Trained as a quantum mechanic, Dr. Gerry Harp was deeply interested in possibilities for using the multiple telescopes of the Allen Telescope Array to generate steerable “beams” on the sky — beams that could be far smaller than any single antenna could produce. Such beams don’t emit anything, but work in reverse by capturing only energy that comes from the sky in a certain direction. Gerry joined the SETI Institute in 2000, practically at the telescope’s inception and uses the telescope for SETI research.

Gerry’s SETI research often focuses on using the array properties of the telescope to speed up SETI by searching large areas of the sky all at one time (imaging SETI). Gerry is also interested in extending the ways we analyze telescope data to search for signals that can contain large amounts of complex information (e.g., spread spectrum signals). Put simply, because of the long times (years) between when they send the signal and when it arrives, the aliens will help us out with some kind of error correction scheme or another. All such schemes introduce redundancy, and by designing algorithms to sense redundancy we can discover complex ET signals without knowing their content.

Gerry, briefly describe your research project.
I’m working with the Allen Telescope Array (ATA), the SETI Institute’s own radio interferometer telescope. Working closely with Dr. Jill Tarter, we look for artificial signals coming from outside our solar system. SETI is kind of a long-range cell phone call. Working as the transmitter, your handheld cell phone converts your voice to radio waves and transmits them to a tower which amplifies and registers your voice with a computer. This recording is transferred to your friend’s location where it is reconverted to sound.

Allen Telescope Array (click on image for larger view)

In SETI, the only difference is that the speaker is very far away and has almost no bars on their connection. In order to hear them, we build a huge radio telescope (tower) to catch those waves, and transfer the recorded signals to a computer “friend” that carefully listens for us. Because of the long distance, the alien’s message is distorted and buried in static. The static can be overcome by listening for a long time or building a larger telescope. Overcoming the distortion is still pretty-much an unsolved problem that I find quite fascinating.

You must accumulate an immense amount of data.
Yes. The world is becoming a better place for scientists, as we now have access to more data than ever before in human history. Today’s scientists need ways to analyze astronomical (ha!) quantities of data. To keep up, the role of computers in all kinds of science is growing. Whether they like it or not, all scientists are becoming computer experts.

We use computer tools to expand what it means to “look” at the data. By doing something we call “projecting the data,” we look at the data from a different angle or in a different light, if you will. Have you ever been to a place during the day, and then when you came back at night, you couldn’t recognize it? You see all sorts of things you didn’t notice during the day. In our language, we’d say that the night view shows a different projection of the same scene than the day view.

It turns out that there are an infinite number of possible projections we can use on the light or radio waves that come from outer space. In practice we’re limited only by our imagination and choices of which projections we look at. How should we look at the universe? Let’s project the data to highlight how the universe changes with time — or highlight different colors. What color are radio waves? If we highlight color differences, what will we find? First of all, anything white will disappear! If you highlight the similarities between one part of the sky and another part, what can you learn from the result? In fact, how would you even design a program that highlights such similarities? History teaches us one important lesson — every time we find a new way of looking at the universe, we discover something new.

How does this apply to SETI science?
We again look for differences and similarities. In one experiment, we looked at one part of a signal taken at a specific time and a another part of the same signal captured at a different time. We then highlighted similarities between these two pieces of the same signal. In nature, there are very few similarities from one time to another. It’s always newly randomized. But it’s very common for artificial signals to repeat. Using this method we can highlight only the artificial signals. Then it is just a matter of proving that the signal comes from outside of our solar system, and you’re done!

Allen Telescope Array (click on image for larger view)

Having just done this research over the last year, we’re now at the point where we have our results. We looked at the data with a new technique called auto-correlation, which basically looks for repetition in signals. We discovered many new signals — very strong signals — that never showed up in any of our previous measurements. You wonder how something like a strong signal could hide, but our usual methods for looking at data did not highlight repetitions. We have tracked down the strongest signals we’ve found and so far have discovered that they were made by human beings, but this is very exciting research.

In addition to conducting SETI searches, how do you use the Allen Telescope Array?
The ATA pushes the envelope for conventional radio astronomy, and I do astrophysics with the Allen Telescope in my spare time, like on my lunch break! I’m working on time-domain astronomy (galaxies that change over time) and applying SETI signal recovery methods to ordinary astronomical data to learn more about the interstellar “channel,” or the contents of the space in between stars and galaxies.

Interestingly, we also use the ATA to locate satellites as they orbit the earth. We rely on satellites for our GPS, telecommunications (satellite TV), weather monitoring (hurricanes) and many other applications. When satellites bump into each other and crash, that causes major problems. They create debris which can crash into other satellites, and even more satellites can get damaged. So we also use the ATA to advise satellite companies where their satellites are and they use that information to avoid future collisions. In addition to private funding, this service helps us pay the bills.

What is the coolest thing about your project?
It is the element of discovery. We are constantly looking at different parts of the sky at different frequencies and analyzing the data in new ways. At every moment, we’re learning something new. There could be a huge astronomical effect or interstellar message right under our noses that no one has yet seen because they haven’t looked in exactly the right way. I’m excited every day to see what we may find.

What do you currently consider your biggest challenge?
The biggest challenge is having enough time. I’m lucky enough to have many good ideas in front of me, all of which I want to pursue. Choosing which ideas to pursue is a challenge — but a good challenge.

Why should the general public care about your research?
One thing that may not be emphasized enough about science is the importance of understanding. Practical applications of Einstein’s General Relativity Theory don’t readily come to mind, yet humans are fascinated with this topic. Physics explains how the universe works; it can tell us how the stars move and how galaxies form and interact with each other. As humans, we place a great deal of value upon this type of knowledge.

My research tries to examine the sky in new ways, ways that differ from seeing or listening. In a small way, it is like developing new human senses or pushing our senses into new domains. Radio Astronomy images offer a new human sense in which we can see the sky as if we had “radio goggles,” much like infra-red goggles used in action movies to see at night. In fact, this is exactly what radio telescopes do — they act as very slow goggles allowing us to see the unchanging parts of the sky in the radio frequency range. We want to speed this up.

In my previous career I worked on similar problems, not using radio waves but x-rays and even electron waves to “see” objects. In that case, the objects were very small (atoms), but the principles are all the same. It is all about adapting data that we can detect with our instruments so it can go through the interfaces of our mind. With these tools, we will make new discoveries and learn more about the universe and our place in it.

We’re in a discovery mode. Nearby space is familiar, but it is keeping many secrets. We don’t know what we don’t know, and finding out those things is the most exciting of all. What we discover may indeed have practical applications — or it may just be really wonderful.

Is there one fact about your research that surprises most people?
Scientific research has always been a marriage of science and engineering. These days, the most important aspects of science progress are happening in computer science and software engineering. I find myself going to more software conferences than science conferences because large buildings full of computers are becoming the tools of astronomy. We build large telescopes and accumulate huge amounts of data, but astronomers don’t have the time to study that data. I see computer science as playing a continually expanding part in the future of astronomy.

What is your personal opinion on the potential for detecting intelligent life beyond Earth?
I have no doubt we will find other life as we explore the cosmos. It’s very clear to me that life is an imperative for the universe, so life is going to grow. I believe that, provided the human race survives, we will eventually find life forms of many varieties. And the longer we last, the more life we will find.

Contrary to popular opinion, the universe is still very young. Perhaps the reason we haven’t found much life beyond Earth is that we’re among the leading edge of intelligent species in the universe, and over time the amount of living creatures in the universe will increase until it is teeming with life. If humans conquer climate change, manage our natural resources and survive for the long term, we may someday face similar issues with our own galaxy.

What was your dream job as a child?
Picasso once said that every child is an artist. I’ve heard other people say that every child is a scientist. We are born with a scientific curiosity that is evident when you watch children’s behavior. They’re constantly doing experiments. In giving it some thought, I think I just never grew up. I was born with a desire to do experiments and understand things around me and I simply haven’t stopped.

I was very fortunate to have had such a calling. By the time I understood what it meant to be a scientist, science had settled in my heart as a permanent fixture. I count myself lucky since knowing what you want is half the battle to getting it.

When did you first become interested in physics?
My father grew up as a son of a coal miner. Growing up in the Appalachian region of West Virginia, most children went through the sixth grade and that was all the schooling they got. My dad actually went as far as eighth grade, which was considered “higher education” at that time and place. Unfortunately he was never able to get the kind of education he wanted. Despite this, my father never stopped learning and gave himself a classical education while working two to three jobs for much of his life. When I was a child, I learned about Einstein and Plato on my father’s knee. That was a very formative time for me. I admired my father and his heroes became my heroes.

What created the connection for you to take your work in Physics and apply it to astronomy and interstellar communication?
As a boy, my parents bought me a telescope and I spent hours staring at the moon and the sun (with appropriate filters, of course). But my primary interests were for things that were very small. At the beginning of my career, I was particularly interested in trying to see atoms by using electrons to make holograms of the atoms. It turns out once you understand something about waves, this knowledge transfers easily to all domains of physics and astronomy, as well as other disciplines.

How do you spend your free time?
I read books about cosmology and other fields of physics. I also love comic books, especially the comic material from Japan, known as Manga. There is a huge amount of Manga comic material in different genres for adults. You can have dramatic, adventures, or even love or detective stories, and I just love this stuff. It’s my only vice. A favorite for all ages is Case Closed.

Tell us about your interest in education.
I was a tenured professor of physics spending several years at Ohio University before I came back to California, and I anticipate holding some kind of college teaching position once again in a few years. In the meantime, I’ve remained involved in education by working with college interns. The SETI Institute sponsors a Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) summer program as well as an Undergraduate Research at the SETI Institute in Astrobiology (URSA), a partnership between the SETI Institute and San Jose State University. I enjoy working with young people and find working with interns to be very rewarding. Besides, they do a lot of great work!

The SETI Institute REU Class of 2010 at Mt. Lassen, California
(click on image for larger view)

I’d like to bring more young engineers into science. I’ve seen a barrier between engineering and science. Scientists are often welcomed in engineering, but not vice versa. I believe scientists can learn a lot from the engineering community. I’m continually blown away not only by engineers but by people of all domains and trades. The world is overflowing with amazing people.

I’m also involved in Puente, a California-wide program to support young, first-in-family students entering college, offered at a local college. As someone who was the first in my family to get a degree, I really enjoy working with Puente to help young people adapt to college life, sometimes explaining the basic rules, like getting straight C’s is not acceptable, or opening their eyes to an entirely new way of life that a college degree can offer. I usually take the students on tours of the SETI Institute. Many of these young people have not been exposed to white-collar work settings and let me tell you, very few exit the premises without a desire for a comfortable desk job! I also get to meet with the students and their families at an organized dinner party. Here we also help the parents understand college basics, explaining how a college is a worthwhile pursuit, not the least because education is an investment that pays out dramatically over time. If you don’t believe me, check out this simple graph on Employment Projections:

Do you have advice for high-school level students who have an interest in science?
I would tell them to study what they enjoy and pursue your love. Don’t worry too much about how you’re going to make it. Unless money is what you live for (some people just like it!), just focus on what you want and get really good at what you enjoy — the opportunities will be there. At some point in your life after you graduate college, you’ll have to be flexible and figure out how you can apply what you’ve learned to something that is productive for society. You can do this. The people who are most successful are without exception the people who love what they’re doing.

What is your philosophy of life?
The biggest obstacle that you’ll face in life is yourself, so try not to get in your own way.

What historic and/or contemporary personalities do you admire and why?
The feat Einstein did all by himself – his leap of understanding – was enormous. At times, I’ve thought perhaps Einstein was too smart. He made this enormous leap and the rest of us didn’t get the opportunity to visit all the stages in between. As a result, it’s very difficult for cosmologists to understand what Einstein understood and very few people can enter the field. But what Einstein did was truly marvelous and he is someone I continue to admire.

Another person I’ve come back to recently is Richard Feynman — not because of his contributions to physics but because of his contributions to education. I only recently realized that he basically rewrote the entire undergraduate curriculum in physics, with a couple of important partners, at CalTech. I’m revisiting his lectures now with amazement. It’s inspiring that kind of accomplishment is possible. I’ve been thinking a lot about how we could rewrite it again.

I also really admire a lot of the people I work with, Jill Tarter being an excellent example. She excels in ways that I’ve never seen in anyone else. She has capacities and abilities to think and synthesize and just has enormous energy — it’s fascinating to watch her. I can only stand in awe of what she accomplishes.

Gerry Harp and Jill Tarter in 2010 at Lassen, near Hat Creek, CA, home to the ATA
(click on image for larger view)

What is your favorite vacation destination?
Perhaps my best vacation was a trip to Ecuador and specifically the Galapagos Islands. That trip was like a complete course in biology and in particular, what can go wrong in evolution. I believe that the animals in the Galapagos have not had sufficient predation; they have not been sufficiently challenged by their environment. It’s just too nice a place to live. The birds cannot get off the ground under their own power. They have to leap off a cliff in order to get airborne because they’re so fat. There are countless similar examples because the environment lacks predators. When I look at them, I can only see ourselves and wonder if perhaps at the moment and as a species, we’re not sufficiently challenged.

Two small depressions on Mars found to be rich in minerals formed by water could have been places able to support life relatively recently in the planet’s history. These findings were published October 1, 2011, in the journal Geology. The team, led by Catherine Weitz of the Planetary Science Institute, studied layered outcrops at the western region of the huge Valles Marineris canyon system.

Many ancient clay-rich rocks have been found on Mars in recent years. What is interesting about this study at Noctis Labyrinthus is that we see alternating rock layers of clays and sulfates, including some clay outcrops as young as 2-3 billion years old, rather than the more common 4 billion year old clay rocks. Dr. Weitz reports, “This indicates a different water environment in these troughs or depressions relative to what was happening elsewhere on Mars.”

Each trough probably experienced multiple water-infilling episodes at variable pH levels that deposited clays under neutral to basic conditions and sulfate minerals under acidic conditions. This dynamic geochemical environment indicates that these two troughs are unique and could have provided a more habitable region on Mars at a time when drier conditions dominated the surface.

The team and I mapped hydrated minerals within each trough using high-resolution images from the High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) camera and hyperspectral data from the Compact Reconnaissance Imaging Spectrometer for Mars (CRISM) on the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) spacecraft, combined with Digital Terrain Models (DTMs) to determine elevations and view geometric relationships between units.

This area would be a fantastic place to investigate with a rover, but the rugged terrain would be challenging for both landing and driving. I’m continuing to investigate sites of interesting aqueous mineralogy on Mars in order to search for possible sites where life may have been possible.

Learn more about Janice and her research in her Q&A, “Mars: Back through the Looking Glass.”

Is the surface of Mars really sterile, or could there be still-undiscovered traces of life littering this hostile landscape? Chemist Richard Quinn focuses on understanding the reactive processes that take place on the surface of the Red Planet, and how these might give a better idea of the potential for habitable environments.

Click on images for larger view

Richard, briefly describe your research projects.
I typically have four to five concurrent projects, all with a common theme, but my research focuses on two general areas. One research area is Mars science – specifically, habitability and astrobiology. I’m working on characterizing mechanisms of biomarkers’ degradation and preservation, especially organic chemicals, which might give us some insight into the habitability of different environments on Mars. I investigate the properties of soils based on in situ measurements made by landers and then use the results to evaluate the habitability of Mars.

My other area of research involves instrument development. I’ve recently been working on instrument technology development and science experiments in low-earth orbit. I’m currently performing an experiment with other researchers on the O/OREOS (Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses) mission, which is a nanosatellite now in low-earth orbit. The experiment is called the Space Environment Viability of Organics. We’re looking at the rate organic molecules, which are the building blocks of life as we know it, are altered in space environments – how they change when exposed to space radiation.

In late August 2011, you were quoted in a Space.com article, with the intriguing headline, “The Dirt on Mar’s Soil: More Suitable for Life than Thought.” Tell us more about those findings and what that could mean for future research.
I recently published a journal paper with some co-authors from NASA-Ames, JPL and Tufts University. It provided an analysis based upon some of the results from the Mars Phoenix Mission that landed in the northern Polar Regions in 2008. We measured the property of the soil, known as the redox, or oxidation reduction, potential. Very simply, it’s one measure of the reactivity of a soil, and metabolism is coupled to redox processes.

One of the concerns for Mars exploration is that Mars’ surface might be very oxidized, or very inhospitable to life. What our measurements have shown is that, in fact, when we added water to Martian soil at the Phoenix site, we found it to be a very moderate soil solution. Previously we had determined the pH was slightly basic, which surprised some who thought Mars soil would be very acidic. Our measurement of redox potential indicates that in its current state, the Phoenix site on Mars is a benign environment. There are other ways in which the environment is very challenging for potential life, but these results gave us one measurement that indicates the environment isn’t as harsh as some people thought. We continue to look at those data sets and come up with new scientific insights.

Another interesting headline appeared on August 30: “Epic search for evidence of life on Mars heats up with focus on high-tech instruments.” According to Dr. Jeffrey Bada, co-organizer of an American Chemical Society symposium on the Red Planet, in late August, “The bottom line is that if life is out there, the high-tech tools of chemistry will find it sooner or later.” Have new tools propelled us into a revolutionary era of space exploration and the possible discovery of life on Mars or elsewhere in the universe?
There are two parts of the problem. One is the tools; the other is the accessibility to the right location. In 2008, the Mars Phoenix mission had an instrument set geared toward accessing habitability, but it was a stationary lander. In November 2011, however, NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory will be launching the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL), which has very good science capability in terms of measurements — and it can also rove. This mission involves taking the combination of good analytic tools and then getting them to the right spot, which is very exciting.

Curiosity – The Next Mars Rover. This artist concept features NASA’s Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity rover, a mobile robot for investigating Mars’ past or present ability to sustain microbial life. This picture depicts the rover examining a rock on Mars with a set of tools at the end of the rover’s arm, which extends about 2 meters (7 feet).
Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Jeff Bada, who made the comment, is right. We do have the tools. The MSL will likely experience technical challenges when making the measurements so we’ll have to wait to see how successful it is, but everybody has high hopes. When doing research, you don’t always get the answer you want, but then you do it again with what you’ve learned from previous attempts and eventually success will come.

What tools are you working on that could take lead to breakthroughs in learning more about a planet’s environment and potential for habitability?
I’m interested in chemical sensors. One of the challenges we face when using chemical sensors is that they tend to have a very short shelf life. On Earth, you can use the sensor and then throw it away. When you need another one, you open up a package and if it doesn’t work, you just get a new one.

I’ve been working on methods that will enable chemical sensing in extreme environments where the chemical sensors are made at the point of use. Typically a chemical sensor has a sensing element that degrades with time. When looking at space exploration into the outer Solar System, it can take many years from the time of the instrument launch to the time it is actually used. To address this, I’m looking at micro-fabrication tools that would allow for self-assembly of our chemical sensing elements in situ. Instead of sending the chemical sensor with the sensing element, we would send a device that would fabricate the sensoring element when it gets to its destination.

Do you personally think the potential exists to discover life on Mars?
My work primarily focuses on evidence for ancient life that once existed on the planet. Based upon observational evidence in terms of the history of liquid water on Mars, it appears there were habitable environments in the past. I think the probability of ancient life existing on Mars is very high. Again, the challenge for the scientists is access — getting a rover to the right location and having the right tools to actually have a confirmation that will hold up to public scrutiny.

What is the coolest thing about your work?
As a scientist, the coolest thing about the work in general is that you have the opportunity to create your own projects. Through the proposal process offered through NASA and other government agencies, you’re allowed to develop your science ideas from the ground up and I think that’s very exciting.

Why should the general public care about your research?
I think the public, and the nation, should be interested in planetary exploration, which includes learning everything we can about our Solar System and beyond. Historically, that’s what progressive nations have done — we’ve explored. Since the founding of the country, we’ve explored our continent, and then we went beyond the continent. That’s what makes – and keeps – nations great.

Looking from a basic science perspective of understanding who we are and understanding both the history and the future of life in the universe, space science is an area that I hope fascinates lots of people.

Are you aware of misconceptions the public may have about space science?
I think one misconception that the public may have is that space science costs a lot of money, and they wonder if it’s worth it. In fact, the cost of space exploration, particularly a Mars rover or something similar, is extremely modest relative to the financial burdens of the country. People may think space exploration is something we can’t afford, but its payoffs are tremendous to the nation in terms of what we learn and in terms of technology spin-off.

Much of what my colleagues and I do is technology development. The technology benefits of NASA programs and space exploration are tremendous. The country would lose a great deal if support for these programs were lost.

What do you currently consider your biggest challenge?
My biggest challenge is the difficult current funding environment. But the economic challenges are not only relevant for scientists but for everybody in today’s economy.

What motivates you?
I love the work I get to do each day. When I was in college, I really dreaded going to different jobs I had throughout that time. As a scientist, however, I can honestly say I don’t think there has ever been a day when I haven’t wanted to get to work and see what discoveries await.

What first sparked your interest in science, and specifically chemistry?
I think it was pretty clear from a young age that math and science were subjects for which I had an aptitude, and so it was a no-brainer to pursue science. My family provided us with a strong academic focus and the encouragement to find something we were good at and enjoyed. There was something that appealed to me early on about the interactive physical aspects of creating something with my hands, and I’m fortunate to be able to work in an area that I’ve been interested in since I was a kid.

Does your work offer the opportunity to speak with youth or work with them?

Yes, I routinely have students working in my lab. Currently, I have two students just starting who are from the URSA (Undergraduate Research at the SETI Institute in Astrobiology) partnership program the SETI Institute has with San Jose State University. I also have REU (Research Experience for Undergraduates) students in the summer. This past summer, I was involved in STEP (Science, Technology and Exploration Program), a summer program for high-school students.

When speaking with students, I give them my perspective as a scientist and describe what science is about, which in fact, turned out to be somewhat, if not quite different, than what I thought it was when I was a kid. I thought science was more precise and always provided the right answer. Now I realize it’s more fluid and there’s a lot of diversity in opinions on the same subject matters. Picture to right: Richard Quinn with URSA student Hana Hashim.

Have you seen your students have the same type of realization regarding their notions of what a career in science is really like?
For students who come to work in my lab, I think the most surprising thing to them is how difficult experimental science is, how patient you need to be to wait for a result, and how the process frequently requires an extended period of time where you feel like you’re not achieving much and then suddenly, the Eureka moment comes and everything falls in place.

Young people tend to expect instant gratification, especially in today’s society. I was recently speaking with a student and I explained how long it takes to get an instrument onto a Mars mission, which is usually more than a decade from the start. She couldn’t believe it and looked so sad! She asked, “It takes how long?” And then she commented on how Google basically “conquered the world” in a matter of years and yet it takes more than a decade to get something to Mars.

Does your work keep you in the lab?
I have a lab at NASA Ames, and I love working in the lab. But I spend a great deal of time writing papers and proposals. From around 2000 through 2007, I spent almost every summer in the Atacama or elsewhere doing field work, but my time away from the lab now tends to be for gatherings with family and friends.

If you had a one-year sabbatical to learn something entirely new, what would it be?
It would be fascinating to learn more about art conservation from a materials science perspective. Being a chemist, the materials and methods of restoring master works and things like that would be pretty interesting.

What is your philosophy of life?
Just try to be a nice person as best you can.

What’s in store for you in the future?
I would like to see another instrument I’ve worked on make it onto another planetary exploration mission. I was just awarded funding to develop an experiment for the Space Station. Developing new technologies and experiments and seeing them deployed in space is one of my goals.

To learn more about Richard and his fascinating research, listen to his talk on the O/OREOS Nanosat Project, presented on April 24, 2011, as part of the SETI Institute Colloquium series.

Figure 1: A waterfall plot. This shows the signal as a function of frequency (increasing to the right) and time (increasing to the top). A slanted straight line is just the sort of thing we look for in SETI searches. In this case, it is from the Voyager spacecraft, 100 times further from the sun than is the earth.

You know that feeling where you have a great idea about doing SETI but you don’t have a large radio telescope handy when you need it? If so, then we have something for you.

For the past two years, the SETI Institute has opened its doors to citizen scientists over all the world by open sourcing our own signal detection system software and a test program offering “raw” telescope data that anyone can analyze. These offerings have generated significant interest and we’re happy to announce an expanded archive of more than 3TB of setiQuest data is now available to all SETI enthusiasts and hosted through a generous donation by Amazon Web Services.

The raw data archive is reorganized with better documentation so you can perform your own “observations” of signals arriving from outer space in the directions of various interesting stellar objects from quasars and blazars to pulsars, from satellites orbiting the earth to spacecraft. It also includes Kepler exoplanets, super-hot O-stars which may be good energy sources for giant astro-engineering projects, and astrophysical masers which might be used as natural amplifiers for a SETI beacon.

Kepler-16 is another great discovery coming from the Kepler telescope, the 10th NASA Discovery mission which is devoted to finding Earth-size exoplanets by monitoring variations of brightness due to transit. Today the Kepler team found a circumbinary exoplanet, an exoplanet orbiting a binary star system. Did they find Tatooine?

In the large 105 deg2 field of view of the Kepler spacecraft, ~156,000 stars are being almost continuously observed by the 0.95m telescope. In 2010, the star number KIC 12644769 of the Kepler Input Catalog quickly got the attention of the Kepler team when they realized that it was an eclipsing binary star system, one of 1,879 detected after 44 days of operation. Binary stars, or pairs of stars orbiting around their center of mass, are common in our galaxy. It is now thought that 30% of stars are part of multiple systems. So the discovery of an eclipsing binary system is interesting but not such a big deal, until something else appeared around this late-K and M-dwarf star system. In a second catalog published in March 2011 and available on arXiv, the Kepler team gave a hint of their discovery. They mentioned the detection of a secondary event with a smaller intensity (<2%), suggesting that a sub-stellar object (aka an exoplanet) could be orbiting this binary system located 200 light-years from us.

Today an article published in Science reports the discovery of a Saturn-size (0.75 x RJupiter) planet orbiting this binary star system. A team led by Laurance Doyle, a researcher at the SETI Institute, shows that Kepler captured 3 revolutions of this exoplanet around the close-binary star system, meaning that 6 transits (3 per star) were recorded. After carefully inspecting the timing of these attenuations, they realized that the observed deviation of approximately 1 minute is due to the gravitational attraction of a third body less massive than Jupiter.

The masses, sizes and orbital elements of the binary star system (Kepler-16 A & B) and its exoplanet, named Kepler-16 (AB)-b (or b), were determined by developing a dynamical model able to fit the length and depth of the Kepler transit as well as additional radial-velocity observations recorded with the Tillinghast 1.5m telescope on Mt. Hopkins, Arizona. The two binary stars of the system, which are smaller and less massive than our Sun (0.69 & 0.20 x Msun for Kepler-16 A & B respectively), revolve around their center of mass at 0.22 AU. The binary system has a significantly eccentric orbit (e~0.16) with a period of 41.1 days. The exoplanet, Kepler-16 (AB)-b, has a circular orbit with a radius of 0.7 AU (the distance of Venus-Sun), also around the center of mass of the binary star system, in 229 days. Its mass (0.33 MJupiter), radius (0.75x RJupiter), and density (0.964 g/cc) are well constrained as well.

Top view diagram of the Kepler-16 system. The orbits of the Kepler-16 components are shown in gray curves. The sizes of the bodies are in current proportions to one another, but on a scale 20 times larger that the orbital scale.

Additional reading from the SETI Institute:
First Planet Orbiting Two Stars Discovered by the NASA Kepler Spacecraft, by Laurance Doyle

For the first time, astronomers with the NASA Kepler spacecraft mission have discovered a planet orbiting two stars. This is a fundamentally different kind of planetary system than has ever been discovered before. The new system is known as “Kepler-16″ and consists of two stars — one about 69% the mass of the Sun, and the other only 20% the mass of the Sun, which circle each other every 41 days. Around both of these circles the Saturn-mass planet, half rock and half gas, known as Kepler-16b, with a period of 229 days. Even though the planet has an orbital period of less than a year, it is still outside the habitable zone of the stars because the stars are much dimmer than our Sun.

Where the Sun Sets Twice – NASA’s Kepler mission has discovered a world where two suns set over the horizon instead of just one. The planet, called Kepler-16b, is the most “Tatooine-like” planet yet found in our galaxy. Tatooine is the name of Luke Skywalker’s home world in the science fiction movie Star Wars. In this case, the planet is not thought to be habitable. It is a cold world, with a gaseous surface, but like Tatooine, it circles two stars.
Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/R. Hurt

The discovery that such “circumbinary” planets can exist increases the likelihood of success of the Kepler Mission, which is to detect the first habitable; i.e. Earthlike, planets around other stars. Perhaps half the stars in the galaxy are in double star systems. Understanding that planets can form in close binary systems means that these, too, can be targets in the search for habitable worlds.

The research team discovered the circumbinary planet in an eclipsing binary system. This is a double star system in which both stars orbit each other across our line of sight, so that eclipses of the stars occur with regularity. Historically, much of what we know about stars sizes comes from such eclipsing binary systems. In addition, the planet’s orbit was found to lie very close to the same orbital plane – the difference in the tilt of their orbits is less than 1/3 of a degree – so that the planet also moves across the disc of each star, momentarily blocking some of the light. Such events are called “planetary transits” and most of what we know about the sizes of planets outside the Solar System comes from such transit events. Thus we have the best of both worlds, and Kepler-16 is probably the most accurately measured planetary system outside our own.

Some scientists have nicknamed the planet “Tatooine” after the name of the home planet of Luke Skywalker, the hero in the 1970s science fiction movie Star Wars. In the story — in a hypothetical galaxy far, far away, — a circumbinary planet’s double sunset was first brought to the screen. The public’s vision of circumbinary planets thus goes back decades. But today science fiction has become science fact, and that galaxy far, far away has become our own galaxy. A whole new kind of planetary system has been shown to exist and — like Luke in the story — the adventure is just getting started.

For more information, visit the SETI Institute website or read NASA’s press release. You can also get more information on the Kepler 16b discovery.

Animation: Three Eclipsing Bodies

Animation: A Dance of Two Suns and One Planet

Learn more about Laurance Doyle in his Q&A on the Huffington Post: Laurance Doyle: A Man of Many Firsts

Additional reading from the SETI Institute:
Kepler-16: Exoplanets around binary star systems DO exist, by Franck Marchis

Rachel Mastrapa studies the surface processes of icy Solar System bodies by interpreting their infrared spectra. The majority of her work involves performing the ground truth measurements in the laboratory including calculating the complex indices of refraction of single composition ice samples. These measurements are then used to construct model spectra to interpret the chemical composition of observed spectra. She also studies the subtle changes seen in ice mixtures that are not seen in single composition samples. Rachel has collaborated with her peers to collect spectra of Europa from the Keck Observatory and interpret Cassini VIMS spectra of Enceladus.

Click on images for larger view

Rachel, do you recall what first sparked your interest in science?
I can’t remember a time when I wasn’t interested in science. Ever since I was very young, I was curious. My mom tells me I used to have a big collection of sticks and stones. Maybe that’s what led to my interest in Earth Sciences.

I excelled at math and science, and I loved participating in science fairs. It was frustrating because I was interested in astronomy, but coming up with astronomy projects wasn’t easy in grade school. I was always doing random projects in completely different areas. In college, I narrowed my interest in astronomy when I took some classes in Earth Sciences. That’s when I discovered that I wanted to pursue Planetary Science.

Briefly describe your research project.
Basically, my work involves doing ground truth measurements for ices in the Solar System. Doing ground truth measurements is a complex process. If we wanted to know what components made up an icy area on Earth, we’d just get a scoop of it, take it to the lab, and conduct several measurements to determine its contents. But these icy Solar System bodies are billions of miles away, so all we can do is use data gathered from ground-based telescopes or spacecraft, such as Galileo, Cassini or New Horizons, which is currently on its way to Pluto.

These spacecraft not only have on-board cameras that take pictures of the visible light; but they also carry spectrometers that break light up into many wavelengths and collect spectra, specifically in the infrared. Using this data, I can then measure the infrared spectrum of these ices in the lab for comparison to these observations. It’s interesting to look at different wavelengths because molecules will absorb light at very specific wavelengths, and those absorptions are unique to specific compositions, such as water.

This picture from the lab shows the sample window (without ice). The sample is deposited on the clear window inside the metal ring. This is generally inside the sample chamber and isn’t visible. It is only pulled out to clean it or check the temperature connections.

The measurements done in the lab help us analyze the remote observation data. Using this remote sensing data, I make a sample of ice under conditions that exist in the outer Solar System, such as on the surface of Europa, Enceladus, or a trans-Neptunian object. There are several different compositions of ice. Primarily water ice is in the Solar System, but it can also include methane, ethane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and methanol. I’ve worked with all of these different ices in the laboratory. The main conditions I can simulate in the lab are the low temperatures and pressures similar to the vacuum in space. I’m looking for ices in the general temperature range within the Solar System — anywhere from the low 20s in Kelvin up to 150 Kelvin. My sample chamber can reach a bottom temperature of 15 Kelvin (-258 degrees Celsius; -432.67 degrees Fahrenheit).

What is the coolest thing about your project?
It’s really fun learning about the composition and structures of ices that are billions of miles away. But my work takes that one step further. There are still some observations that have absorptions that are not identified. We either haven’t made the comparison yet or it’s non-unique; it could be several different materials. Most of the icy objects we’ve observed are mainly water. As we get further out, the objects are mostly nitrogen and methane dominated.

There is another layer of interpretation that we can take from infrared spectroscopy, however, and this has been the bulk of my work recently. My team and I are not just identifying pure compounds but we’re also seeing how those absorptions change as a function of temperature and mixing materials together. Mixing different materials together can shift where the absorptions are, sometimes making them stronger or weaker, making them go away, or making new absorptions appear. By using the infrared spectrum, we can identify not only what materials are on the surface, but we can (a) possibly get a remote measurement of the temperature of the surface, and (b) get an idea of how the materials are separated or mixed together, and that’s really interesting.

It’s also cool working in the Astrophysics & Astrochemistry Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center. Many of these measurements have never been done before. It’s not easy to put these labs together and keep them working, and it can be challenging to make the samples. It’s a lot of fun to get in the lab and do the hands-on work!

Rachel Mastrapa working in the laboratory.

How common is water in the outer Solar System?
I’m looking at a class of objects where water is ubiquitous. The objects I’m already looking at are icy satellites of Jupiter, including Europa, Ganymede, Callisto, and all the other small satellites. I’m also looking at the abundance of objects that are predominately water within the Saturnian system. But water isn’t necessarily an indicator of life on these objects because it’s also very cold. The warmest of these objects are in the Jovian system, which can get up to approximately 150 Kelvin (-189.67 degree Fahrenheit).

Is your research hindered by existing techniques or technology?
When I think about my biggest challenges, the first thing that comes to my mind is just finding the time to pursue all the projects in which I’m interested. But the techniques we use today in making the samples can also be challenging. We’re often limited in the laboratory because it’s difficult and expensive to build a laboratory system that can do multiple measurements. Typically we can make one type of sample or one type of measurement. In my dream world, I’d have a laboratory system with all kinds of instruments so I could better characterize my samples. I don’t waste much time thinking about what I don’t have, however; there’s a lot to do now with the lab equipment I do have access to.

In one of the proposals I’m writing, I’m looking to buy a new radiation source. Most of the objects I look at don’t have an atmosphere; or if there is, it is a very thin atmosphere. The objects are regularly bombarded by radiation. This radiation covers a broad range of radiation energies — from UV, which is just light, all the way to cosmic rays, which includes particle radiation. This constant radiation bombardment around the giant satellites, such as Jupiter and Saturn, can affect their composition and the phase and possibly the stability of the materials. The laboratory I have has a UV source and I’d like to add an electron source. There is a lot of electron radiation, especially around Saturn, and this equipment could prove very useful to this area of research.

Why should the general public care about your research?
Some of these measurements have simply never been done before. My research is the most basic groundwork for future exploration. Some day, far into the future when humans are at the outer edges of the Solar System, they’ll know what those planetary bodies are made of because of the work my colleagues and I have done. Our groundwork might one day lead to locating resources, finding where the hot spots are on the surfaces that have oceans, finding if you can remotely detect the temperature of these surfaces, and even possibly finding evidence of life on these other objects.

Essentially, the methods I’m working out right now will be the basis for future discoveries. In the Star Trek TV series, someone may refer to a “Class M” planet. They know it’s a Class M planet because they did some kind of scan on it and their software contains algorithms that are based on research someone else did a hundred years earlier — and I’m the person doing those measurements now.

What keeps you motivated?
Solving problems! I like finding a question or problem and then trying to figure out an answer or solution. One of the challenging parts of my work is getting the samples just right, but it’s also interesting to think about why it’s so challenging – what’s going on. I like working in the lab and trying out different options to see how things work and finding ways to get the best sample I can – that’s a lot of fun!

I also enjoy working in the lab with my students and post-docs. They tell me about a problem and I can offer suggestions, so the years of trial and error are paying off!

How did you come to join the SETI Institute?
I was in NASA’s post-doctoral program at NASA Ames, which is a common path of entry into the SETI Institute for many of the scientists here.

What was your dream job as a child?
I wanted to be a ballerina, then a veterinarian, then an astronaut, and finally an astronomer – in that order. I wrote a poem about stars when I was eight, which is when I think I first made my choice and knew what I wanted to do.

Do you speak with youth about your career; and if so, what advice do you offer?
I’ve been working with Project Astro for two years now. Project Astro is a national program that has a local node in the Bay Area. Its purpose is to do public outreach, partnering astronomers with educators. It emphasizes offering repeat visits with the same class so there is consistency and the children can follow up on questions with the same astronomer. This year I’ll be visiting a third-grade class again. Project Astro has all the education materials set up so I just go in and talk about the phases of the moon, which is what they’ll be studying. I do a variety of activities, from giving them lectures to an interactive, hands-on project. I like to show the kids that science can be a lot of fun.

I’ve also sat on various panels, including working with high school students. My main advice for them is to pursue a career they will actually enjoy doing and to not select a major simply because it’s what their parents want. I tell them to play to their strengths. But the most important thing I let them know is to not be afraid to fail. A lot of people get hung up on the idea that failure is a bad thing. Failure is often a very good; you can learn a lot from your mistakes – especially in the sciences. There is a massive concern that failure means you’re a loser, and I’d like to help dispel that myth.

Have you come across misconceptions about science or scientists to which you’d like to comment?
I often come across people who aren’t aware of how collaborative science really is. I work with a group of fantastic people. We talk about our ideas with each other, we share our problems in the laboratory, and we help each other find solutions.

Scientists can have a reputation for being social outcasts and nerds who are incapable of talking with people, but science is generally very social. That’s why the meetings we attend are so important. This is where we share ideas and talk to each other about the kinds of measurements and observations we are doing. Even people who are coming into science aren’t fully aware of how important it is to interact with other scientists. (Photo to left: Rachel attending the American Astronomical Society’s DPS [Division for Planetary Sciences] meeting in Cambridge, England.)

Written and oral communication skills are also very important. Going through peer reviews can be tough, and you have to have thick skin when you are answering questions or getting criticism at a presentation. People can be very confrontational and you have to be ready for that. I was lucky because when I was growing up, my older brother would play pranks on me and tell me crazy stories like chocolate milk came from brown cows. I tweeted a while back that I can accredit the vast majority of my scientific skepticism and possibly my thick skin to my older brother.

You have been involved in several organizations related to women in science. Why is this important to you?
In the United States, more women are now in the sciences at the undergraduate level and graduate levels, which is great. (See the Association of Women in Science website for the data.) But somewhere around the post-doc to professional scientist level, something happens which studies refer to as the “leaky pipeline.” For a long time, it was explained as a lag effect because there weren’t a lot of women to begin with in the sciences. But there has been steady increase towards parity at the undergraduate and graduate levels for about 20 years now. Yet at the post-doc and especially the faculty levels, the number of women in science and technology is pathetically low. This is particularly true in the “hard” sciences, such as physics and math. Less that 20% of tenured and tenure-track faculty are women and only 5-10% of full professors are women.

Many people have been looking into this issue of women in science. Some believe women are just not as good in science, but most studies indicate cultural effects. In one example, a recent study examined reference letters for tenure-track faculty positions. Mock panels from actual university departments were given typical reference letters. Statistically, it was much more common for women to be described as thoughtful, caring, helpful, working well in a team, and so on; while men were likely to be described as go-getters, independent, and on the cutting-edge of the field. The latter descriptors were more positively received, and the qualities such as working well in a team were not well received. Members of the science community need to think carefully when writing and reading recommendation letters.

While the situation for women is far better than it used to be, there is plenty of room for improvement. I can’t imagine how difficult it was for the women who were the real pioneers in the sciences when there simply were no women in the field. I appreciate them blazing that trail for me. I’ve had my own challenges but I’ve been able to learn from them, and I’m very happy to be able to pass that experience down and help out the next generation. That’s one of the reasons I believe the time I devote to these organizations is worthwhile.

How do you spend your free time?
I have two young children, aged three and six, so they absorb essentially all my free time. But I do like to read books when they’re in bed.

As a working mom, do you have any advice for other women?
There is no perfect solution – there is only a perfect solution for you. You’ll learn that you have some biases you weren’t aware of in your decision-making. Getting past those biases will be the most helpful thing you can do. It’s the “never’s” that will be a challenge. Some moms say, “I would never put my child in full-time daycare.” And then you realize you’re losing your mind when you’re at home full time so you put your child in full-time daycare or you get a full-time nanny. Or vice versa, you might say, “I would never quit work and stay at home,” but being away from your child might just be destroying you — and you’re surprised by this. Go ahead and quit or cut back your hours and only work part time. You’re not a failure if you do that.

The trailblazers did a fantastic job of getting us into the professional realms; but if anything, we’re being destroyed by our own expectations of ourselves. We’re supposed to work full time, be full-time parents, be active, have a healthy diet, and make sure the kids eat healthy food and have all kinds of great educational opportunities, and the list goes on. My main advice is to define your priorities, realize they might change and the things you believe most might also change. Be willing to adjust and go with it.

What is your philosophy of life?
“Make the world a better place,” which is a part of the Girl Scout Law. I’ve been in Girl Scouts since I was a Brownie at 8 years old, and I have a lifetime membership. Now I’m a Girl Scout leader for my daughter’s Brownie troop.

What is your favorite vacation destination?
Whenever possible, I like to extend business trips and add on a few personal days to enjoy the sights. My next meeting will be in France, and I’m bringing my six-year-old daughter. She’s an adventurer. She’s so excited to see the Eiffel Tower, and I can’t wait to share it with her. It will be a lot of fun.

If you had a one-year sabbatical to learn something entirely new, what would it be?
If I had a one-year sabbatical, I would still want to do what I do now. However, if I was absolutely forced to not do what I like to do, I’m interested in linguistics; but I’ve never sat down and really pursued it.

What’s in store for you in the future?
Continuing my work and making steady progress. It’s incremental work, so there is really no end to it. There is a wealth of information available, and it would be a lot of fun to help identify some of those unidentified compounds. I’ll slowly add equipment to the laboratory, and that’s where I get concerned about the NASA budget. The average success rate for grants is less than 30%, so a lot of proposal writing is also in my future.

The cosmos can be mysteriously alluring to all — from the young in age to the young at heart. In particular, space science and astrobiology fill us with wonder, amazement and awe — but the scientists who work in these intriguing fields may seem intimidating to the non-scientist. At the SETI Institute, we open our doors on an annual basis and invite the public to celebrate science with us at our Mountain View, California, headquarters in what is always an energizing and informative interactive science fair.

Science enthusiasts and those who are just curious are welcomed into an environment that exudes not only the visitors’ enthusiasm, but also the scientists’ passion towards their ongoing research and recent discoveries. According to Tom Pierson, SETI Institute CEO, “This year’s Celebrating Science day was our biggest and best yet. It was a very large crowd, and everyone had a great time, both the scientists and our guests. And… it was fantastic to see so many young students and their families enjoying the wonder of the search for life beyond earth!”

This year, over 400 people attended the SETI Institute’s Celebrating Science event, held July 23, 2011. Guests had the opportunity to speak with a number of scientists who represented the Institute’s wide range of astrobiology and planetary science. Dr. Jill Tarter was on hand to provide an update on the Institute’s search for extraterrestrial intelligence and the Allen Telescope Array.

The renowned Dr. Frank Drake was kept busy talking with a loyal group of admirers who were more than willing to wait in line for the opportunity to meet Frank and have him autograph their Drake Equation t-shirts and books. Dr. Doug Vakoch also signed several copies of the recently released Communication with Extraterrestrial Intelligence, which Doug edited and in which several Institute scientists authored chapters.

Dr. Seth Shostak entertained a standing-room-only crowd with a talk that described what would really happen upon first contact; and Dr. David Morrison, Carl Sagan Center Director, was on hand to dispel the many myths that propagate the Internet. Dr. Peter Jenniskens shared his fascinating stories about tracking meteors around the world. He even brought a meteorite he tracked down and located in the vast desert area of the Sudan. Many other scientists were also present to answer questions and talk about their interesting research into a number of different areas, including Saturn and Mars.

Dr. Jon Jenkins informed the masses who stopped by his table about the exceptional results of NASA’s Kepler Mission at year two. He reported, “The Celebrating Science event was a blast! It’s always energizing to talk to people who are jazzed about science and the work we do at the SETI Institute. I am consistently impressed by the questions I get about the Kepler Mission from young kids to senior citizens — they keep me on my toes and make me feel good about my work and the value of it in their eyes. SETI Institute research scientists are pushing back the frontier of science all the time, and it’s great to be able to share the thrill of discovery and exploration with the public.”

Geoff Puckett, Founder and CEO of EffectDesign Inc., shared a walk-through nebula concept model he is working on for the Institute. The goal is to create a high-tech, museum-quality immersive experience for Institute visitors. Geoff noted, “A key element which got visitors of all ages excited was the ability to walk through one nebula and then come back to the entry to select a different nebula or other body. The ability to ‘experientialize’ scientific data seemed to be the biggest ‘Wow’ factor.”

TeamSETI member William Phelps has offered to share his love of astronomy with event visitors by bringing his solar telescopes to the event for the past several years. This year he brought his very popular large h-alpha solar telescope. “I love setting up my solar telescope at the Celebrating Science event,” said William. “When people first look through the telescope, most people just see red. Our brain is used to receiving all different colors of the visible spectrum. At first it doesn’t really process such a narrow band image very well, unless you’ve been doing this for awhile. Often people take a quick look and then get up to leave. ‘Wait,’ I say, ‘you have to give it at least a minute…’ About 30 seconds later they start to see the details — the texture of the chromosphere, the tiny (!) spikes around the edge of the sun that look like tennis ball fuzz, and finally a prominence or two. That’s when they open their mouth and say ‘Wow!’ and I know they are getting a good look at our closest star; the one we orbit, the one that gives us life.”

TeamSETI member Candace Cook traveled from Oregon to attend Celebrating Science. “What an enlightening event,” she said. “I was thrilled to spend three hours with a group of highly intelligent people who, when asked to discuss a scientific subject, did not roll their eyes, look away and suddenly remember a previous engagement! My sincere thanks to everyone at the SETI Institute for celebrating the fact that many of the civilians out here, even those without a Ph.D, love learning and actually enjoy discussing science! Kudos!”

Rob French and Lisa Ballard’s area was inundated with visitors throughout the afternoon. Rob said, “I was pleasantly surprised at the level of public interest in space science and the number of attendees. Our Cassini table was overwhelmed with guests for most of the day. Many of the people were clearly very interested in the subject and asked insightful questions. For many, I think this was the first time they had seen so much imagery from Cassini, and there was a general sense of awe that humans had really accomplished this. At a time when NASA funding is in such danger, it was great to be able to share our accomplishments with the general public and see their support.”

In addition to sharing science in a way that is easily comprehensible to the general public, the SETI Institute also believes in the importance of cultivating a love for science in the next generation of young scientists. Around 80 children participated in educational, interactive, and fun science activities donated by Agilent Technologies. Kids were given the opportunity to build a catapult or create their own model of the earth, spinning on its axis and changing its seasonal position relative to the sun (Night & Day activity).

One college astronomy teacher commented that she wished her students came to class understanding the concepts that were introduced and easily grasped by the young folks engaged in the Night & Day activity. Younger children were able to dissect owl pellets; and one young girl was exuberant over the fact that her pellet contained not one, but two skulls, with the jaw and a few teeth intact. Moving the jaw, she exclaimed, “It works!” Many children proudly carried around the catapults they built, not realizing they also got a lesson in physics. Even the youngest children got to color and create sticker pictures that had a space theme.

SETI Institute REU (Research Experience for Undergraduates) intern Ross Cawthon thoroughly enjoyed leading the kid’s catapult activity. He said, “Most of the kids started thinking about how to put the catapult together before I even began the instructions. We had a good conversation about why heavier or lighter objects would go further. It was nice to teach interested kids, and it was great to hear how much they like science!”

This was nine-year-old Lea’s second time attending Celebrating Science. “There was a huge crowd there,” she commented. “A lot of SETI scientists were there with a lot of different things to show and tell about space and science. I liked the activities that were there for kids. But what was most interesting to me was learning about how many different planet candidates have been identified by Kepler and how they decide whether they are good candidates or not. Next year I would like to learn more from the different scientists. All in all, I really liked Celebrating Science!”

The SETI Institute would like to acknowledge the almost 60 volunteers and its many supporters who helped make Celebrating Science a success. We’d also like to thank Steve Stubbs and Tom Pierson for capturing the event through their camera lens. If you’d like to see more, visit the Celebrating Science Photo Gallery.

Gail Jacobs
July 2011

The final mission of Space Shuttle Atlantis has spawned a whole series of perspective pieces on the history, state, and future of space exploration. Some, like the YouTube video “NASA’s increase of awesome to continue,” are unabashedly exuberant celebrations of the future in store for us in space; others, like this thoughtful piece in Technology Review entitled “Was the Space Shuttle a Mistake?,” are depressingly and effectively critical of the cost both in dollars (more than $200 billion) and in human lives lost (14 astronauts plus at least 6 ground support staff) of the Shuttle program. Some authors have even posited the end of the space age altogether, as in a piece subtitled “Inner space is useful. Outer space is history” in The Economist.

While some of these articles make throwaway references to the number of robotic missions that could have been launched for the cost of one Shuttle flight (estimates range from $450 million per launch, one Discovery-class mission, up to $1.6 billion per launch, half a Flagship mission), there has been little analysis to date of the relative merits of human exploration vs. robotic exploration.

As a planetary scientist, I have very mixed feelings about the human spaceflight program. On a purely scientific level, there is very little in our current solar system exploration program that can’t be done just as effectively by a robot as by an astronaut. Robots excel at the tedious work of taking similar pictures or analyzing similar rocks over and over and over again, without complaint (usually!) or a need for life support systems. Robots don’t need food or water, they can withstand much more damaging radiation, and, perhaps most importantly, they don’t need to come home at the end of the mission. Simply put, a one-way trip requires only half the fuel of a round trip voyage, and even though you’d likely get plenty of volunteer astronauts signing up for a one-way trip to Mars, it’s unlikely that our current moral and ethical code would allow us to send such a mission.

And yet. While orbiting robotic probes have taken stunning vistas of the outer Solar System, it is clearly our rover missions on Mars that have won the hearts and minds of the general public. Perhaps it is the anthropomorphic, almost cute appearance of Spirit and Opportunity (and don’t underestimate the cuteness factor), but I think it’s also that rover tracks are the closest thing we currently have to astronaut footprints on the surface of another world.

If you think of an iconic image of space exploration, chances are you’ll come up with an astronaut planting a flag on the Moon, or perhaps that classic image of a single bootprint from Apollo 11. Robots have flown past, orbited, and/or landed on all of the major bodies in our solar system and quite a few of the minor bodies — we’ve landed spacecraft not only on Mars, but also on Venus, the Moon (of course), and Saturn’s moon Titan; we sent an atmospheric probe into Jupiter; we’re currently in orbit around Mercury and Saturn; and we’ve flown past Neptune and Uranus (and are on our way for a flyby of that pesky has-been, Pluto). Yet without that bootprint, that iconic image of “touching the surface,” have we really explored those worlds?

Ironically, if the next target of human space exploration remains a trip to a near Earth asteroid, the “boots and flag” doctrine becomes extremely complicated in an irregular microgravity environment. If an astronaut visits an asteroid, she probably won’t actually be able to stand on it because there won’t be enough gravity. Landing would be extremely difficult, but perhaps a spacecraft could rendezvous with an asteroid by matching its speed and let an astronaut drift over to pay a visit to a large space rock. Rather than trying to make a bootprint on the surface, wouldn’t a large pole be easier for her to poke the surface with? It could even collect a sample while making a boot-shaped impression. But then do we need the astronaut outside in her suit in the dangers of space after all? Couldn’t she just operate the pole with a boot on the end from safely inside her spacecraft? What if she operated it remotely, from a larger spacecraft perched a safe distance away from the asteroid? What if she stayed home and operated it truly remotely, from the comfort of a safe NASA facility’s virtual reality tank? What if the boot-and-pole contraption didn’t need to wait for signals from a faraway human astronaut at all, but could be programmed to autonomously tap the surface on approach, make and photograph a nice boot-shaped mark, and perhaps even scoop up a sample or two of asteroid dust to send back to Earth in a small capsule? Would that allow us to check off “asteroid exploration” from our list? What if I told you that mission has already been accomplished — the Japanese Hayabusa spacecraft successfully used a robotic probe to capture a small sample of dust from the asteroid Itokawa in 2005, placed it in a capsule, and sent it back to Earth, where it was successfully recovered in 2010 and is currently being studied.

But what about the science, you say, all that science that can only be done by trained astronauts? What about the amazing green moon rocks that were found by the Apollo astronauts on the lunar surface but surely would have been missed by a robot? To this, I would argue that while certainly human astronauts have the benefit of intelligence, quick thinking, problem solving, and ingenuity, robots have certain inexorable advantages in the realm of space exploration. Aside from not needing to eat, sleep, or return to Earth, robotic missions are significantly cheaper than human missions. For the cost of putting two astronauts on the surface of a planet like Mars for a few days or weeks, you could afford an army of robots that could comb the surface of the planet for years. While they might not spot that green rock right away, through sheer brute force chances are they’d eventually stumble across it and catalog it as an interesting sample to be sent back to Earth someday. And if you don’t have humans to return to Earth (and keep alive and safe all the way home), you have room for a whole lot more rocks in your return capsule!

So why, then, do I have mixed feelings about the end of the Space Shuttle program? If everything humans can do in space, robots can do better, cheaper, and safer (in terms of loss of human life), then why send humans at all? The answer is simple: don’t try to justify human spaceflight using science. NASA got it right when it split off the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) from the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD). Keep exploration, dominated by human astronauts, separate from science, where robots rule. Sure, there may be some chances for science to be done along the way, as in the interesting geological observations made by the Apollo astronauts or the microgravity chemistry experiments performed by astronauts on the International Space Station, but if you try to justify a program like Apollo or the ISS purely on scientific terms, you’ll fail. For the $25 billion spent on the Apollo program (a more inclusive estimate in 2009 dollars is $170 billion), or the $100 billion spent on the International Space Station (which includes construction costs plus the cost of 33 Space Shuttle missions to construct and supply the station), we could have had a small army of robotic lunar geology rovers or a fleet of microgravity satellites. Apollo and the ISS belong firmly in the Exploration side of NASA’s portfolio, and that’s as it should be.

Why, then, should we explore at all, if not for scientific gain? As a scientist, this might be a hard position to admit, but exploration has political and psychological benefits that go far beyond science in many respects. The Apollo program was a unique circumstance of the Cold War era — instead of fighting a war on the ground, with potentially devastating consequences from the use of atomic or nuclear weapons, the United States and the Soviet Union chose astronauts and cosmonauts to fight in a modern-day arena: space became the gladiator ring of the past. In a post-Cold War era, the International Space Station became a sign of international cooperation and trust, as governments from many countries shared resources to build and staff a technological marvel in orbit.

Human spaceflight gives us a new perspective on our world, fragile and beautiful in an endless, empty sea of darkness. It is inspirational, a source of pride in our nation’s accomplishments, a uniting subject at a time of great national divisions. And it is space travel that lights up the minds of children, of the next generation of explorers, sparking a seed of innovation and excitement and exploration that will carry this nation forward. NASA should be on the cutting edge of that exploration.

The Space Shuttle was an innovative technological marvel in 1981, when it was first launched, but it has kept flying far longer than originally intended, and the fleet of spacecraft has grown old and unreliable. Many things have changed since 1981, and it’s time for a change in our human spaceflight policy, as well. I believe that the Obama administration made a tough but correct decision when it decided to encourage commercial development of spacecraft that can serve as the cargo ships and true “space shuttles” of the future, bringing supplies and astronauts to the International Space Station and other future destinations in Low Earth Orbit. Atlantis’ final journey into space turned out to be both majestic and mundane, as the science fiction spacecraft of the future (at least the future as seen in 1981) ends its days ferrying a load of spare parts and bologna sandwiches into orbit and bringing a load of broken equipment and assorted trash back to Earth. Such resupply missions are clearly better suited to the shipping containers of the future, robotic resupply ships that are already automatically docking with the ISS which are unloaded, then filled up with trash and released to burn up in the Earth’s atmosphere on the way down.

NASA’s future of human spaceflight will focus on innovation and true exploration, not the day-to-day operations of the supply chain. As Space Shuttle flights became ordinary, they lost their place in the human imagination because they ceased to be exploration – while the scenery is stunning, there are only so many times that a trip around Earth or a visit to the same Space Station can be spun as new and exciting on the evening news. A focus on developing flexible, innovative, and realistic new spacecraft that can take astronauts to Near Earth asteroids (with or without a boot-on-a-pole), or back to the Moon, or even on to Mars, will give NASA’s ESMD a true purpose and destination once more.

Robotic precursor missions to asteroids and other destinations can certainly do some great science along the way, but NASA needs to make sure that the budget for true scientific exploration, as done by the amazing spacecraft of SMD, remains insulated and protected from the almost boundless demands of human spaceflight. Humans have a place in space exploration, as ambassadors and proxies for the human race as a whole, but robotic missions will venture to the far reaches of our solar system to study environments too remote or dangerous for humans to visit any time soon. Fortunately, there’s plenty of space for both!

About the Author:
Dr. Cynthia B. Phillips is a planetary scientist at the SETI Institute and author of over a dozen books, including Space Exploration for Dummies. Dr. Phillips acknowledges helpful discussions with Dr. David Morrison for this article.

Friedemann Freund doesn’t shrink from taking on the really big problems. His research has elucidated such important phenomena as the fact that rocks under stress behave like batteries that can produce currents deep within the crust of the Earth. These are not piddling electron flows, either – the currents could be as large as millions of amperes, sufficient to be measured above ground, and perhaps even from orbit. Understanding and exploiting this phenomenon could lead to a dramatic breakthrough in earthquake forecasting.

Click on images for larger view

Friedemann, how did the science of earthquake forecasting attract your attention?
I became active in earthquake research approximately 15 years ago. What many find surprising is I came to study earthquakes from the field of basic physics – I wanted to understand defects in minerals that affect the physical properties of rocks when put under stress. Of course, our very tectonically active, dynamic planet puts rocks under enormous stresses all the time. Eventually, these rocks rupture and generate huge shock waves that can bring down buildings or generate tsunamis that can run back and forth across an entire ocean several times. It is mind boggling to realize a magnitude 9 earthquake releases the energy equivalent to several million atomic bombs of the Hiroshima class. Photo to the left is an extensional crack taken in the Santa Cruz Mountains, California, on October 17, 1989. Credit: R.J. McLaughlin, U.S. Geological Survey

The conventional seismological community is unable to derive early warnings for even the large magnitude earthquakes, such as the recent quake that devastated parts of Japan or the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake off the west coast of Sumatra that produced a killer tsunami. Through my work, I hope to help build an understanding of the very subtle signals generated when stresses are building up deep in the Earth to the level where rocks will eventually rupture.

How did your research into mineral defects lead you to the study of pre-earthquake signals?
I became interested in certain mineral defects many years ago while living in Germany. I chose the simplest oxide material one could attain, which was magnesium oxide. My colleagues were skeptical of this area of study, thinking there was nothing left to find. But my work led me to a family of defects, which everybody else had overlooked or misinterpreted as “dirt” or some unspecified form of contamination. I spent the next 20 years characterizing these defects with every physical technique available. I discovered one of the characteristic features of these defects was that, when activated, they would change the electrical conductivity, by 8 orders of magnitude. An enormous change.

After working in this area a number of years, turning more toward studying rocks, I recalled my old studies on the magnesium oxide crystals. They had generated electricity when I “tickled” them. By the mid-1990s, I knew that minerals in common rocks have the same type of defects. It occurred to me that if I mechanically stressed those rocks, I might be able to generate electricity.

This idea turned out to be correct but it took another 10 years before I had time to invent an experiment that has since become a benchmark experiment. Working with two post-docs at NASA Ames, I was able to demonstrate in 2006 that when we apply moderate stress to one end of a block of granite about 20 feet in length, we could draw an electric current from the other end. In addition, based upon a theoretical paper I had published in the mid-1980s, we showed that air molecules become massively ionized at the rock surface and that small sparks are flying off the corners and edges due to the firing of corona discharges.

Are your findings currently being used in the field to detect unusual ionization levels in the atmosphere?

I’ve been working with Tom Bleier, who leads Quakefinder, the humanitarian R&D division of Stellar Solutions. Tom has now installed air conductivity sensors along California’s San Andreas Fault. When there has been a moderate or big earthquake not far from one of his sensor stations, he has indeed recorded a very large increase in air conductivity. When we saw this effect for the first time, we were very pleased even though our sensor was overwhelmed by the amount of ionization. This air ionization at the ground level and the upward expansion of the heavily ion-laden air, probably up to the stratosphere, is what causes distinct reactions in the ionosphere some 200-300 km above us. These are very complex processes, widely reported in the scientific literature as potential pre-earthquake indicators – fascinating for us to begin understanding how these processes work. I’m pleased to see this work receiving press coverage, including news reports in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. 

How does the catastrophic March 2011 earthquake in Japan factor into your research?
I have not looked at this earthquake in any detail because it happened deep underneath the ocean, and the ocean is filtering out many of the signals that arise from electric currents. However, this is work we want to do this summer with one of the SETI Institute’s REU (Research Experience for Undergraduates) student interns. We’ll look at the influence the ionospheric current vortex has on earthquakes that occur on land and under the ocean.

What is the coolest thing about your project?
The sheer scope of the work is energizing! Earthquakes are only one of the many aspects that have come out of my work. Even though I plunged into this earthquake arena and some people now call me the earthquake guy, this work is actually only an entry into an even wider area of research.

How is your research expanding in scope?
In reading a variety of seemingly unrelated reports, I began to wonder if the defects I had seen in the minerals 25 years prior could be responsible for the signals people were reporting from the natural environment prior to earthquakes. To me, the answer very quickly became Yes! That seemed to be an intriguing avenue to follow.

In early June 2011, I gave a talk at a brain mapping conference in San Francisco, California, in which I pointed out a very interesting phenomenon. The ionosphere that wraps around the globe has a standing wave that is constantly fed by lighting strikes on the surface of the Earth. Every lighting bolt that hits the Earth emits a broad electromagnetic radiation from very high frequencies that you can actually hear. In the old radios, you could hear the crackle of lightening strikes.

But there is also a very low frequency component; and one component in the low frequency, around 8 Hz, is the frequency that a wave takes to travel in one single oscillation around the entire Earth and reconnect. I became interested in the influence these extremely low frequency electromagnetic waves might have on living organisms. It turns out our brain emits radiation at 8 Hz and 4 Hz. Even the brains of little animals, such as mice, emit 4 Hz of electromagnetic radiation.

Prior to an earthquake, the earth sends out bursts of low and extremely low frequencies that cover the entire spectrum around 8 Hz from millihertz to 100 Hz. These electric waves come from the belly of the earth. There are some very interesting studies that link psychological and physiological phenomena in humans and animals to the approach of big earthquakes exactly at the same time when these electromagnetic waves are emitted.

What are some examples of psychological or physiological phenomena exhibited prior to an earthquake?
Evidence is mounting that ultra low frequency and extremely low frequency radiation emitted in the natural environment can have profound effects on human and animal health and behavior prior to an earthquake. An excellent paper has been written by Dr. A. Shitov, a professor in Southern Siberia. He characterized a number of incidents that occurred prior to the 2003 magnitude 7.5 Chuya earthquake, a remote area in Siberia. One of the aspects he looked at was medical records. Dr. Shitov was able to show that about two weeks before this earthquake, there was an unusual increase in the number of people seeking medical help. The complaints of those who flocked to hospital emergency rooms before the earthquake were related to neurological conditions – hypertension, vegetative vascular dystonia, epilepsy – while other conditions such as acute respiratory infections and gastro enteric diseases, which are due to poor air quality and drinking water pollution, showed up after the quake.

Emergency visits prior to the Magnitude 7.5 Chuya earthquake in Siberia. September 27, 2003. A. Shitov, 2010

Another example of interesting pre-earthquake behavior came about through pure chance. In the spring of 2008, a group of medical doctors at the University of Chengdu in Sichuan, China, were monitoring the circadian rhythm of laboratory mice. On May 12, 2008, in the midst of their experiment, the devastating magnitude 8.0 Wenchuan earthquake occurred less than 100 kilometers from the university. The researchers continued their experiment but then found out that three to four days before the earthquake, the circadian rhythm of the mice had become completely random. This continued for a few days after the earthquake, until the animals’ behavior returned to a normal pattern. A friend from China sent me the electromagnetic wave spectrum recorded at the same university. It showed a large extremely low frequency electromagnetic emission two or three days before the Wenchuan earthquake – at the same time the mice exhibited their strikingly abnormal behavior.

In a third example from 2009, a Ph.D. biology student from The Open University in England was in Italy continuing her third year of studying toads and their mating behavior. Suddenly the toads disappeared from the lake, which was the study area. When the student couldn’t locate the toads, she became worried as this was extremely unusual behavior. Then the deadly 6.3 magnitude earthquake hit the heavily damaged the town of L’Aquila, Italy, approximately 70 kilometers from the lake. Three days later the toads returned.

Strange and interesting things are observed before major earthquakes. I find this area of study a wonderful challenge in which to understand the complexities of the world. It’s fascinating to think these occurrences are driven by the sun and are influenced by processes that originate in our closest star. We have a diurnal pattern of a distribution of earthquakes controlled by a current in the ionosphere, which is controlled by the activity on the sun. When we move into a new cycle of solar activity, such as we are now entering, the currents in the ionosphere will have a higher chance of triggering earthquakes in the earth’s crust. If you look at 100 or so years of seismic activity records from around the world, you will see a clear pattern that the number of earthquakes follows the solar activity. I want to understand the details surrounding this fact. Image to left: The X9-class solar flare of Dec. 5, 2006, observed by the Solar X-Ray Imager aboard NOAA’s GOES-13 satellite. Credit: NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center

What do you currently consider your biggest challenge?
My biggest challenge is to convince at least a good fraction of the scientific community that these phenomena take place. The work I’m doing is new and some scientists cannot understand that this discovery, which I developed from physical studies of magnesium oxide single crystals, also applies to dirty rocks. Many reject this work out of hand because it provides a new explanation to historically well-documented phenomena.

Why should the general public care about your research?
There’s no doubt seismologists have done wonderful work. They look at the number of earthquakes, details of past earthquakes, and then they construct elaborate statistical models when the next earthquake will happen. But they can’t “predict” earthquakes. That’s where the 30-year uncertainty comes in that is reflected in insurance policies.

I don’t want to look backwards at past earthquakes and predict future earthquakes statistically. I want to train my eyes or my instruments to understand the earthquakes as they happen. As the stress is building up deep in the earth 10, 20, 35 kilometers below the surface of the earth, can we pick up and understand the signals that are detectable at the surface? Since these signals range from animal behavior to ionospheric perturbations and everything in between, it is important to understand how the basic physics is related. If we can show – and I think we can – how atmospheric phenomena and phenomena in the biologic world, such as animal behavior, are linked to ionospheric perturbations, we can then use this to forecast conditions under which earthquakes are likely to occur.

Collapsed building and burned area in San Francisco as a result of the October 19, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Credit: C.E. Meyer, U.S. Geological Survey

While we can’t predict earthquakes, we can issue an alert stating, “Stresses seem to be building up deep in the earth’s crust at a particular fault and if these stresses reach a certain level, there is an increased chance of an earthquake within the next few days.” This can have tremendous impact on the public and saving lives, instead of being unprepared and having to deal with the aftermath of a massive earthquake.

How did you come to join the SETI Institute?
I realized the same defects I had painstakingly studied in the synthetic crystals I was growing also occurred in minerals. The first mineral I looked at was olivine from the Earth’s mantle. Olivine is the most abundant mineral in the universe, not only on Earth but also in the interstellar dust. Most of the dust grains we see out in the galaxies consist of tiny olivine crystals. All these olivine crystals had certain defects. I became more and more interested, and I realized some of these defects actually consist of carbon atoms linking themselves up with hydrogen. Suddenly a door opened that led to a pathway for understanding questions related to the origin of life.

As I came to NASA Ames in the mid-1980s, my interest was focused on the question of the origin of life and how we can understand the conditions on a lifeless Earth 3 ½ billion years ago. It takes very complex bioorganic chemistry for life to evolve, and I wanted to understand more. This area of interest is what brought me to the SETI Institute.

What keeps you motivated?
Motivation is an interesting incentive, and its sources change with age. Throughout my career, however, I have always wanted to understand nature. I’ve been motivated by a desire to try and understand how big things in nature work and also to look at the simple questions in our lives, such as what is chlorophyll or how is it possible for cold-blooded animals to live in cold water and still be active, knowing their body temperature is almost the same as the water temperature. My curiosity will never be quenched as long as questions exist for which we have yet to discover the answers.

As a youth, were there any books or movies that influenced your career?
Strangely enough, Velikovsky’s book, Worlds in Collision, published in 1950, caught my attention. Velikovsky was a colorful character. He had the idea that Venus had been a wandering object that passed near Earth. He proposed this near collision resulted in creating many of the reported floods and other natural catastrophes found in numerous old writings from different cultures continents apart. Velikovsky wrote that Venus was later captured by the solar system and was added to our planetary lineup in the early centuries BCE, after which Venus eventually became a normal planet. That was such a challenging proposal to accept. But if I didn’t want to accept it, how would I refute it? Even as a young man, I was intrigued by the scientific process.

How has your lifelong study into the physics of Earth influenced your thoughts on the possibility of life on other planets?
Wherever in the universe there is a planet with land and liquid water and an active weathering system, I predict that this planet will slowly but inextricably become oxidized. Even without life and without photosynthesis this planet will acquire oxygen in its atmosphere. Carl Sagan’s proposal of the “pale blue dot” being a symbol of life in the “blackness of space” is a beautiful metaphor. Life is not necessary to create a pale blue dot, but the same weathering process which injects oxygen will also release organic molecules into the environment, specifically complex molecules such as must have been available on the early earth, forming the basis for self-organization and the origin of life. Image to the right: This is a computer artist’s illustration of a giant but remote galaxy string discovered recently. Credit: NASA

My work suggests that wherever planets exist in our galaxy and beyond, which are similar to the earth with a similar weathering system, they will create situations for life to form. If this life self-assembles from the organics released from rocks during the weathering cycle, it will look similar to our own – similar in its overall biochemical foundation. I don’t believe in life based on silicon chemistry or on a completely different chemistry. Earth-like planets anywhere will, by necessity, develop both oxygen and primitive life. The slowly but inextricably rising amount of oxygen in the environment will drive the evolution from primitive single-cell organisms like the prokaryotes on earth to more evolved forms of life like the eukaryotes on earth that have learned to not only survive in the presence of oxygen but to thrive in it.

You’ve had an Adjunct Professor position at San Jose State University since 1989. What type of affiliation do you have with the University?
As an adjunct professor, I have the privilege of sitting in on faculty meetings, although I don’t have a voting voice. This position also allows me to select and work with students from the University’s Physic Department and other departments. I enjoy working with young people, and I’ve been able to work with some very good students.

If you had a one-year sabbatical to work on a pet project, what would it be?
I’d like to revisit some ideas I had about 30 years ago. At the time my work had led me to become interested in proton conductivity. I developed a complete semiconductor physics of protons carrying electric currents as they relate to certain chemical processes. I would like to see whether my basic understanding of proton conductivity can be applied to better understand to the functioning of the living cell. Our cells have an amazing capability of transporting protons through the cell membranes. Peter Mitchell who proposed an elaborate but basically “unphysical” mechanism for this transmembrane proton transport received a Nobel Prize. I challenge his idea. If I had six months or a year, or if someone would give me the money to hire a capable young Post-Doc, I’d love to see how far I can take my fundamental understanding of how protons conduct electricity and how they couple to the flow of electrons — a fascinating project, if only I had the time to do it.