Recently in The Moon Category

"'These things are not consistent with the amount of water that we find,' he said. 'I think in its very basic form, the [impact theory] idea is probably still correct, but there's something fundamental about the physics of the process that we don't understand.'"

A new study of lunar magma returned from Apollo 17 finds even more evidence of water on the moon, calling into question our understanding of how the moon was even formed. "The analysis, reported in Science, has looked at pockets of volcanic material locked within tiny glass beads. It found 100 times more water in the beads than has been measured before, and suggests that the Moon once held a Caribbean Sea-sized volume of water."

"We've grown used to wonders in this century. It's hard to dazzle us. But for twenty-five years the United States space program has been doing just that. We've grown used to the idea of space, and perhaps we forget that we've only just begun. We're still pioneers. They, the members of the Challenger crew, were pioneers."

"Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace will stay on the moon to rest in peace.These brave men, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, know that there is no hope for their recovery. But they also know that there is hope for mankind in their sacrifice. These two men are laying down their lives in mankind's most noble goal: the search for truth and understanding."

In a fascinating remnant of alternate history, Letters of Note unearths Nixon's Safire-penned speech on the (possible) failure of Apollo 11. "Others will follow, and surely find their way home. Man's search will not be denied. But these men were the first, and they will remain the foremost in our hearts."

"'It's really wet,' said Anthony Colaprete, co-author of one of the Science papers and a space scientist at NASA Ames Research Center at Moffett Field, Calif. He and his colleagues estimate that 5.6% of the total mass of the targeted lunar crater's soil consists of water ice. In other words, 2,200 pounds of moon dirt would yield a dozen gallons of water."

In keeping with recent studies, NASA is set to announce that there appears to be quite a lot of water on the moon, which would greatly facilitate setting up shop there. Alas, "the U.S. likely won't be involved in manned voyages to the moon anytime soon...But other countries are gearing up. China has pledged to land astronauts on the moon by 2025, and India has plans to do the same by 2020. Japan wants to establish an unmanned moon base in a decade." And, hey, why go to the moon when you can spend a decade in Afghanistan?

"Within 40 small craters, one to nine miles wide, they estimated 600 million metric tons of water. Perhaps most notably, 'It has to be relatively pure,' said Paul Spudis, the principal investigator for the instrument that made the discovery."

By way of a friend, scientists find more evidence of lots of water on the moon. "That is significant, because the ice in these craters could be easily tapped by future lunar explorers -- not just for drinking water, but also broken apart into oxygen for breathing and hydrogen for fuel." Hmm. Maybe it's time to start thinking of ways to get up there...

"The troubled and expensive Ares I rocket that was to replace the space shuttle to ferry humans to space will be gone, along with money for its bigger brother, the Ares V cargo rocket that was to launch the fuel and supplies needed to take humans back to the moon. There will be no lunar landers, no moon bases, no Constellation program at all." As expected (and feared) earlier this year, the Obama administration's proposed NASA budget for the next five years cancels any and all plans to go to the moon anytime soon. "'We certainly don't need to go back to the moon,' said one administration official."

Sigh.

Ok, first off, the administration official who uttered the last sentence should be filed away next to Mr. Left of the Left and Ms. Pajamas as people who should no longer speak for the White House in any capacity whatsoever. Full stop, end of story. Putting my speechwriter cap on for a second: In most any political situation, ridiculing the dreams of an entire generation does not make for particularly good messaging.

Anyway, anonymous WH official aside, NASA administrator Charles Bolden sounded a better note about all this: "We're not abandoning anything. We're probably on a new course but human space flight is in our DNA. We are not abandoning human space flight by any stretch of the imagination. We have companies telling us they're excited to get humans off this planet and into orbit. I think we're going to get there and perhaps quicker than we would have done before."

And, to be clear, the administration's NASA budget increases the agency's funding by $6 billion over the next five years. The new budget ups research and development spending into cheaper heavy launch mechanisms, emphasizes more robotic exploration missions and observational experiments into climate change, extends the life of the ISS (although, with only five more shuttle missions remaining, other nations will have to help service it), and works to promote the various commercial space enterprises moving along right now.

All of this is well and good, but it would be nice to see some recognition of the civic importance of manned space flight by this administration. In their words, NASA is scrapping Constellation on account of it being "over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation due to a failure to invest in critical new technologies." And, given that we still had a lot of the expenditures before us, I suppose now was as good a time as any to kill the program if it's not the right direction to go in.

That being said, how many more times are we going to do this? We keep stopping and starting and stopping and starting our post-Shuttle plans for space, so that now, after five final shuttle missions this coming year, we will longer have the capability anymore as a nation to send men and women into orbit. "If implemented, the NASA a few years from now would be fundamentally different from NASA today. The space agency would no longer operate its own spacecraft, but essentially buy tickets for its astronauts." Forty-one years after we first reached the moon, that's just plain sad.

Ultimately, the central finding of the Augustine commission's final report, released this past October after extensive study of NASA's current situation, is a sound one: "The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources." In other words, we've been trying to talk the talk without walking the walk. If we're going to get serious about manned space flight, we need to stop piecemealing NASA and start making manned exploration a funding priority.

In total, the agency is slated to get $100 billion over the next five years. To put that number in perspective, that's less than a fifth of our defense budget for 2011 alone, and that's going by the most conservative numbers around -- NASA's five-year budget could be closer to a tenth of next year's defense spending. (For its part, the Augustine commission set a price tag of $3 billion a year to get serious about manned exploration.)

If we had put anywhere near that kind of money into exploration and R&D over the years, would we now be in this position, where we face the Hobson's choice of replicating expensive 50-year-old launch tech or being completely grounded as a nation? The lack of thinking about our long-term priorities sometimes is staggering to me. I've said this before, but I still believe it holds true: Short of possibly genomic research and advances in AI, nothing we do right now will matter more centuries or millennia hence than establishing a presence off-world...if we even have that long. Not to get all Jor-El up in here, but we really have to start getting serious about this.

"Although that panel suggested a $3 billion boost to NASA's $18.7-billion-a-year budget in order to take a firm next step in human space flight, Obama's support for a $1 billion bump next year represents a major coup for the agency given the ballooning deficit and the continuing recession. And NASA just won a $1 billion boost from Congress for 2010 in a bill signed by the president." By way of another friend, President Obama backs increased funding for NASA's new heavy launcher. "The president's decision to go with the second option is a major departure from his 2010 budget plan, which called for a 5% increase in 2010--the boost just approved by Congress--but then remaining flat through 2014."

Good, although I do wish he'd gone the full $3 billion. In the great scheme of things, not much we do is of larger importance than manned space flight. And 10,000 years from now, people aren't going to remember or much care how many Joint Strike Fighters we built in the Twenty-Tens. But they will know whether or not we took significant steps to leave the cradle and move off-world.

"Any intact lava tube could serve as a shelter from the severe environment of the lunar surface, with its meteorite impacts, high-energy UV radiation and energetic particles, and extreme diurnal temperature variations." In a tube in the ground lived...a human? An international team of researchers identify a lava tube in the moon's Marius Hills as a good spot for a lunar colony. Just watch out for the exogorths.

"'The discovery opens a new chapter in our understanding of the moon,' the space agency said in a written statement." It's official: Data from NASA's LCROSS impact of a few weeks ago confirms the recent findings of Chandraayan-1: It ain't Hoth or Rura Penthe, but there is a "significant amount" of water on the moon, like, ice-field size.

"The amount of water they found in the plume was a couple of hundred kilograms in total, but that indicates there is a lot more still lying on the surface. They don't know how much exactly just yet." (As we found out recently, the same might also hold true of Mars.)

"'The full understanding of the LCROSS data may take some time. The data is that rich,' said Colaprete. 'Along with the water in Cabeus, there are hints of other intriguing substances. The permanently shadowed regions of the moon are truly cold traps, collecting and preserving material over billions of years.'" I'm very reminded of James Hogan's Inherit the Stars right now. Also, it's probably about time to start taking lunar exploration a bit more seriously again, eh?

Hey all. As we approach the decade mark next month, the readership around here at GitM continues to dwindle, which is primarily my fault for not updating as much as I'd like. Nonetheless, if and when it gets quiet 'round here, I encourage you to also check out my Twitter feed, which is easier to update in the midst of more frantic weeks like last one. (Memo to myself: Columbus Day, and three-day-weekends in general, will mean a lot of speechifyin' in Congress' home districts.)

Yeah, I was skeptical about Twitter earlier in the year, but I'm definitely coming around. Within an hour of news of President Obama's Nobel prize win, for example, (which I'm neither here nor there about -- it seems goofy, yeah, but I was already down on Nobel anyway), there were dozens of wry and amusing quips going around the twitterverse. My favorite two were variations on "Obama, I'mma let you finish but Bono has been working his ass off for this!" and "Uh...did the Nobel committee just miss the fact that Obama bombed the f**king moon?!"

Another good example: the Baucus committee tanking the public option in late September brought on a similar flurry of bon mots: "Senators should be required to make the little cash register 'ka-ching!" noise when they vote." "Well the insurance Industry is looking forward to its Baucanalian Orgy." "75% of Americans support #publicoption, but only 35% of the Senate Finance Cmittee support it." "Health care industry must pay capital gains on Senate Finance Committee members this year as investment is cashed out." Etc., etc.

Its immediate posting benefits aside, Twitter has definitely grown on me as a fertile hothouse environment for exactly this sort of choice, top-shelf snark.

"'This will create a considerable stir. It was wholly unexpected,' said one scientist also involved in Chandrayaan-1. 'People thought that Chandrayaan was just lagging behind the rest but the science that's coming out, it's going to be agenda-setting.'" Well, this definitely changes things if it holds up: India's first mission to the moon discovers "evidence of large quantities of water on its surface(!)"

"Another lunar scientist familiar with the findings said: 'This is the most exciting breakthrough in at least a decade. And it will probably change the face of lunar exploration for the next decade.'" NASA comments tomorrow, so be ready to hum a few bars...

"'The space program began the day humans chose to walk out of their caves,' says Chang Díaz. 'By exploring space we are doing nothing less than insuring our own survival.' Chang Díaz believes that humans will either become extinct on Earth or expand into space. If we pull off the latter, he says, our notion of Earth will change forever."

With that red meat for the space cadets among us, the Smithsonian's Air & Space Magazine surveys current theoretical endeavors in propulsion mechanics, including nuclear-based rocketry and fusion. "I grew up watching Apollo, and the systematic and well-thought-out march to that. And they did it. When you look into pioneering topics, there are those people who don't want to touch it because it's too far out there. But if it's mature enough for you to at least start asking the right questions, and you do an honest job, then you can be a pioneer."

"'If you're willing to wait until 2028, you've got a heavy lift vehicle, but you've got nothing to lift,' she said. 'You cannot do this program on this budget.'" President Obama's Human Space Flight Plans Committee is set to announce that getting back to the moon by 2020 is not feasible given current budgetary constraints, and Mars is definitely out of the question. "The final list of options...will include some variation of a lunar base down the road. But the committee is most animated by what it calls the 'Deep Space' option, a strategy that emphasizes getting astronauts far beyond Low Earth Orbit but not necessarily plunking them down on alien worlds.'" Which basically sounds like unnecessarily strapping astronauts to normally-unmanned fly-by missions -- Not sure I see much point in that.

Honestly, this is pathetic. As I said here, it's time to raise our expectations of what we can achieve in space, and fund manned exploration of the solar system accordingly. Particularly given how much we're blowing on the Pentagon's space toys at the moment, we could stand to spend a bit more on one of the most important collective human endeavors still before us.

"So why do tech geeks love space? Though they may have the resources -- a trip to space will now set you back some $45 million -- this can't be the full answer: You don't see Donald Trump or P. Diddy signing up for an astro-mission. What makes it worth it for the tech geeks?" The Big Money's Julia Ioffe tries to ascertain why dot.com miliionaires pay out the nose for space travel. Uh, because it's there?

"'There's a documentary called Orphans of Apollo that's stated this well,' he explained. 'There's a generation of us, who are the tech leaders of today, who were universally inspired to go into science and technology because of the NASA Lunar Space Program. And the reason the movie is called Orphans of Apollo is because, in many ways, we feel orphaned by the fact that the space industry has not done a good job of capitalizing on that momentum of what many of us believed were the first steps into space, carrying the mission of human space flight farther and farther into deep space.'"

"Said John Logsdon, a George Washington University professor who co-wrote the book honored at the NASA party, 'There is a natural tension built into this situation... Mike is dead-on convinced that the current approach to the program is the right one. And Lori’s job is to question that for Mr. Obama. The Obama team is not going to walk in and take Mike’s word for it.'" The Orlando Sentinel suggests that NASA head Michael Griffin isn't being particularly helpful to the transition team at the agency: "NASA administrator Mike Griffin is not cooperating with President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team, is obstructing its efforts to get information and has told its leader that she is 'not qualified' to judge his rocket program, the Orlando Sentinel has learned."

I've been quite complimentary of Mike Griffin here in the past. He seems like a smart, take-no-guff fellow, and I'm in general agreement with his views on space exploration. But this sort of tantrum reflects poorly on him. Knowing nothing other than what's written in this article, it sounds like Griffin, a holder of six advanced degrees, is indulging his engineer's exasperation with the laypersons who seem to be meddling with his current experiment. But if Griffin wants to see the vision he's outlined for NASA make it into the next administration, I suspect honey would garner more flies than vinegar at this moment.

"'They're taking an Apollo-like approach,' Gilbreth said. 'Our program is much more ambitious than Apollo. We're going to put four people on the moon for seven days, eventually for six months. China is looking for a minimum capability. We're looking to put an outpost on the moon.'" NASA officials concede that China will beat the US back to the moon. "The goal of NASA's Constellation program is to return astronauts to the moon by 2020...Gilbreth said the Chinese could accomplish that by 2017 or 2018."

Moreover, that US date will likely slip five years when Pres. Obama takes office in January. In all honesty, this is one of the few areas where I emphatically disagree with our nominee. There are plenty of places to acquire $18 billion for education without raiding the space exploration budget...defense bloat, for example.

"It's very deep, like in a forest on the darkest night,' said Shawn-Yu Lin, a scientist who helped create the material at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y. 'Nothing comes back to you. It's very, very, very dark.'" Dick Cheney's soul? Tonight's lunar eclipse? No, a great leap forward in "transformational optics"...and invisibility cloaks. The "paper-thin material...absorbs 99.955 percent of the light that hits it, making it by far the darkest substance ever made -- about 30 times as dark as the government's current standard for blackest black."

"And from the crew of Apollo 8, we close with good night, good luck, a Merry Christmas, and God bless all of you -- all of you on the good Earth." Happy holidays to everyone out there. Berk and I are currently at the family homestead, where I'm enjoying home cooking, catching up on work and -- true to form -- checking out some of the better video games of the year: Call of Duty 4, Portal, Rock Band (I'm the frontman.) Hope your own holidays are equally fun and relaxing.

"Fact:...The density of Saturn is so low that if you were to put it in a giant glass of water it would float." And another pilfered link, which I meant to post last week: Megg of Quiddity points the way to 10 Cool Facts about Space (although, to paraphrase The Smiths, some facts are cooler than others.)

"If the current proposals to restart human exploration fail politically, indeed, the human space flight endeavor conducted under government auspices might well lose its momentum. I obviously hope that doesn’t happen. But it’s far from a slam dunk that we’re going back to the Moon and on to Mars." Two companion pieces to today's reflection on 50 years of Sputnik which I missed earlier: The Grey Lady hypothesizes about the next fifty years of space travel (suggesting its future as a public enterprise might be dubious) and takes a moment to consider the pop culture ramifications of the space age. "'At the level of government, I think we’re still struggling as to why we’re sending people to space,' Dr. Logsdon said. 'It’s a decent question, and I think it’s an unanswered question.'" (My answer to this question, for what it's worth, is here.)

In "world of the future" news, NASA announces it plans to establish a permanently-staffed base camp on the moon by 2024, preferably at one of its poles. (Here's the rationale.) A moonbase within 18 years? I'm all for it...just keep an eye out for monoliths and make sure Sean Connery runs a tight ship.

If you believe they put "a" man on the moon, then there's nothing up my sleeve, and nothing is cool. Also, you'll have no problem with the recent update to Neil Armstrong's famous first words there. Score one for the lunar grammarians.

The LA Times examines the beginnings of the second lunar space race, which will involve, among others, the US, Europe, China, and India. "Some researchers even have a name for the first lunar city: Jamestown, in honor of the first English settlement in the New World."

"To become a multiplanet species, we must master the skills of extracting local resources, build our capability to journey and explore in hostile regions, and create new reservoirs of human culture and experience. That long journey begins on the moon -- the staging ground, supply station and classroom for our voyage into the universe." Astrophysicist Paul Sputig eloquently makes the case for a return to manned lunar exploration.