“The Big Splat, or How Or Moon Came to Be” by Dana Mackenzie. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. in 2003, it weighs in at 232 pages all-in. No errors noted.
Having looked at the origins of the Moon from a Christian creationist perspective, I figured it would be a good idea to take a look at what the scientific community thought about Lunar origins. So I turned to the Selenology (or Moon science) section of the Lunar Library and The Big Splat seemed to be a perfect choice.
In the Introduction, the author looks at Genesis Revisited, quickly summarizing the history of thought regarding Lunar origins, and the noting how the application of the tools of science changed the way we approach the idea of the source of our companion Moon. On our first visit to the neighborhood of the Moon, Apollo 8’s circumlunar swing on December 24th, 1968, the crew read from the text of Genesis, imparting a call to the spiritual nature of humanity’s endeavors, wherever they may occur.
In the first chapter, we look at how our companion Moon has waned from an integral part of timekeeping and spirituality in human culture to a marginalized object supplanted by the advent of science. Technological lighting methods diminished the Moon’s role as a nighttime guide. A better understanding of the Earth’s place in the Solar system led to the adoption of a Solar calendar, though there are still many cultures that abide by the Moon’s guidance. We learn of notable figures in history who helped divine her secrets, her characteristics and her cycles.
Chapter two continues the recounting of history, and we learn of Anaxagoras, Pythagoras, Aristarchus and Aristotle,as well as lesser known Lunar-associated figures such as Plutarch, Lamprias, and Pharnaces.
Chapter three moves the story to the early 17th Century, as science and reason were blossoming throughout Europe. Two gentlemen are the focus of the discourse - Kepler and Galileo, who did more to popularize space science amongst a broader audience than any other of their time. We end with Riccioli, whose basic nomenclature for Lunar features is the methodology we use to this day.
Later in the same century, science and mathematics took a big leap when Newton burst upon the scene, and in the next chapter we examine how his principles led to a leap in understanding the seemingly clockwork nature of our Solar system. By the next century the questions were moving away from how it works to where it came from. Folks like Buffon and Kant were postulating ideas on how the grand forces of physics could have led the Universe to today, but it was Laplace who became known for the ‘nebular hypothesis’, whereby the planets and their moons formed from a nebula surrounding and providing the feedstock for the nascent Sun. Also noted is the role of navigation in uncovering the fact that the Moon’s orbit is not as clockwork as one would assume it should be.
It was in the 19th Century that the next major hypothesis for the origin of the Moon was promulgated, by George Darwin, son of the more commonly known Charles. George worked on the science of tides, specifically tidal bulges, which occur when one massive body is in the vicinity of another. Everyone knows the Moon pulls on the water of the oceans to create the tides (in conjunction with the Sun), but it also pulls on the ground. He worked through the mathematics and realized that months were getting slightly longer, which begged the question of what happens when you run the time arrow backwards? This implies an intersection at some point in the past of the Earth and Moon, which implies that the Moon came from the Earth. What would be the physics that would make that happen, where the Moon would fission off from the Earth and escape to orbit. It was a tough slog to try to make the mathematics work, and the idea of a Daughter Moon never really found favor.
Another compelling theory is visited in the next chapter, that of the Captive Moon. This idea holds that the Moon formed elsewhere in the Solar system, went on an errant journey (perhaps nudged by Jupiter), and ended up captured in orbit by the Earth. In this chapter we learn of Thomas Jefferson Jackson See, who championed this explanation for the Moon’s origin. T.J.J. See may not have been the most pleasant of individuals to deal with, but his theory had a certain elegance of orbital mechanics to it, if only the numbers could be made to work, something that scores of scientists pursued over the next century. We’re introduced to the concept of the Roche limit, the distant from a large mass at which a smaller mass begins to feel gravitational differences between the point nearest the large mass and the point farthest from the large mass sufficiently large that it begins to tear the smaller mass apart. This is what is believed to have torn apart Comet Shoemaker-Levy-9 prior to its plunge into Jupiter. Ultimately, the mathematics of capture couldn’t be reconciled with reality, and it remained a plausible, but not proven theory.
Next up is the concept of a Sister Moon, where the Earth and Moon co-accreted near each other in space. We learn more about the work of Roche, as well as others that worked out the physics of accretion in early stellar systems including Safronov, who worked out many of the details of how accretion works.
So by the dawn of the space age there was still a lot unknown about our closest neighbor in space, let alone destinations beyond. It was widely held that the craters of the Moon were largely of volcanic origin, and that vast seas of ash and dust would swallow any spacecraft that presumed to pose upon the surface. It was during this popular wisdom that Baldwin published a book that threw a monkey-wrench into the works, alleging that the craters were actually the result of collisions. Being an outsider to the Ivory Tower of academic knowledge, his theories were controversial, but he had solid evidence on his side, as we had learned much about cratering from two worldwide wars. One scientist inspired by this book was Shoemaker, another Urey, both of whom would have a significant impact on Lunar science. On the eve of Apollo, the ideas were flying fast and furious as more and more bright people took the time to cogitate on the topic of our Moon.
Chapter nine covers the Apollo missions, and provides an overview of some of the bigger questions that seemed to be answered, like “How old is the Moon?” and “What is the Moon made of?” As the scientists worked over the samples, a general consensus began to arise as to the general steps the Moon took once formed to arrive at its present state. Left unanswered was the question of what caused the Moon to form.
In the next chapter the clues start to come together. A paper had been written in 1946 that called into question whether the Moon may have had some kind of glancing blow with the Earth. 1950 saw the publication of Velikovsky’s “Worlds in Collision”. Apollo proved definitively that most of the craters on the Moon were of impact origin, and as we looked around the Solar system we could see evidence of impact everywhere. Four scientists, Hartmann, Davis, Cameron & Ward, started homing in on the theory that reconciles so much of the evidence on hand that for many it is “the” way that the Moon formed.
It wasn’t until the mid-80s that all of the pieces started clicking into place, and the next chapter explores the Kona Consensus that developed out of a conference on selenogony, or the origin of the Moon. As paper after paper was presented, scientists realized that a cogent and rational explanation for the Moon’s origin was coming together. A report card prepared about the different theories shows why it was so compelling. The mathematics of the event had been well worked out in computer modeling. The chemistry was favorable, and readers get an introduction into the chemistry and mechanics of rock dating techniques.
The last chapter introduces us to Theia, the alleged impactor and mythical mother of Selene. Since no one was around to observe it (yet, time travel may not be beyond the realm of possibility, although I believe it is), there are many unknowns. One obvious question is ‘Where is the hole?’, to which George Darwin would probably answer ‘The Pacific’, but in reality the impact totally rearranged the Earth, incorporating both original bodies (proto-Earth and Theia) into both subsequent bodies (Earth and Moon). The author lays out the timeline of events, from impact to about 3.2 billion years (gigayears, or Gy) ago, when the Moon finally became somewhat quiescent, and then the present.
In the appendix, the question of ‘Did We Really Go to the Moon?’ is addressed. I am so over this particular topic, but like a parasite it seems it will evermore be rediscovered by new generations and need refuting time and time again, which is a complete waste of resources. The Lunar Library has a number of the Moon-hoax titles, which are bunk, and management would rather not waste acquisition budget on any more of them. The author presents several compelling examples, including the fact that it’s possible to actually contact the scientists with questions. Not mentioned is the fact that we found five (5) new minerals on the Moon which had not been seen previously (though Tranquillityite was later found in South Africa).
Rounding out the book are a nice glossary, some references, acknowledgements and an index.
What’s nice about this book is that it is written for a general audience. The author is completely frank about the fact that the science sometimes went over his head, and he is careful to frame things as ’scientists explain-this is how it’s done’. It makes a nice counterpoint to the Moon origin books previously reviewed, as the explanations are laid out at the end of a chain of logical steps. Objective evidence is offered in support of assertions, evidence that exists in physics irrespective of the presence of humans. The flow of the writing is easygoing and engaging, making for a pleasurable read. The author prefers the term Big Splat to the more commonly known Big Whack, and he has good reasons why.
Duval, Fred & Jean-Pierre Pécau. Illus. par Philippe Buchet
“Jour J: Les Russes Sur La Lune!”
Delcourt
2010
ISBN13: 978-2-756-01866-9 Publisher’s Web Site
Librarian’s Note: Wow, a very unusual story. History changes when a small asteroid ruptures the Eagle LEM, dashing the hopes of the Americans to be the first on the Moon, allowing Валенти́на Терешко́ва to make the first landing a few months later. This completely changes Nixon’s views on a Moon base, and the world pursues a different space trajectory which takes a surprising turn.
While I didn’t get to see the President’s address regarding his space program (as I’m not paid to watch videos at work, and its message had zero relevance to my portfolio of loan syndications and participations), I have taken the time to read the transcript of the President’s speech and do have a few thoughts.
Librarian’s Note: Since I published a review of the prior edition of this title, that review has been the single most visited article here at OotC, with almost twice as many as the next most popular one. Not many comments, though. I also picked up another Christian creationist theory title, “Taking Back Astronomy” by Jason Lisle, PhD, who gets a thorough fisking (by a rather reasonable Christian, though with some conjecture in his summary) over at C Sharp.
Lindberg
“Space Base & Satellite Explorer”
J Lloyd International Inc.
2010
#91008 Publisher’s Web Site
Librarian’s Note: So new it’s not even up yet at the manufacturer’s website, at last there’s a new, non-shuttle model kit to work on. I picked up the copy for the Lunar Library at my locally-owned and operated hobby store; when I find a good online link I’ll attach it.
So I got an interesting e-mail today. One of the organizers of this year’s ISDC sent out a message to the NSS leadership noting that:
I notice that our ISDC is NOT doing a very good job of attracting young speakers in the space (not entrepreneur) community, i.e., the upcoming think[er]s and doers. We need to be alert to find who they are and seek them out, early.
Historical note: We were the first to showcase Robert Zubrin, and from that exposure he went on to revolutionize our ideas about how we will conduct space exploration and settlement.
Who are the undiscovered Zubrins out there now?
I found this interesting, as one of the ideas I’ve been stewing over of late is a post on who the young up-and-comers might be in the space field. The charts in my previous post clearly demonstrated that there is not a healthy pipeline of talent being cultivated at NASA, nor in the aerospace sector, and any private company would look at the age brackets and flip. Having the bulk of your payroll at the top end of the scale is not sustainable, and doesn’t leave you with much payroll to fill out the lower end.
So what follows are some of the names that I’ve come across in my varied space adventures over the last decade. I can’t swear that any of these folks will be NASA Administrator one day, but they have been standouts in their efforts, overachievers even. This list should not be taken to be definitive, nor comprehensive, just representative.
1) George Whitesides
I met George at the Space Generation Forum (SGF) back in 1999. I don’t remember which project he worked on, but it wasn’t the business stuff I that I worked on. Five years later we met again at the 2004 ISDC in Oklahoma; George as the newly minted Executive Director of NSS, and myself as Chapter President of NSS of North Texas and not too many years out of ISU. We talked about how we need to work with and coordinate better with all of the other space groups, perhaps even co-temporalizing space conferences. Three years later I co-chaired the 2007 ISDC in Dallas, and all of the other local space groups got involved in making it happen, and we had not only the first Space Investment Summit held in conjunction with the ISDC, but also a meeting of the Aerospace Technology Working Group immediately prior to our conference, with the result being that the output of those prior conferences was feeding into my conference through all of the people that stuck around through the weekend, some even giving presentations.
George launched a number of initiatives for NSS, one of the more significant being the Space Ambassadors program run in conjunction with Virgin Galactic, which has been a big supporter of the ISDCs, and should maybe think about showing off their newest craft at this year’s conference in Chicago. George has since moved on from NSS, and now works in a fairly high level position at NASA Headquarters. He’s known to be competent and a straight-shooter, which is one of the reasons I’m not overly concerned about what’s going to happen with the changes at NASA. I do empathize with the crappy job he’s going to have over the next few years helping navigate NASA through the choppy waters of the changes it faces.
2) Loretta Hidalgo-Whitesides
I also met Loretta at the SGF. I’ll admit, I had a bit of a crush on her, brainy scientific chick and all that, but the feelings were definitely not mutual as she fell prey to a common prejudice against NYC bankers. Can’t say I blame her necessarily. She finally warmed up to me during a stop on our SGF trip to Graz when I was examining some interesting looking mountain succulents that I hadn’t seen the like of before and asked her about them.
Our paths next crossed in LA in 2001 when I was interning at Boeing under Andy Aldrin and Brent Sherwood. She had come up with a clever way to celebrate her birthday, which date coincided with Gagarin’s launch in 1961 and the first flight of the Shuttle in 1981. She tapped into her networks through SEDS, NASA Academy, JPL and others to put together a global space party - Yuri’s Night. That first year she had a phenomenal party in LA, with a Moon rover, space info booths, videos,art and thumpin’ music. Yours truly helped staff the ISU information table, and sat in the ticket booth for a while. It was truly excellent and one of my best memories from ISU. The party is notable for being celebrated on all seven continents and in space, and it completes its first decade this year.
Loretta’s motto is “I train leaders”, something she’s held true to over the years. She’s arranged telescope distributions in Africa, continued the SGF legacy through the Space Generation Advisory Council, blogged for Wired, was on the flight staff of Zero-G Corp., and more. There’s no question that hers is a name that you will be increasingly seeing in the future.
3) Will Pomerantz
Back in 2002, well after my ISU graduation, the closest thing I got to a space job was as Program Support and ISU Liaison for the 2002 NASA Academy at Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, a ten-week contractual engagement. The Director’s Discretionary Fund (DDF) that funded the NASA Academy didn’t have enough for my meager stipend, so the Tech Transfer Office underwrote it in return for a project on Tech Transfer opportunities in the DDF projects. It was kind of cool collecting data on bleeding-edge projects like LIDAR and adiabatic demagnetization refrigeration which are common now.
One of the regular Research Assistants that I was charged with chaperoning over the course of the summer was a young Will Pomerantz. Mop haired and Harvard educated, he was quite interested in ISU. He was also a good example of the kind of folks that the NASA Academy looks for in its RAs - the future leaders of, if not NASA, the space industry. When I arranged for the Academy to attend one of Director O’Keefe’s visits to the Hill, in this case for a Congressional hearings that included the topic of education, he was right at home when the Congresscritters came down to talk to the Academy after the hearings. Will did go on to spend a year in Strasbourg to get a Master of Space Studies.
These days he hangs out at the X Prize Foundation as the Senior Director of Space Prizes, which allows him to see lots of really cool stuff. There’s no doubt in my mind that Will is going to be an ongoing leader in the space field.
4) Pamela Gay (a/k/a StarStryder)
I met Pamela at LPI during a special educational session held prior to one of the annual LEAG meetings. She and I were in a team on internet communications, and I could tell she and I were light-years ahead of the others in understandings the issues of internet communications. She has her long-standing Star Stryder blog, has done podcasts in conjunction with Universe Today, worked for the 2009 International Year of Astronomy (where she arranged to send a bunch of IYA astronomy goodies to my Moon Day event), and has even been on TV for “The Universe” series. She’s a strong force for astronomy outreach, and I’m sure she’ll be taking important positions in the astronomy field given her strengths in communicating its lessons.
5) Jeff Feige
I met Jeff at the 2005 ISDC in DC, when t/Space had a cool display of their capsule at the conference and he was working with them on political stuff (which I don’t have much interest in). He has strong entrepreneurial experience in space endeavors, and is currently serving as CEO of Orbital Outfitters, the one company you should think of for spacesuits when you go space diving.
6) Melissa Prebble
I met Melissa at one of the Lunar Commerce Roundtables (LCR, later Space Investment Summits), when she was under the tutelage of Paul Eckert of Boeing, who had helped arrange the LCRs. She later went on to do a Summer Session Program (SSP) at ISU and of late is working in advanced systems at Hamilton Sundstrand (the traditional spacesuit folks).
7) Amanda Stiles
I met Amanda at one of the ISDCs. I don’t remember which one, but what I do remember is that she was giving a talk about a Moon project and I was thinking to myself “Oh crap, competition in the Moon field and she’s way better looking than I am.” My fears may have been well founded, as she appeared recently at SXSW on a Moon 2.0 panel on behalf of the Google Lunar X Prize. (GLXP).
Benjamin & Cariann Higginbotham
My favorite space entrepreneurs, this dynamic duo created SpaceVidCast, the weekly High Def video news program with live chat. I finally met them in person at the 2009 ISDC in Orlando, and we had a long talk about space adventures. To me they represent the prototypical Gen X entrepreneurs, overachieving on basically zero budget. They broadcast from the Crow River Coffee Company in Watertown, MN to a global audience, taking space to places it has never been seen before with a peanut gallery in the chat room. Guests join via webcam and Skype, in the spirit of working with limited resources. This is one of the ventures that I truly hope succeeds.
9) Jonathan Goff
Agent provocateur at the Selenian Boondocks, Jon is noted for his work at Masten Space Systems, where he is a Propulsion Engineer. On the internet he is known for posing annoyingly simple questions that turn assumptions on their head. We met online back when the Return to the Moon BBS (a relic of the pre-web days) was still active. Amazingly, we have never met in person, even though I was guest blogger for a while at Selenian Boondocks, whose archives are an excellent exploration of engineering. I’m thinking Masten needs to send him to the ISDC. He has long been an advocate of cislunar infrastructure like propellant depots.
10) Derek & April Andreas
Several years ago Derek and April were officers in the local Dallas Mars Society and we worked on a number of projects together before they moved to California to work at SpaceX. SpaceX ended up sending them back to Texas to work at their engine test facilities in McGregor, but the Andreases are still active in Mars Society affairs. I think the Mars Society needs to start moving more folks like Derek and April into positions of authority so that they can refocus the Society on getting people and equipment to Mars. [My view is that the Mars Society is hampered by the ‘cult of personality’ associated with Bob Zubrin, and won’t flourish again until they move beyond him. Not abandoning him, but recognizing that Bob is but one part of the story of Humans to Mars]
That’s but a sampling of the folks that are working hard for space right now (and my apologies to those I’ve met who feel they should be on the list, mayhaps a follow-up post is in order), but you don’t normally hear about because they’re in the younger demographics. You’ll be hearing their names, and others, more often in the future.
One thing to remember about the younger generations is that they’re way more networked at their age than preceding generations. This is also true for the young space community, and the networks are a good place to go looking for talent. The ISU alumni network is probably the most potent space network on the planet. Its student body is drawn from the entire planet, and during my MSS degree studies I had classmates from 16 countries, including Israel, Libya, Nigeria, Brazil, Russia, China, Japan, and more. Its alumni and teaching network is reaching increasingly deeply into the established space industry, while also spawning innumerable entrepreneurial efforts.
That’s another thing about GenX, they’ve proven to be particularly entrepreneurial, almost twice as much so relatively speaking than the preceding generation, and those even younger are even more entrepreneurial. We’ve had no choice because we can’t go through life as temps and barristas. Temps don’t buy homes. This is one of the reasons why I’m happy with the proposed changes at NASA, because they increase the opportunity for entrepreneurs to create value-added product and deliver them to a growing market.
Other networks of note include the NASA Academy Alumni Association, whose members grace such places as Mission Control at JSC and Advanced Projects at Orbital Sciences Corp. SEDS has been around long enough to have a decent pool of alumni. The SGF alumni are a good place to look for talent, as well as its offspring the Space Generation Advisory Council, which has UN Observer status. Space societies are another place to look for space talent.
The younger talent is out there, but it hasn’t been necessarily cultivated, more left to tend to its own devices. This lack of mentoring is going to be critical during the changes that NASA is going to need to undergo. It is far easier to excise those functions for which there is no clear line of succession. What’s going to happen is that a lot of talent is going to be culled from the talent pool and moved to the private sector. Some of these folks will find jobs in other fields, some will continue to consult with NASA, and some will have skillsets so esoteric that they’re going to need retraining and yeah, NASA should probably help with that.
So perhaps it is time for the younger talent to step up to the plate and start making presentations at space conferences. In my case I’ve been turned down so often I don’t even bother anymore, but maybe I’ll apply to do a talk at the ISDC on Cislunar Space and the Moon. I’m going to be there anyway for Board of Directors stuff; the question is finding the time.
Oh, and another reason for youngsters to attend ISDCs? The SEDS folks can whip up some mean libations, the sort of things you’d expect when you get Chemistry and Physics geeks together with ersatz lab equipment and alcohol…
Howdy everyone! Thing’s are certainly perking up for Spring, even with regards to our Moon, so I decided to throw together another Carnival of the Moon.
Recently, The Moon Society sent out a request to its members eliciting support for a book donation project to create a Lunar Resource Library in India. Moon interest is rather strong in India, and they’re the #6 visitor to Out of the Cradle, ahead of France but behind Australia and Germany. They have active chapters of The Moon Society and SEDS, and even have a Moon Miner’s Manifesto India Quarterly edition.
But they realize that the internet isn’t everything, and they’re looking to put together a physical library of reference books that can be used to develop Moon knowledge in India. Like a more focused version of the library at the Lunar & Planetary Institute down in Houston. My own personal collection overlaps that collection to some extent, but LPI has titles that I don’t have, though I do have a lot of stuff that they don’t have. The online Lunar Library (LL) catalogues almost the entirety of that collection (well over 2,000 items), and I have delusions of putting it to good use at a local university for a Lunar studies program before eventually bequeathing it to International Space University (ISU) for their eventual Lunar campus.
So India needs Moon books! It’s still kind of a nebulous project, because the organization, composed entirely of volunteers, needs to figure out things like aggregating the collection, clearing customs, and shipping it there. I’ve got a few dups in the LL that I’m going to forward. If you have an interest in this project, head on over to The Moon Society website and drop them a line.
Back here in the States, if you’re a student who wants to present research at a conference, but are coming up short of funds, LPI reminds us that the deadline for this year’s Gerald A. Soffen Memorial Fund 2010 Travel Grants (2x$500!) is coming up on April 15th. If you’re looking for other opportunities coming up, there are still a few left in the Scholarships for Space Studies article I posted back in November, including the Moon Art contest which also has an April 15 deadline for submissions.
If Moon art gives you a hankering for modern Moon stories, there are a variety of choices. Recently, Dr. Philip Harris donated the copyrights to both his original Moon settlement fiction story “Launch Out” as well as his brand new sequel, “Lunar Pioneers” to The Moon Society. “Lunar Pioneers” is currently exclusively to be found only in the Lunar Library. That’s right, folks, the entire text is available for free courtesy of the author, The Moon Society, and the Lunar Library. With the Moon settlement getting established, the young and restless start looking further beyond…
Another free source of modern Moon (and high frontier) fiction is the quarterly on-line magazine “Moonbeams“, which features short stories and is always looking for fresh submissions. Perfect for a portable electronic reading tablet. Still, if you’re an old-fashioned paper guy like I am, and you’re looking for some Moon stories for younger folks then you should stop by the Summer Space Reading Camp.
Over at The Once & Future Moon blog, Dr. Spudis articulates his belief that NASA has lost its way to the Moon under the new plans for how NASA is going to approach space. I don’t necessarily agree with his arguments, as I ask myself what is the destination of the U.S. Geological Survey? What is The Goal of the the Department of Energy? I don’t buy into the insistence that NASA needs to have a particular Goal or destination right at this moment.
I look at things like larger macroeconomic factors and how they interplay to look at what’s going to happen at NASA for it to keep or increase its relevance to generating value for the U.S. economy. The Old Guard is moving on, and reality is having to adapt to the fact that younger generations don’t necessarily do things the same way just because that’s the way it was done. I see the Apollo-architecture redux (throw everything away along the way) that was Ares I/V as an example of how this applies.
I saw it from a different perspective than most of the space-interested, though it was information that was available to those undertaking space outreach activities. NSS of North Texas periodically receives boxes of handout pamphlets relating to various NASA activities. These cover a variety of topics from ISS to Return to the Moon. We had numerous handouts for the Ares rockets, but people never took them, though the other topics rapidly disappeared. This left us lugging around large amounts of Ares handouts from event to event that folks in general just weren’t interested in.
This jibes with NASA’s own research from a couple of years ago, where they hired a communications consultant to help them figure out why NASA didn’t have more support in the general populace. One tidbit hidden in the results was that only about 14% of folks saw NASA as a rocket launching organization. This in spite of the fact that right now NASA is best known for the Space Shuttle.
So it’s time for NASA to stop trying to provide the National Space Transportation System (their own words), and instead help the U.S.’s industrial sector provide the solutions. That is a key way to grow the U.S. economy. This also taps into the demographic fact that those of Generation X have gone entrepreneurial at a rate twice that of the preceding generation, but current economic factors are driving an even stronger entrepreneurial urge in the succeeding generation. So we’re seeing a confluence of meta-factors that actually favors the new direction that NASA is going to have to undertake to make sure that the U.S. space industry grows ever stronger in contributing to GDP.
I don’t think you necessarily need a destination to work on aerospike engines for rockets. I do think you need work on custom alloys and foamed metal-ceramics that can likely only be produced in microgravity. I don’t think you need The Goal to work on things like orbital fuel depots scattered around cislunar space, or a Universal Docking Node that will allow for greater modular customization of orbital facilities, or a universal interface for the Atlas/Delta/Falcon/Ariane/Other 20mt class launchers. Let the market sort out what are the best crew vehicles to ride on top. Because I want mine with rich Corinthian leather seats.
Once you have infrastructure elements like orbital LEO facilities (at 51, 40, 28, and 0 inclinations, for example) and fuel depots on orbit, we can start thinking about vehicles that only travel in space and don’t necessarily need to lug around a heat shield for Earth return. Ditch the heat shield and beef up the radiation shielding. Modularity allows for things like a Bigelow module or two and a Progress module to set up shop at EML-1, or do free returns around the Moon for brief near-Moon visits. Once you have a facility at EML-1 and a ferry back and forth to LEO, then you have access to the entire Moon, and you can have a vehicle designed just for near-Moon operations. Once you’re on the Moon the first thing is to start getting oxygen, both to breathe, and to ship up to cislunar space so that shipments from Earth can be more valuable stuff instead.
Where NASA goes next is going to have a huge affect on where the U.S. space industry ends up. If it picks a goal, then we will end up with an optimized engineering architecture that ignores unnecessary (to that goal) technologies that may otherwise prove invaluable in developing cislunar space. We’ll end up with deadlines that get passed, and increased expenses from indulgent cost-plus contractors because NASA guys keep changing the specs.
Or, we can go with a more entrepreneurial approach where a variety of technologies are moved up the TRL ladder to help optimize how the U.S. approaches space development by letting the market determine the best approach.
Why the Old Guard can’t understand the kids today, courtesy of xkcd:
If you don’t think there is a generational shift that NASA is facing, I offer up a couple of slides courtesy of a presentation from the California Space Education & Workforce Institute. The first is an age distribution that is from calendar year end 2004 at the latest, so picture everything shifted to the right. I’m in the bracket (then 35-39, now 40-45) where you have the three lines intersecting, though an above average representation in the talent pool.
This second shows the age distribution of the aerospace workforce in general. I was trying to break into the field in the 2002-2003 timeframe, a time when that sector shed about 1/7th of its jobs (1/5th in the case of my demographic; I’m in the light blue bracket).
Any surprise that I went back into banking?
Like most folks, the closest I’m likely to ever get to space is to buy a piece of someone else’s adventure. Which can have its appeal. Heritage Auction Galleries is going to be holding a ‘Space Exploration Auction‘ on April 21st here in Dallas. Looking through the catalog I can see several items that would be interesting to add to the Lunar Library, I just wish more people would buy Moon books through the Amazon links so that I could have an acquisition budget for historical artifacts.
Why would Lunar Library LLC want to acquire historical artifacts? Why to share, of course. An example is the art show I’m putting together for this year’s Moon Day event at the Frontiers of Flight Museum at Love Field in Dallas. I just got the go ahead to start putting together the pieces of the event, and since this is a non-decadal anniversary year I’m going to have to work extra harder to get to my goal of 1,000 attendees. I’ve finally accumulated enough Moon-related art and posters that I can actually put together the equivalent of a small gallery showing. The Lunar Quadrant Maps take up a fair amount of real estate now that they’re framed, but a perusal of the Cultura Lunaris section of the Lunar Library shows a lot of other goodies (Lunar Adventures, The Ultimate Sandbox, One Small Step, Asteroid Mine, Probe, Lunar Base, Plinius Cemetary, and more). I’m in the process of getting some of them framed over the next several months, and then the museum wants to exhibit them for 6-8 weeks.
The actual Moon Day event is on July 18th. Lots of planning to due for that one, and like last year I’m going to be posting about my planning efforts to help serve as a road map for those masochistic enough to to try to put together a space event with no budget in their own communities.
So what is the Egg Moon? It was one of the nicknames for the Full Moon in April back in Colonial days, an appellation that the Algonquins also used. The April Moon was more commonly known as the Planter’s Moon, reflecting the return of the fertility phase of the annual cycle. That’s why I’m looking forward, confident that the entrepreneurial phase we’re entering into in the human spaceflight sector offers fertile opportunity to accelerate the day when we’re transforming the grayfields of the Moon.
She finally warmed up to me during a stop on our SGF trip to Graz when I was examining some interesting looking mountain succulents that I hadn’t seen the like of before and asked her about them.
Benjamin & Cariann Higginbotham
