Lesbian Bodies

In article <0IudnQf6dPsDmwbeRVn-rA DeleteThis @adelphia.com>, Jim Lillie wrote:
> Would not the Earth & Luna possibly fit also?
> I remember reading once that Luna's orbit is always concave to Sol,
> never becomes concave or retrogard.
>
The barycentre of the Earth-Moon system is IIRC below the
surface of the Earth.
M(e) 5.98 * 10^24 kg ; r(e) = 6.37 * 10^6 m
M(m) 7.36 * 10^22 kg ; r(m) = 1.74 * 10^6 m
O(m) [radius moon's orbit] = 3.84 * 10^8 m

Let the earth be X m from the barycentre,
Then the moon is O(m) - X m from the barycentre.

M(e) * X = M(m) * [O(m) - X]
rearrange to get X on it's own:
X = M(m) *O(m) / [M(e) + M(m)]

X = 7.36*10^22 * 3.84*10^8 / [5.98*10^24 + 7.36*10^22]
= 28.2624*10^30 / [ 605.36*10^22 ]
= 0.046686930091185410334346504559271 * 10^8 m
= 4.67 * 10^6m
That's about 2/3 of the way from the centre of the Earth to it's
surface. 1600 km below the surface.

--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: +57d10' , -02d09' (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233
Written at Sun, 11 Dec 2005 12:34 GMT
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

JRS: In article <0IudnQf6dPsDmwbeRVn-rA DeleteThis @adelphia.com>, dated Sat, 10
Dec 2005 11:47:43 local, seen in news:alt.books.larry-niven, Jim Lillie
<jimlillie DeleteThis @adelphia.net> posted :

>I remember reading once that Luna's orbit is always concave to Sol,
>never becomes concave or retrogard.
>
>Asking - I am not an expert or have good reference available.

It's easily enough calculated if you remember the length of the year and
the month, and the distances to the Sun and the Moon.

The force on the Moon from each other body is proportional to v^2/r or
w^2*r and w is inversely proportional to the period

Sun : distance 150,000,000, period 1, so force 150,000,000
Earth : distance 400,000, period 1/12, so force 400,000*150

The force from the Earth is about 40% of that from the Sun, so the
Moon's true path always curves towards the Sun, rather like the edge of
a 20p piece.

See also <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/gravity3.htm#Moon>.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

In article <fIxm7.2485$lk6.886338@orpheusnews>, Ginevra M. Longbottom
wrote:
> >> There is a problem with sphericity, in that large objects far from the
> >> sun can be more oblongular than much smaller objects near to the sun.
>
> > A Angleskii, pozhalista? ("In English, please?")
>
> Some cold knobbly objects are much larger than some warm round objects.
>
Unless the local albedo of the surface varies in quite a complex and
co-ordinated manner, then an irregular object will have an irregular light
curve. And by Occam's Razor, if you see a smooth light curve, you can
deduce a close approach to sphericity in the reflection source. On the
contrary, from an irregular light curve one can make some deductions about
the shape of the object. (The third inversion that was used to deduce the
surface albedo variations of Pluto is a special case dependant from the
series of occultations of Pluto by Charon through the 1980s.)

> > ObNiven : Is Jinx a planet or a moon? Yes.
>
> ObNiven: is Persephone mentioned as a 'tenth planet' by Niven?
>
Hmmm, I'd have to find my copy of Protector to answer that.

--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: +57d10' , -02d09' (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233
Written at Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:53 GMT
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

Jim Lillie wrote:

> Ginevra M. Longbottom wrote:

>> Pluto & Charon are more of a double-planetesimal, being the solar
>> system's most equal pair in size, and also the only pair where the
>> barycentre is above the surface of the larger body.

> Would not the Earth & Luna possibly fit also?

Yes, but they're a double planet.


> I remember reading once that Luna's orbit is always concave to Sol

That's right, though I first encountered it via a huge exhibit at
the Science Museum, where you could actually see the curvatures.


Ginevra

--
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

Aidan wrote:

> Ginevra wrote:

>>>> There is a problem with sphericity, in that large objects far from
>>>> the sun can be more oblongular than smaller objects near to the sun.

>>> A Angleskii, pozhalista? ("In English, please?")

>> Some cold knobbly objects are much larger than some warm round objects.

> Unless the local albedo of the surface varies in quite a complex and
> co-ordinated manner, then an irregular object will have an irregular
> light curve. And by Occam's Razor, if you see a smooth light curve, you
> can deduce a close approach to sphericity in the reflection source. On
> the contrary, from an irregular light curve one can make some deductions
> about the shape of the object.

Yes, but the point wasn't that it's hard to determine sphericity; it was
that sphericity is not a suitable criterion for object discrimination.


>>> ObNiven : Is Jinx a planet or a moon? Yes.

>> ObNiven: is Persephone mentioned as a 'tenth planet' by Niven?

> Hmmm, I'd have to find my copy of Protector to answer that.

Anyone?


Ginevra

--
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

In article <fIxm7.2485$lk6.886341@orpheusnews>, Ginevra M. Longbottom wrote:
> >> Some cold knobbly objects are much larger than some warm round objects.
>
[SNIP my reply]
>
> Yes, but the point wasn't that it's hard to determine sphericity; it was
> that sphericity is not a suitable criterion for object discrimination.
>
We're in agreement that a determination of sphericity (within certain
degrees of precision/ smoothness) is do-able (which is good, because it's a
routine, if tedious, set of observations to make).
In fact, given that you need to be able to *see* your object on at
least 3 different occasions in order to determine it's orbit (Gauss's work,
wasn't it, in about 1801, for processing the orbital data for Ceres), then
you've already got the basis for a light curve (one datum = a measurement ;
2 data = a (dis)agreement ; 3 data = either a majority opinion or a trend ;
more data = refined measurement). So, you've already got some of the
necessary data.

While it is *possible* to build a near-spherical object by stochastic
processes, it is at least unlikely (tested against the null hypothesis that
random processes will on average generate irregular objects) that you will
generate a spherical object with only stochastic accumulation. The
observational fact that many small objects are irregular, but all large
objects are spherical agrees with this expectation. That suggests that the
development of high sphericity is something that happens in the process of
building an object, and that's not a property that the object then loses
(arguable exception - if it's totally disrupted ; counter-example Earth-Moon
becoming spherical after their violent formation)

So I would posit that, being observable, being derived from
necessary-to-collect data, and being indicative of a genetic phase in the
development of stiff bodies, then the observation of light curves and using
it to estimate the object's sphericity is a useful observation to make, and
to report.
(The fact that the astronomical literature frequently refers to this
sort of data makes me confident that my thinking is similar to their.)

--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: +57d10' , -02d09' (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233
Written at Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:40 GMT
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

JRS: In article <fIxm7.2485$lk6.886338@orpheusnews>, dated Fri, 9 Dec
2005 19:45:24 local, seen in news:alt.books.larry-niven, Ginevra M.
Longbottom <ginevra_ml@orpheusnet.?> posted :
>
>ObNiven: is Persephone mentioned as a 'tenth planet' by Niven?

Persephone is mentioned as a ninth planet (and Pluto as a non-planet) in
"The Borderland Of Sol", shortly before they leave Jinx. Look for
italics.

One can see why authors don't want to put all their work on-line for
reading. But it would be good to have a search engine which would
return, say, the work, chapter, percentage position, and perhaps
sentence.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

Dr John Stockton wrote:
> JRS: In article <0IudnQf6dPsDmwbeRVn-rA.DeleteThis@adelphia.com>, dated Sat, 10
> Dec 2005 11:47:43 local, seen in news:alt.books.larry-niven, Jim Lillie
> <jimlillie.DeleteThis@adelphia.net> posted :
>
>
>>I remember reading once that Luna's orbit is always concave to Sol,
>>never becomes concave or retrogard.
>>
>>Asking - I am not an expert or have good reference available.
>
>
> It's easily enough calculated if you remember the length of the year and
> the month, and the distances to the Sun and the Moon.
>
> The force on the Moon from each other body is proportional to v^2/r or
> w^2*r and w is inversely proportional to the period
>
> Sun : distance 150,000,000, period 1, so force 150,000,000
> Earth : distance 400,000, period 1/12, so force 400,000*150
>
> The force from the Earth is about 40% of that from the Sun, so the
> Moon's true path always curves towards the Sun, rather like the edge of
> a 20p piece.
>
> See also <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/gravity3.htm#Moon>.
>

Thank you sir for an excellent response.

Jim Lillie Digital design engineer, retired.
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

Dr John Stockton wrote:

> Ginevra M. Longbottom wrote:

>> ObNiven: is Persephone mentioned as a 'tenth planet' by Niven?

> Persephone is mentioned as a ninth planet (and Pluto as a non-planet) in
> "The Borderland Of Sol", shortly before they leave Jinx. Look for
> italics.

Oooh thanks John, I'll tell Aidan.


> One can see why authors don't want to put all their work on-line for
> reading. But it would be good to have a search engine which would
> return, say, the work, chapter, percentage position, and perhaps
> sentence.

Maybe, but intellectual discussion on Usenet of other series of books
is greatly aided by having complete etexts of the author's output.


Ginevra

--
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

JRS: In article <fIxm7.2485$lk6.886344@orpheusnews>, dated Wed, 14 Dec
2005 00:57:55 local, seen in news:alt.books.larry-niven, Ginevra M.
Longbottom <ginevra_ml@orpheusnet.?> posted :
>Dr John Stockton wrote:

>> One can see why authors don't want to put all their work on-line for
>> reading. But it would be good to have a search engine which would
>> return, say, the work, chapter, percentage position, and perhaps
>> sentence.
>
>Maybe, but intellectual discussion on Usenet of other series of books
>is greatly aided by having complete etexts of the author's output.

But that does nothing much for the authors' finances, and is unlikely to
appeal to owners of copyright.

Intellectual discussion of books is best done by those who have copies
of the books, have read them repeatedly, and have ready access to a
concordance. The suggested engine would provide in effect a
concordance.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

In article <-qidnQyr2cPNCwTeRVn-vA DeleteThis @adelphia.com>, Jim Lillie wrote:
> Fundamental - none.
> If Ceres is large enough to be spherical and possibly internaly
> differentiated, then only tradition for size makes it non-planetary.
> Good test case to 'prove' (old meaning) a new rule.
>
Indeed it's a good proof case.
I'm wondering if it's *possible* for something to become
spherical without actually differentiating (to some degree, at least)
internally. That's the geologist in me thinking.
Corollary though - and relevant to all the SF universes with
people mining the asteroids - the little rocks that haven't
differentiated are going to have little in the way of veins of minerals
in them. Fragments of shattered larger (and differentiated) bodies are
a different issue, but not intact bodies.

--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: +57d10' , -02d09' (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233
Written at Fri, 09 Dec 2005 21:48 GMT
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

In article <VA.00000a02.22384253.RemoveThis@validemailaddresstoa.news.group>,
Aidan Karley wrote:

> In article <na.0b2f2a4dcb.a806e0tennant.RemoveThis@orpheusmail.co.uk>,
> Tennant Stuart wrote:

>> What if one set of breeders was the most powerful culture on the planet,
>> using technology to survive the damage it was doing to the environment,
>> whilst harming the potential descendants of rival sets of breeders?

> And the bastard offspring of the dominant culture outside the political
> control of the dominant culture? From the machinations of Teela in
> Ringworld Engineers to get Louis to toast 5% of the Ringworld's
> population, it's evident that Protector's motivations don't play the "I
> care about descendants in one location more than another location" game.
> And I'd bet that the externally-domiciled descendants of a certain
> temporarily dominant culture number more than 15 million (5% of 300
> million). So, protectors don't have much choice but to protect the
> planet rather than the particular location. (One could come to the same
> conclusion from a "atmospheres don't stop at political borders"
> argument, but Dubya the First might think we're being anti-American, and
> the climate in Cuba is so sweaty this decade.)

Wouldn't such a history call him George the Second?


>>>> Spelunker!

>>> Guilty. The next issue (or a couple further) of Cave and Karst Science
>>> may have a paper in it which I contributed to. More work this summer
>>> coming, it would seem too.

>> I only knew the word from playing Adventure, many moons ago.

> But you managed to associate it (correctly) with GG.

In those days, it was just so exciting to type in the command HELP, and
see a block of text appear with both upper & lower case letters.


>> Aren't there now mobile phones where GPS is merely one more feature?

> Mobiles are intermittently banned. Currently the flavour is that they
> must be stowed in your baggage at check-in, switched off, and NEVER
> switched on while on board. But I wouldn't be in the least surprised to
> sdee you having to leave them at the heliport again (which is a right
> royal pain in the proverbials, both for the workforce and for the
> heliport management). Actually, if you fly out of Blackpool heliport (or
> Morcambe Bay, or Liverpool), you still have to leave your phones onshore
> because the rigs are close enough inshore that you can sometimes get
> mobile service. To quote an OIM of my acquaintance "I want to be able to
> take a hammer to one box in the Radio Room and *know* that no
> information is leaving the rig without my say-so."

That will end when we all have subcutaneous mobile phone chips.


> None of which affect the fact that GPS signals don't penetrate through
> steel plate (or aluminium foil, or Hastelloy 516 mesh). And since I don't
> use my laptop in the open air, and do have to quote wellbore positions
> to a precision of +/- 3 mm ... well, I'd rather not be unnecessarily
> misleading.

Will Galileo be up to such a precision?


>>> phrase of NMEA. Do-able without rocket science.

>> Or just have a lookup table for the wi-fi hub currently in use.

> WiFi hub? I've still never seen WiFi in use. Anywhere. Ever.

Oh, some people wander around with handsets that pick up what's going.


> In a corporate network environment composed of fixed workstations with
> minimal local storage (i.e. everything has to be stored on a network
> drive), and with the necessary lock-down on installation of new hardware
> (to prevent data theft through a USB memory stick), would you view WiFi
> as anything other than a massive security hole?

IME everybody leaves massive security holes.


> Mobile workers with laptops? - if they're part of your company, the
> laptops already have the appropriate remote management and locked-down
> environment on them. If they're not part of your company's network, then
> they don't matter. Let's give you an idea of how much provision is made
> for personal usage - the best equipped rig I've seen as far as personal
> access to the Internet goes had 3 PCs (locked down, only a floppy drive
> available) for a POB (persons on board) of 170 people working 3 weeks
> on/ 3 weeks off. The same company has, in the last couple of months,
> rejigged all network permissions so that you could either log on as a
> "job title" (e.g. 'Wellsite Geologist, Smith Installation') when you
> have access to network drives, the internal network, and email OR you
> had to log on personally (e.g. "aidan.karley") when you could only
> access the company's web gateway. Specifically, as a personal user, you
> could not use email except through something like Yahoo or HotMail. Oh,
> and getting a personal account would take a minimum of 2 weeks. That is
> how much personal utility is valued. (Actually, the main reason that the
> network was opened up to this extent for personal use is that several
> voice phone lines were constantly engaged with people trying to make
> arrangements for their flights home, and other people were losing
> working time forwarding faxes for other people, which costs money!
> Cheaper to allow some email access and to be able to lose 24 hour cover
> in the Radio Room (about $100,000 per year).

Or implement pigeon post.


>>> Ho hum. Midnight approaching and Lara Croft has fallen to her death
>>> for the enough'th time tonight. I feel a snooze coming on.

>> Hold down both shifts while hitting the B & N keys for Lara to join you
>> in her Babydoll Nightie...

> This is a previously-unencountered combination of "holding down a shift"
> and "Lara in a Babydoll Nightie". Shouldn't I stop holding down her
> shift in order to grab something more interesting?

The B & N keys are sufficiently close together that your right hand is free.


> (Besides, Lara sleeps in her skin. Isn't it obvious?)

Ooh, which version do you have?


Tennant

--
____ ____ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ ____
(_ _)( ___)( \( )( \( ) /__\ ( \( )(_ _) Greetings to family
)( )__) ) ( ) ( /(__)\ ) ( )( friends & neighbours
(__) (____)(_)\_)(_)\_)(__)(__)(_)\_) (__) @orpheus.co.uk & MCR
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies 

In article <na.d8acd04de5.a806e0tennant.TakeThisOut@orpheusmail.co.uk>, Tennant Stuart
wrote:
> > Morcambe Bay, or Liverpool), you still have to leave your phones onshore
> > because the rigs are close enough inshore that you can sometimes get
> > mobile service. To quote an OIM of my acquaintance "I want to be able to
> > take a hammer to one box in the Radio Room and *know* that no
> > information is leaving the rig without my say-so."
>
> That will end when we all have subcutaneous mobile phone chips.
>
No it won't. For years, all medication has been required to be handed
in to the medic and doled out one dose at a time. That was embarrassing
enough for me when I had a STD with cream to apply three times a day (and
quite a pretty medic lassie too!), but at least I was working on the same
shifts as the medic, not 12 hours out of sync. I know several people already
who smuggle their heart medication and diabetes medication out to the rig,
because they don't want to lose their jobs. After that, having sub-cutaneous
electronics ripped out is only to be expected. We already get thoroughly
"wanded" with electronics and metal sensors - can't take a MP3 player onto
the flight these days, for example, that cam in between early Nov and mid
Dec.
What was the name of that Reading University professor (Information
Science or something) who made a fuss of being implanted with cybernetic
devices about 5 years ago? He got firmly and painfully probed a couple of
years ago and was detained for a number of hours leaving America (had no
problem getting in!) while the FBI were called because of his refusal to
"co-operate". Someone couldn't understand "I can't remove it - it's built
in".

> > misleading.
>
> Will Galileo be up to such a precision?
>
Not directly, but I would expect it to have a differential version. I
doubt that it's signals would be able to get through steel plate either ;
but to be better than GPS it only needs to be able to penetrate wet leaves
or re-bar in concrete.

> > WiFi hub? I've still never seen WiFi in use. Anywhere. Ever.
>
> Oh, some people wander around with handsets that pick up what's going.
>
On several occasions I've proposed doing a wardrive one day to the
local LUG. Whether there'd be anything to pick up is a moot point - there do
actually appear to be some relatively clueful security people in major local
companies.

> > (to prevent data theft through a USB memory stick), would you view WiFi
> > as anything other than a massive security hole?
>
> IME everybody leaves massive security holes.
>
If you've physical access, yes there are holes. But since network
connections can't be relied on (satellite link to shore, or phone line
running through 100-mile pipelines ; fiber-optic is a posh luxury the
Noggins get).

> > in the Radio Room (about $100,000 per year).
>
> Or implement pigeon post.
>
Pigeons cost money. So does complying with the mail-forwarding laws,
so sending paperwork or manuals out to the rig through the post is a good
way to get the client seriously pissed off. Actually, carrying manuals is
being clamped down on now - they want you to put it onto a freight chopper
not in your baggage. Ha ha.


--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: +57d10' , -02d09' (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233
Written at Sun, 08 Jan 2006 08:28 GMT
 >> Stay informed about: Lesbian Bodies