October 11, 2018

Six things you may not know about NASA

NASA turned 60 on October 1, 2018 and last weekend the Museum of Flight hosted a talk by the agency’s chief historian, Bill Barry, as part of the anniversary celebration. Since we all know about the Moon landing, the space shuttle program, explorations of the planets, the Hubble Space Telescope, the International Space Station, and various NASA research and discoveries, Barry focused his talk on six things you may not know about NASA.

#6: NASA science data saved us from disaster

In a day and age when there’s significant distrust of science, it’s interesting to note NASA’s role in solving a difficult environmental problem. Researchers as early as the late 1950s noticed that there was a depletion of ozone in the atmosphere above the South Pole, but it was difficult to document.

NASA chief historian Bill Barry gave a talk at the Museum 
of Flight Oct. 6, 2018 celebrating the 60th anniversary 
of the creation of the agency. Photo: Greg Scheiderer
Barry explained that NASA used the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS) on the Nimbus 7 weather satellite to confirm and map the hole in the ozone.

“It was pretty clear that the ozone hole was big and getting bigger,” Barry said, and that got people’s attention. Scientists postulated that the ozone depletion was caused by chemical reactions with chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) such as refrigerants and spray-can propellants, but again it was tough to prove. Observations made from NASA’s ER-2 aircraft and DC-8 Flying Laboratory eventually confirmed that the CFCs were the culprit.

This led to an amazing act of international cooperation on an environmental issue. In the Montreal Protocol in 1987 nations agreed to phase out CFCs and other ozone depleting substances. It’s working; Barry noted that the ozone is gradually recovering.

“Demographers suggest that this action saved us at least two million cases of skin cancer,” since then, he said.

#5: NASA almost didn’t happen

At the dawn of the space age, after Sputnik, the military became keenly interested in spy satellites and possible space weaponry. US Secretary of Defense Neil McElroy created the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), which later became the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, with the aim of collaborating with academic, industry, and government partners on military programs involving space.

In the meantime over at the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) director Hugh Latimer Dryden had pushed the committee’s research agenda toward high-speed flight and space research. In January 1958 he wrote a key report suggesting that space efforts be a collaboration between the DOD, NACA, National Academy of Science, research institutions, universities, and industry. That’s pretty close to the ARPA mission, with a civilian bent.

Barry said that within about a month of the issuance of Dryden’s report, President Dwight Eisenhower went along with it, and sent Congress proposed legislation creating the National Aeronautics and Space Agency. Congress soon approved it.

In the early days of the collaboration there was still arm wrestling over control. A memo from Eisenhower directed that NASA would run all programs “except those peculiar to or primarily associated with military weapons systems or military operations.” The DOD took a broad definition of that—figuring putting people in space was military and so that was within their bailiwick.

Eisenhower intervened to clarify that the legislation made NASA a largely civilian organization.

“This key decision on Eisenhower’s part was really important,” Barry said. “NASA in some ways has become the world’s space agency, one of the most positive aspects of US international relations,” and the civilian nature of the agency is vital to that.

#4: NASA is a serial creator of new industries


There’s a common belief that Tang, Teflon, and Velcro were creations of the space program. Barry said those aren’t correct, but a lot of other stuff has NASA origins. Excimer lasers developed for ozone detection proved useful for laser surgery, for example, and the complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) chips in your smartphone camera were originally developed to build a better camera for space probes. Oddly, those never flew, but they’ve taken off here on Earth. NASA’s annual Spinoff magazine highlights stuff that originated in the space program.

Beyond those, NASA has spun off entire industries. Weather satellites and communication satellites (now a $2 billion/year industry) came from NASA. Under COTS (Commercial Orbital Transportation Services) companies such as SpaceX and Boeing are building crewed vehicles and plan to begin testing next year.

“We hope by the end of next year to be launching US astronauts from Florida again up to the International Space Station and paying American companies to do it for us,” Barry said.

#3: NASA revolutionized the understanding of the universe

One’s first response to that is, “Well, duh!” but Barry said it’s easy to take for granted what has happened over the last 60 years.

“We don’t often think about how much things have changed since 1958 when NASA was created,” he said. Sixty years ago otherwise sane people thought there may be civilizations and canals on Mars and dinosaurs on Venus. They figured the outer solar system was just boring ice. There were nine planets; we now know that virtually every star has at least one. We had no idea the Van Allen Belts existed. Now we have a photo of the cosmic microwave background.

#2: Why did we go to the Moon?

President John F. Kennedy wasn’t actually that big on space; in early speeches after he was sworn in he kept proposing that the US and Soviet Union team up on space projects.

The Soviet Union wasn’t too keen on that. They were using the success of their space program to proclaim the superiority of their system and to recruit allies in a world that had been “decolonized” after World War II. The Soviets were winning the propaganda war. JFK wanted a way to beat them without breaking the bank.

Trailing in the game, Kennedy moved the goalposts and declared the race to the Moon.

“The Soviet Union’s success in space was a major strategic strategic problem for the United States,” Barry explained, “so investing money in going to the Moon was a way to prove that the western, capitalist model of government was, in fact, at least as good as if not better than the Soviets.”

#1: The race to the Moon was closer than you think

JFK made his speech to Congress about setting the goal of “landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth” in May of 1961, shortly after Yuri Gagarin became the first man in space. It wasn’t until years later, with President Lyndon Johnson pushing the goal as Kennedy’s legacy, that the Soviets took notice.

“It’s really obvious by the summer of 1964 that the US was serious about going to the Moon and had the political will and the money to make it happen,” Barry said.

The Soviet response was the Zond program. They wouldn’t orbit the Moon, but would instead fling their spacecraft around it and then return to Earth.

The Soviets made five Zond launches in 1968 had a few successes. Zond 5 in September took some tortoises and other life forms along and landed back on Earth, though in the Indian Ocean rather than on land as intended. Zond 6 made the trip and landed on target in Kazakstan, but its heat shield failed. Tests weren’t going well on the N-1 rocket, the Soviet counterpart to the Saturn V that would be their way of launching people to the Moon. In December 1968 Apollo 8 and three US astronauts orbited the Moon.

“It was pretty clear they weren’t going to get their guys on the surface of the Moon before we did,” Barry said. But the Soviets didn’t give up. They sent up a Hail Mary.

The Soviets had been launching Luna spacecraft since the late 1950s, and in the space of six months they cobbled together a robotic craft that would land on the Moon, collect a few rocks, and bring them to back Earth.

A first launch attempt failed, but Luna 15 blasted off three days before Apollo 11. The Eagle got to the Moon first. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin did their Moon walk and were catching a few winks before launching to return to the command module Columbia.

“While they’re sleeping in the lunar module the Soviets fired the retro rockets on Luna 15 and landed on the surface of the Moon. It crashed,” Barry said. But he added that if it had landed successfully, the Soviets may well have been able to get their Moon sample back to Earth first.

“The race to the Moon ends July 20, 1969 after the first Moon walk actually happened,” he marveled. “It was that close.”



October 6, 2018

Waffles and big data in the universe

Waffles and big data were on the menu at the most recent gathering of Astronomy on Tap Seattle at Peddler Brewing Company in Ballard.

Fulmer at work. Photo: Astronomy on Tap Seattle
Leah Fulmer, who is working at the University of Washington on her Ph.D. in astronomical data science, gave a talk titled, “Data-Driven Astronomy in the 2020s and Beyond.” Fulmer explained that we’re in the midst of a “data tsunami” that’s been growing over the last three decades of astronomical surveys.

Back in the 1990s the Palomar Digital Sky Survey and the Two Micron All-Sky Survey each collected about a terabyte of data. That’s a trillion bytes; 1012 bytes. Enough to fill a thousand one-gigabyte smartphones.
The 2000s brought the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) and the Galaxy Evolution Explorer. These collected in the tens of terabytes of data. In the 2010s Pan-STARRS collected a petabyte of data; a quadrillion bytes.

In the future this astronomical growth in data collection will continue. The Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) under construction in Chile will survey the entire night sky every few nights for ten years. It will ultimately collect an astounding 500 petabytes of data—that’s 20 terabytes every single night.

“SDSS had a total data collection of 40 terabytes,” Fulmer pointed out. “We’re going to have one SDSS every two nights in the 2020s. This is a big freaking deal.”

On top of the data, Fulmer noted that the LSST will alert its network when it finds something interesting. Given the amount of data, Fulmer said there will be ten million alerts every night, or about 232 every second.

“This is overwhelming; this is a data tsunami,” she said. “With this sort of data collection astronomers cannot do our science in the way we have up until this point.”

A new way to look at data

Up until recently astronomers would apply for telescope time, make their observations, take the data home, and analyze it. That won’t work in the era of big data for a couple of reasons. First, you can’t jam that much data onto your laptop. Second, there just aren’t enough astronomers to sort through data on objects one by one. As you might guess, we need the help of computers.

“Specifically, we need the help of machine learning,” Fulmer said. This can be both “supervised” and “unsupervised” learning. Astronomers can identify objects by their light curves, and the computers can be taught what those are. That’s supervised. In unsupervised learning, the computers can go out on their own and sort various observations into categories with similar characteristics, and we can figure out what’s in each category.

Once you figure that out, a data broker like ANTARES (the Arizona-NOAO Temporal Analysis and Response to Events System, and yes, astronomers still rule at acronyms) can let the right people know about discoveries in a timely manner.

Fulmer said it’s interesting that ANTARES will never look at the sky, just at data, and that many future astronomers may never visit a telescope, just analyze the data. Different fields can learn from each other about how to process all of this information.

Fulmer finds the era of big data exciting.

“It’s not just data-driven astronomy, it’s data-driven everything,” she said.

Astronomy with your breakfast

N. Nicole Sanchez is working on her Ph.D. in astronomy at the UW, and her research interest is in spiral galaxies like our own Milky Way and how they evolve. This, naturally, led her to think of galaxies as waffles. Thus the title of her talk, “Black Holes, Gas, and Waffles.”

Spiral galaxies form into disks, she explained, and a waffle is a disk. The galaxies have a central bulge, represented on the waffle by a big pat of butter. Marshmallows, suspended by toothpicks, represent globular clusters of stars. Red and blue sprinkles represent old red stars and young blue ones. You just have to imagine the supermassive black hole at the center of the waffle. It may be massive, but it’s super small compared to the size of the waffle.

Sanchez came up with the idea for this model while teaching at the UW in the “Protostars” summer science camp for middle school girls the last couple of years. In the waffle model, syrup represents the gas in the galaxy.

“That’s what you’re making your stars out of, so there’s going to be a lot in your disk,” Sanchez said.
In fact, her faculty advisors got wind of the waffle model and said it would need A LOT of syrup, which led to the hilarious twitter thread below. Click on it to see the academic discussion.

Sanchez admitted that her waffle galaxy may be “a bit too simplified” as a model. But the syrup is important.

“There’s actually tons of gas around really all galaxies, in what’s called the circumgalactic medium,” Sanchez said. The gas is important to the evolution of a galaxy. It feeds the black hole and helps  form stars.

Sanchez studies galaxies by using cosmological hydrodynamic simulations.

“I put a bunch of particles in a box, turn on gravity, and let time happen,” she laughed. After running a simulation she looks for a galaxy similar to the Milky Way, and examines interactions between the galaxy’s supermassive black hole and the circumgalactic medium.

“The supermassive black hole is actually really vital to the evolution of the CGM because it’s moving all of this metal that’s being created in the hearts of stars in the disk of the galaxy and it’s propagating them out into the CGM,” Sanchez explained. Without a supermassive black hole, the circumgalactic medium would not look like what astronomers have observed.

Pass the syrup.

October 4, 2018

Exploring the solar system with Emily Lakdawalla

Emily Lakdawalla gushes with enthusiasm about the cool things to see and learn in our solar system, and for her that would be reason enough to explore those places.

“I’m just curious,” she told the Rose City Astronomers at their most recent meeting in Portland. “I like to see the new places, I like to see the planets. I think it’s awfully fun, but that’s not a good reason to make somebody else pay for it.”

Emily Lakdawalla
(Isabel Lawrence/Planetary Society)
Lakdawalla, senior editor and planetary evangelist for the Planetary Society, said the public policy reasons for exploration are to answer the questions of how we got here and whether we’re alone in the universe. We need to find those answers off-planet.

“Earth is a wonderful planet to live on!” she said. “It’s my favorite planet; it’s temperate, it’s a very comfortable place to live. It’s also a terrible place to try to answer these questions from a planetary science point of view.”

That, she says, is because Earth is dynamic. Forces like weather and volcanism and even life and evolution change things and mess up the ancient evidence about how things were before. We need to go to space to find territory in a more undisturbed state.

After the first wave of planetary exploration, with Viking, Mariner, and the like, enthusiasm and political will and funding for planetary exploration waned. Lakdawalla explained that the Planetary Society was founded in 1980 to be an advocate for finding the answers. We’re now enjoying a second wave of exploration.

“Since the end of the second millennium, we’ve had this amazing expansion of robotic space explorers all over the solar system,” Lakdawalla said. She talked about many of them, with a particular emphasis on Mars. This is squarely within her bailiwick, as she is the author of the book The Design and Engineering of Curiosity: How the Mars Rover Performs Its Job (Springer Praxis Books, 2018).

She explained how a series of Mars missions followed the water. Mars Global Surveyor made a map. Mars Odyssey detected evidence of hydrogen by analyzing neutron movement, and hydrogen could mean water. Phoenix went to look for water and found ice. Mars Express found places where there’s clay, evidence of water, in many places. Curiosity went to one of those places.

“Curiosity has found environments on Mars that are unequivocally habitable,” Lakdawalla said. “Curiosity is not capable of looking for fossil evidence of microbial life on Mars. It doesn’t have the instruments.”

While Curiosity continues its mission, Lakdawalla said we’ve pretty well exhausted this particular line of research.

“We have found that, yes, Mars could have originated life in the past, but we can’t tell you if there was life there or not,” she said. That question will be up to the next line of rovers, such as the ESA’s ExoMars and NASA’s Mars 2020.

Lakdawalla spent some time on the outer solar system, particularly the life possibilities on the jovian moons Ganymede and Europa and Saturnian moons Titan and Enceladus. She noted that on Titan the temperature is such that methane could exist on the surface in liquid, gas, or solid forms, much as water can exist on Earth. The Huygens probe found round rocks on Titan, a significant discovery for a geologist.

“We have a river, except it’s a bizarro river,” Lakdawalla said. “Those rocks are made of water ice, and the river they were tumbled in was a methane river. It’s so familiar and so completely bizarre.” She said it’s hard to say if life could exist in that strange environment. Another reason for further exploration!

Lakdawalla said she’d love to see a mission soon to either Uranus or Neptune.

“They don’t get enough respect,” she said. “I think they’re awesome worlds.” But remembering her statement that coolness alone isn’t enough of a reason for the trip, she noted that the ice worlds are at an intermediate size between the gas giants and the terrestrial planets.

“Most of the exoplanets that we have discovered in the last 30 years have been of this size,” Lakdawalla noted. “We’ve never studied up-close the ones in our own solar system except for one Voyager 2 fly-by. We don’t understand these worlds very well at all, so how are we going to understand the rest of the universe and all of these other planets orbiting all of these other stars?”

Lakdawalla concluded that it’s a great time to be in the planetary exploration business.

“We’re doing it for a reason; we’re trying to understand how we got here, whether we’re the only life in the solar system,” she said. “It’s just a wonderful field of study.”