http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:31:17 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/18/083117.php Bennett DawsonThe first dust samples from a comet parachuted safely down to Earth on Sunday, January 15th. The Stardust mission's capsule left a bright streak of light in the night sky as it ripped through the atmosphere at almost 29,000 miles per hour (~46,000 kph). The capsule opened a series of parachutes to slow its descent, and then touched down in the desert at 2:10 AM local time.The dust inside the spacecraft is the first geological sample returned from space since the manned moon flights of the early 1970s. Stardust's round trip to the comet Wild-2 took seven years, and its close encounter in January 2004 provided the best pictures of a comet ever taken, and revealed a surface pockmarked by craters and a surprisingly rigid core. Approaching to within 150 miles of the comet's surface, the craft detected organic molecules in the particles drifting from Wild-2. During this encounter, it deployed a soft, lightweight material called aerogel. Drifting through the halo of dust and gas surrounding the comet's tail allowed this collector to gather samples for analysis back on Earth."I have been waiting for this day since the early 1980s when Deputy Principal Investigator Dr. Peter Tsou of JPL and I designed a mission to collect comet dust," said Dr. Don Brownlee, Stardust principal investigator from the University of Washington, Seattle. "To see the capsule safely back on its home planet is a thrilling accomplishment." The capsule, resting on desert sands.What Next For The Dust?The sample material will be shipped to NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. There it will be divided into minute crumbs and sent to over 175 different science laboratories around the world. A wide range of analysis will be performed to glean the secrets from this unprecedented sample of a comet's tail. The Comet - Up Close. Phil Bland, a planetary scientist from the Imperial College of London will be one of the first to get his hands on the grains. "It's so exciting," he says. "I was three years old when the last Apollo samples came back, and there have been no rocks brought back from space since then."Identifying minerals in the grains should reveal which elements were available as building blocks for our Solar System, and what sorts of stars created them. And if researchers find minerals that have been altered by water in the past, it might help to determine whether comets were instrumental in delivering much of the water in Earth's oceans.After delivering its sample unit safely to Earth, the Stardust mother ship has been put into orbit around the Sun. NASA officials say they are open to any viable suggestions that could send the craft on another adventure, such as exploring asteroids.NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., manages the Stardust mission for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Washington. Lockheed Martin Space Systems, Denver, developed and operated the spacecraft. Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (That's a hell of an accomplishment!) Sci/Tech42446@blogcritics.org Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:31:17 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/16/083251.php Bennett DawsonThe Orion Nebula is one of the closest nebulas to Earth, and because of its orientation in our sky it offers a clear view into the interior of this massive cloud of dust, gas, and newborn stars. This press release from Space Telescope Science Institute describes the image shown, and explains the amazing amount of work that went into capturing it. For more details about this image you can visit SpaceRef or follow the links below to the STSI web site. Source: Space Telescope Science InstituteIn one of the most detailed astronomical images ever produced, NASA's Hubble Space Telescope captured an unprecedented look at the Orion Nebula. This turbulent star formation region is one of astronomy's most dramatic and photogenic celestial objects."Orion is a bustling cauldron of activity. This new large-scale Hubble image of the region reveals a treasure-house of beauty and astonishing detail for comprehensive scientific study," said Jennifer Wiseman, NASA's Hubble program scientist. The crisp image is a tapestry of star formation. It varies from jets fired by stars still embedded in their dust and gas cocoons to disks of material encircling young stars that could be the building blocks of future solar systems.For more images and information about this research on the Web, visit their web site.Also posted at VERMONT SPACE ( We live in exciting times... ) Sci/Tech42330@blogcritics.org Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:32:51 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/11/060057.php Bennett DawsonSpaceX Founder Elon Musk is hoping that 'the third time is a charm' in his attempt to launch America's first private industry rocket program. The first attempt in November was scrubbed due to a tank fill valve that vented unexpected quantities of liquid oxygen. Without enough liquid oxygen in reserve, the launch was scrubbed and rescheduled for December 19th.The second attempt in December started out with a stand-down due to high winds. When management decided to delay the launch for 24 hours, technicians started emptying the fuel tanks. Unfortunately, a short circuit in the tank vent valves resulted in a vacuum that distorted the fuel tank walls, and launch #2 was scrubbed.In an emailed press release, Elon Musk of SpaceXwrote: As previously reported, we traced the problem to failure of an electronic component in one of the first stage fuel tank pressurization valves. Although we have triple redundant pressure sensors and dual redundant pressurization valves, when this component shorted, it caused the valve controller board to reboot, effectively eliminating the redundancy. This is the first time in 3.5 years of hard testing that we have ever seen this happen. Moreover, the component in question has a cycle life and power rating far in excess of the theoretical load that it should see. To address this specific problem, we are replacing the component with one that has a quasi-infinite lifespan and taking a few other steps that will isolate any issue with this component if it goes wrong in the future.It is worth noting that we would have caught the problem without any damage to the vehicle if we had entered the final countdown sequence as planned. The sucked in tank damage only occurred because we partly drained the fuel tank due to the hold for high winds.One thing I love about this start up company is their rapid response to adversity, and the efficiency that comes from having someone on the spot to write the check:Following the problem on Dec. 19, we flew a whole new first stage to Hawaii via C-5 just in time to catch the barge from there to Kwaj a few days before New Year's Eve. The new stage should arrive at Kwaj in about a week, whereupon we will switch it out with the damaged unit, which will be sent back to California for repair. The repair is not particularly difficult or expensive, but can only be done properly in a factory setting....and they're damn good at time management:However, as I mentioned in an earlier update, we are not simply going to address this particular point problem and then merrily jump back into a countdown sequence. Throughout January, the SpaceX team will be doing another full review of vehicle systems, including propulsion, structures, avionics, software and ground support systems. We will be conducting additional engine tests, stage separation tests and avionics tests to once again attempt to flush out any issues. Even if we find nothing, the exercise is worthwhile.Plus, they have a sense of humor, and aren't afraid of being 'on the spot' innovative:High winds are not a limitation of the rocket, which is designed to be essentially "all weather" and handle ground winds in excess of 50 mph (watch out for flying coconuts!). The ground winds limitation is actually due to the need to avoid a collision with the launch stand hold down arms, which grab the rocket at the base of the fuel tank, as the rocket lifts off. To alleviate this problem, we have redesigned the launch stand so that the hold down arms retract out of the way on liftoff, activated by a breakwire. This gives us something very close to 100% winds availability from Kwaj. The retraction force is low, so even if there were an early activation of the actuator, it would not damage the rocket.Another bothersome problem is the high rate of liquid oxygen (LOX) boiloff. This is not surprising when LOX is at -300F and there is a stiff wind impinging on the vehicle at 85F. To minimize boiloff, we will wrap the LOX tank in low cost cryo insulation attached with velcro straps that tear away on liftoff.And most of all, Elon Musk always seems to keep things in perspective... Those familiar with the launch business will know that countdown scrubs are a way of life. It's often said that the safest time to schedule your vacation is around launch day and that's true more often than not. Even rockets that have launched hundreds of times from launch pads that are in heavy use have multiple scrubs. Not too long ago, there was a Titan launch that had eleven scrubs and a Delta launch that had six. Reasons range from hard to avoid technical glitches, like the Shuttle fuel sensor malfunction on its last launch attempt, to silly false alarms. A Titan countdown was once aborted when someone spotted a "bag of suspicious liquid" on the mobile service tower. It turned out that the latrine had simply been a bridge too far for one of the technicians.Given that Falcon 1 is an all new rocket and is launching from an all new launch pad on a remote tropical island, countdown scrubs in the first few attempts were very likely. As it is, we have had one abort due to a launch pad issue and one due to the rocket. If this next attempt succeeds in getting to t-zero, SpaceX will be reasonably fortunate in the scheme of things.I'm looking forward to Feb 9th. I have a good feeling about these folks, and count them as a great investment should they ever go public (after the first successful launch I'm guessing).If you'd like to read more about SpaceX, I recommend these Blogcritics posts: June 28, 2005 - Space Exploration Technology Corporation - SpaceX September 9, 2005 - SpaceX Announces Falcon 9 - A Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle October 8, 2005 - The Space Age of SpaceX Also posted at VERMONT SPACE ( Let's Launch! ) Sci/Tech42107@blogcritics.org Wed, 11 Jan 2006 06:00:57 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/09/125327.php Bennett DawsonFrom the occasionally troubled minds of this disparate flock of bloggers, the question of whether technological advances weaken our senses is tossed about, and I revisit the lost art of installing car stereos. Plus, The Duke discusses the medical retraction of jewels, Eric admits he knows not what he does, and Mark ponders the value of internet-savvy refrigerators.From: Bennett Dawson To: The Hot Topic Team Re: FM Is StereoMy lovely wife and I were talking about those "Top-Ten Hit CDs" from the sixties and seventies. You know, the ones that get hustled on those 30-minute late-night infomercials. Me saying that they're really cool because "...those are all the songs that buzzed out of my candle wax-covered AM clock radio when I was a teenybopper..." Back in 1970, dig?My wife looked puzzled, trying to absorb a stone-age concept. AM clock radio?Before I could explain, a sideways brain connection fizzled through my synapses, and I started wondering about "when did FM start broadcasting?" and "Do I actually remember that historic event?" Yes folks, it's sad but true. In 1970, FM was just like HDTV - meaning I didn't have it.This led to a brief discussion about the difference between AM and FM, and to my surprise, my wife couldn't tell me the profound difference between the two. Now let me say that my wife is brilliant in her field of expertise, and knows many things that I haven't a clue about. But she had a slightly different upbringing (she's a girl), and was eight years further down the timeline than me. That being the case, FM radio was all she ever listened to. "All the music was on FM, and AM was all talk radio and traffic and weather."She knew that FM stations "sounded better" in her car, but that's about it. The "stereo" in the house sounded good because it had two speakers and besides, we paid more money for it than the clock radio, so it had to sound better. She never truly realized that with stereo, each speaker has slightly different music coming out of it, two distinct tracks. I have no idea what she thought about the sound system in her relatively new Jetta, with speakers every few inches in the doors and body panels. 'More speakers = better sound' is what I'd suppose. Understanding that AM is one track and FM is two tracks was not part of her grip on aural reality. She protests. "That's not true!" she says. "My CD Walkman has different sounds for each ear, I just never wondered why or how."Lemme tell ya, my generation was intensely aware of "stereo" and knew exactly what it was. Dammit, we wanted stereo! Our first used cars (junker cars from the fifties and sixties) had an AM push button radio with one speaker in the dashboard. NOT cool.So we installed a new FM radio under the dash (possibly a cassette or eight track tape player... woo hoo!) and two speakers in the rear window deck. We cut holes and ran wires and hooked up fuses, and then we cruised down the road grooving to 'stereophonic sound'.Nowadays, everything is pre wired with stereo. Teenagers don't know how to run speaker wires, what channels are, or how a noise suppresser gets rid of the clicking sound coming from the ignition system. Hell, let's be real - nowadays, kids don't even know what an ignition system is. Technology has moved on and the inner workings of a car are as mysterious as the inner workings of a nuclear reactor. If your car breaks down, you use your cell phone to call a tow truck! What other basic knowledge of 'how things work' has dropped from our pop culture? The home fuse box? Batteries? Pilot lights? Have we morphed into an icon driven world, with no understanding of what lies beneath the shiny plastic logo-embossed surface? Is it really possible to take stereo so much for granted that folks have no understanding of what they're hearing? Are we being blinded by science?Or is this just yer standard progression of technology - unfortunately revealing that I'm one old, and somewhat obsolete fella?By the way, while I was writing this piece, my 21 year-old stepdaughter called, and she has no idea what the word "stereo" means. "A synonym for sound system" was her best guess. From: Aaron - Duke De Mondo To: The Hot Topic Team Re: FM Is StereoThis is all the intriguing in the world. Maybe we ARE those icon-driven hordes ain't got a clue how the torch works but sod it, it's sleek an' white an' the ladies wanna touch me when i got it in the paw.I'm a software sort, yes, with nary a clue about hardware. I'm gonna go ahead an' reveal the age, bein' 23, an' i can assure you i ain't got the faintest a faints regarding how you might wire a plug. They TRIED to teach me, but imma go play a tune or two, if'n it's all the same. Ain't got a clue how the amp works, or the guitar, but i don't especially worry.Anecdotal aside - way back when, i remember my ex-fiancee tellin' me that her then-ex-boyfriend used to come 'round to help her dad wire electrical stuff. I think most likely my nuts disappeared somewheres midst the liver (still in there, too, fish the fuckers out wi' a coat-hanger is all a man can do). Felt like i was no kinda MALE if'n I couldn't fix the telly.Maybe it's cause a buncha youngster-types, far more than used to, are headin' in the direction a university an' theoretical based stuff, as opposed to learnin' trades an so on, which is where this kinda knowledge is handed down, i suppose. Maybe that's not the case at all, maybe i'm just justifyin' my bum-fluff an no-nuts.Regarding stereo, it all made sense to me when i played Sgt. Pepper's in the car stereo back when i was 13 or so, and realized i was only hearin' half the record. Until that point i probably assumed somethin' similar, that stereo just meant Better Sound. I suppose there comes a point when a society can forget about stuff like Mono and Analogue. The differences 'tween these things probably only have any worth to the folks who live through the change-over.From: Eric Berlin To: The Hot Topic Team Re: FM Is StereoI think we've entered the age of the super-user, where we run every aspect of our lives -- from brushing our teeth with an electric tooth brush to laying down with an electric blanket of an evening, and all the server-happy Internet play and work-related electronic tomfoolery in between -- via technology of which we haven't the foggiest notion.Take the words I'm typing right now that cause letters to magically appear on my computer screen. I have a notion that when I type a "v", a "v" appears, or that when I want to say "ultra tubular with consecrated cream cheese linings for upshot adornment of life-melted dude-scape" I can get that message across and feel quite certain I've made an ass of myself in the process.However, I have no idea how the inner workings go. I imagine there are ones and zeros and electronic processes involved, but I don't even have a fundamental understanding of the mechanical function behind an activity I sometimes spend 12-15 hours a day hacking away at.And don't even get me started with the mouse!Sometimes I think about the Roman Empire and the descent into the Dark Ages. About how the art and technology devolved from one generation to another because everyone basically forgot how it was done before. Obviously, we're not in that phase. We're in a phase of astounding innovation and bedazzling art and sights to behold that would blow the mind (a la Scanners) of an 8th-century hombre right straight.But what if we lost those folks who know how stuff works? What if they end up on the island in Lost (pushing that damned button every 108 minutes) or get herded to the Manhattan of Escape From.... fame?It's an interdependent world with all the good and bad trimmings of it, I suppose is the upshot.That, and it's utter gold to know a good mechanic who won't rip you off. From: Mark Saleski To: The Hot Topic Team Re: FM Is StereoAh yeah, so here we have another discussion where technology is concerned. More specifically the effects of "the march".It's interesting that it's mostly taken for granted that advances in technology are a "good thing". For the most part, I suppose that they are. But then I hear about events like the recent Consumer Electronics Show where concepts such as "digital lifestyle" are touted. Sure enough, we get all of these home devices interconnected and talking to each other. But do we really want to?This reminds me of back when I used to watch The Jetsons, where dinner consisted of a food pill. Gross. Perhaps even sillier than manufactured food is the very real Internet-enabled refrigerator. Oh yes, it'll keep an inventory for you. It'll notify you when it's time to buy more eggs. You've got to be kidding me. Some of this is an extension of what often happens during software development. Engineers, being the tinkering sort, can't resist adding features and/or extra layers to things. The result? Bloatware. Sometimes useful, sometimes not. Ever notice how things like "digital lifestyle" are almost always promoted by men? I don't think this is a coincidence. Don't take any of this to mean that I have the fear that these new technologies are going to complicate my life. They won't, mostly because they're not comin' in my front door. No, I don't need a digital book to take on vacation because the books that I do own work just fine. I can figure out when to refill my refrigerator using the analog method: the notepad attached to the freezer door. Music is still played through tubes and wire, because these nice digital files sound like crap. So what do we lose when nobody knows how any of this newfangled stuff works? I'm not sure. In some cases, particularly when talking about media (books, music, etc.), it puts the consumer at one more remove from the artist. I don't think that vinyl records are the 'perfect' medium, but the expansive liner notes allowed me as a fan to get to know the person at the other end. Sure, this can be done in the digital realm, but is it?Ah, maybe Bennett's right. Maybe I'm just old and obsolete.P.S. In the middle of typing this, the guy in the cube next to me was 'attacked' by his Instant Messenger -- he floated his mouse over it and it started playing a ringtone-y version of "My Humps". Now that is an advance. These bloggers have had their say, now it's your chance to chip in!Do you remember an "old way" of getting things done that seemed superior to the "newfangled" way? Do your friends sneer at your approach to fixin' stuff, amazed that you've not a clue? Or are you one of those folks totally comfortable letting "specialists" deal with the inner workings of 90% of your world? Tell us the truth, are you completely happy being a "user", with no idea how these damned things actually work? Also posted at VERMONT SPACE Sci/Tech42030@blogcritics.org Mon, 9 Jan 2006 12:53:27 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/02/205451.php Bennett Dawson2005 was a busy year in the field of space exploration. From the amazing images sent back by the Cassini-Huygens probe orbiting Saturn to the unexpected longevity of the Mars Rovers, we are learning more about the planets of our solar system than ever before. With the deep space views from Hubble, Spitzer, and Chandra telescopes orbiting Earth, we have peered ever deeper into the vast recesses of space, discovering new details about our solar system, our galaxy, and the millions of galaxies that make up our universe. Two missions currently en route, NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and ESA's Venus Express, are expected to add even more to our growing storehouse of data about our two closest planetary neighbors. NASA is hard at work testing a new variation of the external fuel tank (modified PAL ramp) and hopes to launch phase two of its Return To Flight by mid year.Also on the table this year is the long awaited launch of America's first private industry satellite launch system from SpaceX. They had near launches in November and December scrubbed by technical glitches, and hope to try again in February.The holidays were a bit too busy, and I didn't get to put together my planned "Space Year In Review", but here are two images from December (with NASA text) that caught my eye:Titan's Halo With its thick, distended atmosphere, Titan's orange globe shines softly, encircled by a thin halo of purple light-scattering haze.Cassini images taken using blue, green and red spectral filters were used to create this enhanced-color view; the color images were combined with an ultraviolet view that makes the high-altitude, detached layer of haze visible. The ultraviolet part of the composite image was given a purplish hue to match the bluish-purple color of the upper atmospheric haze as seen in visible light. Stellar Snowflake ClusterNewborn stars, hidden behind thick dust, are revealed in this image of a section of the Christmas Tree Cluster from NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope, created in joint effort between Spitzer's Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) and Multiband Imaging Photometer (MIPS) instruments.The newly revealed infant stars appear as pink and red specks toward the center of the combined IRAC-MIPS image (left panel). The stars appear to have formed in regularly spaced intervals along linear structures in a configuration that resembles the spokes of a wheel or the pattern of a snowflake. Hence, astronomers have nicknamed this the "Snowflake Cluster."Star-forming clouds like this one are dynamic and evolving structures. Since the stars trace the straight line pattern of spokes of a wheel, scientists believe that these are newborn stars, or "protostars." At a mere 100,000 years old, these infant structures have yet to "crawl" away from their location of birth. Over time, the natural drifting motions of each star will break this order, and the snowflake design will be no more.While most of the visible-light stars that give the Christmas Tree Cluster its name and triangular shape do not shine brightly in Spitzer's infrared eyes, all of the stars forming from this dusty cloud are considered part of the cluster.The combined IRAC-MIPS image shows the presence of organic molecules mixed with dust as wisps of green, which have been illuminated by nearby star formation. The larger yellowish dots neighboring the baby red stars in the Snowflake Cluster are massive stellar infants forming from the same cloud. The blue dots sprinkled across the image represent older Milky Way stars at various distances along this line of sight. Have a great 2006. It promises to be an exciting year of discovery for space program enthusiasts. Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (I went and asked Santa for a Space Suit... ) Sci/Tech41730@blogcritics.org Mon, 2 Jan 2006 20:54:51 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/22/202458.php Bennett DawsonFollowing months of massive cuts to the life science programs by NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, the U.S. Senate has stepped in to set minimum requirements for spending on the ISS, and has directed NASA to reestablish programs that were cut under Administrator Griffin's heavy handed attempt to find enough money to realize the President's "Vision For Space Exploration". To be fair, Griffin was handed a mandate to return to the moon, but was supposed to make it happen without additional funding. The obvious answer was to cut existing programs, and downsize the agency in order to fit this new goal into NASA's current budget.Apparently, there are members of the Senate who recognize the impossibility of this, and they are stepping forward with both the cash, and a list of requirements that NASA must follow. One of these requirements is the completion of the ISS, along with a specific level of life science research.WASHINGTON – The Senate tonight passed the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Act of 2005, legislation authored by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Chairman of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Science and Space. The legislation authorizes NASA for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008, establishes a policy objective of uninterrupted U.S. spaceflight capability and requires completion of the International Space Station (ISS). It has been reconciled with the House version and will now be sent to President Bush to be signed into law. "Our national policy will determine the nation's role in future space exploration and its contribution to broad research and our national security," Sen. Hutchison said. "Minimizing the gap in space flight must be a goal if the U.S. wants to be a leader in space exploration. The NASA Administrator recently announced a new NASA plan which reduces the gap to as little as one year. I applaud his recognition of the concerns outlined in my bill and encourage action to narrow the gap even further." Sen. Hutchison's NASA legislation designates the U.S. segment of the ISS as a national laboratory facility. The administrator would be required to outline operations and functions of the ISS national laboratory activities. Sen. Hutchison has acted with a focus on the broad research benefits and capabilities of the ISS. "Designation of the ISS as a national laboratory will expand the variety of areas to which space research can be applied. Our future in space has unlimited potential that can be harnessed through appropriate guidance, oversight and accountability," Sen. Hutchison said. In addition, it authorizes $17.9 billion in Fiscal Year 2007 and $18.7 billion in Fiscal Year 2008 in NASA appropriations funding. It includes language to ensure NASA completes a balanced science plan and requires a report to Congress every two years. The legislation also provides for the development of a National Aeronautics Research Plan to guide the course of future investments and priorities in this important area of NASA's scientific activities. Sen. Hutchison visited the Johnson Space Center on December 7 where she met with the new director of the center, Michael L. Coats, and discussed her vision for NASA's future. For more information on this dramatic turn of events, partial transcripts of the funding bill, and some keen commentary by NASA Watch Editor Keith Cowing, be sure to read Congress Gives NASA It's Marching Orders on Space Station ScienceAlso posted at VERMONT SPACE ( It's not over till the fat lady walks in space... ) Sci/Tech41383@blogcritics.org Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:24:58 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/19/210408.php Bennett DawsonWith increasing ability to look far beyond our Milky Way Galaxy using the Hubble and Chandra orbiting telescopes and the Swift Satellite, scientists at NASA are learning more about black holes and other stellar phenomenon. Earlier this year, the Swift satellite captured what could be the first evidence of a very large black hole devouring a neutron star."A neutron star is the core remains of an exploded star that was once about 10 to 25 times more massive than our sun. It contains about a sun's worth of mass crammed into a sphere only about 12 miles across. A black hole is the core remains of an even larger exploded star, over 25 times the mass of the sun."Is it just me? Because this stuff blows me away. Not just that we caught this event with our instruments, but more that we have spent enough time looking at "what's out there" that a scientist can toss off a sentence like "Supporting this merger scenario is the fact that the GRB 050724 burst took place in the outskirts of an old, elliptical galaxy filled with neutron stars and black holes."Oh yeah, that old elliptical galaxy... on the outskirts no less.Few of us understand the forces involved when a black hole "eats" a star, but I believe it's good to fund programs to learn about this stuff. Someone on our small planet should be trying to understand what's happening in our occasionally violent universe. Plus, the pictures are usually worth viewing...Here then, is the report from NASA:GREENBELT, Md., Dec. 14 /PRNewswire/ -- Scientists using NASA's Swift satellite have found evidence of a black hole swallowing a neutron star. The discovery is reported in the December 15 issue of Nature.This rare event, seen on July 24, created a gamma-ray burst that lasted only for a few milliseconds. However, observations of the lingering afterglow provided evidence of what could have been the demise of a neutron star orbiting a black hole. Click picture to download animation! The black hole may have first stretched the dense neutron star into a crescent and broke off pieces in the process. The black hole could have then swallowed the star largely in one gulp, feeding on the broken off pieces in the minutes and hours that followed. Such a black hole would grow more massive."For billions of years this black hole and neutron star orbited each other in a gravitational tug-of-war," said Dr. Scott Barthelmy of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., lead author on one of three Nature articles on this subject. "The neutron star lost."In recent months, the Swift team has reported that "short" gamma-ray bursts arise from a merger either between two neutron stars or a neutron star and black hole. The specific scenario was not clear. Although not definitive, this latest analysis of the July burst is the best evidence of a black hole - neutron star merger, said Barthelmy.A neutron star is the core remains of an exploded star once about 10 to 25 times more massive than our sun. It contains about a sun's worth of mass crammed into a sphere only about 12 miles across. A black hole is the core remains of an even larger exploded star, over 25 times the mass of the sun.The July burst, called GRB 050724, was one of the most thoroughly observed short gamma-ray bursts to date. Swift, NASA's Chandra telescope and the Keck Observatory in Hawaii, along with other observatories, captured the burst afterglow in detail. The combined data enabled scientists to speculate on the nature of the merging objects.If GRB 050724 were a neutron star merger, according to current models, there would not be many pieces falling into a black hole later. The two objects would smash, instantly form a black hole, and after a modest afterglow no more light would be seen. Similarly, two black holes would smash and release very little residual light. But GRB 050724 had a long, flaring afterglow.Prof. Peter Meszaros of Penn State University, University Park, Pa., and Dr. Bing Zhang of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, co-authors on the Barthelmy Nature article, theorize that smaller flares of X-ray light and optical light, detected in the first tens of seconds after GRB 050724, could have resulted from pieces of the neutron star falling into the black hole. Flares occurring later might be from magnetized pieces of gas, which would behave differently. Supporting this merger scenario is the fact that the GRB 050724 burst took place in the outskirts of an old, elliptical galaxy filled with neutron stars and black holes."There's only one thing I know of that could rip apart a neutron star with bits flying out, and that's a black hole. Now we have the first evidence that this might actually be occurring," said Meszaros.Numerical simulations by Drs. Melvyn Davies and Andrew King and others at Leicester University, England, have provided evidence for such a disruption of a neutron star by a black hole, including the late infall of pieces of matter. Other simulations elsewhere indicate conversely that neutron star mergers would leave no flaring afterglow.Drs. Nial Tanvir of the University of Hertfordshire in Hatfield, England, and Edo Berger of the Carnegie Observatories in Pasadena, Calif., are lead authors on the two accompanying Nature articles, which describe follow-up observations after Swift's detection of GRB 050724.Swift, launched in November 2004, is a NASA mission in partnership with the Italian Space Agency and the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council, United Kingdom, and is managed by Goddard Space Flight Center. Penn State University personnel control science and flight operations from the Mission Operations Center. For more information: Go Here!Also posted at VERMONT SPACE ( The star said "eat me", a bad move with black holes ) Sci/Tech41239@blogcritics.org Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:04:08 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/12/142135.php Bennett DawsonTonight's two hour season finale started out with an extended review of the entire season. It was a mediocre season of this so-called "reality" show, with many of the truly likable characters leaving early, and the annoying cast members sticking around for weeks and weeks. It should be mentioned that this tends to happen on Survivor, with the nice guys finishing last.There was a bit of infrared "back at camp" shots of the final four contestants chatting about the Tribal Council. After a mercifully long commercial break, the show returns to "Morning at Camp".The Cast (Stephenie and Bobby Jon not shown as they were surprise additions to the cast) The day starts off with some silly "Tree-Mail" note about the cast members being "part of the Mayan history..." Yeah right. But then a group of native Guatemalans show up to perform a sacrificial offering to their Mayan ancestors. All is well and good until a live chicken is produced. There's a degree of unease among the non-natives with Steph asking Rafe if they were going to kill the chicken. Rafe responds:"Well, they just tore its head off, so I think it's dead already."Indeed they had, and then they placed the carcass on the fire as an offering to the native gods. Steph wants to know if they would get to eat the chicken when all the mumbo jumbo is finished, and is basically told that it's bad juju to eat a sacrificial animal. Despite this, once the natives have left the camp, Lydia and Steph return to the sacrificial fire and snatch the burnt chicken. The three ladies (is that the correct term, I wonder?) chow down. Rafe is the only contestant unwilling to break the sanctity of the sacrifice, much to his credit.That night the area is hit by a strong storm, thunder and lightning and profuse rainfall, and speculation rises that "the gods" are angry. Feh. Still, they shouldn't have eaten the chicken.The next morning starts out soggy, with no food in sight. That's okay, because the next fifteen minutes of show time is taken up by the obligatory "Memory Hike" whereby the remaining four walk past likenesses of their departed tribe mates and make superficial remarks. It's really sad, and I don't mean emotionally. The hike ends at the scene of the first -Immunity Challenge:The four must race around in a big maze, collecting pieces of some individual wooden puzzle. Once all the pieces are gathered, they need to put the puzzle together. Ho hum.Rafe Wins Immunity!The Politics Of Elimination: Rafe keeps his promise to Danni, Steph is brought on board, and Lydia is voted out of the jungle. It was that simple. The Final Three Rafe - Steph - Danni There's only one variable left in this season of Survivor, that being Who will win immunity in the final challenge of the show? I laid out the potential match ups, and the guaranteed outcome of any given match in last week's post. Nailed 'em hard, I did...SURVIVOR: Final Immunity Challenge:The final challenge is a torturous balancing act, standing on a wobbly platform while holding on to two skinny overhead ropes (one for each hand). The contestants endure the heat of midday Guatemala, while they dream of what to spend big bucks on.... After an hour, the three are instructed to let go of one of the ropes. Within a minute all three are hanging from the single rope, thrashing about trying to get a foothold on the wobbly platform. Surprisingly, all three manage to position themselves with their feet on platform and their backs leaning against one of the structure's supporting posts.Time passes and the contestants are told they must release the final rope. From this point on, hand contact with any part of the structure is verboten. All three are enduring this uncomfortable position, until Rafe loses concentration and pushes against the post to shift his position. Rafe is OUT!Danni and Steph endure. Steph's backbone is slowly sliding down the post, and it becomes obvious that Danni has set herself more solidly. Pain takes its toll, and after two and a half hours of agonizing discomfort, Steph collapses to the ground weeping with pain and frustration.Danni Wins Immunity!Lovely Wife turns to me and says "Is that it?" I respond, "Yep, Danni just won a million bucks."And really, everything after this point is a formality. Danni votes Rafe out, taking Steph to the final two. Steph has back stabbed too many of the jury members to have a snowball's chance in hell, and Danni is guaranteed the title, cash, car, and accolades that come to the sole survivor.I must note that one of the best parts of these final episodes is seeing the contestants in Studio City, all dolled up and clean shaven - months after returning from whatever hellhole they lived in for the weeks during the show. Danni looked like a different person (uncomfortable with lipstick), Steph's eyebrows still kinda creep me out, and the guys look almost gentlemanly. Jeff reads the jury's votes and... Danni Boatwright Wins Survivor: Guatemala!The reunion show is interesting, with Jeff probing below the surface of some of the comments and strategies utilized by the cast members. Noting that Blake was voted out after talking on and on about his girlfriend's breast enhancement, Jeff asked how that was received back in the real world. Blake's response was the best line from last night's show."My girlfriend was okay with it, but her dad called me and said 'I never imagined that my daughter's breasts would get you kicked off of the show'" Tune in next season for Survivor: Panama - Exile Island CBS put together a really nice website for this season's show at SURVIVOR. Beautiful pictures of the Mayan ruins are used as the background to each of the contestant's "favorites" and "bio" information. ED: JH Video40875@blogcritics.org Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:21:35 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/09/132326.php Bennett DawsonI'm going to gloss over most of the details of last night's show and get to the meat of the matter. However, there were one or two interesting points to note:1) There are four women left and Rafe. Rafe commented on this by saying something like "Here we are, a little gay guy and four women as the final four. Who'd have thought?" This actually led to one of the decent lines of the show when Lydia said:"We're looking at him as just one of the girls."The Cast (Stephenie and Bobby-Jon not shown as they were surprise additions to the cast) 2) Cindy won the reward challenge, and the reward was a brand new Pontiac Torrent. Nice ride! She was given the choice of keeping the car, or giving it up (getting rid of the "car curse") and have each of the other four survivors receive one of these $30k monsters. Cindy debated the choice out loud, and then decided to keep the car. Her tribe members were split as to whether this was the right thing to do. What would YOU do? Everyone was all smiles until Cindy drove away with Steph for an overnight feast and rum-fest, at which point Rafe's face spoke volumes. He was pissed! (imagine that)There was some chatter about the various goings on, and then it was time for Immunity Challenge:Another ropes and chains course, locks and keys, leg irons and wood posts. Ho hum.Steph Wins Immunity!Politics Of Elimination: Danni promises to be loyal to Rafe. Rafe lobbies Steph to vote Cindy out. Steph resists. Cindy lobbies Steph to vote Rafe out. The howler monkeys held a meeting and voted for all five to get the hell out of their jungle. The debates raged back and forth, all five ladies taking part. Tribal Council It was interesting to see Judd clean-shaven after all these episodes. Nothing important is said during Tribal Council, and so they vote.Cindy Hall is Voted Out Of The Jungle The Meat Of The Matter: So now it's the final four. Who will advance via personal immunity? Who would get the votes from the jury? Who would win by being paired with who? Here's my take on it, depending on the final two.The easy picks: Steph and Rafe - Rafe wins. Steph and Lydia - Lydia wins. Steph and Danni - Danni winsA bit tougher: Lydia and Danni - Danni wins. Rafe and Lydia - Rafe wins.The toughest match up for a final two? Rafe and Danni - This is the only match where Rafe loses. Danni hasn't pissed anyone off, she's pleasant and physically appealing to the (mostly) male jury, plus she's been a good competitor.We shall see... What do you think?Tune in Sunday evening for what should be the best (last!) episode of Survivor: Guatemala. CBS has put together a really nice website for this season's show at SURVIVOR. Be sure to take a look at the individual contestant's profiles. Beautiful pictures of the Mayan ruins are used as the background to each of the contestant's "favorites" and "bio" information.Check back Monday for Final Survivor results! Video40758@blogcritics.org Fri, 9 Dec 2005 13:23:26 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/08/180913.php Bennett DawsonOver the last six months, NASA has cut over half of its space science programs and "de-emphasized" many others. This has led to thousands of layoffs around the country, and a concensus that the "Vision For Space Exploration" was going to end up gutting the innovative and long term research being performed by our nations scientists. Two days ago, NASA Administrator Mike Griffin decided to speak to the concerns of America's science community:Dr. Mike Griffin - NASA Administrator I'm here today to talk about what science at NASA means to U.S. leadership in space exploration, and in the world at large. I will also address specific components of our Science Mission Directorate plans, and discuss the opportunities in science that we expect to result from both our new exploration plan and our ongoing decadal research plans. To begin, I think that some perspective on the role of science in our national life might be in order. We are all here in San Francisco this evening because we believe that what we do is important, not only to our specific disciplines, but also to society at large. It is our good fortune to live in a society that invests in and greatly values scientific achievement. Indeed, most of us have grown up in a world in which we take it for granted that the United States government will invest significant taxpayers' resources in scientific research. But this has not always been the case; prior to World War II, government investment in scientific research was minuscule. But the contributions of science and technology to the war effort prompted President Roosevelt to request a report from Dr. Vannevar Bush, the Director of the Office of Scientific Research, on how scientific expertise could be used in the post-war world. Bush's report, Science: The Endless Frontier, provided the framework for much of the federal backing of scientific research of which many of us have been or currently are the beneficiaries. In his report, Bush wrote, "It is in keeping also with basic U.S. policy that the government should foster the opening of new frontiers and this is the modern way to do it." I think Dr. Bush got it exactly right. America's space program is a prime example of a successful national investment in opening new frontiers that became possible precisely because our leaders thought about scientific advancement in this new context. Today we conduct bold and rewarding, but costly, scientific activities in space today because our leaders two generations ago viewed American preeminence in all aspects of space exploration as essential to maintaining world leadership. It was in this same spirit that, nearly two years ago, President Bush announced the Vision for Space Exploration, noting its implementation would advance America's economic, scientific and security interests. In this sense, science is the beneficiary of our commitment to seek out and explore new frontiers. While exploration has historically spurred technological innovation and commercial enterprise, it has also led to the flowering of scientific activity. I have high hopes for the scientific progress we will achieve as we pursue the Vision for Space Exploration. Through space exploration and related scientific activities, we can project humankind's vantage point into space, both virtually and physically with robots and humans. From space and in space, our scientific initiatives encompass questions as practical as tomorrow's weather and as profound as the origin and nature of the Universe. From space, we can view the Earth as a planet – one member of a solar system governed by a typical main-sequence star midway through its life cycle. We can view the Earth's relationship with the Sun, shaped not just by gravity, but by the solar wind, solar radiation, and the Earth's own magnetic field and atmosphere. And we can view the Earth in its entirety, seeing the interconnectedness of the oceans, atmosphere, continents, ice sheets and life itself. We can observe and track global-scale changes, and perceive regional changes in their global context. We can observe the role that human civilization increasingly plays as a force of change. Earth science at NASA is Earth system science, the study of Planet Earth as dynamic system of diverse components interacting in complex ways. We are learning to trace cause to effect, to connect variation with response, and vastly improve national capabilities to predict climate, weather, and natural hazards. Thus, NASA research is also an essential part of national and international efforts to employ Earth science and observation in service to society. In space, we are extending our virtual presence via robotic missions to other planets and their moons, to asteroids and comets, and to the Kuiper Belt. We are in the midst of a full-scale investigation of Mars, with one or more missions launching every twenty-six months. We are directing more of our attention to the moons of the giant planets as we see intriguing signs of both water and dynamism on their surfaces, knowing that on Earth, where there is water and energy there is also life. We are progressing from observers to rovers to sample return missions, each step bringing us closer to our principal goals: to understand whether life does or did exist elsewhere in the Solar System, and to prepare for human expeditions to other planetary bodies. The human exploration of space will benefit from the scientific research that we conduct in support of the Vision. The selection of lunar and Martian landing sites, the development of techniques for operations in differing radiation environments and atmospheres, and the exploitation of the Lagrange points are examples of the productive interactions we anticipate between science and exploration as each is pursued for its own purposes. But having painted this picture, let me make a second point about the space frontier, which is that in fact we have barely entered it. To gain some historical perspective on the matter, consider that the great European voyages of maritime discovery began in the early 15th Century with the founding, by Prince Henry the Navigator, of the School of Oceanic Navigation in Sagres, Portugal in 1418. Though he never went to sea himself, Prince Henry sponsored a long series of voyages of exploration down the coast of Africa, in search of a seagoing path to the Orient. Henry's vision for ocean exploration was "a journey, not a race." In 1420 the Madeira Islands were discovered by Joao Zarco. In 1434, after no less than fourteen expeditions had failed – many of them simply never returning – Henry's man Gil Eannes finally made it through the treacherous waters off Cape Bojador, on the coast of Africa south of the Canary Islands, and returned alive. Portuguese explorers rounded the western bulge of Africa in 1460, the year of Henry's death. And the southern tip of Africa, the Cape of Good Hope, was finally reached by Bartolomeu Dias in 1488. Vasco da Gama reached India in 1498. By the time Columbus sailed westward in search of a shorter, easier path to Asia, European maritime exploration had been firmly underway for almost 75 years. Yet today, we think of the 1492 voyage of the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria as the beginning of everything. That is hardly the case. The space age, for all its achievements, is less than fifty years old, and is just getting underway. To date, twelve human beings have explored the surface of the moon for a total time of less than one man-month; it is now my job to make that number grow by leaps and bounds. Our initial scientific reconnaissance of the solar system is still incomplete, with NASA planning to launch the New Horizons mission next month to conduct the first robotic exploration of Pluto. We have also barely scratched the surface when it comes to understanding the extent and nature of extra-solar planets. In just ten years, more than 150 planets beyond our solar system have been discovered, and there are indications that at least one has the same rocky characteristics as our home planet. And as this audience knows quite well, we have only begun to tap the potential of Earth observing, weather, and other remote sensing satellites. Continuing on the theme that we are just at the dawn of the true space age, let me point out that in a matter of years, people around the globe will be able to look up at a new moon, and with the aid of a good telescope, be able to see the glimmering lights of a research station on the lunar surface. At this research station, pioneering astronauts will be learning how to obtain oxygen from the lunar regolith. They will be deploying antennas on the back side of the moon, linked in phase to form the largest radio telescope ever built, free of radio noise from Earth. They will be engaged in geological exploration of the moon, finally establishing the origins of our Earth-moon system. And other astronauts, in Earth orbit, will be readying a 500 ton spaceship for mankind's first voyage to Mars. This is the direction for our space program that two successive Congresses have endorsed, and that, according to a very recent Gallup Poll, three-quarters of our citizens "support", or "strongly support". This support is found roughly in equal proportions across the political spectrum, and between the genders. This is the kind of support that will fuel many of our space science initiatives in the future. And we are just at the beginning. Having said this, I am aware that many in the science community have questioned NASA's commitment to science, and believe their own work to be gravely threatened by the Vision for Space Exploration. Let me speak directly to this point. I have frequently stated my belief that exploration will be a boon for science in the long-term. I have also said on many occasions that it is not our desire to sacrifice present-day scientific efforts for the sake of future benefits to be derived from exploration. We who run NASA today are doing our very best to preserve these efforts in the face of, frankly, some daunting fiscal realities. But we also must avoid setting unrealistic expectations. NASA's $5.4 billion investment in its Earth and space science portfolio is almost the size of the entire National Science Foundation, and this robust portfolio has grown at a rate significantly greater than has NASA's top line budget over the past decade. Such growth cannot logically be supported within an overall portfolio that is at best fixed in constant dollars. But we must also acknowledge the plain fact that we cannot do everything that was on our plate when I assumed office. All of you know many reasons why this is so. NASA can only move forward on our fundamental missions of exploration, science and aeronautics at the pace that available resources will allow, so it is important to be as efficient as possible in allocating these resources. To this end, we have made several changes in recent months, and I would like to discuss some of these changes with you tonight. First, we are reconstituting the organization the Science Mission Directorate into separate offices for Earth science, heliophysics, planetary science and physics and astronomy. Second, Mary is defining an executable science program across each of these portfolios in Earth and space science. She is conducting a rigorous review of each flight project now in formulation and development, and establishing gates through which each program must pass in order to proceed from formulation to development. This process requires balancing technical performance against cost, evaluating the management team that is in place, and rigorously identifying risks and defining plans to mitigate them. We very much need better cost discipline in the large assignment missions, as cost growth inhibits the future of the smaller, but incredibly prolific, competed lines. Third, we are returning to NASA's classical approach to science management, including relying on outside bodies for strategic advice on the ranking of missions by priority. In each of the four major elements of our research portfolio, we will establish priorities through dialog with the science community, based on the budget realities we face. The decadal surveys of the National Research Council have proven essential to this process in the past, and we will continue to rely on them as authoritative sources of science community priorities. We also will engage in more frequent venues for dialog with the science community, such as professional society conferences like these. For tactical level advice we will engage the science community in workshops that help us to implement successful programs by balancing detailed technical requirements, cost and schedule. A principle source of advice at this level is the NASA Advisory Council, which has just been reconstituted. The NAC has five committees, including a five-member science committee with many subcommittees. I believe the latter group's advice will be very helpful to the agency. Many of you are interested in our plans for Earth science. While it is true this activity does not get the media attention that human spaceflight and planetary exploration receive, I can assure you it is an important activity that we are determined to continue well beyond the completion of the Earth Observation System. I believe most of you know that I have significantly re-emphasized Earth science since rejoining NASA earlier this year. Our Earth science programs are essential to the accomplishment of three initiatives begun by President Bush: The Climate Change Research program, the Global Earth Observation System and the Oceans Action Plan. We recognize that through our contributions to these initiatives, NASA is providing researchers around the world with unprecedented access to diverse data about the Earth system. This is being done at a time when there are huge societally relevant questions about global changes that require the view from space. One need look no further than NASA's contributions to this season's hurricane predictions to recognize that we are getting tremendous value out of our Earth observation satellites. Indeed, as a result of NASA's development and deployment in the past decade of the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM), the Aqua satellite and the Quickscat sea winds measurement instrument, our colleagues at the National Weather Service are now able to predict the formation of tropical storms nine days instead of seven days out, and predict landfall within 400 miles of coastline instead of 800. Such advances allow significant improvement in the marshalling of resources to deal with the inevitable property destruction of, and better warning to people likely to be affected by, major hurricanes. At NASA's request, the National Research Council has undertaken its first decadal survey for Earth science and applications from space. Our colleagues at NOAA and the U.S. Geological Survey are co-sponsors of this effort, whose results should be available by the end of next year. We will use these results to create a profile with an optimal mix of systematic and exploratory missions, technology development, and research programs to implement the survey's priorities and the presidential initiatives I mentioned. Turning to the sun, NASA's heliophysics program is helping us to gain a better understanding of the sun, and the sun's interaction with Earth, other planetary environments, and interplanetary space itself. We have used a strategy of deploying frequent, smaller missions within this vast system to form a distributed Great Observatory that is truly greater than the sum of its parts. Next year, we are poised to reap the rewards of several years of hard work. In 2006, we will launch STEREO, a mission to track the evolution of solar disturbances from the sun's surface to Earth's orbit; the five-satellite THEMIS mission to determine the causes of space weather reconfigurations of Earth's near space environment; and the AIM small explorer satellite that will examine the formation of the highest altitude clouds in Earth's atmosphere in response to external and internal forcing functions. Also next year, we look forward to deployment of the NASA CINDI and TWINS instruments on two DoD missions, and to providing instrumentation for Japan's Solar-B mission that will resolve magnetic fields on the sun's surface and how they interact with the sun's outer atmosphere. Similarly, our planetary program is guided by the decadal surveys we have in hand, and we will proceed with our planetary mission priorities as quickly as our budget will allow. One area pinpointed for further attention is the Moon. As we plan to return to the Moon to open up the next great era of space exploration, I'd like to mention a few of the new vistas a more extensive focus on lunar exploration will provide. Paul Spudis, my former colleague at Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory, has written extensively on the subject, including a Scientific American article from December 2003 that I commend to your attention. In the article, Paul notes that scientists still have many unanswered questions about the Moon's history, composition and internal structure, whose understanding may also illuminate the history of all the rocky planets in the inner solar system. Paul also wrote of the importance of determining whether significant amounts water ice do in fact exist in lunar polar areas. If confirmed, such a discovery would offer the hope that a lunar base would have a source of water for life support as well as for rocket fuel. We're looking at a number of promising lunar science targets in our Robotic Lunar Exploration Program, an activity that links our Exploration and Science Mission Directorates. Their collaboration began with the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter now in development for launch in 2008. The Science Mission Directorate managed the selection process for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter instruments, and will play a Program and Project Scientist role in spacecraft development managed by the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate. Of course, we're also interested in outer planet exploration which represents some of the most challenging scientific missions NASA carries out. I already mentioned the New Horizons mission set to launch next month. We're in the preliminary design phase for the Juno mission that will investigate whether an icy rock core exists at the center of Jupiter, and NASA hopes to conduct future missions to investigate the potential of life at Europa, Titan, and other compelling targets for outer planet exploration. Again, these missions represent some of the most technically challenging science missions for NASA over the next decade. And I'm also very intrigued by Ed Lu and Rusty Schweickart's ideas about nudging large near-Earth asteroids before they can pose a threat to humanity. We will most certainly continue our work to discover large asteroids close to the Earth. It is important to note that we cannot accomplish all our goals for science and exploration on our own. We're very fortunate to have strong partnerships with a number of spacefaring countries. Today, 29 of NASA's 53 ongoing planetary, astronomy and Earth-observing satellites and spacecraft missions include international participation, with NASA involved in 13 operating science missions led by our international partners. As I've said on numerous occasions, I am looking forward to the opportunity to enlarge and extend these partnerships. In closing, please allow me to offer a few thoughts on what we might achieve in science if we move ahead with purpose and dispatch with our space exploration program. By 2020 we will be surveying our portion of the galaxy to create a census of extra-solar planets, and using the next generation of space telescopes to study the origin and destiny of the universe. We will be probing the Martian surface and subsurface for resources that will enable human exploration, and to answer questions about the past and present habitability of Mars. Together with our partners we will have created a global Earth observing system that includes sentinel satellites in higher orbits communicating with active remote sensing systems in lower orbits. These systems will provide both real time information for hazard warning and management and the long term data records required to understand and predict global change. All of these advances will come about because of the hard work and commitment of our diverse community, which I believe has its greatest successes when we allow the pursuit of exploration and scientific progress to complement each other. I thank you for your hospitality today, and again extend my heartfelt thanks to all of you for your commitment to regaining the initiative that has driven our past successes. [end] As someone who believes that it is in our species' best interests to pursue the "Vision", to start now on the journey that will eventually lead to self sustaining colonies on planets other than our Earth, I accept the tough decisions that Dr. Griffin is being forced to make. I believe that if he had his druthers, nothing would get cut, and he'd spend whatever it took to get this exploration and colonization "under way".However, given specific goals to achieve within a limited budget, Griffin is fearlessly taking the necessary steps to make it happen. It won't make him popular with many, but it will guarantee him a place in the history books if he can pull it off. I wish him, and us, the best of luck with this. What do you think?Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (I hope this works... ) Sci/Tech40719@blogcritics.org Thu, 8 Dec 2005 18:09:13 EST