Where are we headed?

There seem to be two perspectives on the cancellation of the Constellations program, and major participants in previous space programs are divided between the two sides of the barricade. Manned spaceflight is important and giving up on it would be indeed a mistake. However, it did not seem to me at all that this would be the plan of the Obama Administration. 

President Obama’s speech at the Kennedy Space Center was quite inspiring and promising. The President offered an increase in NASA’s funding in order to support robotic exploration which is equally important to the manned spaceflight. Indeed, investing in research that will improve future manned missions seems to be appropriate. [1]. In his speech, President Obama clearly stated the near future objectives of the space program and underlined the importance of stepping forward and doing what NASA has not done before. The proposal seems to be an excellent plan that will support future human endeavors further into deep space, such as landing on asteroids and eventually on Mars.

“…extend the life of the International Space Station likely by more than five years, … conducting advanced research that can help improve the daily lives of people here on Earth, as well as testing and improving upon our capabilities in space. … more efficient life support systems that will help reduce the cost of future missions…” [2]

The Augustine Commission analyzed the situation of the space program in order to offer suggestions on improvements, as well as alternatives, mainly in the light of the termination of the space shuttle program, as well as of the international space station which was supposed to end its operations in 2010. [3] According to the committee, the human spaceflight “appears to be on an unattainable trajectory”. [4] Among the concerns mentioned in the report are matching the space program with the resources, assuring safety, assuring the US keeps its position as global leader in space exploration, as well as moving forward by going further than the LEO and the moon and exploring areas that haven’t been explored before. [5] The Augustine Commission also suggested that in planning the future of the manned spaceflight, goals must be considered first, and destinations should derive from these goals, an excellent idea if we consider that humanity’s main goal with space exploration should be colonizing other celestial bodies and living in space for unlimited time. Ultimately, the conclusion of the committee was that the goal of human spaceflight should be to “chart a path for human expansion into the solar system”. [6]

My belief on the matter is that we should probably look at why we are exploring space in the first place. The motives seem to have changed since the 1960s and 1970s. There is no more space race and the need for military reconnaissance like before. The US does not need to reach first anywhere, but rather improve what has already been done. Most likely the priorities for a space program are of scientific importance. The human race must learn to colonize space in order to assure its future existence. In President Obama’s words, “our goal is the capacity for people to work and learn and operate and live safely beyond the Earth for extended periods of time”. [7] It is appropriate to start focusing on actions that would allow such future endeavors, and for that matter, the future of spaceflight seems promising. I find focusing on such goals to be an excellent strategy.

---

Notes:

[1] The White House. Remarks by the President on Space Exploration in the 21st Century. John F. Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida. April 15, 2010. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-space-exploration-21st-century (Accessed October 26, 2011), 2.

[2] Ibid, 2.

[3] Augustine Commission. 2009. Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation. Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee.http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.pdf (Accessed October 26, 2011), 7.

[4] Ibid, 9.

[5] Ibid, 9.

[6] Ibid, 9.

[7] The White House. Remarks by the President on Space Exploration in the 21st Century. John F. Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida. April 15, 2010. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-space-exploration-21st-century (Accessed October 26, 2011), 4.

---

References

Augustine Commission. 2009. Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation. Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee. http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.pdf (Accessed October 26, 2011).

The White House. Remarks by the President on Space Exploration in the 21st Century. John F. Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida. April 15, 2010. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-space-exploration-21st-century (Accessed October 26, 2011).

Moon Treaty - Two Issues

Two of the issues that caused the Moon Treaty to be so much more contentious than the Outer Space Treaty are: the use of the term "common heritage of mankind", and the protection of the environment of the Moon. [1]

Article 11 of the Moon Treaty stirred up controversy around the sentence “the moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind…” [2], mainly because the term "common heritage of mankind" is not defined in the treaty. According to Berryhill, such unclarity leads to interpretations derived from political, economic or legal predispositions. [3] One such worry is that the less developed countries unable to participate in space exploration could use this term to benefit of a future distribution of resources. [4] However, it is important to keep in mind the frame in which the Moon Treaty was developed. It was the time when humans barely touched the Moon and euphoria was dominating the human spirit. It was a time when the less developed countries had a chance to have their voice heard. Such a situation dominated the debates at the UN, mainly because these countries together had a strong voice, unlike the countries involved in space exploration at the time. [5]

The definition of the term "common heritage of mankind” implies the possession of all humans, but that also means that "all humans", or mankind should be considered an individual invested with property rights, subject of international law. [6] However, states had different opinions on this matter. USSR expressed that individual property rights are out of the question, and therefore by individual in this case one must understand state or country. Argentina favored less developed countries and their participation in equal sharing of the resources. [7] Hungary pointed that even if mankind is not clearly defined, it exists and should benefit from a common heritage. The United States preferred to focus on the debate over the term "common heritage" than discussing whether mankind is subject to the international law. [8] One of the issues brought up was that by focusing on the idea of common heritage of mankind, exploration and exploitation were linked together [9], generating an interest for profit rather than scientific development.

Another controversy is the environmental protection of the Moon and its resources, especially as mentioned above, the term "common heritage of mankind" implies the full and shared access of all states to the lunar resources. Article 4 of the Moon Treaty emphasizes that any exploration of the Moon has to consider the interest of the future generations. [10] In this spirit, Article 7 calls the explorers to “prevent the disruption of the existing balance of its [the moon’s] environment”. [11]  Unfortunately, the environment protection offered by the language of the treaty is limited, by only specifying  the avoidance of harmful contamination, without underlining what would be the circumstances of this stipulation. [12] In the meantime, terms like "harmful contamination" can be interpreted. One explanation for this lack of clarity is the fact that the Moon's environment was still unknown at the time the treaty was debated, and therefore it would have been hard to express clearly what is it that needs protection. [13] It is also important to bear in mind that exploration will inevitably somehow disturb the environment of the Moon, but articles 6 and 8 of the Moon treaty allow exploration for scientific purposes, such as collecting samples or land a spacecraft on the surface, actions that are not considered harmful. [14]

As space exploration develops, a treaty such as the Moon Treaty will probably need revision in accordance with the new developments in the field. So far, the treaty has worked as a mean to offer the entire mankind a chance to benefit from Moon exploration.

Notes:

[1] Berryhill, Katie J. 1996. The Moon Treaty: A Survey of Selected Legal Issues, 1.

[2] Ibid, 3.

[3] Ibid, 3.

[4] Ibid, 4.

[5] Ibid, 6.

[6] Ibid, 7.

[7] Ibid, 8.

[8] Ibid, 9.

[9] Ibid, 10.

[10] Ibid, 18.

[11] Ibid, 18.

[12] Ibid, 19.

[13] Ibid, 20.

[14] Ibid, 20.

New Clues on the Origin of Water on Earth

Last week has brought new evidence about the existence of water on our planet. The Herschel Infrared Space Observatory using HIFI, a very sensitive instrument for detecting water in the universe, has revealed that the comet Hartley 2 contains the same kind of water as Earth’s oceans, allowing the scientist to assume that comets must have played a significant role in the origin of water on our planet. [1] Such a discovery not only offers clues about how water reached our planet, but also reveals the fact that water with similar chemical composition must be present elsewhere in the solar system and the universe.

The origin of water on Earth is still a debatable issue, mainly because our planet seems to have been very hot and dry at its beginnings, and therefore water could have not been present on the planet at that time. Water and other volatile substances must have reached the surface of the planet at a later date. While one hypothesis for the origin of water has always been an impact with a traveling celestial body, such as comets or asteroids, the comets that have been previously studied did not contain the same type of water. As an example, a study done by Caltech researchers on the comet Hale-Bopp revealed the comet contains large amounts of heavy water with a high level of deuterium, while our oceans have a significantly less quantity of it. [2] Of a total of six studied comets originating in the Oort Cloud, none of them has revealed regular water in their composition.

However, by studying the comet Hartley 2 with the help of the Herschel Infrared Space Observatory, scientists have discovered that the vaporized water in the comet’s coma contains both heavy water and regular water as the one on Earth’s surface. Hartley 2 comes from the Kuiper Belt, while the previously studied comets are believed to come from the Oort Cloud. It is now believed that comets in the Kuiper Belt have more regular water than the ones coming from the Oort Cloud. [3] The percentage of heavy vs. regular water in the comet has generated the conclusion that comets must have contributed with at least ten percent of Earth’s water, with asteroids being the primary source, and all the planets in the inner solar system must have gotten their water from the same source.

The Herschel Space Observatory will be studying other comets from the Kuiper Belt to make sure Hartley 2 is not an exception.

________________________________________

Notes

[1] European Space Agency (ESA). Did Earth's oceans come from comets? October 5, 2011. http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Herschel/SEMER89U7TG_0.html (Accessed October 10, 2011), para. 8.

[2] Tindol, Robert. Earth's water probably didn't come from comets. Caltech, 2011. http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news008.html (Accessed October 10, 2011), para. 2-3.

[3] Brown, Dwayne, Clavin, Whitney. Space Observatory Provides Clues To Creation Of Earth's Oceans. NASA, October 5, 2011. http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/oct/HQ_11-338_Herschel_Comet_Water.html (Accessed October 10, 2011), para. 5.

________________________________________

References

Brown, Dwayne, Clavin, Whitney. Space Observatory Provides Clues To Creation Of Earth's Oceans. NASA, October 5, 2011. http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/oct/HQ_11-338_Herschel_Comet_Water.html (Accessed October 10, 2011).

European Space Agency (ESA).  Did Earth's oceans come from comets? October 5, 2011. http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Herschel/SEMER89U7TG_0.html (Accessed October 10, 2011).

Tindol, Robert. Earth's water probably didn't come from comets. Caltech, 2011. http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news008.html (Accessed October 10, 2011).

Navigation Satellites

Means to help navigation have always been sought by humans. It is only normal, considering that one of the inherent traits of our species is exploration of the unknown. In the beginning, people relied on the stars to tell them the way. However, with the dawn of the satellites era, a new way to support navigation became the norm: satellite navigation.

Navigation satellites can tell position anywhere with an accuracy of five to ten meters, regardless of weather condition. Instruments on board can even indicate the position of a stationary object within a few centimeters. ¹ Navigation satellites are placed in highly stable Medium Earth Orbits (MEOs), at high altitudes (1,200 to 14,000 miles above the Earth) in order to allow precise positioning. MEOs are stable orbits with exact orbit predictions. At this altitude satellites move slower and can be observed longer, allowing that at least four at a time be visible from any place on Earth, at all times. ² All one needs is a receiver that can pick up their signal.

Transit, also known as Navsat, was the first navigation satellite to be launched by the United States in 1959-1960, and used for the navigation of the Polaris submarines. The research done by APL scientists George Weiffenbach and William Guier on Sputnik’s orbit revealed that if the exact position of a satellite is known and predictable, the Doppler shift could be used to locate a receiver back on Earth.³ Transit functioned until 1996 when the Global Positioning System (GPS) took over. Because of the many applications of the GPS, it has been decided to extend its capabilities in order to serve the civil community.

GPS satellites are placed on a semi-synchronies orbit, and are set up to into six orbital planes, with four to five satellites per orbital plane, and therefore multiple satellites are in view from one location at the same time. This set-up gives GPS worldwide coverage. The orbits are inclined by 55° with respect to the equator and have orbital periods of approximately 11 hours, 58 minutes. Every time we get an exact location on a GPS receiver, the result is the work of four satellites: the first one gives a roundabout area, the second and third satellite refines the information, and the fourth gives the exact coordinates. The receiver measures the time the signal needed to travel from the satellite, and the measured distance tells the requested location is on the circle where two spheres with the satellites at center meet. The radii of these spheres are the distance between the satellite and receiver.⁴

The Soviet Union also launched a positioning system in 1982. GLONASS became fully operational in 1993, and was made of 21 satellites in three orbital planes. This system is still operational at the moment, in a degrade mode, with only eight satellites.⁵ The European Space Agency plans to launch a navigation satellite system similar to GPS, called the Galileo positioning system, planed to become operable in 2014. China is working on a similar system to become available by 2020.

---

---

Notes:

[1] European Space Agency (ESA). About Satellite Navigation. February 2, 2005. http http://www.esa.int/esaNA/GGGYC650NDC_index_2.html (Accessed September 26, 2011), para. 2.

[2] Ibid, para. 14

[3] Gavaghan, Helen. Something New Under the Sun: Satellites and the Beginning of the Space Age. Copernicus (Springer-Verlag), 1998.

[4] Graham, Rebecca. The Edge of Space. The Universe. 10 February 2009, History Channel.

[5] Space and Tech. GLONASS – Summary. http://www.spaceandtech.com/spacedata/constellations/glonass_consum.shtml (Accessed September 26, 2011), para. 2.

---

References

European Space Agency (ESA). About Satellite Navigation. February 2, 2005. http://www.esa.int/esaNA/GGGYC650NDC_index_2.html (Accessed September 26, 2011).

Gavaghan, Helen. Something New Under the Sun: Satellites and the Beginning of the Space Age. Copernicus (Springer-Verlag), 1998.

Graham, Rebecca. The Edge of Space. The Universe. 10 February 2009, History Channel.

Space and Tech. GLONASS – Summary. http://www.spaceandtech.com/spacedata/constellations/glonass_consum.shtml (Accessed September 26, 2011).

Dark Energy - A Video Student Project for SCIN262 - Cosmology