NASA Wants To Go To Europa 216
MightyMartian writes "'NASA and the White House are asking Congress to bankroll a new intrastellar road trip to a destination that's sort of like the extraterrestrial Atlantis of our solar system — Jupiter's intriguing moon, Europa.' Since Europa seems one of the most likely worlds in the Solar System other than Earth where we have some hope of finding extant life, let's hope Congress gives the green light to this project."
What could possibly go wrong (Score:4, Funny)
"All These Worlds Are Yours Except Europa. Attempt No Landing There. Use Them Together. Use Them in Peace."
Re:What could possibly go wrong (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What could possibly go wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Europe discovered America and now, a few years letters, America wants to discover Europa. They must be subconsciously influenced by the mother continent name from which they originated.
That is going to be quite a surprise to the ancestors of the Asian tribes that actually were the first to settle the Americas ;)
Re:What could possibly go wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Definition of "discover," according to history:
Discover (verb): To be found by a white person
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, if only aboriginal Americans had written it down before the European invasion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... [wikipedia.org]
Oh.
History is written by the victors, not the literate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The takeaway point I'm trying to make is that two wrongs don't make a right. Three lefts do.
Re: (Score:2)
Because one destruction of knowledge deserves another?
Aside from the spoils from conquered lands, what "knowledge" do you assert exists within the Vatican?
Re: (Score:2)
The lesson is pillage *before* your burn. Not that the Vatican is a seat of knowledge. They just hold things they've taken from elsewhere.
Re:What could possibly go wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
There's strong evidence African sailors found South America as well. But, if your culture doesn't have a good record recording your discovery, you don't get to name it.
History vs Pre-history (Score:2)
That's how we define what is called "history". If it happened before writing existed, it's not part of history.
Although, to be fair, Catholic missionaries destroyed a lot of written records [wikipedia.org] from pre-Columbian America. They literally deleted Inca history.
Re:What could possibly go wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not a racism on Slashdot problem, it's heavily euro-centric view of history in the Western world problem. It's very unlikely that the GP perpetuated it intentionally...especially since he was making a joke.
Re: (Score:2)
But old Chris Columbus did discover the "New World". Never mind all those people living there, they don't count. They didn't discover the New World, they were part of it. Ergo Christopher Columbus discovered the New World - complete with native population. Even more credit to ol' Chris!
Re: (Score:3)
A great quote I remember (paraphrasing), it was from some university professor, in an article on what Jesus may have really looked like: "Many Americans would be nervous to fly on a plane with Jesus."
Re: (Score:2)
Europe discovered America and now, a few years letters, America wants to discover Europa. They must be subconsciously influenced by the mother continent name from which they originated.
That is going to be quite a surprise to the ancestors of the Asian tribes that actually were the first to settle the Americas ;)
It was.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A few years letters? :P
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would have been disappointed had this not been the first post.
Re: (Score:3)
Except that in the oriignal novel, the message is. "ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA. ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE."
Of course, in the novel, there was no stupid Cold War subplot, either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
who didn't see that comming....
Me. Not even a hint of radio apparatus anywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
I saw that documentary [netflix.com]! Very well made.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, everyone outside the Land of Freedrm (tm, all rights reserved) can see details here [wikipedia.org] and here [magnetreleasing.com].
In all seriousness, it's a good movie - check it out if you can get it.
Re: (Score:2)
Intrastellar? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes! It is a cute way to describe my next travel to the refrigerator to get some cheese. After all it is Interstellar too.
Re: (Score:2)
s/Interstellar/Intrastellar.
Re: (Score:2)
After all it is intrastellar too.
Your fridge is stuck inside a star? Damned moving company...
There may well be life on Europa (Score:2, Interesting)
But its buried beneath 100 miles of ice. If they're expecting to find some trace of life in some trace of water vapour that may or may not have been ejected near where the probe lands in the few days before any DNA or proteins would be destroyed by the hard vacuum and radiation then I think its wishful thinking at best. At worst a waste of multi billion dollars when it could be spent on other more fruitful missions. Another probe to Titan that could travel around and examine the lakes and atmosphere would b
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It would seem foolish to me to launch a big expensive search for life anywhere without first scouting the place with a small, cheap probe.
Re: (Score:2)
Small - sure. Matter of fact, all space missions strive for "small". Cheap - even the "cheap" Mars rovers weren't exactly cheap.
Re:There may well be life on Europa (Score:4, Funny)
At worst a waste of multi billion dollars when it could be spent on other more fruitful missions.
Here's another idea: why don't we fork science?
One half of science we let believe that there is life on Europa.
The other half of science we let believe that there isn't.
Both halves can proceed with their work, without spending even a dollar!
Re: There may well be life on Europa (Score:2)
Re: There may well be life on Europa (Score:5, Interesting)
"the fact that water if regularly venting to the surface means that there are likely very thin areas of ice that can be utilised."
Unlikely. Its nothing more than melt water from fairly shallow movements in the ice. It certainly won't be anything recent from the deep ocean. The ice may well turn over in geological time but by then any life inside will have long since decomposed into amino acids or whatever precursor its made from. And thats not going to tell us much about whats down there.
Re: (Score:2)
Err, amino acids are scattered throughout the universe and can be made rather easily by simple chemical processes if you have the right precursors. Finding them on the surface of a moon proves nothing other than the precursors are available.
Re: (Score:2)
And besides, this may our last chance to get to Europa before the hordes of Chinese tourists.
Re: (Score:2)
Even on our planet life exists in very, VERY hot water that until recently we thought that life had no chance there
Yes, but its easier for life to exist in more normal environments and very slowly evolve into something suited to those extreme environments. Life springing up from scratch and then sustaining itself in an extreme environment would be much harder.
Re: (Score:2)
True, life starting as an extremophile might be hard. But starting life is likely to be hard no matter what and billions of years gives you plenty of time to randomly futz around until you get organized enough to replicate (sound familiar?).
Besides, 10 miles under the surface might well be a tropical paradise.
Listen to this crazy person herre .... (Score:5, Insightful)
We have a mission.
Then another one that lands and tries some new water fueling technology whatever it may be: for fuel cells and hydrogen fuel or something.
Then it's developed further so not only is Europa a moon for exploration but also a fueling stop.
And I also dream of the day when we can say that we can't go to war because of budget issues: we got a space mission on after all!
And I wish for the day when people bitch and moan about military spending and saying, "Look! The Chinese and Russians are WAY ahead of us in space exploration! WTF do we need another fucking aircraft carrier! We need another rocket!!"
But I am crazy and stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
There's plenty of water just floating around out there without needing to climb out of a gravity well to get it. Still I think we should go to Europa, but with a probe that's able to dig down then dig back up with the data. I'd imagine designing such a probe would be quite difficult given the pressures down there however. I can't see feeding out wire behind it as being a starter, 100km of wire is never going to be that portable... unless the spool was on the surface along with a transmitter... hmm... sheari
Re: (Score:2)
Plan that I saw quite some time ago included a lander with an RTG on the bottom that could melt its way through the ice, and the probe would drop transponders behind it occasionally as it descended. Don't know how viable the concept was, but it sounded neat. Wonder what frequencies they envisioned that would go through ice to the repeaters.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Mein Fuhrer! We need to keep the Chinese from achieving a spaceship gap on us! Besides, we will soon need all that water on Europa to replenish our precious bodily fluids!
Re: (Score:3)
> If they're expecting to find some trace of life in some trace of water vapour that may or may not have been ejected near where the probe lands in the few days before any DNA or proteins would be destroyed by the hard vacuum and radiation then I think its wishful thinking at best.
Even if any DNA in this water would break down, an analysis of the water vapor would refine our models (and could confirm or exclude the presence of complex organic compounds, within or underneath the ice).
> At worst a waste
Re: (Score:2)
There were actually plans at one time (no idea if they ever got worked out) to send a combination lander.
One lander for communication, with a submarine module to bore through the ice and go exploring under water.
Sounded really neat, but not very feasable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ideally they could design a probe or series of probes that could melt or dig their way through the ice, but that is a lot of energy that would be required. And then all that ice is going to make it very hard to relay any data back to Earth.
I would say until they can demonstrate a probe that can melt or dig its way through the ice on Europa that we are better off sending a probe to the edge of the ice cap on Mars.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you'd like to check out how long it took to drill down a few miles to Lake Vostok in Antartica using a team of people on site and a huge drilling rig?
Once you've done that I would suggest you stuff your sarcasm back in its box and buy a ticket on the next clue train going past.
Re:There may well be life on Europa (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet another slashdotter who thinks for two minutes and is somehow certain he understands the issue better than "those idiots" doing the actual work.
He should run for Congress then.
How un-NASA like (Score:2)
Maybe it would help (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe it would help if they offered to takeCongress along with them for the ride. While they are at it there is no reason to leave the whitehouse out. They can even save some fuel by not bringing them back!
No they don't. (Score:4, Insightful)
What NASA Headquarters is proposing is not a mission, it's a recipe for failure. They want to spend no more than $1 billion on a mission we planetary scientists have told them costs $2 billion.
Suppose you're planning a trip for two to New Zealand. You've got the budget all worked out: airfare costs about half of the total, even during the off-season, and you're skimping on hotels and meals and skipping the helicopter tour to save money. Then your spouse comes along and says you can only spend half as much. You can't make the plane tickets any cheaper, so unless you consider sleeping in the Auckland airport a vacation, she's saying you're not going to New Zealand at all.
It costs a billion dollars to send a bucket of bricks to Europa. Doing science once you get there is extra.
Re:No they don't. (Score:4, Funny)
Sounds like you're going to New Zealand without your spouse.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a huge fan of SpaceX, but I'd have a lot of trouble getting behind the idea of putting a 20-year flagship mission project on a rocket that exists only on Youtube. But if NASA and congress screw around much longer, SpaceX will be there when they're needed. Or maybe there'll be a smoking crater where their launch site used to be, who knows.
As for ESA, they already had a joint mission agreement with us, where they'd launch a Jupiter system spacecraft focused on Ganymede and we'd launch a Europa orbiter,
Entitlement millstones (Score:2)
These types of projects aren't likely to get publicly funded because too much of tax revenue is now required to be spent on entitlements. Whether this was intentional or not is debatable but the unintended consequences are clear. A project like this getting shot down will disappoint some people but they will get over it. Private space companies will have to take this on.
Re: (Score:2)
good lord (Score:3)
I thought it said EUROPE.
eruopA makes so much more sense
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would assume they're both named after the Phoenician princess [wikipedia.org] rather than Europa being named after Europe.
Send red dragon via Falcon Heavy and a tug (Score:2)
For all the critics who think this is a waste... (Score:2)
earth? (Score:2)
Since Europa seems one of the most likely worlds in the Solar System other than Earth where we have some hope of finding extant life
i think we already found life on earth.
Me too! (Score:2)
Re:The US is broke for these kinds of projects (Score:5, Informative)
While exploring space is many people's dream. The cost is enormous and the US has so much debt now, should we really be investing in our dreams
vs repairing roads and bridges?
O RLY? http://costsmorethanspace.tumb... [tumblr.com]
Re: (Score:2)
no reason we can't do both, the funding for both are miniscule compared to federal budget
Re: (Score:2)
by the way, NASA's budget for 2014 is 17 billion, transportation infrastructure gets three times that
so really, stop spouting nonsense
Re:The US is broke for these kinds of projects (Score:5, Insightful)
Ground breaking, paradigm shifting revolutions in science are rarely in applied research, it's in basic research. And likewise, space exploration has rather few immediate gains, but the needs of space exploration often lead to other discoveries that have very earthly applications. When you look at the early space programs, up to and including the moon shot, it sure gave us paradigm changes and developments we would not have seen without. From "hard" science, like electronics, computers and safety to "soft" science in the fields of organization and process analysis and optimization. These things were a necessity for the space programs but they also led to development and a boost to these other fields that we now take for granted but would most certainly not be even close to where we are today without the needs of a space program.
My pet example in this context is lasers. The theory behind them was developed as early as the 1920s. It took until the 1960s for a laser to become reality. Only in 1980 it became economically feasible. But our modern economy, especially our entertainment industry, could not even consider existing without it. That's certainly not what the inventor had in mind, but that's where it is used today, with great success. Who can predict what great developments and discoveries could come out of the obstacles faced by this project? I'd say we could easily end up with revolutionary discoveries in the fields of metallurgy, superconductivity, generation/transfer/storage of electrical energy, information transport, imaging along with a better and more efficient handling of process organization and management.
US broke? Do it with Europeans! (Score:5, Informative)
Initially, going to Europa indeed was a joint project between NASA and Europe's ESA, named EJSM ( Europa Jupiter System Mission):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E... [wikipedia.org]
Then a couple of years ago ESA announced that any talks with NASA being unconclusive (not bringing commitment), Europe would move alone; the mission was simplified, now called Jupiter Icy Moon Explorer (JUICE), fully European-funded, and scheduled for 2020.
It *is* developing right now.
IMHO there is still room for cooperating here.
Re: (Score:2)
I was waiting for someone mention the (funded and being built) JUICE mission: it's astonishing to me that the "if it ain't NASA, it ain't worth jack" attitude generally persists, and that hardly anyone in the media (let alone on /.) bothers to do the slightest modicum of research.
JUICE is under development by the European Space Agency for launch in 2022 (not 2020 anymore) and arrival at Jupiter in 2030. It will tour the Jupiter system, including multiple fly-bys of the giant icy moons Europa, Callisto,
The shortsighted (Score:5, Interesting)
"I think we are settling for exploring close planets just because we have no technology to go to where we actually do believe life could survive."
You can't expect to successfully run a marathon on Saturday after if you haven't run a single mile in the past decade. Each step in exploration requires a previous step of smaller magnitude. Often it's the things we're not looking for when we explore that allow us to go further or explore deeper in future missions.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't expect to successfully run a marathon on Saturday after if you haven't run a single mile in the past decade.
Oh, crap - I'm really screwed, in that case. Couldn't you have mentioned this sooner?
Re:The US is broke for these kinds of projects (Score:4, Informative)
This is like taking a vacation to the big ball of twine vs Disney Land because you can't afford it.
That is a terrible analogy. By comparing space exploration to vacation you are suggesting that the science has no value other than to satisfy someone's curiosity, which is simply not true.
A better analogy: Going to Europa is like a manufacturing company investing in a robotic production machine. It costs a lot and takes a considerable amount of skill to setup and use, but once it's going the payoff is enormous.
We should be taking money from other things and putting them into the space program. We need these investments. See: http://www.investopedia.com/fi... [investopedia.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It's also a terrible analogy as it suggests the idea that if we just tried a little harder, we'd make it to Disneyland (after all, the big ball of twine isn't that far from Disneyland.
Going to Europa is like Columbus going to America rather than the moon. Sometimes you gotta take what you can get.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes! If we got rid of NASA altogether, think of all the infrastructure we could build....
Why, the annual savings would be enough for most of one [wikipedia.org] tunnel!
Wrong....just plain wrong. Why is innumeracy so prevalent now? Are numbers really that hard? The $17 billion Nasa will get in 2014 is peanuts compared the rest of the federal budget.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
It's their anti-science position. Going to Europa and finding alien life might encourage the teaching of evolutions in schools.
It will also interfere with their plan to teach that the Earth is a the center of the universe, and the eventual mandate to make it official policy that the world is flat.
Just let them believe that they are going to invade Europa (the continent) and they will probably stand in line to support this idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, the Democrats won't go because space exploration probably involves 'radiation' of some sort - and did you know that all astronauts have been vaccinated? There is no telling what deadly changes in mental state this might be causing!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This could be a big problem for Republicans (Score:5, Insightful)
The mentality of these sort of people is that they will automatically and unquestioningly reject anything that does not fit their world view.
This is exactly what they say about liberals/Democrats. Both sides think the other side is stupid, ignorant, and/or crazy.
Re:This could be a big problem for Republicans (Score:5, Insightful)
The mentality of these sort of people is that they will automatically and unquestioningly reject anything that does not fit their world view.
This is exactly what they say about liberals/Democrats. Both sides think the other side is stupid, ignorant, and/or crazy.
And they're both right!
Re: (Score:2)
And they're both right!
Only if you also include "venal".
Re:This could be a big problem for Republicans (Score:5, Insightful)
This is exactly what they say about liberals/Democrats. Both sides think the other side is stupid, ignorant, and/or crazy.
And they both are.
Re: (Score:2)
Really, this pretty much covers everybody in-between, too.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There seems to be no concept of a middle ground, no grey. Everything is either black or white. How did it end up like this?
Well, a "winner-take-all" election system didn't help. It led us to this place where politicians must increasingly pull away from the middle. If you have too much overlap with your opponent, then there's less to distinguish you from them, and no reason to vote for you. The concentration of power into two parties over time exaggerates the effect.
Newt Gingrich made use of television to really amp up the effect, and the splintering of media into self-reinforcing channels meant you didn't have to seriously cons
Re: (Score:2)
I hate to say it, but the internet hasn't helped either. In many places, it's become a huge echo chamber where people can just hear their own preconceptions parroted back at them, reinforcing their belief that their position must be right.
Why, I've even heard of a tech site where regardless of what a certain OS company does, it is immediately trashed as a terrible, evil idea. Good thing Slashdot is nothing like that.
Re: (Score:2)
A government that is huge does not help either - when you are trying to control and tax everyone by majority vote, you are bound to end up this way. This is why the founding vision was so important, people were allowed to decide for themselves, not elect someone to decide for them and for everyone else.
In short, when everything is political, everything becomes about forcing others to do as you want.
Actually the "people" were never actually allowed to decide for themselves whether to rebel or not. The revolution was a minority position held by influential landowners and buisnessmen who had the networking and the wherewithal to override the majority who wished to remain British subjects.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything is either black or white. How did it end up like this?
I'm no philosopher myself, but you might want to read up a bit on Hegel's dialectic [wikipedia.org] for a possible answer (Out of the clash between Thesis and Antithesis arise Synthesis.)
One of the corollaries of this theory is that if you manage to build up some of these opposing poles with sufficient skill, you can control the "synthesis" (midpoint) being arrived at as well as neutralize the two extreme poles in the process.
You could look around at the world for 2 opposing poles being somewhat artificially being built
Re: (Score:2)
One particular example is the Religion vs Science angle
One could well ask why it would be advantageous to eliminate both vigorous religion and rigorous science in the general population? My guess is that a dumbed-down populace that also does not have any hope for something better are easily controllable consumers and tax payers.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if its possible for America to fix this horrible "if you aren't with us, you are against us" mentality. There seems to be no concept of a middle ground, no grey. Everything is either black or white. How did it end up like this?
What makes you think it wasn't always like this? If you were to go back in time any number of years up to, say, the administration of John Adams, you'd find that the popular political climate was equally nasty if not worse. Look up some contemporaneous quotes from the newsp
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm from Ireland for example, and we have 3 major parties and a couple of smaller ones. And people switch between them and the parties change their policies.
Sure, but Ireland has a population of 5 million, the vast majority of whom have a shared culture (and religion) much older than the entire US. The metropolitan area I live in is 50% larger than that (and much more diverse); the US population is nearly 320 million (officially), and until recently, geographic mobility was relatively limited for many peop
Re: (Score:2)
People are still fighting over Ireland... We fought the British for literally hundreds of years. We were fighting them before America even existed. There is still serious tension in the north, there isn't bombings any more, but they sure aren't all getting along.
I don't see how any of this has anything to do with the extreme polarization of american politics? I don't see why any of this makes it so there is an even split with no middle ground between the groups. It sounds like it should be much more dive
Re: (Score:2)
The Troubles began in the late 1960s and is considered by many to have ended with the Belfast Good Friday Agreement of 1998. However, sporadic violence has continued since then.
Ours, however, only lasted 4-5 years. Which I guess reinforces your point that we can't really meaningfully compare the two (?).
Re: (Score:2)
The other side of the coin would be, if the parties are too fluid in their stances, why would I want to vote for anyone if they're likely to switch to the other side of the issue that gained them my vote in the first place?
Not that I'm defending our "dig your heels in and scream NOOOOOO!!!" system :P Although I would settle for the campaign platform actually being followed after election.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone should look up the meaning of interstellar, this trip although close wouldn't even be interplanetary.
Maybe someone ELSE should re-read the words and note the difference between "inter" and "intra."
Re: (Score:2)
The summary said 'intrastellar'. Which could mean nothing more than a trip to the corner market for beer and porn magazines.