Curiosity, More than Just a Mars Rover

Curiosity is the NASA's next Mars rover. It is also known as the Curiosity Mars Science Laboratory. The main problem for most rovers on Mars is that there is a limited ability for those rovers to analyze the actual composition and complex organic molecules. Luckily Curiosity's name as a Mars Science Laboratory is not just for show! This 2.5 billion dollar, 3 meter long robot with the width as large as a car, is five times the weight of previous rovers. Here is a picture comparison between the most recently sent twin rovers, Spirit/Opportunity, and Curiosity.

(http://flyingsinger.blogspot.com/2009/05/sojourner-spirit-opportunity-curiosity.html)

Curiosity is essentially the size of a car while Spirit/Opportunity is the size of a golf cart. The picture merely gives an idea of Curiosity's size compared to past rovers and thus the context here (which is on Mars) is not truthful! Due to the size of Curiosity, NASA is using a different landing procedure than previous rovers. This new landing procedure is not just more sophisticated, but it is also more safe for the rover if it goes off without a problem. A video with excellent commentary here shows this new sky crane landing system and also other features of Curiosity that makes it a science laboratory!

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIpFgump7so&feature=player_embedded)

This clip really shows why Curiosity is by far the "most scientifically advanced robot rover" ever to be sent beyond Earth. Compared to the old methods of landing rovers like by sticking them into very soft cushioned beach-balls and literally let it bounce on the surface of Mars until it stops, this sky crane landing system seems like a few generations ahead in technology. Curiosity's 10 science instruments will be crucial in allowing the rover to search for evidence of microbial life and also chemical ingredients for life on Mars. One of the most unique instruments Curiosity has is an actual laser that is meant to "look inside rocks and release the gasses" so that its spectrometer can analyze the composition of predicted ancient bedrocks. In the video in the above, it also shows that Curiosity carries an on-board scientific lab that can analyze rocks and sand collected by its drill. Without a doubt, Curiosity is probably as close to robotic ways of doing anthropology on Mars as we will ever get until NASA actually sends manned anthropology teams to Mars to dig and search for dead or currently living lifeforms.

The power supply of the Curiosity is made of plutonium dioxide and is predicted to "significantly enhance" the driving range, scientific capability, and working lifetime of Curiosity compared to solar powered rovers like Spirit and Opportunity.

(http://www.universetoday.com/90397/closing-the-clamshell-on-a-martian-curiosity/)

Curiosity is scheduled to launch on November 25th, 2011 from Cape Canaveral, Florida on an Atlas V rocket. It is anticipated that Curiosity and its on board science laboratory will change our very understanding of Mars and hopefully provide some conclusive proof that life could have, and perhaps even did exist on Mars in the past! Here is a cool time lapse video of NASA's Curiosity rover being packed up for a trip down to Florida for its near future launch.

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=reK2wZ6_ArM)

The video covers the work of "a period of four days" in one minute. I truly hope that Curiosity does get to Mars in good condition, as I also look forward to its contribution in the future to our understanding of the nearby (astronomically speaking) red planet!

Who Needs R2D2? We Now Have Robonaut!

Lets face it. Space is not a friendly place to be for most, if not any, living organisms. This is one of the reasons why probe missions are favored by NASA over manned missions, especially on long distance journeys. Surprisingly, we humans actually require a lot more maintenance, in the form of food, workouts, and healthy life style to be efficient and productive compared to our robotic counterparts. Despite recent increases in movies that depict human-created robots overthrowing their previous masters, NASA has gone through great measures to produce the state of the art robots that would ultimately assist astronauts on space missions and also in the international space station. This emphasis on robotic technology is astute because human lives are irreplaceable due to the amount of training each human must undergo to become an astronaut, while robots are more replaceable. Situations like space walks that has always posed a big risk for astronauts will be decreased almost completely if smart robots can take on the job.

NASA recently developed Robonaut 2, also known as R2 (which seems really similar to R2D2). It is a "dexterous humanoid robot" that is meant to take over simple and dangerous tasks on space missions. On February 24th, 2011, the last Discovery shuttle flight before the shuttle was decommissioned took a Robonaut 2 into space and on board the International Space Station. This marks the first humanoid robot to be in space, and within the International Space Station. Right now there are four operational Robonaut 2s, with many others still in development. These robots were specifically made to be humanoids because only by having human-like physiology will equipment and tools used by robots and humans be interchangeable and thus simpler to produce and replace.

(http://www.space.com/10772-robonaut-2-nasa-space-droid-details.html)

(http://www.space.com/12698-space-station-robot-robonaut-2-power-tests.html)

The implications of the technology of robots, which is the decrease in risk for any humans in any dangerous situation or task, gives the technology much attention from "both military and space" agencies all across the world. This means the amount of funding and support for developing such technologies is very high. It is already predicted that perhaps by 2040, robotic intelligence may start to encroach to human levels. It does make me wonder if the science fiction shows and movies about robots rebelling against humans could become a reality. On the bright side, no doubt better robotic technology will help in our search for life in the universe!

Complex Organic Molecules: More Prevalent Than Previously Thought!

Complex organic molecules have always been conceived as originating from comets. After sending numerous probes to not just detect but also send actual specimens of comets back down to Earth, it has been confirmed that there are complex organic molecules within comets. In fact, it is theorized that complex organic molecules are the "dark surface material" of comets! Due to the high concentration of complex organic molecules within comets, scientists also believe that it is due to this fact that the Earth contained complex organic molecules within its primordial soup over 4 billion years ago, that life was able to develop on Earth. The theory was that comets carrying "payloads of organic material" crashed into the Earth's surface, increasing the amount of organic material (and of course increasing the amount of H2O as well)already present on the planet which led to the rise of life.

(http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Comets)

However, scientists have found that complex organic molecules of "high density" exist throughout the entire universe. The source of complex organic molecules must be from a more powerful, and much more common source. Very recently, scientists have uncovered stars as having the capacity of producing complex organic material! Although the actual process of producing them is still unknown to us, it has been confirmed that the star's infrared emissions (by using the Infrared Space Observatory and the Spitzer Space Telescope) that were thought to represent polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon molecules (PAHs) actually was complex organic molecules in the first place! This helps to explain why so many solar nebula are also known to contain large amounts of complex organic molecules. Because countless stars go supernova, this helps spread the seeds of life into the entire universe.

(http://my-blackberry.net/49__Ingredients_for_Life_-_Complex_Organic_Molecules.htm)

This new information will add to the importance of stars, and their contribution to the production of life. This brings in a point that I thought of immediately after reading this article about complex organic molecules originating from stars. It seems like the older the universe gets, the higher the chance for life to occur across the universe. This is because the longer time passes by, the amount of stars that have gone through supernova since the time of the big bang will continue to increase and therefore increasingly release produced heavier elements (which help to form rocky planets like the first 4 planets in our solar system), and complex organic molecules (which contribute in forming carbon based lifeforms). Perhaps unfortunately life on Earth, due to absurd probability, accidentally formed life when the composition of the universe is not 'mature' enough for life. Perhaps the universe needs to undergo a few more billion years for life, and rocky planets like Earth, to be plentiful, and thus making us quite alone for now in this still 'immature' universe.

Life on Mars, and Missing Factors that Allows for Life on Mars!

Because so many fellow classmates have posted blog posts about the meteorite from Mars in Antarctica and its implications, and the possibility of Mars sustaining and retaining life, I shall also do one of my own in hopes to answer some of the questions they have left behind and come up with questions of my own! Life on Mars for us seems to be a highly skeptical topic, but for Penelope Boston, a scientist that has worked with extreme lifeforms on Earth, she has in fact very high hopes for discovering life on Mars! Here is a video of her point of view!

Despite her optimistic beliefs that there is 25-50% chance that there is life on Mars, I disagree with her claim that life is a "natural outgrowth of evolution of matter." Certainly this is the premier theory of life's origins but it is one that is barely supported. To assume that matter can evolve from a state of unawareness to self-awareness is like saying early, primitive computers can evolve their own artificial intelligence and self-awareness without the help of human programmers. Thus I would criticize that 'evolution' is probably the biggest understatement I've ever come across when it is used to define the transformation from inorganic chemistry to biological cells! I personally doubt that biochemists can create artificial life, especially without a full understanding of the requirements that fuel this process of changing nonliving matter into living matter. However, this does not mean that there is no life on Mars. Although Penelope Boston is highly confident in the chances of finding life on Mars(and she IS an expert on extreme organisms on Earth), I'd say that without knowing the process of how matter transforms from nonliving to living, it is impossible to say if Mars fits the requirements of such transformations. So even if Mars had the environment to sustain life, perhaps unfortunately Mars did not have the requirements to bring life into existence in the first place. Thus Mars' ability to support life does not have any relevance to Mars actually having/have had life existing on it! Of course, these assumptions of mine are based on the theory that life can only exist if they were transformed from nonliving matter to living matter on a specific planet. If astronomers are able to provide support for the case that life is seeded from one planet that is teeming with life, to another through meteorites and other modes of natural transportation, that may provide an adequate explanation if life on Mars is validated to be true. On the other hand, if it is ever conclusive that life is on Mars, another adequate explanation for such an event is that perhaps Mars met the requirements, whatever these requirements are, for life to transform from nonliving matter into self-aware living cells.

Another way of guessing if life was ever on Mars is by seeing if all factors that are required to sustain life (as we know it on Earth) is or was present on Mars. As Science-Nut pointed out on the "Is there Possibility for Life on Mars" blog entry, it seems that Mars doesn't have a magnetic field strong enough to protect the entire planet from solar winds, flares, and deadly meteoroids. Without a dense atmosphere, meteoroids of the same size would cause much deadlier explosions on Mars compared to Earth because Earth's atmosphere causes friction from dense molecules which may burn full meteoroids into crisp (shooting stars), or even reduce the meteoroids' size before it impacts the Earth's surface. Mars' lack of magnetic fields is actually an anomaly within our solar system. As this article from Nasa shows, Earth, "Mercury, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune all have magnetospheres" and only Mercury's magnetic field is smaller than Earth's (and for good reason due to Mercury's relative size to Earth's!) Venus, which does not have a global magnetic field is an understandable exception due to the fact that magnets "lose magnetism" from exposure to heat. Being the hottest planet in the solar system, this allows Venus to pass the buck. However, Mars' climate is nowhere close enough to be understood in the same way as Venus. Recent studies provided in this article show a possible explanation: perhaps giant asteroids that impacted Mars in the past may have crippled the planet's magnetic field. On another note that has a more direct impact on question of life on Mars, is that this article also shows that recent data indicates that Mars' global magnetic field disappeared just when Mars became 500 million years old. This perhaps may decrease the chance of finding life on Mars greatly, be it dead remains and or existing life! Present studies (from this website) show that it took Earth about 1 billion years for the first lifeforms to form. This would mean that maybe before life ever existed on Mars, Mars lost its magnetic field which rendered the planet unlivable because solar winds would blow away the atmosphere of Mars and lethal solar radiation would hit the planet's surface mercilessly. 
Although I do hope that there is life on Mars, unfortunately present data indicates that there is more chance for Mars to only have nonliving matter than having life or remnants of life.

There is still so much about the nature of life that we as humans have no clue of. Our educated guesses unfortunately may still be distant from the actual truth of what is necessary for life to "evolve" from inorganic matter.

The Possibility of Achieving Faster than the Speed of Light

For almost a century, the speed of light is a renowned and acknowledged speed limit from special relativity. Although the math works out, only now have we as human beings are able to verify this almost century old "fact." Intriguing enough, due to the recent CERN announcement that neutrinos travel faster than the speed of light, this fact may be under scrutiny.

If we assume that everything checks out from error analysis and from replicated experiments, this may not call for a total reorganization for general relativity. Present quantum theories speculate that at the scale of smaller than atoms, there are wormholes at the sizes of a "billion trillion trillionth" of a centimeter across.
Unlike light, and other electromagnetic radiation from the electromagnetic spectrum, neutrinos actually have mass (shown here). However, because the mass is almost significant to the point where neutrinos are able to pass through Earth (and even your own body, as every second "tens of thousands of neutrinos" actually do so) without interacting with most of the matter on or within Earth, it may be possible for neutrinos to interact with the tiny micro-microscopic wormholes. Common concepts of wormholes are that it is not just able to transport objects instantaneously over any distance, but it is also able to transport objects backwards or forwards into time. Therefore some question that if neutrinos do have the capability of traveling through wormholes, does that mean they are capable of traveling through time as well. Unfortunately for those who believe in time travel in the sense of going forwards or backwards in time, wormholes may not be the answer they are looking for. Current theories from special relativity speculate that it is impossible to use a wormhole like a time machine. The video here shows why such a thing is predicted to not exist.

Although quantum theory has been criticized for being unable to justify numerous phenomenons in the cosmos, if neutrinos do travel through wormholes theorized by quantum theory, it may be a strong support to some portions of quantum theory. The scientific implications are unknown to me, but perhaps this may lead to a revolution where quantum theory and Einstein's theory of relativity may be united into one theory that may be able to encompass a larger understanding of the universe than our present scientific paradigm. Unfortunately due to my lack of knowledge of the unification process and problems of quantum theory and general relativity, I am unable to prove more information. However, the prospects of physics may be looking better than ever. The possibilities of justifying actual wormhole existence may be close. That may lead to a new way of understanding the universe and its almost limitless phenomenons. 

4 Dimensional Universe

When the fact that the universe is four dimensional was heard by me, I was dumbstruck. It almost feels like we as human beings are unable to detect and understand four dimensional space! But it may be simpler than what most people imagine! 

Here's a website that helps visualize 4 dimensional space! Although it does not exactly help to show the shape of the universe, it does show the nature of the universe. It also helps to describe the expansion of the universe with the use of the scale of time! Here's an image to show what I mean:

Despite the idea of the universe being in 4 dimensions, there are other theories out there that place the dimension of the universe at above 10 dimensions or more. One of these theories is called M-Theory, or also known as string theory. Popularly known as Sheldon Cooper of Big Bang Theory's field of study. M-theory dictates that the universe actually has 11 dimensions. For those who want to read on M-theory and its implications, check out these two websites!

1) http://www.columbia.edu/cu/record/23/18/14.html

2) http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/gr/public/qg_ss.html

UFOs, and Their Negative and Positive Impacts on Humanity!

I recently read a website on UFOs, abductions, and ancient astronauts. In addition to that, I also read Alien Impact by Michael Craft over the summer. It is interesting to see that despite the continuous generation of UFO "sightings" from the general public, scientists seem to be quite persuaded that such sightings were driven by a mix of belief and unsubstantiated support. In almost all cases, all UFO sightings described in 'Alien Impact' seemed to have shown that UFO sightings are perhaps a psychological creation that has no relevance to the real world. Perhaps the sudden realization of space being ever changing due to the very recently opened space frontier, and also the endless possibilities of worlds out there in the universe that have the capacity for life, we as humans long for a meeting with an alien race. 'Alien Impact' goes as far as to saying that UFO sightings may be ingrained within western civilization as a type of culture that manifests itself due to people's own beliefs. The website I've provided also shows philosophically sound skepticism against wild propositions.

On another note, despite the negativity of UFOs and their unsupported existence, their contribution to humankind may not be all negative! NASA has managed to test the notion of the 'flying saucer' and has deemed it a more efficient way of getting aircraft off the ground than mere rockets. A video below shows exactly how this is done:

Despite the fact that many scientists insist that UFOs are humanity's creation, it is odd to also think that humanity has benefited from such ideas. Perhaps developing technologies such as this, be it that they are still in primitive stages, may help us revolutionize atmospheric and space flight as we know it!