Podcast: Is It Really an Exomoon?

Posted on by onespaceman2000

The recent news about the discovery of the first exomoon stirred up the astronomy community, including astronomy professor David Kipping, who needed to address it immediately on his Cool Worlds podcast.

The episode, “We Need to Talk About That “First Exomoon” Discovery,” is basically an hour-long monologue by Dr. Kipping as he discussed the discovery, compares it to earlier similar discoveries, goes over the current definition of a exomoon, and quotes other astronomers regarding their position on the discovery.

The bottom line is that the media may have overplayed the discovery, similar discoveries happened in the past, and the lack of a good definition for an exomoon makes any decision on this new discovery troublesome.

Dr. Kipping has a particular interest in exomoons, and he admits this bias at the start of the show, but he does a good job covering all of the terrain. It is an informative one-man debate reminiscent of the difficulties in defining Pluto.

I recommend you check it out.

Note: The episode can also be found on YouTube. Also, go to this earlier story for more by Dr. Kipping on exomoons.

Podcast: AI Data Centers in Space

Posted on by onespaceman2000

If you are following the debate about whether data centers belong in orbit, this Freakonomics Radio podcast titled “Should A.I. Move to Space?” may be for you.

Guest host Steve Levitt talks to a number of experts about the role of AI in our economy. I recommend listing to all of the podcast since much of it touches on the logistics of data centers in orbit, but it is the later part of the podcast involving a discussion with Will Marshall, co-founder and C.E.O. of Planet Labs, that peaked my attention. He discusses both the role of Planet Labs as its satellites monitors every corner of the Earth’s surface as well as the need for AI data centers in space.

In terms of the Planet Lab satellites, I found his most intriguing statements were related to the reduced costs of satellites. While most of the stories in the press seem to be about the decrease in rocket costs, Mr. Marshall said the real transformation is the miniaturization of satellites. Even under the earlier rocket system (pre-SpaceX), the drop in satellite costs due to smaller satellites would have been incredible.

In the quote below, Mr. Marshall is referring initially to the lower rocket costs, but then he expands into the real cost saving:

But remember even a four or five x reduction in cost, which really helps the whole space industry and has helped spawn it, is less significant, purely from an economic standpoint, than the 100 to a 1,000x improvement in cost performance of satellites that are going in. So, in each kilogram that you put up into space, if you can get a hundred times more data, because you’ve made the satellite way smaller, then you have won big time, even if the launch cost didn’t change one iota.

In his discussion about AI data centers, Mr. Marshall also has a unique view about the role of the Earth’s surface versus space:

I think it’s inevitable that, within a 10-ish year timeframe, most computers being built on the Earth will be going to space. I actually think not only is it going to be economically cheaper, but it’s going to be more sustainable. Earth’s life is so precious, it’s incredible, but yet we’re whittling away a lot of it. We’re doing deforestation for lithium, for cows, for whatever, we’re doing it. And we need to put our energy-intensive infrastructure into orbit, if we can, to not have a collision course with the biodiversity on the planet,

The podcast episode is in two parts, so be sure to listen to the second part when it comes out.

Podcast: The Future of Space Stations

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Image (Credit): Design of Blue Origin’s Orbital Reef space station. (Blue Origin)

The latest podcast episode of the Planetary Society’s Planetary radio had an informative discussion about space stations, including why we need them and who should be financing them. The episode, What’s Going on with Commercial Space Stations, is a conversation between Casey Dreier, Chief of Space Policy for The Planetary Society, and Clayton Swope, Deputy Director of the Aerospace Security Project and Senior Fellow for The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

Mr. Swope wrote an story last month for CSIS titled “NASA Changes Course on Commercial Space Stations.” In it, he notes that NASA’s recent change to its program for commercial space stations was due to greater skepticism about the private sector’s ability to make a business case for a space station and then properly construct one in a timely fashion. This is the crux of his discussion with Casey Dreier, which is fun to follow.

Should the federal government continue to take the lead on both the financing and construction of manned space stations to replace the International Space Station (ISS) once it is retired? And why do we even need another manned space station? Does it serve a commercial purpose that cannot be replicated with robots? Or is it more akin to our nation’s support and participation in the Olympics, where we can show American prowess while hopefully taking sports to a new level?

The conversation covers a fair amount of ground, while the Planetary Radio website offers a variety of background links as well as some useful information on the proposed commercial space stations, including:

  • Axiom Station,
  • Orbital Reef,
  • Starlab,
  • Cygnus spacecraft captured by Canadarm2, and
  • Sierra Space LIFE habitat.

NASA and the private sector will need to find a way to make this Earth-orbiting commercial space station a viable option before the ISS is little more than a shooting star. NASA has already killed the Moon’s space station earlier this year (aka Gateway), demonstrating that it is willing to move quickly and break things.

Image (Credit): Artist’s rendering of Gateway orbiting the Moon. (NASA)

Podcast: You Can Provide Comments on Proposed Grant Rules Impacting NASA

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Image (Credit): Information from OMB’s “Learn About the Regulatory Process” page. (OMB)

As noted in a prior posting, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is politicizing the grant process for science, including space-related grants.

A recent episode of the Planetary Society’s Planetary Radio podcast covered this proposed change and suggested ways that all of us can push back on these changes.

For specific guidance on what you can do, this page from the Planetary Society provides useful instructions. As the site states:

The OMB proposal would allow political appointees to usurp agency autonomy and cancel any grant at any time if that person decides the work is no longer convenient. The proposed rules would make scientific peer review only advisory while political appointees decide what (and who) gets funded.

The site provides clear instructions to help you write at least two paragraphs that can then be used to challenge this proposed policy. In this case, form letters are not helpful because they would be grouped together as one comment.

The American Astronomical Society has its own page explaining how you can respond to this particular OMB proposal.

And remember, if you want to submit comments but remain anonymous rather that providing all of your personal details to OMB or even the Planetary Society, you are allowed to do that as well per these OMB instructions. So don’t let that be a factor that holds you back.

Comments must be submitted by July 13th, so that still gives everyone a month to think this through and put forward a solid set of concerns.

TV/Podcast: Neil deGrasse Tyson on Real Time with Bill Maher

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Credit: Simon Six

The most recent episode of HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher including an interview with Neil deGrasse Tyson, who was chatting up his new book Take Me To Your Leader: Perspectives on Your First Alien Encounter.

Bill Maher has invited Dr. Tyson multiple times to his program, and it is always a fun show.

The interview covered a variety of topics, but one interesting discussion (following a discussion about anal probes) revolved around how Hollywood almost always portrays aliens as humanoid versus something completely different, such as the rock-like alien in the book and movie Project Hail Mary.

Dr. Tyson noted that most life on earth does not look human, even though all the life on our planet has DNA in common. For example, we share about 20 percent of our genes with a banana. Hence, there is every reason to believe that aliens from distant civilizations will look as different from us as humans are from a banana. It is certainly a different way to look at the galaxy (and the missed opportunities on Star Trek). Here is a clip with him expanding on this argument.

Check out the podcast if you want an entertaining diversion for a few minutes.

Note: If you are interested in the book itself as part of your summer reading, here is the jacket summary:

Take Me to Your Leader is the culmination of a lifetime of fascination, speculation, and the amassing of scientific data about the possibility of Aliens visiting Earth. Drawing on a wealth of depictions from history, literature, pop culture, and film, Tyson applies the universal laws of physics to make the case for what Aliens might look like, act like, how they might travel through the universe to reach us, and what they might think of us upon arrival. Should such an event occur, Tyson further offers useful etiquette tips for your first close encounter.

If you’ve ever wondered why there are so many UFO sightings, or whether Aliens might already be among us, Tyson offers an informed perspective that is both factual and fun. Take Me to Your Leader is a tantalizing exploration of what would be the most mind-blowing experience of your life—the book for anyone who has ever wondered: Are we alone?