#31
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
On Oct 9, 12:00 pm, Michael Ash wrote:
In rec.arts.sf.science Eivind Kjorstad wrote: If you can use a very narrow signal, this problem goes away, it's a bit hard to imagine a swarm of LEO-satelites, each maintaining a large number of very narrow-beam signals (say laser) with independent receivers. Keep in mind that the lower a satelite is, the faster it zips by, from the POV of the receiver. So the satelite would need to be constantly tracking with all of its beams, and there'd be a constant stream of handovers from one satelite to the next. Using a phased array would probably help a lot. Then everything comes down to a problem of computing power, something which becomes less of a problem with each passing day. Actually, that is precisely my approach. 600 satellites in LEO - located in 24 orbital planes, 25 satellite in each plane - all sunsynch polar orbits. Each satellite uses a large phased array antenna to paint doppler corrected stationary cells using GPS signals. Think of a digital projector equipped with a gyroscope. As the projector moves it could provide signals to a computer to paint a pattern that remained stationary on the screen regardless of how the projector moved. Now imagine a large number of projectors flying around the back of the room so equipped. As long as the fields of view overlapped, the picture would remain stationary no matter what the projectors were doing. This is what we're talking about for the satellite. That's the downlink/uplink. Each satellite is a router, with a half dozen open optical links at 20 THz between nearest neighbors. So,you have a very broadband optical backbone,and a large number of overlapping stationary doppler corrected hotspots on the surface. That's the plan. And at the end of the day you get internet to the few places where it -doesn't- pay to do it the land-based way. Which means there's few users and/or the ones that are there have low ability to pay for it. This is the lesson of Iridium. Non-satellite works well enough for 99.99% of the people, so you'd better be able to make money off only 0.01% of the people. What nonsense. Just because someone already subscribes doesn't mean they won't subscribe from you. And those who already have service,are not 100% of the human population. By providing wireless global broadband at dramatically reduced prices you increase the number of folks who have access as well as steal away customers from more traditional high priced systems. Only 1.5 billion people have routine access to the internet today and only 3.0 billion have telephone service. There are nearly 7 billion people in the world. So, the market is huge. The 600 satellites described above would cost something like $40 billion to build and install (including development of the reusable launcher fleet that puts them in place) and provide something on the order of 50 billion channels for a period of 15 to 30 years. So, by charging $1 per channel per month, you'd make a helluva return on investment!! And $1 per channel per month would be the high end. The low end might be $1 per channel per year - and you'd get nearly total coverage of the market. In this way you'd capture the $90 billion or so per year in telecommunications services. And this is just the start. You'd sell all sorts of equipment to attach to the global broadband system,and you'd also sell a wide range of services. Micro-banking, global banking, insurance, retirement plans - basically providing a stable financial infrastructure for developing as well as developed nations - which could increase revenues into the trillions of dollars. The same reusable fleet that put up the satellites would be available after to put up a lunar hotel. That hotel once established could announce the first bank of luna and deliver banking insurance retirement investment and other financial services electronically around the world (and on the moon and point in between). It could even issue silver bullion in increments of say 2.5 grams. This bullion I envision would be in the form of two transparent plastic coins sandwiched together with a thin layer of silver vapor deposited on the interior. The interior of each plastic chip would have copyrighted holographic artwork - and would be sold at a slight premium over spot silver as bullion. Silver bullion 'coins' - silver lunars 2.5 grams = $1.00 12.5 grams = $5.00 25.0 grams = $10.00 Gold bullion 'coins' - gold lunars 1.0 grams = $20.00 2.5 grams = $50.00 5.0 grams = $100.00 25.0 grams = $500.00 Backed by the good faith and credit of the first bank of luna. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:41:50 -0700, in a place far, far away,
Crown-Horned Snorkack made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Hint: It doesn't work like ships, where the flag nation is automatically responsible. Ah, this part. Read the Outer Space Treaty and Liability Convention then. Nowhere is the citizenship of persons mentioned. I see references to launching state, and to states whose territory is used for launch as well as states performing or procuring the launch, but not to persons. When a Soviet spacecraft (unmanned) crashed in Canada, Soviet Union paid for damage. Should a US spaceship launched or about to land in Florida crash in Cuba, USA would pay Cuba for the damages. Columbia carried an Israeli citizen. If a US shuttle with an Israeli citizen aboard were to crash in Cuba, would Israel be jointly and severally liable for the damages done to Cuba, or would the damages be paid by USA alone? It was a US launch. The US would be liable. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 07:24:51 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote: No, it does not appear that that is the case at all. If a company chartered in the Bahamas owns a Liberian flagged ship with a Moroccan crew and there is an accident, who is financially responsible? Now ask yourself the same question about a spacecraft. The answer is quite different. How is it different? |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:47:58 -0600, "Logan Kearsley"
wrote: wrote in message oups.com... On Oct 7, 2:40 pm, "Logan Kearsley" wrote: "Space Cadet" wrote in message ps.com... Hi All Got this email from a friend of mine: Hi all, I am working on a new lesson for my second graders focusing on Moon Laws. If YOU were given the task of creating a constitution, laws, bill of rights for people in a future lunar colony what would YOU include? I'd love to have your input! Thanks, My first thought is that doesn't the OST say or at least imply that the country that launches an object/probe/spacecraft is responsible for said object? And whatever rule of law applies to that country would apply to said object? Even if you would go with a privately funded moon colony. That company would be based on some nation on Earth, and whatever laws apply to that country would apply to the colony? Yes, but... that doesn't mean that the people living in the colony have to agree with the Earthlings who signed that treaty. They could just declare themselves soveriegn and say "*we* never signed the OST, so bugger off". Well wait a minute most of the people living there will have been born on Earth,and be from one of the nations that signed the OST. So,its Yes. So? Most of them probably wouldn't *want* to declare independence; there are lots of very good practical reasons *not* to. But there's nothing to stop them from doing so if they *did* want to. All the things that stop most terrestrial separatist groups from declaring independence and forming their own nations, would still apply. You will note that most separatist groups do *not* in fact declare independence, and when one does it's a fairly traumatic process with a high failure rate. And it's not just a matter of brute force being used to squash the separatists, either. Building a nation, or nation-substitute, is hard even when nobody is opposing you. There's nothing magical or more special about nations than any other group of people that causes them to exist on their own or by Authoritative Permission of someone else. However, nations that *do* exist, tend to be pretty good about continuing to exist. Part of that is not just politely waving bye-bye when a bunch of separatists decide to lop off a chunk of the nation's territory. Heck, an even bigger part is arranging things so that the separatists are never a local majority and/or never manage to make the case for independence. not quite that easy. And their children, even if born on the moon, will likely be claimed as citizens from the country their parents were born in. Sort of like kids born at military bases in other nations. Why should they care if some other nation considers them to be citizens? It just means they get double citizenship for free. Citizenship, free? Citizenship means having to pay taxes. And comes with other obligations like obeying laws and serving on juries or even in armies. Being so obligated to two nations, is more expensive than one, even if both governments are being nice and cooperative about it. If they're *not* being cooperative, dual citizenship can be an enormous hassle. For example, and not hypothetical, you can be required to spend the years between age 18 and 20 serving in the armies of two different nations. Pick one, and for the rest of your life risk prison if you ever set foot in a country that has an extradition treaty with the other. -- *John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, * *Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" * *Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition * *White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute * * for success" * *661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition * |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
"John Schilling" wrote in message
... On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:47:58 -0600, "Logan Kearsley" wrote: wrote in message roups.com... On Oct 7, 2:40 pm, "Logan Kearsley" wrote: "Space Cadet" wrote in message ps.com... Hi All Got this email from a friend of mine: Hi all, I am working on a new lesson for my second graders focusing on Moon Laws. If YOU were given the task of creating a constitution, laws, bill of rights for people in a future lunar colony what would YOU include? I'd love to have your input! Thanks, My first thought is that doesn't the OST say or at least imply that the country that launches an object/probe/spacecraft is responsible for said object? And whatever rule of law applies to that country would apply to said object? Even if you would go with a privately funded moon colony. That company would be based on some nation on Earth, and whatever laws apply to that country would apply to the colony? Yes, but... that doesn't mean that the people living in the colony have to agree with the Earthlings who signed that treaty. They could just declare themselves soveriegn and say "*we* never signed the OST, so bugger off". Well wait a minute most of the people living there will have been born on Earth,and be from one of the nations that signed the OST. So,its Yes. So? Most of them probably wouldn't *want* to declare independence; there are lots of very good practical reasons *not* to. But there's nothing to stop them from doing so if they *did* want to. All the things that stop most terrestrial separatist groups from declaring independence and forming their own nations, would still apply. You will Never said otherwise. note that most separatist groups do *not* in fact declare independence, and when one does it's a fairly traumatic process with a high failure rate. And it's not just a matter of brute force being used to squash the separatists, either. Building a nation, or nation-substitute, is hard even when nobody is opposing you. And yet we do know that it is in fact possible to declare independence and establish a new nation, even though it doesn't happen very often, because every once in a while those separatist groups *do* in fact declare independence, and sometimes they even succeed. That won't change just because you're on the Moon. I have never claimed anything stronger than that. -l. ------------------------------------ My inbox is a sacred shrine, none shall enter that are not worthy. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:14:19 -0700, John Schilling
wrote: If they're *not* being cooperative, dual citizenship can be an enormous hassle. For example, and not hypothetical, you can be required to spend the years between age 18 and 20 serving in the armies of two different nations. Pick one, and for the rest of your life risk prison if you ever set foot in a country that has an extradition treaty with the other. Do you have any case examples of this? |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
On Oct 9, 6:51 pm, Michael Ash wrote:
In rec.arts.sf.science wrote: That's the downlink/uplink. Each satellite is a router, with a half dozen open optical links at 20 THz between nearest neighbors. I suppose you have some special technique for transmitting data optically over 1000+ miles of empty space without any sort of repeaters at a rate which has any sort of hope of competing with terrestrial installations? Yes I do have such a technique. Here is a primer; Short distance optical problem; http://spiedl.aip.org/getabs/servlet...cvips&gifs=yes Long distance optical problem; http://seti.harvard.edu/oseti/tech.pdf http://seti.harvard.edu/oseti/oseti.pdf Now, consider two telescopes pointed at each other separated by some distance, say 10,000 km. Small optical telescope 450 mm aperture Small modulated laser array (think of a low-res TV screen with each pixel independently variable at many MHz) Several laser arrays at different colors (Ge, GaAs(1), GaAs(2), GaAs(3),InPh,etc.) Communicating with another telescope With a dichroic film stack efficiently reflecting each color onto a matching detector array at the focus of the telescope. Think of a color TV camera producing a signal from each pixel at many MHz At a modest power level and sensitivity, such a setup with moderate pointing accuracy easily communicates 10,000 km through the vacuum of space with a bandwidth of about 40,000 GHz. Six full duplex communication sets per router - communicate with the 6 closest nearest neighbors - providing 480,000 GHz This is the lesson of Iridium. Non-satellite works well enough for 99.99% of the people, so you'd better be able to make money off only 0.01% of the people. What nonsense. Just because someone already subscribes doesn't mean they won't subscribe from you. And those who already have service,are not 100% of the human population. By providing wireless global broadband at dramatically reduced prices you increase the number of folks who have access as well as steal away customers from more traditional high priced systems. You're going to *reduce* prices by going for the most expensive possible way to provide service? Right.... Explain your reasoning? Your statement is pretty facile. Obviously how you measure expense and what you get for it determines the cost of the service. Saying one thing is expensive isn't enough. For example, each satellite will cost millions of dollars. But putting up millions of virtual cells over the entire earth with only hundreds of satellites provides a great cost multiplier., Having a tera-hertz backbone and a terahertz uplink downlink using multiple gigahertz beams that reuse the same frequencies at different phases - provide the lowest cost system in history. So, yeah, despite your stupid comment, it willl be pretty great. Only 1.5 billion people have routine access to the internet today and only 3.0 billion have telephone service. There are nearly 7 billion people in the world. So, the market is huge. Do you know *why* there are billions and billions of people with no access to telephone or internet service? They cannot afford it and they have no infrastructure. It's because they're dirt poor! haha..idiot Can you quantify that with real data? No because if you'd look at real data before spouting ill informed opinions you wouldn't look like such a jackass. Here look here; http://devdata.worldbank.org/wdi2006...nts/index2.htm Fact is the two most populous nations on Earth, China and India have the strongest growth and relatively high income with inferior telecom infrastructure that is highly regulated. China 1,322 million people $7,800 per capita 11.1% growth India 1,130 million people $3,800 per capita 9.4% growth By comparison US 300 million people $43,800 per capita 2.9% growth Now, $300 per month and $600 per month is small compared to $3,600 per month - BUT - at even $300 per month a family of four makes $1,200 a month, and could easily afford $3 to $9 per month for quality wireless broadband. Check out this country; Russia 141 million $12,200 per capita 6.7% growth Here are 2.5 billion people that could afford $9 per month - per household, which would be $9 billion per month - and generate $54 billion on a $40 billion investment with very little recurring costs. In fact since China is a quality industrial exporter,you could cut a deal with the Chinese government to provide telecom services in exchange for handset and other equipment that would communicate with that infrastructure. People with no discretionary income tend to make for really bad customers for fancy space-based services. Depends on the details. Clearly even India has sufficient discretionary income to pay $9 per channel per month for wireless broadband. The 600 satellites described above would cost something like $40 billion to build and install (including development of the reusable launcher fleet that puts them in place) and provide something on the order of 50 billion channels for a period of 15 to 30 years. Iridium cost about $6 billion and included roughly 1/10th the number of satellites, so your cost would seem to be reasonable for traditional launch methods. Include pie-in-the-sky R&D for reusable stuff and I completely do not buy it. Well like your earlier comments these comments are based on your deep seated prejudices not on any factual or technical analysis. I have no idea what a channel is in this context, though. That I believe. So, by charging $1 per channel per month, you'd make a helluva return on investment!! And $1 per channel per month would be the high end. The low end might be $1 per channel per year - and you'd get nearly total coverage of the market. In this way you'd capture the $90 billion or so per year in telecommunications services. You said 50 billion channels, which is something like 8 per human, so these are something which people will find a need for more than one? Obviously yes. There are a variety of services that will be sold to provide a whole new level of capacity for people. Virtual reality, Ultrahigh definition, telerobotics, a variety of informational, financial, navigation and security services - unlike our current media, which is oriented toward entertainments, this new service will contain a plethora of entertainments certainly, but it will also provide a wide range of distinct economic benefits - otherwise the 3 billion folks who will be buying the services, won't buy them. Its just where they are in their economic growth. Think of a mid-western farmer in the US in the early part of the 18th century. They wouldn't have purchased entertainments either. They would have thought it ungodly even. Its the same for most of the rest of the developing world. They're no nonsense hardworking god fearing people - that are smart enough to take advantage of advanced technology when its package and price right, and delivers the goods. And this is just the start. You'd sell all sorts of equipment to attach to the global broadband system,and you'd also sell a wide range of services. Micro-banking, global banking, insurance, retirement plans - basically providing a stable financial infrastructure for developing as well as developed nations - which could increase revenues into the trillions of dollars. The internet has shown that there is generally little value in proprietary networks anymore. That's because no one has done it right, or on the scale we're talking about here. If you manage to get a cut of all of these activities directly you're just setting yourself up to make sure nobody ever uses the service. That's as ludicrous a statement as any of the other clueless statements you've made. Fact is,it depends on the details, and when you look at the details, the benefits you offer versus the cost you charge - if its in the right range - with the right people and so forth - will work out quite nicely - and the existing services that we now call the internet will fit nicely in the corner of this service. The same reusable fleet that put up the satellites would be available after to put up a lunar hotel. That hotel once established Selling a concept because the leftover infrastructure will be available for even *crazier* activities which will, we are assured, make us even *more* money is a classic technique but it's not going to work on me. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I am not asking you for anything. I ammerely stating a fact. We build a fleet of reusable vehicles that will still have about 85% of their flight capability when the satellite network is completed. Obviously that capability will find other uses. Since I own them at the end of the day, it is plainly a valid interest to what these assets will be put to use doing. Let's be more realistic. Let's assume you can find, oh I dunno, one milion subscribers who somehow are not satisfied with the wealth of ground-based options available. I'll just tell you what I'm doing. I am building 5 coal-to-liquid facilities throughout the world and own a large segment of each. Once these are operational in 2011 Iwill have significant income. I will spend a portion of that income developing the core technologies for the satellites, launchers, uplink, downlink, open optical systems, etc., etc.,along with the advanced router technologies on board the satellites. And I will launch 600 satellites as described and announce the service. ISP operators will be able to tap into this new backbone with special wireless ground stations, and I will work with manufacturers to make a variety of handsets, add on equipment and hardware available that will tap into this system. As I said the internet will sit comfortably in a corner of this system and there will be no charge for that. Telephone services will be provided free as well. think of the way Google Earth is marketed. You have a free version. You have a pro version. You have a corporate version. Same here. Whatever you take for granted from your wireless, cable, and internet provider today, you obtain FREE from my system - anywhere in the world. I will make sure all that stuff is available for free. Then, you will have opportunities to buy additional services at added costs. (Note that Iridium currently has one-fifth this number, and had only 55,000 at the point when it declared bankruptcy.) It was slow in developing its network and deployed a substandard network all because of inadequate access to launchers. That's why building my own fleet of reusable launchers is absolutely critical. furthermore, Motorola did not adequately fund the entire project nor plan sufficiently for the challenges it faced. It also assumed a fixed target market - and didn't project improvements adequately and it was delayed getting to market which also was a killer. Let's further assume that your investors will accept a 5% return on investment. I have no other investors. This means that for your $50 billion system, you need to generate $2500/year *per subscriber* just for the interest payments, If you have $50 billion channels, you'd pay $1 per channel per YEAR - oh yeah, you put in a bogus number for the number of subscribers. Look, you put up the system and fully populate the earth with virtual cells, you make today's services basically free through the system - ISPs can link in and still collect fees through the system - you give the hardware away at cost.. Then you start upgrading the system and charge for upgrades - if people want them. completely ignoring operating costs. Why pull numbers out of your ass? Today's telecom market earns $90 billion worldwide. If I charged 50% of what others charged (but I'm giving it away free remember) I'd earn $45 billion a year. But its even simpler than this a $40 billion system earning $1 per channel per YEAR on 50 billion channels would have a revenue of $50 billion per year- a 125% annualized return on investment. This doesn't count the revenue on the ground from the sale of hardware that makes use of the network. Asimo type robots that are controlled via VR links remotely - to allow people to live anywhere and work anywhere else - would be a huge boon to developing nations. A robot with appropriate equipment in even the remotest village could provide instantly an entire range of services from medicine to dental work to police to engineering - telerobotically.- and the folk living there could deliver services anywhere in the world. dramatically increasing wealth throughout the world, and increasing demand for this wireless broadband. If we assume that you can run and maintain this enormous satellite fleet for the same cost as the interest payments, What are the costs of operating a fully automated solar powered infrastructure? Why make assumptions. The documentation is clear. Satellite networks have a well defined cost structure. You pay a lot up front and very little ongoing. Your numbers are totally bogus, cooked up for the sole purpose of saying nasty dismissive things about this idea. Fact is,adequately funded and properly executed, this would be a huge benefit to everyone on Earth and everyone on Earth can afford to pay back 20x the cost of the system over its life while paying only 1% of what people in the advanced countries are paying for the same services today. you'll "only" need to generate $5000/year per subscriber, or a bit over $400/month, where comparable cellular service which only works *nearly* anywhere can currently be had for roughly one tenth the cost. Your numbers are totally asinine and wrong. Wireless, cable, internet, type services will be provided free of charge to all. ISP operators, cable operators, telephone operators,will have free unfettered access through these channels to communicate with their subscribers - free of charge. This will take up about 3 billion of the 50 billion channel capacity. The remainder will be reserved for upgrades - and that's where income will be generated. The channel will be a commodity and operators will live on value added services. This is ignoring the cost of the purpose-built (i.e. expensive) satellite modem Nonsense. That's why special launchers are needed. Each satellite will be large and equipped with a large (sensitive) phased array antenna (think radio telescope) in low orbit, using GPS signals to paint the Earth's surface with millions of low power doppler corrected cells - so that the satellites will communicate with existing wireless devices. which each subsciber must buy, whether directly with his own money or indirectly in his subscription fees. Hmm.. no the system will use off-the-shelf wireless chipsets adapted to this new system. The money will be put in the satellites and launcher to lower the cost of the ground system so that even the 'dirt poor' can afford them. The satellite modem as you called it will be ubiquitous and every device will have several - reducing their costs even further. So, best of luck with your project, but for your investors' sake I hope that you never get anywhere with it. Its very clear you hope I get nowhere with my idea. Your hatred is plain for all to see. Fact is,I have no outside investors, I don't need them. -- Michael Ash Rogue Amoeba Software |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Moon Laws
Since the formation of the UN, has there be a case of a former
colony declaring itself independence? What mechanisms are in place at the UN to reconize a new country. The only new country that comes mind off the top of my head is Israel and there has been 'some' controversy over its formation ;^) Small world you have. Here is a few more from http://geography.about.com/od/lists/...endenceday.htm Most of these are former colonies. The Mandate of Palestine (which later became Israel and Jordan) wasn't strictly speaking "a colony", but something League of Nations put together after the collapse of Ottoman Empire. Btw, UN doesn't recognize countries. Individual member states do. But becoming member of UN you need both General Assembly and Security Council approval. August 15, 1945 - Korea, North August 15, 1945 - Korea, South August 17, 1945 - Indonesia Sept. 2, 1945 - Vietnam April 17, 1946 - Syria May 25, 1946 - Jordan August 14, 1947 - Pakistan August 15, 1947 - India January 4, 1948 - Burma February 4, 1948 - Sri Lanka May 14, 1948 - Israel July 19, 1949 - Laos August 8, 1949 - Bhutan December 24, 1951 - Libya November 9, 1953 - Cambodia January 1, 1956 - Sudan March 2, 1956 - Morocco March 20, 1956 - Tunisia March 6, 1957 - Ghana August 31, 1957 - Malaysia October 2, 1958 - Guinea January 1, 1960 - Cameroon April 4, 1960 - Senegal May 27, 1960 - Togo June 30, 1960 - Congo, Republic of the July 1, 1960 - Somalia July 26, 1960 - Madagascar August 1, 1960 - Benin August 3, 1960 - Niger August 5, 1960 - Burkina Faso August 7, 1960 - Cote d'Ivorie August 11, 1960 - Chad August 13, 1960 - Central African Republic August 15, 1960 - Congo, Dem. Rep. of the August 16, 1960 - Cyprus August 17, 1960 - Gabon Sept. 22, 1960 - Mali October 1, 1960 - Nigeria November 28, 1960 - Mauritania April 27, 1961 - Sierra Leone June 19, 1961 - Kuwait January 1, 1962 - Samoa July 1, 1962 - Burundi July 1, 1962 - Rwanda July 5, 1962 - Algeria August 6, 1962 - Jamaica August 31, 1962 - Trinidad and Tobago October 9, 1962 - Uganda December 12, 1963 - Kenya April 26, 1964 - Tanzania July 6, 1964 - Malawi Sept. 21, 1964 - Malta October 24, 1964 - Zambia February 18, 1965 - Gambia, The July 26, 1965 - Maldives August 9, 1965 - Singapore May 26, 1966 - Guyana September 30, 1966 - Botswana October 4, 1966 - Lesotho November 30, 1966 - Barbados January 31, 1968 - Nauru March 12, 1968 - Mauritius Sept. 6, 1968 - Swaziland October 12, 1968 - Equatorial June 4, 1970 - Tonga October 10, 1970 - Fiji March 26, 1971 - Bangladesh August 15, 1971 - Bahrain Sept. 3, 1971 - Qatar November 2, 1971 - United Arab Emirates July 10, 1973 - Bahamas Sept. 24, 1973 - Guinea-Bissau February 7, 1974 - Grenada June 25, 1975 - Mozambique July 5, 1975 - Cape Verde July 6, 1975 - Comoros July 12, 1975 - Sao Tome and Principe Sept. 16, 1975 - Papua New Guinea November 11, 1975 - Angola November 25, 1975 - Suriname June 29, 1976 - Seychelles June 27, 1977 - Djibouti July 7, 1978 - Solomon Islands October 1, 1978 - Tuvalu November 3, 1978 - Dominica February 22, 1979 - Saint Lucia July 12, 1979 - Kiribati October 27, 1979 - Saint Vincent and the Grenadines April 18, 1980 - Zimbabwe July 30, 1980 - Vanuatu January 11, 1981 - Antigua and Barbuda Sept. 21, 1981 - Belize Sept. 19, 1983 - Saint Kitts and Nevis January 1, 1984 - Brunei October 21, 1986 - Marshall Islands November 3, 1986 - Micronesia, Federated States of March 11, 1990 - Lithuania March 21, 1990 - Namibia May 22, 1990 - Yemen April 9, 1991 - Georgia June 25, 1991 - Croatia June 25, 1991 - Slovenia August 20, 1991 - Estonia August 21, 1991 - Kyrgyzstan August 24, 1991 - Russia August 25, 1991 - Belarus August 27, 1991 - Moldova August 30, 1991 - Azerbaijan Sept. 1, 1991 - Uzbekistan Sept. 6, 1991 - Latvia Sept. 8, 1991 - Macedonia Sept. 9, 1991 - Tajikistan Sept. 21, 1991 - Armenia October 27, 1991 - Turkmenistan November 24, 1991 - Ukraine December 16, 1991 - Kazakhstan March 3, 1992 - Bosnia and Herzegovina January 1, 1993 - Czech Republic January 1, 1993 - Slovakia May 24, 1993 - Eritrea October 1, 1994 - Palau May 20, 2002 - East Timor June 3, 2006 - Montenegro June 5, 2006 - Serbia |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Laws of Nature | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 0 | January 2nd 07 10:31 PM |
80/f5 For the In-Laws | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | November 3rd 05 12:55 AM |
IP in china worse than no laws at all | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | February 24th 05 03:02 AM |
Kepler's laws and trajectories | tetrahedron | Astronomy Misc | 2 | March 27th 04 05:31 AM |
Kepler's laws | Michael McNeil | Astronomy Misc | 1 | January 23rd 04 04:45 PM |