The Subtlety of What's Next in Space

This is my entry for the Coalition for Space Exploration's "What’s Next?" Contest, please enjoy.

Photo by rAmmoRRison



We will not have cities on other planets in one hundred years, but subtle progress towards space habitation. This includes increased reliance on the undergraduate community, motivating them to continue space related careers. Isolating space programs economically, by the use of space resources to fund these high flying endeavours, will protect them from the recession and political movement. The diffusion of space centers and research throughout the nation will decrease the political tension in the space field. Increased focus on life cycle engineering during space system design is forced upon us because of the space junk problem. There is also the troubling public opinion towards science in general; it is no longer respected but is often regarded as “opinion”. All of the above items are next if becoming a space-faring species is in the cards for humanity.

One of the first lessons I learned in my ongoing undergraduate career is that attending a university is hard and learning Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) is harder. The joy of a STEM career is not enough to motivate students to complete their STEM majors, especially when other majors, like finance, seem more profitable. Space agencies will have to find ways to encourage undergraduate participation in the progress towards a space-faring society. This should be enough to keep STEM retention high.

Photo by blueforce4116

Global markets are currently volatile, so volatile that I fear we can no longer depend on them to fund space ventures using Earth’s resources. Private companies and governments must look at using space resources to fund high flying dreams. This will allow space development to continue no matter what happens on Earth. Furthermore, it will bring people into space ventures as money making opportunities open up in the high frontier.

Currently, with government being the major consumer of space services, space companies are exposed to political movements. At times like these, NASA is on the chopping block. However, independently funded space ventures are free from the tides of public opinion, even if they are ran by the government. No one will cut programs with short-term profit and technological benefits with no tax burden on the public. We also have the side benefit of speedier space development when funded with space resources.

Space projects are increasingly seen as only pork-barrel projects; not as projects of benefit to the greater public. However, this will change as humanity’s adventure into space increases in speed. Instead of adding onto the current space complexes, we will see spaceports rise all around the nation as demand for space services (especially telecommunications) increases. If people are able to see the impact of space in their local economies, they will have less reasoning behind the already baseless claim of the porky nature of space exploration.

However the space community does have self-made problems. The “[s]pace junk problem reache[d a] tipping point'” recently, “with enough currently in orbit to continually collide and create even more debris, raising the risk of spacecraft failures"1. If humanity wants to be space-faring, all future designs must focus on the whole life cycle of the device and include a way to safely de-orbit the object. I also fear that our attitudes are far riskier to development of the high frontier than a sphere of deadly space junk.

Science is no longer regarded as fact and I am troubled by this trend. This general attitude impacts the space field because of its high tech nature and need for heavy R&D. For example, if people are denying global warming, it becomes harder to convince them to launch more weather satellites or look into radiation. What we need is an increase in STEM education to allow people to connect with the scientific community better.

1: O'Neill, Ian. "Space Junk Problem Reaches 'Tipping Point'." Discovery News. Sep 2, 2011. Web. 26 Sep. 2011. .

Help NASA with Space Habitation

College seniors and graduate students can build prototypes to be used in space in the eXploration Habitat (X-Hab) Academic Innovation Challenge. If NASA likes your proposal, they will send you $5-$45 thousand to build your idea. Stop procrastinating and build the space age.

Important Dates

• March 14, 2011 - Date of Announcement / Release of RFP
• March 29, 2011 Questions for TIM #1 Due
• April 1, 2011 Notice of Intent Due
• April 5, 2011 Technical Interchange Meeting Telecon #1
• April 12, 2011 Questions for TIM #2 Due
• April 19, 2011 Technical Interchange Meeting Telecon #2
• May 6, 2011 Proposal Due Date
• May 23, 2011 Award Announcements

The NASA Aeronautics Scholarship Program

The Aeronautics Scholarship Program (ASP) offers our nation's research leaders of tomorrow exceptional funding:
Undergraduate Students

• $15,000 awarded for each school year, to be used for educational related expenses
• $10,000 Summer internship at a NASA Research Center
• 2 years of support

Graduate Students

• $35,000 stipend
• $11,000 awarded each year, to be used for educational related expenses
• $10,000 Summer internship at a NASA Research Center
• 2 years of support, with an option for a 3rd year

The NASA ASP online application is now open.

If you think you have the stuff to run with the nation's top program, than apply. Hurry, applications are due Jan. 15, 2012.

NASA Seeks Bight Undergraduates To Fly Research In the Vomit Comet

Undergrads, now is your chance to make a splash in the scientific community and do your own research with NASA.

Teams interested in conducting student-driven research should submit a letter of intent by Sept. 14. This step is optional, but serves as an introductory notice that a team plans to submit a proposal for the competition. Proposals for student-driven experiments are due Oct. 26, and selected teams will be announced Dec. 7. The actual flight experience will take place in June 2012.

This opportunity will set you up for a career in space, so what are you waiting for, my permission. Get a team together and start designing.

My Trip to Kennedy Space Center

I went to Kennedy Space Center on New Year’s Day. Honestly, I did not really notice I was there when my dad drove the family van into the parking lot. I was taking a nap, expecting to be in New Jersey in 18 hours. Early in the vacation, my dad asked me and my three siblings where they wanted to go during the vacation and I mentioned KSC. New Years Day was the last day of the trip and we went to Universal Studios in the morning before heading out on the road. So I did not expect to be at KSC, but there I was. I was so excited, taking pictures whenever I could. I immediately send out a tweet

I'm at the Kennedy Space Center wooooot! http://myloc.me/2x8Tb

Now, I have to explain something. The people who I’ve connected with on twitter on the biggest space cadets in the world. So it was not surprising when @TaviGreiner retweeted that tweet

TaviGreiner  Yay, Daniel! :D RT @AronSora: I'm at the Kennedy Space Center wooooot! http://myloc.me/2x8Tb

But, even the Space Tweeple, as they call themselves, do not compare to the space cadets at KSC. After my dad brought tickets, I was in heaven. The first thing we did was the Shuttle Experience.

 

NASA did a great job with this attraction. Every detail was there; nothing stood out as inaccurate with my inexperienced eye. It was a motion simulator ride, but it was epic. The motion simulator actually tilted to vertical for the launch and slowly tilted to horizontal just as the shuttle does during a launch. Once we where in orbit, the simulator tilted to about negative ten degrees to replicate zero gravity. The ride felt real. I swear, I felt negative and positive g’s. If this launch where real, we would have been in a special passenger container in the shuttle bay. They even had a scatic with the environmental control system labeled for our fictional pod.

Bolden gave commentary through the simulation and before hand in give an explanation of what the shuttle does during a launch. I found it humorous. But I am a geek, so most people might not see the humor.

After looking at some of the rockets on display, we boarded one of tour busses to see the launch pads.

We passed Pegasus with the external fuel tank on board. Pegasus is the barge which carries the external fuel tank. We saw the firing building, the shuttle processing building and the Vehicle Assembly Building. There where TVs on the bus with interviews with the people who worked in these building. We also saw this gigantic eagle's nest. We stopped at an observation tower for shuttle launches on the bottom floor, there were models of the various building in KSC and a movie about the shuttle preparation process.

Another bus took us to the Apollo complex. They had the original firing room from Apollo. They replayed the process with video and audio. Each station would light up when the person working at that station did said something. When the rocket went off, the windows vibrated; it seemed like the windows would break. It was sort of sad that they did this to the original firing room, but it would have ended up like the Manhattan Project room at Columbia University [storage] if they did not do this.

Finally we have a Saturn V rocket on display.

 

This thing

 

is flipping

 

huge.

 

I was shocked by the size of the rocket. This really put into perspective for me the energy required to go to the moon. Imagine what a Mars rocket would require. They also had a moon rock that you could touch, that was epic.

All in all, it was a fun trip. I was surprised by the number of people. I expected KSC to be a ghost town, but everything had a line. Every bus was full. Everyone there was really friendly too, even the bus drivers. Everyone sounded they like had a passion for space and I really felt at home there. Hopeful, I will get to go down again to see one of the last shuttle launches.

SPC #11: Applications of Living Systems Theory of Life in Space

Welcome to the Sunday Paper Club. Every Sunday, this blog will offer analysis of a paper on space habitation and other related topics. These are my opinions on a weekly scientific paper; basically I read the paper and write down my thoughts are I read it. They are subject to my perspectives and believes. I am open to debate, so if any reader believes I have misinterpreted something in a paper, please point it out. I'm only a student and I'm still learning how to read these papers and interpret them. All quotes are from the paper unless otherwise noted. All papers I review are available for free online.

This week we are reviewing the paper Applications of Living Systems Theory of Life in Space.

Since some humans will be spending more and more time in space, we need to think of the human factor more then ever. So far, astronauts have been able to endure the stressful environment of space because the astronauts were able to build up enough motivation to cope with the stress. But, as people are subjected to small living spaces and a lack of privacy, they may burnout or snap. As we move farther from Earth, feeling of isolation from humanity will grow.

If we use living systems theory, it could solve the problem that come with the human factor. Living systems theory is the combined study of technology, sociology, biology and ecology. Of course, this brings a problem, the sciences are compartmented. So, we must reinvent our education system to give people a general sense of how their systems effect other factors because we need to study every aspect of space habitation in order for it to work.

Living systems theory is to categorize the subsystems of non-biological systems into twenty categories and identify the amount of inputs for the system to work based on the categorizes of subsystems in biological systems. Once we know this, we can fix dysfunctional systems. The 20 subsystems are: the reproducer, the boundary, the ingestor, the distributor, the converter, the producer, matter-energy storage systems, the extruder, the motor, the supporter, the output transducer, the encoder, the decider, memory, the associator, the decoder, the timer, the channel and net, and the internal transducer.

The study has a very interesting diagram on page 25 of the PDF which maps every part of a moon base to the 20 subsystems. It really shows how complicated even the simplest moon base would be.

Basically, NASA is using living systems theory to make sure every possibility is planned for. If every subsystem is strong, then the whole system could stand up to a lot.

Reactions

- Is it a good idea to low at what we need for space habitation in terms of what our body needs to function?

In Case You Skimmed

-Biological systems have 20 subsystems

-In order for a space habitat to function well, it must replicate biological systems with its own version of the 20 subsystems

Wisdom in Space Habitation

While doing research for my education philosophy paper (my final paper for high school, wooot), I came across the TED talk The real crisis? We stopped being wise given by Barry Schwartz. I think his words can be applied to any field, any task and every action we take. Incentives and punishments, as Barry Schwartz points out, do not work. I feel they will not work in space. But, this is what makes human space flight special. I feel those who are in the space field have a certain wisdom. It's found outside of this field, yes, and, yes, there are a few dull bulbs in the space flight. But, I feel that the vast majority of the people in space will resonate with Barry Schwartz's words. Not just agree with him, but feel a connection to his argument the runs down to the soul. This philosophy must be buried deep within the space habitation movement because it will guide us on unmade trails and unknown obstacles.

Photo by alicepopkorn

Here's the video if you want to watch it. It's 20 minutes long, so I quoted the best parts for this blog post. But, Barry Schwartz is a great speaker and really makes a convincing argument. Plus, it makes my job easier if you watch it. Your time will not be wasted by watching this video... relative to the other youtube videos that we all know you watch. 

Real-world problems are often ambiguous and ill-defined and the context is always changing. A wise person is like a jazz musician -- using the notes on the page, but dancing around them, inventing combinations that are appropriate for the situation and the people at hand.

The space program has ignored the rules. The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project is my primary example. This project occurred, not only during the cold war, but in the same year of the Vietnam war, which was basically a war between the USSR and the USA, but with puppets. If NASA and the Soviet Space Program followed the rules, we would have seen the first war in space. Both sides where trying to stop the spread of the other's ideologies and, if the programs followed the textbook, they should have gone to war, at the very least ignore the other side. But, this was not done. They talked to each other. These two countries who where just at war and had nuclear weapons aimed at each other had their astronauts and cosmonauts shaking hands in space. Americans climbed in to Russian vehicles and visa-versa. This shouldn't have happened. The administrators and engineers of both space programs showed incredible wisdom though this act. If we continue to toss out the rules in space, we will see a multinational team in the first space habitation. Because the rules still say we should be fearful of other nations. I believe, after man achieved the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, that space programs will ignore these social rules - the very rules which will lead to humanity's destruction. 

In Switzerland back about 15 years ago they were trying to decide where to site nuclear waste dumps. There was going to be a national referendum. Some psychologists went around and polled citizens who were very well informed. And they said, "Would you be willing to have a nuclear waste dump in your community?" Astonishingly, 50 percent of the citizens said yes. They knew it was dangerous. They thought it would reduce their property values. But it had to go somewhere and they had responsibilities as citizens. The psychologists asked other people a slightly different question. They said, "If we paid you six weeks' salary every year would you be willing to have a nuclear waste dump in your community?" Two reasons. It's my responsibility and I'm getting paid. Instead of 50 percent saying yes, 25 percent said yes. What happens is that the second this introduction of incentive gets us so that instead of asking, "What is my responsibility?" all we ask is, "What serves my interests?"

It's because of the above quote that I fear the promise of fortunes in space will be the Achilles heel the space habitation movement. In my experience of talking to others about space habitation, claiming that we should have a space habitation because it cool is a much more effective argument then human extinction or profit. Simply put, incentives and punishments will not power the space habitation movement. They will give us creditability, but something will be at the core of our mission. I don't know what it is, the space habitation idea hasn't lived this long because it cool. We need a rallying call, a moral obligation that space habitation fulfills. Again, I'm not sure what it is, but this obligation has keep this dream alive for many year, it will lead to it's fulfillment.

So I want to know, what did you take from this video. 

Fear in Space Habitation Pt. 3

The space race has a very valuable lesson to teach us about fear in space programs.

The reason we still do not have a moon base is because the 1970's space programs where based on fear. I feel the only reason the nation cared about NASA during this time was to beat Russia. During the cold war, we wanted to wipe the communists all over the floor in every, single, possible area. I feel the nation didn't have a passion for space during that time, they had a fear of a communist controlled outerspace. I want to point something out to you, look at this, note the times the NASA budget was more then 1% of the federal budget, then come back.

 

1962 was the Cuban Missile Crisis, the height and beginning of the mass fear of the cold war. After this point, the arms build up and threat of a nuclear war only increased. 1977 was two years after the end of the Vietnam War, which, in my opinion, was the point where American citizens just got sick of the Cold War. After we we got sick of fear, the motivation for a space program was gone. Plus, we had already "defeated" Russia in the space race, so there was nothing to fear. We "owned" space. So, NASA got it's funding cut. Today, the thing America fears (terrorism) is not in space, yet. So there is even less reason to fund NASA if you used only fear to justify a space program.

 

Fear also has another problem. If you where to make a graph of public support of a program based on fear it will be similar to Y = (1/X), ignoring the negative X part. Basically, the program will start off with a ton of support, then it will wane off. This is an inefficient support system for a program with long term goals. This is why we can't use fear to support a space habitation program, it will have alot of support at first, but then it will wane off. I feel that a fear based space habitation program will only lead to a single space colony supporting just enough people to have genetic diversity in lower Earth orbit. That is enough to eliminate the fear of human extinction.

 

In order to move to other stars, the public support for space habitation should look like the graph of Y = 2^X. It should start with very little support, but then increase exponentially until the idea is engrained into the cultural of humanity. Fear does not do this, it only rides the wave of fear until it finds a new idea to power.

Fear in Space Habitation Pt. 1

I've noticed I've been posting alot on human extinction and I'm using that argument as my flag ship argument. That worries me. Fear has been studied and is generally considered a bad motivator. But, we can use fear in a moral and appropriate matter

"Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd." ~ Bertrand Russell

I worry about those opposed to space habitation. When I use human extinction as an argument, I tap into people's fears and their fears about their children. The emotional response will be huge. People who I have convinced with the human extinction argument will target those opposed to space habitation as treats to themselves as their children. I don't want to cause someone's life to be ruined because of an idea.

"There is nothing to fear except the persistent refusal to find out the truth, the persistent refusal to analyze the causes of happenings." ~ Dorothy Thompson

People who support space habitation out of fear will not critically look at what he supports. If space habitation is completely disprove, fear will not allow a person to give up. Maybe there are other ways to prevent human extinction and I believe all space habitation supporters must be open minded, but if I use fear I could close the mind of anyone who follows me.

"You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You must do the thing which you think you cannot do." ~ Eleanor Roosevelt

But, humanity really looking into the face of it's own mortally may help us deal with other times when we do not have a threat. Thinking about humanity dying off is scary, we have trouble thinking about our own deaths, but the thought of no one experiencing life is horrifying. Really take a breath in and imagine that was the last breath that will every be drawn in this universe. But, if we pull of what ever macro-engineering project that will ensure our survival, we will come out of this scary time a stronger and more confident species. Maybe talking about human extinction will make us stronger.

Fear is an emotion indispensable for survival. ~ Hannah Arendt

This is human however, this is what made us live till today. Fear is what caused the creep of technological advancement. Everything we do has a taint of fear in it. Going to school can be supported with fear of poverty, partying may be done out of fear of loneness and having a relationship may be done out of fear of missing something in life. Everything we do has fear and space habitation, consuming a large amount of resources will also consume alot of human emotion.   

Tell your heart that the fear of suffering is worse than the suffering itself. And no heart has ever suffered when it goes in search of its dream.- Paulo Coelho

However, we are already worrying about it. The 2012 fear wave is already causing alot of suffering. Maybe, since we are all ready started to have fear about human extinction, we can focus on some project, some dream and decrease the suffering. Because people running around in circles screaming "the sky is falling" is worse then supporting a dream with some fear. I rather have a rush to build a space colony then riots.

I have to consider this more, please, if you think I use fear too much, tell me.

The Fire of a Launch

This is a comment for the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee. The question is: What do you find most compelling about NASA’s human space flight activities and why?
Last updated: July 6, 2009
Passion, a mission, a purpose, a focus: this is what NASA's work does has given me and why I believe this nation, more then ever, needs NASA. The last two great periods for the US were wars, the cold war brought us unimagined achievements and WW2 brought unsurpassed industrial production. Those two times in history placed American as a leader in the world. But, war can no longer be our focus, for it threatens, not the lives of a few soldiers or a city or a nation, the all the human life on this planet. Humans are truly experts in war and the thought that war could lead to a day where the sunrise is not viewed by a human eye leads many to not focus on war. War can no longer be a passion because it today it means self destruction.

This is why we need a macro-engineering project. But not just any macro-engineering project. Yes, we can build a better city, a longer bridge, a higher building or a bigger canal, but they all lack something. It is just what we have done before, but bigger and they do not tap into something deep within our instinct. I believe humans are driven to protect and better the world for the next generation. Imagine a day when nothing, absolutely nothing, can wipe out humanity. Imagine a day where every star supports life. THAT, that is a purpose. Thinking of that gives life and energy to a person. Looking up everyday and seeing that there is nearly infinite possibilities and wilderness builds a huge fire in the heart. When I wake up, I first think of this possibility and when I want to stop studying or blogging or working on all I have to do, I look up. The fire will never die in me because of this; this mission has complete control over me. Space flows through my veins.

NASA shows this is possible, it shows that anything one dreams can happen. IT shows not even the huge gravity of Earth can hold back passion; can hold back a dream! Yes, NASA would be the worst, most inefficient corporation in the world, but they are not a corporation. Even human who sees a launch is lit like a candle out of the burning cloud of a shuttle escaping the chains of gravity and that will never, ever go out. This fire, in even one person, is well worth the cost of one shuttle flight, but this fire is not given to just one person. A launch lights the world! Once humanity is given this passion NOTHING will stop us. We will be an unstoppable species.

The beginning of the song used Star Trek: Enterprise intro places this nicely; it explains what goes through the mind of someone touched by a launch...

It's been a long road,
To get from there to here.
It's been a long
time,
but my time is finally here.

And I can feel a change in the
wind right now.
Nothing's in my way.
And they're not gonna hold me down
no more.
No they're not gonna hold me down.

'Cause I've got faith of
the heart.
I'm going where my heart will take me.
I've got faith to
believe.
I can do anything.
I've got strength of the soul.
And no
one's going to bend or break me.
I can reach any star.
I've got
faith,
I've got faith,
Faith of the heart.
~ Rod Steward - Faith of the Heart

I choose this part because we are not there yet. Humanity has put hundreds of years into this. Please, the dream of a day where the second part this this song, the part used in the intro, describes the mind set of those touched by the fire of a launch. That day will be when we leave this solar system. This is what NASA gives to us and justifies it's cost. Passion given to a human is invaluable.

Please, I, on my knees, beg you to not only keep the fire of the launch burning, but to expand it. Please, give what human space flight has awoken in me to everyone. Human space flight was the stepping stone, this allowed me to find the people to help me in my goals. Let NASA burn and pass it's fire across this demotivated nation. The thought of a human bathing in the light from another star will drive me, forever. Human space flight is NASA's passion and what it spreads.
Let humanity burn with passion!
Share your comment here.

The image that links to this article on the home page is by jurvetson.

The ISS might have an Economic affect

I was reading the article ISS: Closing in on completion, in the March 2009 issue of Aerospace America, written by Astronaut Tomas D. Jones and this part of the article caught my eye.

Congress declared the station a national laboratory in 2005, and NASA is actively seeking government and industry customers who want to use the ISS for a wide variety of research and applications. NASA will not charge for utilities and crew time, but experimenters must find their own transportation to the station, a major obstacle for smaller enterprises. Low-cost commercial transportation to [low earth orbit] (from SpaceX, Orbital Sciences and others) may offer relief.

By doing this, NASA and the US government is opening the door for any company to get involved in space. Yes, launching to space is expensive, but building a space lab is even more expensive and a well thought out plan should attract enough investors to fund prototype transportation. So, the ISS might be the proving ground for space industry as industrial methods are developed on the station. This could lead to a boom in the space industry as well as manufacturing in general as new materials and techniques as created.

Also, I strongly believe that space-based manufacturing will be the center piece to any space habitation efforts. By providing a incubator for space industry, the ISS could lead to space habitation. A mass scale space habitation effort, just like any other macro-engineering project, would be a huge boost to the economy.

Well, those are my thoughts, what does this quote mean for you?

A Ground Breaking Idea in Space Station Design

This idea will rock the space industry, changing the status quo in space station design. This idea shows how important it is to bring the general public into this arena because this idea, an idea that will save money and improve the lifes of space explorers, come from a contest. Space stations have looked the same since their birth, from Salyut 1 to ISS, they have been a network of tubes. There is Bigelow Aerospace with it's expandable space station sections, but it is the same basic space station design, only puffy. Plus, the current trend in space station design does not allow for artificial gravity, endangering crews should they stay in space for more then a year and requiring that a crew be rotated.

But, the Gallagher Space Center, generated by the NASA's Create the Future design contest, gets around a major road block. Since this space station is in a ball, we can rotate it on it's X,Y, and Z axis (Correction: we can rotate it on one axis) and generate artificial gravity. This is due to the centrifugal force that is generated by a rotating object; the floor of the space station would feel like its pushing up on it's occupants, simulating gravity.
The only part I don't like about this design is the orientation of the living area, if it was flipped, so the floor would be concave, then we could generate artificial gravity. The way it is now, people would fall to the ceiling if we spun the station. But, this is a minor problem still the design is only on paper. Furthermore, the huge windows on this space station would make life much better aboard it and the station can be placed into orbit in a simlar method to the way "'Pringle Potato Chips' are packaged" and shipped, reducing lauch costs. (Create the Future 1) All in all, this design solves many of the problems with living in space.

Thank you to The Design Blog for posting this, I would not have seen this if they had not posted the design. You can see the creator's post about his design and learn more about this briliant man on his website.

Update: You can see more on this idea here

--------------------------
1: Dettler, Andre. "Gallagher Space Center". NASA Tech Befiefs and SolidWorks . 17 Oct. 2008. 10 Mar. 2009

President Obama’s proposed budget and NASA

While dropping entrecards I came across the blog First Door on the Left where I found a scribd document detailing the proposed budget for 2010. It was really interesting reading through the financial plan for this nation, but then I came across the section on NASA; $18.7 billion dollars plus $1 billion from the American Recovery and Investment Act. The budget also gives a commitment to manned spaceflight and a return to the moon. The development of a replacement for the suttle and the International Space Station (ISS) are also funded. NASA's section in the report on the budget begin on page 109 of the scribd document below. It is really amazing that public support (assuming the action of politicians indicates what the public wants which could be a bad assumtion) is still in favor of space exploration.

I'm curious through, do you think that this is a apporpriate use of tax dollars.
A New Era of Responsibility: The President's 2010 Budget Proposal

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Periodicals & Report budget Barack Obama

Surveys and Backlinks

On Sunday my little study on the public opinion of space habitation ended. I want to write a post the mimics the format of professional studies. While researching for the introduction section of this study, I came across several papers that discussed the very topic I was studying. I am very happy with the post and will be posting it on the weekend, after I finish proofreading. I would like to thank those bloggers who participated in my survey now and later in the study itself. (Backlinks, for everyone!) My data had a huge non-response rate, so I can not make generalizations about the opinions of all mankind. But, I can redesign my study based on the comments I got. The participants who chose to identify themselves are:

chato of Mental Health Humor and Cartoons,
sarah of PC Game Trek,
Bob of Black holes and astrostuff,
Spicybugz of Spicybugz World,
Metallman of Metallman's Reverie,
Ravyn of Exchange of Realities,
bstone of planet earth looks blue,
nipsy of its completely nipplelicious,
Jude of Mature Not Senile,
April of The Crazy Green Cheapskate,
RevOxley,
Stephanie of Rocket Scientist,
webbielady of Webloglearner,
Lubasa of Lubasa sketchlog.
Thank you to all the other poll takers who did not identify themselves. Your time and your efforts have given me inside into the subject which I am passionate about.

In other news, there is a real study on public opinion of manned space flight. If you have any free time, please take this survey. Surveys like mine and the space expectations survey need a very large sample size to get over the problem of voluntary sampling and to make conclusions about a population. In voluntary sampling, only those who care about the subject will take the survey, creating biased results. Every questionnaire matters in a survey, the space community needs your input to but understand and serve you, please take survey ran by the International Academy of Astronautics.

Poll: Do you think humanity will move off earth in the near future?

TO ENTRECARD USERS: VOTE IN THE POLL AND YOU CAN ADVERTISE YOUR BLOG IN THE COMMENTS. Read more below...

I recently put up a poll asking "do you think humanity will move off earth in the near future?". I want to know what my readers think of this concept of space habitation. This space is meant for further discussion about the poll and for people who want to expand on and explain their reasons behind their vote. At the end of a week, I will be writing an analysis of the results. I will also credit to those who commented here when I quote them in my analysis by linking their blog. Even if I don't quote you, I will still give credit to all participants. So please, if you voted in the poll at least leave a link to your blog in the comments so I can give you credit. (*cough* free advertising *cough*) The poll is on the sidebar, to the left. Well, let the experiment begin and thank you for your help.

So, What Does the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act say about NASA

That is a really long title, sorry about that. But, either way, please enjoy what the stimulus package says about NASA. We are tossing huge amounts of money into changing the game, we may even move into a space based economy because of this act. Furthermore, NASA is not getting a blank check, they have to mange these funds with a strong plan. I will follow this post with detailed explanation of some of the programs detailed in this act. I'm also looking through the act for research funding to other areas of science, but this part of the act is on the main topic of my blog, so I'm posting it.

But, 400 million dollars to exploration is very impressive considering the political environment and that 400 million is less than half of what NASA is getting. It is an amazing time to be in this field, even politicians see the benefit of space. Well, I'm not going to hold you back any more, please, sit back and enjoy the jaw dropping, mouth watering, NASA stimulus.

SCIENCE
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
ADMINISTRATION
NASA is directed to submit to the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations a
spending plan, signed by the Administrator,
detailing its intended allocation of funds
provided in this Act within 60 days of enactment
of this Act.
SCIENCE
The conference agreement includes
$400,000,000 for Science, to remain available
until September 30, 2010. Funding is included
herein to accelerate the development of the
tier 1 set of Earth science climate research
missions recommended by the National
Academies Decadal Survey and to increase
the agency’s supercomputing capabilities.
AERONAUTICS
The conference agreement includes
$150,000,000 for aeronautics, to remain available
until September 30, 2010. These funds
are available for system-level research, development
and demonstration activities related
to aviation safety, environmental impact
mitigation and the Next Generation Air
Transportation System (NextGen).
EXPLORATION
The conference agreement includes
$400,000,000 for exploration, to remain available
until September 30, 2010.
CROSS AGENCY SUPPORT
The conference agreement includes
$50,000,000 for cross agency support, to remain
available until September 30, 2010. In
allocating these funds, NASA shall give its
highest priority to restore NASA-owned facilities
damaged from hurricanes and other
natural disasters occurring during calendar
year 2008.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
The conference agreement includes
$2,000,000 for the Office of Inspector General,
to remain available until September 30, 2013.
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
NSF is directed to submit to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations a
spending plan, signed by the Director, detailing
its intended allocation of funds provided
in this Act within 60 days of enactment of
this Act.
RESEARCH AND RELATED ACTIVITIES
For research and related activities, the
conference agreement provides a total of
$2,500,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2010. Within this amount,
$300,000,000 shall be available solely for the
major research instrumentation program
and $200,000,000 shall be available for activities
authorized by title II of Public Law 100–
570 for academic facilities modernization. In
allocating the resources provided under this
heading, the conferees direct that NSF support
all research divisions and support advancements
in supercomputing technology.
EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES
The conference agreement includes
$100,000,000 for education and human resources,
to remain available until September
30, 2010. These funds shall be allocated as follows:
Robert Noyce Scholarship
Program ......................... $60,000,000
Math and Science Partnerships
............................... 25,000,000
Professional Science Master’s
Programs ................ 15,000,000
MAJOR RESEARCH EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES
CONSTRUCTION
The conference agreement includes
$400,000,000 for major research equipment and
facilities construction, to remain available
until September 30, 2010.

The original document is here.

A Flaw in My Last Post

I have a very strong bias in support of NASA and all they do, so in my last post, Creativity in Negative Times, I assumed that NASA would be open to internal innovation. But, I have found evidence that proves this is not the case. While dropping entrecards I ran into a mispelt bog [sic]. The first post was an embedded youtube video called Barriers to Innovation and Inclusion directed by NASA astronaut Andrew S. W. Thomas. This video is based on real events that occurred at NASA.
The video details the following roadblocks to innovation at NASA. They are...

• Superiors wanting to stay within their comfort zones
• Compartmentalizing employees
• Assuming ideas from contractors means they are wasting working time and contract restrictions (It is possible that a passionate employ spends his/her free time doing work)
• Fear of retribution from superiors and other departments
• Fear of losing a contract because of an idea
• Lack of trust in employees and deferring problems to the chain of command
• Conformity to the current direction/Institutional inertia
• Ad Hominem Arguments (Attacking the source of an argument or an idea to disprove the argument or idea)
• Risk aversion
• Worrying about the process to develop the idea with disregard of the outcome.

So, it seems that NASA is not as supportive of innovation as I originally assumed. I found an article about someone who tried to fix this called Wayne Hale's NASA Blog: Stifling Dissent, but after working on fixing this problem...

Still, it is hard to tell how effective the change effort has been. Even though I personally try to solicit information from a variety of folks in a variety of places and ways, the reports were generally that alternate opinions are welcomed, dissent is accepted and evaluated, and we are doing better than ever.
But the anonymous polls and [Internet] feed back says there is still a lot of work to be done.
Recently I had a couple of events which affected my thinking on this. I have been out of the Shuttle Program manager job for almost a year now and a trusted coworker just a week ago told me that people in his organization had been prevented from giving me important alternative choices for some program choices that occurred a couple of years ago. This was staggering. It was happening right in front of me and I was totally unaware that people - who I trusted, who I hoped would trust me - kept their lips sealed because somebody in their middle management made it clear to them that speaking up would not be good.

I will write further blog posts about this flaw I found, it is fascinating and I want to understand why it occurs. This is only my opinion though, is there good that can come out of what I think is a flaw in NASA's management.

Internet in Space

I was over at the blog The Martian Chronicles reading the article "Would You Go?" which asked it's readers wether or not they would go on a one-way trip to Mars. The vast majority of commenters (and I) said they (I) would. When commenting, I thought of what I would do during my free time. See, one can be entertained for hours on end with the Internet. But, the Internet is not available in it's current form on Mars.

That [the long distances] rules out TCP,which requires the computer sending a message to get almost immediate acknowledgement of receipt from the computer that receives the message.The computer will continue to send messages only if it receives a steady stream of such receipts.The impossibility of immediate acknowledgement means TCP will not work over the distances of deep space. (1)

I thought one could take a personal intranet with information needed for the mission on physical memory, much like taking a Wikipedia CD collection to Mars. But, using YouTube on Mars would be fun. How would that work? The current version of the Internet on Mars is the Deep Space Network.

NASA currently communicates with interplanetary and Earth-orbiting missions using its Deep Space Network. The network consists of dishes in California, Spain, and Australia, which are manually set to receive transmissions from a given spacecraft. The main drawback of the Deep Space Network is that it relies on line-of-sight transmissions. That means rovers or astronauts on the far side of Mars must wait until they are back in the line of sight with Earth before sending a message home. To receive the message, the Deep Space Network dishes must be pointed in the right direction at the right time, or the signal will be lost forever. (2)

Meaning, if I were to send a message to Earth from Mars, I would have to send it, hope the message got to Earth and wait for a few hours for confirmation that the message got to it's destination. However, there is a better plan.

 

 

Image Credit: (3)

Imagine the Internet on Earth and a similar one on Mars, linked by satellites, which relay the information between the Internets. These special purpose satellites are called 'gateways'. Now think of it not only as two Internets, but a network of Internets, interconnected by a store-and-forward "overlay" network that forms the backbone across interplanetary space. Each Internet will have a local gateway.(4)

I think this is a very good idea, but I have input. How would I know if there was new content to request. I think there would need to be an index of the Earth's Internet on Mars plus an index of Mar's Internet on earth. This way, I could search the index for information located on another planet. Then, get it. It would need to be updated continuously, so my idea would take up a ton of bandwidth but it would allow for a fast search for information that can be accessed later.

It would have to work like a mail order. I need a catalog to see what a company has, I don't know wether or not a company would have ... tin foil pants without a catalog. Only with the catalog could I request the tin foil pants, which could then be shipped to me. But, the company must keep sending me new catalog every few months so I can see the updates. Otherwise, I could end up requesting tin foil pants which went out of production long ago and miss out on the recycled plastic pants which just came out. (That was the most ridiculous example ever.)

So, I could play Halo 3 over Xbox Live on Mars with the people on Earth. But, I could watch YouTube with a long delay as long as I have a catalog. It would work like this...

only without the real time voice. I did not find on other ways it could work, but please share your ideas.     

 

Sources

(1): Hogie, Keith, Ed Criscuolo, Ron Parise. Putting More Internet Nodes in Space. April - June 2006. CSCWorld. 8 Feb. 2009 <http://personal.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/cleo/hogie-papers/hogie-cscworld-apr-jun-2006.pdf>

 

 

(2): Gray, Rich. On the Edge: Interplanetary Internet. 02 May 2003. Space.com. 8 Feb. 2009 <http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/ontheedge_0305.html>

 

 

(3) and (4): Ward, Deirdre, Rachel McDonnell, Micheal Tinney, Emer O'Donovan, Philip Kelly. The Internet In Space - What Is Happening?. Networks and Telecommunications Research Group. 8 Feb. 2009 <http://ntrg.cs.tcd.ie/undergrad/4ba2.02/space/index.html>

The Cutting Room Floor

I recently entered The Dupont Challenge with an essay about NASA Technical Memorandum 102102 entitled Lunar Production of Solar Cells. (I found a scan of the original document in a database my school subscribes to, but I have linked to a text version that is free online) I can't post the essay I wrote, but I found all this great content which I could not include in the essay for the contest. I also had to clip a section about population because it did not directly relate to science, it was more mathematics based. I also could not support the argument in this scraped section well. I hope in posting it, I will get feedback to make this argument stronger or disprove it. Here is the scraped section of my essay for The DuPont Challenge.

    In about two hundred years the earth will struggle to support humans. The earth has only so many resources. The Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) Fact Book mentions that there are 6,706,993,152 living on 148.94 million square kilometers of land that exists on earth. Breaking this number down, that means there is .0222066724 sq km per person (5.48738825 acres) or about forty-five people per sq km of land. Of that, the CIA lists that only 10.57% of that land is arable. That leaves only .0023472453 sq km (.58 acres) of farmland per person. According to the executive summary of Food, Land, Population and the U.S. Economy, “at least 1.2 acres per person [are] required to maintain current American Dietary standards.”. With the remaining acres, one must provide living space, landfills, roads, workplaces, recreation facilities and health care services to each person.

    In the year 2200 the human population will stabilize somewhere just above 10 billion people. At that time there will be only .014894 square kilometers (3.68038755 acres) per person. The farmland shortfall will be worst with only .00152663496 sq km (.3772397139 acres) of farmland per person. There are ways to expand our farmland, projects like vertical farming are in development. With more food available, populations tend to raise as demonstrated in Human Carrying Capacity Is Determined by Food Availability and Human Population Numbers As A Function Of Food Supply. We could also change our culture to consume less food, but the trend in food consumption is going in the opposite direction. Increasing farmland and changing our culture are not viable solutions. These calculations are based on the assumption that all the land on earth will only be used by humans. In reality, there is less land available due to the large amount of non-human biomass.

    All population is based on a limited exponentiation growth model. The limits on population are determined by the resources available to that population. Should humanity grow to the point where our exponential population growth is limited by our resources then suffering will occur. Any growth past the limit will result in huge starvation rates. Humans will continue to reproduce, even if there are no resources to support a new life. In a world of ten billion people, the limit of our growth as determined by the UN report, we will see unimaginable suffering. Most of these problems can be solved with a space based economy.

I'll be looking around on the cutting room floor for more blog posts. Any criticism or comments are welcomed

NASA-MUST Scholarship Program

Hey, I'm really excited for the NASA-MUST Scholarship Program. (That's why there hasn't been a new blog post in a while) From the scholarship's website:

Motivating Undergraduates in Science and Technology

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is sponsoring the Motivating Undergraduates in Science and Technology (MUST) Program, offering support to undergraduate students from across the United States in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines.

Program participants receive a scholarship, NASA internship, mentors, and access to a wealth of professional development opportunities.

The program offers:

• A one year competitive scholarship covering up to one-half of tuition and fees, not to exceed $10,000 per academic year. The scholarship is renewable through the student's junior year provided that all eligibility criteria continue to be met.
• Support from MUST Professional and Academic Support System (PASS) providing scholars with an online student community and professional development/leadership training.
• A $6,000 (10-week summer internship stipend) to participate plus transportation and location allowance not to exceed $1,000. Students will have the opportunity to participate in a paid internship at one of ten nationwide NASA centers.
• Invaluable resources, insight, and experience to further STEM education and career aspirations from the MUST Consortium, comprised of three member organizations: the Hispanic College Fund, the United Negro College Fund Special Programs Corporation, and the Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers.

Eligibility requirements:

• Must be a U.S. citizen. Students from underrepresented groups (women, minorities, persons with disabilities, and individuals from rural and low-income communities) are encouraged to apply.
• Must reside in the United States or a U.S. Territory.
• Be a college freshman, sophomore, or junior and hold full-time academic status at an accredited college or university for the 2009-2010 academic year.
• Must earn and maintain a cumulative grade point average of no less than 3.0 on a 4.0 scale (un-weighted).
• Must be enrolled in STEM disciplines whose majors are aligned with NASA's core competencies (physical science, technology, engineering, or mathematics).

NASA MUST Scholarship opened November 1, 2008: click here to apply

Deadline for Applications: February 2, 2009

If I get this scholarship, I'm on the fast track to my dream career. I would really suggest any high school senior or college student check this out. It is a really generous offer. Good luck to anyone who applies.