Robotic Asteroid Flyby Scanning Technology - What Equipment Could Be Used?

Some Interesting Points on What a Robotic Asteroid Flyby (Remote Data
Acquisition) might consist of, in general terms, that avoids the
necessity of "gravity traps" inherent in Moon or Mars landings, and
the sort of useless technology that helps to perpetrate boondoggle
exploits of most of U.S.'s eventual abysmally expensive budgeting, (by
both our NASA and Congress), should help to bring about a new "gold
rush", as long as our most popular, yet most monstrously prohibitive
mountain of Congressional pork and anti-space rhetoric is overcome -
by a hugely massive leap into overcoming the curse of super-heavy
lift, earth-to-orbit technology, that so many at the Fed seem to
overlook. If this (simple enough) task were overcome, by eliminating
the barriers to space exploration on-the-cheap, then there not only
would be more competition, but the asteroids would open up a new gold
rush, not unlike what America experienced in the 1800's.

Vessels which bring more scanning and radar equipment are key for an
initial flyby, to be followed up later with mining and cargo ships. A
robotic flyby would consist of a radar system passing the data from a
matched filter to a subsystem, referred to as a Detection Processor
(DP), that accomplishes data compression by comparing the matched
filtered data to a threshold. The potential targets (i.e., those that
exceed the threshold) are flagged and the remaining data may be
rejected. A block diagram of one possible general DP structure is
shown he http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif

At the input of the DP is the MCA, or Multi-Channel Analyzer, which
involves a FWD radix-4 and INVERSE radix-4 pipeline FFT. After the
MCA, is a magnitude calculation which involves a subsystem that
approximates the magnitude to the I and Q samples, where I is the
intensity of the signal and Q is the number of samples over the block
size. Next an amplitude estimator calculates an estimate of the peak
amplitude of the signal based upon the amplitude of the three nearest
samples.

The constant false alarm rate (CFAR) subsystem provides an estimate of
the ambient noise or clutter level so that the threshold can be varied
dynamically to stabilize the false alarm rate. The threshold logic
unit selects which of several possible thresholds is to be compared
with the estimated signal amplitude thru the CFAR or Multi-Channel
Analyzer.

There used to be an interesting CFAR data site that listed CFAR
processing code, but the link has since expired. However, there are
some very unique locations for downloading software to calculate CFAR:
http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbo...e.html#bs4ahpf
MCB or Multi-Channel Background, shows the broad spectrum
characteristics of the waveform, which is an input to an MCA emulator
for analysis. One such MCA unit (not emulator) can be seen at:

http://www.phywe.com/461/pid/4769/Vi...detektors-.htm

Synthetic aperture radar is a bit more complicated. A typical
scintillation circuit diagram is given he http://www.canberra.com/products/513.asp
This component is analogous to the NaTl component given above, at
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif The picture and
description of given in the above link as the Canberra Model 802, had
a page designed for that specific instrument, about 10 years ago:
Description

A Monoline Crystal Assembly which includes a high resolution NaI(TI)
crystal, a photomultiplier tube, an internal magnetic/light shield and
a chrome plated aluminum housing. Specifications (were): Resolution
approximately 8% at 662 keV of Cs-137, Window 0.02 in. aluminum,
density 147.9 mg/cm^2, Reflector: oxide 1/16 in. thick, density 88 mg/
cm^2, Magnetic/Light Shield: Conetic lined steel, Typical Operating
Voltages: Cathode to Anode +1100 V DC, Dynode to Dynode: + 80 V DC,
Cathode to Dynode: + 150 V DC

The pulse is further amplified and analyzed by a multichannel pulse
height selector (referring to the MCA component, older pic he
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/117/multim.gif , and a more up-to-
date example given he http://www.canberra.com/products/639.asp ,
followed by a counter (referring to the counter component he
http://www.barrytech.com/hewlett-pac...s/hp5314a.html , which
is obsolete, and has been replaced by:
http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/...&&cc=US&lc=eng
, with data sheet given he http://cp.literature.agilent.com/lit...990-6283EN.pdf
This device counts the pulses received in each channel. The resulting
photon energy is directly proportional to the intensity of the beam.
The intensity is correlated with its associated wavelength, rendering
the spectrographic signature. The signature is compared with existing
spectrographic data to determine the elements comprising the asteroid.

On Feb 19, 12:46*pm, American wrote:
Some Interesting Points on What a Robotic Asteroid Flyby (Remote Data
Acquisition) might consist of, in general terms, that avoids the
necessity of "gravity traps" inherent in Moon or Mars landings, and
the sort of useless technology that helps to perpetrate boondoggle
exploits of most of U.S.'s eventual abysmally expensive budgeting, (by
both our NASA and Congress), should help to bring about a new "gold
rush", as long as our most popular, yet most monstrously prohibitive
mountain of Congressional pork and anti-space rhetoric is overcome -
by a hugely massive leap into overcoming the curse of super-heavy
lift, earth-to-orbit technology, that so many at the Fed seem to
overlook. If this (simple enough) task were overcome, by eliminating
the barriers to space exploration on-the-cheap, then there not only
would be more competition, but the asteroids would open up a new gold
rush, not unlike what America experienced in the 1800's.

Vessels which bring more scanning and radar equipment are key for an
initial flyby, to be followed up later with mining and cargo ships. A
robotic flyby would consist of a radar system passing the data from a
matched filter to a subsystem, referred to as a Detection Processor
(DP), that accomplishes data compression by comparing the matched
filtered data to a threshold. *The potential targets (i.e., those that
exceed the threshold) are flagged and the remaining data may be
rejected. *A block diagram of one possible general DP structure is
shown hehttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif

At the input of the DP is the MCA, or Multi-Channel Analyzer, which
involves a FWD radix-4 and INVERSE radix-4 pipeline FFT. *After the
MCA, is a magnitude calculation which involves a subsystem that
approximates the magnitude to the I and Q samples, where I is the
intensity of the signal and Q is the number of samples over the block
size. *Next an amplitude estimator calculates an estimate of the peak
amplitude of the signal based upon the amplitude of the three nearest
samples.

The constant false alarm rate (CFAR) subsystem provides an estimate of
the ambient noise or clutter level so that the threshold can be varied
dynamically to stabilize the false alarm rate. *The threshold logic
unit selects which of several possible thresholds is to be compared
with the estimated signal amplitude thru the CFAR or Multi-Channel
Analyzer.

There used to be an interesting CFAR data site that listed CFAR
processing code, but the link has since expired. However, there are
some very unique locations for downloading software to calculate CFAR:http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbo...e.html#bs4ahpf
MCB or Multi-Channel Background, shows the broad spectrum
characteristics of the waveform, which is an input to an MCA emulator
for analysis. *One such MCA unit (not emulator) can be seen at:

http://www.phywe.com/461/pid/4769/Vi...erweiterte-Ver...

Synthetic aperture radar is a bit more complicated. *A typical
scintillation circuit diagram is given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/513.asp
This component is analogous to the NaTl component given above, athttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif*The picture and
description of given in the above link as the Canberra Model 802, had
a page designed for that specific instrument, about 10 years ago:
Description

A Monoline Crystal Assembly which includes a high resolution NaI(TI)
crystal, a photomultiplier tube, an internal magnetic/light shield and
a chrome plated aluminum housing. Specifications (were): Resolution
approximately 8% at 662 keV of Cs-137, Window 0.02 in. aluminum,
density 147.9 mg/cm^2, Reflector: oxide 1/16 in. thick, density 88 mg/
cm^2, Magnetic/Light Shield: Conetic lined steel, Typical Operating
Voltages: Cathode to Anode +1100 V DC, Dynode to Dynode: + 80 V DC,
Cathode to Dynode: + 150 V DC

The pulse is further amplified and analyzed by a multichannel pulse
height selector (referring to the MCA component, older pic hehttp://img80.imageshack.us/img80/117/multim.gif, and a more up-to-
date *example given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/639.asp,
followed by a counter (referring to the counter component hehttp://www..barrytech.com/hewlett-pa...s/hp5314a.html, which
is obsolete, and has been replaced by:http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/...lc=eng&nid=-33...
, with data sheet given hehttp://cp.literature.agilent.com/lit...990-6283EN.pdf
This device counts the pulses received in each channel. The resulting
photon energy is directly proportional to the intensity of the beam.
The intensity is correlated with its associated wavelength, rendering
the spectrographic signature. The signature is compared with existing
spectrographic data to determine the elements comprising the asteroid.

Gamma spectrometry tells us exactly what's on the surface, and it even
penetrates several meters deep in order to tell us and help quantify
the internal elements of its crust.

IR tells us what the surface and residual core heat is, and otherwise
color saturation imaging gives us a closeup visual look-see that'll
include those unavoidable UV reactive colors of whatever raw
elements. Of course we can always use our NASA/Apollo era science of
our moon, that'll prove where all this new and improved science
instrumentation is going to be perfectly worthless.

These instruments are no longer spendy, large nor all that energy
consuming.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Feb 19, 4:06*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 19, 12:46*pm, American wrote:









Some Interesting Points on What a Robotic Asteroid Flyby (Remote Data
Acquisition) might consist of, in general terms, that avoids the
necessity of "gravity traps" inherent in Moon or Mars landings, and
the sort of useless technology that helps to perpetrate boondoggle
exploits of most of U.S.'s eventual abysmally expensive budgeting, (by
both our NASA and Congress), should help to bring about a new "gold
rush", as long as our most popular, yet most monstrously prohibitive
mountain of Congressional pork and anti-space rhetoric is overcome -
by a hugely massive leap into overcoming the curse of super-heavy
lift, earth-to-orbit technology, that so many at the Fed seem to
overlook. If this (simple enough) task were overcome, by eliminating
the barriers to space exploration on-the-cheap, then there not only
would be more competition, but the asteroids would open up a new gold
rush, not unlike what America experienced in the 1800's.

Vessels which bring more scanning and radar equipment are key for an
initial flyby, to be followed up later with mining and cargo ships. A
robotic flyby would consist of a radar system passing the data from a
matched filter to a subsystem, referred to as a Detection Processor
(DP), that accomplishes data compression by comparing the matched
filtered data to a threshold. *The potential targets (i.e., those that
exceed the threshold) are flagged and the remaining data may be
rejected. *A block diagram of one possible general DP structure is
shown hehttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif

At the input of the DP is the MCA, or Multi-Channel Analyzer, which
involves a FWD radix-4 and INVERSE radix-4 pipeline FFT. *After the
MCA, is a magnitude calculation which involves a subsystem that
approximates the magnitude to the I and Q samples, where I is the
intensity of the signal and Q is the number of samples over the block
size. *Next an amplitude estimator calculates an estimate of the peak
amplitude of the signal based upon the amplitude of the three nearest
samples.

The constant false alarm rate (CFAR) subsystem provides an estimate of
the ambient noise or clutter level so that the threshold can be varied
dynamically to stabilize the false alarm rate. *The threshold logic
unit selects which of several possible thresholds is to be compared
with the estimated signal amplitude thru the CFAR or Multi-Channel
Analyzer.

There used to be an interesting CFAR data site that listed CFAR
processing code, but the link has since expired. However, there are
some very unique locations for downloading software to calculate CFAR:http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbo...e.html#bs4ahpf
MCB or Multi-Channel Background, shows the broad spectrum
characteristics of the waveform, which is an input to an MCA emulator
for analysis. *One such MCA unit (not emulator) can be seen at:

http://www.phywe.com/461/pid/4769/Vi...erweiterte-Ver...

Synthetic aperture radar is a bit more complicated. *A typical
scintillation circuit diagram is given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/513.asp
This component is analogous to the NaTl component given above, athttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif*The picture and
description of given in the above link as the Canberra Model 802, had
a page designed for that specific instrument, about 10 years ago:
Description

A Monoline Crystal Assembly which includes a high resolution NaI(TI)
crystal, a photomultiplier tube, an internal magnetic/light shield and
a chrome plated aluminum housing. Specifications (were): Resolution
approximately 8% at 662 keV of Cs-137, Window 0.02 in. aluminum,
density 147.9 mg/cm^2, Reflector: oxide 1/16 in. thick, density 88 mg/
cm^2, Magnetic/Light Shield: Conetic lined steel, Typical Operating
Voltages: Cathode to Anode +1100 V DC, Dynode to Dynode: + 80 V DC,
Cathode to Dynode: + 150 V DC

The pulse is further amplified and analyzed by a multichannel pulse
height selector (referring to the MCA component, older pic hehttp://img80.imageshack.us/img80/117/multim.gif, and a more up-to-
date *example given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/639.asp,
followed by a counter (referring to the counter component hehttp://www.barrytech.com/hewlett-pac...s/hp5314a.html, which
is obsolete, and has been replaced by:http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/...lc=eng&nid=-33...
, with data sheet given hehttp://cp.literature.agilent.com/lit...990-6283EN.pdf
This device counts the pulses received in each channel. The resulting
photon energy is directly proportional to the intensity of the beam.
The intensity is correlated with its associated wavelength, rendering
the spectrographic signature. The signature is compared with existing
spectrographic data to determine the elements comprising the asteroid.

Gamma spectrometry tells us exactly what's on the surface, and it even
penetrates several meters deep in order to tell us and help quantify
the internal elements of its crust.

IR tells us what the surface and residual core heat is, and otherwise
color saturation imaging gives us a closeup visual look-see that'll
include those unavoidable UV reactive colors of whatever raw
elements. *Of course we can always use our NASA/Apollo era science of
our moon, that'll prove where all this new and improved science
instrumentation is going to be perfectly worthless.

These instruments are no longer spendy, large nor all that energy
consuming.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That what I was getting at, in the above post - A procedure for
spaceborne gamma spectrometer data interpretation using the EGS-4 code
for Monte-Carlo simulations can obtain theoretical gamma spectra
distribution. A study I did a while back included an Introduction,
Models and Calculations, Processing of Experimental Data, and the
Model Experiment for a 'Monte Carlo type experiment, that would
simulate what the scanning returns on an asteroid might consist of.
For X-ray imaging at even 100 frames per second, with 64 cells per
frame equalling 6400 cells per second (12 bits/cell), there are 64-
channel pixel processors available for the most viable candidates.

Components of each cell in a 654-channel pixel processor include a
discriminator for which a Discriminate frequency, TTL input, TTL
output, Accurate & robust, Digital Frequency Discriminator Calculation
can be performed. The chips for these sensors are small enough - an 8
X 8 chip requires a discriminate frequency for each cell and may be
tuned for reception of the individual transition frequency emissions
of the precious metals. With 100 frames at 64 cells per frame, swaths
can be programmed for several transition frequencies simultaneously.
In addition to the discriminator frequency, a GHz counter can be
programmed by coupling dual modulus-prescaling technique with
available phase-locked-loop synthesizer chips that control a prescaler
in the TTL-programmable counter.

On Feb 19, 4:22*pm, American wrote:
On Feb 19, 4:06*pm, Brad Guth wrote:









On Feb 19, 12:46*pm, American wrote:

Some Interesting Points on What a Robotic Asteroid Flyby (Remote Data
Acquisition) might consist of, in general terms, that avoids the
necessity of "gravity traps" inherent in Moon or Mars landings, and
the sort of useless technology that helps to perpetrate boondoggle
exploits of most of U.S.'s eventual abysmally expensive budgeting, (by
both our NASA and Congress), should help to bring about a new "gold
rush", as long as our most popular, yet most monstrously prohibitive
mountain of Congressional pork and anti-space rhetoric is overcome -
by a hugely massive leap into overcoming the curse of super-heavy
lift, earth-to-orbit technology, that so many at the Fed seem to
overlook. If this (simple enough) task were overcome, by eliminating
the barriers to space exploration on-the-cheap, then there not only
would be more competition, but the asteroids would open up a new gold
rush, not unlike what America experienced in the 1800's.

Vessels which bring more scanning and radar equipment are key for an
initial flyby, to be followed up later with mining and cargo ships. A
robotic flyby would consist of a radar system passing the data from a
matched filter to a subsystem, referred to as a Detection Processor
(DP), that accomplishes data compression by comparing the matched
filtered data to a threshold. *The potential targets (i.e., those that
exceed the threshold) are flagged and the remaining data may be
rejected. *A block diagram of one possible general DP structure is
shown hehttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif

At the input of the DP is the MCA, or Multi-Channel Analyzer, which
involves a FWD radix-4 and INVERSE radix-4 pipeline FFT. *After the
MCA, is a magnitude calculation which involves a subsystem that
approximates the magnitude to the I and Q samples, where I is the
intensity of the signal and Q is the number of samples over the block
size. *Next an amplitude estimator calculates an estimate of the peak
amplitude of the signal based upon the amplitude of the three nearest
samples.

The constant false alarm rate (CFAR) subsystem provides an estimate of
the ambient noise or clutter level so that the threshold can be varied
dynamically to stabilize the false alarm rate. *The threshold logic
unit selects which of several possible thresholds is to be compared
with the estimated signal amplitude thru the CFAR or Multi-Channel
Analyzer.

There used to be an interesting CFAR data site that listed CFAR
processing code, but the link has since expired. However, there are
some very unique locations for downloading software to calculate CFAR:http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbo...e.html#bs4ahpf
MCB or Multi-Channel Background, shows the broad spectrum
characteristics of the waveform, which is an input to an MCA emulator
for analysis. *One such MCA unit (not emulator) can be seen at:

http://www.phywe.com/461/pid/4769/Vi...erweiterte-Ver....

Synthetic aperture radar is a bit more complicated. *A typical
scintillation circuit diagram is given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/513.asp
This component is analogous to the NaTl component given above, athttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif*The picture and
description of given in the above link as the Canberra Model 802, had
a page designed for that specific instrument, about 10 years ago:
Description

A Monoline Crystal Assembly which includes a high resolution NaI(TI)
crystal, a photomultiplier tube, an internal magnetic/light shield and
a chrome plated aluminum housing. Specifications (were): Resolution
approximately 8% at 662 keV of Cs-137, Window 0.02 in. aluminum,
density 147.9 mg/cm^2, Reflector: oxide 1/16 in. thick, density 88 mg/
cm^2, Magnetic/Light Shield: Conetic lined steel, Typical Operating
Voltages: Cathode to Anode +1100 V DC, Dynode to Dynode: + 80 V DC,
Cathode to Dynode: + 150 V DC

The pulse is further amplified and analyzed by a multichannel pulse
height selector (referring to the MCA component, older pic hehttp://img80.imageshack.us/img80/117/multim.gif, and a more up-to-
date *example given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/639.asp,
followed by a counter (referring to the counter component hehttp://www.barrytech.com/hewlett-pac...s/hp5314a.html, which
is obsolete, and has been replaced by:http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/...lc=eng&nid=-33...
, with data sheet given hehttp://cp.literature.agilent.com/lit...990-6283EN.pdf
This device counts the pulses received in each channel. The resulting
photon energy is directly proportional to the intensity of the beam.
The intensity is correlated with its associated wavelength, rendering
the spectrographic signature. The signature is compared with existing
spectrographic data to determine the elements comprising the asteroid..

Gamma spectrometry tells us exactly what's on the surface, and it even
penetrates several meters deep in order to tell us and help quantify
the internal elements of its crust.

IR tells us what the surface and residual core heat is, and otherwise
color saturation imaging gives us a closeup visual look-see that'll
include those unavoidable UV reactive colors of whatever raw
elements. *Of course we can always use our NASA/Apollo era science of
our moon, that'll prove where all this new and improved science
instrumentation is going to be perfectly worthless.

These instruments are no longer spendy, large nor all that energy
consuming.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That what I was getting at, in the above post - A procedure for
spaceborne gamma spectrometer data interpretation using the EGS-4 code
for Monte-Carlo simulations can obtain theoretical gamma spectra
distribution. *A study I did a while back included an Introduction,
Models and Calculations, Processing of Experimental Data, and the
Model Experiment for a 'Monte Carlo type experiment, that would
simulate what the scanning returns on an asteroid might consist of.
For X-ray imaging at even 100 frames per second, with 64 cells per
frame equalling 6400 cells per second (12 bits/cell), there are 64-
channel pixel processors available for the most viable candidates.

Components of each cell in a 654-channel pixel processor include a
discriminator for which a Discriminate frequency, TTL input, TTL
output, Accurate & robust, Digital Frequency Discriminator Calculation
can be performed. *The chips for these sensors are small enough - an 8
X 8 chip requires a discriminate frequency for each cell and may be
tuned for reception of the individual transition frequency emissions
of the precious metals. With 100 frames at 64 cells per frame, swaths
can be programmed for several transition frequencies simultaneously.
In addition to the discriminator frequency, a GHz counter can be
programmed by coupling dual modulus-prescaling technique with
available phase-locked-loop synthesizer chips that control a prescaler
in the TTL-programmable counter.

When your talking about GHz frequencies, you are referring to the
precious metals:

Wavelength in Angstroms / KEV

Platinum

0.190381 65.122
0.185511 66.832
0.164501 75.368
0.163675 75.748
0.15939 77.785
0.15920 77.878
0.15826 78.341
0.16271 76.199
0.16255 76.27
0.15881 78.069

Gold

0.185075 66.9895
0.180195 68.8037
0.159810 77.580
0.158982 77.984
0.15483 80.08
0.154618 80.185
0.153694 80.667
0.18672 66.40
0.158062 78.438
0.157880 78.529
0.154224 80.391

On Feb 19, 4:29*pm, American wrote:
On Feb 19, 4:22*pm, American wrote:









On Feb 19, 4:06*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Feb 19, 12:46*pm, American wrote:

Some Interesting Points on What a Robotic Asteroid Flyby (Remote Data
Acquisition) might consist of, in general terms, that avoids the
necessity of "gravity traps" inherent in Moon or Mars landings, and
the sort of useless technology that helps to perpetrate boondoggle
exploits of most of U.S.'s eventual abysmally expensive budgeting, (by
both our NASA and Congress), should help to bring about a new "gold
rush", as long as our most popular, yet most monstrously prohibitive
mountain of Congressional pork and anti-space rhetoric is overcome -
by a hugely massive leap into overcoming the curse of super-heavy
lift, earth-to-orbit technology, that so many at the Fed seem to
overlook. If this (simple enough) task were overcome, by eliminating
the barriers to space exploration on-the-cheap, then there not only
would be more competition, but the asteroids would open up a new gold
rush, not unlike what America experienced in the 1800's.

Vessels which bring more scanning and radar equipment are key for an
initial flyby, to be followed up later with mining and cargo ships. A
robotic flyby would consist of a radar system passing the data from a
matched filter to a subsystem, referred to as a Detection Processor
(DP), that accomplishes data compression by comparing the matched
filtered data to a threshold. *The potential targets (i.e., those that
exceed the threshold) are flagged and the remaining data may be
rejected. *A block diagram of one possible general DP structure is
shown hehttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif

At the input of the DP is the MCA, or Multi-Channel Analyzer, which
involves a FWD radix-4 and INVERSE radix-4 pipeline FFT. *After the
MCA, is a magnitude calculation which involves a subsystem that
approximates the magnitude to the I and Q samples, where I is the
intensity of the signal and Q is the number of samples over the block
size. *Next an amplitude estimator calculates an estimate of the peak
amplitude of the signal based upon the amplitude of the three nearest
samples.

The constant false alarm rate (CFAR) subsystem provides an estimate of
the ambient noise or clutter level so that the threshold can be varied
dynamically to stabilize the false alarm rate. *The threshold logic
unit selects which of several possible thresholds is to be compared
with the estimated signal amplitude thru the CFAR or Multi-Channel
Analyzer.

There used to be an interesting CFAR data site that listed CFAR
processing code, but the link has since expired. However, there are
some very unique locations for downloading software to calculate CFAR:http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbo...e.html#bs4ahpf
MCB or Multi-Channel Background, shows the broad spectrum
characteristics of the waveform, which is an input to an MCA emulator
for analysis. *One such MCA unit (not emulator) can be seen at:

http://www.phywe.com/461/pid/4769/Vi...erweiterte-Ver...

Synthetic aperture radar is a bit more complicated. *A typical
scintillation circuit diagram is given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/513.asp
This component is analogous to the NaTl component given above, athttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif*The picture and
description of given in the above link as the Canberra Model 802, had
a page designed for that specific instrument, about 10 years ago:
Description

A Monoline Crystal Assembly which includes a high resolution NaI(TI)
crystal, a photomultiplier tube, an internal magnetic/light shield and
a chrome plated aluminum housing. Specifications (were): Resolution
approximately 8% at 662 keV of Cs-137, Window 0.02 in. aluminum,
density 147.9 mg/cm^2, Reflector: oxide 1/16 in. thick, density 88 mg/
cm^2, Magnetic/Light Shield: Conetic lined steel, Typical Operating
Voltages: Cathode to Anode +1100 V DC, Dynode to Dynode: + 80 V DC,
Cathode to Dynode: + 150 V DC

The pulse is further amplified and analyzed by a multichannel pulse
height selector (referring to the MCA component, older pic hehttp://img80.imageshack.us/img80/117/multim.gif, and a more up-to-
date *example given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/639.asp,
followed by a counter (referring to the counter component hehttp://www.barrytech.com/hewlett-pac...s/hp5314a.html, which
is obsolete, and has been replaced by:http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/...lc=eng&nid=-33...
, with data sheet given hehttp://cp.literature.agilent.com/lit...990-6283EN.pdf
This device counts the pulses received in each channel. The resulting
photon energy is directly proportional to the intensity of the beam..
The intensity is correlated with its associated wavelength, rendering
the spectrographic signature. The signature is compared with existing
spectrographic data to determine the elements comprising the asteroid.

Gamma spectrometry tells us exactly what's on the surface, and it even
penetrates several meters deep in order to tell us and help quantify
the internal elements of its crust.

IR tells us what the surface and residual core heat is, and otherwise
color saturation imaging gives us a closeup visual look-see that'll
include those unavoidable UV reactive colors of whatever raw
elements. *Of course we can always use our NASA/Apollo era science of
our moon, that'll prove where all this new and improved science
instrumentation is going to be perfectly worthless.

These instruments are no longer spendy, large nor all that energy
consuming.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That what I was getting at, in the above post - A procedure for
spaceborne gamma spectrometer data interpretation using the EGS-4 code
for Monte-Carlo simulations can obtain theoretical gamma spectra
distribution. *A study I did a while back included an Introduction,
Models and Calculations, Processing of Experimental Data, and the
Model Experiment for a 'Monte Carlo type experiment, that would
simulate what the scanning returns on an asteroid might consist of.
For X-ray imaging at even 100 frames per second, with 64 cells per
frame equalling 6400 cells per second (12 bits/cell), there are 64-
channel pixel processors available for the most viable candidates.

Components of each cell in a 654-channel pixel processor include a
discriminator for which a Discriminate frequency, TTL input, TTL
output, Accurate & robust, Digital Frequency Discriminator Calculation
can be performed. *The chips for these sensors are small enough - an 8
X 8 chip requires a discriminate frequency for each cell and may be
tuned for reception of the individual transition frequency emissions
of the precious metals. With 100 frames at 64 cells per frame, swaths
can be programmed for several transition frequencies simultaneously.
In addition to the discriminator frequency, a GHz counter can be
programmed by coupling dual modulus-prescaling technique with
available phase-locked-loop synthesizer chips that control a prescaler
in the TTL-programmable counter.

When your talking about GHz frequencies, you are referring to the
precious metals:

Wavelength in Angstroms / KEV

Platinum

0.190381 * * * *65.122
0.185511 66.832
0.164501 75.368
0.163675 75.748
0.15939 77.785
0.15920 77.878
0.15826 78.341
0.16271 76.199
0.16255 76.27
0.15881 78.069

Gold

0.185075 66.9895
0.180195 68.8037
0.159810 77.580
0.158982 77.984
0.15483 80.08
0.154618 80.185
0.153694 80.667
0.18672 66.40
0.158062 78.438
0.157880 78.529
0.154224 80.391

How the energy level for a particular shell is calculated:

E_n = - ( 13.6z^2 / n^2 ) eV

where z is equal to the charge on the molecule ( gold z = 79 ,
platinum z = 78 ) and n = the shell or energy level number. Frequency
of the emitted photon is found, knowing the wavelength, from the
relationship frequency = c / lamda , where lamda is equal to
wavelength in meters ( from table, 1 angstrom = 10^-10m ), and c =
speed of light in meters per second ( 299,792,458 m / sec ). For
example, using gold wavelength = 0.185075 Angstroms, we calculate
frequency = c / lamda = 2.99792458 x 10^8 / 1.85075 x 10^-8 =
1.61984307983 x 10^16 cycles / second or 16,198,430,798,300,000 cps,
or 16.198430798300000.00 gigahertz! What Energy level is this? Using
the above formula, KeV = - ( 13.6 ( 79 )^2 / n^2 ) eV, and recalling
that to use n, the atomic shell number needs to be known, we can
surmise that gamma-rays can penetrate further into the molecule and
produce higher energies than the outer shells.

For this reason, we use n = 1 and solve for eV = - ( 13.6 ( 79 )^2 /
( 1 )^2 ) = 84,877 eV for the energy of the first shell. Note that
this value exceeds the value of 66.9895 KeV given in the table. If we
use n = 2 for the second shell, the value for eV becomes eV = - ( 13.6
( 79 )^2 / ( 2 )^2 ) = 21,219.4 eV, which is too low. Therefore, the
energy level is taken from one of the two electrons in the first
shell. Actually, it is the alpha_2 electron transition between the K
and LII shells (from spectral analysis).

Recall that there are 6 energy levels in the gold molecule. From the
innermost to the outermost shell, there are 2, 8, 18, 32, 18, and 1
electrons occupying shells. A properly tuned and calibrated gamma-ray
spectrophotometer can resolve these minute differences within shells.
In fact, the spectrophotometer automatically scans asteroidal surfaces
to provide spectral analysis data for what a flyby would consist of.

On Feb 19, 1:22*pm, American wrote:
On Feb 19, 4:06*pm, Brad Guth wrote:









On Feb 19, 12:46*pm, American wrote:

Some Interesting Points on What a Robotic Asteroid Flyby (Remote Data
Acquisition) might consist of, in general terms, that avoids the
necessity of "gravity traps" inherent in Moon or Mars landings, and
the sort of useless technology that helps to perpetrate boondoggle
exploits of most of U.S.'s eventual abysmally expensive budgeting, (by
both our NASA and Congress), should help to bring about a new "gold
rush", as long as our most popular, yet most monstrously prohibitive
mountain of Congressional pork and anti-space rhetoric is overcome -
by a hugely massive leap into overcoming the curse of super-heavy
lift, earth-to-orbit technology, that so many at the Fed seem to
overlook. If this (simple enough) task were overcome, by eliminating
the barriers to space exploration on-the-cheap, then there not only
would be more competition, but the asteroids would open up a new gold
rush, not unlike what America experienced in the 1800's.

Vessels which bring more scanning and radar equipment are key for an
initial flyby, to be followed up later with mining and cargo ships. A
robotic flyby would consist of a radar system passing the data from a
matched filter to a subsystem, referred to as a Detection Processor
(DP), that accomplishes data compression by comparing the matched
filtered data to a threshold. *The potential targets (i.e., those that
exceed the threshold) are flagged and the remaining data may be
rejected. *A block diagram of one possible general DP structure is
shown hehttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif

At the input of the DP is the MCA, or Multi-Channel Analyzer, which
involves a FWD radix-4 and INVERSE radix-4 pipeline FFT. *After the
MCA, is a magnitude calculation which involves a subsystem that
approximates the magnitude to the I and Q samples, where I is the
intensity of the signal and Q is the number of samples over the block
size. *Next an amplitude estimator calculates an estimate of the peak
amplitude of the signal based upon the amplitude of the three nearest
samples.

The constant false alarm rate (CFAR) subsystem provides an estimate of
the ambient noise or clutter level so that the threshold can be varied
dynamically to stabilize the false alarm rate. *The threshold logic
unit selects which of several possible thresholds is to be compared
with the estimated signal amplitude thru the CFAR or Multi-Channel
Analyzer.

There used to be an interesting CFAR data site that listed CFAR
processing code, but the link has since expired. However, there are
some very unique locations for downloading software to calculate CFAR:http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbo...e.html#bs4ahpf
MCB or Multi-Channel Background, shows the broad spectrum
characteristics of the waveform, which is an input to an MCA emulator
for analysis. *One such MCA unit (not emulator) can be seen at:

http://www.phywe.com/461/pid/4769/Vi...erweiterte-Ver....

Synthetic aperture radar is a bit more complicated. *A typical
scintillation circuit diagram is given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/513.asp
This component is analogous to the NaTl component given above, athttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif*The picture and
description of given in the above link as the Canberra Model 802, had
a page designed for that specific instrument, about 10 years ago:
Description

A Monoline Crystal Assembly which includes a high resolution NaI(TI)
crystal, a photomultiplier tube, an internal magnetic/light shield and
a chrome plated aluminum housing. Specifications (were): Resolution
approximately 8% at 662 keV of Cs-137, Window 0.02 in. aluminum,
density 147.9 mg/cm^2, Reflector: oxide 1/16 in. thick, density 88 mg/
cm^2, Magnetic/Light Shield: Conetic lined steel, Typical Operating
Voltages: Cathode to Anode +1100 V DC, Dynode to Dynode: + 80 V DC,
Cathode to Dynode: + 150 V DC

The pulse is further amplified and analyzed by a multichannel pulse
height selector (referring to the MCA component, older pic hehttp://img80.imageshack.us/img80/117/multim.gif, and a more up-to-
date *example given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/639.asp,
followed by a counter (referring to the counter component hehttp://www.barrytech.com/hewlett-pac...s/hp5314a.html, which
is obsolete, and has been replaced by:http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/...lc=eng&nid=-33...
, with data sheet given hehttp://cp.literature.agilent.com/lit...990-6283EN.pdf
This device counts the pulses received in each channel. The resulting
photon energy is directly proportional to the intensity of the beam.
The intensity is correlated with its associated wavelength, rendering
the spectrographic signature. The signature is compared with existing
spectrographic data to determine the elements comprising the asteroid..

Gamma spectrometry tells us exactly what's on the surface, and it even
penetrates several meters deep in order to tell us and help quantify
the internal elements of its crust.

IR tells us what the surface and residual core heat is, and otherwise
color saturation imaging gives us a closeup visual look-see that'll
include those unavoidable UV reactive colors of whatever raw
elements. *Of course we can always use our NASA/Apollo era science of
our moon, that'll prove where all this new and improved science
instrumentation is going to be perfectly worthless.

These instruments are no longer spendy, large nor all that energy
consuming.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That what I was getting at, in the above post - A procedure for
spaceborne gamma spectrometer data interpretation using the EGS-4 code
for Monte-Carlo simulations can obtain theoretical gamma spectra
distribution. *A study I did a while back included an Introduction,
Models and Calculations, Processing of Experimental Data, and the
Model Experiment for a 'Monte Carlo type experiment, that would
simulate what the scanning returns on an asteroid might consist of.
For X-ray imaging at even 100 frames per second, with 64 cells per
frame equalling 6400 cells per second (12 bits/cell), there are 64-
channel pixel processors available for the most viable candidates.

Components of each cell in a 654-channel pixel processor include a
discriminator for which a Discriminate frequency, TTL input, TTL
output, Accurate & robust, Digital Frequency Discriminator Calculation
can be performed. *The chips for these sensors are small enough - an 8
X 8 chip requires a discriminate frequency for each cell and may be
tuned for reception of the individual transition frequency emissions
of the precious metals. With 100 frames at 64 cells per frame, swaths
can be programmed for several transition frequencies simultaneously.
In addition to the discriminator frequency, a GHz counter can be
programmed by coupling dual modulus-prescaling technique with
available phase-locked-loop synthesizer chips that control a prescaler
in the TTL-programmable counter.

Right, and because these instruments are small, low mass and energy
efficient is why the cost per asteroid flyby survey should be really
cheap. Of course our moon is actually one heck of an asteroid, and
thus far we've been informed of perhaps all of 0.1% about our public
funded science (the other 99.9% is still nondisclosure rated).

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Feb 19, 5:35*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 19, 1:22*pm, American wrote:









On Feb 19, 4:06*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Feb 19, 12:46*pm, American wrote:

Some Interesting Points on What a Robotic Asteroid Flyby (Remote Data
Acquisition) might consist of, in general terms, that avoids the
necessity of "gravity traps" inherent in Moon or Mars landings, and
the sort of useless technology that helps to perpetrate boondoggle
exploits of most of U.S.'s eventual abysmally expensive budgeting, (by
both our NASA and Congress), should help to bring about a new "gold
rush", as long as our most popular, yet most monstrously prohibitive
mountain of Congressional pork and anti-space rhetoric is overcome -
by a hugely massive leap into overcoming the curse of super-heavy
lift, earth-to-orbit technology, that so many at the Fed seem to
overlook. If this (simple enough) task were overcome, by eliminating
the barriers to space exploration on-the-cheap, then there not only
would be more competition, but the asteroids would open up a new gold
rush, not unlike what America experienced in the 1800's.

Vessels which bring more scanning and radar equipment are key for an
initial flyby, to be followed up later with mining and cargo ships. A
robotic flyby would consist of a radar system passing the data from a
matched filter to a subsystem, referred to as a Detection Processor
(DP), that accomplishes data compression by comparing the matched
filtered data to a threshold. *The potential targets (i.e., those that
exceed the threshold) are flagged and the remaining data may be
rejected. *A block diagram of one possible general DP structure is
shown hehttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif

At the input of the DP is the MCA, or Multi-Channel Analyzer, which
involves a FWD radix-4 and INVERSE radix-4 pipeline FFT. *After the
MCA, is a magnitude calculation which involves a subsystem that
approximates the magnitude to the I and Q samples, where I is the
intensity of the signal and Q is the number of samples over the block
size. *Next an amplitude estimator calculates an estimate of the peak
amplitude of the signal based upon the amplitude of the three nearest
samples.

The constant false alarm rate (CFAR) subsystem provides an estimate of
the ambient noise or clutter level so that the threshold can be varied
dynamically to stabilize the false alarm rate. *The threshold logic
unit selects which of several possible thresholds is to be compared
with the estimated signal amplitude thru the CFAR or Multi-Channel
Analyzer.

There used to be an interesting CFAR data site that listed CFAR
processing code, but the link has since expired. However, there are
some very unique locations for downloading software to calculate CFAR:http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbo...e.html#bs4ahpf
MCB or Multi-Channel Background, shows the broad spectrum
characteristics of the waveform, which is an input to an MCA emulator
for analysis. *One such MCA unit (not emulator) can be seen at:

http://www.phywe.com/461/pid/4769/Vi...erweiterte-Ver...

Synthetic aperture radar is a bit more complicated. *A typical
scintillation circuit diagram is given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/513.asp
This component is analogous to the NaTl component given above, athttp://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8009/gray5.th.gif*The picture and
description of given in the above link as the Canberra Model 802, had
a page designed for that specific instrument, about 10 years ago:
Description

A Monoline Crystal Assembly which includes a high resolution NaI(TI)
crystal, a photomultiplier tube, an internal magnetic/light shield and
a chrome plated aluminum housing. Specifications (were): Resolution
approximately 8% at 662 keV of Cs-137, Window 0.02 in. aluminum,
density 147.9 mg/cm^2, Reflector: oxide 1/16 in. thick, density 88 mg/
cm^2, Magnetic/Light Shield: Conetic lined steel, Typical Operating
Voltages: Cathode to Anode +1100 V DC, Dynode to Dynode: + 80 V DC,
Cathode to Dynode: + 150 V DC

The pulse is further amplified and analyzed by a multichannel pulse
height selector (referring to the MCA component, older pic hehttp://img80.imageshack.us/img80/117/multim.gif, and a more up-to-
date *example given hehttp://www.canberra.com/products/639.asp,
followed by a counter (referring to the counter component hehttp://www.barrytech.com/hewlett-pac...s/hp5314a.html, which
is obsolete, and has been replaced by:http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/...lc=eng&nid=-33...
, with data sheet given hehttp://cp.literature.agilent.com/lit...990-6283EN.pdf
This device counts the pulses received in each channel. The resulting
photon energy is directly proportional to the intensity of the beam..
The intensity is correlated with its associated wavelength, rendering
the spectrographic signature. The signature is compared with existing
spectrographic data to determine the elements comprising the asteroid.

Gamma spectrometry tells us exactly what's on the surface, and it even
penetrates several meters deep in order to tell us and help quantify
the internal elements of its crust.

IR tells us what the surface and residual core heat is, and otherwise
color saturation imaging gives us a closeup visual look-see that'll
include those unavoidable UV reactive colors of whatever raw
elements. *Of course we can always use our NASA/Apollo era science of
our moon, that'll prove where all this new and improved science
instrumentation is going to be perfectly worthless.

These instruments are no longer spendy, large nor all that energy
consuming.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That what I was getting at, in the above post - A procedure for
spaceborne gamma spectrometer data interpretation using the EGS-4 code
for Monte-Carlo simulations can obtain theoretical gamma spectra
distribution. *A study I did a while back included an Introduction,
Models and Calculations, Processing of Experimental Data, and the
Model Experiment for a 'Monte Carlo type experiment, that would
simulate what the scanning returns on an asteroid might consist of.
For X-ray imaging at even 100 frames per second, with 64 cells per
frame equalling 6400 cells per second (12 bits/cell), there are 64-
channel pixel processors available for the most viable candidates.

Components of each cell in a 654-channel pixel processor include a
discriminator for which a Discriminate frequency, TTL input, TTL
output, Accurate & robust, Digital Frequency Discriminator Calculation
can be performed. *The chips for these sensors are small enough - an 8
X 8 chip requires a discriminate frequency for each cell and may be
tuned for reception of the individual transition frequency emissions
of the precious metals. With 100 frames at 64 cells per frame, swaths
can be programmed for several transition frequencies simultaneously.
In addition to the discriminator frequency, a GHz counter can be
programmed by coupling dual modulus-prescaling technique with
available phase-locked-loop synthesizer chips that control a prescaler
in the TTL-programmable counter.

Right, and because these instruments are small, low mass and energy
efficient is why the cost per asteroid flyby survey should be really
cheap. *Of course our moon is actually one heck of an asteroid, and
thus far we've been informed of perhaps all of 0.1% about our public
funded science (the other 99.9% is still nondisclosure rated).

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That's all right, because I've been told that many are noticing how
ridiculous the spending gets - even if the whole world chips in:
http://csis.org/publication/costs-in...nal-lunar-base ...and that
is, of course, all ready dependent on the current ultra-expensive lift
program that we have with ANY private enterprise, or for that matter,
any military budgeted enterprise. The problem as I see it, is that
there just isn't enough "payback" to justify all of the hoopla being
thrown at having a Moon Base - it's wayyyy too exclusive, if you ask
me, the average voter.

I think the key is getting more groups involved in forcing either
private industry or Congress (impossible - they'd rather watch Rome
burn, while escaping to either Canada or Australia, than get
themselves involved in such a win-win for the American people) to
accommodate the market motivation for extraterrestrial resource
development, which include mining the metals from the asteroids first
(the pieces of a once-rogue planet have already been broken down by
their spectrographic (infared) signatures, into consumable quantities
that the privateer, so to speak, can enjoy), whereas anything 'Moon-
sized' is going to be problematic, considering the moon has almost the
same gravitational pull as the earth (IMO Newton's concept of gravity
is wrong, e.g. an asteroid ~150 miles in diameter can have a surface
gravity nearly the same as Earth's). Some asteroids even have
miniature moons orbiting around them.

On Feb 20, 5:59*am, American wrote:
On Feb 19, 5:35*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Right, and because these instruments are small, low mass and energy
efficient is why the cost per asteroid flyby survey should be really
cheap. *Of course our moon is actually one heck of an asteroid, and
thus far we've been informed of perhaps all of 0.1% about our public
funded science (the other 99.9% is still nondisclosure rated).

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That's all right, because I've been told that many are noticing how
ridiculous the spending gets - even if the whole world chips in:
http://csis.org/publication/costs-in...nal-lunar-base... and that
is, of course, all ready dependent on the current ultra-expensive lift
program that we have with ANY private enterprise, or for that matter,
any military budgeted enterprise. The problem as I see it, is that
there just isn't enough "payback" to justify all of the hoopla being
thrown at having a Moon Base - it's wayyyy too exclusive, if you ask
me, the average voter.
Right, accomplishing the moon is only worth a future payback potential
of a trillion dollars per month, and its initial investment at 100
billion per month (20+ months of that) is only worth 100 million
jobs. Who the hell needs any of that?

In other words, with 7+ billion of us to pay for everything that we
always get to pay for anyway, so what if it cost us 10 trillion to set
that moon up for operations of accommodating us and our TBMs?

Humans have had so many do-overs, that we obviously don't give a
tinkers damn about most others, nor honestly care about our planet.
So why not go off-world in a very big way?

Of course my LSE-CM/ISS is an all-inclusive alternative that includes
cheap lunar access as well as offering an ideal outpost/gateway/
oasis...


I think the key is getting more groups involved in forcing either
private industry or Congress (impossible - they'd rather watch Rome
burn, while escaping to either Canada or Australia, than get
themselves involved in such a win-win for the American people) to
accommodate the market motivation for extraterrestrial resource
development, which include mining the metals from the asteroids first
(the pieces of a once-rogue planet have already been broken down by
their spectrographic (infared) signatures, into consumable quantities
that the privateer, so to speak, can enjoy), whereas anything 'Moon-
sized' is going to be problematic, considering the moon has almost the
same gravitational pull as the earth (IMO Newton's concept of gravity
is wrong, e.g. an asteroid ~150 miles in diameter can have a surface
gravity nearly the same as Earth's). Some asteroids even have
miniature moons orbiting around them.

Perhaps a 150 mile diameter asteroid of solid iron and nickel
(possibly one of pure thorium and gold) could provide good surface
gravity. That's kind of unlikely, if not impossible, but then I
haven't actually worked out the math.

William Mook can get us to/from that really big asteroid we call our
moon (NASA and Kodak telling us that it's passive and harmless), at
not 10% the cost of our dysfunctional NASA and DARPA that always claim
to know everything there is to know. Other various captured moons and/
or asteroids can be managed once we have accomplished a suitable
infrastructure of TBMs and habitats within our moon.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Feb 20, 9:47*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 20, 5:59*am, American wrote: On Feb 19, 5:35*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Right, and because these instruments are small, low mass and energy
efficient is why the cost per asteroid flyby survey should be really
cheap. *Of course our moon is actually one heck of an asteroid, and
thus far we've been informed of perhaps all of 0.1% about our public
funded science (the other 99.9% is still nondisclosure rated).

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That's all right, because I've been told that many are noticing how
ridiculous the spending gets - even if the whole world chips in:

http://csis.org/publication/costs-in...nal-lunar-base... and that is, of course, all ready dependent on the current ultra-expensive lift
program that we have with ANY private enterprise, or for that matter,
any military budgeted enterprise. The problem as I see it, is that
there just isn't enough "payback" to justify all of the hoopla being
thrown at having a Moon Base - it's wayyyy too exclusive, if you ask
me, the average voter.

Right, accomplishing the moon is only worth a future payback potential
of a trillion dollars per month, and its initial investment at 100
billion per month (20+ months of that) is only worth 100 million
jobs. *Who the hell needs any of that?

In other words, with 7+ billion of us to pay for everything that we
always get to pay for anyway, so what if it cost us 10 trillion to set
that moon up for operations of accommodating us and our TBMs?

Humans have had so many do-overs, that we obviously don't give a
tinkers damn about most others, nor honestly care about our planet.
So why not go off-world in a very big way?

Of course my LSE-CM/ISS is an all-inclusive alternative that includes
cheap lunar access as well as offering an ideal outpost/gateway/
oasis...



I think the key is getting more groups involved in forcing either
private industry or Congress (impossible - they'd rather watch Rome
burn, while escaping to either Canada or Australia, than get
themselves involved in such a win-win for the American people) to
accommodate the market motivation for extraterrestrial resource
development, which include mining the metals from the asteroids first
(the pieces of a once-rogue planet have already been broken down by
their spectrographic (infared) signatures, into consumable quantities
that the privateer, so to speak, can enjoy), whereas anything 'Moon-
sized' is going to be problematic, considering the moon has almost the
same gravitational pull as the earth (IMO Newton's concept of gravity
is wrong, e.g. an asteroid ~150 miles in diameter can have a surface
gravity nearly the same as Earth's). Some asteroids even have
miniature moons orbiting around them.

Perhaps a 150 mile diameter asteroid of solid iron and nickel
(possibly one of pure thorium and gold) could provide good surface
gravity. *That's kind of unlikely, if not impossible, but then I
haven't actually worked out the math.

William Mook can get us to/from that really big asteroid we call our
moon (NASA and Kodak telling us that it's passive and harmless), at
not 10% the cost of our dysfunctional NASA and DARPA that always claim
to know everything there is to know. *Other various captured moons and/
or asteroids can be managed once we have accomplished a suitable
infrastructure of TBMs and habitats within our moon.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

But Brad, Mook never says anything about just staying in the local
asteroid belt, IMO because the Moon remains a NASA-driven agenda. He
won't let alone any of the associated technology that could be used to
extract useful metals, because that would not be kosher to dump them
all in the earth markets, because it (might) crash the value of them.
The problem as I see it, is that we're really talking about how both
the earth-to-orbit engineering, as well as the orbit-to-asteroid
engineering should, at least for a while, be driving the move into
space!

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt...3q3r1FDVKr62sg

e.g.

Data Set Overview:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt...8FVgI3r0-w-A4w

The five filters listed for observation in the data link:

ECAS u-v color, in column 4
ECAS b-v color, in column 6
ECAS v-w color, in column 8
ECAS v-x color, in column 10
ECAS v-p color, in column 12

The data sets available in the above link can give info on calculating
what the reflectances, as well as the transmissives would be, for the
different states of metal, in the case that the asteroid in question
is of the LL chrondite variety, which means low-low iron consistency.

The spectral emissivity tends to increase with decreasing wavelength.
The normal spectral emissivity for Platinum at 1 meter wavelength is
approximately 0.25 at 1217degrees K. However, this emissivity is for
polished platinum. The emissivity would be higher (0.05 maximum
variation) for a less smooth surface. Still, a lower surface
temperature (less than 1217 degrees K for platinum) would tend to
raise the spectral emissivity variation a maximum of 0.025. The total
maximum variation in spectral emissivity would then be about 0.075.
Added to the normal spectral emissivity would equal 0.25 + 0.075 =
0.325.

The reflectivity, being the inverse of emissivity, would then equal
0.675 for a worst case scenario. At this point, it might be worthwhile
to examine the orbits of metallic asteroids to determine that more of
these type asteroids are located in the inner asteroid belt, which
makes an elliptical path closer towards the sun, and then back towards
the earth at closest approach. This fact would then mean that a higher
and not lower surface temperature exists on the asteroid during its
observation.

On Feb 20, 7:29*am, American wrote:
On Feb 20, 9:47*am, Brad Guth wrote:









On Feb 20, 5:59*am, American wrote: On Feb 19, 5:35*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Right, and because these instruments are small, low mass and energy
efficient is why the cost per asteroid flyby survey should be really
cheap. *Of course our moon is actually one heck of an asteroid, and
thus far we've been informed of perhaps all of 0.1% about our public
funded science (the other 99.9% is still nondisclosure rated).

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

That's all right, because I've been told that many are noticing how
ridiculous the spending gets - even if the whole world chips in:

http://csis.org/publication/costs-in...nal-lunar-base... and that is, of course, all ready dependent on the current ultra-expensive lift
program that we have with ANY private enterprise, or for that matter,
any military budgeted enterprise. The problem as I see it, is that
there just isn't enough "payback" to justify all of the hoopla being
thrown at having a Moon Base - it's wayyyy too exclusive, if you ask
me, the average voter.

Right, accomplishing the moon is only worth a future payback potential
of a trillion dollars per month, and its initial investment at 100
billion per month (20+ months of that) is only worth 100 million
jobs. *Who the hell needs any of that?

In other words, with 7+ billion of us to pay for everything that we
always get to pay for anyway, so what if it cost us 10 trillion to set
that moon up for operations of accommodating us and our TBMs?

Humans have had so many do-overs, that we obviously don't give a
tinkers damn about most others, nor honestly care about our planet.
So why not go off-world in a very big way?

Of course my LSE-CM/ISS is an all-inclusive alternative that includes
cheap lunar access as well as offering an ideal outpost/gateway/
oasis...

I think the key is getting more groups involved in forcing either
private industry or Congress (impossible - they'd rather watch Rome
burn, while escaping to either Canada or Australia, than get
themselves involved in such a win-win for the American people) to
accommodate the market motivation for extraterrestrial resource
development, which include mining the metals from the asteroids first
(the pieces of a once-rogue planet have already been broken down by
their spectrographic (infared) signatures, into consumable quantities
that the privateer, so to speak, can enjoy), whereas anything 'Moon-
sized' is going to be problematic, considering the moon has almost the
same gravitational pull as the earth (IMO Newton's concept of gravity
is wrong, e.g. an asteroid ~150 miles in diameter can have a surface
gravity nearly the same as Earth's). Some asteroids even have
miniature moons orbiting around them.

Perhaps a 150 mile diameter asteroid of solid iron and nickel
(possibly one of pure thorium and gold) could provide good surface
gravity. *That's kind of unlikely, if not impossible, but then I
haven't actually worked out the math.

William Mook can get us to/from that really big asteroid we call our
moon (NASA and Kodak telling us that it's passive and harmless), at
not 10% the cost of our dysfunctional NASA and DARPA that always claim
to know everything there is to know. *Other various captured moons and/
or asteroids can be managed once we have accomplished a suitable
infrastructure of TBMs and habitats within our moon.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

But Brad, Mook never says anything about just staying in the local
asteroid belt, IMO because the Moon remains a NASA-driven agenda. He
won't let alone any of the associated technology that could be used to
extract useful metals, because that would not be kosher to dump them
all in the earth markets, because it (might) crash the value of them.
The problem as I see it, is that we're really talking about how both
the earth-to-orbit engineering, as well as the orbit-to-asteroid
engineering should, at least for a while, be driving the move into
space!

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt...asa.gov/pds/vi....

e.g.

Data Set Overview:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt...asa.gov/pds/vi....

The five filters listed for observation in the data link:

ECAS u-v color, in column 4
ECAS b-v color, in column 6
ECAS v-w color, in column 8
ECAS v-x color, in column 10
ECAS v-p color, in column 12

The data sets available in the above link can give info on calculating
what the reflectances, as well as the transmissives would be, for the
different states of metal, in the case that the asteroid in question
is of the LL chrondite variety, which means low-low iron consistency.

The spectral emissivity tends to increase with decreasing wavelength.
The normal spectral emissivity for Platinum at 1 meter wavelength is
approximately 0.25 at 1217degrees K. However, this emissivity is for
polished platinum. The emissivity would be higher (0.05 maximum
variation) for a less smooth surface. Still, a lower surface
temperature (less than 1217 degrees K for platinum) would tend to
raise the spectral emissivity variation a maximum of 0.025. The total
maximum variation in spectral emissivity would then be about 0.075.
Added to the normal spectral emissivity would equal 0.25 + 0.075 =
0.325.

The reflectivity, being the inverse of emissivity, would then equal
0.675 for a worst case scenario. At this point, it might be worthwhile
to examine the orbits of metallic asteroids to determine that more of
these type asteroids are located in the inner asteroid belt, which
makes an elliptical path closer towards the sun, and then back towards
the earth at closest approach. This fact would then mean that a higher
and not lower surface temperature exists on the asteroid during its
observation.

Mook's way cheaper fly-by-rocket alternatives can be used for anything
you like. Obviously you like doing it the spendy expendable NASA/
DARPA way.

Btw; diverting asteroids to becoming LEOs or perhaps smacking them
into the far side of our moon could be double the value, because they
can't continue to be a threat to Earth. Processing of those lunar
impact sites would be fairly simple, because of the existing TBMs and
their mineral processing infrastructure for doing just that. Of
course all of those previous craters should also be metallicity
treasure troves.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”