PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet, 70/2000 - 21 June 2000
------------------------------
"A 1999 survey on the public's
understanding of science shows that
while Americans' confidence and interest
in science and technology
is very high, their understanding of
basic science facts and
principles remains quite low. [...] Only
50 percent of Americans
know how long it takes Earth to circle
the sun [...] The
scientific process isn't well understood
either. Only 21 percent
of those surveyed were able to explain
what it means to study
something scientifically, just over half
understood probability,
and only a third knew how an experiment
is conducted. Most of what
Americans know about science comes from
television and newspapers,
the report says, citing widespread
consensus among scientists and
journalists that important information
about science and
technology is not reaching the public.
It also cites several
surveys that show belief in the
pseudoscience is commonplace in
the U.S. and traces this belief to the
entertainment industry.”
-- National
Science Foundation, 19 June 2000
(1) WATER LEAKS FUEL WILD INTERNET SPECULATIONS
SpaceDaily, 20 June 2000
(2) THE 1998 LEONID METEOR SHOWER
Harvey Leifert <HLeifert@agu.org>
(3) NATURAL HAZARD CAUCUS
Harvey Leifert <HLeifert@agu.org>
(4) COOL BRITANNIA: GLOBAL WARMING NEITHER GLOBAL NOR WARMING
Ananova News, 19 June 2000
(5) TRUE BELIEVERS: AMERICANS HAVE CONFIDENCE IN SCIENCE, BUT
LACK UNDERSTANDING
Michelle Edwards <medwards@nsf.gov>
(6) HADEAN (4.5 - 3.8 Ga) ASTEROID BOMBARDMENT AND THE ORIGIN OF
LIFE
Andrew Glikson <geospectral@spirit.com.au>
(7) MEASURING METEOR DECELERATIONS BY RADAR
Duncan Steel <D.I.Steel@salford.ac.uk>
(8) 1570's CIRCLE OF FIRE
Duncan A. Lunan <astra@dlunan.freeserve.co.uk>
(9) AUGUST 1571
Mark Bailey <meb@star.arm.ac.uk>
(10) A MECHANISM FOR INTERSTELLAR CREATION
Andy Nimmo <andy-nimmo@ntlworld.com>
(11) AND FINALLY: MACHINE-AGE LOOMS TEMPORALLY REMOTE?
Bob Kobres <bkobres@uga.edu>
================
(1) WATER LEAKS FUEL WILD INTERNET SPECULATIONS
From SpaceDaily, 20 June 2000
http://www.marsdaily.com/water.html
NASA To Reveal New Evidence For Water On Mars
Washington - June 20, 2000 - NASA is expected to make an
announcement
Thursday next week concerning an important new discovery from
data
collected by the Mars Global Surveyor currently in orbit about
Mars.
Speculation on the Internet has been running wild since late
Monday
when word came of a special White House briefing by NASA of
something
new that has been found on Mars.
After discounting the usual wild ideas of winking faces and what
not,
the money appears to be on some sort of discovery relating to
water at
a low point in the Valles Marineris where the atmospheric
pressure of
Mars may be high enough to allow standing water.
Meanwhile, NASA Watch is reporting that a paper is under
preparation by
members of the MGS Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team for submission
to Science magazine. NASA Watch further reports "Informed
sources
within NASA suggest that the article may be concerned with water
ice
and the Valles Marineris region of Mars."
Additional speculation has focused on outgassing or volcanic
processes
being observed over an extended period. Although Mars still has
the
potential for volcanic activity the planet is largely cooled with
only
occasional eruptions.
Copyright 2000, SpaceDaily
===========
(2) THE 1998 LEONID METEOR SHOWER
From Harvey Leifert <HLeifert@agu.org>
American Geophysical Union
Geophysical Research Letters
Highlights of This Issue - July 1, 2000
I. Highlights
Leonid meteor shower 1998: Special Section
The 1998 Leonid shower was the best since the storm of 1966. The
high
fluxes of visible meteors provided a rare opportunity to study
the
effects of meteors on the upper atmosphere. The nights of 16-18
November 1998 were particularly rich in bright fireballs, some
as
bright as the full Moon. Many left in their wakes spectacular
chemiluminescent trails that remained visible for as long as 30
minutes. The four papers in the special section describe high
resolution lidar and imager observations of these ablation trails
from
a research aircraft flying out of Okinawa, Japan, and at the
Starfire
Optical Range near Albuquerque, New Mexico. These unique
measurements
provide new insights into the chemical processes responsible for
the
persistent ablation trails and the effects of eddy diffusion and
gravity wave dynamics on this region of the upper atmosphere.
1. The lifetimes of the ablation trails observed by the iron and
sodium
lidars are directly related to the chemical lifetimes of the
species
below 90 kilometers [56 miles] and to molecular diffusion above
95 km
[59 mi]. Chu, Pan et al. ["Characteristics of Fe ablation
trails
observed during the 1998 Leonid meteor shower"] use a
molecular
diffusion model to determine that the average age of the trails
is just
over 10 minutes and is strongly altitude dependent. The shortest
ages
were observed below 92 km [57 mi] and above 98 km [61 mi].
2. Kelly et al. ["First observations of long-lived meteor
trains with
resonance lidar and other optical instruments"] measure for
the first
time the sodium densities in the chemiluminescent trails produced
by
the Leonid meteor storm event, and also image the trails in
sodium
light.
3. Chu, Liu et al. ["Lidar observations of elevated
temperatures in
bright chemiluminescent meteor trails during the 1998 Leonid
shower"]
probe seven persistent trails associated with bright fireballs
with a
steerable sodium wind/temperature lidar in New Mexico during the
shower. They suggest that the masses of the meteors range from 1
gram
[.04 ounce] to 1 kilogram [2.2 pounds]. The persistent trails are
especially rich in sodium airglow emissions. The fine structure
of
these emissions, recorded by CCD imagers, suggests that the
airglow is
confined to the walls of a tube which increases in diameter over
time
in response to molecular diffusion. Lidar profiles show clearly
that
temperatures are warmest at edges of the persistent trails where
the
airglow emissions are strongest. Current models of chemical
heating,
however, predict heating rates that are about 100 times smaller
than
observed.
4. Grime et al. ["Meteor trail advection observed during the
1998
Leonid shower"] acquire and track meteor trails with a
Doppler
wind/temperature sodium resonance lidar, and use the spatial
tracking to estimate the region's neutral wind to infer the local
small-scale diffusivity.
**********
II. Authors referenced in the Highlights (in order of
appearance):
1. Xinzhao Chu, Weilin Pan, George Papen, Gary Swenson, Chester
S.
Gardner, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer
Engineering, U.
Illinois at Urbaba-Champaign, Illinois; Peter Jenniskens, SETI
Inst.,
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California.
2. Michael C. Kelly, Craig Kruschwitz, Pamela Loughmiller, Jaclyn
Engleman, School of Electrical Engin., Cornell U., Ithaca, New
York;
Chester Gardner, Alan Liu, Xinzhao Chu, George Papen, Dept. of
Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering, U. Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, Illinois; Jack Drummond, AFRL/DES, Kirkland
AFB, New
Mexico; Tom Armstrong, Los Alamos National Lab., Los Alamos, New
Mexico; Brent Grime, Dept. of Electrical Engin., The Pennsylvania
State
U., University Park, Pennsylvania.
3. Xinzhao Chu, Alan Z. Liu, George Papen, Chester S. Gardner,
Dept. of
Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering, U. Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, Illinois; Michael Kelley, School of Electrical
Engin., Cornell U., Ithaca, New York; Jack Drummond, Robert
Fugate,
AFRL/DES, Kirkland AFB, New Mexico.
4. Brent W. Grime, Timothy J. Kane, Dept. of Electrical Engin.,
The
Pennsylvania State U., University Park, Pennsylvania; Alan Z.
Liu,
George Papen, Chester S. Gardner, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
and
Computer Engineering, U. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Michael C.
Kelley, Craig Kruschwitz, School of Electrical Engin., Cornell
U.,
Ithaca, New York; Jack Drummond, AFRL/DES, Kirkland AFB, New
Mexico.
**********
III. Notes, including ordering information
Authors are listed above, with institutional affiliations, in
the
order in which their papers appear in these Highlights. This
information is not repeated in this form in GRL itself.
The Highlights and the papers to which they refer are not under
AGU
embargo.
Journalists and public information officers of educational and
scientific institutions (only) may receive one or more of the
papers
cited in the Highlights; send a message to Daryl Tate <dtate@agu.org>,
indicating which one(s). Include your name, the name of your
publication, and your fax number. If you did not receive this
message
directly from AGU, i.e., if you are not on the AGU distribution
list,
please provide your title, physical address, and phone number as
well.
Harvey Leifert
Public Information Manager
American Geophysical Union
2000 Florida Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20009
U.S.A.
Phone (direct): +1 (202) 777-7507
Phone (toll-free in North America): (800) 966-2481 x507
Fax: +1 (202) 328-0566
Email: hleifert@agu.org
===================
(3) NATURAL HAZARD CAUCUS
From Harvey Leifert <HLeifert@agu.org>
American Geophysical Union
June 16, 2000
AGU RELEASE NO. 00-18
For Immediate Release
Contact: Harvey Leifert
(202) 777-7507
hleifert@agu.org
Congressional Natural Hazards Caucus to hold first forum
WASHINGTON - The recently formed Congressional Natural Hazards
Caucus
will hold its first forum on reducing America's vulnerability to
disasters on Wednesday, June 21, at 11:00 A.M., in Room 124 of
the
Dirksen Senate Office Building.
Speakers at this session will be James Lee Witt, Director of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency; Dr. Bernadine Healy,
President of
the American Red Cross; Eric Tolbert, North Carolina's Director
of
Emergency Management; John Jones, Deputy director of the National
Weather Service; Harvey Ryland, President of the Institute for
Business
and Home Safety; and Dr. William Hooke, Senior Fellow of the
American
Meteorological Society.
The caucus was created to develop a wider understanding within
Congress
of the value of reducing the risks and costs of natural
disasters.
Jurisdiction for natural hazards programs is spread among many
committees, each of which handles only a piece of the overall
effort to
prevent and mitigate natural disasters. A caucus can provide the
"big
picture" to interested lawmakers and their staffs, and it
gives them
the opportunity to see how the issues that fall within individual
committee jurisdictions fit into a larger national effort.
Co-chairs of
the caucus are Senators Ted Stevens (R-AK) and John Edwards
(D-NC).
The Natural Hazards Caucus is supported by a working group of
scientific and engineering societies, including the American
Geophysical Union, along with private sector companies concerned
with disasters. (A list of members of the caucus and of the
working
group is appended to this document.)
Among the objectives of the caucus are:
Improve understanding of the need to mitigate
against the impacts
of floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, landslides and land
subsidence,
tornadoes, volcanoes, wind storms, drought, fire, and tsunamis.
Foster better land-use planning and optimize
building codes.
Strengthen public and private support for science
and engineering
research by demonstrating how application of advances in science
and engineering research can contribute to saving lives and
money.
Support the implementation of new technologies, such
as
geographic information systems, to address societal challenges
faced
by state and local government and the private sector.
**********
Members of the Congressional Natural Hazards Caucus
Sen.. Ted Stevens (R-AK), Co-Chair
Sen. John Edwards (D-NC), Co-Chair
Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI)
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Sen. Robert Torricelli (D-NJ)
Sen. Frank Murkowski (R-AK)
Sen. Thad Cochrane (R-MS)
Sen. John Breaux (D-LA)
Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-WV)
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY)
Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA)
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI)
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND)
Members of the Natural Hazards Caucus Working Group
American Geological Institute
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Red Cross
American Society of Civil Engineers
Association of American State Geologists
Association of State Flood Plain Managers
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Emergency Information Infrastructure Project
Geo-Institute of ASCE
Geological Society of America
Institute for Business & Home Safety
International Association of Emergency Managers
IRIS Consortium
National Emergency Management Association
Multihazard Mitigation Council of the National Institute of
Building Sciences
Reinsurance Association of America
Seismological Society of America
State Farm
Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE
Telcordia
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Western Disaster Center
=================
(4) COOL BRITANNIA: GLOBAL WARMING NEITHER GLOBAL NOR WARMING
From Ananova News, 19 June 2000
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/climate_sea-uk_158567.html
Britain cooling during global warming
Hopes of basking in Mediterranean sunshine as global warming
changes
Britain's climate may be premature, according to new research.
The reality is that the weather in Britain and the rest of
north-west
Europe is likely to get colder during the next 100 years.
The reason is what is predicted to happen to the Gulf Stream,
which
guarantees the temperate climate of the British Isles. Thanks to
this
ocean current, which acts as a "conveyor belt" bringing
warm water
across the Atlantic from the Gulf of Mexico, the climate of
north-west
Europe is up to 10C warmer than it ought to be.
But new research suggests that the "conveyor belt"
might be switched
off over the next century. So while global warming heats up other
parts
of the world, Britons may have to put up with icy winters and
miserable
wet summers.
Scientists from the University of East Anglia and the British
Antarctic
Survey came to the conclusion after following the path of a
tracer
chemical added to the water of the Greenland Sea. The experiment
was
part of an investigation into the complex way ocean waters
circulate
and mix.
Team member Professor Andrew Watson said: "The conveyor belt
mechanism
is a giant central heating system for keeping our part of the
world
warmer than it would otherwise be. We need to understand better
the
processes that sustain it and try to estimate its effects on
climate
should it switch off."
The research is presented as one of the exhibits at the New
Frontiers
of Science exhibition being held at the Royal Society in London
from
tomorrow.
Copyright 2000, Ananova News
================
(5) AMERICANS HAVE CONFIDENCE IN SCIENCE, BUT LACK UNDERSTANDING
Michelle Edwards <medwards@nsf.gov>
Media contact:
June 19, 2000
Charles Drum
NSF PR 00-45 (NSB 00-131)
(703) 306-1070/cdrum@nsf.gov
Program contact:
Melissa Pollak
(703) 306-1775 ext. 6931/mpollak@nsf.gov
NEWEST SURVEY SHOWS MOST AMERICANS HAVE CONFIDENCE IN SCIENCE,
BUT LACK UNDERSTANDING
Science & Engineering Indicators 2000 reports new data
A 1999 survey on the public's understanding of science shows that
while
Americans' confidence and interest in science and technology is
very
high, their understanding of basic science facts and principles
remains
quite low.
The results of the survey are published in the National Science
Board's
(NSB) biennial report to the President for Congress on the state
of
U.S. science, engineering and technology, Science &
Engineering
Indicators 2000. The survey results show a slight
improvement in
public understanding of certain scientific principles over the
last two
decades. However, the improvement has been paralleled by a
widespread
belief in pseudosciences such as astrology, alien abductions and
extrasensory perception.
The vast majority of Americans say that science and technology
are
making their lives better, and describe their general reaction to
science and technology with words like "hope" and
"wonder." In
contrast, only 17 percent of respondents to the National Science
Foundation supported survey for S&E Indicators described
themselves as
well informed about new scientific discoveries and the use of new
inventions and technologies. Thirty percent said they were poorly
informed.
Answering a series of 20 questions designed to test basic
knowledge,
only 50 percent of Americans know how long it takes Earth to
circle the
sun, and most still can't correctly describe in their own words
some
basic scientific terms, including molecules, the Internet, and
DNA,
marking little improvement over surveys conducted in 1995 and
1997.
The scientific process isn't well understood either. Only
21 percent
of those surveyed were able to explain what it means to study
something
scientifically, just over half understood probability, and only a
third
knew how an experiment is conducted.
Most of what Americans know about science comes from television
and
newspapers, the report says, citing widespread consensus among
scientists and journalists that important information about
science and
technology is not reaching the public. It also cites several
surveys
that show belief in the pseudoscience is commonplace in the U.S.
and
traces this belief to the entertainment industry.
"Americans in the next decade will be asked to make
important decisions
that will involve highly technical issues such as genetically
engineered crops and the preservation of biodiversity," says
NSF
director Rita Colwell. "To understand these issues, the
public must be
better informed about basic science and engineering, as well as
the
scientific process."
Even if they don't understand it, Americans respect science. In
1999 a
record 82 percent voiced support for federal funding of basic
research.
While 14 percent thought the government was spending too much on
research, 37 percent said not enough, the report says. Americans
consistently believe that the benefits of scientific research
outweigh
any harmful results. Public confidence in the medical and
scientific
communities, the report points out, is higher than in other
American
institutions, including education, the Supreme Court, television,
and
the media.
-NSB-
For more information see: http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind00/start.htm
Also see: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/press/00/pr_indicators.htm
============================
* LETTERS TO THE MODERATOR
============================
(6) HADEAN (4.5 - 3.8 Ga) ASTEROID BOMBARDMENT AND THE ORIGIN OF
LIFE
From Andrew Glikson <geospectral@spirit.com.au>
Research School of Earth Science, Australian National University,
Canberra, ACT 0200
Dear Benny,
In this letter I point out terrestrial life survived during early
episodes of heavy asteroid bombardment which recurred during the
Archaean as late as c. 3.2 Ga, as well as to factors which favour
the existence of life on Earth in pre-3.8 Ga ("Hadean")
times.
This contrasts with suggestions cited in CCNet (13.6.2000) from
Nicholas Wade's article (New York Times, 13.6.2000) regarding
conditions in pre-3.8 Ga times: "The surface of the earth is
molten rock. The oceans are steam or superheated water. Every so
often a wandering asteroid slams in with such energy that any
incipient crust of hardened rock is melted again and the oceans
are reboiled to an incandescent mist. Welcome to Hades, or at
least to what geologists call the Hadean interval of earth's
history. It is reckoned to have lasted from the planet's
formation
4.6 billion years ago until 3.8 billion years ago, when the rain
of ocean-boiling asteroids ended. The Isua greenstone belt of
western Greenland, one of the oldest known rocks, was formed as
the Hadean interval ended. And amazingly, to judge by chemical
traces in the Isuan rocks, life on earth was already old".
On this basis, it is stated "life seems to pop up almost
instantly
after the last of the titanic asteroid impacts that routinely
sterilized the infant planet." (CCNet (13.6.2000).
I suggest such a conclusion is not borne by the geological
evidence.
That solid crustal rocks existed on Earth at least as far back as
4.27 Ga ago is indicated by detrital zircons in quartzites of the
Mount Narrier - Jack Hills terrain, Western Australia (Compston
and Pidgeon, 1986, Nature, 321, 766-769), and by 3.97 Ga and
older
xenocrystic zircons in the Acasta Gneisses, Slave province
(Bowring et al., 1989, Geology, 17: 971-975) and the Nappier
Complex, Enderby Land, Antarctica (Black, 1988, Precambrian
Research, 38: 355-365). This precludes a totally molten crust
pre-3.8 Ga, as this would have resulted in age resetting of the
older U-Pb zircon ages, particularly parallel to the lunar maria
formation at 3.95-3.80 Ga. The existence of solid crustal domains
pre-3.8 Ga would allow the survival or re-emergence of
chemotropic
bacteria residing in crustal faults and fractures, and possibly
also of transient near-surface bacterial colonies.
Likewise, the lunar impact record suggests that the period
pre-3.8
Ga was affected by episodic bombardment rather than forming a
tail-end of planetary accretion, and that maria formation was
concentrated during 3.95-3.8 Ga (Ryder, 1991, LPI Contr. 746,
42-43; 1997, LPI Contr. 790, 61-62). This is consistent with the
terrestrial evidence for existence of pre-3.8 Ga crustal rocks.
Life could have existed on Earth several hundred million years
prior to the Isua greenstone belt.
The post-3.8 Ga Archaean impact record is likewise episodic, as
suggested by the Ar-Ar impact spherules age data of Culler et al.
(2000, Science, 287, 1785-1789). The most intense meteoritic
bombardment on Earth is recorded at 3.24 - 3.18 Ga by multiple
impact spherule units at the base of the Fig Tree Group,
Barberton, Transvaal, originally detected by Lowe et al., 1989
(Science 245, 959-962) and now established by Ir anomalies,
Ni-chromites and 53/52Cr isotopes. The significance of these
impacts may be corroborated by Culler et al.'s
near-contemporaneous major lunar spherule peak about 3.18 Ga. The
spherule data suggest multiple terrestrial maria-type basins
several hundred km in diameter about 3.24-3.227 Ga (Byerly and
Lowe, 1994, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta, 58, 3469-3486; Shukloyukov
et al., Proceeding Conference on Impacts and the Early Earth,
Cambridge, U.K., December, 1998). Stromatolites, which occur at
3.46 Ga in the Pilbara (Hoffman et al., 1999, Geol. Soc. Am.
Bull., 111: 1256-1262) appear to have survived these cataclysmic
impacts.
There is still a tendency to underestimate the survivability of
early as well as present-day life forms. The occurrence in the
upper melt breccia (Onaping Black Member) of the 250 km-large
Sudbury impact structure of isotopically light carbon
(Sudbury-1997 - Lunar and Planet. Instit. Contrib. 922) and the
recently detected nano-bacteria (150-20 nm) in drill cores
derived
from 4-5 km depth and temperatures of 115-170 degrees C (Uwins et
al., 2000, in Glikson and Mastalerz [eds.], Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 421-444) illustrate the extreme conditions under
which micro-organisms may survive.
Despite the large datasets which now exist for the Archaean
(post-3.8 Ga) Earth, little is known regarding its pre-3.8 Ga
history, and even less about contemporaneous surface conditions
on
Mars and other terrestrial planets. For this reason suggestions
of
interplanetary bio-transport, whether import to or export from
Earth, though possible in principle, are of limited help where
the
fundamental question of the origin of life is concerned. The
insights allowed by Paul Davies (The Fifth Miracle, 1998, Penguin
Press) suggests that the fundamental factors inherent in the
origin of the genetic code and phenomenon of life arise from yet
little-understood mathematical principles and biological
hardware/software-type information/complexity laws. With the odds
weighed against accidental formation of complex protein molecules
in the order of 10^130 (Davies, 1998), panspermia import/export
ideas and views of the origin of life as a mere accident merely
avoid the fundamental issue of the underlying principles and the
origin of the phenomenon of life.
Andrew Glikson
Research School of Earth Science
Australian National University
Canberra, ACT 0200
17 June, 2000
============
(7) MEASURING METEOR DECELERATIONS BY RADAR
From Duncan Steel <D.I.Steel@salford.ac.uk>
Dear Benny,
In the issue of CCNet dated 13 June the following paper in ICARUS
was listed:
D. Janches, J.D. Mathews, D.D. Meisel, Q.H. Zhou: Micrometeor
observations using the Arecibo 430 MHz radar I. Determination of
the
ballistic parameter from measured Doppler velocity and
deceleration
results. ICARUS, 2000, Vol.145, No.1, pp.53-63
The abstract finished with the following text:
"We believe these are the first radar meteor decelerations
detected
since those ones reported by J. V. Evans (1966, J. Geophys, Res.
71,
171-188) and F. Verniani (1966, J. Geophys, Res, 71, 2749-2761;
1973,
J. Geophys, Res, 78, 8429-8462) and the first ones for meteors of
this
size."
Unfortunately the authors' belief is erroneous, indicating a lack
of familiarity with much recent work. I will limit my comments to
radar
meteor observations with which I have myself been involved;
others might
care to describe other work in which radar meteor decelerations
have been
presented. I will list only a few papers; there are others
available
in the scientific literature.
Firstly, the AMOR system in New Zealand delivers atmospheric
decelerations
using the classical specular reflection geometry; see, for
example,
W.J. Baggaley, R.G.T. Bennett, D.I. Steel & A.D. Taylor,
'The Advanced Meteor Orbit Radar Facility: AMOR,'
Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 35, 293-320
(1994)
Secondly, a VHF radar located near Adelaide, South Australia, has
been
used to measure speeds and decelerations for meteors propagating
down
the pencil beam towards the radar site:
A.D. Taylor, M.A. Cervera, W.G. Elford & D.I. Steel, 'A new
technique
for radar meteor speed determination: inter-pulse phase changes
from
head echoes,' IAU Colloquium 150: Physics, Chemistry and
Dynamics of
Interplanetary Dust (eds. B.Å.S. Gustafson and M.S. Hanner),
Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, 104, 75-78
(1996).
Thirdly, the same VHF radar has been used to measure meteor
speeds from
the phase variation before closest approach in classical specular
reflection mode, this being of much greater accuracy than
previous speed
determination techniques for this classical mode, making accurate
deceleration measurements feasible through this avenue:
M.A. Cervera, W.G. Elford & D.I. Steel, 'A new method for the
measurement of meteor speeds: The pre-t0 phase technique,' Radio
Science, 32, 805-816, (1997).
Yours sincerely,
Duncan Steel
===============
(8) 1570's CIRCLE OF FIRE
From Duncan A. Lunan <astra@dlunan.freeserve.co.uk>
Re: GREAT BALL OF FIRE IN AUGUST 1571?
Dear Luz,
Although the year isn't exact I think I can shed some light on
your
'circle of fire'. Sunspot activity resumed in 1547 at the end of
the Sporer Minimum. The solar cycles which followed were of
normal
intensity, but there was a major auroral display in 1564,
following
prolonged meteor showers the previous winter. The chronicler John
Stow recorded an exceptional aurora in 1566: "...at night
from seven
of the clock till nine was seen in the element as though the same
had
opened the breadth of a great sheet and showed a great flame of
fire and
then closed again, and as it were at every minute of an hour to
open and
close again, the which I being at the Barrs without Aldgate saw
plain
east as it were over the church called Whitechapel." (‘Barrs’
refers to
the ‘bars’ or barriers which marked the limits of the
city’s
jurisdiction, where tolls were levied – such as Holborn Bar
and Temple
Bar.) He saw still another big aurora in 1574, on 14th November,
coming from a black cloud in the north like the 1173 event. It
was
followed the next night by a major display of a type which Edmund
Halley
later named 'coronal', which is distinguished by a glowing ring
at the
observer's zenith. The references for these are:
1. Dr. Thomas Short, "A General Chronological History of the
Air,
Weather, Seasons, Meteors Etc. in Sundry Places
and at Different
Times", 2 vols., Longman, 1749.
2. James Gairdner, ed., 'Stowe's Memoranda', in "Three
Fifteenth
Century Chronicles with Historical Memoranda by John
Stow, the
Antiquary", Camden Society, 1880.
3. W.H. Newton, "The Face of the Sun", Penguin, 1958.
There were several comets later, but I think the aurora fits the
description better. The comets were:
1577. October. Great Comet in retrograde orbit which inspired
Tycho
Brahe's variant of Copernican
theory. Tycho believed the orbit
was circular; comet was depicted
in Turkey, and later tabulated
by Halley.
1580. Nov. Comet in direct orbit, later tabulated by Halley.
1585. September. Comet in direct orbit, later tabulated by
Halley.
1590. Jan. Comet in retrograde orbit, later tabulated by Halley.
1596. July. Comet in retrograde orbit, later tabulated by Halley.
References for these are:
4. Carl Sagan & Ann Druyan, "Comet", Michael
Joseph, 1985.
5. Sky & Telescope, Dec. 1977 p.452-.
6. Anon, 'Halley's Cometary Studies', in 'Scientific
American Reports
on the 1910 Apparition of Halley's Comet', in
John C. Brandt, ed.,
"Readings from Scientific American:
Comets", W.H. Freeman, 1981.
7. R.A. Lyttleton, 'Comets and Their Origins', in John C.
Brandt, ed.,
"Comets".
====================
(9) AUGUST 1571
From Mark Bailey <meb@star.arm.ac.uk>
Dear Benny,
Re 'GREAT BALL OF FIRE IN AUGUST 1571?'
The entry for 1571 in Thomas Short (1749: `A General
Chronological
History of the Air, Weather, Seasons, Meteors etc'), reads
...Was extreamly intemperate with South Wind, Rain and Fogs. The
Winter
following was much moister, with either continual Rains, Wind, or
Snow,
to the middle of February; then came an intense Cold with
continual
North Wind, and thick dark Air to the Equinox. The following
Spring,
Summer, and even into the Harvest, were very moist and watery,
with a
South Wind, and abundance of fiery meteors; then followed the
Winter,...
Regards,
Mark
================
(10) A MECHANISM FOR INTERSTELLAR CREATION
From Andy Nimmo < andy-nimmo@ntlworld.com
>
How wide is our Sun's shockwave? How many molecular, atomic and
subatomic interstellar dust and/or gas particles will flow round
it in
the lifetime of our Sun? How many different kinds of these will
there
be? How many differing kinds of juxtapositions will result? What
are
the probability odds of at least one or more such juxtapositions
in a
star's lifetime being such as to create one or more molecular
primitive
embryo life forms?
If the calculations are as rigorously pursued as possible with
the
information available to us, as others pointed out, they lead to
the
virtually inevitable conclusion that the odds are very much that
sooner
or later this will be a certainty. Accordingly, somewhere in the
gas
and dust tails behind stars in interstellar space, embryo
molecular
life forms should exist, even if only some nano ancestors of
viruses.
From time to time such star tails will be cut by a passing
interstellar
star, planet, moon, comet, asteroid or whatever, crossing through
them,
either in its oscillation up and down through the gravitational
plane
of our galaxy, or in galactic orbital motion. Because of the
number of
stars in our galaxy and the complexities of their motions, this
should
happen frequently. Our galaxy must positively seethe with rivers
of
such gas and dust particles. From time to time such tails will
flow in
and be absorbed by stars, and those will thereby grow in mass and
move
up the Hertsprung-Russell diagram. Often, when a tail is cut, the
part
immediately behind the cut will be slowed by this cutting. All
the
material behind that slowing part will then begin to ball up into
it.
This will create interstellar asteroids, comets, and sometimes
even
larger objects.
The size of the tail balling up will depend on the size of the
star
whose tail it is, on the density of interstellar matter through
which
it has moved, on the time it has existed and on how much of that
tail
is behind the cut. Really big stars' tails may create baby stars
this
way. - This may explain why there are so many red dwarf stars in
our
galaxy. This hypothesis indicates that such stars should be young
stars
rather than old ones, whereby large stars are the oldies that
have
grown.
Even a baby star would fry any embryo life that we know of.
However
many smaller bodies, particularly comets, moons or planets, might
sometimes provide an environment in which such life forms can
develop
and evolve through eons into something like us, if their host
body is
later captured into orbit round a passing star.
As I'm sure all CCNet readers are aware, the above is not
accepted
theory, but at least some of the theories that are accepted, are
far
too preposterous for me to believe in. Perhaps this modern
accretion
hypothesis for the interstellar creation of stars, planets,
moons,
comets, asteroids - and life, may provide a plausible
alternative.
Andy Nimmo (President, The Space Settlers' Society).
================
(11) AND FINALLY: MACHINE-AGE LOOMS TEMPORALLY REMOTE?
From Bob Kobres < bkobres@uga.edu
>
Woven clothing was being produced on looms 27,000 years ago, far
earlier than had been thought, scientists say.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_790000/790569.stm
By BBC News Online science editor Dr David Whitehouse
It had been thought that the first farmers developed weaving
5,000 to
10,000 years ago. But Professor Olga Soffer of the University of
Illinois, is about to publish details in the journal Current
Anthropology of 90 fragments of clay that have impressions from
woven
fibres.
Prof Soffer first revealed her findings in previous research when
she
said that a 25,000 year old figurine was wearing a woven hat. If
confirmed, this work will change our understanding of distant
ancestors, the so-called Ice Age hunters of the Upper
Palaeolithic
Stone Age. [. . .]
A detailed examination of the impressions reveals a large variety
of
weaving techniques. There are open and closed twines, plain weave
and
nets. Professor Soffer told BBC News Online that twining can be
done by
hand but plain weave needed a loom.
It may be that many stone artefacts found in settlements may not
be
objects of art as had been supposed but parts of an ancient loom,
which
should now be considered as the first machine to be made after
the
wheel and aids such as the axe, club, and flint knife.
This research will force a re-evaluation of our view of ancient
man,
who lived tens of thousands of years ago, before the last Ice Age
had
ended and before the invention of agriculture.
The traditional view is of the male Ice Age hunters working in
groups
to kill large prey such as mammoths. But this may be a distorted
and
incomplete view of their lives.
All that scientists have from these ancient times are mostly
solid
remains such as stone, ivory and bone. Now they have evidence of
textiles.
The discovery that they developed weaving as early as 27,000
years ago
means that we must consider the role that women and children may
have
played more carefully.
The possibility that they made nets has fascinating implications
according to Professor Soffer. It may be that nets were used by
women
and children to catch small prey such as hares and foxes.
By catching food this way, women and children could have made all
the
difference to their communities' food budgets, allowing a surplus
to be
generated that permitted society to grow. [. . .]
Complete article with pictures of imprints:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_790000/790569.stm
Web warped.
bobk
woof woof. . . ;^)
----------------------------------------
THE CAMBRIDGE-CONFERENCE NETWORK (CCNet)
----------------------------------------
The CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe,
please contact the moderator Benny J Peiser < b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk
>.
Information circulated on this network is for scholarly and
educational use only. The attached information may not be copied
or
reproduced for any other purposes without prior permission of the
copyright holders. The fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from
February 1997 on, can be found at http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html