On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog as the saying goes. But the next time you come online, there's a chance your chat buddy could be a chimpanzee. Musician Peter Gabriel has always been keen on sharing the internet with other species. He's joining forces with Vint Cerf and Neil Gershenfeld to bring our primate cousins online.
If the experiment goes ahead – a spokesperson for Monkey World said the plans were still at a very early stage and wouldn’t comment further – the hope is to see if chimpanzees could learn to use videoconferencing to communicate with each other. “The idea is to extend a big video network that already exists in labs at [MIT] so that different species including our own have a chance to communicate,” said Gabriel. “I am also interested in how they would use the internet to communicate.” After that, he would be looking at how they could communicate with us.
Of particular interest is if this will encourage chimps to ask existential questions. Apes taught human sign language know words like "who", "what", and "where" but, from Joseph Jordania's Who Asked The First Question?:
Nevertheless, according to the accounts of the experiment authors, apes do not ask questions. Wonderful examples of conversations with their human teachers have been recorded and published (Terrace, 1980; Gardner & Gardner 1975, 1984; Premack, 1976; Rumbaugh, 1977; Rumbaugh & Gill, 1977; Patterson & Linden, 1981). Analysis of their conversations shows that in human-primate conversations questions are asked by the humans only. The same can be said about the question words: apes understand them and give appropriate responses, but amazingly they themselves do not use question words in conversations with their human teachers.
On the bright side, the internet's love of cats crosses species boundaries evinced by Koko the Gorilla and her pets. Monkeys also love selfies. Our times get exponentially more interesting with each passing moment.
You may also like:
One of the most famous quantum physics experiments is the double-slit experiment. It's a simple experiment proving light behaves as a wave and a particle at the same time. You don't need a fancy set-up to try this at home, as Thomas Young performed a version of the double-slit experiment back in 1801. To be brief, a light source shines on a surface with two slits in front of a wall. The light creates an interference pattern of bright and dark spots since the photons are going through both openings at the same time, acting like a wave. Should one measure the light, in hopes of catching it acting like a wave, light then changes its mind acting like a particle by going through one slit at a time.
If the light "knows" when it's being measured, John Archibald Wheeler proposed it could be "fooled".
He suggested that the actual point of measurement at which you spy on the path taken by the light could be set up after the light has already passed through the slits but before it arrives at the detector—so the light could not know as it moved through the experiment whether it would be observed or not. Such experiments have since been carried out in quantum laboratories and it turns out that, even then, light could not be fooled. The observer’s later choice of what measurements to make determines whether the photon took one path or two at an earlier point in the test. In other words, the observer seems to have changed what has happened in the past.
Wheeler's delayed choice thought experiment utilizing some of the biggest, and most distant, objects in space. Gravitational lensing is when a large object with a strong gravitational field bends light from an object, creating the illusion of there being two. His delayed-choice experiment would use a quasar's light bent by a galaxy's gravitational field.
Now Dr. Laurance Doyle at the SETI Institute, and a few of his colleagues, are hoping to turn Wheeler's thought experiment into reality. They're scaling it down, and making it a bit more practical. Their plan is to ping Jupiter's moons Ganymede and Europa with radar when they're at nearly the same distance from Earth on the other side of the sun. As the radar propagates the 628 million kilometers between us and Jupiter, the beam will spread like a flashlight enabling it to hit both moons at the same time. When the signal bounces back at Earth, Doyle and co. will recombine the beams to see if there's an interference pattern or not. The interesting part is our sun's gravity could warp the beams, delaying them and allowing astronomers to see the path the radar took.
What they hope to discover is the nature of time.
If you’d asked Einstein, he would have told you that time is another dimension, much like the three dimensions of space. Together they knit together to create a spacetime fabric that pervades the universe. This notion of time as a dynamic, flexible dimension forms the basis of his immensely successful general theory of relativity, which explains how gravity manifests on cosmic scales as matter warps spacetime. On the other hand, however, the equally celebrated theory of quantum mechanics, which governs the nanoscale behavior of atoms and subatomic particles, says that time is unaffected by the presence of matter, serving as an absolute background reference clock against which motion can be measured.
One fly in the ointment is how precisely the scientists can measure any time difference. They could set up the experiment so the difference is so large, there will still be an interference pattern. The next time Earth, Jupiter, and its moons are in the correct alignment is 2017. Fingers crossed they're able to pull this off!
Roger Shawyer's "impossible" stardrive continues inching its way towards reality. The EmDrive is a RF resonant cavity thruster using microwaves, rather than reaction mass like liquid oxygen, to move. Keep in mind this isn't a warp engine since it doesn't bend spacetime. Yet the EmDrive has the potential to go faster than current technology, getting astronauts to Pluto in 18 months compared to New Horizons's nine year journey, opening up the cosmos to humanity.
What makes this gadget "impossible" is its apparent violation of Newton's Third Law: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Best analogy for the EmDrive's counterintuitive mechanism is a person in a car pushing the steering wheel and the vehicle moves forward. Conventionally, a driver can only move the vehicle by pushing the back bumper. Shawyer insists no physical laws are violated by the EmDrive. The thrust happens because the microwaves have a group velocity greater in one direction when Einstein's relativity is taken into account. A pretty neat trick.
But with extraordinary claims, there's extraordinary skepticism. At first, skeptics claimed the source of the thrust was thermal convection from air heated by the microwaves. Paul March at Eagleworks put the kibosh on that, testing the EmDrive in a hard vacuum and still saw thrust. More recently skeptics suggest investigators are measuring the Lorentz force, a force exerted by a magnetic field on a moving electric charge, rather than thrust from the microwaves. Lorentz interactions are the principle behind loudspeakers, railguns, and particle accelerators. On Halloween Paul posted they've tested the EmDrive again, taking those interactions into account, and the anomalous thrust signals remain. Except he can't show us 'til the peer-reviewed paper's published. He does drop a few hints about how Eagleworks compensated for this complication.
I will tell you that we first built and installed a 2nd generation, closed face magnetic damper that reduced the stray magnetic fields in the vacuum chamber by at least an order of magnitude and any Lorentz force interactions it could produce. I also changed up the torque pendulum's grounding wire scheme and single point ground location to minimize ground loop current interactions with the remaining stray magnetic fields and unbalanced dc currents from the RF amplifier when its turned on. This reduced the Lorentz force interaction to less than 2 micro-Newton (uN) for the dummy load test. Finally we rebuilt the copper frustum test article so that it is now fully integrated with the RF VCO, PLL, 100W RF amp, dual directional coupler, 3-stub tuner and connecting coax cables, then mounted this integrated test article at the opposite end of the torque pendulum, as far away as possible from the 2nd generation magnetic damper where only the required counterbalance weights now reside. Current null testing with both the 50 ohm dummy load and with the integrated test article rotated 90 degrees with respect to the TP sensitive axis now show less than one uN of Lorentz forces on the TP due to dc magnetic interactions with the local environment even when drawing the maximum RF amp dc current of 12 amps.
In the meantime there are quite a few makers building their own EmDrives at home. All one needs is a truncated cone of copper, a 2.45 Ghz magnetron from a typical microwave oven, wires and a source of electricity. Over on YouTube, iulian207 has been showing the world his adventures testing a homebrew EmDrive. By no means are his experiments happening under the same, strict conditions one could expect of NASA, but the results are provocative.
Should someone have the moxie, the cash, and the EmDrive's physics are sound, we might be on the brink of a grand diaspora. A democratization of the plutocratic exit strategy where no human's left behind. Science fiction has explored these scenarios in the past. Take Orion's Arm, a collaborative, science fiction worldbuilding project and its entry on backyarders. In the 22nd and 23rd centuries, the little people gained access to tech that used to be the domain of governments and megacorporations. They cobbled together starships, flinging themselves into the dark hoping to find fame, fortune, freedom, or just a little peace and quiet. Closer to our own timeline is Jerry Oltion's The Getaway Special. It's a fun little novel about a scientist sharing his blueprints for a hyperdrive on the internet, enabling anyone with a septic tank, oxygen, and some electrical knowhow to chill out on an alien planet for the weekend.
We are living in interesting times.
You might also like:
"Are we alone?"
Quite possibly the biggest question posed by eusocial primates. The need to know encouraged our forebears to climb down from the treetops. To brave the savannahs in hopes of sighting distant forests, or making meaningful contact with other clever apes. Over the millennia humans crossed oceans to new lands in hopes of deepening their gene pool, or their pockets. Unlike Alexander the Great, we do not weep when we see the breadth of our domain, knowing there are no more worlds to conquer. Instead we turn our gaze to the stars in hopes of expanding our real estate portfolio, and perk our ears heavenward to eavesdrop on aliens.
More esoterically, cosmologists and mathematicians propose the existence of parallel universes. If it happens we are the sole inhabitants in this dimension, maybe one day we can ping nearby branes of other universes, and hear what our parallel peers have to say about the human condition. The math seems to bear out the many-worlds interpretation, but where's the evidence?
Back in 2010, Stephen Feeney and pals performed the first observational tests of eternal inflation. They combed WMAP's 7-year survey of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) for evidence of cosmic collisions. Their theory predicts our universe exists inside a single bubble within an expanding multiverse. Other universes exist within their own bubbles, sometimes 'bruising' ours. Bringing us to Roger Penrose and Vahe Gurzadyan detecting concentric circles in the CMB. These patterns could be indicative of a cyclical universe, with each incarnation ending with a big bang. The subsequent universe contains each of the previous universes, presenting a cosmological model akin to a Matryoshka doll. Feeney did note with the volume of data from WMAP, "[I]t is rather easy to find all sorts of statistically unlikely properties in a large dataset like the CMB."
More observations would be needed to support these theories. WMAP's successor, the Planck observatory, was up to the task. More sensitive than its predecessor, Planck left behind reams of data after its decomissioning in 2013. Ranga-Ram Chary took it upon himself to renew the search. His Spectral Variations of the Sky: Constraints on Alternate Universes describes bright anomalies in the CMB, possibly from our universe bumping into others. Chary's method was to subtract the CMB, dust, gas, and stars from Planck's data which should've left nothing but random noise. At the frequency of 143 GHz he found some parts of the sky were significantly brighter than others, proposing they're evidence of those bumps. With such outlandish claims, there's a high burden of proof to support them. Chary proposes two explanations outside of alternate universes. He suggests the bright spots may be carbon monoxide in the foreground interstellar medium (ISM) from stellar nurseries. Something similar happened with BICEP2's data when scientists crowed about last year's detection of gravity waves. Instead, those waves turned up being dust in the ISM. Ranga-Ram goes on to say carbon monoxide in the ISM is highly unlikely, since the lines aren't as strong as they ought to be. Therefore a multiverse is a distinct possibility. At least 'til NASA's Primordial Inflation Explorer, or PIXIE, launches in 2016 to disprove these theories.
Bringing us back to Feeney's eternal inflation model. Once inflation starts it doesn't stop, producing smaller pocket universes within the multiverse. Most of these bubbles would have their own physics and composition, some tearing themselves apart in the blink of an eye. Others would be more or less indistinguishable from our own. Some, like Edward Harrison and John Gribbin, posit this is evidence of why our universe is so stable.
[Harrison] says that there are three possible answers. First, that God designed it, though he argues that this answer precludes further rational inquiry. Second, the anthropic principle, but he finds this unsatisfactory. His third answer is that our Universe was created by life of superior intelligence existing in another physical universe. How does he arrive at that conclusion? First, he picks up on the above suggestions of black holes as the birthplaces of new universes. Second, he argues that due to the rapid evolution of intelligence (which we currently see in humanity) there is every reason to expect that a time will come when we will be able to design and create our own universes. Thus, the fine tuning of this Universe is to be explained as an engineering project of superior beings. They have created this Universe out of a black hole. He calls it a 'natural creation theory', and claims that it also explains why the Universe is intelligible to us. It is created by minds similar to our own, who designed it to be that way. cite
What if all those brief-lived universes are failed experiments? The product of graduate students pursuing their masters or doctorates, conjuring up each universe like a game of SimCity just to see what works. Or beings from another universe planning the ultimate exit strategy, abandoning their universe for another. Take Marvel's Galactus. Formerly known as Galan of Taa, his universe collapsed on itself. In the ensuing big bang, he was reborn as Galactus: Devourer of Worlds. In Stephen Baxter's novel Ring, an alien race called the Xeelee hopes to escape the heat death of the universe via the Great Attractor. It's the ultimate big dumb object, created by the Xeelee using cosmic strings as an escape hatch to other universes where physical laws aren't so familiar.
The possibilities are, literally, endless.
Living in a fishbowl isn't all it's cracked up to be. Three squares a day, moody lighting, and a never-ending parade of ugly-but-clever apes tapping on the glass. But life gets dull. There are only so many hiding spots, the gravel is only so deep, and that plastic diver isn't getting any more attractive.
Combining their mad Houdini skills with unearthly intelligence, octopodes are notorious for causing mischief. Many FOAFtales litter the internet of nightly jaunts to snack on neighbors. They use tools, care for their young, and show empathy. Take this passage from Sy Montgomery's delightful The Soul of an Octopus. Anna, a volunteer with Asperger's Syndrome at the New England Aquarium, is having a hard time coping after her best friend's suicide, and the staff encourages her to play with a wild-caught octopus named Octavia.
She was working that Wednesday in Cold Marine when Dave suggested she might want to play with Octavia. "At that point," Anna wrote me, "I had already taken her out more times than I could count, and I felt like I knew her pretty well. I think she sensed something was wrong. She was a lot gentler than she usually was, and she had her tentacles on my shoulders. It's hard to explain why I think she understood... After interacting with an animal lots of times, you get to understand what the usual behavior is and what it does in different situations.
Observations and anecdotes like these suggest there's something more going on than mere instinct and conditioning. Patrick Lee at The California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco respects their intelligence, knowing happy critters mean happy visitors. He illustrates his maverick approach to engaging the strange in the video below.
So, maybe, the next time you're out for sushi, give the takoyaki a pass. There's a chance octopodes might return the favor when human sashimi is on the menu.
You might also like:
Quantum suicide is one of the most horrifying thought experiments proposed by Hans Moravec. To be brief, rig up a gun to a device measuring the spin value of a proton every ten seconds. The spin value randomly creates a quantum bit as 1 or 0. When the trigger's pulled and the quantum bit comes up 1, the gun fires, killing the subject. Zero? The subject survives, and will survive subsequent attempts should Hugh Everett's many-worlds interpretation prove correct. It's a riff on Schrödinger's cat, where kitty is in a superposition of being alive and dead at the same time.
But who wants to risk their lives despite the prospect of quantum immortality? Isn't there a safer way to test this?
Enter Daniel Filan and Joseph Hope, two of the Australian National University's brightest, addressing the question, "What would it have looked like if it looked like I were in a superposition?" Their theory has nothing to do with conspiracy theories, disinformation, nor dodgy memories but remembering events from parallel universes, harkening to Fiona Broome's Mandela Effect.
In case you've been living under a rock, the most popular example of this theory is the Berenstain Bears controversy. Rap duo Run The Jewels, and many others, insist the children's book series was originally spelled "Berenstein".
Filian and Hope discover it's impossible to find definitive proof, but their paper describes how to detect if a person was in a state of superposition. It's a non-lethal take on quantum suicide. The experimenter enters a machine with pen and paper to record the state of an electron as "yes" or "no". After noting their observation, they exit the machine, leaving the data on a table. After, say, 100 tries, the data is reviewed. Should the compiled results be roughly 50/50, then the person wasn't in superposition. If all the results are the same, the experimenter was in superposition.
"We also note that this test relies crucially on both the 'memory loss' experienced by the experimenter, and the knowledge of the phase of the initial superposition. The full quantum state of the experimenter, including their memories, is being generated by the machine. This means that it is possible for them to have any memories at all, but we have shown that they must be identical across multiple branches of the superposition, and therefore cannot be correlated with the actual relevant measurement results."
What if these memories only appear identical, and the differences are so insignificant where realities are indistinguishable from another? For example, the differences between a pair of realities might be an atom resonating at a lower energy than its parallel doppelgänger. Over these iterations, based upon the experimenter's measurements, a universe with a significant difference like Berenstain/Berenstein could crop up and conflict with "reality".
The possibilities are endless, like our infinite universes.
- Does Quantum Physics Imply That You Are Immortal?
- The Berenst#in Bears Problem: Alternate Timelines and Spurious Realities
(h/t Norman R.)
The new New Horizons images are out and they reveal Pluto has blue skies and red water ice! The blue is caused by a mysterious mix of particles scattering blue light when sun light reaches them, and the layers of haze extend to 100 miles above Pluto's surface. And on the surface? Red-coloured water ice. This might not be exciting to some, but it raises very big questions in the search for Earth-like planets. Pluto was expected to be as barren as our own moon, but everything New Horizons has beamed back to Earth has blown the minds of the NASA scientists studying the data. Dr Stern and his colleagues have every right to hype this up, 2015 is absolutely a year for the science text books. And the quality of the images... this was the stuff of dreams when I was a kid. Just look at that!
This world is alive. It has weather, it has hazes in the atmosphere, active geology. Every week I am floored. Nasa won’t let me tell you what we’re going to tell you on Thursday. It’s amazing.
This is what Dr Alan Stern, one of NASA's lead researchers, told a packed lecture hall at the University of Alberta in Canada on Monday. Pluto, once a planet and then demoted to an insignificant dwarf rock at the edge of our Solar System, is proving to be as interesting as Mars. Only 10 percent of the data captured by NASA's New Horizons spacecraft has been downloaded, so what has NASA seen that has Dr Stern giddy as a schoolboy?
We'll find out today, when NASA releases new images and data from the New Horizons spacecraft. Or will the news be about Pluto's moon, Charon? After the huge announcement of flowing salt water on Mars, what could have NASA even more excited about a little planet & its moon at the edge of our solar system? Will Matt Damon gear up for The Plutonian?
Beautiful image of Pluto & Charon below from NASA's New Horizons page.
You'll also like:
- The Overview Effect: Seeing Earth From Space Transforms Your Perspective On Life
- Artist Accurately Drew Pluto... in 1979
- Ferryman of the Vasty Deep: Charon Comes Into View
- Water on Mars: Amateur Research Scores
- A Martian Stonehenge, or Tars Tarkas up to shenanigans?
- Don't Drink The Martian Water
- Mother Lode of Unseen Apollo Images Dumped On The Internet
- The World Newton Meteorite: From Outer Space Into Fiction
In 1966 military sound engineer Frank Watlington heard something weird while recording underwater explosions.
Frank passed the recordings off to biologist Roger Payne. After a few listenings, he discovered these weren't random sounds but complex vocalizations by creatures possibly as smart as humans. Recordings weren't the only data Payne shared with the world, He printed out sonograms of whale song, illustrating their structure as units, phrases, and themes.
Ever since Payne's discovery of whale song's properties, humans fascination with whales has flourished. If it wasn't for his discovery, these great beasts could've become a fond memory, hunted to extinction. Fortunately whales still swim among us, singing to each other, tantalizing us with the prospect of interspecies communication.
Eerily, the sonograms resembled the sheet music for Gregorian chants. These neumes evolved into today's musical notes. Now David Rothenberg and Mike Deal have standardized whale song notation for human consumption.
The top row contains individual examples of each unit. The colored glyphs below were created by tracing the “averaged” shapes that resulted from overlaying the many occurrences of the same unit across Knapp’s recording.
Because standard musical notation is, in essence, made of timelines of note symbols plotted against a vertical axis of pitch frequencies, we can match the whale sounds to their corresponding frequencies on the musical staves. Hopefully this gives the whale sound shapes a more familiar context.
This isn't humanity's first attempt to put whale song into an anthropomorphic context. Marc Fischer uses wavelets, a mathematical function used in signal processing, to visualize sound. Over at Aguasonic Acoustics, he's imaged whale and dolphin song into gorgeous mandalas like the one below. Best thing about them, they still show "rhymes" and the units of speech that excited Payne.
Going a step further into the fringe, look at the soundwaves in the blue whale song video. If you squint, you can make out a face in parts of the sonogram. This might be a clue to the method of communication between whales. Whales use sound not only to communicate, but also to hunt and navigate with active sonar. Sonar is the use of sound waves and listening for the echo to "see" the world. Sonar's pretty sensitive, as dolphins can differentiate fish with their clicks and whistles.
But what if these vocalizations aren't language as we know it, but images or sonic holograms.
Each moan, groan, click, and whistle, adjusted for pitch, rhythm and tempo, could generate an image or animation. Instead of saying "A pod of orca killed ol' Humphrey", the witnesses would create the scene in a song. As the song propagates through pods, variation does occur.This might be evidence of whales collaborating, embellishing, or entropy akin to a game of Telephone. That's a huge leap of logic, but how could one test the hypothesis of whale song as an image?
Putting whale song back into a human context, consider each unit of whale song as a pixel. With enough pixels, an image will form, but only if one knows the correct pattern for the raster. Take the Arecibo message as an example. It's 73 rows by 23 columns, making up 1679 pixels. If earthlings didn't give those dimensions to aliens, they might screw up the image as below.
In this case, the correct dimensions are just transposed rendering the message as gibberish. If audio engineers play with the whale song, tuning it to whale-specific frequencies, an image might emerge. In short, humans need to think like a whale rather than a human brain in a whale's body. If we are able to communicate with cetaceans, this'd be a huge step for SETI should we ever intercept their communications.
With the discovery of flowing water on the surface of Mars, it's fair to say it's been quite a week for Science and astronomers all over the world --particularly so for armchair researcher Efrain Palermo with this vindication of his 14-year-old findings, as I reported last Tuesday.
"Great!" all those space enthusiasts may be thinking; "now NASA will know where *exactly* to send future drone missions to look for signs of life on Mars."
Well, here's the thing: Legally they can't.
NASA, as a government agency, is bound to obey the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which is part of the international agreements intended to govern the conduct of member nations of the United States with regards to activities and/or exploitation of outer space, the Moon and other celestial bodies.
The Outer Space Treaty was opened for signature in the United States, the United Kingdom and the former Soviet Union on January of 1967 --while the Space Race was in full swing, and there was a serious concern that the Cold War could extend beyond the surface of our planet-- and entered into force on October of 1967. As of 2013, 103 countries are parties of it.
The treaty (which you can download here) binds all signature parties to conduct space exploration solely for peaceful scientific purposes; it forbids the national appropriation of the Moon or other planets (asteroids included) or the placing of either weapons or military bases in any of them, nor on orbit around the Earth.
Article IX states:
[...]State Parties to the Treaty shall pursue studies of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, and conduct exploration of them so as to avoid their harmful contamination [emphasis mine] and also adverse changes in the environment of the Earth resulting from the introduction of extraterrestrial matter and, where necessary, shall adopt appropriate measures for this purpose.
Ever wondered why Curiosity and the rest of its rover siblings always seemed to be sent to the most BORING parts of Mars, where there was little chance they could actually find a living Martian microbe? Well, now you know why.
As Bec Crew explains on his article for Science Alert, NASA's current sterelization methods for the equipment they send out to outer space or other planets are not 100% reliable, hence there's still a tiny risk of contaminating the surface of these other worlds with alien life --i.e. Earthling microbes.
Not that NASA couldn't sterilise the crap out of its rovers if it wanted to. As UNSW astrobiologist Malcolm Walter told The Sydney Morning Herald, they could blast Curiosity with crazy amounts of heat and radiation that would wipe out anything and everything that managed to survive the journey from Earth without a shadow of a doubt, but then they'd be wiping out the rover's internal electronics in the process. Not exactly practical.
"In order to be completely sterile, they'd have to use really powerful ionising radiation or heat, both of which would damage the electronics," says Walter. "So they go as far as they dare."
The treaty sure throws a bucket of cold, briny water not only to our hopes of finally finding extraterrestrial life within our lifetime, but also on the possibility of fulfilling a manned mission to Mars. Deposits of H2O on the world you want to visit is a great asset, because it means you can use the water not only for consumption, but also to extract breathable oxygen and event convert it into rocket fuel, which you could use for the trip back home.
Oh, and that awesome trip to Europa concocted by real-life Tony Stark? Fuhgeddaboutit! Unless he becomes a citizen of Guatemala, or other non-party state of the Outer Space Treaty --although with his dough he could probably buy one of those in the future...
Of course, back in 1967 there were a lot of things we didn't know about the resilience of extremophiles, which are now been found to resist the harshest environments imaginable, like the core of nuclear reactors or even on the windows of the space station (apparently); which is why Akshat Rathi of Quartz concludes there's no guarantee NASA's or other space agency's missions hadn't already contaminated Mars forever --Beagle 2 anyone?
Should we worry that much, though? We know Earth and Mars have been exchanging meteorites for millions of years, so sending up more microbes hitching a ride on our equipment or astronatus could be seen as a continuation of a natural panspermic process.
We could always revise the treaty, making it more lenient with regards to the 'harmful contamination' of the Moon and othe celestial bodies, or maybe even abolish it entirely due to its impracticality --after all, seems to me the Air Force has been bending the rules somewhat with that secretive X-37B space plane which can orbit the Earth for months doing god-knows-what!
But of course, if the treaty goes, so too the assurance that we won't have nuclear warheads zipping over our heads like an orbital Damocles sword...
But hey, if everything fails to prevent the safe and unpolluting exploration of outer space, just remember: There's always remote viewing.
Unless you were captured by the Mole people and just recently released --I heard Molemaids are hot, bro!-- you've probably read the news from NASA announcing the discovery of liquid water on the south pole of Mars; something which *exponentially* increases our chances of finding extraterrestrial life on our sibling planet in the near future.
Director Ridley Scott, who is about to release his newest film 'The Martian', claims he knew about the flowing water on Mars "about two months ago", when the head of NASA showed him the photographs that were released yesterday to the rest of the world.
But there was someone who knew the dark stains streaking across the Martian landscape was evidence of liquid water more than 14 years ago. That person was amateur astronomer Efrain Palermo.
Efrain, who resides in Portland, is what NASA scientists would call an 'armchair researcher.' He holds no degrees in Physics, Astronomy or Geology; but nonetheless has a passion for Science and Space. And like many other civilians, he likes to go through the thousands of publicly-released images taken by NASA's probes orbiting the Red Planet for almost 2 decades.
It was in one of those archival images taken by the Mars Global Surveyor --which has been charting the planet's surface since September of 1997-- in 2000-2001, when Efrain came across an image showing black streaks, which at that time were interpreted as 'dust slides' by NASA. However, Efrain became convinced by casual observation the streaks were water-related.
After gleaning through thousands of images, I had collected over 400 that had streaks in them. [Software engineer] Jill England joined me, and wrote a program to look for duplicate images taken at different times of the year, and she found images which showed flow activity in present time.
Richard Hoagland suggested plotting the images, and when we did so it became evident that the streaks were all in the equatorial zone of Mars, which is the warmest part of Mars and therefore likely candidates for liquid water.
Efrain and Jill partnered with Harry Moore --a geologist for the Society for Planetary SETI Research(SPSR) , Blaine, Tennessee-- who also had an interest in water on Mars, and brought sound geology to the table. Together they wrote a short paper --which you can read here-- and presented it at the 4th International Mars Society Convention, at Stanford University, in August 2001.
This is remarkable, Moore, England, and Palermo are amateur astronomers who went over the MGS data on their own to make the discovery, 14 years before NASA's announcement today.
Asked for a comment, Efrain showed diplomacy albeit tainted with justified frustration, because his work wasn't given its due recognition in yesterday's landslide of Mars-related articles:
The recent news announcement was validating; even though we did not have access to spectroscopic tools ,and we're working with the much lower resolution of the Mars Orbital Camera, we still arrived at the same conclusions 14 years ago. The information has been on my website since 2001, and I presented my seeps paper at the 2001 Mars Society Convention at Stanford U. While it has been gratifying to have NASA validate that work, it is also frustrating that no credit was given to the paper and its authors.
Frustrating, indeed. On the one hand NASA and the US government are always trying to keep the public interested in space exploration --after all, that's how they gain the necessary funding for future missions-- and yet when a group of amateurs make a substantial contribution to Science, they get silently swept under the rug without even a kudos.
Is it because they lacked the 'right' kind of credentials, and this is the typical reaction an 'outsider' receives when it comes knocking at the doors of Academia's ivory tower? Or maybe because they are guilty of associating themselves with someone like Richard Hoagland, who is by now synonymous with kooky claims about Martian civilizations who left the surface of their planet littered with all sorts of pareidolic artifacts?
With regards to the former, you'd think Astronomy would be more welcoming with amateurs, since they have been credited with all sorts of discoveries --e.g. the Shoemaker-Levy comet.
As for the latter, well… there's no getting around the fact that there arepeople in this field who stared at the Void far longer than they should have, and that for every Palermo or Hancock making astounding claims which are still not outside the realm of possibility, there are also folks finding Bigfoot on Mars, or selling Lemurian headbands...
Either an honest mistake or a blatant omission, NASA should do well in crediting people like Efrain Palermo*. Because he's an example that when it comes to space exploration (as with several other fields) it is amateurs --i.e. people not directly associated with government space agencies or academic institutions-- the ones who are now pushing the envelope and helping us expand our horizons.
And it will be amateurs like himself, Zubrin and Elon Musk, the ones which will probably determine our future as a space-faring civilization in the years to come.
To further know more about Efrain's work on Mars, listen to his interview on The Grimerica Show.
Efrain and Jill England also discussed the recent NASA news last night (Sept. 28) on Richard Hoagland's radio show The Other Side of Midnight.
UPDATE: In an interview for CNN to discuss NASA's anouncement, Robert Zubrin sets the record straight on the (not-so-recent) discovery of flowing water on Mars, and mentions Palermo et al's work.