Category Archives: Space Exploration

Blue Origin, the private spaceflight company founded by billionaire Jeff Bezos, will launch a spacecraft filled with science experiments and thousands of postcards from kids on Tuesday (Dec. 10), but only if Mother Nature allows.

The company's reusable New Shepard spacecraft is scheduled to launch on the suborbital NS-12 mission at 9:30 a.m. EST (1430 GMT) from Blue Origin's West Texas proving grounds.

You can watch Blue Origin's launch here and on Space.com's homepage, courtesy of the company's webcast, beginning at 9 a.m. EST (1400 GMT). You can also watch the launch directly from Blue Origin's website here.

Related: How Blue Origin's New Shepard Rocket Ride Works (Infographic)

Blue Origin is watching the weather, however, which may not be the best for a launch.

"Current weather conditions aren't as favorable as wed like, but we're continuing to keep an eye on the forecast," Blue Origin wrote in a mission update.

The NS-12 mission will mark Blue Origin's twelfth New Shepard launch and sixth using this particular New Shepard spacecraft. The vehicle made its first flight in December 2017, with two more in 2018 and two more flights this year in January and May, respectively.NS-12 will be Blue Origin's ninth commercial mission using a New Shepard vehicle.

For this flight, New Shepard is carrying a series of science experiments for NASA and other customers, including Blue Origin's 100th payload for customer, the company reported. Some of the science experiments include:

Related: Art in Space Contest: A Conversation with OK Go's Damian Kulash

Packed among the experiments are thousands of postcards with handwritten messages and artwork from children from Blue Origin's nonprofit Club for the Future. Blue Origin launched the club in May to inspire children in space exploration. Its first project is to launch 10,000 postcards from kids containing their visions of humanity's future in space.

The NS-12 launch will be New Shepard's first flight in seven months, during which time Blue Origin has unveiled plans for a crewed lunar lander for NASA and has been working on a passenger version of New Shepard.

"As we move towards verifying New Shepard for human spaceflight we are continuing to mature the safety and reliability of the vehicle," Blue Origin wrote in its mission update.

Email Tariq Malik attmalik@space.comor follow him@tariqjmalik. Follow us@Spacedotcom, Facebook and Instagram.

Original post:

Blue Origin Will Launch (and Land) a Reusable Spacecraft Tuesday. How to Watch - Space.com

Doug Loverro, whose space experience has been primarily military, has taken his place as the NASA Associate Administrator for the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate or HEOMD. Loverro is in charge of sending human beings to the International Space Station as well as the moon and, eventually, to Mars. He has a difficult job ahead of him.

Rocket science has become a byword for complexity for a reason. NASA programs, especially those that involve sending people to destinations in the heavens, have often taken longer than expected and cost more than estimated. Loverros job is to take control of NASAs two human spaceflight programs, Commercial Crew and Artemis, and get them to proceed on time and on budget. The goal is imperative because NASA programs that cost more and take more time become vulnerable to cancellation.

A strange exception to that rule is the Space Launch System, the rocket that is still the center of NASAs plan to return to the moon by 2024. It has proven to be billions over budget and years late. The SLS is now due to launch for the first time in 2021 maybe. The heavy rocket maintains support because it is being built in Alabama, the home state of Sen. Richard ShelbyRichard Craig ShelbyDemocrats open door to repealing ObamaCare tax in spending talks On The Money: Economy adds 266K jobs in strong November | Lawmakers sprint to avoid shutdown | Appropriators to hold crucial talks this weekend | Trump asks Supreme Court to halt Deutsche Bank subpoenas Appropriators face crucial weekend to reach deal MORE, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Otherwise, NASA might opt to use commercial rockets, such as the Falcon Heavy or the upcoming Starship, to get people back to the moon, saving a lot of money. Loverros toughestjob is to get control of the SLS and make it work, cutting its estimated $2 billion a launch cost.

NASAs workforce is clearly worried about the fate of the Artemis program, astwo of the questions askedduring the town hall in which NASA Administrator Jim BridenstineJames (Jim) Frederick BridenstineWhy Voyager 2's discoveries from interstellar space have scientists excited NASA planned expedition to orbit Pluto won't settle whether it's a planet NASA Administrator: 'I believe Pluto is a planet' MORE introduced Loverro to employees at the space agency suggest.

With new funding stalled, how does Moon2024 differ from the other times Lucy has pulled the football from the workforce?

Lucy and the football is the analogy that Bridenstine has used for the other two times NASA embarked on a human deep space exploration program only to have them cancelled.

Artemis lacks the congressional support required to make it a reality. For how long will NASA pretend otherwise?

Bridenstine took on those two questions by noting that a NASA funding bill has passed out of the Senate. It includes money for a lunar lander, key to getting humans back to the moon by 2024. ButOMB has sent a letterto Shelby arguing that funding for the lunar lander and related technology in the Senate bill is insufficient to achieve the 2024 goal. The House version of the NASA bill has none of the extra funding at all.

The problem is that NASA, like many other parts of the government, has been funded by a continuing resolution since the current fiscal year started. Congress has not been doing its job of getting funding bills passed in a timely manner. If a NASA appropriations bill that contains sufficient money for lunar landers fails to pass by December 20, the goal of landing the first woman and the next man on the moon by 2024 becomes problematic. Bridenstine hassent a letterto Congress imploring it to pass an appropriations bill for NASA that includes lunar lander money.

If Congress does as Bridenstine asks, then the part of NASA that handles human space flight, under Loverros leadership, has to perform. The whole point of sending the first crewed expedition to the moon since 1972 in five years is to concentrate the minds of the people working to make that happen with a deadline. No more delays. Artemis must put people on the moon by 2024.

The strategy is fraught with some degree of risk. One disaster, either during a test or, worse, during an actual mission, would set back the Artemis program by months or even years. A mishap could kill the third effort to send explorers out into deep space entirely.

But the rewards for success will be sweeter than any effort undertaken since the Apollo program. Artemis would prove that the United States and her international and commercial partners can achieve something wonderful, uniting much of the world in not just the exploration of space, but the expansion of human civilization beyond the Earth, to the moon, Mars and beyond.

Mark R. Whittington, who writes frequently about space and politics, has published a political study of space exploration entitledWhy is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon? as well asThe Moon, Mars and Beyond. He blogs atCurmudgeons Corner.

See original here:

Doug Loverro's job is to restore American spaceflight to the ISS and the moon | TheHill - The Hill

Space research and space exploration are vital to the future of humankind. The Earth may be resilient -- it's still here long after the dinosaurs, and it shows no scars from the Carrington solar storm that fried telegraph lines in 1859. But society on this planet is facing some unprecedented challenges.

Our dependence on technological systems such as power grids and satellite communication makes us more vulnerable than ever to solar storms. We should not forget that another significant asteroid collision is a matter of when, not if. And planetwide shifts such as climate change, ocean acidification and deforestation raise vital questions about how the Earth can continue to support the growing population.

These are just a few reasons why this is a pivotal time to take major steps in space-based technologies that can help us predict, adapt to, mitigate and protect ourselves from catastrophes or slower-occurring changes. Theyre also good reasons to boost space exploration. To ensure that our species endures, we have a responsibility to develop our society to become a spacefaring one.

Technologically, we're making exciting progress. For example, through the Artemis program, NASA is partnering with private industry and universities to take people back to the moon by 2024 and to Mars by the 2030s. Chinas uncrewed Chang'e program just landed a rover on the far side of the moon, where the Chinese space agency is laying the groundwork for a lunar research station. University, industry and government programs around the world are conducting promising research on ion thrusters for faster interplanetary travel and on small low-cost satellites to explore our solar system and beyond for signs of habitable worlds.

Many of us who work in these areas will be gathering next week for the American Geophysical Union fall meeting. Its the worlds largest Earth and space science conference, and this happens to be its centennial year. As we consider the next hundred years, we must embrace the notion that technology alone wont carry us forward.

We need to design this spacefaring future in context, and universities can play an important leadership role. Thats why, on our campus, weve recently launched the University of Michigan Space Institute. Its purpose is to bring together a strong multidisciplinary community and facilitate entirely new types of collaborations that might not have emerged organically solely within science and engineering communities. Here are some key areas where we believe this approach can pay dividends.

Zoning on the moon. Who owns the moon? How do we determine where we can build a station or mine for water or minerals? While the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 prohibits nations from claiming celestial bodies, it didn't anticipate the privatization of space exploration. Technological advancement and economic shifts have opened many new questions about how nations and companies should operate on outposts beyond the Earth. Researchers in engineering, policy and law will need to work together to develop processes for establishing sustainable settlements.

Tracking and reducing space junk. Artificial satellite explosions and collisions have left behind more than 23,000 pieces of orbital debris that are larger than 10centimeters, as well as more than 100million that are smaller in size. Traveling at more than 15,000 miles per hour, the debris poses threats to the International Space Station and to the future crewed and uncrewed spacecraft crossing their orbits as space travel becomes increasingly commonplace. Today, the international Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee works to limit the accumulation, and other entities are aiming to improve tracking, but it will take both engineers and space policy makers to solve the problem.

Astronaut health. While we have some knowledge of how long-term weightlessness and living in a space environment affects the human body and mind, theres still so much we dont know about how to stay safe and healthy beyond Earth. To ward off physical and mental health problems, present-day astronauts spend two hours of every eight-hour workday exercising. Kinesiologists, biomedical engineers and other health and space environment experts are needed to develop better and more effective exercise hardware and regimens.

Beyond our brains, muscles and bones are our microbiomes. Trillions of micro-organisms help us digest food and fight disease. Microbiologists, gastroenterologists and environmental engineers will need to determine how the human microbiome will react to environments beyond Earth, and how we can ensure that it thrives.

The list goes on in this area. We need better understandings of radiation exposure, immune function, nutrition and medication stability. Only multidisciplinary teams can tackle such challenges.

Building the space workforce. As we move forward in space research and exploration -- whether were focused on understanding, protecting and improving life on Earth, or expanding human civilization beyond its cradle -- we must inspire and prepare tomorrows workforce to collaborate across traditional boundaries. Were already witnessing the space industry outgrowing dependence on government funds and creating new kinds of jobs. We have a responsibility to introduce students in majors not typically associated with space to the opportunities in the new space economy. And the space industry will benefit from the types of creativity that are new to the sector.

In one step toward building a more diverse future space workforce, several universities, including the University of Michigan, are working with NASA to explore ways to increase the number of women who are principal investigators of large missions. We know that more diverse teams, and more diverse leadership, lead to more innovative ideas.

These and other emerging areas are already demanding collaborations not only between engineers and planetary scientists, who have driven much of space exploration to date, but also among scholars from a wide variety of other disciplines. As we become more ambitious, moving toward self-sustaining colonies and human exploration beyond our home planet, the need for a space research community that represents all areas of human knowledge will only grow.

Originally posted here:

Universities must break interdisciplinary boundaries to help advance space-based technologies (opinion) - Inside Higher Ed

On Nov. 19, Mark S. Robinson opened an email with the subject line, Vikram Landers final resting place (Images with Proof).

Dr. Robinson is the principal investigator for the sharp-eyed camera aboard Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, a NASA spacecraft that has been mapping the moon for a decade, and he had received a lot of these emails since an Indian robotic spacecraft disappeared in September as it attempted to land on the moon.

But this one turned out to be the crucial clue in finding the missing lander, and on Monday NASA announced the location of the crash site, with photographs showing the scar on the moonscape.

The accomplishment was a triumph of crowdsourcing in modern space research, and pointed to the value of NASAs openness with its data and operations. Most of the data from American civilian space missions is freely available to both academics and curious amateurs, who were able to scour pictures from a NASA orbiter for signs of the Indian spacecraft.

By contrast, the Indian Space Research Organization, or ISRO, the agency that runs Indias space program, has been parsimonious in revealing what it knew about the fate of Vikram, which was part of Chandrayaan-2, a mission that launched in July. An accompanying orbiter continues to operate around the moon.

If Vikram had successfully made it to the surface, India would have become only the fourth nation to accomplish that feat. But as it descended, something went awry about a mile above the surface. Vikram shifted off course, then went quiet.

A day later, the Indian space agency posted on its website that it had already found the lander: Vikram lander has been located by the orbiter of Chandrayaan-2, but no communication with it yet.

This week, K. Sivan, ISROs director, dismissed the NASA announcement, repeating the claim that Vikrams location had been identified back in September.

However, the Indian space agency never released images or other data to corroborate the statement, nor did it share the coordinates of where Vikram supposedly sat on the moons surface. Only last month did the Indian government admit failure.

Thus, NASA and others looked for Vikram without ISROs help.

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which has been methodically mapping the lunar surface for a decade, happened to pass over the Vikram landing site 10 days after its crash.

Dr. Robinson and other camera scientists examined the images, but there were no obvious signs of Vikram. The high-resolution images encompassed about a billion pixels, and the small lander, if it were not hidden in the shadows, would be only a few pixels wide.

There was a huge search area, said Dr. Robinson, a professor of earth and space exploration at Arizona State University. There were five or six people who pitched in and spent a day.

They then returned to their more scientific tasks. It was interesting to do, Dr. Robinson said. There wasnt a lot of scientific value in it.

The orbiter made additional flyovers of the site on Oct. 14, Oct. 15 and Nov. 11, adding more pictures to analyze. The direction the spacecraft was pointing during the Nov. 11 flyover provided better lighting and sharper resolution in the images.

Amateur enthusiasts continued to examine the NASA images, and many claims of Vikram sightings landed in Dr. Robinsons inbox. For most, a quick before-and-after comparison with older photographs showed that the purported impact crater was already a feature of the lunar surface.

While NASAs openness has enabled many more eyes to look over the scientific data, the space agency, with management of its missions spread around the country, is not always diligent in following up on tips.

The November email came from Shanmuga Subramanian, a computer programmer and mechanical engineer living in the south Indian city of Chennai, who had already tried for a month to tell NASA what he thought he had found.

On Oct. 3, Mr. Shanmuga posted on Twitter a tiny white speck that was not visible in an older image, which he said he thought could be Vikram.

Two weeks later, he emailed Noah E. Petro, the project scientist for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. Five days later he followed up with Dr. Petro and John W. Keller, the deputy project scientist.

But it was only on the third email that he added Dr. Robinson, who forwarded the email to other scientists on the camera team, and they quickly found the crash site.

First, they confirmed that the speck Mr. Shanmuga identified was not there before September but was also visible in the October and November flybys. That ruled out the possibility that the speck was unlucky camera noise.

They then found changes in the brightness of nearby soil caused by bits of the moon flying upward and outward after the impact.

The pattern looked like a splash of water and pointed to where Vikram had slammed into the moon, about 2,500 feet to the southeast of the speck Mr. Shanmuga had seen. The speck turned out to be a piece of Vikram thrown out by the impact, and the scientists spotted other bits of wreckage.

The debris is spread out over a wide area, Dr. Robinson said.

While Indian authorities had initially suggested that the spacecraft could still be operational after a harder-than-designed landing, the images showed Vikram had disintegrated.

It wasnt a hard landing, Dr. Robinson said. It was a crash.

Dr. Robinson said it took a few days to carefully check the analysis before he informed Dr. Petro and Dr. Keller, who in turn told agency officials before Thanksgiving.

A NASA spokesman said that the release of the findings was coordinated with the Indian space agency. But the spokesman said ISRO did not share with NASA the coordinates of where it thought Vikram had ended up.

ISRO did not respond to questions about the claim that the Chandrayaan-2 orbiter had already located the lander in September.

Vikrams inadvertent strike of the moon reveals properties of the soil in the area that scientists would not have seen otherwise.

At the impact point, the surface became darker.

That material is not itself necessarily darker, but rather chunkier and thus casting more shadows, making it appear darker.

That tells something about the cratering mechanics, Dr. Robinson said.

Farther away, lighter-colored material emanates outward. The lighter streaks are not a coating of material thrown out by the impact but rather, the surface was smoothed out, making it more reflective and brighter, Dr. Robinson said. Seeing that could aid future studies of the moons surface.

_____

Hari Kumar contributed reporting from New Delhi.

Here is the original post:

A Billion Pixels and the Search for Indias Crashed Moon Lander - The New York Times

What will space exploration look like in 2069, a century after the first moon landing? In the fifth and final episode of podcast series, To the moon and beyond, we speak to space scientists about the missions they are dreaming about and planning for the future.

In episode four we heard about plans to establish a base on the moon, potentially mining the lunar surface for minerals and even water that could be turned into rocket fuel. Episode five finds out what happens when this is built. How could a base on the moon help us travel to other parts of the solar system? And where should we go? These are some of the questions we investigate.

We start by finding out why the moon is seen as such a great place from which to launch missions further into space. Ultimately its down to the fact that the hardest part of any space journey is getting a rocket out of Earths gravity.

Alex Ellery, an associate professor of Space Robotics and Space Technology at Carleton University in Canada, explains the different ways its possible to exploit the moons weak gravity. One way is to build a new space station that orbits the moon something that NASA and other international space stations are already planning.

Another way is to build a base on the moons surface using lunar resources. This would be much more ambitious but could ultimately be safer and more sustainable, according to Ellery:

In fact, there is a veritable host of useful stuff on the moon. Iron, aluminium, titanium, silicon, ceramics, reagents, regolith gases of various kinds, and so on, from which it is possible to build an entire infrastructure and to do this robotically. This is how we get the true value of using the moon as a stepping stone towards Mars and elsewhere.

While different people have different views about when well actually make it back to the moon and how, most academics weve spoken to are confident it will happen. Monica Grady, professor of planetary and space sciences at the Open University in the UK, told us where she would go, once a moon base is set up.

For her, its all about travelling to the places where life might be. This could be Mars, Jupiters moon, Europa, or Saturns moon, Enceladus. Europa and Enceladus are unusual in the sense that they have huge internal liquid oceans buried under a thick sheet of ice heated by the gravitational tug of the huge planets they orbit. Grady says:

If I had to really pick one place where I thought there was definitely going to be life a living life I would say Europa. Because Europa has had all those building blocks, its had all the ingredients, its had plenty of time. I imagine that the ocean floor, Europas ocean floor must be a relatively stable environment [for life to develop].

Grady also explains how scientists would go about finding life on another planet when that life is probably not going to be visible aliens walking around above ground. In cold places like Mars, Europa or Enceladus, its more likely to be some sort of microorganism thats not visible to the naked eye and is deep below the surface.

When it comes to finding life elsewhere in the solar system, a big concern is the extent that humans (and robots built by humans) may contaminate alien ecosystems in the process. At the same time, futurists warn that space exploration is a necessary part of human survival. Anders Sandberg, from the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University, says the financial cost of space exploration is a worthwhile investment:

In terms of cost effectiveness, space is maybe not in the cheapest way of saving humanity. There are many other important things we can and should do down here. But its not a competition. Its not like the space budget is always eating into the budget of fixing the environment. In fact theyre quite complementary. One of the best ways of monitoring the environment is after all from space.

Sandberg predicts that humans could be living on Mars in 30 to 100 years time. Going beyond our solar system to exoplanets will be much trickier, but this is the next step. And there are scientists working on far flung missions to explore them. Frdric Marin, an astrophysicist at the University of Strasbourg in France, is one. He tells us about ideas for a giant, multi-generational spaceship that could go the distance:

You have to find a way to keep your crew alive for centuries-long missions and part of my work is to investigate if this is feasible in biological terms, in terms of physics, chemistry, food production and energy production, artificial gravity, and so on. So Im currently working on simulations of multi-generational space travels, in which a population will live inside a vessel and procreate, die and the new generation will continue this cycle until the population reaches an exoplanet.

While this kind of mission may get off the ground in the next 50 years, current technology would not see it arrive at the nearest exoplanet until well beyond 2069 into future centuries. So watch this space.

To the moon and beyond is produced by Gemma Ware and Annabel Bligh. Additional reporting by Nehal El-Hadi and Aline Richard. Sound editing by Siva Thangarajah. Thank you to City, University of Londons Department of Journalism for letting us use their studios.

Music: Even when we fall and Western Shores by Philipp Weigl; An Oddly Formal Dance by Blue Dot Sessions; Traverse Night Sky (Non Dreamers) by epitomeZero. All via Free Music Archive.

Take it all in via Zapslat.

Archive footage: Apollo 11 and 17 audio from NASA.

Miriam Frankel, Co-host, To the moon and beyond Podcast, The Conversation and Martin Archer, Space Plasma Physicist, Queen Mary University of London.

It's that time of year when we all give thanks, and we want to extend that thanks to you. All of us at AlterNet are honored by your readership and support. We hope you and your family enjoy a cozy, joyful Thanksgiving.

AlterNets journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. Were here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And were proud to say that weve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 yearslonger than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

Its through the generosity of our supporters that were able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone cant pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

Read this article:

To the moon and beyond 5: What space exploration will look like in 2069 - AlterNet

The 2019 Kennedy Center Honors this year highlighted the lifetime achievements of five artists:Linda Ronstadt,Sally Field,Michael Tilson Thomas, Earth, Wind & Fire, and Sesame Street, which was the first TV show to receive the award. Politicians, celebs, and Washington socialites all gathered to celebrate.

The star-packed evening began on the red carpet, where Sesame Street puppeteers walked in character, holding aloft the celebrities we really wanted to talk to. Elmo talked about learning the art of the clip-on bowtie and Abby Cadabby joked about having rented her gown. Much of the Sesame Street team was wearing yellow feather pins to commemorate the original puppeteer behind Big Bird and Oscar the Grouch,Caroll Spinney, who died earlier that same day.

When Field walked down the carpet, one reporter asked about the Presidents noted absence (he has skipped all of the Kennedy Centers high-profile events since taking office). Field responded that if he were in attendance, she wouldnt be. One of her guests for the evening was Tom Hanks, who spent a lot of time talking about space exploration and the 50th anniversary of moon landing. He said he could talk about it all night, and after a couple minutes, I really believed him. (But who could get bored with Hanks explaining Apollo missions? Id listen to that podcast.)

The show started with the Eagles Don Henley speaking about Ronstadt. One of our first shows was here in the DC area, he said. Glenn [Frey] and I shared a room at the Georgetown Inn and we played at a little club that existed then called the Cellar Door down on M Street, capacity 163. That was almost 49 years ago. (Ronstadt herself made a little news the night before, at the State Departments intimate dinner for the honorees, when she reportedly said that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was enabling Donald Trump.)

While Trump was not mentioned specifically at the Honors, the audience made its feelings known. At one point, Kennedy Center chairman David Rubenstein gave a shout out to the many lawmakers and other political figures in the room, including Trump-administration figures Pompeo, Betsy DeVos, andWilbur Ross, to polite applause (I didnt hear any boos). But when Rubenstein mentioned attendeeNancy Pelosi, the Opera House erupted in shouts and cheersa standing ovation for the House Speaker who last week announced that she would move forward with impeachment.

The most awkward part of the night was host (and former honoree)LL Cool J, who seemed to have something to say but was a bit too afraid to say it. Theres so many people here that make important decisions, theres so many people that deal with so many things that so many dont understand, but ultimately we are one, he said. He went on to ramble about unity, but acknowledged the countrys dirty laundry history that were not so proud of. When he tried to sum it up, he said, So I would encourage us to not be arrogant, but to actually embrace the world and make sure that we provide leadership for the world that is so desperately needed. The audience slowly clapped, confused but relieved it was over. Next time, get the man an index card!

The music, of course, did not disappoint. To honor Ronstadt,Carrie Underwood performed Blue Bayou while the all-female mariachi group Flor de Toloache beautifully highlighted the singers Mexican roots with harmonies that could make you (cough, me) cry. Sesame Street puppets along with country artist Thomas Rhett performed the classic Sing, and Michael Tilson Thomas was honored with some killer Stravinsky, as well asAudra McDonald singing Leonard Bernsteins Somewhere.

The biggest boogie came in the final tribute toPhilip Bailey, Verdine White, and Ralph Johnson, the remaining original members of Earth, Wind & Fire, with performances by John Legend, Harriet actor Cynthia Erivo, Ne-Yo, and the Jonas Brothers. As all of the vocalists came together for September, everyone in the crowd was up on their feet dancing.

Join the conversation!

Web Producer/Writer

Rosa joined Washingtonian as an editorial fellow in fall 2016. She likes to write about race, culture, music, and politics. She graduated from Mount Holyoke College with a degree in International Relations and French with a minor in Journalism. When she can, she performs with her familys Puerto Rican folkloric music ensemble based in Jersey City. She lives in Adams Morgan.

Continue reading here:

All of the Best Moments From the 2019 Kennedy Center Honors - Washingtonian

The first lander to reach Mars was launched nearly 50 years ago, but much about the red planet remains a mystery. After decades of roving, research and taking illuminating photos, the biggest question remains: Could there be life on Mars?

For decades, space was the final frontier. But as space exploration advanced, scientists increasingly set their sights on a new frontier: Mars.

The first lander to reach Mars was launched nearly 50 years ago, but much about the red planet remains a mystery. Scientists are still attempting to bring samples of Mars red soil back to Earth for further study, and human trips to Mars are still years from being feasible.

After decades of roving, research, and taking illuminating photos of the red planet, the biggest question remains: Could there be life on Mars?

To understand Mars potential for life, we need to go back in time about 3 or 4 billion years.

At that time, Mars and Earth shared many of the same characteristics. The red planet was warm and wet, with a robust atmosphere a far cry from the cold, unforgiving place it is today.

Mars is a planet that started with all the same raw materials as Earth, but along the way has suffered changes, said the European Space Agencys Director of Human and Robotic Exploration, David Parker. You could say its kind of broken down.

Because it was once Earths sister planet, Parker said scientists must ask themselves, When life got going on Earth, did it get going on Mars?

Mars lost its magnetic field, meaning nothing shields the planet (or potential life forms) from radiation. Mars also lost most of its atmosphere another deviation from Earth, where the atmosphere supports life by giving us oxygen and acting as a blanket for the planet.

Mars still has an atmosphere but its very thin and mostly carbon dioxide, so its colder, explained Parker.

That means the average temperature on Mars is -81 degrees Fahrenheit, which makes it an unforgiving planet for most life forms.

But just because Mars is cold and unprotected doesnt mean scientists have ruled out finding life.

In 2018, NASAs Curiosity rover found organic matter on Mars, which could mean that the building blocks for life once existed, or still exist, on Mars.

Organic matter preservation is central to understanding biological potential on Mars through time, wrote NASA researchers in the journal Science. Whether it holds a record of ancient life, is the food for extant life, or has existed in the absence of life, organic matter in martian materials holds chemical clues to planetary conditions and processes.

NASAs rover has also detected methane on Mars, which is considered the most simple organic molecule and could be another chemical clue of life.

With our current measurements, we have no way of telling if the methane source is biology or geology, or even ancient or modern, said Paul Mahaffy, director for NASA Goddards Solar System Exploration Division, in a June press release.

Meanwhile, Europe and Russias ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter launched in 2016 with the aim of detecting atmospheric gases that could mean theres active, biological life on Mars. The ESAs Parker said that while the Curiosity Rover found methane on parts of the surface, they have not detected methane all across Mars atmosphere.

We have not seen methane globally on Mars, which means methane gas is being produced somehow, Parker said. So is there a methane cycle on Mars?

The discovery of localized methane presents an exciting breakthrough because a common source of methane on Earth is microbial life, according to NASA.

Water and ice on Mars also provide valuable clues that suggest Mars might be more habitable than once thought.

In 2015, NASA scientists thought they found evidence of occasional flowing, salty water flows across the surface of Mars. However, another NASA study in 2017 determined that the flows were most likely grains of sand and dust.

But another breakthrough came in 2018 when the European Space Agency detected a small lake of liquid water beneath the southern polar ice cap of Mars, which the ESA said could further contribute to knowledge about Mars evolution and habitability.

And this year, NASAs Curiosity rover found evidence in Mars Gale Crater that there were once ancient salty lakes on the surface another hint that the red planet could have once supported microbial life.

Water is key because almost everywhere we find water on Earth, we find life, wrote NASA on their website.

Its not just liquid water that space scientists are interested in, but also ice. Parker said the ESA is currently working on research about the ice below Mars surface.

Were getting more and more information about subsurface water ice its further from the poles than we thought, Parker told CNN.

Ice could be further evidence of habitable conditions, and it could also be a valuable resource if space agencies send humans to Mars one day.

To unravel the more complex mysteries surrounding life on Mars, scientists want to collect samples, which would require a round-trip mission.

Because the really powerful scientific instruments are huge, we cant take them and never will be able to take them to Mars. So we need to bring Mars back to Earth, Parker said. By bringing Mars back, we can study it for the next 50 years.

Although no space agency has yet figured out how to launch an unmanned craft from the surface of Mars to get samples back to Earth, one way to bring back Martian samples would be for astronauts and cosmonauts to collect them in person.

But reaching Mars, which at its closest point is still about 33.9 million miles away from Earth, would be a feat of engineering.

Its is an order of magnitude farther away. Youre talking about a 3-year round-trip mission, said NASA spokeswoman Stephanie Schierholz.

If reaching the Moon was one giant leap for mankind, reaching Mars would be more like an Olympic long jump. And unlike traveling to the International Space Station (a mere 250 miles above Earth), traveling to Mars would potentially require a lot more packing.

We send up resupply missions every few months (to the space station), Schierholz said. We dont have the luxury of doing that if we go to Mars.

Despite the challenges, NASA is aiming to send astronauts to Mars by 2035. That means the first life on Mars could be us.

This content was republished with permission from CNN.

Original post:

What we now know (and still dont) about life on Mars - WTOP

This Phoenix engineer will have her own device in space in 2021

A 26-year-old engineer from Arizona, working in Phoenix, invented a system that will allow space explorers to stay in the solar system for at least 2 years. The device reduces CO2 in the International Space System.

PHOENIX - An engineer from the valley is helping astronauts breathein space through her own invention.

Phoebe Henson, 26, created a device that cuts down on carbon dioxide in the International Space System. She'sbeen at Honeywell for just 4 years, but she'salready leading engineers that are much older and who've been doing it much longer.

She works as an advanced systems engineer, and herproject will allowastronauts to live in space for twoyears.Some say this will change space exploration as we know it.

The system will be used to help astronauts breathe on missions to the moon and Mars, and even out in deep space.

Henson says it's the most efficient, safest, lightestand smallest comparedto any other system on the market.

Leading a team of engineers at Honeywell, which has a partnership with NASA, a CO2 removal system for the international space station was created. The deviceabsorbs CO2 from the air, captures it and turns it into oxygen.

She says her system maintains a CO2 concentration half the levels on the space station currently.

"This problem is a critical one to solve if we are going to make long term space habitation a reality," Henson says.

This is important because astronauts experience negative healtheffects including headaches dizziness and fatigue.

At a young age, Henson says she wanted to become an engineer. She studied at Arizona State University and tookher first job out of college at Honeywell.

She's proud to work for a company that's given her opportunities to grow and change the way we study space.

"It is really exciting," she said."It is always a dream of mine to put something into space."

Henson's system will be put to use in the space station in 2021.

Another bit of exciting news for Henson: She was just namedas one of Forbes' "30 Under 30" recipients for her groundbreaking work.

Link:

This Phoenix engineer will have her own device in space in 2021 - FOX 10 News Phoenix

Most second-year university engineering students can easily explain the differences between force, torque and pressure. The reason for their confident answers is that engineering schools typically require a term of study in both static and dynamic forces by a students sophomore year. However, from that point on, further studies in these areas are usually confined to aerospace, civil and mechanical engineering disciplines. Few electronic engineers need or will take advanced force mechanic courses.

But modern advances in material properties and device miniaturization as in micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) and sensors mean that force, torque and pressure are relevant across all of the major disciplines. A quick technical review will help remind everyone of these basic concepts.

Force

Simply put, a force is a push or a pull upon an object. A force can cause an object with mass to change its velocity, i.e., to accelerate. Since a force has both magnitude and direction, it is a vector quantity.

A unit of force in the International Systems (or SI) of units is a newton. One newton is defined as the unit of force which would give to a mass of one kilogram an acceleration of 1 meter per second, per second. In terms of an equation, force equals mass times acceleration (F = ma).

Actually, Newtons Second Law of Motion defines force as the change in momentum over time, not mass through an acceleration. But the momentum equation is reduced to F=ma for basic engineering calculations.

Sometimes the word load is used instead of force. Civil and mechanical engineers tend to make calculations based on the load in which a system (e.g., a bridge) is resisting the force of gravity from both the weight of the bridge as well as the vehicles driving over it.

Newtons Laws have been called the basis for space flight. According to NASA, understanding how space travel is possible requires an understanding of the concept of mass, force, and acceleration as described in Newtons Three Laws of Motion. Consider a space rocket in which the pressure created by the controlled explosion inside the rocket's engines results in a tremendous force known as thrust. The gas from the explosion escapes through the engines nozzles which propels the rocket in the opposite direction (Law #3), thus following F=MA (Law #2) which lifts the rocket into space. Assuming the rocket travels beyond Earths atmosphere, it will continue to move into space even after the propellant gas is gone (Law #1).

Newtons Three Laws of Motion

1.

Every object in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless an external force acts on it.

2.

Force equals mass times acceleration [F = ma]

3.

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Torque

The first university course in static forces is usually followed by a course in dynamic forces in which the idea of rational force or torque is introduced. Torque is the tendency of a force to rotate or twist an object about an axis, fulcrum, or pivot. It is the rotational equivalent of linear force.

Formally, torque (or the moment of force) is the product of the magnitude of the force and the perpendicular distance of the line of action of force from the axis of rotation. The SI unit for torque is the newton metre (Nm).

Image Source: Wikipedia by Yawe (Public Domain)

Deriving the equation for torque is often done from a purely force perspective. But it can also be accomplished by looking at the amount of work required to rotate an object. This was the approach the Richard Feynman used in one of his lectures on rotation in two-dimensions.

We shall get to the theory of torques quantitatively by studying theworkdone in turning an object, for one very nice way of defining a force is to say how much work it does when it acts through a given displacement, explained Feynman.

Feynman was able to show that, just as force times distance is work, torque times angle equals work. This point is highlighted in several avionic and aeronautical examples from NASAs Glenn Research Center where NASA designs and develops technologies for aeronautics and space exploration. Force, torque and pressure concepts continue to exert their influences far beyond the earths atmosphere. Concern the release of a large satellite like the Cygnus Cargo Craft from the International Space Station (ISS). The satellite is connected to a large robotic arm that removes it from the ISS prior to release into space. The robotic arm acts just like a huge moment of force in space subject to forces, torques and pressure acting in space.

Pressure

Pressure is the force per unit area applied in a direction perpendicular to the surface of an object. Many of us are familiar with gauge pressure from measuring tire pressures. Gage pressure is the pressure relative to the local atmospheric or ambient pressure. This is in contrast to absolute pressure or the actual value of the pressure at any point. This will make more sense shortly.

Pressure is the amount of force acting per unit area. The SI unit for pressure is the pascal (Pa), equal to one newton per square meter (N/m2). Pressure is also measured in non-SI units such as bar and psi.

In his lecture on the The Kinetic Theory of Gases, Feynman introduced the concept of pressure by thinking about the force needed for a piston plunger to contain a certain volume of gas inside a box. The amount of force needed to keep a plunger or lid of area A would be a measure of the force per unit area of pressure. In other words, pressure is equal to the force that must be applied on a piston, divided by the area of the piston (P = F/A).

Applications for pressure technologies exist both on and off the planet. In space, however, pressure is so low that it may almost be considered as non-existent. Thats why engineers often talk about vacuum rather than pressure in space applications. A vacuum is any pressure less than the local atmospheric pressure. It is defined as the difference between the local atmospheric pressure and the point of a measurement.

While space has a very low pressure, it is not a perfect vacuum. It is an approximation, a place where the gaseous pressure is much, MUCH less than the Earths atmospheric pressure.

The extremely low pressure in the vacuum of space is why humans need space suits to provide a pressurized environment. A space suit provides air pressure to keep the fluids in our body in a liquid state, i.e., to prevent our bodily fluids from boiling due to low pressure (via PV = nRT). Like a tire, a space suit is essentially an inflated balloon that is restricted by some rubberized fabric.

Homework question: Why didnt the wheels on the Space Shuttle bust while in space, i.e., in the presence of a vacuum? Look for the answer in the comments section.

In summary, force, torque, pressure and vacuum are important physical concepts that thanks to advances in material sciences and MEMS devices cross all of the major disciplines. Further, these fundamental concepts continue to have relevance in applications like space systems among many others.

Continue reading here:

Tutorial: What are the differences between force, torque, pressure and vacuum? - DesignNews

Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) First Deputy Head Alexander Ivanov, Russia's President Vladimir Putin, and Federal Agency for Special Construction head Alexander Volosov watch a rocket booster carrying satellites blast off from a launch pad at the Vostochny Cosmodrome.

Mikhail Metzel | TASS | Getty Images

NATO, the U.S. and Russia have a new domain to compete and conflict over: space.

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned Wednesday that the U.S. saw space as as "theater of military operations" and that the development of the U.S. Space Force posed a threat to Russia.

"The U.S. military-political leadership openly considers space as a military theater and plans to conduct operations there," Putin said at a meeting with defense officials in Sochi, according to Russian news agency TASS.

"For preserving strategic supremacy in this field the United States is accelerating creation of its space forces, which are already in the process of operative preparations," Putin said, adding that the world's leading countries are fast-tracking the development of modern military space systems and dual purpose satellites and that Russia needed to do the same.

"The situation requires us to pay increased attention to strengthening the orbital group, as well as the rocket and space industry as a whole."

Russia opposed the militarization of space, Putin insisted, but said "at the same time the march of events requires greater attention to strengthening the orbital group and the space rocket and missile industry in general."

Putin's comments Wednesday reiterated those he made in late November to his security council, in which he said he was "seriously concerned" about NATO's "attempts to militarize outer space."

That comment came after NATO had declared space a fifth "operational domain" for the military alliance, alongside air, land, sea and cyber.

"Space is part of our daily life here on Earth. It can be used for peaceful purposes. But it can also be used aggressively," NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said at a meeting of foreign ministers on November 20.

"Satellites can be jammed, hacked or weaponized. Anti-satellite weapons could cripple communications and other services our societies rely on, such as air travel, weather forecast or banking," he said. "Space is also essential to the alliance's deterrence and defense," Stoltenberg added, referencing the organization's ability to navigate, to gather intelligence, and to detect missile launches.

"Making space an operational domain will help us ensure all aspects are taken into account to ensure the success of our missions," he said. "For instance, this can allow NATO planners to make a request for allies to provide capabilities and services, such as satellite communications and data imagery."

He said that around 2,000 satellites currently orbit the Earth with around half of them owned by NATO countries.

Stoltenberg insisted that "NATO has no intention to put weapons in space. We are a defensive alliance." He added the alliance's approach to space will remain fully in line with international law. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty is a global agreement considered a foundation stone of international space law.

The treaty was first signed by the U.K., U.S. and then-Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War to promote the peaceful exploration of space. It banned the placing of nuclear weapons in space and limited the use of the Moon and all other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes only. It also established that space shall be free for exploration and use by all nations, but that no nation may claim sovereignty on any part of it.

There are other space treaties covering, for example, the rescue of astronauts, the moon, the International Space Station (ISS) and liability for damage caused by space objects. Still, the use of space for defensive activities is likely to be litigious and provocative territory.

It's not the first time that space has been seen as a potential realm for defense though, especially during the Cold War. The "Strategic Defense Initiative" was a program first initiated in 1983 under President Ronald Reagan. The aim of the program was to develop an anti-ballistic missile system that was designed to shoot down nuclear missiles in space, with potential missile attacks from the Soviet Union specifically in mind.

Artist's concept of interceptor under development for the U.S. Army's HEDI (High Endoatmospheric Def. Interceptor), a key element of its 1983 Strategic Defense. Initiative (aka Star Wars)

Time Life Pictures | The LIFE Picture Collection | Getty Images

It was dubbed "Star Wars" because it envisaged that technologies like space-based x-ray lasers could be used as part of the defensive system. Funding shortages as well as the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 meant that the SDI was never built.

The idea of space dominance and defense has gained more traction in recent years, however, and in 2018, President Donald Trump floated the idea of developing another military branch, the "Space Force." He said the idea of a Space Force had started as a joke but he had then decided it was a "great idea."

"Space is a war-fighting domain, just like the land, air, and sea," Trump said. "We have the Air Force, we'll have the Space Force." In June 2018, he ordered the Pentagon to begin the creation of the new branch.

At the start of 2019, the U.S. unveiled an overhaul of its missile defense program in its "Missile Defense Review" in which it stated the need for a "comprehensive approach to missile defense against rogue state and regional missile threats." The review also recognized "space is a new war-fighting domain, with the Space Force leading the way" and said it would ensure "American dominance in space."

In a speech presenting more detail on the Missile Defense Review, Trump said the U.S. would "invest in a space-based missile defense layer. It's new technology. It's ultimately going to be a very, very big part of our defense and, obviously, of our offense," he said.

U.S. Air Force Space Command Gen. John "Jay" Raymond stands next to the flag of the newly established U.S. Space Command, the sixth national armed service, in the Rose Garden at the White House August 29, 2019 in Washington, DC. Citing potential threats from China and Russia and the nations reliance on satellites for defense operations, Trump said the U.S. needs to launch a 'space force.'

Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images News | Getty Images

"The system will be monitored, and we will terminate any missile launches from hostile powers, or even from powers that make a mistake. It won't happen. Regardless of the missile type or the geographic origins of the attack, we will ensure that enemy missiles find no sanctuary on Earth or in the skies above."

Russia responded angrily to the comments, saying it was tantamount to the U.S. relaunching the Cold War-era "Star Wars" program. According to a statement from Russia's foreign ministry, reported by Reuters, Russia condemned the strategy as an act of confrontation and it urged Washington to reconsider its plans.

"The strategy, de facto, gives the green light to the prospect of basing missile strike capabilities in space," the statement said. "The implementation of these ideas will inevitably lead to the start of an arms race in space, which will have the most negative consequences for international security and stability," it said.

"We would like to call on the U.S. administration to think again and walk away from this irresponsible attempt to re-launch, on a new and more high-tech basis, the still-remembered Reagan-era 'Star Wars' program," it said, Reuters reported.

Experts say Russia is wary of the U.S., and NATO, opening up a new operational frontier in space as Russia would be easily out-competed by the combined NATO countries' technological expertise, advances and weaponry in space.

"I think when the Russians hear this, they primarily think of the 'Strategic Defense Initiative', they think of missile defense, and those are the kinds of things they can't compete in those areas as well and something they would be very keen to avoid (competing over). The question is, what is NATO actually going to do here?," Daragh McDowell, principal Russia analyst at Verisk Maplecroft, told CNBC Wednesday.

Russia was quick to criticize NATO's announcement of space as a new operational domain with Putin telling his security council that "we are also seriously concerned about the NATO infrastructure approaching our borders, as well as the attempts to militarize outer space."

Earlier this year, Putin had said Russia needs to heavily upgrade its space industry, telling his security council in April that "it is obvious that it is necessary to fundamentally modernize the rocket and space industry," according to news agency TASS. He also said that leading positions in space exploration were essential for solving national development tasks, ensuring the country's security and technological and economic competitiveness, TASS reported.

Christopher Granville, managing director of EMEA and Global Political Research at TS Lombard, told CNBC Wednesday that Russia had spent considerable time and effort, in the last few decades, developing technologies to defend against "any conceivable U.S. strategic defense or anti-missile defense capabilities."

"And if the U.S. were hypothetically to develop new capabilities in outer space, then Russia would have to come up with new responses in addition to the weapon system that Putin announced with some fanfare last year," he said, referencing Putin's revealing of new nuclear weapons in March 2018 that he said were "invincible."

Read the original post:

Putin fears the US and NATO are militarizing space and Russia is right to worry, experts say - CNBC