Michael Griffin’s a birthday wish for NASA, which he runs: "An understanding that not everything that is worthwhile can be justified in terms of immediate dollars and cents on the balance sheet." An artful reply, and America’s space agency did not survive 50 years without being artful.
NASA was thrown together after Soviet Union launched Sputnik in 1957, and received impetus by the flight of the first cosmonaut in 1961. Then president John Kennedy responded by saying that an American should go to the moon by the end of the decade. Within five years, NASA had access to three-quarters of 1% of America's GDP.
Dr Griffin said of that period that "the moon race was more than exploration for its own sake; it was considered a real-life test of the viability of our open society—a vindication of the very concept of freedom." Although an exaggeration, he is right- there was something heroic about the project.
It changed humanity's view of itself by broadcasting pictures of the Earth as a frail blue dot hanging in a hostile void over an unchanging lunar desert, demonstrating that not everything that is worthwhile can be justified in terms of money.
It might have been better for NASA's reputation if it had closed down at that point. NASA has survived through a space-shuttle programme far more expensive than the rockets it was supposed to replace, through the construction of an orbiting space station, though it has produced little of scientific value—and also, through a programme of unmanned scientific space probes that have pushed back the frontiers of human understanding.
Dr Griffin may be the administrator with the boldest vision since the early 1970s. He is trying to realize George Bush's almost casual announcement that America should return to the moon, and then go on to Mars. Though it will be expensive, it might bring the "manned" and "unmanned" parts of the organisation together.
NASA was thrown together after Soviet Union launched Sputnik in 1957, and received impetus by the flight of the first cosmonaut in 1961. Then president John Kennedy responded by saying that an American should go to the moon by the end of the decade. Within five years, NASA had access to three-quarters of 1% of America's GDP.
Dr Griffin said of that period that "the moon race was more than exploration for its own sake; it was considered a real-life test of the viability of our open society—a vindication of the very concept of freedom." Although an exaggeration, he is right- there was something heroic about the project.
It changed humanity's view of itself by broadcasting pictures of the Earth as a frail blue dot hanging in a hostile void over an unchanging lunar desert, demonstrating that not everything that is worthwhile can be justified in terms of money.
It might have been better for NASA's reputation if it had closed down at that point. NASA has survived through a space-shuttle programme far more expensive than the rockets it was supposed to replace, through the construction of an orbiting space station, though it has produced little of scientific value—and also, through a programme of unmanned scientific space probes that have pushed back the frontiers of human understanding.
Dr Griffin may be the administrator with the boldest vision since the early 1970s. He is trying to realize George Bush's almost casual announcement that America should return to the moon, and then go on to Mars. Though it will be expensive, it might bring the "manned" and "unmanned" parts of the organisation together.
For pictures of Mars and more, click here.
At the moment, about a third of the agency's budget is spent on unmanned science- on missions to planets, vital observations of the Earth, and examination of the sun and scanning of the universe.
The remaining budget is consumed by manned space flight—the shuttle and the space station. NASA often refers to this as "space exploration" but actually, both are barely out of the atmosphere. The real exploration of space is being done by the unmanned missions.
The result is a tension between the "manned" and "unmanned" sides of the organisation. Many scientists reckon a lot more useful stuff could be done in space if the manned budget were spent on robot probes. Dr Griffin, however, says that without the human-exploration side, the science side would be "a mere shadow of itself today". The implication is that without the fluffier but politically appealing bits of human space exploration, space science would not do so well.
To keep the scientists on side, manned spaceflight should be justified to taxpayers in its own right—not in terms of money, but for its inspirational value. Historically, that is questionable. The voyages of discovery to America, commonly compared to spaceflight, were entirely about money.
Nevertheless, it is an argument that keeps the dollars coming, for Americans seem reluctant to abandon their manned space programme. To replace the shuttle, there will be new rockets and a new type of spaceship. There will also be a moon lander, and eventually a mission to Mars. NASA, then, may get to relive its youth after all, but may find that the reality of youthful experience has moved on.
NASA was defined by the competition with its Soviet counterpart. But things have changed since the 1960s. A lot of people other than national agencies want to join, and NASA is under pressure to do something it is bad at- collaborating.
Take the case of Richard Garriott, a successful games designer who is flying to the space station in October as a private tourist. Initially, NASA was sniffy about the whole idea of space tourism. Mr Garriott also hopes to do some commercially valuable experiments when he is in orbit. Just the sort of application, it might be thought, that should be encouraged.
Such collaborations are a way forward. Google's chief executive exhorted NASA to engage more with the outside world by creating "open systems" that others can build on. Google would like to start collecting its own data for its planetary-visualisation projects.
That, perhaps, is a more subtle threat than NASA realises. For Google's virtual planets are a symptom of the changing nature of vicarious experience. If Google can eventually be able to bring the illusion not just of not just being on the moon, but of actually having had them, then paying for real manned Mars missions might seem an awful waste of money.
(797 words)
At the moment, about a third of the agency's budget is spent on unmanned science- on missions to planets, vital observations of the Earth, and examination of the sun and scanning of the universe.
The remaining budget is consumed by manned space flight—the shuttle and the space station. NASA often refers to this as "space exploration" but actually, both are barely out of the atmosphere. The real exploration of space is being done by the unmanned missions.
The result is a tension between the "manned" and "unmanned" sides of the organisation. Many scientists reckon a lot more useful stuff could be done in space if the manned budget were spent on robot probes. Dr Griffin, however, says that without the human-exploration side, the science side would be "a mere shadow of itself today". The implication is that without the fluffier but politically appealing bits of human space exploration, space science would not do so well.
To keep the scientists on side, manned spaceflight should be justified to taxpayers in its own right—not in terms of money, but for its inspirational value. Historically, that is questionable. The voyages of discovery to America, commonly compared to spaceflight, were entirely about money.
Nevertheless, it is an argument that keeps the dollars coming, for Americans seem reluctant to abandon their manned space programme. To replace the shuttle, there will be new rockets and a new type of spaceship. There will also be a moon lander, and eventually a mission to Mars. NASA, then, may get to relive its youth after all, but may find that the reality of youthful experience has moved on.
NASA was defined by the competition with its Soviet counterpart. But things have changed since the 1960s. A lot of people other than national agencies want to join, and NASA is under pressure to do something it is bad at- collaborating.
Take the case of Richard Garriott, a successful games designer who is flying to the space station in October as a private tourist. Initially, NASA was sniffy about the whole idea of space tourism. Mr Garriott also hopes to do some commercially valuable experiments when he is in orbit. Just the sort of application, it might be thought, that should be encouraged.
Such collaborations are a way forward. Google's chief executive exhorted NASA to engage more with the outside world by creating "open systems" that others can build on. Google would like to start collecting its own data for its planetary-visualisation projects.
That, perhaps, is a more subtle threat than NASA realises. For Google's virtual planets are a symptom of the changing nature of vicarious experience. If Google can eventually be able to bring the illusion not just of not just being on the moon, but of actually having had them, then paying for real manned Mars missions might seem an awful waste of money.
(797 words)
No comments:
Post a Comment