# Countdown to curiosity.



## Vertigo

Well, curiosity is due to make it's remarkable landing attempt on Monday 6th 6:30 am British Summer Time.

If successful this will be the most incredible extraterrestial landings ever undertaken. At 900kg the Curiosity is just shy of a metric tonne; that's a serious amount of weight to land purely autonomously. Instructions from Earth take around 14 minutes I think, which is a rather slow reaction time for dodging any abysses she's about to land in.

I think I might even get up early to watch this live on the NASA feed.


----------



## Ursa major

If only the BBC could be persuaded that the landing has something to do with the Olympics, you'd have a number of channels from which to choose rather than a NASA feed.


----------



## Gordian Knot

The landing is called The 7 Minutes of Terror! Because once the lander's message reaches Earth that the descent is in progress, it will take 7 minutes before we find out if it crashed and burned, or landed successfully.

My nerves couldn't handle that! LOL. I'll wake up later in the morning (it will be landing roughly 5:30 a.m. here on the U.S. eastern seaboard) and find out which way it went!


----------



## Vertigo

GN I think you might have that wrong, all the sites I have seen (including NASA) give the time as 05:31 *GMT.* One site said:



> Curiosity is scheduled to touch down on Mars at Gale Crater on Monday, August 6, 2012 at 05:31 Universal Time. Here in the United States that’s _10:31 PM Pacific Time_ on Sunday, August 5, or _12:31 AM Central Time_ and _1:31 AM Eastern Time_ on Monday morning August 6. Coverage will begin a few hours before, including a special on the Discovery Channel which is currently promoting a partially screwed up date.


 
Agree on the 7 minutes of terror. I watched a BBC Horizon documentary on the whole mission so far and whilst it wasn't the best documentary the Horizon team have ever made the content was fascinating and they did give a feel for how helpless they will be during that time.


----------



## mosaix

Can't wait. If that thing gets down in one piece it will be a miracle.


----------



## Stephen Palmer

Vertigo said:


> I watched a BBC Horizon documentary on the whole mission so far and whilst it wasn't the best documentary the Horizon team have ever made the content was fascinating and they did give a feel for how helpless they will be during that time.



I watched that as well, a nice intro to the mission, I thought. I really hope the mission is successful...


----------



## Kylara

Hehe this just reminded me of this...http://xkcd.com/695/


----------



## Gordian Knot

Here is a great video of the 7 minutes of terror. Just watching the simulation ruins my nerves!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2I8AoB1xgU


----------



## Metryq

It's a robot.

Would anyone prefer a live pilot setting down with a big spacecraft for the first time? In a way that's already been done with the Apollo missions, which could have "crashed" merely by setting down at a tilt because of a boulder. After Curiosity there will be other "big" missions, all adding to the experience of setting down spacecraft far from auto club assistance, experience that will make the first manned missions to Mars and elsewhere a little less stressful.

from the movie SHORT CIRCUIT:

"It's a machine. It doesn't get scared. It doesn't get happy. It doesn't get sad. It just runs programs."


----------



## Gordian Knot

Not sure what your point is. It's not the machine. I'm talking about the people here on earth waiting in excruciating suspense whether or not the landing went as planned.


----------



## Vertigo

Yeah the really scary part is when they were interviewing people involved in the mission, they were talking about how long they spend working on one mission - it can be several decades - and over a career you are only likely to work on maybe two to four different missions. To have one crash and burn would be devastating for these people. I would be terrified myself!


----------



## Abernovo

It's 0830 for me, which is fine. I'll even put the TV on, just in case one of the news channels has footage (doubtful, but I live in hope ).


----------



## Metryq

Vertigo said:


> I would be terrified myself!



_Terrified_? Seriously? Disappointment I can understand, but if a mission left the pad safely—where most failures occur—anyone _terrified_ by the landing sequence is in the wrong business.

Lots of robotic missions have failed. (A few manned ones, too.) Yet the world rolled on. It's those failures that make any human endeavor worthwhile.



> "But I'm surprised at you, Doc," he went on. "You're afraid to take the responsibility for us, aren't you? That's the size of it?"
> 
> "Yes, Ross, that's the size of it."
> 
> "Yet you were willing to take the responsibility of leading us on a trip to the moon. That's more dangerous than anything that could happen here, isn't it? Isn't it?"
> 
> Cargraves bit his lip. "It's different."
> 
> "I'll tell you how it's different. If we get killed trying to make the jump, ninety-nine chances out of a hundred we all get killed together. You don't have to go back and explain anything to our parents. That's how it's different!"
> 
> "Now, Ross!"
> 
> "Don't `Now, Ross' me. What the deuce, Doc?" he went on bitterly. "Suppose it had happened on the moon; would you be twittering around, your morale all shot? Doc, I'm surprised at you. If you are going to have an attack of nerves every time the going gets a little tough, I vote for Morrie for permanent captain."
> 
> —ROCKET SHIP GALILEO by Robert Heinlein



Maybe these mission planners are "terrified" because then they'd be around to deal with failure. Welcome to the human race.


----------



## Ursa major

You have to consider the possibility that not all seven billion of us react the same way to events, Metryq. Otherwise we might as well be robots.


----------



## Vertigo

Also most of our failures might only trash a few days or months work. It's rare for most of us that the failure of a single operation will trash years or even decades of work. I would find such a thing utterly sould destorying, and the prospect of it, yes, terrifying. On the other hand success for them would bring so much satisfaction/fulfillment. So I would say the stakes are mega high for these people in either direction.

The leader of the team put it quite nicely. He gets away from the stress by surfing. And he remarked that one little mistake surfing created an embarrassing wipeout, one little mistake in space and it would be the end of that particular game.


----------



## mosaix

Not long now. 

Apparently the on board plutonium generator could keep Curiosity going for up to 14 years. 

Please, please let this thing get down in one piece.


----------



## Abernovo

Watched the scenes from Mission Control on CNN - they went nuts as they got confirmation of landing.  Presently looking at first pictures on the NASA site.

It shows what can be done if people put their minds to it.


----------



## Vertigo

And they're down, receiving data, and have the first image in.

Awesome, it worked! I'm staggered and so impressed with these people. My congratulations to them all.


----------



## Moonbat

You can follow the Curiosity Rover on twitter 

@MarsCuriosity

Not sure if it is really tweeting on its own, but it should give you regular updates and the latest info on what is happening.


----------



## RJM Corbet

It landed?

That's so cool


----------



## Kylara

Moonbat said:


> You can follow the Curiosity Rover on twitter
> 
> @MarsCuriosity


 
Please tell me it posts in binary, that would just make my day


----------



## Dave

I missed the fact that it had landed because of all the Olympic hype. I was waiting for it to land on, and to flatten a Martian cat.

Could someone give me a quick run-through of the mission objectives? Are they searching for liquid water this time? Have they got a more reliable test for "life"? Is it going to dig? How long is it going to be working and where is it going to travel?

PS. I could Google and find all that out myself, but I'm lazy and it would be of interest to everyone if someone already knows.


----------



## RJM Corbet

One thing I know it has it's own plutonium power source, so it's not going to be dependant on the solar panels that got dusted up on previous rovers ...

EDIT: Sorry Moonbat, I see you've mentioned the fact already


----------



## Kylara

I know I posted this earlier in the thread but this was too good an opportunity to miss...how long you ask? No solar panels? hehehe http://xkcd.com/695/ (there's a mouseover too :wink: )

And here is the Curiosity one http://xkcd.com/1091/


----------



## Abernovo

Dave said:


> I missed the fact that it had landed because of all the Olympic hype. I was waiting for it to land on, and to flatten a Martian cat.
> 
> Could someone give me a quick run-through of the mission objectives? Are they searching for liquid water this time? Have they got a more reliable test for "life"? Is it going to dig? How long is it going to be working and where is it going to travel?
> 
> PS. I could Google and find all that out myself, but I'm lazy and it would be of interest to everyone if someone already knows.


Hi, Dave. Shamelessly nicked off their wiki page, but the goals of the Curiosity Rover are to:


> Determine the mineralogical composition of the Martian surface and near-surface geological materials.
> 
> Attempt to detect chemical building blocks of life (biosignatures).
> 
> Interpret the processes that have formed and modified rocks and soils.
> 
> Assess long-timescale Martian atmospheric evolution processes.
> 
> Determine present state, distribution, and cycling of water and carbon dioxide.
> 
> Characterize the broad spectrum of surface radiation, including galactic radiation, cosmic radiation, solar proton events and secondary neutrons.



The fifth goal does indeed involve looking for water, although more in regards to examining its function in the Martian environment, I suspect.

Kylara, I like the cartoon. Still, xkcd is usually good for a chuckle.


----------



## Gary Compton

Dave said:


> PS. I could Google and find all that out myself, but I'm lazy and it would be of interest to everyone if someone already knows.



Sends memo to Brian, "Change other admin name to Lazy Dave."


----------



## Ursa major

> Interpret the processes that have formed and modified rocks and soils.
> 
> Assess long-timescale Martian atmospheric evolution processes.


There was a guy (from UCL?) on the TV explaining that the site was chosen because the scientists believe the accessible strata of a mountain in the crater where Curiosity has landed will allow the various strata from 3bn years ago up to more recent times to be examined.


----------



## Vertigo

Ursa major said:


> There was a guy (from UCL?) on the TV explaining that the site was chosen because the scientists believe the accessible strata of a mountain in the crater where Curiosity has landed will allow the various strata from 3bn years ago up to more recent times to be examined.


 
Yes, as I understand it, that's exactly why they are in that crater. It is thought that if there had been significant amounts of water this area would have been underwater. So they will be examining the rock in the various strata and looking for,I think, carbonates which, I think, could only be there if there had been life in the past. So instead of looking for life there now, they are looking for chemical traces of life in the past; chemical compounds that could only occur as a side effect of life.

But as Aber's post states that is just one of the objectives, though of course it is the main one the media talk about.


----------



## Stephen Palmer

Carbonates is right.


----------



## Miggy

Dinosaurs on Mars trust me


----------



## Vertigo

Stephen Palmer said:


> Carbonates is right.


 
Phew, I was worried I might have had that one wrong 

I can't wait to see the high res pictures when they get the main camera going later in the week. The higher perspective should make the pictures much better and more natural to the eye. As opposed to the very low perspective of the earlier and much smaller rovers.


----------



## mosaix

I would like to offer my congratulations to the scientists and technicians at NASA and elsewhere who got that thing down in one piece. This is just phenomenal space science on their part - and bang on target too.

From across the pond America seems like an odd place at times but American society is capable of some awe inspiring achievements when it puts its mind to it.

This thing is powered for up to 14 years, lets hope the politicians provide the funding to keep it going for as long as possible.


----------



## Ursa major

Miggy said:


> Dinosaurs on Mars trust me


Does anyone/anything else trust you?


----------



## TheEndIsNigh

Oh, hello. You humans are at it again are you.

Chucking your space junk onto our planet. Well at least this one was a bit quieter than the last one and didn't go bouncing all over the shop before it accidentally smashed into that baseball bat. (That was great fun: we had a fine time kicking around afterwards).

Well it was until the dirty great rocketty thing eventually gave up the ghost and plummeted down. 

We'll probably leave this one alone as it's away from the populace and to interfere with it would be more trouble than its worth. Still, if it starts all that drilling and scraping like the other little wheely thing did we may have to go and sort it out.

Don't worry though, we'll chuck it back if it gets too annoying.


----------



## Metryq




----------



## Vertigo

A truly alien landscape! The star shaped feature on the ground just above the rover on the right of the picture (partly of the image) is the blast area from the thrusters of the sky crane.

They are starting to get some of the first images from Curiosity. Still a lot to do before they get going. Including installing a completely new set of programs over the weekend. They will be ditching all the landing software and installing the driving/exploring software. What they are rather cutely calling the 'brain transplant'!

However there are some interesting images already, as well as the one above. Including one image from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter showing the heat shield, parachute, sky crane and Curiosity herself. Or at least the impact zones. The dark area is where the lighter surface material has been distubed exposing the darker underlying material.
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/images/Milkovich-1ANNOTATED-pia16001-br2.jpg

For those interested this is the Curiositey home page: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/
This is the press release images page: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/images/?s=1

From the home page there is even a video of the release of the heatshield taken by Curiosity herself!

This is a short two minute summary video of where things are at now: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/videos/index.cfm?v=68

What can I say? So cool!


----------



## Metryq

What—no interactive page where Web users can control Curiosity themselves?  (Can you imagine the havoc?)


----------



## Vertigo

Yay, I bags drive over the sand dunes! 

I really am very excited about this mission. The previous ones have been great but frankly most of the data coming back has been scientific. Fantastic stuff for scientists and masses discovered. But not quite so exciting for the layman. This beasty can send us _videos_ of it's travels. There is going to be so much more that can easily be appreciated by the layman on this one.


----------



## alchemist




----------



## Vertigo

Are you following it on the MSL site Alc? Some of the high res pictures they've been getting back are awsome. They should have finished the brain transplant by now, I think, so things should start getting interesting!


----------



## Dave

It's Tatooine!

I'm sure I just saw two droids coming your way.


----------



## Vertigo

Hehe - I can see that Dave! Works even better if you access the full panorama image. I won't paste it in directly as it's a little bit big. The black areas are where they haven't yet downloaded the hires images for those sections.
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/images/pia16051_figure_1_raw_smaller-br2.jpg

Funnily enough my first impresson from the one above (not so much the whole panorama though) was of the Martian scenery at the end of Total Recall.

Incidentally Mount Sharp is in the centre of the image but off the top of it. And the dark area below it's slopes is an area of dunes, which, if I've got it right, they are planning to bypass either to their left or right.


----------



## alchemist

Vertigo said:


> Are you following it on the MSL site Alc?


 
Afraid not, Vertigo. I saw those pics on another discussion forum and was so wowed by them that I had post here. You can just imagine walking through that desert.


----------



## Vertigo

Okay, well if you want to follow everything that is coming from Curiosity then it is all here: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/

Oh and here's one of my favourite raw images (that is the tiles from which they make up the full panorama images). This one shows the bedrock which was exposed by the landing thrusters.


----------



## Vertigo

Latest word from the team is that they will probably have their first _test_ drive in about a week. Note that it is not excatly going to be tearing along like a dune buggy; they expect to be driving at around 100m in a day!


----------



## mosaix

They've been using the past few days to upgrade computers, removing the redundant manoeuvring and landing software and replacing it with the software suitable for surface operations. Fascinating stuff. Who'd have thought they'd be doing remote upgrades at that kind of distance distance?


----------



## Ursa major

Let's hope that _ieframe.dll_ hasn't just arrived on Mars....


----------



## Venusian Broon

mosaix said:


> They've been using the past few days to upgrade computers, removing the redundant manoeuvring and landing software and replacing it with the software suitable for surface operations. Fascinating stuff. Who'd have thought they'd be doing remote upgrades at that kind of distance distance?


 
Yeah it does seem a bit mad, but I'd guess they've been testing and re-testing, and testing and re-testing etc... the software while it was on the journery across to try and make it perfect, so that the really won't be any silly 'negative rather than a positive' kind of mistakes, or more complex nasties hiding in the code that might knock out the whole mission. It's happened in the past!

I'm sure they picked up loads of bugs (although I'm not sure we'd hear about them )


----------



## alchemist

But why do they need to replace all the software? Surely giving its electronics enough processing power to fulfil both functions would be a less risky operation than the brain transplant?


----------



## Venusian Broon

alchemist said:


> But why do they need to replace all the software? Surely giving its electronics enough processing power to fulfil both functions would be a less risky operation than the brain transplant?


 
Honestly don't know - perhaps they are working with really hard constraints on the hardware and the software is mind-boggling complex. (would be fascinating if we had any interplanatery craft builders on the forum that could answer such questions)

Perhaps they also remove bits they don't want anymore so they had maximum space for future upgrades, memory storage and perhaps ensure that they didn't accidently run dud applications that were never going to be used again but if activited might cause some chaotic behavour?


----------



## Vertigo

The new software that has just been installed was actually sent to Curiosity and stored in memory whilst it was on route to Mars.

The installation process was pretty secure. They have two computers: a main one and a redundant back up one. They installed on the main one first then tested everything, whilst still having the back up to fall back on if problems occurred. Once they were satisfied with that they did the same on the backup computer. So not too risky.

As to why, the original software was optimised for getting to and landing on Mars. As I understand it, Curiosity actually controlled the entire spacecraft for the duration of the flight. There was basic driving and science software as well but I think there wasn't room to have software doing both jobs optimally. All that flight software, being now redundant, could be binned, freeing up resources for much better driving and science software.

Bearing in mind the duration of the planned mission, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole process is repeated several times with new and improved versions of the software.

Bottom line it all probably comes down to space and weight. Not just weight in flight but also they want to minimise how much power is required for driving around. Their power pack doesn't have that much spare. For example the transmitter that sends data back to Earth is just *TEN* watts!!!! And we can pick that signal up from here after passing through two atmospheres. Compare with the average FM radio station transmitter that is, I believe, typically around 50kW.


----------



## Metryq

Vertigo said:


> For example the transmitter that sends data back to Earth is just *TEN* watts!!!!



I haven't looked at the technical specs for the mission. Is that 10w transmitter on Curiosity and sending direct to Earth, or does it communicate to an orbiter which relays to Earth?

Still, that sounds like the kind of figure journalists love to toss around to wow the readers. Terrestrial transmission—with hills, trees, atmospheric effects, moving receivers, etc.—is quite different. And how do the "baud" rates compare? I believe the transmitters on the Voyagers are 23 watts. Inverse square that one, and it's very impressive.


----------



## Venusian Broon

Metryq said:


> Still, that sounds like the kind of figure journalists love to toss around to wow the readers..


 
Precisely, what is amazing IMO (and what has ensured that we've been able to 'hear' the voyagers all this time) is our listening ability and the advances that have been made there. 

I don't know about the orbital characteristics of the mars orbiter (I wouldn't think that it makes sense for it to be geostationary, if it's part of its mission is to take measurements of the surface - that'd cut out half the planet), so I guess at the very least for redunancy reasons they'll be able to pick up signals directly from curiosity and communicate, (in fact may be for very good reasons that that it's the main route - don't know!)


----------



## Vertigo

I believe Curiosity communicates directly with Earth when it can and when it is on the far side of Mars it uses one or both of the two current Mars orbiters to relay the signal.

I appreciate that the dynamics of radio transmission in space is very different but don't forget the signal is having to travel through two lots of atmosphere as opposed to one lot. Also don't forget that the inverse square law refers to a point light source that is propogating as an expanding sphere. Here we are talking about signals focused by a dish so the drop in signal is mainly due to atmosphere rather than the exapnsion and so 'dilution' of the radio beam. Even so detecting a ten Watt source at around 250 million kilometres is pretty darn impressive however you look at it.


----------



## Metryq

Deep Dish Pizza, er, *Deep Space Network*


----------



## RJM Corbet

And the plutonium 238 power unit is not a plutonium 239 fission reactor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator


----------



## mosaix

Looks like the landing wasn't totally perfect. They think some damage has been sustained from stones thrown up by the skycrane jets...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19338870


----------



## alchemist

Yeah, yeah, jets. Local hooligans, more like.


----------



## Metryq

Curiosity's wind sock torn from its mast. Film at 11.


----------



## mosaix

In a nice touch from NASA the Curiosity landing site has been named Bradbury Landing after Ray Bradbury.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19342994

NASA have also reported that one of the rovers wheels came down on a 9cm high rock. That it sustained no damage is yet another tribute to the design engineers.


----------



## Starbeast

So, is there anything interesting on Mars besides dirt, rocks and frozen water?


----------



## mosaix

Starbeast said:


> So, is there anything interesting on Mars besides dirt, rocks and frozen water?



There might be. How do you suggest we find out?


----------



## Metryq

And then some joker on the programming team decides to upload a crop circle routine, or programs Curiosity to tool around making "Nazca" pictures for the orbiting mappers.


----------



## Starbeast

mosaix said:


> There might be. How do you suggest we find out?


 
We have to wait for NASA to tell us. They've been roaming Mars with rovers since the late 1990's. Not to mention mapping the surface for a while too.

I'm surprised there aren't more close-up photos of Mars, most of the stuff they release is all computer grenerated. They tell us they do that so we can see more detail.

Current space exploration is very boring to me.


----------



## mosaix

Starbeast said:


> They've been roaming Mars with rovers since the late 1990's.



They've covered an area considerably smaller than the Isle of Wight.


----------



## Starbeast

mosaix said:


> They've covered an area considerably smaller than the Isle of Wight.


 
Yeah...it takes a lot of time and money.

I'll check on NASA's progress in five years, or ten...maybe twenty years from now.


----------



## Moonbat

Set Google on it, they'll map it quickly. Also if Apple find out they are mapping it they'll either sue them or launch their own rival mapping enterprise.


----------



## Ursa major

Speaking of Apple: the wheels on the rover have suspiciously rounded corners....


----------



## Galacticdefender

Starbeast said:


> We have to wait for NASA to tell us. They've been roaming Mars with rovers since the late 1990's. Not to mention mapping the surface for a while too.
> 
> I'm surprised there aren't more close-up photos of Mars, most of the stuff they release is all computer grenerated. They tell us they do that so we can see more detail.
> 
> Current space exploration is very boring to me.


 

Wrong. The images are NOT computer generated. They are color enhanced so THEY can see more detail, such as layers of rock how they would appear in Earth's light. 

There is NOTHING our race can do that is more important than space exploration. Wether it's NASA or Spacex, as long as someone is going beyond our atmosphere to explore what's out there, I will always have significant faith in humanity. Exploring is what we do best, and we have been doing it since the dawn of our species. We should always continue this most basic of human endeavors. 

What if Columbus had come to the new world, looked around,and returned to Europe and nobody ever went back or thought much of it? Mars is a "New World" in a more literal since, and I firmly believe humans will be living there permenantly before the end of this century in some manner or another. In 1000 years, what was going on with the world economy, or what happened at the latest sports event will not matter. But what NASA did will matter, and be remembered. I think Curiosity could even be in a museum one day, on Mars.


----------



## Metryq

Galacticdefender said:


> What if Columbus had come to the new world, looked around,and returned to Europe and nobody ever went back or thought much of it?



Columbus almost didn't mention his "discovery" after finding the rock covered with graffiti saying (in Runic, Gaelic, Chinese and other script): "The Solutreans were here", "Greenland is better", "St. Brendan blesses this land" and "Emperor Yongle claims this land."


----------



## Galacticdefender

Eh, What?

But the Vikings are confirmed to have been here before Columbus, they just didn't do much.


----------



## Moonbat

> What if Columbus had come to the new world, looked around,and returned to Europe and nobody ever went back or thought much of it?


 
It probably wouldn't be called the west indies. 

And two ancient civilisations may have survived instead of being slaughtered.


----------



## Metryq

Galacticdefender said:


> But the Vikings are confirmed to have been here before Columbus



That was my point, yet Columbus is often invoked as some critical lynchpin in the exploration of the Americas. He wasn't the only one at the time to think of sailing west. If he hadn't sailed, it would have been someone else, and the following history might have been largely the same—only Columbus, Ohio would have a different name.

If Columbus hadn't sailed—_and no other Europeans were similarly driven_—then history would be radically different because Europe probably would have collapsed and/or become colonized by more aggressive and dynamic societies that were exploring.

Curiosity may make some fantastic discoveries, yet it is only one mission out of many. Its primary importance is to show that we're still kicking.

(I just hope the lander doesn't find any of Heinlein's Martian flatcats. If the probe happened to roll over one, the mission would be branded with an unfortunate figure of speech forever.)


----------



## Starbeast

Galacticdefender said:


> Wrong. The images are NOT computer generated. They are color enhanced so THEY can see more detail, such as layers of rock how they would appear in Earth's light.


 
Sorry, I was reffering to images shown to the public before the rover beemed back images. Like Cydonia for example, every image was computer generated. I was surprised, because I thought the Hubble telescope could take great pictures of Mars. Or maybe it's too close an object to get any good images of Mars? And that's why it was mapped by satellites.



> There is NOTHING our race can do that is more important than space exploration.


 
I agree, the sooner I can get away from Earth, the better.



> What if Columbus had come to the new world, looked around, and returned to Europe and nobody ever went back or thought much of it?


 
I wish Columbus never came back. I can't stand that vicious slave trader.

The Native American Indians traded goods (not slaves) with the people from the middle east many centuries ago (there's evidence of that) and they were peaceful to each other.

The Chinese and Vikings were here before Columbus too.

Anyway, I don't believe I'll see any great advantages from space exploration that would effect me in my life time. That's why the subject doesn't interest me.


----------



## Galacticdefender

Hubble can take decent pictures of mars from space, and we can see what the weather is like, such as the time we saw a planetwide sandstorm, but it obviously cannot take pictures from the surface like a lander, and the hubble can't map it out like the sattelites we ("we" of course meaning humans, for you Europeans and your Mars Express) have orbiting mars.

And yes, I know Columbus was actually a pretty evil guy, but I could have just as easily said "If Europeans had never come to the new world", or even "if Native Americans had never crossed the land bridge". And the Vikings are the only Europeans confirmed to have been here before Columbus. (I'd love to see a source for that middle eastern trade you mentioned...)

Space Already affects many people's lives, such as those who live in areas where space industry boosts the economy, not to mention things we got from space tech like microwave ovens, etc. With all of these private space companies picking up speed (there's even one who plans on asteroid mining), space travel has the potential to get much cheaper and much more commonplace. So, yes, in your life you may very well be affected by space exploration. All sciences were once pure sciences before they became applied sciences, then in turn technology. Space is the future!


----------



## RJM Corbet

Starbeast said:


> ... Anyway, I don't believe I'll see any great advantages from space exploration that would effect me in my life time. That's why the subject doesn't interest me.


 
It's a vision, SB. Everyone needs a vision, to mitigate the mundane everyday existence on the planet Earth ...


----------



## alchemist

RJM Corbet said:


> It's a vision, SB. Everyone needs a vision, to mitigate the mundane everyday existence on the planet Earth ...


 
Very true RJ.

And here are some technologies that grew from, or were improved by, space exploration, via NASA, including Light-emitting diodes, Infrared ear thermometers, Scratch-resistant Lenses, Aircraft anti-icing systems, Firefighting equipment, Temper foam, Water purification.


----------



## Dave

alchemist said:


> And here are some technologies that grew from, or were improved by, space exploration, via NASA, including Light-emitting diodes, Infrared ear thermometers, Scratch-resistant Lenses, Aircraft anti-icing systems, Firefighting equipment, Temper foam, Water purification.


You do know that is very debatable subject and fiercely disputed. There are many people who refute that NASA invented anything and claim it is simply other people trying to justify the huge expenditure on the Space Race and the military in general. They say that those items could have been invented anyway if that money had been spent in other ways. (I was always told that Teflon was a result of rocket cone technology, but a quick Google search proves it was around years before the Mercury programme.) Skim down that Wiki page halfway and there are other examples of mistakenly attributed spin-offs (some deliberately so.)

Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger. I'm happy to sit on the fence over this anyway. *I firmly believe Space Exploration is a good thing in its own right.* What I will agree is that "necessity is the mother of invention." If things are not required then there is no reason to invent them, and the Space Race gave a reason for many of them to be. It also popularised others and aided in their development. However, just as if Columbus had not gone to America someone else would have, then if NASA hadn't invented Memory Foam then someone else would have. Actually there was a BBC TV programme in the 1970's with Michael Burke called _Connections_ that used to prove this on a weekly basis.

Also from Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections_(TV_series)


> Burke contends that one cannot consider the development of any particular piece of the modern world in isolation. Rather, the entire gestalt of the modern world is the result of a web of interconnected events, each one consisting of a person or group acting for reasons of their own motivations (e.g. profit, curiosity, religious) with no concept of the final, modern result of what either their or their contemporaries' actions finally led to.


----------



## Starbeast

RJM Corbet said:


> It's a vision, SB. Everyone needs a vision, to mitigate the mundane everyday existence on the planet Earth ...


 
Yes, a vision of a better tomorrow. Hopefully in the far future, humankind can venture onto other worlds to create habitats, find new resources and discover new amazing discoveries that can benefit all people of this planet.

I only wanted leave this world in my life time and perhaps help explore the new home for humankind.



Dave said:


> *I firmly believe Space Exploration is a good thing in its own right.*


 
I highly agree, but it takes time and a great deal of money. At the present time we have robots on Mars roaming around. Technology has made a big jump since a hundred years ago.

I wonder where humankind will be in the next one hundred years?


----------



## mosaix

Dave said:


> *I firmly believe Space Exploration is a good thing in its own right.*



Seconded.


----------



## Galacticdefender

mosaix said:


> Seconded.


 
Indeed, Pure Science must first exist if we are to apply that science, and create technology. And that technology will further advance pure science, so in other words space exploration is an endless cycle of awesome.


----------



## Dave

Based upon the old adage that _fact is stranger than fiction_ science fiction could not possibly imagine what we will find on Mars.



Starbeast said:


> So, is there anything interesting on Mars besides dirt, rocks and frozen water?


However, if that is the attitude then no pure science research would ever be undertaken.

Is there anything interesting down a telescope except stars and galaxies?
Is there anything interesting at CERN except subatomic particles?

Hey, why did we even bother to explore the Earth? It is mostly water with a few islands of dirt and rock anyway, and that mythical southern continent just turned out to be frozen water.


----------



## mosaix

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21654308

_Nasa's Curiosity Mars rover has been put into "safe mode" after a computer glitch caused by corrupted files._


----------



## Harpo

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21340279

A rock crushed under the Curiosity Mars rover's wheels has dazzled mission scientists in more ways than one.

Mars is supposed to be the Red Planet, but the rock - dubbed "Tintina" - is a brilliant shade of white.


----------



## Harpo

If this comet hits, what are Curiosity's chances of survival?

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/26mar_marscomet/


----------



## RJM Corbet

Harpo said:


> If this comet hits, what are Curiosity's chances of survival?
> 
> http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/26mar_marscomet/


 
These comets come from deep space. They're not predictable. There was one about ten years ago, in the sky over South Africa, a really impressive one, that lasted about a week, which no-one had predicted.

I mean, once they've got it logged, they can predict the trajectory pretty much, but they don't know when one's suddenly going to pop up.

So let's just hope we don't get one heading our own way ...


----------



## Vertigo

Chances are pretty good for Curiosities survival. Assuming it's not too close the the impact area. The biggest problem would be the sky being filled with dust which would take some time to settle. However with Curiosity being power by nuclear batteries she'll be better off than the Opportunity rover which relies on solar power.

They're still only giving it a 1 in 2000 chance of hitting. You're probably taking a greater chance everytime you cross the road. A very interesting near miss is far more likely.


----------



## mosaix

Some news re Curiosity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22402849

That's a stunning photo.


----------



## mosaix

Curiosity to start moving towards Mount Sharp soon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22784635

_"It's difficult to say exactly how long it will take. I'd hazard a guess  that somewhere between 10 months and a year might be a fast pace."_


----------

