Laser-Powered Robot Climbs to Victory in the Space-Elevator Contest | 80beats

lasermotiveA laser-powered robot took a climb up a cable in the Mohave Desert in Wednesday, and pushed ahead the sci-fi inspired notion of a space elevator capable of lifting astronauts, cargo, and even tourists up into orbit. The robot, built by LaserMotive of Seattle, whizzed up 2,953 feet (nearly 1 kilometer) in about four minutes, which qualifies the team for at least $900,000 of the $2 million in prizes offered in the NASA-backed Space Elevator Games.

Theorized in the 1960s and then popularized by Arthur C. Clarke’s 1979 novel “The Fountains of Paradise,” space elevators are envisioned as a way to gain access to space without the risk and expense of rockets. Instead, electrically powered vehicles would run up and down a cable anchored to a ground structure and extending thousands of miles up to a mass in geosynchronous orbit — the kind of orbit communications satellites are placed in to stay over a fixed spot on the Earth [AP].

The LaserMotive vehicle that climbed up the cable (held by a hovering helicopter) was powered by a system that resembles an upside-down solar power mechanism. Laser beams on the ground were fired up at the ascending craft and hit its photovoltaic cells–like those used in solar panels–in a process known as “power beaming.” LaserMotive will have a chance to improve its vehicle’s speed at another trial today, and other teams will also be vying for prizes.

Related Content:
80beats: Japanese Group Pushes for $9 Billion, 22,000-Mile Space Elevator
DISCOVER: Going Up follows U.S. engineers on the space elevator quest

Image: Space Elevator Games. The LaserMotive vehicle gets weighed in.



New Statesman on Accommodationism | The Intersection

There is a middle-of-the-road report on the “new atheist”/”accommodationist” argument in The New Statesman, which, it seems to me, gives a pretty fair account of the dispute. Frankly, I am surprised that there has not been more objective media coverage of this very significant rift; if Lingua Franca magazine were still around, that would be an appropriate place for it, but where are other appropriate outlets, like the Chronicle of Higher Education?

Anyways, I didn’t speak with the New Statesman author, but it seems Barbara Forrest did:

Forrest argues that new atheists should respect the personal nature of faith, and nurture a sense of humility by recognising that scientific evidence does not rule out existence of the divine. They should accept that there is a wide range of views, she says, and stop insisting that everyone follow the “one true way” of atheism. Failing to do so only turns people off in droves.

Yet it seems unlikely that the new atheists have been this damaging. They have been an identifiable group and social force for five years only – starting with Harris’s The End of Faith in 2004, which was followed by Dawkins’s The God Delusion in 2006. More significantly, polls indicate that the proportion of the US public that subscribes to a creationist account of human origins has remained relatively constant for the past 25 years, hovering around 45 per cent. The previous era, which advocated greater respect for religion, does not seem to have won over hearts or minds. So who is to say that taking the opposite approach will drive anyone away?

I want to comment on this, because I think it contains some pretty big misconceptions about the nature of public opinion, and how we might detect changes therein.

We know there is a strong and unwavering subset of the public that embraces creationism, and that it is deeply entrenched, and has been for decades. That’s not in dispute. But there is a lot of questionable thinking about how the New Atheism, a very young movement, may or may not have affected this.

First, I don’t know to what extent that part of the population that embraces creationism views the New Atheism as something distinctly “different” from what came before. After all, creationists and the religious right were denouncing “secular humanists” long before the New Atheism came along. Creationist leaders are surely aware of the New Atheism, but for the creationist rank-and-file, who have long considered evolutionary science to be the equivalent an atheist plot (and have been told this repeatedly by said leaders), it is not clear to me that they will find any news here, much less change their views dramatically on that basis.

Therefore, even assuming that the New Atheists are having an impact somewhere, it is hardly obvious that the creationist ranks are the place where we would expect to detect it. For my part, I’m far more worried about alienation of the middle, and the thwarting of coalitions that might combat the creationists, as a result of the New Atheism.

Secondly, I find it highly dubious to judge past strategies to be a failure based on the lack of movement in the creationist polling numbers cited above.

In a longstanding culture war situation, like the one we have over the teaching of evolution, you often have to run to stand still. And in the “previous era,” at least one kind of undeniable stride was made that has nothing to do with polling numbers–namely, we won the court cases and got the legal precedents when it really counted. Moreover, in the courtroom, e.g., the Dover trial, “accommodationism” was the triumphant strategy.

These court victories don’t mean that the creationist numbers went down; they just mean the creationists didn’t get a stronger foothold in our schools–which itself was a pretty big achievement.

Throughout all of this, there has been a longstanding perception in much of America that science and religion are inimical to one another, and contradictory. This is a perception that the creationists have fanned for a long time (hence the “secular humanism” business), and that the New Atheists now also explicitly support. In a sense, it works to the advantage of both groups, at the expense to of the middle.

This “conflict narrative” or “conflict thesis” also happens to be a historically misinformed perspective, in my view, and one that is questionable on other fronts as well–but I think it is a dominant perception, and constantly reinforced by the mass media.

For those of us critical of the New Atheists, then, it is not because we think they have emerged and dramatically upset the culture war stalemate over the teaching of evolution in some way. Rather, it is because they are likely alienate the middle ground and aren’t a constructive response, in the present moment, to the need to defuse longstanding tensions over science and religion in America.



Inspired by Maple Seeds, a Robotic Whirligig Takes To The Skies | Discoblog

Introducing the maple-seed-inspired Ulrich flyer, the world’s first controllable robotic monocopter. The monocopter’s inventors studied the way a maple seed whirls and twirls as it falls to the ground, and designed their flyer based on that biological blueprint. In this video, watch the little aircraft rise through the air with its single blade spinning furiously–accompanied by an epic soundtrack that ranges from techno to symphonic grandeur.

Invented at the University of Maryland’s Aerospace Engineering Autonomous Vehicle Laboratory and Alfred Gessow Rotorcraft Center, the small and capable craft meets most of the challenges set forth by DARPA’s nano-air-vehicle program. The program asks engineers to invent ultra-lightweight vehicles that could come in handy for urban military missions.

Read more about the copter over at Physorg.com.

Related Content:
80beats: How a Maple Seed Twirls and Whirls and Stays Aloft
Discoblog: Military Blob-bot to Ooze Its Way Past Enemy Lines
Discoblog Gallery: Disarmingly Cute: 8 Military Robots That Spy, Fly, and Do Yoga

Video: YouTube / RoboSeed



Britain’s New Protected Minority: Tree-Huggers | Discoblog

forest-cathedralEmployers in the U.K. have just learned that there’s a word for discrimination against a person based on their earth-conscious, tofu-eating ways: “greenism.” And firing someone for their environmental views is just as illegal as firing someone for their religious or philosophical beliefs, according to a court ruling.

Tim Nicholson, former head of sustainability at property firm Grainger Plc, claims he was laid off because of his views on climate change and the environment. A judge said Nicholson could take Grainger to the Employment Appeals Tribunal over the layoff, but Grainger challenged the ruling on the grounds that climate change is a scientific and not philosophical viewpoint. However, that challenge was overturned, according to the Telegraph:

In a landmark ruling, Mr Justice Michael Burton said that “a belief in man-made climate change … is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the 2003 Religion and Belief Regulations.”

The ruling could open the door for employees to sue their companies for failing to account for their green lifestyles, such as providing recycling facilities or offering low-carbon travel.

Nicholson said during previous hearings that due to his strong convictions he refused to travel by air and renovated his house to be environmentally friendly. He also said Grainger’s chief executive, who allegedly once flew a staff member from Ireland to London to deliver a forgotten Blackberry, was hostile toward his beliefs. The company said it will now argue that there was no link between Nicholson’s views and his layoff.

Related Content:
Discoblog: Are “Climate Friendly” Food Labels a Terrible Idea?
Discoblog: University Sued for Saying Earth Not Created in 6 Days
Discoblog: Nobel Laureates Go Ape After Royal Society Creationist Comment

Image: flickr / hpeguk



The Secret Lives and Loves of Great White Sharks | 80beats

great-white-shark-webGreat white sharks, much like humans, tend to stick to familiar turf, according to new research. Also like a lot of people, they like to hang out along the coastal waters of California. Sharks tagged with acoustic devices often spent up to 107 days at four key sites along the central and northern California coast where seals and sea lions are abundant: Southeast Farallon Island, Tomales Point, Año Nuevo Island and Point Reyes [LiveScience]. A few of the fearsome predators were tracked as far inland as the Golden Gate Bridge, apparently in search of snacks, say the researchers. The study, the largest and most detailed study of North American great white sharks, provides evidence contrary to the popular notion of great white sharks swimming aimlessly in the ocean.

The sharks under study divided most of their time between three locations: Northern California, Hawaii, and an area that the researchers called the white shark café, a spot in the open ocean about halfway between the Baja Peninsula and the Hawaiian Islands. Exactly what goes on at the café is still unknown–although researchers suspect it may be a hot spot for mating. Lead researcher Salvador Jorgensen explains that male white sharks “converge in a very specific area of the cafe,” Jorgensen said, while female sharks move in and out of the area. “It adds a little more evidence to the argument that this could be an important reproductive area” [Washington Post].

The scientists tracked the snaggly toothed predators between 2000 and 2008 from the Bay Area to San Diego, Hawaii and back as the sharks followed a route that was carried out with surprising precision and under a strict time frame [San Francisco Chronicle]. These great whites have been isolated from other great white sharks near Australia and South Africa for so long that they are now genetically distinct. The study was published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Related Content:
80beats: Toothy Sea Monsters Need Sanctuary, To
80beats: The Great White Shark Is the Serial Killer of the Seas
80beats: Human Appetite for Sharks Pushes Many Toward Extinction

Image: flickr / hermanusbackpackers



Are You a Cognitive Miser? | Cosmic Variance

Jack is looking at Anne, but Anne is looking at George. Jack is married, but George is not. Is a married person looking at an unmarried person?

A) Yes.

B) No.

C) Cannot be determined.

This is from this month’s Scientific American — article unfortunately costs money. It’s about “dysrationalia,” which is what happens when people with nominally high IQ’s end up thinking irrationally. A phenomenon I’m sure we’ve all encountered, especially in certain corners of the blogosphere.

And the answer is the first option. But over 80 percent of people choose the third option. Here’s the solution: the puzzle doesn’t say whether Anne is married or not, but she either is or she isn’t. If Anne is married, she’s looking at George, so the answer is “yes”; if she’s unmarried, Jack is looking at her, so the answer is still “yes.” The underlying reason why smart people get the wrong answer is (according to the article) that they simply don’t take the time to go carefully through all of the possibilities, instead taking the easiest inference. The patience required to go through all the possibilities doesn’t correlate very well with intelligence.



In Controversial Scent Lineups, a Dog’s Nose Picks Out the Perp | 80beats

bloodhound-webCurvis Bickham spent eight months in prison for a triple-homicide because a police dog confused his scent with that of the killer. Now Bickham and others who spent months in jail after dogs linked their scents to evidence from crimes they did not commit are filing a lawsuit claiming Texas authorities falsely arrested and imprisoned them, their attorney said Tuesday [AP]. In a scent lineup, dogs sniff items found at a crime scene, and then sniff jars swabbed with the suspects’ scents and the scents of others not involved in the crime. When the dogs link crime scene and suspect, that evidence is often relied on heavily in court by the prosecution. Alaska, Florida, New York and Texas all use scent lineups to link suspects to crimes.

Dogs are used all the time to fight crimefrom sniffing out bombs and drugs to locating dead bodies. However, scent lineups have critics barking. They say the lineups are poorly controlled, and argue that avoiding cross-contamination is basically impossible. The main target of the current lawsuit is Fort Bend County Deputy Keith Pikett—whose home-trained bloodhounds identified the suspects. A 2004 F.B.I. report warned that dog scent work “should not be used as primary evidence,” but only to corroborate other evidence. In several of the cases that were based on Deputy Pikett’s dogs, however, the scent lineups appear to have provided the primary evidence, even when contradictory evidence was readily available [The New York Times]. Deputy Pikett, by his own estimation, has conducted thousands of scent lineups.

The three men who filed the lawsuit against Deputy Pickett were all eventually set free after contradictory evidence proved their innocence. The Innocence Project of Texas, a legal defense organization … released a report last month that excoriated dog scent lineups as a “junk science injustice” [The New York Times]. Dog scent lineups bring to mind another high profile forensic science debate in Texas that many believe led to the execution of an innocent man. Now that the science behind dog scent lineups is coming under the same scrutiny, one can’t help but wonder if scent lineups might have led to a similar outcome.

Related Content:
80beats: Think DNA Evidence Can’t Be Faked? Think Again.
80beats: NYC Uses DNA to Indict Suspects to Be Named Later
80beats: DNA Sampling of Innocent-Until-Proven-Guilty People Is on the Rise
DISCOVER: Reasonable Doubt examines the fallibility of DNA evidence

Image: flickr / contadini



Don’t Pack Your Bags Yet—New Planet-Finder Hobbled by Electronic Glitch | 80beats

KeplerThe quest to find a second Earth–a potentially habitable planet that’s about the size of our home, but that lies in a distant solar system–has hit a snag. The Kepler space telescope was expected to be well on its way to detecting Earth-sized exoplanets by now, but an electronic glitch is slowing it down. The delays are caused by noisy amplifiers in the telescope’s electronics. The team is racing to fix the issue by changing the way data from the telescope is processed, but the delay could mean that ground-based observers now have the upper hand in the race to be the first to spot an Earth twin [Nature News].

Kepler, which was launched in March, uses the transit method to detect exoplanets; it’s watching a patch of 100,000 stars in hopes of detecting the brief dimming of a star’s light, which indicates that a planet has passed in front of the star. Kepler focuses light onto 42 light-detecting chips, called CCDs, each of which monitors stars in a different part of the telescope’s field of view. Each CCD is split into two for the purposes of sending data back to Earth, for a total of 84 data channels. Three of these channels are plagued by electronic noise that makes stars in their field of view appear to flicker – “like it’s changing its brightness at a rapid rate”, says Kepler chief scientist William Borucki [New Scientist]. That’s awkward, since the artificial flickers could obscure the real dimming that occurs during a planet’s transit.

The astronomers reportedly detected the problem during testing before Kepler’s launch, but they judged it riskier to dismantle the satellite at the last minute than to correct the glitch after launch. The noise affects only a small portion of the data, Borucki says, but the team has to fix the software — it would be “too cumbersome” to remove the bad data manually — so that it accounts for the noise automatically. He says that the fix should be in place by 2011 [Nature News].

Still, researchers say that the problem isn’t likely to delay the announcement of an Earth-like planet. For an exoplanet to be habitable to life as we know it, the planet would have to orbit its star at a distance that would keep it at a reasonable temperature and allow for liquid water. An Earth-like planet around a sun-like star would have an orbit roughly similar to Earth’s, and would take about a year to complete one circuit around its star. Astronomers feel the need to record three transits to confirm a planet’s existence–and in three years time, the noise-canceling software should be available. The delays would only affect habitable planets around smaller, cooler stars. The habitable zone for these stars is closer in, where planets could complete the necessary three orbits in about one Earth year. Without the glitch, this kind of planet could in principle be confirmed in 2010 [New Scientist].

Related Content:
80beats: NASA’s New Kepler Spacecraft Is Ready to Find Some Earths
80beats: Kepler Sends Postcards Home: It’s Beautiful Out Here
DISCOVER: How Long Until We Find a Second Earth?
DISCOVER: The Inspiring Boom in “Super-Earths”

Image: Kepler / Ames Research Center



Finally! An iPhone App That Lets You Track Your Bathroom Habits | Discoblog

poolog-webThe folks behind the best-selling book, “What’s Your Poo Telling You?” aren’t satisfied with being mere bathroom reading material. So they’ve dropped a new iPhone app, the Poo Log, which allows you to time, log, and graph your BMs—and learn about your gastrointestinal health while doing so.

Via The Presurfer:

The ‘Poo Log’ is a digital timer and journal for recording and studying the wondrous uniqueness of each bowel movement. With a clever mix of bathroom humor and legitimate medical information, the ‘Poo Log’ allows the user to track his/her digestive workings and graph their ‘poo’ – all with one hand.

According to the app’s developers, AvatarLabs Inc, the tracker features medically accurate info that is suitable for all ages, and of course helpful tips such as, “Light a match. Now.”

Related Content:
Discoblog: Want to Cure Your Fear of Flying? There’s an App for That.
Discoblog: “Electric Fart Machine” Could Lead to Greater Fuel Storage Efficiency
Discoblog: Not Subtle, But It Works: Peepoo Bag Converts Human Waste Into Fertilizer

Image: AvatarLabs Inc



The Politics of Addiction | The Intersection

The faces of addiction come in every color and gender. The disease creeps into the lives of those from a wide spectrum of socio-economic levels, backgrounds, and experiences. It crosses continents, latitudes, and longitudes. That’s the thing about addiction–it doesn’t discriminate. Neither should politicians. Particularly when it comes to funding the research to help those who need treatment most.

Jessica’s got a thoughtful post up over at Bioephemera on double standards, politics, and drug treatment research. Having spent two years as a AAAS fellow at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, she understands the gravity of the issue. Jess writes:

..research to help smokers quit is generally portrayed as necessary and important, [while] increasingly, I’m seeing politicians complain that research to help other drug addicts quit is a waste of money.

Maybe it’s because these other addicts are meth addicts, or potheads, or heroin addicts – probably not people you relate to or approve of. That makes it pretty easy for the media to take cheap shots at crack, etc. addicts, and question whether we should waste money trying to help them. But we should get angry about these cheap shots…Tobacco is still a significant public health problem, and I want to do all we can to help smokers (like my mom) quit, but crack, meth, etc. utterly destroys families and communities. We should be leveraging scientific research every way we can to help these people – not throwing them away or taking shots at them because they’re “bad,” or because we can’t relate to them. They’re real people. They have families.

Nevertheless, people routinely and cynically use drug treatment research as a political football.

Of course it’s not news that politicians bash science research to score points with the voting public: Sarah Palin notoriously mocked fruit fly studies along the campaign trail while John McCain took issue with grizzly bear research and the Adler Planetarium. And the truth is that this tactic probably continues to win votes since science remains such a partisan issue. But when it comes to people–and finding the means to treat those most in need–a political agenda is unquestionably not acceptable.

Lots of us like to imagine there are justifiable reasons we’re the most deserving of the best care when sick. The truth is that better treatment and attention should not come as a result of wealth, location, or the social acceptability of a disease. Like Jess, I agree we must let doctors and scientists continue to study drug abuse and test treatments in the real world. That’s the way research progresses and results are achieved.

I’ll leave you with this illuminating video Jess posted that demonstrates the problem:



A Crack Opens in the Ethiopian Landscape, Preparing the Way for a New Sea | 80beats

Ethiopia-cracksIn 2005, the earth cracked open in Ethiopia. Two volcanic eruptions shook the desert, and a 35-mile-long rift opened in the land, measuring 20 feet wide in some places. Now a new study adds weight to the argument that the opening of this crack marks the first step in the formation of a new sea that may eventually separate East Africa from the rest of the continent. Says lead researcher Atalay Ayele: “The ocean’s formation is happening slowly, likely to take a few million years. It will stretch from the Afar depression (straddling Ethiopia, Eritrea and Djibouti) down to Mozambique” [ABC News].

The study, to be published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, explains that the seismic movements observed in Ethiopia are very similar to the changes wrought by faults and fissures on the seafloor, where the processes that move tectonic plates usually begin.

Seismic data from 2005 shows that the rift opened in a matter of days. Dabbahu, a volcano at the northern end of the rift, erupted first, then magma pushed up through the middle of the rift area and began “unzipping” the rift in both directions, the researchers explained in a statement today. “We know that seafloor ridges are created by a similar intrusion of magma into a rift, but we never knew that a huge length of the ridge could break open at once like this” [LiveScience], says study coauthor Cindy Ebinger.

The active volcanic region in Ethiopia’s Afar desert sits at the boundary of the African and Arabian tectonic plates, which have been gradually spreading apart for millions years; the new study shows that large-scale seismic events can speed up that process. The gradual separation has already formed the 186-mile Afar depression and the Red Sea. The thinking is that the Red Sea will eventually pour into the new sea in a million years or so [LiveScience].

Related Content:
DISCOVER: Meet the New Continent: East Africa
DISCOVER: The Thrill-Seeker’s Travel Guide points tourists towards the Afar desert
80beats: Tremors Point to a Stressed-Out Stretch of the San Andreas Fault
80beats: Armed With Data, Scientists Still Mystified by Antarctica’s Hidden Mountains
80beats: Ancient Continental Collisions May Have Provided Air to Breathe

Image: University of Rochester



Blah Blah Blah – Why We Should Care About Social Media

I had an opportunity to participate in a workshop hosted by the JSC Social Media Working Group at NASA Johnson Space Center today and thought I’d share the presentation I gave.  What’s interesting about this presentation is not so much how NASA is currently using social media, but how it might use social media in the future.  NASA has really embraced social media and is making great strides at engaging people in the NASA mission.  What I’m interested in, is how can NASA use social media in the future to further it’s mission. I posed this question to the audience (using an interactive online poll) by asking”What’s Next?”  It was a wide open question and I included a few of the answers below.  What do you think?  What’s Next?

“Bridging public to space workers and their environment, i.e., what exactly are you doing? How can I participate?”

“Really engaging in public outreach :) build connections!”

“Get our current workforce fully involved!”

“Using social media to fish for ideas to solve specific problems.”

“Moderated mission video that highlights several parts of the launch along with real time q&a with viewers and NASA experts”

“Virtual moon lab”

“Distributed telepresence exploration”

“I would love to be able to look at mission control and station consoles real time.”

“Open problems to the public to help NASA”

“Allow people to take space walks virtually”

“Make astronauts the rockstars that they are. NASA is so powerful it could be part of the cult of personality.”

“Public virtual presence on moon, Mars, beyond”,

“Unless the U.S. government gets behind U.S. HUMAN space exploration, the question of using social media is a mute point for space exploration”

Ideas at Work

imagine09_logo_final

How many times have you been to a conference where it feels like the only thing that changed was the venue and location. The speakers are the same, the attendees are the same, the topics are the same! That’s been one of my frustrations with space conferences over the past few years, so I wanted to let you all know about an event coming up in Houston on December 2-3rd that’s going to be a little different. The American Astronautical Society is having their annual conference in Houston, just like they do every 2 years. However, this time, the only thing that will be the same is the fact that it’s in Houston. This years AAS Imagine09 Conference is focused on exploring remarkable ideas that are making a difference in the world and that could transform the space industry (if we choose to apply them). Some of the world’s most creative, productive and compelling individuals will actively engage attendees, providing knowledge and inspiration and encouraging breakthroughs in thought. The event has been designed to both spark imagination and to get people talking. If you have the chance to attend, you’ll hear Disney Imagineers talk about the use of narrative to create strategy and build teams and CEO’s talk about talks about designing the future. The entire list of speakers and topcis is included below. I hope you will be able to make it!

What: American Astronautical Society (AAS) Conference – Imagine 09. Ideas at Work.
When: December 2-3, 2009
Where: NASA Johnson Space Center Gilruth Center, Houston, TX
How to Register: Visit this website (Note: If you are a CS at JSC, use the NASA Satern system and look for announcements in JSC today)
More Information: AAS Website

Armen Berjikly talks about the power of uniting people who can improve each other’s lives - technology start-up entrepreneur, and founder/CEO of The Experience Project.

Steve Boehlke talks about the need for innovators to break (the right) rules - coach to leaders ranging from executives to rural farmers in developing countries, and founder/President of SFB Associates.

Charles Bolden (invited) talks about the importance of innovation to NASA - pilot, astronaut, U.S. Marine Corps General officer, and NASA Administrator.

Christopher Bronk talks about Gov 2.0 and NASA as the next Google - diplomat, Baker Institute Fellow in Technology, Society and Public Policy, Rice University.

Charles Chafer talks about the power of public participation space missions - high-tech entrepreneur, pioneer of commercial space, CEO of Space Services Inc., founding partner of Team Encounter, LLC, and co-founder of Celestis, Inc.

Dr. Franklin Chang-Diaz talks about looking beyond today’s propulsion technology - astronaut, inventor of the magnetoplasma rocket, entrepreneur, Chairman/CEO of Ad Astra Rocket Company.

Nancy Conrad talks about designing the future and what to do when the pipeline is dry - entrepreneur, innovator, philanthropist, founder/CEO of the Conrad Foundation.

Dr. Dan Durda talks about barn-storming the space frontier - planetary scientist, pilot, diver, Senior Research Scientist at Southwest Research Institute.

Dr. Betty Sue Flowers talks about the myths that shape our world - consultant/editor for TV series and book The Power of Myth with Joseph Campbell, host of radio series The Next 200 Years, Director of the LBJ Presidential Library, strategy consultant.

Richard Garriott talks about TBA - video game developer, entrepreneur, space tourist, Vice-chairman of the Board for Space Adventures, and a Trustee of the X PRIZE Foundation.

John Gibson talks about “people fusion” and open innovation’s power to solve tough technical problems - President of Halliburton Energy Services, amateur rocketeer, Executive Chairman/CEO of Paradigm Ltd.

Wayne Hale talks about choosing the future - NASA flight director, Space Shuttle Program Manager, blogger, Deputy Associate Administrator of Strategic Partnerships.

Bryan Guido Hassin talks about how, with just a nudge, individuals can change their behavior dramatically for the good of the whole - Head of Global Operations at Poken, technology start-up entrepreneur, CEO of Enistic, Inc.

Thomas B. Pickens, III talks about commercial use of weightlessness to benefit humankind - chairman/CEO for many companies during startup, growth, and turnaround in a challenging environment, President/CEO of Astrotech Corp.

Will Pomerantz talks about revolution through competition - co-founder of SpaceAlumni.com, zero gravity coach, Senior Director of Space Prizes for the X PRIZE Foundation.

Dr. Howard Prince talks about ethics, leadership and spaceflight - U.S. Army General Officer, clinical psychologist, Director of LBJ School’s Center for Ethical Leadership, University of Texas.

Bob Rogers talks about public engagement in 2010, and being careful what you wish for - themed entertainment producer, inventor, futurist, Academy Award nominee, founder/Chairman of BRC Imagination Arts.

Joe Rohde, creator of Disney’s Animal Kingdom, talks about the use of narrative to create strategy and build teams - adventurer, Executive Designer and VP/Creative at Walt Disney Imagineering.

Dr. Evan Thomas talks about sustainable development powered by social innovation and space technology - NASA life support engineer, Engineers Without Borders-USA team member, entrepreneur.

Brett Williams talks about using rockets to teach and inspire high school students - marine biologist, teacher at Fredericksburg High School, founder of SystemsGo student launch program.

The Economics of Space

With the economy being in the current shape (aka, not a good one), many people are noticeably, and understandably, nervous about long-term investments; especially those that don’t return in the same form or currency as the initial buy-in.  With the same trepidation, people are wary about spending more money on NASA, particularly the human spaceflight aspect of NASA.  Sure, folks seem not to mind sending satellites, probes and robots to explore the vast stellar reaches, but talk about putting a human into space, and some people get noticeably weak in the knees.  They talk about risks, and costs, and use the all-too-popular “why not send a robot to do it? They’re just as good and no one cares about them.”  And most of them use internet-enabled cellphones while driving GPS-equipped cars while doing it.

Well, where do you think all of this stuff came from?

Sure the internet, GPS, and other modern-day technical wonders aren’t NASA-specific developments, but the items that are share a very similar lineage with these items, and that is they were initially funded by a federal program that was funded, in turn, by tax dollars.  Then some bright person had an ever brighter idea about taking said applications and making it useful for the broader civilian population.  No one complains now about the existence of the internet, GPS, fuel cells that produce clean energy, rechargeable batteries, or other technical marvels, but take away the funding that funded the programs that initially created these, and the world today would be a much different, much less connected place.  While some may argue that we could do with a little less electronic connection and a little more face-to-face, the fact of the matter is much of today’s life experience (good, bad, and otherwise), would not be possible without these developments.

Most of the opposition to spending more on spaceflight use the argument that money spent today doesn’t guarantee a technical or financially viable return in the near future.  To that I say “well, duh”.  Think about spending money spaceflight like  spending money in the stock market.  You wouldn’t realistically expect to put in $100 dollars today and get out $1,000 tomorrow, next week, or even next year (unless you’re really lucky).  You put in your $100 with the knowledge that it will take time to grow, mature, and make earnings and interests over the years.  If you apply the same principle to, say, the internet, with it’s far reaching influence over the past decade, you’ll see that the initial dollars spent in the late 50’s and early 60’s (yes, that long ago since a national network of radar sites was created) have literally mushroomed into an unstoppable, life altering force that has affected the lives of billions of people on every continent and in every nation.  A lot of the technology that makes this far-reaching capability possible was developed with tax payer dollars with no clear idea of what the future held.

How about satellites?  That’s one thing that NASA does better than most, besides launching humans on large rockets.  Without satellites, most of the internet wouldn’t be possible.  Naiton-wide cellphone coverage wouldn’t be possible.  You certainly wouldn’t have access to over 500 channels from Direct TV or the like.  Weather prediction would be kinda hard (think about not having advance warning for Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, or Ike) and we can kiss instant news reports from the four corners of the world goodbye as well.

The point is, spaceflight can’t be look at as something that will produce immediate, tangible or financial results (at least this is the case most of the time).  Some things will take years to develop.  Somethings, like the internet, will take decades before their full potential is realized (and I still think the ‘net has a long way to go).  If we spend the money now, our children and grandchildren will reap the benefits of our choices.  However, they will also reap the consequences of our inaction.  Saving money now doesn’t necessarily equate the ability to fast track technological developments in the future.  Space travel is much more than just a bunch of smart guys sitting around trying to figure out how to build rockets and launch people and items into space.  It’s where ideas are born, developed, and ultimately transformed into world-changing ideas and concepts.

Also, let’s not forget the commercial applications.  Already we have private companies launching satellites , and a few are looking at attempting to reach LEO with science payloads and perhaps even ferrying crews to the ISS.  This comes with a need for trained people, which equates to more people being educated to fill technical jobs; jobs that will enable them to spend more on goods and services which, in turn, allows more companies to hire more people, enabling them to buy more…and the cycle continues.  Is space travel the answer to the world’s current economic woes?  Not by far.  But, not spending on space isn’t the correct answer, either, and could do more future harm than future good.

Staying the Course

Anyone who pays half cent’s worth of attention to national news these days will know that NASA is getting more airtime than it normally does.  Generally, NASA and it’s employees are content to remain in the national background where they go about their daily professional lives with minimal intrusion from curious outsiders.  This is both blessing and curse.  While they are allowed a relatively quite environment to go about their brainy work, most people outside of NASA have little to no clue what goes on inside NASA.

It’s funny how being at a crossroads will change things literally over night.

Ever since the HSF Committee (aka Agustine Committee) was officially announced in May of 2009, national attention has been focused on NASA, it’s budget, and how it spends said budget on various projects.  Those who are used to this sort of attention (aka those usually not associated with NASA) know that it’s all apart of the process.  When a federal agency asks for what amounts to a pay raise, folks start taking stock of how well the agency has performed in the past and if such a hike in money is warranted.   This can cause a very large distraction for people working in the agency, especially when they are not used to such scrutiny.

This fact has not gone overlooked by group leads, managers, center directors and the folks at “NASA HQ” in DC.  About once a week or so, we the workers at JSC will get some sort of email/briefing/all-hands-meeting/talking to from various members of management at various levels about “staying the course”.  In short, they are telling us that while we may be looking forward to the future, past shuttle retirement, into ISS-only operations for awhile, and possibly (hopefully) developing and launching a new capability in space, we still have a job to do.  Even though the shuttle program is almost 30 years old, each mission presents it’s own unique challenges and hardships to overcome.  There are still new problems to solve (remember the knurled knob in Atlantis?), astronauts to train, facilities to upkeep, and orbiters to process.  All of this work requires a uniquely high level of devotion and concentration.

Make no mistake about it; launching shuttles is not your run-of-the-mill activity.

But as I sit here in the NBL taking part of STS-129’s last practice for an EVA activity, I’m very aware of the cocoon that seems to surround the astronauts and their trainers.  Sure, everyone is aware that Ares I-X is sitting on the pad just a few miles from Atlantis, but it doesn’t dominate their thinking or their ability to focus on the task at hand.  We are dedicated to the work and readying ourselves for the -129 mission.

And it’s just not the -129 crew and trainers that I noticed.  Everyone I know that trains, or works in MCC as a flight controller are supremely focused on the successful completion of the shuttle program.  Staying the course, it would seem, is definitely not a problem with these folks.

Reflections On a Business Trip in Huntsville

I’m sitting in front of a rusty gate closed by a chain and padlock. Birds are chirping behind me and I hear crickets in the woods on both sides. I feel a peaceful serenity and solitude at the end of this torn up road. In the distance in front of me, beyond the gate and a row of low trees rise two towers of steel webbed girders, adorned with propellant and oxidizer tanks and cranes that look as if they have been caught in a spider’s web waiting to be consumed and sucked dry. I can not see the base of the towers; they are obstructed by different kinds of trees. A low pitched whirr is coming from the base of the towers, perhaps some sort of refrigeration system? A wren calls out. The road that I am on, at the southern end of Redstone Arsenal and the Marshal Spaceflight center, is cracked and the asphalt litters the road in spots with pebbles. A wasp just performed a flyby of my computer screen. Perhaps he wonders why someone has come here to sit on the hood of his car and type into his computer. The wildlife gets louder. Perhaps they are more comfortable now that I have been here for a while. I wonder how the wildlife reacted when the mammoth F-1 engines were tested at this test stand in the 1960s.
This morning, my manager told me that the engineers had not considered the magnitude of the acoustic shock from the engine, and with no suppressing countermeasures, windows for miles around were broken out by the shockwave. That was the first time the engineers working on that engine had operated something so powerful. Perhaps only weaker than the atom bomb, but the F-1 engines sustained continuous explosion, while a nuclear bomb is over in an instantaneous flash.

I hear a clang. The whirring stops. When the airplane overhead moves on, I expect to hear no man made sounds at all. Only the birds and crickets inhabit this place, along with the inanimate man made objects.

Two walkers approach me from behind, and give me a nod. They reach the gate, turn around, and return back down the winding wooded avenue.

30 minutes ago I stood in front of the Jupiter C, Redstone, Saturn 1, Hermes, and V2 rockets lined up in a row about a mile north of where I sit. The Jupiter was riveted together, like a vintage airplane with round rivets that protruded from the metal, unlike modern airplanes where the rivets are flush. It looked like something that was put together a long time ago. These rockets weren’t that big, either. I looked up at the Redstone rocket, which carried Allan Sheppard into his suborbital flight so long ago. I could be on top of that, I thought. It’s not even that tall. I did a full walk around the Jupiter C. The V2 Stood next to the Hermes. It’s comical bulbous pointy shape pointed to the sky. “I aim for the stars” was the name of the movie made about Von Braun. “But sometimes I hit London,” a satirist suggested as an addendum to the title. That V2. Here in Alabama. Far from Penuumbre where it was conceived and manufactured. It came to these woods in Alabama with the designers to show the hunters how to begin the ascendance above the atmosphere. This same machine above me at the time served as a beacon along the trail to the stars, whereas if it had been picked before one of the other V2 rockets in the final days of World War Two at Penuumbre it could have been one of the rockets that killed 168 people at Woolworths in New Cross, London. Its brother V2, which actually struck Woolworths, could be the one standing erect at the Redstone arsenal in 2009. Would it feel survivor’s guilt like the Apollo moon walker Eugene Cernan felt guilt for not being shot at in fighter planes over Vietnam because her was flying in space missions to the moon?

The V2 rocket and Von Braun both came here to Alabama to shake their dark past of fatal slave labor from Jews and merciless arbitrary killing against the people of London. They came to Alabama, with no pretentions about their past, but a dogged determination to make good with the evil gift that had been a mainstay of Nazi desperation in the waning days of World War Two. Still, here at the Redstone armory, both Von Braun and V2 were saddled side by side with the development of the nuclear-carrying ICBM missiles. Hitler had pushed rockets for war in the 1940s, and in the 1960s, Von Braun was not free from the clutches of a country that used every advance in space exploration to further the military technology of missiles.

I pondered on the simple calculations that I had done the night before as I took my propulsion midterm exam. Those formulas that I employed to answer the arbitrary questions, did the engineers who built this hardware really know them much better than I did when they were grappling with the Redstone rocket design? I saw the smooth tubular shell of the rockets. “How complicated is it in there?” I wondered. As I looked carefully, I saw a bird pecking about inside the rocket inside the mesh. That bird was more familiar with the inner workings of the rocket than I was. When I draw my sketches on paper for a homework problem, they are so simple. I know that there are mysteries that the engineers had to discover and uncover as they built these rockets. The unseen intricacies underneath the white painted skin are what has become ingrained in these Alabama hunters. It’s that mystery that has been frozen into these steel webbed towers that rise before me. They wait for us to build again.

I hear a rocket firing to my left. It is still going. Is it an engine? It sounds throttled back. The birds complain, breaking out into shrieks. I still hear the sound. It sounds like metal being dragged across the floor. It sounds like a waterfall.

The rocket is throttled up again. It sounds like sparks flying. It sounds like standing under a shower head, echoed through the hilly wooded countryside. I can’t imagine anything other than a rocket test that could make that noise. Now I hear crows in front of me beyond the trees beginning to caw. Perhaps they have had enough. Or maybe they are going to go and see what I can only imagine as I sit here.

These test stands wait here. They stand ready for America to build new engines, to try new technologies never before built by man. These towers are sleeping giants ready to roar to life with the birth of the engineering artifacts that will carry other men’s dreams, other men’s fears, and other men’s pride forward and upward through the atmosphere to unknown worlds and lands..

Men like Von Braun, who walked this very road countless times from the time that the government brought him here to this army base in 1960 with a mandate to put America on the Moon. Some of the Alabama country folk stopped hunting deer in the forests to start building rockets. They never stopped hunting deer, they just moved to other forests. One of the first things that I heard here in Alabama was when I got my security clearance at the Arsenal entrance: A group of locals were standing outside the security post and one said: “When I was gutting a deer this weekend…” in a deep southern drawl. I smiled as I headed to the rental car. These Alabamans didn’t put down their guns when they picked up their tools to construct this oddity in the universe; this portal to change. Where hunters ascend to Knowers. Doers. Makers. Be-ers.

I sit here, surrounded by birds, the very creatures that moved Wilbur and Orville off the sands of the beach in Kitty Hawk. An airplane flies above me now, a creature of man’s making that further moved men to build spaceships and rockets. I sit in front of the towers with their mechanical whirr (it started up again). The towers are creatures that are moving me to some future transcendence. What is it? I can envision interplanetary voyages, as the Wright brothers and Da Vinci envisioned flight when seeing the birds; as Goddard, Oberth, and Braunn envisioned space travel after seeing the airplanes. I see the current day spaceships, the test stands before me right now… I envision permanent settlement on the Moon and Mars. I envision simplified reliable rockets bringing up satellites, experiments, people, and energy into space. I envision a people who identify themselves not with their country, but with their planet and solar system. I envision knowledge spread among the people.

The walkers return again. The same walkers, dressed in sweatshirts and jeans. How many times do they make this trip? I asked them what the noise was earlier. They didn’t even notice. They told me, in their Alabama accents, about how different parts of the arsenal were used to test army missiles and NASA motors. They didn’t notice the sounds. It is such a regular occurrence to them that it only enters their subconsciousness. Those sounds are as natural to them as the birds and crickets.

I set the laptop down and walk down a small street that comes off the dead end where I sit toward the sound that I heard earlier. Perhaps I will catch a glimpse of the source of the noise. Writing on the back of a receipt that I find in my pocket, I make note of these things: The street is covered with dead tree bits. I pass a white blockhouse with a silent diesel generator installed on the side. The blockhouse can’t be larger than 15 feet by 8 feet. Next to it stands a rusty radio tower, consumed with vines. The old-school antennas atop the tower point toward the source of the sound. In big blue letters 4692 is written on the side of the building. A little further down the road, I meet another rusted gate, this one marked with a small white sign with C-12 painted on it, the paint mostly washed away by years, rain and sun. The padlock is rusted, the barbed wire atop the gate is rusted. An old metal mailbox bolted to the gate has been bent to the point that it no longer closes. I see through the open top that the bottom has been rusted out. What type of letters were delivered here, next to the sign that reads “DANGER: Explosives Keep Away.” Perhaps the neighbors dropped off letters asking the workers to keep down the noise. Perhaps the wives of the engineers dropped off lunch in the little box? The gate itself has had vines growing from one side all the way to the other, only to die years ago. The dead vines now cross through the gate, past the padlock, as if to confirm the prohibition of access and the permanency of closure. The road continues past the gate in a straight line, ending in trees far away. Dead branches from the encroaching forest lay in the path, not even causing enough of a nuisance to warrant removal.

When I return to the car, a different walker passes by. He wears mesh shorts and is listening to headphones. He walks decidedly to the gate and taps the little white “C-18″ sign as a token of reaching the end of his lap. And this is the end of my lap.

This is Huntsville. This is the Redstone Arsenal. This is the Marshal Spaceflight Center.

For me it is, anyway.

As I ready to leave, I hear once again the sound of rushing water, sparks, a metal plate being drug along the ground, or whatever it is.

I guess this place isn’t sleeping after all.

TEDx NASA

NASA and the National Institute of Aerospace are excited to be hosting TEDx NASA - a unique day of ingenuity, beauty, passion, innovation, laughter, creativity, sharing and, most importantly, ideas capable of changing the world – ideas worth spreading.

TEDx NASA – Space to Create will be held on November 20, 2009, at the Ferguson Center in Newport News, Virginia.

Please visit tedx-nasa.org for complete details and ticketing information. Tickets will be available to the public on November 14, more information to follow.
“Space to Create” is the perfect platform to explore new ideas, creativity and innovation.  Following the TED (ted.com) model of “riveting talks by remarkable people, free to the world,” TEDx NASA speakers will give ‘the talk of a lifetime’ in 18 minutes or less. This fast paced event will have woven into it shorter talks and entertainment featuring truly unique thinkers, musicians, artists, inventors, research students, and creative-types. A speakers list will be available soon; but, as with all TED events, there will be unannounced special guests.
Event:               TEDx NASA
Web site:          tedx-nasa.org
Theme:             Space to Create – ideas worth spreading
Attendance:     1,700 guests
Date:                November 20, 2009
Location:         Ferguson Center at Christopher Newport University
Time:                Day-long event

This Isn’t Your Typical Conference
This is much more than just putting a group of famous, and not so famous, name speakers on a stage to entertain an audience. TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events modeled after TED conferences. They are about bringing together a unique group of people, presenters and attendees alike, to join in on extraordinary conversations. At a TEDx event, videos and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection. In fact, one of the main reasons to come is to unite with other attendees. It is about passion, laughter, beauty, brilliance, ingenuity, innovation, contribution, and, most importantly, ideas capable of changing the world – ideas worth spreading.

Our Speakers
Our presenters look after some of the Nation’s most valuable assets, teach at some of the best universities, entertain at some of the world’s biggest venues, design some of our most useful products, author inspiring books, research to find solutions to some of our biggest challenges, invent world-changing devices and machines, and create ground-breaking media. They range from rocket scientists to guitar virtuosos. They are a combination of familiar trusted voices and convention-breaking mavericks, icons and geniuses. They will be persuasive, creative, courageous, fascinating, inspiring, ingenious, funny, and informative. We have also sought out some of our local emerging artists, scientists and thinkers, to introduce them to our new TEDx NASA community. For the most part, speakers will stay for the entire event and mingle with the audience.

Our Audience
The TEDx NASA attendees will be just as extraordinary as the speaker line-up; they will include internet pioneers, local technology leaders, movie producers, architects, creative directors, CEOs, entrepreneurs, authors, engineers, investors, celebrities, scientists and leading opinion formers of every kind. Indeed, we expect all 1,700 spaces at the Ferguson Center to be occupied.

Program Structure
This year’s theme for our TEDx NASA event is “Space to Create.” For NASA, the word space has one meaning, for others, space can be a studio or a library, or a city park. Each session will contain a great variety of topics.

In the tradition of TED Talks, some basic speaker guidelines will be followed There will be no keynotes – all speakers are equal. There are no panel discussions, no Q&As, and no podiums. Keeping within the allotted timeframe, speakers will clearly communicate the core message agreed upon with the conference organizers.

Generous breaks will be scheduled between sessions to give the audience time to think about what they’ve seen, and to share their thoughts with other attendees and speakers.

Dumpster Diving for Rockets

Excalibur Almaz has done something cool by using old Russian manned modules and dusting them off to do more missions with them.

According to Wikipedia, there are a few dozen Titan 2 rockets waiting to be scrapped or “turned into monuments” in Tucson Arizona.

How much payload could these send to the moon? Could this be a boon to Google Lunar X-Prize contestants? These can put 277 KG on an escape trajectory. That could get a real lightweight payload to the surface of the moon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_(rocket_family)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-25C_Titan_II

What other obsolete rockets are moldering about in warehouses?

Engaging JSC’s Next Gen: A Leadership Analysis

A little over 18 months ago, a group of about 30 young professionals at JSC were assembled in a conference room off-site and tasked with developing their own vision for the Center, as well as an associated strategic plan (1 year) to get closer to realizing this vision, over the course of a 2-day workshop. A response to the Gen Y Perspectives presentation that previously made the rounds within the agency, the JSC 20-Year Vision development effort was specifically designed to engage young professionals at the center and allow them to provide their own perspective of where they collectively hoped to see the Center in 20 years.

The team recognized at the end of those two days that its task was daunting enough to need extra work, and so the team members set out to accomplish their task. The result, after a little over a month of diligent work, outlined their vision for the JSC of 2028 and provided 5 suggestions of “immediately” implementable ideas that would, in the end, help realize this vision (presentation can be found in the Documents section of this website).

In recognizing the value of documenting and analyzing the leadership lessons learned throughout this experience, a subset of the team worked to compile the following paper. We are, of course, anticipating updating and adding to this paper as we chat more about our collective experiences. In the mean time, we hope that it can provide some more insight on the activities over the past year and a half and spark some interest in the dynamic leadership model that was utilized by the 20-Year Vision Team.

The paper can be found at the following link: Next Gen at Johnson Space Center - Boldly Expanding the Frontiers of Human Space Exploration

Making NASA Cool

Recently the NASA Langley Center Leadership Council created a mid-term strategic objective of ‘Making NASA Cool’. They actually set several objectives along this same vein, looking into the merits Participatory Exploration, STEM education and Telling the NASA Story. Teams have been formed to make recommendations to center leadership on what the center, and what the agency can do to work towards these goals.

So far the ‘Making NASA cool’ initiative has hosted a whiteboard session, posted a blog on OpenLaRC seeking recommendations,  and created wiki for ideas on how to communicate the cool things that NASA does on a daily basis to the public. Some of the recommendations are included in the attached presentation, though it is only a start. Comments are welcomed and the feedback will help to craft an action plan of how to move forward.