>>>> Since you seem to want to be serious about this. I was
 >>>> thinking that Gamma particles in space could be hitting
 >>>> the CPU and too thin/small a trace within the PNP of the
 >>>> chip itself could be literally disconnected while the
 >>>> larger trace used on older designs could withstand
 >>>> multiple strikes? 
 
 ->>> Alpha and Beta radiation are particles.  Gamma radiation
 ->>> is rays, like x-rays. 
 
 TW>> And if their field is strong enough they will do a number
 TW>> of solid state devices too. 
 
 CA>> As I've said in another message I have been aware of this
 CA>> for over 40 years now which makes all the talk of extended
 CA>> year+ trips to Mars right now seem like so much sci-fi
 CA>> talk. All of the computerized equipment would fail and
 CA>> possibly every living thing in the 'spaceship' would be
 CA>> long since dead from gamma radiation exposure. :-\ 
 
 CJ> There's not much gamma radiation from the sun, though solar
 CJ> flares can boost X-ray radiation. 

 CA> If the gamma radiation is not from the sun, where do you
 CA> believe it is comming from? 

	Why, non-solar sources where the nuclear processes are
not safely buried as they are in the sun, of course.  These 
include some pulsars, novae, supernovae, "jets" from material
falling onto black holes and neutron stars, gamma-ray "bursters."
Welcome to the world of astrophysics, which you seem not to have
paid much attention to for many decades, though that does not seem
to have prevented you from commenting on it as if you had knowledge.
 
 CJ> Satellites have operated in orbit much longer than the
 CJ> transit time between a Mars-Earth expedition would take,
 CJ> and performed longer than design specifications, so I'm
 CJ> rather astonished at your statement that "the computerized
 CJ> equipment would fail." 

 CA> I'm rather astonished that you (or anyone) would disagree. 

	Anyone can see what your statement up above was.  In
reference to trips to Mars, you stated "All of the computerized
equipment would fail and possibly every living thing in the 
`spaceship' would be long since dead from gamma radiation exposure.
:-\"   Since you were under the delusion that gamma radiation would
come principally from the sun, and Mars is farther from the sun
than the earth, it is obvious that satellites in Earth would be
receiving more solar gamma radiation than those traveling farther
from the Sun than Earth.  Yet those satellites have not failed
from gamma radiation exposure.  Even if one assumed that most
gamma radiation came from the sun, do you yet see the fallacy of
your statement?
 
 CJ> Have you never heard of Galileo, Voyager, Pioneer, etc.
 CJ> probes? 

 CA> No, never. I was raised on a mountain top by Anglican monks who
 CA> did not think that worldly matters were of any importance. 

	You do seem to have paid less than sufficient attention
to matters of astrophysics and space exploration to comment on
them as magisterially and fallaciously as you did.

 CA> The objects you are referring to were on a trajectory that sent
 CA> them as far away from the sun as was doable. They were moving
 CA> _away_ from the sun which might be a factor here? 

	In point of fact, many of those probes were taking advantage
of the "slingshot" effect and so moved *closer* toward the sun than the
Earth as part of their complicated trajectory.
	There have also been probes to Venus and Mercury, which are of
course closer to the sun than the Earth, which of course succeeded
in their missions.  Evidently you were not aware of them or you would
not have made your statements.

 CA> The trajectory to Mars is somewhat a modified orbit around the
 CA> sun and not particularly far from the sun at it's apex. No
 CA> matter, I'm certain this is all very astonishing to you. 
 
	The Viking probes went to Mars without any problems.  I'm
sure that's astonishing to you, because if you'd known that you
wouldn't have been spouting your assertion that all computer systems
would necessarily fail.


--- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR]