopted when they offer something people want, more then what we'ld have 
to give up to get them.  Esentially a economic / marketing view.  We don't 
want to pay for "plant the flag" specticals like Apollo, and can't find any 
way to practicalyu use space.  I.E. theirs no mineral out there worth the 
cost to return, no place with realestate interesting or profitable enough to 
intrest us in colonizing it.   If their were cost competative resources, or 
if Mars looked like Barsom or a Trek world, we'ld be out in force.

So we need to eaither lower the cost a lot, or find something more valuble.  
Look at how fast the Comsat market exploded. Or even how seriously O'Nielian 
plans for Space colonies and power sats were looked into back in the energy 
crisis era.  They looked to fill a needed void, so we were quick to jump on 
them.  just as other bissar things like deep ocean / arctic oil rigs.  Or 
contnent wraping internat infastructures.

Whats space really able to offer us now?  

What would it take to make what it can do, worth the cost to us?

Kelly




In a message dated 7/20/02 2:53:26 PM, lparker@cacaphony.net writes:

>The Spacefaring Web: 2.11
>
>Writing in the Infrared
>
>
>
>by John Carter McKnight
>
>Scottsdale - Jul 04, 2002
>
>
>
>Ideas and technologies that were recently only the wildest speculation
>now
>
>are hotly, even violently, debated worldwide. But not the prospect of a
>
>spacefaring future. While many address opportunities in space, their work
>
>seems to fall into a cultural blind spot, present but unseen. It's as if
>
>they were writing in the infrared: something is there, discernable by anyone
>
>sufficiently attuned. The world at large, though, literally cannot see
>the
>
>writing on the wall.
>
>
>
>There is a chasm between innovation and adoption. On the one side there
>may
>
>be a good idea whose time hasn't come (or a harebrained notion that'll
>never
>
>amount to anything - they look the same from a distance). On the other
>side
>
>lies ubiquitous application of the brilliant-but-seemingly-inevitable fruits
>
>of the inventor's genius. How does an idea go from invisible to inevitable?
>
>
>
>Some say that the innovation has to be honed to elegance before adoption.
>
>While the fallacy here should be obvious to anyone who has ever used a
>
>personal computer or a VCR, this argument has persisted. We haven't gone
>to
>
>Mars, the argument goes, because rockets are kludgy; the day we have
>
>nuclear-thermal propulsion the colony ships will leave.
>
>
>
>At one of the early Case For Mars conferences, there was a marvelously
>
>thought-provoking presentation entitled "Romans To Mars." The author
>
>demonstrated that it would have been marginally possible for the Romans
>to
>
>have discovered and settled the New World with staggered convoys of galleys,
>
>but at immense cost. The argument was that, since using an adequate but
>
>suboptimal technology was prohibitively expensive, rationally, the
>
>settlement of the New World would have to wait upon the advent of the
>
>deep-draught sailing ship. By analogy, Mars must await advanced propulsion.
>
>
>
>That argument fails on several grounds. First, optimal sailing technology
>
>was not necessary. A rational cost-benefit analysis might have sent Roman
>
>galleys to Mexico. Romans had been great commercial explorers as late as
>
>Caligula's time; a later emperor might rationally have chosen to revive
>the
>
>enterprise in hopes of bringing new wealth into an over-extended,
>
>cash-strapped empire. Likewise, the Elizabethan decision to explore and
>
>settle North America was less technologically favorable and a greater
>
>gamble. Rome had the resources and discipline to send a fleet into the
>
>unknown; Elizabeth's backing of exploration by her quasi-pirates was a
>
>high-stakes gamble by a third-rate power with, even by the standards of
>the
>
>time, second-rate naval technology. A crewman on one of Henry Hudson's
>or
>
>Martin Frobisher's ships likely would have traded a limb for a berth on
>a
>
>Nova Roman galley, let alone a bare-bones Mars Direct hab.
>
>
>
>Elegance is not likely to develop before an innovation suddenly appears
>
>blindingly obvious. In the technological realm, an invention typically
>goes
>
>from kludge to cool later in its lifetime, only after becoming widespread.
>
>The early market entrants make a killing selling the Mark One; the laggards
>
>can only turn a profit by cutting production costs, streamlining design,
>
>offering advanced features to a market accustomed to the basic model and
>
>ready for more. I won't shell out $200,000 for a Lamborghini if I still
>like
>
>my horse and buggy just fine. A couple hundred for a Model T, maybe. Once
>
>I'm sold on driving, then I'm ready for something sleeker, faster, redder,
>
>and with cupholders. Sellers of computer networks may recall this mindset
>
>among corporate customers in the 1980s.
>
>
>
>With ideas, elegance won't get you across the chasm either. Copernicus
>
>didn't enter the history books because he was the first person to look
>at
>
>the tangled mess of Ptolemaic cosmology and see the beautiful simplicity
>of
>
>a heliocentric alternative. Darwin was not the first to look at the breadth
>
>of physical traits and conceive an active mechanism for their evolution:
>
>we'd been selectively breeding plants and animals for millennia. Da Vinci's
>
>notebooks epitomize writing in the infrared: if elegance were sufficient,
>
>the Borgia Popes would have flown to church in helicopters.
>
>
>
>No, "invention is the easy bit," as the Economist Technology Quarterly
>(June
>
>23, 2001, p.3) observed. "It matters little whether some exciting new
>
>technology has suddenly become available. If the market timing is wrong,
>the
>
>innovation will most assuredly flounder." The Economist's editor draws
>a
>
>distinction between need - would it be useful? and demand - will anybody
>pay
>
>for it? Only demand gets you across the chasm. This explains the VCR: the
>
>demand for home movies and timeshifted TV programs was so great that the
>
>kludgy VCR sold like hotcakes. Twenty-five years later TiVO and the DVD
>
>player finally provide an elegant means of filling that demand. Ptolemy's
>
>teachings were tied to the authority of the medieval Church: when that
>
>authority was unquestionable, there was no prospect of a heretical
>
>heliocentrism catching on. Come the Renaissance, when "market conditions"
>
>were ripe for free-thinking, an elegant idea could gobble market- (or mind-)
>
>share.
>
>
>
>Why isn't asteroid mining on the agenda at the World Economic Forum? Why
>
>aren't protesters in the street denouncing Martian terraforming plans?
>Only
>
>with demand does opposition come forth. Nobody fights either the impossible
>
>or the inevitable, only the likely. Borderless commerce and genetic
>
>engineering have vigorous champions and enemies: we see those innovations
>as
>
>likely. A spacefaring civilization is needed but not demanded. It is not
>
>seen as likely; it is not seen at all.
>
>
>
>But what creates demand? One theory, historical determinism, seems more
>
>descriptive than analytical. Science fiction writers have long spoken of
>
>"railroading time" - when cultural forces align for railroads to be
>
>ubiquitous, there will be railroads. When it's time for evolution, Darwin
>
>and Wallace will submit simultaneous papers. Determinism is a nice
>
>refutation of the "elegant technology" argument: if there's a
>
>readily-perceived demand, any number of people will cobble together
>
>something to fill it, as witnessed by the variety of early bicycle and
>
>airplane designs, before those technologies matured to elegance. Yet
>
>determinism can only explain after the fact: it doesn't account for why
>
>railroads took off when they did, rather than a decade earlier or later.
>Nor
>
>is it a guide to whether the next decade will be "human genetic engineering
>
>time" or "nanotech time" - or, at last, spacefaring time.
>
>
>
>The other approach to causation is the "great man" theory. Beloved of space
>
>advocates who point to Henry the Navigator and John F. Kennedy, this claims
>
>that an idea crosses the chasm into ubiquity when somebody big enough grabs
>
>it and hurls it. It's true that new industries arise when one or a few
>
>people see a newly-arisen demand and strike first to fill it. Marconi with
>
>radio, Rockefeller with petroleum products, Gates with operating systems
>-
>
>the early bird does get the worm. With ideas, a bold promoter matters:
>
>Huxley did as much for evolution as Darwin; planetary astronomy was advanced
>
>more by Percival Lowell's popularizing as by his critics' meticulous
>
>accuracy. The key phrase above, though, was "see a newly arisen demand."
>The
>
>"great man" only rises to dominate an existing, visible market. A
>
>revolutionary leader can only come to power when there's a market for
>
>revolution - otherwise, his head ends up on a pike outside the palace.
>
>Likewise, Kennedy didn't create an American demand for a space-race
>
>spectacular - that's the logic error committed by the "next Apollo"
>
>advocates who invoke his name.
>
>
>
>As Kim Stanley Robinson has observed ("A Sensitive Dependence," in Remaking
>
>History and Other Stories, p.446), "the great man theory considers
>
>particles; historical materialism considers waves. The wave/particle
>
>duality, confirmed many times by experiment, assures us that neither can
>be
>
>the complete truth. Neither theory will serve as the covering law." People
>
>do shape events, individually as well as in the aggregate, creating those
>
>"tipping points" that move innovation into exploitation.
>
>
>
>Innovation, promotion and demand are intertwined, feeding back upon each
>
>other in complex ways. No one alone is sufficient, nor can any one be
>
>slighted. Von Braun went from dreaming to advocacy to building moon rockets.
>
>Born promoters have found inspiration in the innovations of others and
>
>spread the word: Saul of Tarsus got Christianity across the chasm, as Lenin
>
>did Marxism and Zubrin in-situ resource utilization.
>
>
>
>Had Tsiolkovskii and Goddard not pressed on despite being ignored, Korolev
>
>and von Braun could never have gotten us into space. Ray Bradbury considers
>
>a lifetime of space advocacy unwasted (Mars and the Mind of Man, p.133):
>"If
>
>I seem to be beating a dead horse again and again, I must protest: No!
>I am
>
>beating, again and again, living man to keep him awake and move his limbs
>
>and jump his mind." Fanciful scheming, crackpot theorizing and howling
>in
>
>the wilderness may not alone change today's reality. Today, it's not
>
>spacefaring time. But tomorrow it might be. When that tomorrow comes, it
>
>will be because, thanks to the subtle actions of innovators and advocates,
>
>we awaken and open our eyes to discover that we can see, there on the wall,
>
>The Case for Mars, The High Frontier and so many other works once written
>in
>
>the infrared.
From VM Mon Jul 22 17:12:09 2002
Content-Length: 780
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["780" "Monday" "22" "July" "2002" "17:10:57" "-0700" "Curtis Manges" "clmanges@yahoo.com" nil "28" "starship-design: harmless diversion" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6N0AxaD015276
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 17:10:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6N0Axo8015274
	for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 17:10:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web13609.mail.yahoo.com (web13609.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.9])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id g6N0AwaD015269
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 17:10:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20020723001057.79217.qmail@web13609.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [206.148.24.79] by web13609.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 17:10:57 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-903380311-1027383057=:79117"
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Curtis Manges <clmanges@yahoo.com>
From: Curtis Manges <clmanges@yahoo.com>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: starship-design <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: harmless diversion
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 17:10:57 -0700 (PDT)

--0-903380311-1027383057=:79117
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


this looks interesting . . .

http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/vplanet.html

keep looking up,

curtis


get the facts! visit www.worldnews.com


---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
--0-903380311-1027383057=:79117
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<P>this looks interesting . . .</P>
<P><A href="http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/vplanet.html">http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/vplanet.html</A></P>
<P>keep looking up,</P>
<P>curtis</P><BR><BR>get the facts! visit www.worldnews.com<p><br><hr size=1><b>Do You Yahoo!?</b><br>
<a href="http://health.yahoo.com/">Yahoo! Health</a> - Feel better, live better
--0-903380311-1027383057=:79117--
From VM Tue Jul 30 17:06:33 2002
Content-Length: 488
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["488" "Wednesday" "31" "July" "2002" "00:59:08" "+0100" "Peter \\(Sci\\)" "scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk" nil "15" "starship-design: Busy busy" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6V027Ho026433
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6V027hd026432
	for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.172])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6V025Ho026412
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from modem-3559.antelope.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.134.29.231] helo=kat)
	by cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
	id 17ZgwC-0000RX-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 01:02:03 +0100
Message-ID: <001801c23825$1bc2eca0$e71d86d9@kat>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Peter \(Sci\)" <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>
From: "Peter \(Sci\)" <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "Starship Design" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: Busy busy
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 00:59:08 +0100

Last couple of weeks, I've been talking to a few friends.  This has resulted
in much design work on my intergrated ship network (the Kitten Modules), and
the associated peripherals.
I also got a name dropped on me, and was wondering if it was familier to
anyone on this list?
The Association Of Autonomous Astronauts, or the AAA.  Anyone?

Checking in,

Sci


PS: Anyone know what sort of componant density is needed on an IC to prevent
radiation-damage? (how do you rad-harden a chip?)

From VM Wed Jul 31 10:41:58 2002
Content-Length: 998
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["998" "Tuesday" "30" "July" "2002" "19:18:59" "-0500" "L. Parker" "lparker@cacaphony.net" nil "35" "RE: starship-design: Busy busy" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6V0KWHo003495
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6V0KWtl003491
	for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6V0KVHo003477
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:20:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user121.net241.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.208.121] helo=broadsword)
	by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 17ZhE5-0004hD-00; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:20:29 -0700
Message-ID: <002301c23827$de55cc40$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <001801c23825$1bc2eca0$e71d86d9@kat>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "'Peter \(Sci\)'" <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>,
   "'Starship Design'" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: RE: starship-design: Busy busy
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 19:18:59 -0500

It is not a function of component density. It is a combination of grounding,
shielding and a different substrate that is not as susceptible to radiation
damage. Standard silicon is not very good for this purpose.

Lee

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
> [mailto:owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu]On Behalf Of
> Peter (Sci)
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 6:59 PM
> To: Starship Design
> Subject: starship-design: Busy busy
>
>
> Last couple of weeks, I've been talking to a few friends.
> This has resulted
> in much design work on my intergrated ship network (the
> Kitten Modules), and
> the associated peripherals.
> I also got a name dropped on me, and was wondering if it was
> familier to
> anyone on this list?
> The Association Of Autonomous Astronauts, or the AAA.  Anyone?
>
> Checking in,
>
> Sci
>
>
> PS: Anyone know what sort of componant density is needed on
> an IC to prevent
> radiation-damage? (how do you rad-harden a chip?)
>
>
From VM Wed Jul 31 10:41:58 2002
Content-Length: 982
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["982" "Tuesday" "30" "July" "2002" "19:36:48" "-0600" "Ben Franchuk" "bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca" nil "29" "Re: starship-design: Busy busy" "^From:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6V1eDHo023821
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 18:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6V1eD20023820
	for starship-design-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 18:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bach.ccinet.ab.ca (bach.ccinet.ab.ca [198.161.96.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6V1eBHo023812
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 18:40:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jetnet.ab.ca (gc-jet-195.jetnet.ab.ca [207.34.60.195])
	by bach.ccinet.ab.ca (8.12.5/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g6V1e9h1091001
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 19:40:09 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca)
Message-ID: <3D473F30.3000805@jetnet.ab.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020721
X-Accept-Language: en,ja
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <002301c23827$de55cc40$0201a8c0@broadsword> <3D473EDA.4090800@jetnet.ab.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>
From: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: Re: starship-design: Busy busy
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 19:36:48 -0600

Ben Franchuk wrote:
> L. Parker wrote:
> 
>> It is not a function of component density. It is a combination of 
>> grounding,
>> shielding and a different substrate that is not as susceptible to 
>> radiation
>> damage. Standard silicon is not very good for this purpose.
> 
> 
>>> PS: Anyone know what sort of componant density is needed on
>>> an IC to prevent
>>> radiation-damage? (how do you rad-harden a chip?)
>>
> 
> I also suspect it has to do with radiation energy levels
> and chip speeds and power used. CMOS logic is sensitive
> to distructive latchup that radiation could cause, but
> I suspect transient errors to be more of a problem in memory.
> Most logic nowdays does not have even parity or other forms
> of diagnostics trading this all for speed and the ability
> to run windows. :(
> Get the hardware working and then count on being two computer
> generations back for space rated stuff.
> Check here for space rated hardware.
> http://www.gaisler.com/
> 
> 

From VM Mon Aug  5 10:32:51 2002
Content-Length: 2668
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["2668" "Sunday" "4" "August" "2002" "21:25:36" "-0500" "L. Parker" "lparker@cacaphony.net" nil "49" "starship-design: Boeing Internal Report Looks At Propellentless Propulsion" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil "starship-design: Boeing Internal Report Looks At Propellentless Propulsion" nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g752PcHo010219
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 19:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g752PcMH010218
	for starship-design-outgoing; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 19:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g752PbHo010212
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 19:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user121.net241.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.208.121] helo=broadsword)
	by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 17bXYu-0005kC-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Sun, 04 Aug 2002 19:25:36 -0700
Message-ID: <000601c23c27$628723d0$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "Starship-Design List \(E-mail\)" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: Boeing Internal Report Looks At Propellentless Propulsion
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 21:25:36 -0500

Boeing Internal Report Looks At Propellentless Propulsion

A report published July 29 by Jane's Defense Weekly says Boeing has
acknowledged it is conducting a variety of anti-gravity experiments that
could rewrite the economics of conventional aviation technologies.

According to Jane's Defense Weekly (JDW) the research is being done at
Boeing's famous Phantom Works facility in Seattle where Boeing is working to
gain the services of the Russian scientist Dr Evgeny Podkletnov who claims
he has developed anti-gravity devices in Russia and Finland.

But with the Russian government starting to realize that many of the
greatest treasures of the Soviet era are to be found scattered throughout
the country in forgotten science and technology projects, the bureaucracy
has begun to clamp down on high technology transfers to the West.

A briefing document obtained by JDW says the project is operating under the
internal name of GRASP - Gravity Research for Advanced Space Propulsion.
This document also sets out what Boeing believes to be at stake, stating:
"If gravity modification is real, it will alter the entire aerospace
business."

Behind the project rests many years of, initially, Russian research, and
later on American research at NASA and now Boeing - to investigate
'propellentless propulsion' the politically correct term for anti-gravity
machines. Much of the western research has been aimed at testing the
validity of Podkletnov's fundamental work with several projects over the
years at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.

In tandem, has been the need to examine possible uses of anti-gravity
technologies. Conceivably, uses could range from transport both
terrestrially and in outer space through fuel-free electricity to powerful
directed energy weapons.

In fact, one of Podkletnov's claims was that in high-power experiments using
a so-called impulse gravity generator he was able to generate a beam of
gravity-like energy that exerted an instantaneous force of 1,000g on any
object — enough, in theory, to vaporize it, and even more so if the object
is moving quickly.

According to the JDW report, Boeing recently approached Podkletnov directly,
but fell foul of Russian technology transfer controls. The GRASP briefing
document cited by Jane's noted that BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin have
also contacted Podkletnov "and have some activity in this area".

In conclusion the briefing document said additional "classified activities
in gravity modification may exist". But moreover, Podkletnov was strongly
anti-military and was only wanting to provide assistance if the research was
conducted out in the "white world" of open development.
From VM Mon Aug  5 10:32:51 2002
Content-Length: 12179
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["12179" "Sunday" "4" "August" "2002" "21:28:18" "-0500" "L. Parker" "lparker@cacaphony.net" nil "219" "starship-design: A Mass of Inertia" "^From:" nil nil "8" nil "starship-design: A Mass of Inertia" nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g752SLHo010554
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 19:28:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g752SLw8010553
	for starship-design-outgoing; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 19:28:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g752SKHo010546
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 19:28:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user121.net241.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.208.121] helo=broadsword)
	by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 17bXbX-0000yd-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Sun, 04 Aug 2002 19:28:19 -0700
Message-ID: <000701c23c27$c33c8670$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "Starship-Design List \(E-mail\)" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: A Mass of Inertia
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 21:28:18 -0500

A Mass of Inertia
by Marcus Chown
London - Feb. 3, 2001

What is this thing called mass? Pondering this apparently simple question,
two scientists have come up with a radical theory that could explain the
nature of inertia, abolish gravity and, just possibly, lead to bizarre new
forms of spacecraft propulsion.

Faced with the same question, you might answer that mass is what makes a
loaded shopping trolley hard to get moving -- its inertia. Or, perhaps, that
mass is what makes a bag of sugar or a grand piano weigh something. Either
way, the origin of mass is one of nature's deepest mysteries.

Some particle physicists claim that a hypothetical particle called the Higgs
boson gives mass to subatomic particles such as electrons. Late last year,
hints that the Higgs really exists were found at CERN, the European centre
for particle physics near Geneva. So, does the Higgs explain weight and
inertia? The answer is probably no.

Wait a minute. How can these physicists claim they have discovered the
origin of mass when their proposed mechanism fails to explain the very
things that make it what it is? Well, as Bill Clinton might say, it all
depends on what you mean by mass.

When these particle physicists speak of mass, they are not thinking in terms
of inertia or weight. Matter is a concentrated form of energy. It can be
changed into other forms of energy and other forms of energy can be changed
into matter -- an equivalence embodied in Einstein's famous equation E =
mc2. So in this sense, the mass of a subatomic particle is a measure of the
amount of energy needed to make it. The Higgs can account for that, at least
partly (see "Mass delusion", p 25).

"But the Higgs mechanism does not explain why mass, or its energy
equivalent, resists motion or reacts to gravity," says Bernard Haisch of the
California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics in Palo Alto. He believes
instead that inertia and gravity are manifestations of far more familiar
effects. When you lift that sack of potatoes or shove your shopping trolley,
the forces you feel might be plain old electricity and magnetism.

If the forces are familiar, their origin is anything but. For in Haisch's
view, they come out of the quantum vacuum. What we think of as a vacuum is,
according to quantum theory, a sea of force fields. The best understood of
all these fields is the electromagnetic field, and it affects us
constantly -- our bodies are held together by electromagnetic forces, and
light is an oscillation in the electromagnetic field.

That these fields pop up in the vacuum is reflected by Heisenberg's
uncertainty principle, which states that the shorter the length of time over
which an energy measurement is made, the less precise the result will be. So
although the energy of the electromagnetic field in the vacuum averages to
zero over long periods of time, it fluctuates wildly on very short
timescales.

Rather than being empty, the vacuum is a choppy sea of randomly fluctuating
electromagnetic waves. We don't see or feel them because they pop in and out
of existence incredibly quickly, appearing only for a split second. These
fleeting apparitions are called virtual photons.

But sometimes, virtual becomes real. Stephen Hawking worked out that the
powerful gravity of a black hole distorts this quantum sea so much that when
a virtual photon appears, it can break free and escape into space, becoming
real and visible just like an ordinary photon. And a fundamental principle
of Einstein's theory of general relativity is that gravity is
indistinguishable from acceleration.

So if gravity can release photons from the vacuum, why shouldn't
acceleration do the same? In the mid-1970s, Paul Davies at the University of
Newcastle upon Tyne and Bill Unruh at the University of British Columbia in
Vancouver realised that an observer accelerated through the quantum vacuum
should be bathed in electromagnetic radiation. The quantum vacuum becomes a
real and detectable thing.

This idea hit Haisch in February 1991, when Alfonso Rueda of California
State University gave a talk about the Davies-Unruh effect at Lockheed
Martin's Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory in Palo Alto. If an accelerated
body sees radiation coming at it from the front, Haisch thought, that
radiation might apply a retarding force. "I'm an astrophysicist," he says.
"So I am used to the idea that radiation -- for instance, sunlight - can
exert a pressure on bodies such as comet particles."

Rueda said he would do some calculations. Some months later, he left a
message on Haisch's answering machine in the middle of the night. When
Haisch played it back the next morning he heard an excited Rueda saying, "I
think I can derive Newton's second law."

According to Rueda, photons boosted out of the quantum vacuum by an object's
acceleration would bounce off electric charges in the object. The result is
a retarding force which is proportional to the acceleration, as in Newton's
second law, which defines inertial mass as the ratio of the force acting on
an object to the acceleration produced. Haisch and Rueda, along with their
colleague Harold Puthoff of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Austin,
Texas, published their initial work in February 1994 (Physical Review A, vol
49, p 678).

This electromagnetic drag certainly sounds like inertia. But do the
calculations agree with the known inertial masses of subatomic particles?
Why are quarks heavier than electrons, even though they have less charge?
And why are the particles called muons and taus heavier than electrons, even
though they appear to be identical in other ways? It might be because they
are doing a different kind of dance.

In deriving his result, Rueda adapted an old idea proposed by quantum
pioneers Louis-Victor de Broglie and Erwin Schrsdinger. When low-energy
photons bounce off electrons, they are scattered as if the electron were a
ball of charge with a finite size.

But in very high-energy interactions, the electrons behave more as if they
are point-like. So de Broglie and Schrsdinger proposed that an electron is
actually a point-like charge which jitters about randomly within a certain
volume.

This can account for both kinds of behaviour: at high energies, the
interaction is fast and the electron appears frozen in place; at low
energies, it is slow, and the electron has time to jiggle about so much that
it appears to be a fuzzy sphere.

Haisch and Rueda believe that de Broglie and Schrsdinger's idea was on the
right lines. The electron's jitter could be caused by virtual photons in the
quantum vacuum, just like the Brownian motion of a dust particle bombarded
by molecules in the air. "Random battering by the jittery vacuum smears out
the electron," says Haisch.

This is important because Haisch and Rueda suspect that their
inertia-producing mechanism occurs at a resonant frequency. Photons in the
quantum vacuum with the same frequency as the jitter are much more likely to
bounce off a particle, so they dominate its inertia.

They speculate that muons and taus may be some kind of excited state of the
electron, with a correspondingly higher resonance frequency. That would
probably mean a greater mass, as there are more high-frequency vacuum
photons to bounce off. Quarks might also be resonating in a different way
from electrons.

"If we knew what caused the resonance we would probably be able to explain
the ratio of the various quarks' rest masses to the electron rest mass,"
says Haisch. The cause of such excitations might lie in string theory, which
treats particles as tiny vibrating strings, but this is only conjecture.

If inertial mass is an electromagnetic effect, why does the neutrino appear
to have some mass, even though it doesn't feel electromagnetic forces? This
might be easier to explain. The electromagnetic field is not the only field
in the vacuum. There are two other force fields: the weak nuclear force and
the strong nuclear force. Both could make contributions to mass in a similar
way to the electromagnetic field.

Neutrinos only feel the weak force, which could explain their small mass.
Quarks feel the strong nuclear force, and that could affect their mass. It
is even possible that strong-force fluctuations in the vacuum dominate the
masses of quarks and gluons. As these contributions are much harder to work
out than the electromagnetic ones, no one has attempted them yet.

Vacuum-packed

So much for inertia. But what about the force holding you to the floor? Can
the vacuum account for gravitational mass too? The idea of linking gravity
with the quantum vacuum was suggested by Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov
in 1968 and has been developed recently by Puthoff. Haisch and Rueda's
latest project is to connect this idea with their work on inertia.

It's still highly speculative, but they think they can explain away gravity
as an effect of electromagnetic forces. Oscillating charges in a chunk of
matter affect the charged virtual particles in the vacuum. This polarised
vacuum then exerts a force on the charges in another chunk of matter. In
this rather tortuous manner the two chunks of matter attract each other.
"This might explain why gravity is so weak," says Haisch. "One mass does not
pull directly on another mass but only through the intermediary of the
vacuum."

Einstein's theory of general relativity already explains gravity beautifully
in terms of the warping of space-time by matter, so this "geometrical"
description ought to be compatible with the quantum-vacuum picture. Haisch
points out that the curvature of space can only be inferred from the bending
of the paths of light rays. But the polarised vacuum would bend light paths,
just as a piece of glass does when light enters or leaves it.

"The warpage of space might be equivalent to a variation in the refractive
index of the vacuum," Haisch conjectures. "In this way, all the mathematics
of general relativity could stay, intact, since space-time would look as if
it were warped." And all the strange predictions of general relativity, such
as black holes and gravitational waves, would be manifestations of this
polarised vacuum.

If they can get their idea to work, Haisch and Rueda will have a theory of
quantum gravity -- the long-sought marriage of Einstein's general relativity
with quantum mechanics. It would finally allow physicists to understand the
first moments after the big bang, and the crushing singularity at the core
of a black hole.

That just leaves rest mass, the kind of mass that's equivalent to energy.
According to Haisch, the Higgs might not be needed to explain rest mass at
all. The inherent energy in a particle may be a result of its jittering
motion, the buffeting caused by virtual particles in the vacuum.

"A massless particle may pick up energy from it, hence acquiring what we
think of as rest mass," he says. If this were the case, all three facets of
mass would be different aspects of the battering of the quantum vacuum. "It
would be a tidy package."

It may be that there is no explanation for inertial and gravitational mass.
They may just come hand in hand with rest mass. This is what many particle
physicists believe. "Some people think Haisch and Rueda are on the right
track, others think they are on a wild goose chase," says Paul Wesson, an
astrophysicist at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada.

But if gravitational and inertial mass do emerge from the vacuum, perhaps we
could take control of them. It might be possible to cancel mass, creating an
inertia-less drive that could accelerate a spaceship to nearly the speed of
light in the blink of an eye.

To do this we would have to exclude quantum fluctuations from a region where
there is matter -- blow a bubble in the vacuum. Haisch doesn't know if that
is possible. "Nature does not abhor a vacuum," he says. "However, it may
abhor a vacuum in the vacuum."

This article appeared in the February 3 issue of New Scientist New
Scientist. Copyright 2001 - All rights reserved. The material on this page
is provided by New Scientist and may not be published, broadcast, rewritten
or redistributed without written authorization from New Scientist.
From VM Mon Sep  9 17:19:01 2002
Content-Length: 16219
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["16219" "Monday" "9" "September" "2002" "20:17:21" "EDT" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "534" "starship-design: Fwd: Atomic scale memory" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8A0HY04029867
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 17:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g8A0HYGp029866
	for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 17:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8A0HW04029820
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 17:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from KellySt@aol.com
	by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.10.) id i.d4.1cdbd205 (18403);
	Mon, 9 Sep 2002 20:17:21 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <d4.1cdbd205.2aae9411@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_d4.1cdbd205.2aae9411_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Mac sub 39
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com
From: KellySt@aol.com
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: JohnFrance@aol.com, dtaylor611@comcast.net, moschleg@erols.com,
   starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu, RICKJ@btio.com
Subject: starship-design: Fwd: Atomic scale memory
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 20:17:21 EDT


--part1_d4.1cdbd205.2aae9411_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


In a message dated 9/9/02 9:51:17 AM, KStarks.Apollo@SIKORSKY.COM writes:

>
>
>
>
>http://www.news.wisc.edu/releases/view.html?id=7774
>
>
>
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>
>                     9/3/02
>
>                     CONTACT: Franz J. Himpsel (608) 263-5590, (608)
>
>877-2000 fhimpsel@facstaff.wisc.edu 
>
>
>
>                     NOTE TO PHOTO EDITORS: To download a high-resolution
>
>image to accompany this story,
>
>                     visit: http://www.news.wisc.edu/newsphotos/atomic.html
>
>
>
>
>                     SCIENTISTS DEVELOP ATOMIC-SCALE MEMORY 
>
>
>
>                     MADISON - In 1959, physics icon Richard Feynman, in
>a
>
>characteristic
>
>                     back-of-the-envelope calculation, predicted that all
>
>the words written in the history of the
>
>                     world could be contained in a cube of material one
>
>two-hundredths of an inch wide -
>
>                     provided those words were written with atoms. 
>
>
>
>                     Now, a little more than 40 years after Feynman's
>
>prescient estimate, scientists at the
>
>                     University of Wisconsin-Madison have created an
>
>atomic-scale memory using atoms of
>
>                     silicon in place of the 1s and 0s that computers use
>to
>
>store data. 
>
>
>
>                     The feat, reported in the journal Nanotechnology,
>
>represents a first crude step toward a
>
>                     practical atomic-scale memory where atoms would
>
>represent the bits of information that
>
>                     make up the words, pictures and codes read by
>
>computers. 
>
>
>
>                     "This is proof of concept of what Feynman was saying
>40
>
>years ago," says Franz Himpsel,
>
>                     a UW-Madison professor of physics and the senior author
>
>of the Nanotechnology paper. 
>
>
>
>                     Although the memory created by Himpsel and his
>
>colleagues is in two dimensions rather
>
>                     than the three-dimensional cube envisioned by Feynman,
>
>it provides a storage density a
>
>                     million times greater than a CD-ROM, today's
>
>conventional means of storing data. 
>
>
>
>                     The atom, says Himpsel, represents the "hard wall"
>of
>
>technological miniaturization. "We
>
>                     seem to be at a natural limit." 
>
>
>
>                     Although divisible, the atom is a fundamental unit
>of
>
>nature. They are the smallest
>
>                     particles of an element and a single grain of sand,
>for
>
>example, can contain 10 million
>
>                     billion atoms. 
>
>
>
>                     The new memory was constructed on a silicon surface
>
>that automatically forms furrows
>
>                     within which rows of silicon atoms are aligned and
>rest
>
>like tennis balls in a gutter. By
>
>                     lifting out single silicon atoms with the tip of a
>
>scanning tunneling microscope, the
>
>                     Wisconsin team created gaps that represent the 0s
>of
>
>data storage while atoms left in
>
>                     place represent the1s. 
>
>
>
>                     Like conventional memory, the atomic-scale device
>can
>
>be initialized, formatted, written
>
>                     and read at room temperature. 
>
>
>
>                     By manipulating individual atoms at room temperature
>to
>
>create memory, Himpsel and his
>
>                     colleagues are treading a middle ground between atom
>
>manipulation at very low
>
>                     temperatures and conventional data storage, which
>
>operates at room temperature but
>
>                     uses millions of atoms per bit. It is far easier to
>
>manipulate atoms one at a time and
>
>                     keep them stable at very low temperatures, Himpsel
>
>says. 
>
>
>
>                     The new memory was made without the use of lithography.
>
>To make conventional memory
>
>                     chips, light is used to etch patterns on a chemically
>
>treated silicon surface. To use
>
>                     lithography to make chips that are denser than the
>best
>
>available chips is prohibitively
>
>                     expensive and difficult. 
>
>
>
>                     The new atomic-scale memory was made by evaporating
>
>gold onto a silicon wafer, which
>
>                     results in a precise track structure. By subsequently
>
>evaporating silicon onto the treated
>
>                     wafer, the Wisconsin team was able to diffuse silicon
>
>atoms across the structure where
>
>                     they line up and sit within the tracks like eggs in
>a
>
>carton. These silicon atoms represent
>
>                     the bits of information. 
>
>
>
>                     Importantly, the atoms line up in such a way that
>there
>
>are atomically precise gaps
>
>                     between individual atoms, permitting scientists to
>
>pluck the particles out using the
>
>                     superfine tip of a scanning tunneling microscope
>
>without disturbing neighboring atoms and
>
>                     possibly creating unwanted chemical bonds. 
>
>
>
>                     While the Wisconsin work proves the feasibility of
>
>atomic-scale memory and provides a
>
>                     platform for exploring the fundamental limits of data
>
>storage, the technology will require
>
>                     years, if not decades, of refinement to achieve a
>
>practical working memory that could be
>
>                     mass produced, Himpsel says. Obvious drawbacks, he
>
>notes, are the fact the memory was
>
>                     constructed and manipulated in a vacuum, and that
>a
>
>scanning tunneling microscope is
>
>                     needed to write memory which makes the writing process
>
>very time consuming. 
>
>
>
>                     Moreover, there is a tradeoff between memory density
>
>and speed, Himpsel says. "As
>
>                     density increases, your ability to read the memory
>
>comes down because you get less and
>
>                     less of a signal. As you make things smaller, it's
>
>going to get slower." 
>
>
>
>                     An intriguing aspect of the Wisconsin work is that
>
>memory density is comparable to the
>
>                     way nature stores data in DNA molecules. The Wisconsin
>
>atomic-scale silicon memory
>
>                     uses 20 atoms to store one bit of information,
>
>including the space around the single atom
>
>                     bits. DNA uses 32 atoms to store information in one
>
>half of the chemical base pair that is
>
>                     the fundamental unit that makes up genetic information.
>
>
>
>
>
>                     "Compared to conventional storage media, both DNA
>and
>
>the silicon surface excel by their
>
>                     storage density," says Himpsel. 
>
>
>
>                     Co-authors of the Nanotechnology paper, published
>in
>
>the July 4, 2002 issue of
>
>                     Nanotechnology, include R. Bennewitz, J.N. Crain,
>A.
>
>Kirakosian, J-L. Lin, J.L. McChesney
>
>                     and D.Y. Petrovykh. 
>
>
>
>                     For more information, visit:
>
>http://uw.physics.wisc.edu/~himpsel/memory.html
>
>                     # # #
>
>                     -- Terry Devitt (608) 262-8282,
>
>trdevitt@facstaff.wisc.edu
>
>                     Version for printing 

--part1_d4.1cdbd205.2aae9411_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <KStarks.Apollo@SIKORSKY.COM>
Received: from  rly-xd03.mx.aol.com (rly-xd03.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.168]) by air-xd05.mail.aol.com (v88.20) with ESMTP id MAILINXD54-0909095117; Mon, 09 Sep 2002 09:51:17 -0400
Received: from  mail2.utc.com (mail.utc.com [192.249.46.67]) by rly-xd03.mx.aol.com (v88.20) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXD39-0909095049; Mon, 09 Sep 2002 09:50:49 -0400
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
	by mail2.utc.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) id g89Dom323131;
	Mon, 9 Sep 2002 09:50:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from uusnwa0p.utc.com(159.82.80.106) by mail2.utc.com via csmap (V6.0)
	id srcAAAvtaqlT; Mon, 9 Sep 02 09:50:48 -0400
Received: from saexch-bh1-stf.sikorsky.com (saexch-bh1-stf.sikorsky.com [140.76.216.20])
	by uusnwa0p.utc.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id g89Doka07874;
	Mon, 9 Sep 2002 09:50:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by saexch-bh1-stf.sikorsky.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
	id <RHZ0QR8R>; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 09:50:44 -0400
Message-ID: <B94D9EFEABBFD745A8BCFC0F658E3D74580B61@sussfe01.sikorsky.com>
From: "Starks, Kelly       Apollo" <KStarks.Apollo@SIKORSKY.COM>
To: "'Carol'" <kryswalker@aol.com>,
        "'kathan  (yahoo account)'"
	 <kathan_1@yahoo.com>,
        "'Kathleen Casciola'" <mdlynlv@mobil1.net>,
        "'Kellys Home'" <kellyst@aol.com>,
        "'Rhonda office'"
	 <rkelpers@powersystems.rockwell.com>,
        "Love, Philip B"
	 <PLove@SIKORSKY.COM>
Subject: Atomic scale memory
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 09:50:42 -0400 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"



http://www.news.wisc.edu/releases/view.html?id=7774

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
                     9/3/02
                     CONTACT: Franz J. Himpsel (608) 263-5590, (608)
877-2000 fhimpsel@facstaff.wisc.edu 

                     NOTE TO PHOTO EDITORS: To download a high-resolution
image to accompany this story,
                     visit: http://www.news.wisc.edu/newsphotos/atomic.html 

                     SCIENTISTS DEVELOP ATOMIC-SCALE MEMORY 

                     MADISON - In 1959, physics icon Richard Feynman, in a
characteristic
                     back-of-the-envelope calculation, predicted that all
the words written in the history of the
                     world could be contained in a cube of material one
two-hundredths of an inch wide -
                     provided those words were written with atoms. 

                     Now, a little more than 40 years after Feynman's
prescient estimate, scientists at the
                     University of Wisconsin-Madison have created an
atomic-scale memory using atoms of
                     silicon in place of the 1s and 0s that computers use to
store data. 

                     The feat, reported in the journal Nanotechnology,
represents a first crude step toward a
                     practical atomic-scale memory where atoms would
represent the bits of information that
                     make up the words, pictures and codes read by
computers. 

                     "This is proof of concept of what Feynman was saying 40
years ago," says Franz Himpsel,
                     a UW-Madison professor of physics and the senior author
of the Nanotechnology paper. 

                     Although the memory created by Himpsel and his
colleagues is in two dimensions rather
                     than the three-dimensional cube envisioned by Feynman,
it provides a storage density a
                     million times greater than a CD-ROM, today's
conventional means of storing data. 

                     The atom, says Himpsel, represents the "hard wall" of
technological miniaturization. "We
                     seem to be at a natural limit." 

                     Although divisible, the atom is a fundamental unit of
nature. They are the smallest
                     particles of an element and a single grain of sand, for
example, can contain 10 million
                     billion atoms. 

                     The new memory was constructed on a silicon surface
that automatically forms furrows
                     within which rows of silicon atoms are aligned and rest
like tennis balls in a gutter. By
                     lifting out single silicon atoms with the tip of a
scanning tunneling microscope, the
                     Wisconsin team created gaps that represent the 0s of
data storage while atoms left in
                     place represent the1s. 

                     Like conventional memory, the atomic-scale device can
be initialized, formatted, written
                     and read at room temperature. 

                     By manipulating individual atoms at room temperature to
create memory, Himpsel and his
                     colleagues are treading a middle ground between atom
manipulation at very low
                     temperatures and conventional data storage, which
operates at room temperature but
                     uses millions of atoms per bit. It is far easier to
manipulate atoms one at a time and
                     keep them stable at very low temperatures, Himpsel
says. 

                     The new memory was made without the use of lithography.
To make conventional memory
                     chips, light is used to etch patterns on a chemically
treated silicon surface. To use
                     lithography to make chips that are denser than the best
available chips is prohibitively
                     expensive and difficult. 

                     The new atomic-scale memory was made by evaporating
gold onto a silicon wafer, which
                     results in a precise track structure. By subsequently
evaporating silicon onto the treated
                     wafer, the Wisconsin team was able to diffuse silicon
atoms across the structure where
                     they line up and sit within the tracks like eggs in a
carton. These silicon atoms represent
                     the bits of information. 

                     Importantly, the atoms line up in such a way that there
are atomically precise gaps
                     between individual atoms, permitting scientists to
pluck the particles out using the
                     superfine tip of a scanning tunneling microscope
without disturbing neighboring atoms and
                     possibly creating unwanted chemical bonds. 

                     While the Wisconsin work proves the feasibility of
atomic-scale memory and provides a
                     platform for exploring the fundamental limits of data
storage, the technology will require
                     years, if not decades, of refinement to achieve a
practical working memory that could be
                     mass produced, Himpsel says. Obvious drawbacks, he
notes, are the fact the memory was
                     constructed and manipulated in a vacuum, and that a
scanning tunneling microscope is
                     needed to write memory which makes the writing process
very time consuming. 

                     Moreover, there is a tradeoff between memory density
and speed, Himpsel says. "As
                     density increases, your ability to read the memory
comes down because you get less and
                     less of a signal. As you make things smaller, it's
going to get slower." 

                     An intriguing aspect of the Wisconsin work is that
memory density is comparable to the
                     way nature stores data in DNA molecules. The Wisconsin
atomic-scale silicon memory
                     uses 20 atoms to store one bit of information,
including the space around the single atom
                     bits. DNA uses 32 atoms to store information in one
half of the chemical base pair that is
                     the fundamental unit that makes up genetic information.


                     "Compared to conventional storage media, both DNA and
the silicon surface excel by their
                     storage density," says Himpsel. 

                     Co-authors of the Nanotechnology paper, published in
the July 4, 2002 issue of
                     Nanotechnology, include R. Bennewitz, J.N. Crain, A.
Kirakosian, J-L. Lin, J.L. McChesney
                     and D.Y. Petrovykh. 

                     For more information, visit:
http://uw.physics.wisc.edu/~himpsel/memory.html
                     # # #
                     -- Terry Devitt (608) 262-8282,
trdevitt@facstaff.wisc.edu
                     Version for printing 

--part1_d4.1cdbd205.2aae9411_boundary--
From VM Mon Sep 23 10:14:56 2002
Content-Length: 965
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["965" "Monday" "23" "September" "2002" "14:28:00" "+0100" "scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk" "scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk" nil "21" "starship-design: LCDs" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil "starship-design: LCDs" nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8NDT7Le011564
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:29:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g8NDT7gS011563
	for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:29:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8NDT5Le011557
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:29:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from modem-1406.antelope.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.134.21.126] helo=kat)
	by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
	id 17tTGp-0003st-00; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:29:04 +0100
Message-ID: <000701c26305$3217c4c0$7e1586d9@kat>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>
From: <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "Starship Design" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Cc: "AAA - List" <aaa-list@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: starship-design: LCDs
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:28:00 +0100

In recent discussions with a friend I was pointed out a problem with my
multi-purpose terminals idea.  Previously I wanted to use full-colour
displays, allowing maximum adaptability (all forms of display, readouts,
alerts, etc...).  However, as my friend said, colour displays both LCD and
plasma, lose or leach their colour over time, while monochrome LCDs are
virtually imortal.
Now, I'd still like to use colour displays in my designs, as they are more
adaptable, even if possibly shorter-lived and more expensive.  Does anyone
have any info on long-lasting flat colour displays, prefable low-energy use
ones?

I'll probably end up doing the prototypes one mono displays, as I'm on a low
budget and they'rw all I have laying about, but I'd like to leave the room
for expansion. I picked up the 19" rack on saturday, which already has some
of the equipment mounted in it, so things are getting a little closer to
first practical experiements.

All the best

Sci

From VM Mon Sep 23 10:44:13 2002
Content-Length: 1450
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["1450" "Monday" "23" "September" "2002" "12:31:24" "-0500" "L. Parker" "lparker@cacaphony.net" nil "48" "RE: starship-design: LCDs" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8NHVSLe010020
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:31:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g8NHVS30010019
	for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:31:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8NHVQLe010011
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:31:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user121.net241.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.208.121] helo=broadsword)
	by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 17tX3M-00006q-00; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:31:24 -0700
Message-ID: <007a01c26327$0acb86a0$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <000701c26305$3217c4c0$7e1586d9@kat>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>,
   "'Starship Design'" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Cc: "'AAA - List'" <aaa-list@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: starship-design: LCDs
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 12:31:24 -0500

Plasma screens are much more rugged, durable and longer lasting.
Unfortunately, the ones I am familiar with are power hogs.

Lee

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
> [mailto:owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu]On Behalf Of
> scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 8:28 AM
> To: Starship Design
> Cc: AAA - List
> Subject: starship-design: LCDs
>
>
> In recent discussions with a friend I was pointed out a
> problem with my
> multi-purpose terminals idea.  Previously I wanted to use full-colour
> displays, allowing maximum adaptability (all forms of
> display, readouts,
> alerts, etc...).  However, as my friend said, colour displays
> both LCD and
> plasma, lose or leach their colour over time, while
> monochrome LCDs are
> virtually imortal.
> Now, I'd still like to use colour displays in my designs, as
> they are more
> adaptable, even if possibly shorter-lived and more expensive.
>  Does anyone
> have any info on long-lasting flat colour displays, prefable
> low-energy use
> ones?
>
> I'll probably end up doing the prototypes one mono displays,
> as I'm on a low
> budget and they'rw all I have laying about, but I'd like to
> leave the room
> for expansion. I picked up the 19" rack on saturday, which
> already has some
> of the equipment mounted in it, so things are getting a
> little closer to
> first practical experiements.
>
> All the best
>
> Sci
>
>
From VM Mon Sep 23 17:21:50 2002
Content-Length: 313
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["313" "Monday" "23" "September" "2002" "19:52:48" "EDT" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" "<14b.148e49db.2ac10350@aol.com>" "15" "Re: starship-design: LCDs" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8NNr3Le016958
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 16:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g8NNr3Q5016957
	for starship-design-outgoing; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 16:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imo-r01.mx.aol.com (imo-r01.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.97])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8NNr2Le016925
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 16:53:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from KellySt@aol.com
	by imo-r01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.10.) id z.14b.148e49db (25098)
	 for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 19:52:48 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <14b.148e49db.2ac10350@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Mac sub 39
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com
From: KellySt@aol.com
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
Subject: Re: starship-design: LCDs
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 19:52:48 EDT


In a message dated 9/23/02 1:33:30 PM, lparker@cacaphony.net writes:

>Plasma screens are much more rugged, durable and longer lasting.
>
>Unfortunately, the ones I am familiar with are power hogs.
>
>
>
>Lee

Lee, Starships ae such a power hog, the flat screens could hope to use 
enonugh to be noteworthy.

;)
From VM Thu Sep 26 14:46:45 2002
Content-Length: 1890
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["1890" "Thursday" "26" "September" "2002" "16:24:55" "-0500" "L. Parker" "lparker@cacaphony.net" nil "45" "starship-design: Russia mulls mothballing space station" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8QLPr8k004245
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g8QLPrVk004244
	for starship-design-outgoing; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8QLPq8k004230
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:25:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user121.net241.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.208.121] helo=broadsword)
	by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 17ug8C-0006Pn-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:25:08 -0700
Message-ID: <000201c265a3$29983230$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "Starship-Design List \(E-mail\)" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: starship-design: Russia mulls mothballing space station
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 16:24:55 -0500

Russia mulls mothballing space station
Thursday, September 26, 2002 Posted: 2:31 PM EDT (1831 GMT)


MOSCOW (Reuters) -- Manned missions to the international space station may
have to be suspended because Russia cannot afford to build new craft to
carry crews there, a Russian space official said Thursday.

"The situation is desperate," Valery Ryumin, director of the Russian section
of the ISS, said by telephone.

Ryumin, also a top designer for rocket-builder Energiya -- which supplies
the Soyuz craft -- said the company had no money beyond next year to build
the vehicles.

"It takes two years to build the spaceship. Unless we place an order today,
we will have nothing to fly on in 2004," he said.

A key member of the 16-nation space station program, Russia has undertaken
to provide Soyuz capsules.

Designed to carry three people, they remain docked to the orbiting outpost
for months at a time and can be used for emergency rescues. It is intended
for use on a single mission.

Ryumin said that without Soyuz, U.S. crews would not be able to use the
space station as their shuttle craft were designed to remain at the station
for a maximum of three weeks.

The U.S. program also had no alternative provision for rescue missions.

"That is why the issue has been raised of suspending permanent manned
missions at the station," he said.

Ryumin said he had sent a letter to his U.S. counterpart explaining Russia's
concerns. He suggested that the publicity given to Russia's financial
difficulties might prompt the government to stump up more funds.

"Perhaps the government will choose to avoid an international scandal," he
said. "But I will tell you frankly that I have almost given up hope."


Once I knew where I was going, but now I have  forgotten.  Sometimes my mind
wanders.  Sometimes it goes alone, and other times it takes me along...this
isn't one of those times...
From VM Fri Sep 27 12:16:58 2002
Content-Length: 2763
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["2763" "Friday" "27" "September" "2002" "20:12:37" "+0100" "Peter \\(Sci\\)" "scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk" nil "72" "Re: starship-design: LCDs" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8RJCs8k026718
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 12:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g8RJCrIL026717
	for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 12:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.18])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8RJCp8k026684
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 12:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from modem-84.elephant.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.134.240.84] helo=kat)
	by cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
	id 17v0Xd-0006Z8-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 20:12:48 +0100
Message-ID: <002d01c26659$ddf8fc80$54f086d9@kat>
References: <14b.148e49db.2ac10350@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Peter \(Sci\)" <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>
From: "Peter \(Sci\)" <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: Re: starship-design: LCDs
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 20:12:37 +0100

> >Plasma screens are much more rugged, durable and longer lasting.
> >
> >Unfortunately, the ones I am familiar with are power hogs.
> >
> >
> >
> >Lee
>
> Lee, Starships ae such a power hog, the flat screens could hope to use
> enonugh to be noteworthy.
>
> ;)

Well, I've done some more research now, so I think the answers are resonably
logical.

You're right, Plasma displays are power-hogs... compared to LCDs.  Compared
to CRTs, they use less than half the power however.

I have a suspicion (and that's all it is) that some effieicy could be gained
with plasma screens if they didn't have to convert the mains-source power (a
"mains" supply apready running at the needed 300V or so?).

Looking into their structure, they're more durable physicly, but I suspect
also in vacuum.  LCDs are thin and contain a liquid, which would be leached
out in any (hopefully expected) vacuum exposure, whereas plasmas only
containa  low-pressure gas, making it less likely to leak or fracture from
internal pressure.  They could be used easily in and out of vacuum (EG: and
V-exposed ship-lab, or in an airlock?).

It would make more of a demand on a ships power, but it can be lessened by
simply having inactive terminals shut down.

The stats I've found for their lifespan also seem impressive:

<quote>
This varies considerably between manufacturers but usually from 20,000 to
30,000 hours. After this time the plasma screen will only be at around half
the original brightness. If you used your plasma screen for 5 hours a day
every day it would last over 10 years.

At the end of the plasma screen's life, the screen will be very dull and you
will need to replace the plasma screen with a new one. This is one advantage
plasma screens have over LCD projectors, which have a bulb life of usually
2,000 hours before replacement.
</quote>

Another source said:
<q>
Manufacturers quote a life expectancy of around 24,000 continual hours use
before noticeable deterioration of the picture quality becomes apparent. It
will probably last much longer depending on the application of your screen.
Eight hours per day, seven days per week for eight years is less than 24,000
hours!
</q>

Even being used 24hours a day, that still nearly 3 years of solid use before
they loose half their brightness.  with power-saving modes saving of screen
life and power, a ship would probably only need a complete screen refit
every 10 years?
I'd imagine it's the phosper in the screen that decays, leading to the
screens death.  Anyone know if there's a way to revitalise phosphers?  Even
if not, I'd guess most of the screens could be reused if the phosphers could
be replaced?

Baring new developments in flat-screens, I think Plas,a screens fit the bill
nicely. =)

All the best,

Sci

From VM Fri Sep 27 12:22:39 2002
Content-Length: 528
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["528" "Friday" "27" "September" "2002" "20:16:29" "+0100" "Peter \\(Sci\\)" "scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk" nil "16" "Re: starship-design: Russia mulls mothballing space station" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8RJGU8k028161
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 12:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g8RJGUIw028156
	for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 12:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.210])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8RJGT8k028130
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 12:16:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from modem-84.elephant.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.134.240.84] helo=kat)
	by cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
	id 17v0bD-00049N-00
	for starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 20:16:28 +0100
Message-ID: <002e01c2665a$67797ca0$54f086d9@kat>
References: <000201c265a3$29983230$0201a8c0@broadsword>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Peter \(Sci\)" <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>
From: "Peter \(Sci\)" <scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk>
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: "Starship-Design List \(E-mail\)" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: Re: starship-design: Russia mulls mothballing space station
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 20:16:29 +0100

> Russia mulls mothballing space station
> Thursday, September 26, 2002 Posted: 2:31 PM EDT (1831 GMT)

<removed for brevity>

Just curious, does anyone know if international salvage law applys to
spacecraft (as a type of ship?).  Even if not, I doubt there's been a case
of it yet.

If the ISS is abandoned, like MIR was, I'd rather not see it wasted as dust
in the upper atsmosphere.  If it were to be abandoned, I imagine it could be
claimed somehow and moved to a parking orbit until the claimee could make
use of it.

Sci

From VM Fri Sep 27 14:07:13 2002
Content-Length: 741
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["741" "Friday" "27" "September" "2002" "16:54:45" "EDT" "KellySt@aol.com" "KellySt@aol.com" nil "30" "Re: starship-design: Russia mulls mothballing space station" "^From:" nil nil "9" nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Return-Path: <owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8RKst8k021286
	for <starship-design-outgoing@darkwing.uoregon.edu>; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 13:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g8RKst4m021285
	for starship-design-outgoing; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 13:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98])
	by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g8RKsr8k021262
	for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 13:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from KellySt@aol.com
	by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id z.26.2e57d9fb (25098)
	 for <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 16:54:46 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <26.2e57d9fb.2ac61f95@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Mac sub 39
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: KellySt@aol.com
From: KellySt@aol.com
Sender: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
To: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
Subject: Re: starship-design: Russia mulls mothballing space station
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 16:54:45 EDT


In a message dated 9/27/02 3:18:10 PM, scifox@asylum30.freeserve.co.uk writes:

>> Russia mulls mothballing space station
>> Thursday, September 26, 2002 Posted: 2:31 PM EDT (1831 GMT)
>
><removed for brevity>
>
>
>
>Just curious, does anyone know if international salvage law applys to
>spacecraft (as a type of ship?).  

I beleave it does, though only a fool would try to "claim" a few billion 
dolars worth of US teratory.

;)



>Even if not, I doubt there's been a case
>of it yet.
>
>If the ISS is abandoned, like MIR was, I'd rather not see it wasted as
>dust in the upper atsmosphere.  If it were to be abandoned, I imagine it 
could
>be claimed somehow and moved to a parking orbit until the claimee could make
>use of it.
>
>Sci