JM: Hi everybody! This is Joanne Manaster,
a blogger with Scientific American

and I'd like you to welcome to this
very special Scientific American chat

that we are airing on the heels

of NASA's press conference yesterday

about NASA's MAVEN space orbiter
that is expected to launch

mid-November to head to Mars

to look at the non-existent
atmosphere of Mars

and wonder, where did it go?

So I'm joined today by two special guests

who can enlighten us about

both what's going on with the orbiter

and about unmanned or robotic
space exploration in general.

So first, I'd like to introduce you
to a NASA space scientist,

one of the MAVEN scientists,

Nick Schneider, from the
University of Colorado in Boulder.

He's with the Laboratory for
Atmospheric and Space Physics.

That's a mouthful.

And he's one of the members
of the Science Team.

I'm actually going to pull up…

He's an Associates Professor

in the Department of Astrophysical
and Planetary Sciences

at the University of Colorado.

He received his PhD in Planetary Science
from the University of Arizona.

His research interests include

planetary atmospheres
and planetary astronomy

with one focus on the odd case
of Jupiter's moon, Io.

He is also the lead on the
Imaging Ultraviolet Spectrograph

on the upcoming MAVEN mission to Mars.

He enjoys teaching at all levels

and is active in efforts to improve
undergraduate astronomy education.

I'd go for that.

Off the job, he enjoys
exploring the outdoors

with his family
and figuring out how things work.

What I have here?

I'd like to show up something you've done.

You are one of the authors on this book

which I hear is in 7th edition.

NS: That's right.

JM: <i>The Cosmic Perspective</i>

This is a beginning astronomy textbook.

NS: Exactly.

JM: Welcome Nick.

I'm going to introduce Chris right now.

Chris Impey is a
university distinguished Professor

at the University of Arizona.

So you guys have a connection.

And he's Deputy Head
of the Astronomy Department.

His research interests include

observational cosmology,
quasars, and distant galaxies.

He has written 160 research papers
and two astronomy textbooks

but you say those are online, right?

CI: Yeah, the one's repurposed.

It's called <i>Teach Astronomy</i>
so it's up there and free.

JM: Oh, great. He has won
11 teaching awards

has served as a National Science
Foundation distinguished teaching scholar

a Phi Beta Kappa visiting scholar

and the Carnegie Council's
Arizona Professor of the Year.

He is former Vice President of
the American Astronomical Society

and Fellow of the AAAS.

He has four popular books
actually now five:

<i>The Living Cosmos</i>,
<i>How It Ends</i>, <i>Talking About Life</i>,

and the one that we are referencing today

called <i>Dreams of Other Worlds</i>

which is the <i>Amazing Story of
Unmanned Space Exploration</i>.

So welcome, Chris.

CI: Thank you.

JM: It's great to have you both here.

Before we go forward

in News of Space today,

Chris Hatfield, Col. Chris Hatfield
from the Canadian Space Agency

who was on the ISS and returned recently.

As we know he made
a big splash on social media

with his images, and singing,

and his videos explaining his music.

He has published a book
It is out today.

So if you haven't gotten
you haven't heard of it, it's called

<i>An Astronaut's Guide to Life on Earth:
 What Going to Space</i>

<i>Taught Me About Ingenuity, Determination,
and Being Prepared for Anything</i>

And we at Scientific American

will have him as a guest
on November 14th at noon.

So mark that on your calendars
and join us if you can for that.

So, let's talk a little bit about MAVEN

before we talk about un-manned
space exploration in general

or robotic space exploration in general.

There's a lot of interest,
so why don't we do some of the details?

When is this expected to launch?

NS: MAVEN is slated to launch
in the afternoon of November 18th.

It's a short period every afternoon

for a couple of weeks

when all the planets are aligned,

because we have to have the Earth
in the right position relative to Mars

and the right rotation of the Earth

so that the spacecraft will actually
get to Mars on time.

If you ever wanted to know somebody

whose life was controlled
by the positions of the planets

well, that's anybody trying to launch
a spacecraft to another planet.

JM: But not the rest of us.

So what's in paper is not relevant at all.

But actually there are several days

so you have a window
of several days during this time.

NS: That's right, it's a couple of weeks
and the main thing that happens

if the planets go out of alignment
it just takes a little bit extra fuel.

And fuel is precious,
it's our ability to maneuver

when we get to Mars.

So we really want to launch
at that sweet spot

early in the launch window.

JM: That's fantastic.

I'm excited because I'm going down
for the launch, myself.

The only other launch I've seen

is the last space shuttle launch.

I'm glad I got to see that one.

So, I'm looking forward
to watching an Atlis-5 go off.

NS: Me too.

JM: I'm really quite excited about this.

So, as far as…

We're wondering, for those of who did
not catch the press conference yesterday.

What is MAVEN going to do?

NS: Sure, I'm happy to explain that.

I'm pretty sure that
the members of the hangout

are going to be pretty familiar

with the basics on Mars.

A hundred years ago or more

anybody who looked through
the telescope on Mars

really wondered what was going on
with the change of the seasons.

There was actually a suspicion
that there was life on Mars,

water on Mars,

but by the time
the first NASA probes got to Mars

what they discovered instead

is that the atmosphere now
is next to nothing.

There's no flowing water or evidence

of abundant water on the surface

and instead it's this really cold

really dry planet.

And yet, you look at those images

and what you see from the spacecraft

are dried up river beds

river deltas filing up craters.

There must have been
a warmer wetter environment

billions of years ago.

And the only way that's possible

is for there to have been
a huge greenhouse effect

with lots more atmosphere.

Everybody's best guess

is that Mars has lost
80, 90, 99% of the atmosphere

over billions of years.

We used to think that
the atmosphere on Mars

might have combined with the surface.

That's actually where limestone
comes from on the Earth.

It's carbon-dioxide being
sucked into the surface.

But the missions sent to Mars so far

can't find enough evidence

that the atmosphere
re-combined with the surface.

So we're left with the other possibility

that the atmosphere escaped away to space.

And so that's what MAVEN
is going to go check.

Is it possible

that through the host of processes

we understand that the escape rate
of the atmosphere to space

is large enough to explain

where almost all the early
Mars atmosphere went?

And I can get into more detail

about how we make
those measurements, if you want,

but I just wanted you
to get the basic idea

about what MAVEN's about,

JM: That's interesting.

So part of my interest in this

is I was invited to come
to a New Media workshop

out there at the University of Colorado

and to listen to you scientists talk about

what MAVEN was all about.

So I'm happy to follow up
with this hangout

for the Scientific American audience.

One thing that was interesting was

Why didn't we send a probe to Venus?

We've sent probes elsewhere 
to look at the atmosphere.

But why not Venus?

I mean that's so obvious
it's so close, but…

I'll actually ask Chris

to weigh in on this because
you've just written a book

about almost every single
unmanned exploration craft

that's been sent out.

CI: I think that the trouble with
planetary science now

is there's so many good ideas to pursue,

and so few new starts possible
in the budget.

You can't do everything.

I was hanging out at JPL

lecturing to engineers there

and one of them was the lead
on a Venus mission,

a Venus lander,

which got deselected at the last stage.

When it got down to the final four
it wasn't picked.

And it was really challenging

because, you know, Venus
is a pretty nasty place

and they had a mission
that was going to land there

take data for ten days

before it got baked out and died

and learn an enormous amount about Venus.

So, you know, there are missions

sitting there on the shelf

from NASA people
and people who work with NASA

to do almost everything you could imagine

whether it's Hydrobot

melting through the European ice pack
and looking for life

or going back to Titan with dirigibles

and sampling all the lakes

or the more advanced Mars concepts

that would actually look for life

by drilling down to what we think
might be aquifers underneath.

There are all these concepts out there

and not enough coin to do most of them.

JM: Yeah,

with the number of things we've sent out

and we've learned a lot,
it just seems infinite

what else we could possibly learn

if we could send every dream

of explorers out there.

Actually before we get back to
the Mars atmosphere and MAVEN

I was interested,

when I first mentioned to my editor,

I want to talk about this book
and the MAVEN thing.

Your subtitle is <i>The Amazing Story of 
Unmanned Space Exploration</i>

and I was immediately countered with

"Oh, that's not the correct term

"the politically correct term

"to use the word 'unmanned' ".

And I inquired of you about that.

So do you want to explain why you chose
"unmanned" versus "robotic"

despite the fact "unmanned"
might upset people?

CI: To be honest, that was
a publisher decision actually

They published a book
and they get the deciding vote on that.

"Robotic" would have been
a better choice, I agree.

And, we've had to take
the various languages…

Look at the evolution of the Star Trek
the famous Star Trek line,

"where no <i>man</i> has gone before" to
"where no <i>one</i> has gone before"

So there's been
suitable and appropriate evolution

of some of these iconic phrases

JM: So, would both of you agree that
"robotic" is probably

just a better term, or a perfect term

or is there an even better term?
'Cause we've sent out telescopes…?

And when I think of "robotic"

I think of lots of moving arms

and things that are grabbing things
to bring back to analyze

and less so just
analytical equipment or optics.

But, I guess, my expansion of "robotics"
might need to expand.

NS: I use "robotic exploration".

CI: They do feel quite different.

Orbiting telescopes
or telescopes at the LaGrange Point

they're just the technology
we use on Earth to observe

transplanted into space.

And we remote observe on the Earth

I don't have to go to
Chili or Hawaii anymore

because I can remote observe
from my office.

But I think "robotic" is appropriate

for the planetary missions

because they're literally
like sense extenders.

They're our eyes and our ears

on another world, and we often
operate them that way.

JM: I'll have Chris give sort of

a history of robotic exploration
on Mars for us

and then we'll go back and talk a
little bit more about the MAVEN mission.

So, think back to your book,

what you've talked about
the different explorers

that have goneto Mars
and what they've accomplished.

Maybe their drawbacks

and how we're improving on that?

CI: Right, why I was interested in that book

is that I think that some people

just underestimate how fantastic
these technologies really are.

Just setting Mars aside for a minute,

the Huygens probe to soft-land on a world

nearly a billion miles away

and then inspect it
and find that it has

this bizarre Earth-like lakes,

and weather and cryovolcanism,
and all this cool stuff.

That's an amazing achievement

and to go back to the beginning

the Viking missions, long forgotten now

most Americans were not alive
when those missions were designed.

They were 1960s technology

Think of computers then,
think of electronics then.

And those two landers and two orbiters

did amazing things.

They did life-detection experiments

that have not been surpassed since

and one of which at least
led to an ambiguous result.

So, the Vikings were amazing missions

for that time, 40 years ago

and we've just continued
the progression with rovers.

Then NASA having gone for the
bouncing bag landing mechanism

which is kind of safe, very forgiving

upped the degree of difficulty hugely

with Curiosity and the Skycrane.

So again, amazing technologies

really high risk

and high reward
and high payoff activities.

These types of missions
absolutely push our technology.

Now a geologist would tell you

there is no substitute
for bringing back Mars rocks.

On Earth you could examine them
molecule by molecule.

But what you can compress into

something that you can launch
and will survive the passage

and the launch, and the entry into Mars

is still pretty amazing technology.

The instruments on Curiosity,
for instance,

I think we absolutely push the envelope

of almost everything
we can do in technology

when we design these kind of missions.

NS: Yeah, Chris, if I can jump in here

and add onto this
you talk about high technology

high performance, high capability.

But part of the message
that sometimes gets lost

is that this is also low cost.

If you think about every image

ever returned by Cassini spacecraft

or every rock ever picked up
by a Mars rover

the sum total of all this
robotic exploration

is less than half of NASA's budget.

It's a small fraction.

Putting humans in space

as dramatic and as forward moving as it is

and as much as I love that, too

that's more expensive.

What we can do with robots

being so much more affordable

we can go everywhere
and we can go there now.

So, it was really the immediacy
of robotic exploration

and our pervasive presence in space

that makes it such
a compelling subject for me.

CI: And, of course, that advantage
will just continue to grow

because the robotic missions

will become more miniaturized.

They will benefit from Moore's Law

and humans are always going to be tricky

and difficult to sustain in space.

Space is not a natural place for humans.

We're sort of shading into a huge debate

that plays out in our various communities

of man versus unmanned
or human versus non-human or robotic

and it doesn't have to be either or.

You're going to be talking
to Chris Hatfield

and when the astronauts
like him or John Grunsfeld

who we've had here a number of times
and who's a hero.

He walks into the auditorium
and he gets a standing ovation

from 200 astronomers
the guy who fixed Hubble three times.

So, there's no substitute for <i>that</i> either.

But it's expensive.

The space shuttle real cost

was half a billion dollars a launch

and a couple of shuttle launches

buys you a really cool planetary probe

so that's a hard trade-off.

JM: I actually really liked
your recap of the Hubble

the entire Hubble
building, launching, and repair

in your book.

It's worth visiting the book just for that.

But I did really like that retelling.

What I wanted to say

now that Chris has
talked about the different

probes that are there
that we sent there.

Of course, we know
we just had a government shutdown

and this probably had you guys
at MAVEN sweating... a lot

but you got a bit of a reprieve

and they allowed you to continue the work.

Do you want to explain why you guys
were allowed to get that exemption?

- Sure
- But the NAH couldn't?

NS: So, the MAVEN project did stand down

for a couple of days

under the government shutdown.

We were all very anxious
and frustrated by this.

This mission is ready to go

and it's got great science

but under the terms of the shutdown

that's not enough to get the exemption.

And even the fact that missing this launch
window that I talked about

and waiting in cold storage
for a couple of years

for the next chance would cost
a couple hundred million dollars

even that was not enough.

But, what really mattered is the fact that

built into MAVEN is a relay capability
for radio transmission

with the rovers on the surface

and so it's really these ongoing missions

that we need to preserve
the capability for communication.

That was the primary justification
for MAVEN getting

exempted from the shutdown.

There are a couple of satellites
around Mars

that are capable of performing
that relay function

but they're getting
a little long in the tooth

and we needed to make sure that MAVEN
would get there in <i>this</i> launch window

to be able to fulfill that role as needed.

Now we hope those other missions survive

but the last thing you want

is Curiosity, on the surface
making great discoveries

and no capability for
the high data rate back to Earth.

So that was what got MAVEN back on track.

And we are on track
for the launch on November 18th.

Did I say November 18th?

JM: Yes.

CI: I can't resist commenting that.

We're talking about how high-tech
space exploration is.

One of the areas where it's really
behind the curve is communication.

Probably some of your viewers may know

that Vincent Serf, who is the architect
of the original internet

is now working with NASA
on an interplanetary internet,

because there are real problems

with operating the internet
beyond the Earth

because you have missions
with hour-long transmission times

and they have to look up IP addresses

and they have to get hooked

into the patchwork quilt
that is the internet

and the protocols that go with it.

There's no way to do that right now.

So, we actually have to design
an entirely new architecture

for interplanetary internet

on which all of these
space missions will depend.

JM: That's really interesting.

CI: It's been pioneered by the mission
that's just gone to the moon, actually.

JM: Bellary.

CI: Bellary has been just pioneering

some of the first transmission protocols
under this new internet

a protocol for planetary explor…

JM: Is that built into the MAVEN, too then?

NS: No, we don't have
that advanced technology.

JM: You have a picture
of MAVEN behind you

and you also have a model.

Why don't you pull that forward
and sort of explain

what we've got going on

so people have a…

Because everyone's got this idea

of what Curiosity looks like, right?

Because there are just images all the time

of the rovers displayed on the internet
and everything.

So, I thought we could get an idea
of what an orbiter this type

is going to look like and do.

NS: Sure, and I'm glad you emphasized
the word "orbiter".

This spacecraft doesn't land
on the surface.

We just orbit the planet
over and over again

about every five hours, or so

studying the different ways

that the atmosphere
can escape away to space

and even what the atmosphere properties

are high up in the atmosphere.

But to give you a bit of a tour

this is a 1/30th scale model.

So the actual MAVEN spacecraft

from tip to tip is about the size
of a school bus.

And everything that you see out here

all this real estate, is the solar arrays.

So we gather enough solar power

to fuel all of our instruments
all of our controlled electronics.

Right here is where
we keep the explosives.

This is the fuel that we fire

as we enter Mars' orbit.

It has to slow us down
all the excess energy

that we arrive there with.

And, so the actual
rocket nozzles are down here.

And this is our relay antenna

by which we send
our own data back to Earth

and also any data from the rovers

when they need us
to perform that function.

And when we talk about robotic exploration

we might say that humans
have five senses

Well, I have to say that
spacecraft can have dozens

or you can choose from dozens
of different kinds of senses

when you're designing
your robotic explorer.

And Chris has already talked about

how robots can be the eyes and ears
and those analogies are really quite good.

So, for example, you can see
we've got these antennas here

and we've got some
devices out on the end here.

These are like the ears of the spacecraft

listening to the magnetic and electric fields

as they change in the vicinity
of the spacecraft.

One of the things our spacecraft does

is it actually flies
through the atmosphere

actually it flies this way.

That's why the solar arrays
are angled like that.

As we fly through the atmosphere

we have a handful of instruments

that it's like smelling
or tasting the atmosphere.

Particle by particle they can see
what the atmosphere is made out of

and even how fast
those particles are going

and if they'll escape away.

My baby is this instrument, right here.

It's the Imaging Ultraviolet Spectrograph.

It's the eyes of MAVEN.

You might not know it

but every atmosphere in the solar system

is glowing like crazy in the ultraviolet.

We have this instrument
that can spread the spectrum apart

and see how much carbon dioxide is,

how much hydrogen, how much oxygen,

all those different ingredients

how they're distributed
through the atmosphere

and even, again,
their chances of escaping.

So this spacecraft is perfectly designed

with every instrument onboard
that's necessary

to track all the different ways

that the atoms and molecules
of the Mars atmosphere

can escape away to space.

Did I leave anything out?
Did you have any questions?

JM: When you're saying it's going
through the atmosphere

were you saying that's towards the planet
or away from the planet?

Because there are some dips

you are doing, like planned…

NS: That's right.

Let me get my other prop here.

JM: Which will not be to scale?

NS: I don't have enough hands
to really do it right.

But to keep things in perspective

remember that a planet's atmosphere

is really thin on the scale of the planet.

Mars is considerably
smaller than the Earth,

larger than the moon
intermediate-size planet

but still the atmosphere
is just about 100, 200 km down here.

And our spacecraft is designed

to swoop from high altitudes here, down

and fly, skim through the upper layers

where the air resistance
is pretty significant

and then come back up again.

We're actually able to take
images of the planet from up here

and then we'll dip back down.

And, every now and again
we change our orbit,

so that we go even deeper
into the atmosphere.

It's still far above where airplanes fly
or anything like that

in terms of density in Earth's atmosphere

but it's a region of great interest

for the upper layers of the atmosphere

where gasses start to escape.

So we call those deep dips.

Nonetheless,

it's pretty I won't say hair-raising
I'll just say unnerving

the sight that every orbit
we dip down into the atmosphere

that's just a little bit of friction
and we come out again.

It's why we need to have fuel
so we can continue to tune the orbit

and not dip down any deeper
than we need to, scientifically.

JM: So how long is this…

How long is MAVEN's,
your science project, supposed to last?

And then I'll get to Chris
about the longevity of things

because things have lasted
longer than we thought.

So your project
is slated to last how long?

You'll be collecting data officially…?

CI: The MAVEN primary mission

is one Earth year in duration.

We were hoping that we could
slip in the fine print

change one Earth year to one Mars year

but it turns out they're tracking that.

But one Earth year is enough for us

to sample all the different
conditions of the atmosphere

especially how the atmosphere behaves
when the sun kind of goes kablooey.

I'm sure that the viewers
are aware of solar activity

and the way that the sun
can spit out

extra energetic photons,
energetic particles.

Those are the processes that can
strip away the Mars atmosphere.

And we really want to study how the
atmosphere behaves under those conditions

and we should see that
in our one Earth year primary mission.

JM: So there's an anticipated
major solar activity, right?

That this is of concern as you guys arrive

if I remember correctly?

NS: The sun is unpredictable.

We don't know what the sun's going
to do when we arrive,

You might be thinking about the comet

that gets to Mars
around the same time that we do,

JM:That must be what I'm thinking of
which is different.

NS: Always something going on
in our solar system.

JM: Now, you will not be doing
any sort of readings on the comet

unless it affects the atmosphere, right?

NS: That's too soon to tell.

We're putting all that on hold
until we're safely launched.

I just needed to correct

something that I said a minute ago
and that is to say

we are arriving at Mars

while the sun is
in a statistically active period.

So that part was correct.

But whether or not there's going to be

a good solar storm the day we turn on

we wish, but we don't know.

JM: We don't know that for sure,
that's one of those things.

I want to pop back to Chris
because, first of all,

this area writing this book

about unmanned space exploration
is not your original field of study.

This is not what you prefer to do
but you're very interested.

You've been allowed a lot of insights
by the people you know.

NS: Yeah, he chose the wrong field
when he was young.

CI: Well, I talked to people
like Caroline Porco

and she said it's like child-rearing.

You've got to set aside
an 18-20 year timespan

to do something like Cassini

I'm just a bit too much of an
instant gratification kind of person.

I like to go to a big telescope
get my data, write a paper

and be done within six months.

So it's just impatience
that's the only thing

I do want to echo
one thing Nick talked about.

The trajectory, and the swooping
in and out of the atmosphere.

That's another one of the amazing…

the orbital mechanics
of the people that do this

in the outer solar system
or anywhere in the solar system

it's pretty amazing.

Cassini will by the end of it's
equinox and solstice missions

have done over a hundred flybys.

And they of course
re-program these in real time.

Once you find out that ???
is interesting you go back to it.

And I think the closest approach

was 22 km via Iapetus
and that's incredible.

And that's a billion miles away
and you're swooping your billion

multi-billion dollar hardware.

NS: And don't forget that this
was all pre-programmed

weeks or months in advance

because there's no two-way communication.

No one's driving Cassini.

CI: That's right. So, these are really

remarkable feats to be doing,

and the people who do that,
they must be having a hell of fun.

Just like the guy who was
was the deputy PI

of the Deep Impact mission.

He was quoted afterwards saying

"I can't believe they're paying us
to have this much fun".

NS: That's right, and every now and again

somebody will come up to me and say,

"Oh, are you a rocket scientist?"
and you know, I get a little chuffed.

But then I was put in my place recently
when somebody said,

"Huh, rocket scientist. I would <i>never</i> get

into a rocket made by a scientist".

It's the rocket engineers
that really deserve the credit.

You know, we get to go answer
the big questions

and that's what we consider fun,

but boy, are we ever dependent
on the ingenuity of the rocket engineers,

and what an amazing job they do.

JM: I have to interject this.

I met a lady, who was an engineer,

and she ended up writing
a book for children

about engineers, what do engineers do,

because her own 5-year-old
was looking at, like,

a shuttle launch, or something, and said,

"Oh, wow! Look what scientists get to do"

and she goes "and engineers".

"Engineers are the ones
who make this actually happen"

so, yeah, is very important.

We don't have an engineer
on the panel right now.

We got two scientists...
well, three scientists.

But I don't do space stuff.

Chris, I'd like you to speak quickly
about this thing.

We send… well, we've had a few

where things have tried to give up,

but then sort of revived themselves,

they're able to work,
but for the most part,

we send these things out,

and they have an expected lifespan.

But most of the time they seem
to be exceeding that lifespan.

If you could speak on that,

and what we can do,
once we've gotten lucky.

CI: And that's natural and good engineering.

Of course, engineers like to have big margins,

and those margins are not always…

For a bridge, or anything,
it's a factor of two or three.

I think in space sometimes it's even more,
like an order of magnitude.

So, obviously the twin rovers

poor Steve talking about Mars time,

poor Steve Squires has been
living Mars time for a decade,

and he was only supposed
to do that for three months.

Because the second
of his rovers is still working.

There is another wonderful example.

The Pioneers and the Voyagers
now leaving our messages in a bottle,

tossed into the outer solar system.

They're putting out.

Their plans are reduced to a fraction

of a Watt of transmitted energy,

but we've got big enough
telescopes like Arecibo

to detect that at a distance
of billions of miles.

These again, Ed Stone, whose at JPL,

he's into his 80s, I think,
and these missions

are outlasting all of their investigators,
some of them.

And that's fine,

because they're still returning
useful data, and it's great.

The problem, of course, is the project,

and the money, and the funding

sort of implies an ending point,

and so it's horrible
when you face the prospect

of having to switch something off

that's still working,
or just not look at the data,

or not run the instruments anymore.

And those are real situations

because, obviously,
you can't start new things

unless you stop doing
some of your old things.

JM: I'm going to move back.
Thank you for that, Chris.

I'm going to move back
over to Nick about…

So what will you do when you're
past the one-year mark?

Will it depend on funding?

Will you still maintain

the communications
with the rovers on the surface,

or pair up with ESA
for future projects, or what?

NS: The one thing we know for sure
after our first year,

is that MAVEN will be kept
alive and operating

to serve as a relay for the rovers

for absolutely as long as possible.

And obviously, the current rovers,

and there's another one
arriving in Mars 2020,

but whether or not MAVEN
is also doing science

remains to be seen

Every NASA mission, whether it's
the Hubble Space Telescope

or the rovers, after 90 days,

goes through a very careful process

where the team says,
if you give us more money,

here's the science that we can do.

And so, they're thoughtful decisions,

albeit with a tight pocketbook

And so, we'll go through that process
called "Senior Review"

probably a handful of months
before the end of our first year

and we'll make the case saying,

if you allow us to keep
making measurements

here's the science that we can accomplish

It's a fabulous spacecraft.

It's got excellent instrumentation on it,

and I'm sure we'll make a very good case,

but it'll be up to a bunch of people
making these difficult choices.

JM: How many instruments are on MAVEN?

NS: You know, the truth is,
I can't remember if it's eight or nine,

but it's a bunch

and some of them are designed
for measuring the waves and the fields.

Some of them are designed
for the charged particles.

Some for the neutral particles

We're for photons, and some have two parts

and some have three,
and so that's why I can't quite keep track.

Basically, we have enough instruments on,

that an atom and molecule
can't get away from Mars

without us having a handle
on that process.

JM: We've noticed that.

Chris, so, reading your book, 
I got the sense,

the average seems to be a dozen.

There's at least a dozen
on every probe we send out.

Would you say that's true?
Did I get that right?

CI: Yeah, a lot of mass emissions now
are likely Swiss army knives.

They have large numbers
of instrument teams combining

and Cassini is a classic example

that these are
multi-billion dollar missions.

Hubble is an example,
great space observatories,

but NASA's also had enormous success

with more specialized
single purpose missions.

My favorite two examples, of course,

are Keplar, as it's PI, Bill Burouki,
famously said,

"it's the most boring mission
you could possibly imagine".

It's designed to take a picture
of the same piece of sky,

every six minutes, for years,

and that's all it does.

It's how dull?

And then WMAT,
a completely different concept.

A sort of microwave satellite
looking at the early universe

also just doing a very simple thing,

just scanning the sky,
over and over and over again,

drilling down in the systematic
and random errors

to make a microwave map,

and that's all it can do
but it's incredible.

Those two missions hit,

which cost a fraction of a billion dollars,

more like, 100 million, say,
which is of course not cheap.

They do one thing exquisitely well.

So there's sort of two ways to go
with all of these missions

JM: Now MAVEN,
there were a lot of questions

about cost in the press conference
yesterday.

Do you remember some
of those numbers, Nick?

NS: No, and I missed the last part
of this press conference.

Scientists you'll learn remember numbers 
to a factor of two, or so.

But we have, of course, teams of people.

The engineers are
a little more precise in that.

And the budgeteers more precise still.

All I know is that MAVEN has not
raised the alarms of cost overruns.

We have a principle investigator
who's made some hard choices,

especially early on

about how we're going
to keep this mission from over-running.

This is a real… the mark of what
are called "PI-led missions"

Principle Investigator Led Missions,

where it's really on one person's plate

to make sure that
this is going to perform,

do the science, and not overrun in cost.

So the MAVEN definitely goes
in the plus column

and being in the university setting

is one of the ways
that we've really been able

to keep the cost down,

and we sure wish that
more opportunities like this

would be coming down the pike

CI: These are hard tradeoffs too,

because sometimes an idea comes along

that you really want to add in
to your instruments

so it gives you a new capability,

and you've got to fit it
under that cost curve.

The famous example I like,

is that the Vikings were not
originally designed with cameras.

And Carl Sagan argued, he said

"We're going to look really foolish

"if there are polar bears on Mars

"and we didn't have a camera
to take pictures of them".

He was joking, but his point was taken,

and so the Vikings had cameras,

and it's the evocative image
of the surface of Mars

that caught everyone's attention.

And then fast-forward to Curiosity,

and this was unfortunately a failed attempt.

James Cameron was part of that project,

and he was on the verge of having a design

for an HD video camera
to be part of Curiosity.

It just couldn't make it under the wire

of getting all specified and locked down
before the launch,

so Curiosity did not have
the James Cameron connection.

But keeping these possibilities in play
is really important,

even if it's a tough budget decision.

NS: So, MAVEN by the way,

does not have
a visible light camera on it.

When you think about
the technology that's there

for Mars reconnaissance orbiter,

every camera has to be better
than the one before.

With all these other instruments
that we have onboard,

we couldn't take an even better camera.

But we'll be sending back

some pretty cool images and movies

of the planets at the ultraviolet,

and that'll be a new contribution.

Not so many megapixels though,
not scientifically important.

JM: I'm actually wearing,
I'll have to come up closer.

I'm actually wearing a necklace

by this gal whose fascinated with Mars

and this is Curiosity's
first photo on Mars.

So, she's taken iconic images
that have been taken on Mars

by Viking and all that
she's then turned into jewelry,

and I love wearing them because
they are conversation pieces.

So my little contribution
to spreading the excitement

of space exploration to the rest of the world.

Let me just… There was a question
I wanted to ask.

Chris, is there anything else
you'd like to add to this conversation

of the larger picture
of space exploration?

CI: Well, I'll just make a guess
for the future,

which is that we're at a sort
of interesting transition point

in space exploration
of the solar system or beyond

or even of space astronomy,

where we see this nascent private
space industry, which is emerging.

Just as well, since America can't get
astronauts up into orbit, anyway.

We depend on the Russians,

and now we're going to depend
on the private sector.

I think that's going to start playing out

in the business we've been talked about.

Remember there are
a thousand billionaires on the Earth,

and any one of them could fund
a really cool planetary probe.

So if NASA gets stock on sending
that Hydrobot to Europa,

or going back to Titan
with the dirigible technology,

I think some billionaires might step in,

and I think the whole game
is going to get more interesting.

It's kind of limiting

when only a couple
of governments are doing it

and the governments
get shutdown occasionally,

and they have tough budget
choices and so on.

I think it will be more of a wild west,

but there's going to be some
really cool things that happen

when the private sector and entrepreneurs

actually start doing this stuff.

JM: So, here's a question.

Any idea how many project ideas
are out there,

and what percent actually happen?

NS: It's a small fraction.

Every time NASA has an announcement
of opportunity with open categories,

there tend to be dozens of missions

for every one or two that are selected.

And it's a different set of dozens
for every opportunity.

So, pretty soon, that's going to be

hundreds of ideas that we're not doing.

And I can't promise that
they're all good or feasible

with the current technology,

but far more good and practical missions
are not chosen

because a nation hasn't found
the will to fund it.

CI: I agree. I mean, in some competitions

you go down from 100 to 25 to 4 to 1,

and the engineering,
we've talked about the engineering,

which is exquisite, and these
are technically feasible.

That almost never is the issue
of why they weren't chosen.

So, it really is more the will

the money, the priorities and so on,

which is why I think 
if there are more players

some of these things
that are sitting there on the shelf,

NASA has the designs on the shelf,

will actually happen.

NS: Let me change from the billionaires

that Chris talks about
to the billion kids on the planet,

almost all of whom are excited about space.

And space is really the gateway,

I think the best gateway
to stem education.

It's really important that we keep
this space program going.

It's now an international effort,

so many nations participating to have this

really excite the next generation.

And before the viewers get discouraged 
about the state of affairs

where we can't do
everything that we want to,

I want everybody to realize that everybody
can play a part in this.

And I think spreading the word about

what NASA's big handful
of operating missions are doing,

if you have access to…

If you are comfortable go out
and volunteer in a classroom.

Go make sure your taxi driver

or your waiter or waitress

know what's going on in space.

Make this part of everyday conversation

so people want to know what's next.

What are we doing?

Because in the big picture
of the federal budget,

this is not an expensive proposition
that we're talking about.

We just need to raise everybody's awareness

that this is affordable and exciting

and it paves the way for the next generation.

JM: So actually, you guys
will be happy to hear

that I have feedback from my twitter feed

and from my Google+ that we have
a couple classrooms

watching us right now.

I'm so happy that teachers
saw this and said,

let's just share about this.

The other thing… I do remember a question,

and to me the answer seems obvious,

but here's a question someone
on my twitter feed asked yesterday.

"So why are we going back to Mars?

"Why not set our sights on an already
predetermined Earth-like planet

"that is way out there, an exoplanet?"

So why Mars?

NS: I'll do the "Why Mars?" again,

and then I'll let Chris talk
about the next exoplanet.

We're doing Mars again because

what MAVEN is doing there
has never been done before.

There's never been a mission

that's basically looking at
where the atmosphere goes.

We've sent a large number of missions

that figured out that there was
a greater atmosphere in the past,

but this is just about the biggest
mystery on Mars, nowadays.

Where did the atmosphere go?

And none of the operating
missions can do that.

We've got to go back.

CI: And I would also,
just to echo and Segway,

I would say that there's so much
still to learn on Mars,

and Mars is indeed potentially
a habitable planet under the surface,

so we need to figure that out.

And we will always learn so much more

about a planet in the solar system,

than any exoplanet, however nearby.

It's just there's no comparison.

However, what happens to a planet,
because planets evolve and change

and Mars is the great example

is going to be true elsewhere too.

And so, as we start looking at our bodycount

of habitable and Earth-like planets

from Kepler and other missions,

the context for understanding them

when we have very little data,
really we just have a size or a mass,

and almost no other information

our context for understanding them
is still the solar system,

is still the terrestrial planets,
much closer to us

NS: We must develop the capability

to characterize those planets in greater detail.

James Webb's space telescope
will start to do that,

but it's a big technological challenge.

And, lot's of our favorite
engineers and designers

are working on it,

but at present it's a pretty
expensive proposition.

It's actually considerably cheaper
to continue learning more

within our own solar system

than it is to learn in great detail

about the wealth of worlds
that we now know are out there.

JM: So, we've been talking,
a little over 45 minutes.

I would like to give both of you
an opportunity

to express anything else

you'd like to express to our audience

or maybe something
I completely forgot to ask,

and then we will wrap things up.

So why don't we start with Nick?

NS: No, no, go to Chris
while I'm trying to…

JM: Go to Chris.

CI: Well, I just want to echo something

that we've touched on a few times,
which is, it feels like

solar system exploration,
study of planets nearby,

is a mature subject

that we've learned most
of what we might want to learn,

and that just simply isn't the case.

Even with our close neighbour Mars,

there're just a ton
of questions and mysteries.

And when we get to all those others,

the best guest is there're probably

a dozen habitable spots
in the solar system,

mostly in the outer solar sysem.

And we're almost
completely ignorant of those.

And so when it comes to going
to Titan or Europa

or these really fascinating destinations,

our level of ignorance
is still almost complete.

So it's still early days, actually,
for solar system exploration,

and especially in the context of biology,

and where we might find it
in the universe.

NS: And if I could just step back
for a broad perspective,

Carl Sagan said,

"There's one generation that gets

"to experience this transition of planets

"as points of light,
to worlds in their own right".

And men are ever getting a close look

at these worlds with the latest
generation of spacecraft.

My brother's a political scientist,

and he once said to me that

"Everything that I said
is going to be forgotten

"in decades or 100 years,

"but this transition of humans
becoming spacefaring,

"this is going to be remembered
for 1000 years."

People will talk about this age,

and so for all of us

to appreciate this incredible time
that we live in,

and this opportunity
that we are given to participate.

Get everybody onboard.

Spread the word.

This is a real halmark of the age

that we have the privilege of living in.

JM: That's amazing. My final question:

When are we sending humans to Mars?

NS: When I was growing up
I said I wanted to go to Mars

and raise chickens to find out

if they would grow larger in low-gravity.

It's become clear to me
that I won't have that opportunity.

I would love it, if one of my kids
had that chance.

I sure hope it doesn't go down
to the generation beyond that.

It's sometimes said that it's too expensive

to send humans to Mars,

but our nation has
apparently found the will

to spend that much money
on other projects

that I think, will not be remembered
in a thousand years,

and I would love for this effort
to change the focus of our nation,

and even the efforts of the world

to make that next grand step

because I think that it is human destiny.

Robots lead the way, but humans
can and must follow.

CI: And to answer your question directly
we're talking 20+ years.

And then again I think the private sector

is already starting to step up
and make ideas.

For instance,
there's a well-publisized idea

for a one-way trip,
which'd obviously save some money.

NASA first was outed on having

a very similar idea
sitting on their shelf,

but it's not good PR for NASA

to send astronauts of to die on a…

NS: Yeah, I actually think that the space frontier

will be conquered by humans,

when humans are allowed
to take the same kinds of risks

that they took when moving
to Colorado and California,

when coming to the American west.

Individuals took risks.

Many of them lost their lives doing it

but the way that they opened
for the rest of us

we'll remember forever.

I think it's like Chris says.

It's going to be the private sector
and individuals taking risks

that will allow us to cross that frontier.

IC: And if you want to evoke
the multi-generational future,

I recommend Kim Stanley Robinson's
<i>Mars</i> trilogy,

<i>Mars: Red, Green, and Blue</i>.

Amazing evocations,
not just of people on Mars,

but of the geology
and the atmosphere, and so on.

They are mesmerizing books.

JM: Thanks for the book recommendation

because that's one of my platforms.

I love to get people to read.

Thank you gentlemen for your input today.

And thanks to the MAVEN team.

We will wait for the anticipated launch.

But thank you guys for a project

that's on budget, or under budget,

and on time, or under time,

and you guys are just meeting
all these hallmarks

and making people happy.

They'll want to hire you again

NS: That's right. And let's go answer
some more big questions.

JM: Well, thank you very much,

all of you out there
in the audience for joining us

for this very enlightening
discussion about MAVEN.

And don't forget, we're looking out
towards November 14th

for Chris Hatfield to join us.

So, if you didn't hear,
his book is out today.

So, if you want to pick that up
and join us here

November 14th at noon
for a Scientific American chat with Chris.

We'll get more of the human side
of space travel,

and today, of course,
we were just talking

about unmanned, or robotic, space travel.

So, thank you, Chris, and thank you, Nick

NS: So long, everybody.

CI: Bye.