Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #600337 > unrolled thread

A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars.

Started by"Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com>
First post2016-10-10 21:29 -0400
Last post2016-10-18 11:15 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 297 — 20 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-10-10 21:29 -0400
    A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 18:49 -0700
    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 08:45 -0500
      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-10-11 14:57 +0000
        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 10:21 -0700
        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 18:54 +0000
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-10-11 19:05 +0000
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 12:37 -0700
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2016-10-11 22:56 +0300
              the static eventuality noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 09:55 -0700
      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 10:13 -0700
        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 18:56 +0000
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 12:44 -0700
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 21:46 +0000
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-11 19:46 -0400
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:18 -0700
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:19 +0000
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:59 -0700
      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-11 19:10 -0400
        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 19:19 -0500
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-11 20:51 -0400
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 20:50 -0500
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:58 -0700
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:23 +0000
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:09 -0700
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:42 -0500
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:03 -0700
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:40 -0500
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:20 +0000
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:26 -0700
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:15 -0400
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 19:05 -0700
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:13 -0400
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 13:36 -0500
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 11:02 -0500
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 12:40 -0400
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:21 -0400
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:32 -0400
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:53 -0400
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:36 -0700
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 18:54 -0500
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:49 -0700
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:10 -0500
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:07 -0700
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:39 -0500
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-16 22:13 +0000
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:27 -0400
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:21 -0700
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:46 -0400
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 08:45 -0500
                                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 17:18 +0000
                                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 21:44 -0500
                                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 07:14 -0400
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 08:23 -0700
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:10 -0400
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 23:48 +0000
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:09 -0400
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 18:03 +0000
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:27 -0700
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:14 -0500
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 17:52 +0000
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:28 -0700
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:10 -0700
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:44 -0500
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:25 -0400
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 18:29 +0000
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:17 -0700
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 20:00 -0500
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 05:19 +0000
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 05:51 -0700
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 14:03 -0500
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 23:40 +0000
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:30 -0700
                                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 10:01 -0500
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:45 -0700
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 20:49 -0500
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 05:28 -0700
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:48 -0500
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 23:45 +0000
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:48 -0400
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 10:07 -0500
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 07:15 -0400
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 09:02 -0500
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 16:29 -0400
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-19 19:38 -0400
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 19:27 -0500
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 18:57 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:08 -0400
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 12:15 -0500
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 02:37 +0000
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 21:02 -0700
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:23 +0000
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:11 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:17 -0400
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 23:54 +0000
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:52 -0700
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:07 -0500
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:50 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:50 -0500
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:16 -0700
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:45 -0500
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:05 -0700
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:43 -0500
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:22 +0000
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 19:20 -0700
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 11:27 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:47 -0500
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:48 -0700
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-12 01:21 -0400
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:53 -0500
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-12 19:18 +0000
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 16:02 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:06 -0700
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 06:26 -0400
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:01 +0000
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:14 -0400
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 18:07 +0000
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:35 -0700
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:50 -0500
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 23:54 +0000
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:21 -0700
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 07:12 -0500
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 06:50 -0700
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 17:00 -0500
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 23:47 +0000
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:31 -0700
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 12:16 -0500
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-10-17 13:40 +0000
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:24 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:58 -0700
        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 02:36 +0000
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 21:01 -0700
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:56 -0500
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 14:12 -0700
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:49 -0500
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:06 -0700
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:45 -0500
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:08 -0700
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 11:48 -0500
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:42 -0700
        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-12 00:38 -0400
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:59 -0500
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 07:18 -0700
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 14:14 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:52 -0500
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:13 -0700
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 20:02 -0500
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:18 -0700
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 08:05 -0500
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-13 09:38 -0400
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:06 +0000
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-13 21:26 -0400
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 02:51 +0000
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:01 -0400
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 07:25 -0400
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 07:29 -0500
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 10:20 -0400
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:30 -0700
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:48 -0500
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 14:09 -0700
                                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 18:57 -0500
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:08 +0000
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:57 -0700
                                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:16 -0500
                                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:11 -0700
                                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:53 -0500
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:04 +0000
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:02 -0700
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:18 -0500
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:23 -0700
                                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 15:00 -0500
                                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:30 -0400
                                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 00:00 +0000
                                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-16 20:17 -0400
                                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 05:28 +0000
                                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-17 07:15 -0400
                                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:13 +0000
                                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:53 -0700
                                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 06:47 -0700
                                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 16:50 -0500
                                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 18:09 -0700
                                                        tensegrity ... TensegritoY noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 18:46 -0700
                                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 20:58 -0500
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:29 -0400
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:03 +0000
                                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:52 -0700
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:01 +0000
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 09:51 -0700
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:34 -0400
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 08:06 -0500
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:54 +0000
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:30 -0400
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:11 +0000
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 21:40 -0400
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 02:57 +0000
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:30 -0400
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:14 +0000
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 19:11 -0400
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 23:28 +0000
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 19:59 -0400
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 02:23 +0000
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 04:07 -0700
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:29 -0500
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:19 +0000
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 16:54 -0500
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:14 -0700
                                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 12:19 -0500
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:15 -0700
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:37 -0400
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:45 -0700
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:17 -0700
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:32 -0400
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:17 -0400
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 18:36 +0000
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:48 -0400
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:42 -0500
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:27 -0700
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:19 -0700
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-10-17 13:40 +0000
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:21 -0700
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:42 -0400
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:16 -0700
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 08:00 -0500
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 10:21 -0400
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 09:47 -0500
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:28 -0400
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:18 +0000
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:20 -0700
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:56 -0500
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:09 -0700
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-15 16:17 -0400
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-15 20:00 -0400
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:39 -0700
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:02 -0500
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:24 +0000
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:57 -0500
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:46 -0700
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:56 -0500
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:41 -0700
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 21:18 -0500
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:53 -0700
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 13:28 -0500
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:50 -0700
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:17 -0500
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:40 -0700
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:21 -0500
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 21:09 -0400
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 23:04 -0500
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:47 -0700
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:03 -0500
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:29 -0700
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:25 -0700
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-10-16 18:36 +0100
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-14 20:08 -0400
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 04:00 -0700
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:20 -0500
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:34 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 20:42 -0400
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 21:23 -0500
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 09:38 -0400
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 09:37 -0700
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 02:04 +0000
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:44 -0700
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 02:00 +0000
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:42 -0700
          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:29 -0400
            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:14 +0000
              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:32 -0400
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 12:27 -0400
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:28 +0000
                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:26 +0000
                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:34 -0700
                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:25 -0500
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2016-10-15 19:28 +0200
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:23 +0000
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:22 -0700
                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:21 +0000
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:38 +0000
                        Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:17 -0700
                          Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:07 -0500
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 13:29 -0400
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:38 +0000
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 20:28 -0400
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 00:58 +0000
                                    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:32 -0400
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 08:12 -0700
                                      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 17:24 +0000
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:38 -0700
                            Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:32 -0700
                              Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 13:43 -0500
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 16:32 -0400
                                  Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 19:00 -0700
                                Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 18:48 -0700
    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-10-11 13:34 -0700
      Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 21:48 +0000
    A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 16:19 -0700
    Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-10-18 11:15 -0400

Page 3 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 15  Next page →


#600917

FromSerigo <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-10-14 18:54 -0500
Message-ID<ntrr8l$oa9$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#600872
On 10/14/2016 1:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/13/2016 1:36 PM, Serigo wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> what else are you going to use ?  do you have any ideas ?
>>>>>
>>>>> N2 is the only practical one.
>>>>>
>>>>> and you have to take a lot of it,

>>>>> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, already tested.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 74-percent oxygen
>>>> and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of the
>>>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.

>>>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>
>>> Great, that problem solved.
>>
>> ISS uses 14.7psi about 70% O2
>>
>
> Then they're all dead, since that would give a partial pressure of
> oxygen in excess of 9 psi.
>
> Hint:  ISS air is 21% oxygen.  The remainder is nitrogen.
>

the link I found said different,
but there is so much copying going on without verification across the 
internet websites, it is hard to find the real information.

looks like N2 is a problem as well

remmember the Apollo astronoughts were at 100% O2 at 16.7 psi
which causes Teflon to burst into flames
it was to be reduced to 5 psi the flight pressure

When designing the Mercury spacecraft, NASA had considered using a 
nitrogen/oxygen mixture to reduce the fire risk near launch, but 
rejected it based on two considerations. First, nitrogen used with the 
in-flight pressure reduction carried the clear risk of decompression 
sickness (known as "the bends"). But the decision to eliminate the use 
of any gas but oxygen was crystalized when a serious accident occurred 
on April 21, 1960, in which McDonnell Aircraft test pilot G.B. North 
passed out and was seriously injured when testing a Mercury cabin / 
spacesuit atmosphere system in a vacuum chamber. The problem was found 
to be nitrogen-rich (oxygen-poor) air leaking from the cabin into his 
spacesuit feed.[35] North American Aviation had suggested using an 
oxygen/nitrogen mixture for Apollo, but NASA overruled this. The pure 
oxygen design was judged to be safer, less complicated, and lighter in 
weight.[36]

In his monograph Project Apollo: The Tough Decisions, Deputy 
Administrator Seamans wrote that NASA's single worst mistake in 
engineering judgment was not to run a fire test on the Command Module 
before the plugs-out test.[37] In the first episode of the 2009 BBC 
documentary series NASA: Triumph and Tragedy, Jim McDivitt said that 
NASA had no idea how a 100% oxygen atmosphere would influence 
burning.[38] Similar remarks by other astronauts were expressed in the 
2007 documentary film In the Shadow of the Moon.[3

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#600977

FromFred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com>
Date2016-10-15 03:49 -0700
Message-ID<17240cpo7hs0u5udbhacqk74umk6gg2ag9@4ax.com>
In reply to#600917
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:

>On 10/14/2016 1:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/13/2016 1:36 PM, Serigo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what else are you going to use ?  do you have any ideas ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> N2 is the only practical one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and you have to take a lot of it,
>
>>>>>> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, already tested.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 74-percent oxygen
>>>>> and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of the
>>>>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.
>
>>>>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Great, that problem solved.
>>>
>>> ISS uses 14.7psi about 70% O2
>>>
>>
>> Then they're all dead, since that would give a partial pressure of
>> oxygen in excess of 9 psi.
>>
>> Hint:  ISS air is 21% oxygen.  The remainder is nitrogen.
>>
>
>the link I found said different,
>

Either the link you found is preposterously wrong or you can't read.
It should have been obvious to you that it was wrong, since at that
partial pressure of oxygen people would start showing symptoms in a
day or so.

>
>but there is so much copying going on without verification across the 
>internet websites, it is hard to find the real information.
>

No, it's not hard to find at all.

>
>looks like N2 is a problem as well
>

What kind of 'problem' and did you get it off the same sort of website
you got the ISS atmosphere composition from.

<snip things I've known for decades>


-- 
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
 territory."
                                      --G. Behn

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#600993

FromSerigo <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-10-15 10:10 -0500
Message-ID<nttgtr$qdp$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#600977
On 10/15/2016 5:49 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/14/2016 1:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>

>>>
>>> Hint:  ISS air is 21% oxygen.  The remainder is nitrogen.
>>>
>>
>> the link I found said different,
>>
>
> Either the link you found is preposterously wrong

from NASA website, now admit you are wrong.


>> looks like N2 is a problem as well
>>
>
> What kind of 'problem' and did you get it off the same sort of website
> you got the ISS atmosphere composition from.

NASA,  cant you find simple information on the internet ?  Why do you 
keep making stuff up ??

>
> <snip things I've known for decades>

too bad  you've known all the WRONG stuff.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601060

FromFred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com>
Date2016-10-15 21:07 -0700
Message-ID<q4v50cl1mq34v5hphr6t5f5qj7t371mc72@4ax.com>
In reply to#600993
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:

>On 10/15/2016 5:49 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/14/2016 1:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>
>
>>>>
>>>> Hint:  ISS air is 21% oxygen.  The remainder is nitrogen.
>>>>
>>>
>>> the link I found said different,
>>>
>>
>> Either the link you found is preposterously wrong
>>
>
>from NASA website, now admit you are wrong.
>

Cite, you lying troll?

>
>>>
>>> looks like N2 is a problem as well
>>>
>>
>> What kind of 'problem' and did you get it off the same sort of website
>> you got the ISS atmosphere composition from.
>>
>
>NASA,  cant you find simple information on the internet ?  Why do you 
>keep making stuff up ??
>

Cite, you lying troll?  I note you avoid answering the question.


>>
>> <snip things I've known for decades>
>>
>
>too bad  you've known all the WRONG stuff.
>

It was the stuff YOU posted.  Are you saying everything you posted was
wrong, then?


-- 
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
 only stupid."
                            -- Heinrich Heine 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601118

FromSerigo <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-10-16 14:39 -0500
Message-ID<nu0l24$18de$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#601060
On 10/15/2016 11:07 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/15/2016 5:49 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/14/2016 1:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hint:  ISS air is 21% oxygen.  The remainder is nitrogen.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> the link I found said different,
>>>>
>>>
>>> Either the link you found is preposterously wrong
>>>
>>
>>from NASA website, now admit you are wrong.
>>
>
> Cite,


Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 84-percent oxygen
and 16-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 3 psi instead of the
"normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.

https://piv.pivpiv.dk/


>
>>
>>>>
>>>> looks like N2 is a problem as well
>>>>
>>>
>>> What kind of 'problem' and did you get it off the same sort of website
>>> you got the ISS atmosphere composition from.
>>>
>>
>> NASA,  cant you find simple information on the internet ?  Why do you
>> keep making stuff up ??
>>
>
> re-Cite,


Actually, now look at the ISS atmosphere.  It used a a 54-percent 
oxygen,  36-percent nitrogen and 10% CO2 breathing mixture at a  25 psi 
instead of the "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. 
The reason for over pressure is to counteract the small punctures by 
metorites in orbit.

http://tinyurl.com/zm2xcen

>
>
>>>
>>> <snip things I've known for decades>
>>>
>>
>> too bad  you've known all the WRONG stuff.
>>
>
> It was the stuff I posted.  Are you saying everything I posted was
> wrong, then?
>

seems that you are just wrong, I dont know why at all.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601148

FromThomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de>
Date2016-10-16 22:13 +0000
Message-ID<nu0u1r$8gt$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de>
In reply to#601118
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> schrieb:

> Actually, now look at the ISS atmosphere.  It used a a 54-percent 
> oxygen,  36-percent nitrogen and 10% CO2 breathing mixture at a  25 psi 

This is not possible. CO2 is toxic above 3%.

> http://tinyurl.com/zm2xcen

I don't follow short URLs - you don't know where they've been.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601172

From"Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com>
Date2016-10-16 19:27 -0400
Message-ID<daCdnURcq6R7kZnFnZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#601118
"Serigo"  wrote in message news:nu0l24$18de$1@gioia.aioe.org...
>
>On 10/15/2016 11:07 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/15/2016 5:49 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/14/2016 1:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hint:  ISS air is 21% oxygen.  The remainder is nitrogen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> the link I found said different,
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Either the link you found is preposterously wrong
>>>>
>>>
>>>from NASA website, now admit you are wrong.
>>>
>>
>> Cite,
>
>
>Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 84-percent oxygen
>and 16-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 3 psi instead of the
>"normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.

Yes, Skylab was designed around the Apollo pressure. That has nothing to do 
with what's here.


>
>https://piv.pivpiv.dk/
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> looks like N2 is a problem as well
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What kind of 'problem' and did you get it off the same sort of website
>>>> you got the ISS atmosphere composition from.
>>>>
>>>
>>> NASA,  cant you find simple information on the internet ?  Why do you
>>> keep making stuff up ??
>>>
>>
>> re-Cite,
>
>
>Actually, now look at the ISS atmosphere.  It used a a 54-percent oxygen, 
>36-percent nitrogen and 10% CO2 breathing mixture at a  25 psi instead of 
>the "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. The reason for 
>over pressure is to counteract the small punctures by metorites in orbit.

Again, as Thomas said, I'm not following a tiny URL, but I can tell you 
that's categorically wrong.
Hell, I posted a link from a guy who provided access to real time data (at 
the time he posted it).

And no, it's surely not that high because they're trying to replicate 
Earth's atmosphere at sea level because that's what they use as a control.

And that high of O2 is a huge fire risk, for no benefit.
And that high of CO2 would be deadly.




>
>http://tinyurl.com/zm2xcen
>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> <snip things I've known for decades>
>>>>
>>>
>>> too bad  you've known all the WRONG stuff.
>>>
>>
>> It was the stuff I posted.  Are you saying everything I posted was
>> wrong, then?
>>
>
>seems that you are just wrong, I dont know why at all.
>

No, you're wrong.  You continue to be wrong.


-- 
Greg D. Moore                   http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601191

FromFred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com>
Date2016-10-16 17:21 -0700
Message-ID<tb680ch4t8jk6bbu51f8f4h1uv9jg9a0ni@4ax.com>
In reply to#601118
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:

A demonstration of what an ignorant troll he is.


-- 
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
 truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
                               -- Thomas Jefferson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601451

FromJeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com>
Date2016-10-18 08:46 -0400
Message-ID<MPG.326fe3c9701d090298984a@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#601118
In article <nu0l24$18de$1@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
> 
> On 10/15/2016 11:07 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> > Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/15/2016 5:49 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> >>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 10/14/2016 1:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> >>>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hint:  ISS air is 21% oxygen.  The remainder is nitrogen.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> the link I found said different,
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Either the link you found is preposterously wrong
> >>>
> >>
> >>from NASA website, now admit you are wrong.
> >>
> >
> > Cite,
> 
> 
> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 84-percent oxygen
> and 16-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 3 psi instead of the
> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.
> 

74-percent oxygen and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at 5 pounds 
per square inch  
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm

Jeff
-- 
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.  
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, 
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601461

FromSerigo <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-10-18 08:45 -0500
Message-ID<nu5913$9v5$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#601451
On 10/18/2016 7:46 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:

>>
>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 84-percent oxygen
>> and 16-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 3 psi instead of the
>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.
>>
>
> 74-percent oxygen and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at 5 pounds
> per square inch
> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm
>
> Jeff
>

forget that stuff,

how are they going to get all the furnature up there ? like the chairs, 
beds, tables, desks, monitors, computers, sterios, stoves ?

you cant use a bucket for all that, and there is no IKIA nearby.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601488

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-10-18 17:18 +0000
Message-ID<s32idd-kem.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#601461
In sci.physics Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 10/18/2016 7:46 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
> 
>>>
>>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 84-percent oxygen
>>> and 16-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 3 psi instead of the
>>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.
>>>
>>
>> 74-percent oxygen and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at 5 pounds
>> per square inch
>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm
>>
>> Jeff
>>
> 
> forget that stuff,
> 
> how are they going to get all the furnature up there ? like the chairs, 
> beds, tables, desks, monitors, computers, sterios, stoves ?
> 
> you cant use a bucket for all that, and there is no IKIA nearby.
 
You are losing it and getting silly.

Of course you can haul all the crap to Mars.

If it is too big or too heavy to go as one piece you send it in pieces.

Most preassembled furniture is shipped to the stores in pieces and
assembled in the store.
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601595

FromSerigo <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-10-18 21:44 -0500
Message-ID<nu6mmo$hnm$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#601488
On 10/18/2016 12:18 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 10/18/2016 7:46 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
>>

>>>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 84-percent oxygen
>>>> and 16-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 3 psi instead of the
>>>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 74-percent oxygen and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at 5 pounds
>>> per square inch
>>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm
>>>
>>> Jeff

>>
>> forget that stuff,
>>
>> how are they going to get all the furnature up there ? like the chairs,
>> beds, tables, desks, monitors, computers, sterios, stoves ?
>>
>> you cant use a bucket for all that, and there is no IKIA nearby.
>
> You are losing it and getting silly.

yep, I have been doing increadably boring spreadsheets the past week.

[rather build a steel plant on Mars so they can house Geologists... ]

>
> Of course you can haul all the crap to Mars.
>
> If it is too big or too heavy to go as one piece you send it in pieces.
>
> Most preassembled furniture is shipped to the stores in pieces and
> assembled in the store.

IKEA has that down to an art, light weight furnature, fits fine in 
shipping containers. On Mars besides furnature, they could be turned 
into charcoal to coke to make the steel...
(drat I'm flaming out again... time to go recharge)

a photo of a few IKEA chairs and table with a drink + umbrella on Mars 
with earth riseing in the background, great advertizing.


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601637

FromJeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com>
Date2016-10-19 07:14 -0400
Message-ID<MPG.32711f858bf47e3989850@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#601461
In article <nu5913$9v5$2@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
> 
> On 10/18/2016 7:46 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
> 
> >>
> >> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 84-percent oxygen
> >> and 16-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 3 psi instead of the
> >> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.
> >>
> >
> > 74-percent oxygen and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at 5 pounds
> > per square inch
> > http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm
> 
> forget that stuff,
> 
> how are they going to get all the furnature up there ? like the chairs, 
> beds, tables, desks, monitors, computers, sterios, stoves ?
> 
> you cant use a bucket for all that, and there is no IKIA nearby.

Dumbass.

Jeff
-- 
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.  
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, 
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#601473

FromFred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com>
Date2016-10-18 08:23 -0700
Message-ID<s9fc0clb5taudqekb3tpbcu5dllahkhlpm@4ax.com>
In reply to#601451
Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:

>In article <nu0l24$18de$1@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
>> 
>> On 10/15/2016 11:07 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> > Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 10/15/2016 5:49 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> >>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On 10/14/2016 1:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> >>>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hint:  ISS air is 21% oxygen.  The remainder is nitrogen.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> the link I found said different,
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Either the link you found is preposterously wrong
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>from NASA website, now admit you are wrong.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Cite,
>> 
>> 
>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere.  It used a a 84-percent oxygen
>> and 16-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 3 psi instead of the
>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure.
>> 
>
>74-percent oxygen and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at 5 pounds 
>per square inch  
>http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm
>

Which gives around 3.7 psi partial pressure of oxygen.  Perfectly
fine.  When you look at his claim for ISS atmosphere, you get around a
9 psi partial pressure of oxygen, which is very, very bad for you and
will probably kill you in a couple of days.  That alone should tell
him he's wrong, yet he will still argue for it.

-- 
"Rule Number One for Slayers - Don't die."  
                    -- Buffy, the Vampire Slayer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#600685

FromJeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com>
Date2016-10-13 08:10 -0400
Message-ID<MPG.326943cb93e228e989835@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#600547
In article <4vt0dd-dap.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com 
says...
> 
> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > Really?  You think we breath NITROGEN?  Uh, no.  We just use the
> > oxygen.
> 
> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
> 
> Breathing pure oxygen is generally bad for humans.
> 
> http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/why-does-breathing-pure-oxygen-kill-you

But there is "fixed" nitrogen on Mars.  Could be useful as fertilizer.  
If not then the nitrogen would need to be extracted in other ways (i.e. 
chemistry).

NASA's Curiosity Rover Finds Biologically Useful Nitrogen on Mars
http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/mars-nitrogen

Chemistry will solve many of these problems.  

Jeff
-- 
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.  
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, 
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#600793

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-10-13 23:48 +0000
Message-ID<j2j5dd-cab.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#600685
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
> In article <4vt0dd-dap.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com 
> says...
>> 
>> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> <snip>
>> 
>> > Really?  You think we breath NITROGEN?  Uh, no.  We just use the
>> > oxygen.
>> 
>> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
>> 
>> Breathing pure oxygen is generally bad for humans.
>> 
>> http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/why-does-breathing-pure-oxygen-kill-you
> 
> But there is "fixed" nitrogen on Mars.  Could be useful as fertilizer.  
> If not then the nitrogen would need to be extracted in other ways (i.e. 
> chemistry).
> 
> NASA's Curiosity Rover Finds Biologically Useful Nitrogen on Mars
> http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/mars-nitrogen
> 
> Chemistry will solve many of these problems.  
> 
> Jeff

Doing chemistry takes lots of energy, particularly when you have to
synthesize just about everything complex.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#600825

FromJeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com>
Date2016-10-14 06:09 -0400
Message-ID<MPG.326a78e8e46a288998983d@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#600793
In article <j2j5dd-cab.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com 
says...
> 
> In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
> > In article <4vt0dd-dap.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com 
> > says...
> >> 
> >> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> <snip>
> >> 
> >> > Really?  You think we breath NITROGEN?  Uh, no.  We just use the
> >> > oxygen.
> >> 
> >> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
> >> 
> >> Breathing pure oxygen is generally bad for humans.
> >> 
> >> http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/why-does-breathing-pure-oxygen-kill-you
> > 
> > But there is "fixed" nitrogen on Mars.  Could be useful as fertilizer.  
> > If not then the nitrogen would need to be extracted in other ways (i.e. 
> > chemistry).
> > 
> > NASA's Curiosity Rover Finds Biologically Useful Nitrogen on Mars
> > http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/mars-nitrogen
> > 
> > Chemistry will solve many of these problems.  
> 
> Doing chemistry takes lots of energy, particularly when you have to
> synthesize just about everything complex.

Some Mars reference missions include a nuclear reactor so that the 
return ship can produce liquid methane and LOX from the CO2 atmosphere 
and H2 brought on the ship.  If we end up going that route, just keep 
leaving nuclear reactors on Mars brought from earth on the transport 
ships.

Jeff
-- 
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.  
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, 
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#600867

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-10-14 18:03 +0000
Message-ID<a8j7dd-voh.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#600825
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
> In article <j2j5dd-cab.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com 
> says...
>> 
>> In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
>> > In article <4vt0dd-dap.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com 
>> > says...
>> >> 
>> >> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> <snip>
>> >> 
>> >> > Really?  You think we breath NITROGEN?  Uh, no.  We just use the
>> >> > oxygen.
>> >> 
>> >> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
>> >> 
>> >> Breathing pure oxygen is generally bad for humans.
>> >> 
>> >> http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/why-does-breathing-pure-oxygen-kill-you
>> > 
>> > But there is "fixed" nitrogen on Mars.  Could be useful as fertilizer.  
>> > If not then the nitrogen would need to be extracted in other ways (i.e. 
>> > chemistry).
>> > 
>> > NASA's Curiosity Rover Finds Biologically Useful Nitrogen on Mars
>> > http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/mars-nitrogen
>> > 
>> > Chemistry will solve many of these problems.  
>> 
>> Doing chemistry takes lots of energy, particularly when you have to
>> synthesize just about everything complex.
> 
> Some Mars reference missions include a nuclear reactor so that the 
> return ship can produce liquid methane and LOX from the CO2 atmosphere 
> and H2 brought on the ship.  If we end up going that route, just keep 
> leaving nuclear reactors on Mars brought from earth on the transport 
> ships.
> 
> Jeff

Yes, just keep sending reactors until you have enough power, however
that is not going to be cheap.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#600964

FromFred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com>
Date2016-10-15 02:27 -0700
Message-ID<bet30cl21ccvr7nfi1vhpl4eso1767t9fe@4ax.com>
In reply to#600867
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

>In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
>> In article <j2j5dd-cab.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com 
>> says...
>>> 
>>> In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
>>> > In article <4vt0dd-dap.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com 
>>> > says...
>>> >> 
>>> >> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> 
>>> >> <snip>
>>> >> 
>>> >> > Really?  You think we breath NITROGEN?  Uh, no.  We just use the
>>> >> > oxygen.
>>> >> 
>>> >> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
>>> >> 
>>> >> Breathing pure oxygen is generally bad for humans.
>>> >> 
>>> >> http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/why-does-breathing-pure-oxygen-kill-you
>>> > 
>>> > But there is "fixed" nitrogen on Mars.  Could be useful as fertilizer.  
>>> > If not then the nitrogen would need to be extracted in other ways (i.e. 
>>> > chemistry).
>>> > 
>>> > NASA's Curiosity Rover Finds Biologically Useful Nitrogen on Mars
>>> > http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/mars-nitrogen
>>> > 
>>> > Chemistry will solve many of these problems.  
>>> 
>>> Doing chemistry takes lots of energy, particularly when you have to
>>> synthesize just about everything complex.
>> 
>> Some Mars reference missions include a nuclear reactor so that the 
>> return ship can produce liquid methane and LOX from the CO2 atmosphere 
>> and H2 brought on the ship.  If we end up going that route, just keep 
>> leaving nuclear reactors on Mars brought from earth on the transport 
>> ships.
>> 
>
>Yes, just keep sending reactors until you have enough power, however
>that is not going to be cheap.
>

I think it's funny that someone had to suggest this before you thought
of it and moved from 'impossible' to 'expensive'.  I think it's even
funnier that I said it to you and you stupidly have your head up your
ass to keep from seeing it.

You only need enough reactors to get you started producing solar cells
from in situ resources.  And it's no more 'expensive' than shipping
anything else to Mars.


-- 
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
 territory."
                                      --G. Behn

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#600994

FromSerigo <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-10-15 10:14 -0500
Message-ID<ntth5g$qss$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#600964
On 10/15/2016 4:27 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>

>>>
>>
>> Yes, just keep sending reactors until you have enough power, however
>> that is not going to be cheap.
>>

> I think it's funny that someone had to suggest this before you thought
> of it and moved from 'impossible' to 'expensive'.  I think it's even
> funnier that you said it to me and I stupidly have your head up my
> ass to keep from seeing it.

     no one cares what you think, troll.

>
> You only need enough reactors to get you started producing solar cells
> from in situ resources.  And it's no more 'expensive' than shipping
> anything else to Mars.

bullshit.

you gloss over the required complexity so fast, you must be stoned as 
shit. or a lying shit.



[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 3 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 15  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web