Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!nott-cs!pyr1.cs.ucl.ac.uk!william
From: william@pyr1.cs.ucl.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Shuttle orbiter-naming competition
Message-ID: <44700005@pyr1.cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Date: 26 Jul 88 15:08:00 GMT
References: <11378@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Lines: 30
Nf-ID: #R:ames.arc.nasa.gov:-1137800:pyr1.cs.ucl.ac.uk:44700005:000:1440
Nf-From: pyr1.cs.ucl.ac.uk!william    Jul 26 15:08:00 1988


> [talk about naming the next Shuttle preceeds this message] 
> > Bob sounds fine to me.  Also, Falcon was mentioned as an Apollo 15
> > name - was that a research ship?  Of course, if NASA is really keen
> > on getting popular approval, it could modify this to Millenium Falcon.
> > And we could do the Launch to LEO in under 12 parsecs!
>                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>      
> ....I hate to say it, but last time I looked, 'parsec' was a unit of length,
> specifically 3.26 light years. B-)

WAAAA!!!  Does NOBODY read rec.arts.sf-lovers?  I know it's a unit of length,
thanks all the same.  This error in the film was much bitched about, until
some bright bod pointed out that in an FTL situation, space-like and
time-like directions may (under some circumstances) be shown to swap,
so the parsec REALLY DOES become a unit of duration.  An alternative
explanation is that, using the SW type hyperspace travel, the quality
of the spaceship is gauged in terms of how near to the destination you
end up when you fall out of hyperspace. 12 parsecs sounds bloody awful to me.

			... Bill

PS:  Replies to sf-lovers.


************************************************************************
Bill Witts, CS Dept.     *
UCL, London, Errrp       *       Don't believe everything you hear,
william@uk.ac.ucl.cs(UK) *       or anything you say.
william@cs.ucl.ac.uk(US) ***********************************************