home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.physics:19016 sci.astro:12075
- Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.astro
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!gumby!wupost!darwin.sura.net!uvaarpa!murdoch!kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU!crb7q
- From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
- Subject: Re: Higgs Spotted?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov16.204835.25383@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
- Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
- Organization: University of Virginia
- References: <FRANL.92Nov14160323@draco.centerline.com> <1992Nov16.064710.28511@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1e8uetINNiaa@smaug.West.Sun.COM>
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 20:48:35 GMT
- Lines: 67
-
- In article <1e8uetINNiaa@smaug.West.Sun.COM> Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews) writes:
- >crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:
- >>>> "Mars is somewhat the same distance from the sun, which is
- >>>> very important. We have seen pictures where there are
- >>>> canals, we believe, and water. If there is water, there
- >>>> is oxygen. If oxygen, that means we can breathe."
- >>>> Dan Quayle, August 11, 1989
- >
- >> It sounds pretty funny when presented the appropriate way, but
- >> nothing that is said above appears to actually be wildly incorrect.
- >
- >Not as I read it.
- >
- >> 1) compared to Uranus, Mars is roughly at the same distance from the
- >> Sun as the Earth.
- >
- >If you call 52% farther "somewhat the same," then I will grant this.
- >A more complete quote from Quayle shows he preceded the above comments
- >with "Mars is essentially in the same orbit [as Earth]." P/Swift-Tuttle
- >and the Perseids are essentially in the same orbit. Earth and Mars are
- >not.
-
- Feel free to give us the 'more complete' quote.
-
- >> 2) there are large numbers of surface features that
- >> seem to have been shaped by water, and while it is true that we
- >> may not be able to see the water ....
- >
- >While there are canyons and channels, there most definitely are not canals
- >(unless you use a silly definition of "canal" being any markings on Mars;
- >such a definition is irrelevant in a context discussing evidence of water).
- >Second, Quayle used the present tense in saying that pictures show there
- >*are* canals and water. There most definitely is no photographic evidence
- >of water on Mars *now*.
-
- Colloquial politician definition of canals as 'things that used
- to hold water'. The existence of pluvial features on Mars
- *is* one of the justifications for assuming that there is water
- somewhere. The pictures show things that look like riverbeds,
- thus we believe there may be water.
-
- >> 3) where there is water, there is oxygen,
- >> and 4) any number of proposals have been made in my community to use
- >> indigenous materials, including subsurface water, to breathe.
- >
- >In Quayle's statement, we can either take "oxygen" to mean atomic oxygen
- >or molecular oxygen. If the former, then Quayle's first statement is true
- >and the second is false -- you need atomic oxygen plus a whole lot more.
- >If we take "oxygen" to mean molecular oxygen, then the first statement
- >is false and the second is true (with the qualification that you must
- >have enough oxygen). Either way, Quayle loses (but he took care of that
- >2 weeks ago anyway).
-
- Only if you assume that he was talking about breathing water.
- He was fully aware of proposals to procure consumables from
- Mars itself.
-
- You have to assume he is stupid to make him stupid. This seems
- silly and very misleading.
-
- dale bass
-
- --
- C. R. Bass crb7q@virginia.edu
- Department of Mechanical,
- Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering
- University of Virginia (804) 924-7926
-