“Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.”

When you look up at the stars in the night sky, what do you envision?  Are we alone, or is the Universe full of life, and we’re just looking in the wrong places or with the wrong tools?

Scientists and Cosmologists have no idea, and they have interesting theories about why it is we haven’t found anyone else yet.  Before we talk about why, let’s talk about time and distance relative to space travel.

Our star, the Sun is about 8 light minutes and 20 seconds away from Earth.  Light emitted from the Sun, traveling at 186,000 miles per second reaches the Earth in 8 minutes and 20 seconds.  This is to say that if the Sun were to simply disappear right now at this instant, you wouldn’t know about it for 8 minutes and 20 seconds.

The speed of light is the fastest known constant in the Universe.  By contrast, the fastest man-made spacecraft – Voyager 1 – is currently traveling at 38,000 miles per hour.  Launched in the 1970s, Voyager is now 11.7 billion miles from Earth.  Taking 40 years to go that distance, the speed of light would have done it in a few hours.  At our current technological level, it will take 81,000 years to get to the next solar system.  Our current technology makes it prohibitive for us – our our robots – to visit any known close solar system.

The Fermi Paradox states that due to the size of the Universe, statistics indicates that there has to be a Sun-like star elsewhere in our galaxy or others, and an associated-Earth like planet capable of sustaining intelligent life.  The Universe should be full of intelligent life to the age and size of the known Universe.  So why haven’t we seen any evidence?

There are several theories as to why and each of them are plausible.  “The Great Filter” theory states that there is some unknown barrier that stops intelligent life from developing past a certain point.  It could be behind us (in our past) or ahead of us (in our future) and it will work as a barrier toward evolution of intelligent life. ¹

It is also possible that life is common, but intelligent life is uncommon and we are a rare breed.  We’re special, and we don’t give each other enough credit.

Another theory is that it’s the nature of all intelligent life to destroy itself when it reaches a certain age.  War, disease, famine and fighting for needed resources eventually destroys civilizations before they can reach a level of intelligence and technology capable of inter-stellar travel.

Building upon this theory, some scientists believe that it’s the nature of intelligent life to destroy others as they appear, in an effort of self-preservation.

Furthermore, other theories suggest that perhaps the distances between space and time are just too great and with the speed of light being the fastest known speed in the Universe, it just simply impossible for interstellar travel to be possible.

There are further hypothesis, and you can research those on your own, as I am only gong to touch on two more here.  I’ll touch on these next two because I believe both of these theories could be correct, and both present their own issues of morality, mortality, and religion.

One particularly interesting idea is the Zoo Hypothesis.  The Zoo Hypothesis implies that there are many advanced civilizations in the Universe capable of observation of or travel to Earth, but they simply don’t because they want us to develop naturally, without external interference.  I’m not sure I agree with it, only because as I understand it, it assumes that the aliens have no use for our resources and/or are naturally benevolent. Perhaps aliens of a certain age or sophistication – type III or IV on the Kardashev scale – have no use or time for being anything other than good, kind beings, which would make the Zoo Hypothesis work.

Then again, if they see us destroying each other and polluting the environment, and they are kind beings, wouldn’t they intervene? If they see us destroying each other and the planet, and they do nothing, they’re complicit, and a spectator to destruction. And that’s not a quality I like in someone, and then I would suggest that they may not kind beings, and also don’t need our resources. They’re simply apathetic, or too busy to care.

The Simulation Hypothesis

The Simulation Hypothesis states that we’re not real.  We’re a computer-generated being, playing out in a game on someone’s hard drive.  Let me explain why this makes some sense.

The Universe is 13 billion years old.  Humanity has been around for 130,000 years give or take.  Likely, there are far far advanced civilizations in the Cosmos that have millions or billions of years of technological advancement compared to us.  Here we are, in our kitchens or living rooms or cars reading this blog post.  See how far we have come in 30 years.  Now imagine a billion years of technological advancement.  As we play Cities Skylines and take care of our “Sims” to make sure they are housed and live in a nice city, it is not out of the question to assume that a civilization a billion years more technologically advanced than us have developed similar simulations – and we are their “Sims”.

Neil deGrasse Tyson puts the odds at “50-50” that we’re living in a simulation on someone’s hard drive.  According to Mr. Tyson we’re equally likely to be real vs. a simulation in some high-tech being’s computer.

If we are a simulation, how did we get free thought? Why do we feel?  What happens when we’re born, and what actually happens when we die?

This hypothesis offers many more questions than it answers, but it’s an important thing to discuss.

I hope I have piqued your interest in “why we are here?” and I encourage you to read further about these subjects if it interests you.

1 – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter

 

It was twenty years ago that the NASA Space Shuttle Challenger exploded shortly after liftoff. I was 10, and I was in 5th grade. I don’t even really remember if I was watching the launch with my fellow classmates or not. I don’t know if that’s because it was 20 years ago, or if something has blocked my memory of it.

I definately remember watching the TV later that night when I got home, looking at the replays of it on the evening news. It was an exceptionally sad day for me–even at 10 and younger, I watched the Shuttle launch every time. Each time it went up, it was spectacular. Even as a child, I understood that it was an amazing achievement of man and machine, yet without a knowledge of “the real world” much less engineering, I didn’t understand the risks and thus it made the whole experience a bit more confusing for a 10 year old interested in baseball and bikes.

It’s interesting to look back, see the improvements and adjustments made, and notice that a few years after Challenger, we were back flying the shuttles again. Arguably, any space travel has risks, and no matter what improvements are made, mistakes will be found, catastrophic events will continue, and the element of risk will not be eliminated.

It’s been 20 years since Challenger explode, and almost 3 years since Columbia disintegrated over the Western U.S. upon re-entry. Life is not without risk, and space travel is no exception to the rule. The best that can be done is to honor those that risked their lives in the interest of science, and to establish a culture of safety and caucious optimism to limit the chance of major malfunctions on future missions.

I was born in 1975, and soon after that, the Space Shuttle Enterprise made it’s maiden test-flight for aerodynamics, followed by the first flight by the first fully operational shuttle, Columbia in 1981. The remaining shuttles (Discovery, Atlantis & Endeavour) are due to be decomissioned after 2010, until then used soley to fix, maintain, and expand the ISS. In 2010, I’ll be 35. I will have lived through an entire generation of major space successes, and two catostrophic failures. I feel honored to have lived through its birth, its growth, and its presumed passing, when a new space vehicle will begin its life to continue Man’s reach for the stars.

For those that want to continue reading, both MSNBC and CNN have produced interesting and informative pieces celebrating and commemorating the Challenger and its crew. They write about the more human aspects of the disaster, not so much the events themselves. They also talk about myths that people might still believe as root causes of the accident. Below are the links.

CNN.com – Remembering Challenger
MSNBC.com – Twenty Years After Challenger

We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, this morning, as they prepared for their journey and waved good-bye and ‘slipped the surly bonds of Earth’ to ‘touch the face of God. – Former President Ronald Reagan.

I’m a big proponent of space exploration. I think we’re not devoting enough money to it, even in 2005. Sure, people will disagree with me, and that’s fine. That’s what makes all of this (life) beautiful. However, like with everthing else, there is perspective.

The cost of redesigning the Shuttle fleet to accomidate safety features recommended after the Columbia accident has so far exceeded $1.5 billion dollars, and as of August 2005, the Shuttle foam problem still exists. This being said, I will guestimate the final cost to repair the Shuttle fleet to be $5 billion. I think thats an over-estimated figure by 50%, but it will help to illustrate my point. 🙂

The war in Iraq, as of today, has cost over $188 billion. Here’s another tid-bit; the war in Iraq costs about $2,500 per second.

Theres your perspective. 🙂

…

I was sitting in the local Nissan dealership today, waiting for my car to be finished with one of its required routine maintenances, and they showed on the news that the cost of bringing Discovery from California (where it landed) back to Florida ontop of a specially designed NASA 747 over the required 2 day flight would cost just over $1 million. The people in the waiting room with me grunted and groaned, and in broken English mixed with Spanish, French, and Russian, I heard the word “why”. People, the $1 million is insignificant. Space travel can get expensive, but it is necessary. Where would we have been if Lewis & Clark, Magellen, Columbus, etc. didn’t spend the money needed to explore. Where would we be?

Rather than butcher the English language, or re-hash someone elses fine work, please click here to read about all of the benefits that space exploration has provided for you, and how it has impacted your daily life.

Perhaps too much celebration, and not enough careful eye. Sure, it was awesome to hear the Shuttle is now flying, and it’s now extremely disappointing that the Shuttles have been indefinately grounded once again due to camera footage showing foam insulation breaking off the main fuel tank from Wednesday’s Discovery launch. Apparently, the foam did not hit the orbiter, but it was just this kind of incident that led to the dissintigration of Columbia.

Time will tell if Discovery comes back safely in 11 days, and how long it is before the next Shuttle launch happens.

Abundance of caution is good, just frustrating. 🙂

I was 10 when the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded. Old enough to understand what happened, and to understand the consequences. In 1985, a faulty o-ring, a seal on the solid rocket boosters (SRBs) failed, and as the shuttle passed through the sound barrier – or, in scientific terms, the area of maximum pressure – its engines are throttled down to 2/3’s capacity. After it breaks through, the familiar term “…go with throttle up” is sent from Texas to the shuttle. After Challenger’s engines were increased to 105% of capacity, the o-ring failed, igniting a fire, and the Challenger exploded.

Years passed before the next shuttle launch, and o-rings were redesigned.

On February 1st, 2003, the Columbia – one of NASA’s oldest shuttles – disintegrated over re-entry over the western United States. Foam insulation from liftoff broke off one of the SRBs, hit the shuttle wing, and during re-entry 2 weeks after liftoff, super hot gases entered the wing, and disintegrated Columbia over Texas as it traveled at several thousand miles per hour.

Today, after almost two and a half years of a complete redesign of NASA safety culture, the shuttle Discovery was launched, and it was a picture-perfect one at that.

Without drowning in Nationalism, it is quite something to think about. We’re the world’s remaining superpower, and even with all of our problems, we are always pushing the envelope of exploration, just like the people that ‘discovered’ America did.

Everything in life has a degree of risk. It is measured. Space Travel is risky. It’s also necessary, for the question that will always be is asked is “who are we?” and “why are we here?”. Space exploration is the only way to attempt to ever find an answer to this question.

The Shuttles will be retired in 2010, when the ISS (International Space Station) is due to be completed. Between now and then, remaining shuttle missions are devoted to completing the ISS. After that, a new “shuttle” will be designed to brings us to the Moon and to Mars. Hopefully, mankind will still be around to see this feat, and I hope I’m around too.

Congratulations to NASA and all involved. The work you do is so relevent to our existence, and I wish there were no problems that mankind had to work through, so 100% of our effort could be put on finding ourselves and others in the Universe.

Below are comments from 2003 and today, from people all around the world.

(Most text courtesy of the BBC)

THEN
The US space shuttle Columbia has broken up soon after re-entering the Earth’s atmosphere, killing all seven astronauts on board. All contact with the shuttle was lost about 15 minutes before it was due to land at the Kennedy space centre in Florida.

NASA has not confirmed what happened to the spacecraft but its vapour trail was seen to disintegrate into several smaller trails in the sky and there are reports of a loud boom and falling debris.

Both Nasa and the White House are flying their US flags at half-mast.

My heart is broken at the loss of seven people today. My windows rattled but at that moment I did not know why. I assumed it was some jet planes over head. It was about five minutes later I turned the TV on and started to hear the news.
Ladyenglish, Texas, USA

I felt so shocked when I listened to the news in the morning. Hard to believe the tragedy happened again, which happened seven years ago. I feel so sorry for the people that have lost their sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, wives and husbands. I feel so sorry that we have lost the bravest men and women who risk their lives to make our dreams come true.
Jun Zhang, China

In 1983 (if I recall correctly) the shuttle Columbia flew piggy-back over Manchester, UK, on a 747. It was a magnificent sight to witness, and now 20 or so years on, I’m seeing the demise of the same orbiter and her crew. I’m so sorry for the loss.
Andy T, UK

We saw the launch at Cape Canaveral a fortnight ago whilst on holiday. It is so sad that the shuttle we saw leaving will not be coming home.
Caroline Hack, Northern Ireland

An overwhelming tragedy. Our American friends continue to amaze me with their resilience in the face of catastrophe. The road to recovery has no doubt already begun.
Ian, Canada

We can’t ever forget that space travel is dangerous, that exploration, by nature, carries risk. The best way we can honour these astronauts, every astronaut who has died in their work, is to keep reaching up.
OTR, USA

America is the only country remotely interested in space travel; through them people from around the world are finding out about space. This is a sad loss not just to America but to the whole world.
Daniel Clegg, England

NOW:

“Take note of what you saw here today. The power and the majesty of the launch, of course, but also the competence and the professionalism, the sheer gall, the pluckiness, the grittiness of this team that pulled this program out of the depths of despair 2 1/2 years ago and made it fly,” NASA Administrator Michael Griffin told a press conference following the launch

“Oh! It was amazing!” said Thor Hurlen of Aalesund, Norway. “You see it on television, but now, to experience it for real and to feel its power — it’s just fantastic.”

For the Burrows family, who were visiting the United States from Burnley, England, Tuesday’s launch was moving.

“I got a lump in my throat,” said Hazel Burrows, 40, as she hugged her 8-year-old daughter. “I had to have my hankie ready because I had tears in my eyes. It was just so emotional.”

Hazel’s husband, Leigh, 30, said the joy of the launch inspired him.

“It was quite emotional, really,” he said. “Thinking about all the things that are happening in the world right now, especially in the United Kingdom with the bombings and things, this just kind of provides you with hope for the future. Something so amazing. Something so positive, you know?”

As he packed his truck to leave, Dave Apostol of Melbourne, Florida, reflected on his first shuttle launch.

“It was awesome!” said Apostol, who camped out overnight to get a spot right by the riverside. “It’s a testament to man’s dream. It’s like the Super Bowl of man’s technology. It’s the Super Bowl of man.”

How time flies. I remember before I started the U of Delaware in 1993, the Hubble Space telescope was launched. It was going to be the next big thing in space research. The hopes were high, that we would soon be able to see to the edge of the Universe.

After the launch, it was realized that the Hubble’s lenses – or eyes – were not focused right. So, the choice was to scrap the entire telescope, or send a Shuttle up with astronauts to do a series of spacewalks to repair it. The decision was to send people up to fix the Hubble in 1993.

When I got to college, I watched much of the live Hubble repair missions on NASA TV as a freshman. It was interesting. We built something, we broke it, and now we’re fixing it 300 miles up.

For over 10 years now, the Hubble has brought amazing imagedry from all corners of the Universe, steller imagines that have amazed children and made scientists cry.

Here is a gallery of Hubble pics taken over the years. Enjoy
http://www.seds.org/hst/hst.html

Due to Bush’s budget constraints for space research, he has decided that the Hubble is no longer valuable. There will be a ‘next generation’ telescope going up in a few years, but there will be a non-activity period of a few years between when the Hubble gets retired and when the new telescope goes up, which i believe is in 2011.

I don’t have a problem with the Hubble being retired, but as the article points out, it’s going to be destroyed. We’re going to spend money to build something to launch into space so it can guide the HST to a semi-graceful death, by diving into the atmosphere and burning to bits on re-entry. This is not how the Hubble should be retired.

The Hubble needs a Shuttle to go and get it, bring it back down safely to Earth, and have it tour the World, finally resting for good in the Smithsonian. Is that too much to ask? We’re going to spend millions to destroy it, why not spend a little more to save it.

————-
NASA budget would kill Hubble
Budget hike for 2006
Monday, February 7, 2005 Posted: 9:14 PM EST (0214 GMT)

CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (AP) — With the moon on its horizon, NASA sees a slight increase in the budget proposed by President Bush on Monday, but it’s not enough to save the Hubble Space Telescope.

Only $93 million in the space agency’s $16.45 billion budget would go toward Hubble’s survival: $75 million to develop a kamikaze robot that would steer the orbiting observatory into the ocean at the end of its lifetime, and $18 million to try to eke out as much scientific observing time as possible from the telescope through clever remote controlling.

No money is in the budget to send either a robotic repairman or shuttle astronauts to Hubble to extend its lifetime, a decision that is sure to anger astronomers and members of Congress.

Late last year, a National Academy of Sciences panel recommended one final visit to Hubble by astronauts.

The proposed budget for NASA — 2.4 percent higher than last year’s — sets aside $9.6 billion for science, aeronautics and exploration, and $6.7 billion for exploration capabilities.

That includes $4.5 billion for the space shuttle program, on track for resuming flights this year for the first time since the 2003 Columbia disaster, and $1.85 billion for the international space station.

Just over a year ago, Bush announced a new exploration vision for NASA geared around returning astronauts to the moon by 2020. Everything now revolves around that.

NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe said even though the space agency is not getting as much money as envisioned by the president a year ago, a 2.4 percent budget increase is “rather remarkable” given the federal deficit and the spending cuts elsewhere in the government.

As for Hubble, O’Keefe said the National Academy of Sciences panel presented such a bleak assessment of a robotic mission to install new parts on the space telescope that it made little sense to presume success and, consequently, no money was put aside for such an endeavor.

“We’ll see. In a month’s time, there may be an epiphany,” O’Keefe said. “But I think it’s going to be a very difficult mountain, a steep hill, to climb.”

O’Keefe reiterated his long-held view that a shuttle flight to Hubble poses too many dangers in the wake of the Columbia catastrophe.

“It is a judgment call and this is a judgment call that is my responsibility for however period of time that I reside here,” said O’Keefe, who will leave NASA in less than two weeks to assume the chancellor’s job at Louisiana State University.

————————————-