Mars
Mars looms large as a human destination in sci-fi lore—no surprise, given that it remains unmarred by human boot prints but orbits the sun tantalizingly close to Earth, well within the realm of possible exploration. But that possibility has always been out of reach.
If that changes, it likely won't be for another two decades at the very least. Obama has stated that his goal is to send U.S. astronauts on a round-trip swing past Mars in the 2030s, with a landing on the Red Planet shortly thereafter.
Reaching Mars might require extensive international cooperation—or some creative thinking. Some nations have already joined forces for robotic exploration of the planet or to lay groundwork for a future manned mission. China's first Mars probe, Yinghuo 1, is expected to hitch a ride to the Red Planet as early as this year on a Russian rocket along with Phobos–Grunt, a Russian lander bound for Phobos, one of the two tiny Martian moons.
And Russia has already partnered with the European Space Agency (ESA) to investigate the psychological effects that the prolonged confinement and isolation of a round-trip Mars journey might have on a crew. In an experiment called Mars500, now in progress, six volunteers are spending more than 500 days in an enclosed capsule in Moscow, punctuated by a simulated landing and spacewalk on Mars.
But serious technical challenges and physiological questions remain. (For one, can a human safely endure the dosage of cosmic radiation that comes with such a journey?). And at present, no nation is close to being able to send a manned mission to Mars, let alone return that crew safely.
Enter the creative thinking: Some, including physicist Lawrence Krauss, have proposed that the best way to get to Mars might be to make it a one-way trip. That would greatly reduce the complexity of the mission—no need for a return stage, no need for fuel for the trip home—and cut in half the dangerous cosmic radiation dosage that astronauts would accrue on the interplanetary journey.
Lagrange point
In 2009, after taking office, Obama convened a blue-ribbon panel to review NASA's plans for manned spaceflight. One of that commission's suggestions was a manned mission to a Lagrange point in space, one of five gravitational equilibrium points in the sun–Earth system where gravitational and centrifugal forces balance to create a relatively stable place to essentially hover in a deep-space orbit. (Astronauts would not be able to explore much while spacewalking at a Lagrange point, but it would be an unprecedented voyage into deep space nonetheless.)
One of those points, a spot well beyond the orbit of the moon known as L2, has become a popular destination for unmanned astronomical spacecraft—both NASA and ESA have sent missions there.
The L5 Society, a 1970s group driven by the space-colonization ideas of Princeton University professor Gerard O'Neill, advocated for a human presence at the two most stable Lagrange points, L4 and L5. That dream has not yet become reality but may in the coming decades as humankind ventures beyond low Earth orbit and into ever deeper reaches of the solar system.
Subscription Center
See what we're tweeting about
11 Comments
Add CommentThere can be no progress in manned space flight by U.S. civilian astronauts until NASA becomes an independent agency, free from all political interference. NASA must have a guaranteed percentage of the federal budget each year and the authority to set its own goals in space.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNasa needs engineers in charge, not former Astronauts who think that rocket power is the way to go byond the ISS. Nasa was offered the technology of the Flying Saucer, discovered and patented. They could even have flown a Shuttle to Mars. Thanks to incompetence Nasa is now moribund.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAn effort to develop a new Copernican model of spacetime enabling faster than light transit is a much more sensible spacefaring investment. The need for this kind of conceptual framework has been generally acknowledged in the physics community for decades, and the success of such research will produce economic benefits on Earth almost certainly within a decade, and in the process revolutionize theoretical physics, energy production, and provide transformative changes, benefits, and admittedly: new risks in other areas within 3-5 years of a initiating a concerted, well-designed research portfolio - having merely a normal amount of luck.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe should investigate all the fields and fund it accordingly. It is so sad that over 40 years ago we traveled to the moon and now with all of our technology we can't even duplicate this simple feat. US does not even have the rockets to take us there anymore. Shameful how the space race has ceased. Sad and shameful.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is my contention that the Government does not believe in Jesus Christ. They have no hope for the future. They sent way to much money on space exploration (since no faith in God) believing the planet will one day die. This is more money wasted as in bailout. Their is a God named Jesus christ if anyone belives it or not he will be returning soon. He will conquor the Government and de throne all corupt leaders.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEvery knee will bow every tounge will confess he is lord God!
We carried the load for the rest of the world for fifty years in manned space flight. Since we are now enjoying the benefits of Tang and freeze dried cuisine designed for space flight. So, now we can sit back and enjoy watching the Chinese travelling to the moon. I wonder if that will turn out like Chinese coal mining?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am dumbfounded by the intellectual quality of the comments being posted here about NASA and future manned space flight. If they are indicative of the intellectual capacity of the current Scientific American readership, then the editors need to look at their editorial content and marketing very carefully in future. Perhaps I sampled too few?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs there any intelligent life out there?
A lot of science is based on previous science fiction. The internet, satellites, your car all far fetched ideas at one time thought to be made by insane people with too much time on their hands.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe reality is by researching these "flying saucers", single stage to space craft, 100 year missions means that even if only a small proportion comes true in the next 100 years its a fantastic achievement.
Youre right about the first comment though, NASA must remain a govermment institution, that cannot write its own checks. If you want commercial institutions go join Virgin Galactic, or spacex. There are a few of them already.
Well, the username "burntsynapse" suggests at least self-awareness, and longplainfirstnation appears to be outstanding in his fieds.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisbigbaddude...You do realize this a science magazine don't you...ps..real soon has been for the last two thousand years...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen do you predict...1..10..100..1000...you just sound so sure, thought you must have some inside information from your current cult....
Jesus I was thinking the same thing, except for the first post about depoliticizing NASA and guaranteeing its cash flow. Especially that Christian nut case, what's he doing reading science anyway? Doesn't he know that's a sin? :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this