Budgetary pressures on science including planetary exploration are enormous. Mars is one of the primary goals of planetary exploration due to its closeness and many similarities to Earth. In fact, Mars is the only other planet in our Solar System where a future presence of humans can be considered. The Mars Science Laboratory is currently on its way to Mars, but beyond the landing of the rover Curiosity, future Mars exploration seems to be uncertain. Yet, we should take pride that NASA has the best record of any space agency and the most sophisticated technology to land probes and rovers on Mars successfully. Many of us feel it would be a grave mistake to retreat from planetary exploration, particularly Mars exploration. Mars is also the only planetary body in our Solar System, where we could find life in the near future -- a theme and objective, which resonates well with the public. However, as laudable this goal is, we still have to be aware of achieving maximum return with minimum resources and conduct space exploration in a cost-conscientious way.
To address the question of life on Mars in a cost-conscientious way, we called for a mission to Mars with a strong and comprehensive life detection component. At the heart of our proposal, just published in the journal Planetary Space and Science, is a small fleet of penetrators that can punch into the Martian soil and run a range of tests for signs of ancient or existing life. We call this mission BOLD and it is both an acronym for Biological Oxidant and Life Detection and a nod to the proposal's ambition.
With this mission proposal, we anticipate to address the big questions on Mars in a much more straightforward way. With the money for space exploration drying up, we have to get some exciting results that not only the experts and scientists in the field are interested in but that the public is interested in as well. The BOLD mission would feature six 130-pound probes that could be dropped to various locations. Shaped like inverted cones, they would parachute to the surface and thrust a soil sampler nearly a foot into the ground upon landing. On-board instrumentation would then conduct half a dozen experiments, transmitting data to an orbiter overhead.
The soil analyzer would measure inorganic ions, pH and the concentration of oxidants such as hydrogen peroxide, since microbial organisms could be adapted to the harsh conditions on Mars by using a mixture of water and hydrogen peroxide as their internal fluid. Hydrogen peroxide or perchlorates might also account for several of the findings of the Viking Mars landers in the late 1970s.
The probe's microscopic imager would look for shapes similar to known terrestrial microfossils, while another instrument (Nanopore-ARROW Instrument) would look for single long molecules similar to the long nucleic acids created by life forms on Earth. Other experiments would repeat work done by the Viking landers, but with greater precision that could detect previously overlooked organic material and re-examine the question of the presence of life on Mars (note: the Viking lander's results from the '70s were inconclusive). Each probe would have about a 50-50 chance of landing successfully. But with the redundancy of six probes, the chance of at least one succeeding is better than 98 percent, which is a very high likelihood for success given the past track record for Mars landing missions.
The proposal comes at a time when NASA is reevaluating its Mars exploration program. In order to find a way out of the current situation, a workshop has been announced on "Concepts and Approaches for Mars Exploration" to be held at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in the Houston area, June 12-14, 2012. It is to be hoped that the Mars program within NASA can be reinvigorated. What many of us eventually like to see in their lifetime are humans walking on Mars. However, before this grand goal can be achieved, robotic exploration has to move forward and we have to do this in a way that both prepares for a later anticipated human landing and to answer the bigger questions that are close to our heart: Are we alone and is there life on Mars?
Let there be no mistake. We live in a dangerous universe. If we do not take steps to explore our planetary neighborhood and eventually build outposts on other worlds, we will follow in the footsteps of the dinosaurs. Certainly, there is no replacement for Earth, and Mars will never be a replacement for Earth. But we do need to move forward, and mission proposals, such as BOLD, will be the first step toward a grand vision. We do have the technology, but the question is: do we also have the political will? All we can do is encourage Congress to provide NASA with the necessary funds to achieve its mission, so that NASA can build on its past great accomplishments. Let's take up a BOLD new chance for Mars exploration!
Aaron Wang: Space and NASA: The Truth
Jim Bell: A Turning Point at Mars
I believe in extending the reach of humanity. It would require cooperation and foresight -- something not common in politicos. It would require problem-solving that could very well make life better here on earth as well. Providing for energy on long trips could be the impetus to helping us solve our own renewable energy problems here. Learning how to use raw materials and create less-polluting production techniques could help us with our own manufacturing and environmental problems.
Certainly exploration of space is a daunting task. But we need to do it. The more we spread out, the more likely human freedom will be preserved. As long as we are all bunched together, the uber-rich can treat us like so much cattle.
That means we need to be establishing the Moon as one of those waystations, and deeper space inhabited artificial habitats in space that serve as stops on the way to and back from Mars.
As for life on Mars, I'm not sure we have anything more to prove. Viking lander experiments, although discounted at the time, provided significant evidence of the existence of microbial life on the planet. Our unwillingness to accept the evidence before our eyes has always puzzled me. The tests we conducted with Viking, those that showed the existence of biological activity, and those that showed a lack, when done on Earth in the Antarctic, provided the same results. We accept the presence of life results in the Antarctic and negate the tests that showed absence, but for Mars we have a different standard.
So going to Mars with humans isn't about the search for life. It's about extending the reach of our species, the outward urge, the moving frontier.
Why don't you just say it? Right now, there is no life on Mars.
Was there ever? Like microbes? Maybe. But locating fossils of microbes is hardly a worthy endeavor.
China is going to obtain the stars because they focus inward and don't try to conquer everyone. Imagine what America could do if we did the same thing.
Not all the money in the world could have built a manned Mars colony.
Going to Mars is long on expenditures and short on economy.
http://www.huliq.com/12092/billionaires-invest-space-asteroid-mining-venture
That's why the smart money is on robotic asteroid mining. Get commerce up and going, then the people can follow.
Let me say I fully support NASA and the science that you are proposing. But we don't tax the way we did in the 70's, so we can't expect a space program like we had in the 70's. It is time for commerce to do what our collective will cannot.
Yes, I can see why you would not want to do something that is of course impossible, because it is strictly sci-fi.
Republican'ts hate Science, and, Progress... and they don't much like Higher Education either. They don't like "Public" Education period. They don' want to FUND those things, they don't want to fund anything, period, unless it's a WAR, and actually Republicans didn't FUND our last two wars they started, they just "borrowed" a trillion.
Without the evil old "educated scientists" to get us TO MARS and without bad big government FUNDS, how we going to get there? Do we send uneducated Astronauts to space?
Since the population of poverty ridden homeless families is growing in America, millions of American children go to bed hungry at night, and republicans won't even fund free school lunches for hungry children...it seems to me we are already going the way of the dinosaur.
As much as I'd like to see humans walk on Mars, I'd prefer seeing Americans right here right now, EATING two or three squares a day, with a decent roof over their heads, and being able to go to the doctor when they are sick, and getting a quality education...first.
Maybe we do live in a dangerous "Universe" but humans can't even manage ONE earth.
Seems to me the biggest threat to earth...and America...is ignorance, poverty, hunger, and fools, right here on THIS little planet.
The increasing poverty in America is the result of deliberate government policy...a preference for spending cuts to finance tax cuts. The same govt austerity is eating away at the space program.
The benefits of a vigorous space program...the creation of jobs in science and manufacturing all around the nation...are similar to the far more dubious benefits of war spending. Space exploration has the additional benefit of relieving, rather than causing, human suffering.
The idea America will be a Space exploration player, let alone power, is laughable. It will be the Chinese who will populate the first colonies on the Moon for mining and on Mars because it will also bring rewards. We will have to beg to participate.
The International Space Station which we cannot service, is nearing the end of its life cycle and a Bipartisan Congress will cut funds to keep it going.
We now spend more on wars than we did going to the Moon. We prefer slaughter over Space exploration.
America is a failed nation state and should be broken up into smaller units if all we are good for is warfare.
No empire lasts forever.