Extrasolar system science [was: Solar System Science] with SKA

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, LARRY KLAES wrote: > Astrophysics, abstract: > astro-ph/0409220 > From: Bryan Butler [view > email] > Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 12:48:16 GMT (1386kb) > Solar System Science with SKA > Authors: B. J. > Butler

Re: [esa_general] Stunning new images of Titan!

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 06:13:09PM -0800, Mark Schnitzius wrote: > > > only give us two hours on the surface, and that was > > exceeding expectations. > > > > You want a problem that relates to Europa? There's > > a problem that relates to Europa. > > I

Re: Rose's Web site

Michael Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And I'm going to start with what I think is a pretty reasonable > assumption: Europa may actually fit the profile of a very average, > life-bearing planet in the universe. Most life in the universe > may originate from oceans on planets around gas gian

Re: Fw: Slate Article: Is Mars Ours?

Gino, > I agree with one of Mr. Zubrin's basic ideas, is that to go to Mars cheaply > and effectively, we must start to use the Martian environment for resources, > like fuel, etc. I have no problem with any of Zubrin's basic ideas. It would be interesting to see whether they could be applied

Re: Fw: Slate Article: Is Mars Ours?

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Gary McMurtry wrote: ... several points in favor of exploration ... I'll just offer a few observations. Re: Engineering redundancy, G-force and radiation tolerance, reprogramability, etc. are *much* easier with probes than humans (at this time). Without manned exploration

Re: Fw: Slate Article: Is Mars Ours?

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Gary McMurtry wrote: > 1) WE are not "Back on Mars", a robotic probe is there, taking > pictures and doing pre-planned experiments on our behalf; Yep and at a cost of ~1/400th of what a manned mission would have cost a decade ago. So we could send 400 robotic missions to M

Re: Prometheus propulsion

On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Christopher England wrote: > If nano-devices could do this better, I'm for it. Yes, of course. I think it is an interesting area because I am not aware of anyone, even Drexler, who has investigated this (the limits of ion propulsion). But there is a *lot* of older work on

Re: SPACE: Loss of the Saturn V

Ok, the best information I been advised of at this time (from what I would call semi-authoritative sources) is that the blueprints for the Saturn V are preserved on microfilm. However they would be insufficient because apparently there were on-the-fly modifications made by the engineers/assemble

Re: Prometheus propulsion

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Christopher England wrote: > Ion propulsion is efficient but low in thrust (like ounces of force). > Chemical propulsion will be needed for high thrust needs like fast > orbital capture, landing and takeoff. Chris, has anyone done an analysis to determine whether one could p

SPACE: Loss of the Saturn V

The recent release of the CAIB report has caused both hearings in Congress as well as lots of speculations, e.g.: http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/09/05/1731237&mode=thread&tid=134&tid=160&tid=98&tid=99 Obviously if we had inexpensive heavy lift capacity today, the entire debate ab

Re: Europa energy fluxes

On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Eugen Leitl wrote: > It's one big petri dish. If there's life, it's closely related. If it > isn't, it's a giant data blip that life emerges rather effortlessly, and > that crosscontamination is way harder than we think despite ample material > transport. Eugen's points are

Re: Europa energy fluxes

Joe, > I still see issues with what I will call volume of scale. Agreed. Does one want a larger number of smaller craft with a fair amount of redundancy or a smaller number of larger craft with perhaps greater capabilities? And does one deal with the volume of the Europa ocean better with a "

Re: Europa energy fluxes

On 3 Mar 2003, Joe Latrell wrote: > Could someone please elaborate on what they mean by nanotech in these > discussions? Nanotech as currently defined by the National Science Foundation and the National Nanotechnology Initiative is the ability to manufacture things on the 10-100 nm scale. This

Europa energy fluxes

On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, CHRIS CANTRELL wrote: > No matter how simple the organisms are, it would be nice to get a DNA > (or RNA) sequence just to compare to life here on Earth. That assumes, > of course, that RNA will be the genetic mechanism for Europa too. Making this argument (seriously) require

Bruce being back

I'm going to leave aside *all* of the cat stories. I've never owned one and cannot offer what could be considered an informed opinion on their intelligence. But, > That being said, it's very unlikely that Europan life has even become > multicellular, let alone intelligent. The stumbling block

Re: WORRY ABOUT INCOMING

Chris, > The meteor crater in Arizona was formed about 45,000 years ago. I'm not > much on statistics, but an interesting guess might be that such a strike > has a probability of 1/45,000 per year. This strike was a small one. True, but would you want it to happen in your city? > Zodiacal du

Re: Our long-term future on Earth and beyond

This is mostly a message to Larry, but it might also have some list relevance as well. On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, LARRY KLAES wrote: > Of course Armageddon might resonate better with a public > that is not very discriminatory when it comes to science > accuracy in films - or bad acting and plotting:

Columbia analysis and space exploration

(I wrote much of this first to Bruce and John offlist, but I realized upon re-reading that it might have general list significance.) I would tend to agree with John that we may want to simply let the investigation run its course. Unfortunately the news media seem to be turning up revealing deta

Bruce in print

I'm sure Bruce ends up in print a lot, but I just ran across this Space Daily piece from a few days ago. "Lost in LEO" http://www.spacedaily.com/news/oped-03q1.html Robert == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe

Re: What about intelligent life on Europa?

On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, H Frank Benford wrote: > Cats don't have the physical capability of opening a jar(paw with > oposable thumb) whereas an Octopus does(tentacles). It took one time > showing my cat how to open a door and my house hasn't been safe since. Typical example of the linear thinking

RE: What about intelligent life on Europa?

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Eugen Leitl wrote: > There are not many sources of such utilizable entropy gradients on Europa. > Direct photons are the least important of them, it's probably magnetic > trap proton irradiation and chemothrophy harkening back to the original > molecular nebula. Put much mo

Re: What about intelligent life on Europa?

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, adam . wrote: > Personally i think it is very possible for intelligent life forms to evolve > naturally on Europa. Adam, you need to make a better case than simply "thinking". I would say a good place to start is in calculating free energy fluxes. On Earth one has at leas

RE: What about intelligent life on Europa?

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, CHRIS CANTRELL wrote: > Depending on how "intelligent" you mean, civilization (as we know it) > must eventually learn to produce rapid and intense energy e.g. fire in > order to grow technologically. Strongly agree -- "technology" is the issue and that would seem to require

RE: Life on Europa: So what?

Some of these points may be useful for the list (which is why I'm posting it there). On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Gary McMurtry wrote: > The concept that DNA may not be the most efficient or reliable information > carrier is intriguing. There are days (not many mind you) when I even amaze myself... Pe

RE: Life on Europa: So what?

On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Gary McMurtry wrote: > Please don't forget that if you argue for panspermia (like Earth-born life > on Europa or vice versa) you are presupposing the answer to the question of > how unique the origin of life may be. Let me say that I'm not arguing for panspermia -- but I do

Re: Life on Europa: So what?

On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Rulx Narcisse wrote: > It is important to know about the origin of life! > When we know our origin, we know ourselves. Rulx, with all respect, it isn't of much use to "know oneself" if one second later one is extinct. I have a strong drive to know my origin and know what h

Life on Europa: So what?

I am going to post what some might consider (on this list) a very heretical comment. So what if there is life on Europa? (And as a secondary addendum) *so what* if life ever evolved on Mars... We have 10^11+ star systems in our galaxy and probably 10^11 galaxies in the universe. Who really gi

RE: What the hell?!!

Jack wrote: > How could the foam hit the shuttle at 500mph??? [snip] > Now, ask yourself, did that 2 lb piece of plastic do much damage to the > aluminum alloy leading edge of that wing? [more snips] Though I hate to bring it up in the Europa discussion, I think the comment points out how muc

Better heat shielding

I believe that I've read articles that much better heat shielding materials have been developed since the shuttle tile system was created. Does anyone know what these materials might be and who is developing them? Also, does anyone know the heat tolerance of the tiles on the shuttles is? Thank

RE: 'NASA Sets its Sights on Nuclear Rocket to Mars"

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Thomas Green wrote: > Yeesh! and I thought I was a pessimist :-) > > As far as can NASA do anything useful for $1B and innovate? Get a grip!! > NEAR: total mission cost of $200m > Pathfinder: total mission cost of $260m > > Is this unreasonable costs? Inefficient? S

Re: 'NASA Sets its Sights on Nuclear Rocket to Mars"

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > Starting this program at this particular time strikes me as absolutely > harebrained; but then this administration seems to specialize in the > harebrained, particularly in recent months. You will get no argument from me with respect to our harebrained

Re: Plutonium is the latest superconductor

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > [snip] > In short -- though I still > don't know for certain -- I still imagine that there are no differences in > the superconductive ability of the different isotopes of an element. Bruce -- a quick Google on "superconductivty isotope" turns up a fai

Re: Plutonium is the latest superconductor

On Wed, 25 Dec 2002, Bruce Moomaw wrote, in response to my comments: > > It isn't clear to me whether it has been determined that all > > of [Pu's] isotopes are superconducting. I would doubt it. > > Actually, I imagine all Pu isotopes are superconducting, [snip] Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was

Re: Plutonium is the latest superconductor

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > On Dec 2, 2002, James McEnanly wrote: > > Is there a stable plutonium isotope? > > Nope -- the highest atomic-number element to have any stable isotopes is > bismuth (# 83). According to the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, the most stable Pu isotopes

RE: Titan: Exploring the origins of life

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Reeve, Jack W. wrote: > Titan's tale of a potentially bio-generative molecular soup existing at > another temperature realm begs the question: How many of these temperature > realms are there where an appropriate liquid solvent provides a medium for > genesis? Robert Freita

Re: Great Moments on the Space Frontier (continued)

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > "Soyuz 5S/TMA-211, the new CRV (crew return vehicle) docked at the DC-1 > compartment, currently has no altimeter (VP) for the terminal landing phase. [snip] > I've been trying, so far unsuccessfully, to get > word from Sen. Bond on whether he still sup

Europan Lava Lamp

Red Freckles On Europa Suggest "Lava Lamp" Action http://www.sciencedaily.org/releases/2002/11/02071410.htm == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/

Re: Guidance System for Icepick I, and Cryobot thoughts

On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > As for mechanical drilling through ice rather than melting; it can be done, > but all the studies conducted over the past few years have concluded that, > on balance, it requires much more energy expenditure than hot-water jet > melting. There might als

Re: Power Source

On Mon, 4 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > What about rocks?? You have to come up with a scheme to navigate around the rocks anyway -- you sure aren't going to melt them. You also may hit patches of salt. That too requires a lot more energy to melt than ice -- though not as much as rock. I

Re: Power Source

On Sat, 2 Nov 2002, Gail Leatherwood wrote: > The original concept proposed motorcycle batteries for the power source, > primarily, I think, because of their small size. How long would they > continue providing enough current to melt the ice enough for the vehicle to > sink? For about 2 minutes

Re: Heating and Power

On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I know some debates have surfaced over batteries. The pro's for > batteries as I see them are: [snip] I would strongly urge people to *read* the materials available on the web about previous cryobot efforts. You are *NOT* going to get 400+ kW out

Re: Antimatter Power: Reaching for Deep Space

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > My comments: > 'Antimatter is cheap IF you have a self-replicating system that can produce > it, and IF you are willing to discard energy that might otherwise be > dedicated to potentially more useful pursuits'. > > Do you have such a system? If no

Re: Antimatter Power: Reaching for Deep Space

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Antimatter Power: Reaching for Deep Space > > http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/antimatter_sail_021029.html [snip] > Chalk it up to Gail Leatherwood's file on 'unobtainium'. Oh well. At least > it gives us perspective. No it d

Power requirements

In response to my inquiry to Dr. Behar, he provided the following information: > The 2 20KW generators was for electric power, to run pumps, > controls, computers, etc. > The 480KW was what was calculated to be produced from burning diesel to > heat up the water. So we are *not* talking a smal

RE: No power sources available

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Robert Crawley wrote: > Yes, that should work nicely. Let's see... drop grenade on ice. Wait 30-45 > minutes. Drop grenade #2 down the hole. Wait a few minutes before it gets to > the bottom. Wait another 30-45 minutes. Drop grenade #3... this might take a > little while. R

RE: No power sources available

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Christlieb, Scott F. wrote: > One grenade would go through the whole cabinet > in a few moments. On a larger scale, could we control and direct this type > of energy to quickly clear a path for Icepick? It would be a fast way to the > bottom of the ice. The problem is that

RE: Radio control v. Wire... and 1 part or 2?

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Reeve, Jack W. wrote: > A few miles of light-transmitting fiber spooled out behind the cryobot > shouldn't weigh any more than the proposed transmission "pucks". Also, if a > metallic filament were adjacent the optical line(s), it could be > periodically heated to repositio

RE: No power sources available

Robert, > If I understand this correctly, lithium makes lithium hydroxide and hydrogen > after being exposed to water. Could there be a chemical way to revitalize > this process without adding tons of materials? Is anyone on this list a > chemical engineer? Generally speaking in chemistry you a

Re: No power sources available

It is worth noting that according to: http://helios.jpl.nasa.gov/%7Ebehar/AntWebSite/MainPage/documents/JPLAntIceProbe.pdf Slide #26 of 48, that the Hot-water jet drilling required 480kw of power. That is *not* a small amount of power (its approximately equal to 24 homes drawing their full pow

Re: Working Model Points Addressed

On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > (By the way, the Cryobot does NOT generate "hydraulic pressure" when it melts > ice -- quite apart from the fact that any such pressure would be in every > direction anyway, remember that water ice is one of the very few substances > that SHRINKS wh

Re: Some more thoughts on Proteus/IcePIC

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Shouldn't we include in our goals a cryobot and hydrobot that could test for > life in a place like Lake Vostok? The folks from NSF/NASA are working on this. Its been an ongoing effort for a decade or more. Serious scientists will scream very lou

Re: Radio control v. Wire... and 1 part or 2?

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Are we going to have this thing radio controlled or a cable/wire attached to > it? > > >From the CalTech glaciology website... > "For electromagnetic waves with frequencies from 5 to 300 MHz the loss of > energy by absorption in ice is sufficiently

Re: Ice phases, etc.

On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Gary McMurtry wrote: > Also, why worry about the power source for a demo? Because if it isn't realistic enough it gets labeled a 'joke'. Its a no brainer that if I stick a radiative ball on the top of a glacier connected to an endless supply of steam that its going to melt

No power sources available

On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Two key points: the word 'future', suggests 'someday, when/if we get the > technology, we might do something like this'. Forget it. This is not about > someday. This is about NOW. This is the future. It's 2002. The parts are > out there. The

Re: Icepick

Scott wrote: > Who are the key players? > How can I get involved? By leaning on NASA to do some out-of-the-box thinking. I wrote a long letter on Sunday to the NEO search folks and the NEXT folks (who are proposing the Earth-moon L1 station) suggesting that they combine their interests. Leavin

Re: [Spaceref-daily] The Mars Institute: A New Resource for a New Century of...

On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I shall rise to that challenge, Robert. I'm not a scientist per se, but I do > like to tell myself that I am at times, rational. On my better days, I can make that claim too! :-) > Dismantling Mars is not going to happen, ever. This is more a p

RE: [Spaceref-daily] The Mars Institute: A New Resource for a New Century of Mar (fwd)

On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Gary McMurtry wrote: > What? Dismantle Mars? No way! Some of us like it just fine the way > it is. In fact, let me be one of the first (this week?) to call for > an International Mars Preserve, for science, culture, etc. like we've > done for Antarctica. Hey Gary, its n

RE: [Spaceref-daily] The Mars Institute: A New Resource for a New Century of Mar (fwd)

Mickey Schmidt observed: > How will this organization (Mars Institute) do anything that the Mars > Society is not already set up to do? It looks like they are positioning > themselves to divide and dilute the community interested persons who want to > further Mars Exploration, support, and inter

Re: Drake still sticking with estimate of 10K civs in MWG

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, LARRY KLAES wrote: > My question is, aside from most of our television programs, > political and religious attitudes, and our general backwards > behavior, what would or could we do to annoy such an > advanced society to the point of earning their wrath? Well, gee that soun

Re: Drake still sticking with estimate of 10K civs in MWG

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > One can easily take technological progress and project it. > > How? Could anyone living in 1950 have predicted the personal computer? That isn't relevant. The paper I cited has a graph showing an exponential increase in telescope collecting are

Re: Drake still sticking with estimate of 10K civs in MWG

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm not convinced the Drake Formula is complete. After all, presume that > there are 100 billion stars in the galaxy. I believe the numbers are up to around 400 billion at this time. > Not all of them will be positioned well. Clearly true -- the

Re: Life and SETI [was RE: Survival of the Flattest]

On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, James McEnanly wrote: > Why not look for stars that are pertrubed by an unseen > body, looking for 'gravity's silhouette', as it were. This is to some extent what the gravitational microlensing studies did/do. The results that were obtained in these studies in the '90's a

Re: So what should the first words on Europa be?

On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > 'Crap, 100 billion tons of ice, and no scotch for 10 billion miles!' > Actually, my brief back of the envelope calculations suggest that it would be more likely to be ~58 peta-miles (58 quadrillion miles). I suspect the amount of ice is off by a

Re: Life and SETI [was RE: Survival of the Flattest]

On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED], responding to my comments, wrote: > He suggests that we can't find suns transmitting signals, because those suns > are already cloaked, and pumping energy into vast 'ringworlds'. Actually, more like "sphere-worlds" but that is a technical detail. > I'd ha

Life and SETI [was RE: Survival of the Flattest]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Gary McMurtry wrote: > In the collection is an > article by Ian Crawford entitled "Where Are They?", subtitled "Maybe > we are alone in the galaxy after all". I found this article thought > provoking to say the least. Crawford uses the SETI results to date > to suggest tha

Re: Survival of the Flattest

On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Consider: here on Earth, we have had several major extinction events, such > as the ones experienced at the end of the Paleozoic and the Jurassic. Sharks > are still with us, trilobytes are not. No, but horseshoe crabs still are. One could specu

Re: NASA MOVES FORWARD ON HUMAN MISSIONS TO MOON, MARS AND ASTEROIDS

On Sun, 29 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED], commenting on my comments wrote: > A vasculoid system is apparently a concept for the creation of billions of > nanosized platelets, to cover the internal surfaces of every blood vessel in > the human body, and increase the efficiency of blood, by replacin

Re: NASA MOVES FORWARD ON HUMAN MISSIONS TO MOON, MARS AND ASTEROIDS

On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Robert, your enthusiasm is astounding. Where are the off-the-shelf > microplate sapphire suits? Sorry, not here yet. We can't even assemble sapphire at the molecular level yet. But we do have a design for an internalized sapphire wet-suit: "Va

Re: NASA MOVES FORWARD ON HUMAN MISSIONS TO MOON, MARS AND ASTEROIDS

On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > Chris Cantrell wrote: > > But part of me wishes that I couldn't remember the Apollo days ... I > > wish I had been born generations later when it would be possible to take > > my passion for SCUBA to the ocean of Europa. > > Of course, given the increa

RE: BBC E-mail: New 'moon' found around Earth

The latest BBC news suggests J002E3 is a Saturn V 3rd stage from the Apollo 12 mission... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2253385.stm Wonder what the moon hoax proponents will have to say about that... :-) Robert On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, John Sheff wrote: > > Of course, all of these object

Re: The Great Mars Chlorophyll Flap

On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > Nevertheless, the flap has begun (this sort of thing always sells > newspapers, after all). I shudder to report that CNN, in its new headline > story on the subject, doesn't even bother to mention that 4 of the spots > were on the spacecraft and so cou

Re: Europa Orbiter's nuclear power source

> Nope -- Europa Orbiter itself is a considerably bigger spacecraft than the > Pluto probe, and needs two RTGs by itself. Jiminy Cricket -- what is the source of the larger power requirements (communications bandwidth)? > Fortuantely, Venus and (to a less extent) Mars are available as > altern

Re: Europa Orbiter's nuclear power source

On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > The US currently has enough domestic Pu-238 to fuel any one of these RTGs > (enough for the Pluto probe) -- but not two of them (and Europa Orbiter > by itself would require two). I assume this is because you are assuming a "lander" and not just an or

Re: More jolly Space Station news

This is in reply to this and a subsequent message-- > Don't be ridiculous. In a world of 6.5 billion people, lives are cheap. Yes, in the current world context it is completely accurate to say this. But from a moral perspective, one is required to ask *if* and *when* this will change? As the

Re: More jolly Space Station news

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > From: "David M Harland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > INDUSTRIAL SPACE FACILITY > > > > [snip] In reality, however, this revolutionary start-up deal > > had its origins in the Reagan administration's July 1984 call for > > commercialisation of space operations

Re: More jolly Space Station news

On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, David M Harland wrote: > There is no viable alternative to the Shuttle for human spaceflight. > It is now running about as efficiently as it ever will. It is simply > a costly business. Huh? Does anyone know what the costs are for the Russian missions? If they will take

Re: More jolly Space Station news

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > Forgive me for saying so, but you have a complete bee in your bonnet on the > urgency of asteroid deflection. Bruce, it is precisely because I understand the laws of statistics that I have such a bee. I have sat at the roulette tables in Las Vegas att

Re: More jolly Space Station news

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, David M Harland wrote: > >> I disagree, the problem is its functionality has been pared back to > >> much, it needs to be expanded! > > > >Hogwash. Its real cost was always ridiculously disproportionate to the size > >of the scientific benefits it would supposedly produce

Re: More jolly Space Station news

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > It's what it has been from the start: some kind of thermionic nuclear > generator converting the heat from Pu-238 into electrical energy. However, > NASA would like to develop a new system more efficient at this conversion > than the current RTGs, ther

Re: More jolly Space Station news

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Gary McMurtry wrote: > So, we got it. Now, we have the space > station to give the shuttles someplace to go when they're not > launching satellites, fixing telescopes, bore-bore-bore, etc. I've read someplace, perhaps "The Case for Mars", that the space station was desig

Re: More jolly Space Station news

On Sun, 7 Oct 2001, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > "NASA believes it has whittled its $4.8 billion shortfall on the Space > Station to about $500 million, but that only buys a three-man crew -- barely > enough to keep the station operating, and woefully inadequate for > 'world-class science'. To my way

What about the power source?

I was under the impression that there was still no solution, particularly no flight-tested solution to the problem of a long term radioactive power source. Has this problem been solved? If so do they plan to test it in space before they fly it all the way to Jupiter? Thanks, Robert == You a

Re: Chemoautotrophas

> And isn't sulfides one thing that Europa has in spades? National > Geographic recently had an article about a cave in Mexico that abounds in > strange forms of acid loving bacteria... I'll try to dig up a reference > if anyone's interested. The book you want to read is "Dark Life" by Michae

Re: Failure IS an option

Bruce wrote: > ... for the simple reason that MGS' photos have a top resolution of > fully 1.4 meters per pixel -- which means there's no way they could possibly > show the lander as anything more than a speck composed of 2 or 3 pixels, > which would thus show absolutely nothing about its land