|
Keep Nation bragging and the political debate out. |
The MSL program was one of the main programs I was supporting when I worked for NASA Ames. Our branch, the Reactive Flow Environments Branch, was in charge of designing the heat shield to handle the Martian Entry.
Here is a cool video of the code DPLR (data parallel line relaxation) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_gnLGLnTE4), which is the computer code that NASA uses to understand hypersonic re-entry physics.
Anyways... to add a level of complexity, we decided to instrument this heat shield! So we spent years developing a method for the spacecraft to survive martian atmospheric entry... and then we wanted to drill holes in it! Essentially, we wanted more REAL data on Martian entry so we wanted to put instrumentation right on the heatshield (which is obviously extremely dangerous). A program MEDLI (Mars Descent and Landing Instrumentation) was thrown together with the sole purpose of proving to the big dogs that we could instrument this heatshield without adding risk.
It was a fun couple years supporting MSL (many of you know I was also supporting Project Orion before it was cancelled)... this program MSL was so close to being cancelled too. After 6 months of MEDLI support, I had to go down to the Jet Propulsion Lab in SoCal and we presented our case for 3 days. Eventually the Project team accepted our proposal and let MEDLI instrument the heatshield.
I actually have a nice NASA award for MEDLI  ) Anyways... glad this project didn't get cancelled, and glad it's sparking some interest ^^
|
This is great news ! I hope it will lead to some interesting discoveries. But it's sad that every organic product can also have a geological source (like methane production), which always brings the doubt 
And for all those who think spending money for space exploration is useless:
The space industry created thousands of jobs, you know, this thing people have to do to earn money so that they can live decently in the modern society.
From the processes needed to build space rockets to the continuity of each project ( plus all the restaurants and cleaning workers needed to take care of employees and facilities ).
If we stop to invest in space, all those people would loose their job.
Furthermore, without the space industry, there would have been no satellites ( no cell phones, no GPS, no cheap TV (would be way more expensive on a ground based network) ).
One day demographic issues might force us to find more place than there is available on earth (is the exponential trend keeps going).
Colonising space is a long process, and it is wise to start thinking about it while there is no urge so that the technology is available when we finally need it ( most likely our grand grand grand children ).
Then it would be totally stupid to supress the space exploration. Let's say the united states stop completely to go to space.
Let's say Europe keeps going and finally land on an other planet to extract its ressources (gas / metal ).
United Stats would become completely dependant from Europe to get those products since they would not have developed the technology to explore space themselves.
Sure in the short term, space exploration does not seem great. But in the long term it is vital.
What people should be affraid of about space exploration is the possibility that it might lead to new wars when we actually have the technology to colonise and exploit extraterrestrial worlds.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
Let's hope it lands safely.
|
On August 05 2012 20:27 Twinkle Toes wrote:
Another way to burn our money uselessly. Really what's to be had in all these space missions in this time when the economy is barely floating.
Technologies you can thank NASA for
Interactive flash animation that shows NASA tech you rely on
Things have unintended consequences.
OT - I am really super duper pumped for this, I'll watching the landing and following Curiosities progress. If we find Mars had life on it the implications would be huge! Hopefully this also paves the way for human exploration of more of the solar system.
|
Let's hope there aren't BETA on Mars.
|
On August 05 2012 20:27 Twinkle Toes wrote:
Another way to burn our money uselessly. Really what's to be had in all these space missions in this time when the economy is barely floating.
Since NASA was founded back in the late 50's its total budget spent comes to less than 1 year of the recently "ended" Iraq war, by quite some margin might I add.
NASA costs US taxpayers 0.5cents per tax dollar and NASA has basically developed all the modern technology you love, without NASA there wouldn't be half the creature comforts you have come to expect. Not to mention that while going in to space costs money, the return for the investment is far greater in that people are inspired to create the technologies, industries and economies of tomorrow.
The real question is, how can we NOT afford to do more of this?
|
On August 06 2012 01:43 emythrel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 20:27 Twinkle Toes wrote:
Another way to burn our money uselessly. Really what's to be had in all these space missions in this time when the economy is barely floating. Since NASA was founded back in the late 50's its total budget spent comes to less than 1 year of the recently "ended" Iraq war, by quite some margin might I add. NASA costs US taxpayers 0.5cents per tax dollar and NASA has basically developed all the modern technology you love, without NASA there wouldn't be half the creature comforts you have come to expect. Not to mention that while going in to space costs money, the return for the investment is far greater in that people are inspired to create the technologies, industries and economies of tomorrow. The real question is, how can we NOT afford to do more of this?
I agree, and would venture to say NASA is the pinnacle of American achievement.
|
On August 06 2012 01:43 EchOne wrote:
Let's hope there aren't BETA on Mars.
That, indeed, was my first though
|
I'm excited about this mission but I think that NASA should switch over from Mars to Enceladus/Titan/Europa as those objects are more likely to harbor life than Mars. Subsurface Bactria is cool but even more complex organism might have colonized the three moons i listed.
|
On August 06 2012 01:43 EchOne wrote:
Let's hope there aren't BETA on Mars.
Let's hope we don't give them a terrible Engrish name like "Beings of extraterrestrial origin that are adversary to human" if there are.
|
On August 06 2012 01:42 SilverJohnny wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 20:27 Twinkle Toes wrote:
Another way to burn our money uselessly. Really what's to be had in all these space missions in this time when the economy is barely floating. Technologies you can thank NASA forInteractive flash animation that shows NASA tech you rely onThings have unintended consequences. OT - I am really super duper pumped for this, I'll watching the landing and following Curiosities progress. If we find Mars had life on it the implications would be huge! Hopefully this also paves the way for human exploration of more of the solar system.
And those spendings are nothing compared to what the us government spends on military assets that kill people.
The question is, is whether or not nasa will be 100% truthful no matter what. I doubt it.
|
A proud day for humanity. I hope they find some aliens there, and I'm not even kidding
|
On August 06 2012 02:38 archonOOid wrote:
I'm excited about this mission but I think that NASA should switch over from Mars to Enceladus/Titan/Europa as those objects are more likely to harbor life than Mars. Subsurface Bactria is cool but even more complex organism might have colonized the three moons i listed.
It might be true but you are referring to worlds covered with ice. They would need huge rovers to dig deep enough to reach liquid water beneath the surface ( and the distance from earth is huge compared to Mars, it increases the duration and cost of the mission ).
Mars is closer to our reach and traces of ancient life could be discovered on the ground in lake/river like formations.
|
And when you compare the technical advancements they've done with this rover compared to the last one, who knows what they'll be able to do next time they decide to spend big bucks on sending something out?
|
On August 05 2012 20:27 Twinkle Toes wrote:
Another way to burn our money uselessly. Really what's to be had in all these space missions in this time when the economy is barely floating.
Welp theres this whole "overpopulation" issue where humans have had so much success as a species without understanding what that actually means so we fucked ourselves (literally) into this situation where we are pushing the carrying capacity of the Earth in terms of available resources. But you know - other than that - you are right - really what is the point of investing money in the future of the human race?
|
On August 06 2012 01:42 SilverJohnny wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 20:27 Twinkle Toes wrote:
Another way to burn our money uselessly. Really what's to be had in all these space missions in this time when the economy is barely floating. Technologies you can thank NASA forInteractive flash animation that shows NASA tech you rely onThings have unintended consequences. OT - I am really super duper pumped for this, I'll watching the landing and following Curiosities progress. If we find Mars had life on it the implications would be huge! Hopefully this also paves the way for human exploration of more of the solar system.
Lol - at least I can prove the existence of God because how else could something as amazing as powdered lube be invented? Oh wait - NASA made that? NASAAAA!!!
|
On August 06 2012 02:38 archonOOid wrote:
I'm excited about this mission but I think that NASA should switch over from Mars to Enceladus/Titan/Europa as those objects are more likely to harbor life than Mars. Subsurface Bactria is cool but even more complex organism might have colonized the three moons i listed.
To be fair Mars is significantly closer - but I agree - especially Europa (which is the moon with the ice ocean miles thick if I'm not mistaken?). It will be interesting to see what kind of fossil evidence (if any) they discover on Mars and what it's impact is on our theories of Mars' ecological history.
|
|
|
On August 06 2012 02:38 archonOOid wrote:
I'm excited about this mission but I think that NASA should switch over from Mars to Enceladus/Titan/Europa as those objects are more likely to harbor life than Mars. Subsurface Bactria is cool but even more complex organism might have colonized the three moons i listed.
Those are all targets that have been discussed but there's a magnitude of difficulty to be overcome. On Europa, for example, any probe would have to drill its way through the extremely thick surface ice in order to reach the liquid ocean that may harbor life. Significantly more difficult than even the MSL.
There's still a lot of science to be done on Mars, one step at a time.
|
On August 06 2012 05:59 TheNihilist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 02:38 archonOOid wrote:
I'm excited about this mission but I think that NASA should switch over from Mars to Enceladus/Titan/Europa as those objects are more likely to harbor life than Mars. Subsurface Bactria is cool but even more complex organism might have colonized the three moons i listed. Those are all targets that have been discussed but there's a magnitude of difficulty to be overcome. On Europa, for example, any probe would have to drill its way through the extremely thick surface ice in order to reach the liquid ocean that may harbor life. Significantly more difficult than even the MSL. There's still a lot of science to be done on Mars, one step at a time.
Omg though - think of the ridiculous organisms that might live in the vast ocean miles away from sunlight. Even if there aren't any - think of the vast ocean under miles of ice - its so preeettty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
