MARS, HERE WE COME

It was announced this week that the hunt is now on for colonists for Mars. No, not by NASA (who really believed George W. Bush when he announced plans to go to the Moon and Mars back in 2004, and what’s really been done since then other than some paperwork?) No, I’m talking about a private initiative based in the Netherlands called Mars One which hopes to raise a ton of private money and put human colonists on the Red Planet by 2023. Recruitment will begin over the next few months, and training for the…(dare I call them Martianauts?) will take about eight years.

Chief Medical Director for Mars One, Norbert Kraft, a former Sr. Research Associate at NASA states, “In my former work with NASA we established strict criteria for the selection and training of astronauts on long duration space flights. Gone are the days when bravery and the number of hours flying a supersonic jet were the top criteria. Now, we are more concerned with how well each astronaut works and lives with the others, in the long journey from Earth to Mars and for a lifetime of challenges ahead. Psychological stability, the ability to be at your best when things are at their worst is what Mars One is looking for. If you are the kind of person that everyone chooses to have on their island, then we want you to apply too.”

You need to be 18 or older, and have lots of other qualifications, but you can read all about it here.

The catch? Well, they have a chance of coming up with a way to get you to Mars, but there won’t be any way to get you back. It’s a one-way trip, and you’ll be alone on a whole planet with the rest of your team for two additional years, until the next group of colonists is expected to arrive.

Do you really feel like getting away from it all? How do prepare yourself mentally for something like that? Watch all the reruns of Gilligan’s Island?

Or maybe just haul out all of those lists that end “...would you take with you to a desert island?”

REAL SCIENCE STILL FIRES THE IMAGINATION

It’s always interesting to follow the top science stories and let your imagination run free. For any SF writer, I’d say it’s an essential exercise. Over the past week:

Remember all the fuss in 2006 when Pluto was downgraded from planet status to the new category of “dwarf planet”? That was because other bodies just as large had been discovered beyond Pluto’s orbit (Eris, Haumea, and others) and within the asteroid belt (Ceres). Scientists got their first good look at one called Makemake recently when it passed it front of distant stars. Unlike Pluto, Makemake appears to have no atmosphere, although its covering of methane ice might vaporize when its orbit brings it to its closest approach to the sun. Dwarf planets aren’t exactly hospitable, but they’d be a whole lot more accessible than the gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn. Even the concept of asteroids or dwarf planets being converted into giant luxury resorts isn’t so far-fetched. A continent-sized skating rink, anyone?

Meanwhile, John Grotzinger, project scientist with NASA’s Mars Rover mission told an NPR reporter that a chemistry lab aboard the Curiosity rover had made a discovery that would be one for the history books, but he refused to elaborate until the data has been thoroughly checked. That set off a flurry of speculation—the discovery might be anything from definite signs of life (my own opinion) to proof of space aliens (I really doubt it). Definitive proof of life beyond Earth will finally give science fiction writers license to embody just about any setting we can imagine with exotic species (we do it anyway, but we’d really love to be able to say, “I told you so.”)

A third story involved the hunt for the ultimate sub-atomic particle, the famous Higgs boson, the proposed particle at the very root of physical structure that would complete our picture of why objects have mass. Scientists at the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland are nearly certain that they’ve found it (or at least confirmed its existence by observing its by-products). Yet there’s been a measure of disappointment in the announcements. The particle appears to behave exactly according to theory, but that’s the problem. If it had been found to have unexpected properties, that would have been a step toward confirming some of the more exotic theories of physics. As it is, the straightforward Higgs boson just adds support to the current model of the universe. So what’s left to discover? To the particle physicists I say, “Don’t worry”—in 1900 Lord Kelvin is reputed to have said, “There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now; All that remains is more and more precise measurement.” It may have been a misquote, but the opinion wasn’t uncommon at the end of the Victorian era. It wasn’t true then and it isn’t true now.

I’m still confident that the universe is as limitless as our imagination.

IS THE MAN IN THE MOON A WARNING?

For thousands of generations humans have looked up at the Moon and imagined a face in its features: the Man in the Moon, smiling gently upon us from his perch high in the heavens. A pleasant thought, right? But maybe also a warning—a warning of a threat from space that we on Earth have no way to stop.

Japanese scientists announced last week in the journal Nature Geoscience that they had used spectral analysis to measure the composition of minerals in the 3000-kilometre-wide Procellarum Basin, the giant flat space that makes up the largest part of the Man in the Moon’s face. Then they’d compared those results with rock samples brought back from the Moon by Apollo astronauts. Their conclusion? The Procellarum basin is a newer feature than most of the Moon’s craters, and was most likely caused by the strike of one giant asteroid that ripped off a huge portion of the crust and produced a new one, about 3.9 billion years ago.

That’s not just an interesting factoid (and a serious romantic buzzkill) but also a reminder that a huge chunk of space rock like that might one day have Earth in its sights.

You can get two fairly similar versions of that scenario in the movies Armageddon and Deep Impact, both released in 1998. The newer movie Seeking a Friend for the End of the World, a quirky but often sweet romantic comedy starring Steve Carell and Kiera Knightley, has just come out on video and is worth a look (but note that Bruce Willis isn’t in the cast, and adjust your expectations accordingly). I’ve explored the killer asteroid idea in some old blog posts and in my short story “Saviour” which you can read by following this link. In “Saviour” the man in charge of the mission to save humankind from the approaching cosmic doom takes a rather unorthodox approach.

“Saviour” was significantly inspired by another movie called Sharkwater in which filmmaker Rob Stewart showed that sharks are on the path to extinction, thanks to the inexplicable human taste for shark fin soup (among other things). Stewart has now produced a follow-up to Sharkwater due in movie theatres next spring that’s even more disturbing. Ocean scientists pointed out to him that by the 2040’s not only will sharks be gone, virtually every other species of fish and sea mammal will also be wiped out, due to indiscriminate overfishing, pollution, and global warming. The movie goes on to show the forecast consequences of climate change on the rest of the planet. Revolution expresses a message of hope, but its premise is certainly dire. And it’s not fiction.

So what’s the connection between climate change extinctions and a killer asteroid? For that you’ll have to read “Saviour”. But consider: if a giant space rock ever is found to be on a collision course with Earth, will it be a terrible twist of fate?

Or the universe protecting itself from us?

SHOW ME THE MONEY

This past Sunday a fairly momentous event happened without much fanfare among the general public. It was the successful splashdown of the Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) Dragon spacecraft after a supply mission to the International Space Station—the very first such mission by a craft produced and launched by a private company. This was important to NASA and the International Space Station program in general because it assures the station can continue without the American space shuttles, now retired. The Dragon craft is also capable of bringing back a lot more in the way of research materials than the conventional Russian spacecraft that have been going back and forth to the ISS since the last shuttle flight, and especially refrigerated materials. But this mission was much more important as a symbol: a sign that private industry can pick up where government-funded organizations like NASA leave off in the realm of space exploration.

Why does that matter?

I could list dozens of reasons I think humanity needs to venture out into space—from ecological relief, to easing population pressure, to safeguarding Life from possible extinction by cosmic collision. Yet the truth is, the real motivator that will ensure us a lasting presence in space is the same as it has always been for exploration: wealth. Money. Commerce. Call it what you will. Columbus’s voyages might have been funded by government (royalty) but his explorations were about finding cheaper ways to access the riches of the Orient. Same with the first expeditions to Canada, and then the exploration deeper into the continent was all about the fur trade. The story was the same for Africa and South America, and it will be the same for the Moon and Mars and the asteroid belt. When the journeys can be made to provide a desirable financial return they’ll happen. For that reason my bet is that we’ll have a better-established presence in the asteroid belt before we have colonies of any size on Mars (unless someone discovers oil there!)

What does this mean for the future? Great opportunities for companies that deal in mining technology, pharmaceutical research (thanks to zero-gravity), solar energy, and robotic systems, among many other fields.

And maybe more science fiction stories with former hard rock miners and lab-coated technicians, and fewer hot shot ex-military pilots.

WHAT IF WE KNEW WE HAD NEIGHBOURS?

Just a week ago, on October 17^th, a group of scientists at the Observatory of Geneva in Switzerland announced a discovery some are calling the biggest of the century. They discovered a new planet beyond our solar system—a rocky planet a little more massive than Earth, orbiting so close to its sun that its surface temperature could easily reach 1200 degrees Fahrenheit. So what’s the big deal? Well, it’s the nearest planet we’ve ever found—it orbits the star Alpha Centauri B which, along with its companion Alpha Centauri A, is our closest stellar neighbour, only 4.4 light years away. And where there’s one rocky planet, there are almost always others. Maybe the new planet Alpha Centauri B b has a sister planet that orbits within the habitable zone of its star, a planet that is home to Life.

Those who’ll admit to watching the 1960’s TV show Lost In Space may remember that the Alpha Centauri system was the original destination of the Jupiter 2 mission. Because it’s the closest star system to our own, people have long imagined going there. In reality, we can’t travel at anything close to the speed of light, so even futuristic propulsion methods being developed couldn’t get us there in much less than a human lifetime. NASA and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) are jointly sponsoring a research project called the 100-Year Starship led by former astronaut Mae Jeppison, the first African-American woman in space. The project is charged with envisioning what will be needed to make such a long journey through space, from food supplies to social structures to the clothes the travellers would (or wouldn’t) wear. A daunting task, but since the technology required is likely many years away, I guess there’s no rush.

The thing is, we won’t have to wait a hundred years to know whether Alpha Centauri will change our universe-view forever. The discovery of Alpha Centauri B b required a painstaking process of more than 450 observations over four years (and hasn’t yet been confirmed by another team). But the technology used to discover exoplanets is getting better all the time. Before too many more years we’ll know if Alpha Centauri B has more planets. We’ll know if those planets have atmospheres capable of sustaining life. And soon after, we’ll know if those atmospheres show traces of industrial processes or other signs of civilization. Then we will know we’re not alone in the universe.

I read about a recent survey that said more Brits believe in space aliens than believe in God. But believing isn’t the same as knowing. Once we know we’re not the only intelligent species, will it make us curl up and hide on our little planet, or become aggressive, determined to outcompete anything and anyone else out there? Will we become peaceful? Or fearful?

All of this could follow from last week’s announcement. Significant indeed.

Just as a treat, check out this video of layered images from the International Space Station for a great light show.

NEW HOPE FOR STAR TREK FANS?

In the decade that saw men first land on the moon author Arthur C. Clarke envisioned a manned mission to Jupiter in the year 2001 (Saturn in the book), and probably most of us thought that was reasonable. Eleven years past that date we’re no longer capable of going to the moon and a long way from being able to send humans to Mars. Sure, we’ve got an International Space Station crewed around the clock, but that’s practically in our backyard, and there’s no Pan Am space clipper service to take tourists for a visit.

Still, there are some hopeful signs. Some believe that private industry holds the greatest promise for space exploration and exploitation. I’ve written here about some of the current endeavours before, and this coming October 7^th the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft will take its second trip up to the ISS, this time carrying supplies, after proving it was up to the task last May. A supply run may not seem glamorous, but it’s a good sign for things to come.

Even so, the most encouraging news I saw this month was the assertion that warp drive might not be out of the question after all. Every Star Trek fan knows that it wouldn’t have been possible for the starship Enterprise to visit a different planet every week without being able to travel a whole lot faster than the speed of light. The concept of warp drive was a brilliant (but fictional) solution to Einstein’s edict that nothing can exceed light speed. Then in 1994 a Mexican physicist named Miguel Alcubierre proposed a method for a spacecraft to warp space/time around itself and propel itself at speeds of up to ten times the speed of light. The problem was the energy required: something like the total conversion to energy of a mass the size of Jupiter. Mind boggling! So Alcubierre’s warp drive might not be entirely impossible, but just this side of it.

Fast forward to September of 2012 when Sonny White of NASA’s Johnson Space Centre announced that, with an alteration of the shape of the warp field that Alcubierre had proposed, the energy requirement would be far less—still requiring the complete mass conversion of something the size of the Voyager 1 space probe, but not a gas giant! Further tweaks could improve the situation still more, bringing the concept of warp drive into the realm of plausibility. And NASA scientists are now experimenting to see if they can create a (miniscule) warp field in a lab.

Ceti Alpha Five here we come. (No, wait! Not Ceti Alpha Five!!)

SPACE EXPLORATION: RUNNING ON EMPTY?

I recently read an article that suggested humanity’s efforts to explore space are quietly being abandoned. The idea was triggered by the recent transport of the space shuttle Discovery to Washington DC to become a museum display. The argument goes that, while surveys show citizens still want and expect to see a future that includes Star Trek-like space travel, governments are quietly cutting funds and letting the dream die.

While there’s some truth to that, it ignores the way the private sector has been stepping up to the plate, and it’s been doing so in a big way lately. We’ve all heard about Richard Branson’s plans with Virgin Galactic to take millionaire thrill-seekers like Ashton Kutcher to the edge of space, and you may have dismissed it as little more than a carnival stunt. But space tourism is a perfectly valid way to fund other projects, and I’m sure Branson won’t be content with joyrides alone.

Even more immediately promising is PayPal co-founder Elon Musk’s company Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX). NASA has just given the go-ahead for SpaceX to launch a test cargo mission to the International Space Station on April 30^th. The mission calls for SpaceX’s unmanned Dragon space capsule, launched by their Falcon 9 rocket, to haul a cargo of food and supplies to the station and bring other cargo back to Earth. It will be the first time a private spacecraft has visited the station, but it’s part of a longer contract to supply the ISS for the next few years. The Falcon rockets have performed well so far, and the Dragon capsule is designed to be able to land on the Moon or other planets in years to come.

Then there’s the Google Lunar X PRIZE offering $20 million to the first nongovernment team that can land a robot on the moon capable of traveling a half a mile or so and sending high-definition video back to Earth before the end of 2015. Second prize is $5 million, and other bonuses are available. A reported twenty-six groups are in the running.

And this coming Tuesday April 24^th a new space exploration company called Planetary Resources will be unveiled at a press conference. The high profile names associated with the venture include film director James Cameron, Google executives Larry Page and Eric Schmidt, X PRIZE founder Peter Diamandis, former NASA mission manager Chris Lewicki, and politician Ross Perot's son, among others. The project to be announced Tuesday is promised to involve a new industry that will overlay space exploration and natural resources. Industry watchers believe it will be a plan to mine asteroids.

So maybe governments are losing some of their enthusiasm, but private entrepreneurs are stepping forward to pick up the slack and, to me, that signals that the future of space exploration is still bright!

TAKE A RIDE ON A ROCKET

Here some pretty amazing footage taken from cameras aboard the space shuttle's solid rocket boosters. Experience the ride from start to finish. We won't see this kind of thing anymore.

Whether or not you were a fan of the space shuttle program, the first privately-owned space cargo delivery business is almost ready to begin. Space Exploration Technologies Corp., known as SpaceX plans to launch the first commercial cargo load of supplies to the International Space Station on April 30. After about 12 contracted cargo runs, SpaceX will start ferrying astronauts to the space station.

We'll be watching closely on April 30 and keeping fingers crossed that this will be a productive new step outward into space.

In the meantime Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic continues to sign up passengers for its planned tours to the edge of space. The newest to make a booking? Actor Ashton Kutcher will be Virgin Galactic's 500th passenger, if everything goes according to plan, though there's still no official start date for flights to begin. The ride is expected to cost about $200,000 per person for a flight about three-and-a-half hours in total (only six minutes of weightlessness).

The times they are a changin'...hopefully for the better.

STUFF HAPPENS AND EINSTEIN STILL RULES

If you follow scientific news at all you probably saw the headlines in September of last year when an experiment done by a particle accelerator at the CERN facilities in Switzerland appeared to show neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light (see my earlier post). A beam of neutrinos sent from the Super Proton Synchotron in Geneva seemed to arrive at a detector 730 kilometers away in Italy 60 nanoseconds faster than a beam of light sent at the same time. Of course, Einstein’s Theory of Relativity says that nothing can go faster than light, so this was potentially momentous news.

Fast forward to this week (but not faster than light!) and the scientists involved have announced that the results of the experiment are in doubt. They may have been caused by a data transmission problem. A fiber-optic cable that fed data from a GPS used in the timing procedure wasn’t as tight as it should have been, and that bad connection could potentially have produced a time discrepancy that suspiciously matches the 60 nanoseconds at the heart of the furor.

Now, this isn’t a clear-cut conclusion that the experiment was a bust, just an admission that an equipment problem could have accounted for the controversial results. The smell test says it probably did, and Einstein is still on his throne.

Which also means warp speed is still fiction. For now!

BACK TO THE BASICS IN GENETIC ENGINEERING?

At some point in Earth’s history, the first living cell was produced from what’s popularly called a “witches brew” of chemicals in the water of our newborn planet. Then the next big leap was when those first single-cell organisms became multicellular, allowing for specialization of function and the beginnings of the diversity we know today. We’re not sure how that happened, or exactly what triggered it, so for decades chemists have searched for the answer with a wide range of experiments.

Mostly, when we think about evolution, we think in terms of major changes occurring over millions of years, if not billions. Especially a transition as pivotal as from single cells to multicellularity. But now a team of scientists at the University of Minnesota has encouraged cells of simple brewer’s yeast to evolve into multicellular clusters within just two months!

How? By creating conditions that forced it to evolve. Their process is described in a good Wired article here, but essentially the researchers created an environment in which yeast cells that clustered together were given an advantage in reproducing—so that’s exactly what the cells did. Within two months they’d formed permanent multicellular clusters of cells, featuring specialized components and ready to diversify.

The lead researchers suggest that, when we want to produce specialized organisms for industry or medicine, complex genetic engineering might be far more complicated than necessary. We might be better off shaping evolution by doing the job that natural selection has done, but doing it faster. Farmers have done something similar for centuries breeding animals and crops.

To my way of thinking, that method seems a lot less likely to produce unintentional genetic creations that might prove unwelcome or even dangerous.

Sometimes simple is better.