NASA declines to protect the Planet Earth

In article ,
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
In sci.physics,

wrote
on Tue, 15 Aug 06 10:27:00 GMT
:
In article ,
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
In sci.physics, Derek Lyons

wrote
on Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:45:06 GMT
:
wrote:

In article ,
Alan Anderson wrote:
wrote:

Alan Anderson wrote:
Boiling for cooking is used mostly to provide a consistent
temperature,
not for killing germs. For that, 80 Celsius will do just as well as
100...

Then why does the health advisories say boil your water for
5 minutes?

Because it's easier to bring water to a boil than to monitor its
temperature with a thermometer.

Sigh! I understand that part. I want to know about the 5 minutes.


Because when water starts boiling (to noncooks meaning generally
somewhere around a low rolling boil) generally the entire mass of the
water isn't at boiling, especially if the quantity is above a gallon
or two. Letting it go for five minutes allows the entire mass to mix
and get above 160F.

D.

I suspect it gets complicated at this point. The water at
bottom is the water usually receiving the heat. It will
of course vaporize; the bubbles of vapor will rise as they
are less dense. Depending on water temperature above, the
vapor may simply collapse (and rather noisily), or will
continue to the surface and evolve as steam. Since most
boiling water boils into air (although high-pressure
boilers might let the steam into piping), it will cool and
generate fog/water vapor droplets, unless it's really hot.

As for sterilization, I for one can't say. One form of
pasteurization requires a temperature of only about 160 F,
although there are lifeforms that can live near the very high
temperatures of "smoker vents" at the ocean floor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteurization

So 5 minutes is quite literally overkill, but there are
issues in heating the rest of the water above the water
that's actually vaporizing on the bottom. I for one could
see cold water boiling

But this is not boiling. Boiling is big bubbles at the top
and through.

It is boiling at the bottom, but not at the top.

Sigh! To a cook that (bubbles at the bottom) is not boiling.

snip

/BAH

In article ,
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
US involvement in the European theater didn't effectively begin until
sometime in January (the timeline indicates 1942-01-26 as
the time troops arrive in Great Britain) and may not have
been done in earnest until sometime that summer...

US involvement in the European theater began, in earnest, when the
Lend-Lease Bill took effect on 11 March 1941, and Congress initially
authorized the President to loan up to $7G worth of war materiel to "any
nation whose defence the President deemed vital to the defence of the
United States" -- that is, to Britain. Not least among the effects of the
bill was that it rescued Britain from impending bankruptcy. (In fact,
because the bill moved more slowly than expected, Britain would have been
bankrupt on 1 March had the Belgian government-in-exile not loaned Britain
GBP60M in gold as bridge financing.)

In April, British ships started refitting in US ports. On 27 May,
Roosevelt proclaimed a national emergency. Three weeks later, he
suspended diplomatic relations with Germany and Italy and froze their
US assets. In July US troops moved into Iceland, replacing a British
garrison, to protect the island and build naval facilities for convoy
protection. In September the USN, which had been providing convoy escorts
for US vessels for some time, began providing them for foreign ships too.

Also, Germany declared war on the US 3 days later, presumably
because of their alliance with Japan at the time.

Note that Japan hadn't bothered to follow Germany into war against Russia
despite that alliance, so it's unlikely to have been influenced Hitler
much. More significant, almost certainly, was the growing US involvement
in Britain's war effort (see above)... plus the publication by the Chicago
Tribune, on 4 Dec, of a secret US Army plan for war against Germany and
Japan (which we know Hitler took seriously, because he mentioned it in his
Reichstag declaration-of-war speech).

(In fact, the plan was just the usual sort of military contingency
planning -- "what would we *do* if we ended up at war with Germany and
Japan?" -- but the Tribune was isolationist, and played it up because
Congress was then debating a supplementary defence appropriation.)
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

In article ,
Alan Anderson wrote:
In fact most of the meals probably WILL be planned in advance.
That will not help morale. I thought the goal was variety, not
a high school cafeteria menu (if it's Thursday, it must be SOS).

The goal is not variety. It is palatability.

The two are not unconnected; even an excellent meal will start to pall if
you eat the same thing enough times in succession. The rule of thumb in
*well run* institutional cafeterias -- the ones in high schools generally
do not qualify -- is that you need something like a 28-day cycle of menus.
Five (or seven) menus is definitely not enough to make people forget about
the repetition.

By the way, don't confuse variety with choice. Variety can be preplanned.
People typically want to have their choice on snacks, but mostly aren't
bothered by having most of the major meals planned in advance, if the food
tastes good and the menu varies enough.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

In article ,
Andy Resnick wrote:
NASA tried a tether experiment that was a spectacular and colossal
failure...

Twice, in fact... both times because of manufacturing defects rather than
anything wrong with the overall plan. Several more-modest tether
experiments around the same time were quite successful.

(Not that there aren't some complex dynamics issues for large tether
systems like the ones that would be used for artificial gravity, but
those issues are a very small part of mounting such a mission.)
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

In article ,
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
As for sterilization, I for one can't say. One form of
pasteurization requires a temperature of only about 160 F,
although there are lifeforms that can live near the very high
temperatures of "smoker vents" at the ocean floor...

There are, in fact, organisms which thrive at roughly the conditions used
in autoclaves (for hospital-class sterilization of equipment etc.).

*However*, those organisms are completely dormant under more normal
conditions. They aren't a threat. All the really heat-tolerant forms are
specialized, and will grow and multiply *only* under extreme conditions.
Near-boiling temperatures will kill everything that will grow and multiply
inside you.

Note that pasteurization in particular doesn't kill 100.0% of bacteria,
which is why pasteurized milk will eventually spoil even in a still-sealed
container. (Whereas irradiated milk, which really is completely sterile,
will keep almost forever if the seal is unbroken.) Pasteurization is a
compromise between killing bugs and ruining the food by overheating; it
settles for killing almost all of them, to greatly delay spoilage.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

Henry Spencer wrote:

NASA tried a tether experiment that was a spectacular and colossal
failure...

Twice, in fact... both times because of manufacturing defects rather than

being a butt ****ing stupid concept, eh, Henry?

Henry Spencer - defending NASA as only NASA can't.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org

In article ,
(Henry Spencer) wrote:

The two are not unconnected; even an excellent meal will start to pall if
you eat the same thing enough times in succession. The rule of thumb in
*well run* institutional cafeterias -- the ones in high schools generally
do not qualify -- is that you need something like a 28-day cycle of menus.
Five (or seven) menus is definitely not enough to make people forget about
the repetition.

Remind me never to have you stay with me for a few weeks. We have about
5-10 different meals for dinner, and the same lunch and breakfast every
day (with some variation on weekends).

This is by choice, mind you, not because we're living in an institution
with a limited menu. We just lack the time and incentive to put more
effort into our own meal planning. So I think you are vastly
overstating your case here.

Cheers,
- Joe

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
| Henry Spencer wrote:
|
| NASA tried a tether experiment that was a spectacular and colossal
| failure...
|
| Twice, in fact... both times because of manufacturing defects rather
than
|
| being a butt ****ing stupid concept, eh, Henry?
|
| Henry Spencer - defending NASA as only NASA can't.
|
The solar sails on the ISS seem to be tethered. Any idea why they haven't
broken off yet? :-)
http://ams.pg.infn.it/whatis/photos/iss/iss.jpg
Androcles

Sorcerer wrote:
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
| Henry Spencer wrote:
|
| NASA tried a tether experiment that was a spectacular and colossal
| failure...
|
| Twice, in fact... both times because of manufacturing defects rather
than
|
| being a butt ****ing stupid concept, eh, Henry?
|
| Henry Spencer - defending NASA as only NASA can't.
|
The solar sails on the ISS seem to be tethered. Any idea why they haven't
broken off yet? :-)
http://ams.pg.infn.it/whatis/photos/iss/iss.jpg

Perhaps because they are relatively small well engineered square planar
arrays, with a specific useful purpose, not a wire strung out for miles
for no apparent reason except it's so cool. Like golfing in space.

**** you. I've got better things to do than suffer fools gladly.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
...
| Henry Spencer wrote:
|
| NASA tried a tether experiment that was a spectacular and colossal
| failure...
|
| Twice, in fact... both times because of manufacturing defects rather
| than being a butt ****ing stupid concept, eh, Henry?
|
| Henry Spencer - defending NASA as only NASA can't.
|

Sorcerer wrote
The solar sails on the ISS seem to be tethered. Any idea why they haven't
broken off yet? :-)
http://ams.pg.infn.it/whatis/photos/iss/iss.jpg

[Fritz to Andro]
Perhaps because they are relatively small well engineered square planar
arrays, with a specific useful purpose, not a wire strung out for miles
for no apparent reason except it's so cool. Like golfing in space.
**** you. I've got better things to do than suffer fools gladly.

[hanson]
Fritz, you might not have to suffer so grievously if you do what you
preached in your message ...
wherein you said: "Go **** some bible camp counselors."
Go get lucky, don't suffer, Fritz.... ahahahaha...
ahahaha... ahahanson