This week’s pic is actually a video from NASA’s Perseverance Mars rover capturing Phobos as it partially blocks out the sun. You can see the video here and read more from NASA here.
It is certainly more dramatic than the two shots below from the Martian rover Opportunity in 2004. Deimos is just a speck within the image on the left.
It was only a matter of time. Canada wants to develop its own version of the US Space Force later this year. According to media reports, the Canadian Space Division would eventually employ about 270 people, versus about 16,000 in the US program.
The two nations are not alone. A quick check on Wikipedia shows space forces in numerous countries, from Italy to Peru, though the definition of “space force” is pretty wide.
Even with their growth, not everyone is a fan. The Cato Institute had this to say in its 2020 report, Space Force: Ahead of Its Time, or Dreadfully Premature?:
This investigation determines that the Space Force’s establishment is hobbled by unclear goals and uncertain effects, contending that the Space Force lacks a clearly defined organizational culture and a clear strategic purpose, both core elements of organizational success, and that the decision to create the service is premature at best and irresponsible at worst.
Not a ringing endorsement, but maybe a sign that some more thinking needs to go into the role of these new organizations. Yet just as the air force was a natural break away from the army, the space force is a natural offspring of the air force. What comes after that? Maybe a Lunar Force or a Martian Force when we start to occupy space. I would love to see those recruitment videos.
It was Stephen R. Covey who said, “When you have too many top priorities, you effectively have no top priorities.” Is that where we are today with Elon Musk as he buys Twitter and puts his fortune and name on the line?
I thought he was the man with ideas for transforming our auto industry while also building the first Martian colony. Now I am not so sure. Maybe that is what too much money will do to a person – cause them to think that they have a solution for everything rather than simply some good, focused ideas.
Will Mr. Musk have enough attention and energy to oversee SpaceX, Tesla, and Twitter? Will he combine them into one big company? Will he sell off something to fund his other adventures?
Clearly his priorities have expanded from building better rockets and cars, though these improved rockets and cars really what this country needs more than one more person playing with Twitter. We don’t need Mr. Musk to save democracy from itself, which is what he seems to think he is doing. No, we need to build new and better things to get us into a better future. Let someone else worry about a company of 280 characters.
Twitter could disappear tomorrow and life will be just fine. And maybe Tesla could disappear tomorrow now that everyone else got the point about electric vehicles. But the space program? We need ever more innovative ideas to get us to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere. That is where Mr. Musk helped us to dream and see a new future. No one dreams about improved edit capabilities at Twitter, except maybe Mr. Musk.
It is time to focus on the prize and not the prattle. Mr. Musk will not be remembered for “saving” Twitter from itself. He will be remembered if he can get us to Mars. It is time to grow up, ignore the noisy crowd, and start building rockets again. Let’s keep the dream alive.
In a recent The Guardian newspaper editorial, Bernie Sanders had some questions about the role of private companies, such as Blue Origin and SpaceX, in the future of space exploration or, as he sees it, space profiteering. In his editorial, “Jeff Bezos is worth $160bn – yet Congress might bail out his space company,” he noted the following:
At this moment, if you can believe it, Congress is considering legislation to provide a $10bn bailout to Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin space company for a contract to build a lunar lander. This legislation is taking place after Blue Origin lost a competitive bid to SpaceX, Musk’s company. Bezos is worth some $180bn.
He then cites the costs of Jeff Bezos’ yacht and homes while pointing out the plight of those living paycheck to paycheck. Of course, the same could be said about Elon Musk, rumored to be the wealthiest man in the world and now in the papers for buying another company unrelated to space (or the car industry).
First, this battle between Bernie and Bezos has been going on for some time, but the “bailout” in question was debunked by Verifythis.com last year, which stated:
Although NASA recently chose SpaceX over Blue Origin and one other company to receive funding for development of a human lunar lander, NASA stated in its decision that it wanted to fund two companies but lacked the budget to even fund one without negotiating the price down. The Senate bill is in response to that, allocating NASA enough funding to award a second contract. Blue Origin is the likely frontrunner for that contract, but it’s not guaranteed. Even if Blue Origin does win the contract, the allocated $10 billion to NASA isn’t just for this contract and therefore wouldn’t all go to Blue Origin.
Of course, the editorial is really a lead in to the real issue – who owes the minerals in space? Mr. Sanders highlights the worth of a single asteroid, stating “Just a single 3,000ft asteroid may contain platinum worth over $5tn.” It is a good point as we consider the next great race for minerals. Of course, maybe Uncle Sam can get some of it back via taxes, but it is not hard to believe space companies would incorporate in the Bahamas or somewhere similar to avoid such taxation.
Mr. Sanders is calling for a “rational space policy,” and wants Congress to be part of the process. Given the number of nations heading to the Moon and Mars, it is much bigger than the U.S. Congress. The United Nations will need to play a role here via the Outer Space Treaty, which NASA is attempting to update via the Artemis Accords. In addition, maybe Congress needs to update the rescind the 2015 U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, which states in § 51303:
A United States citizen engaged in commercial recovery of an asteroid resource or a space resource under this chapter shall be entitled to any asteroid resource or space resource obtained, including to possess, own, transport, use, and sell the asteroid resource or space resource obtained in accordance with applicable law, including the international obligations of the United States.
By the way, NASA has already issued a press release regarding more lunar lander opportunities. You can find the press release here.
Back in a November 2020 article, Science News discussed the difficulties of farming on Mars, noting it was not as easy as Matt Damon’s character made it seem in the film The Martian. In fact, toxins discovered in the Martian soil has proven that growing potatoes with a bit of man-made manure is not possible.
In the article, “Farming on Mars will be a Lot Harder Than ‘The Martian’ Made it Seem,” the author noted that researchers put together a variety of soil samples to match the surface of Mars and determined that the soil that most closely matched the Martian soil was unable to grow vegetation for any length of time. Once that soil was modified to include calcium perchlorate, which makes up about 2 percent of Martian soil, nothing could grow at all. In other words, Matt Damon would have starved if he only had a latrine to support him.
The researchers are testing other possible soil types using materials that can be found on Mars, so Martian potatoes (or at least legumes) may be possible. We will just need to send Mr. Damon back to Mars to test these new approaches.
Extra: The BBC’s Science Focus website posted a more hopeful article around the same time highlighting what can be grown on Mars, but it also outlined a number of problems that will impact Martian farming, including less sunlight, lower temperatures, thinner atmosphere, radiation, and extreme seasonal variations. We don’t always realize how good we have it back here on our home planet.
Our Awesome Universe 