19 minute read
Chapter 1. History of space exploration
The history
Since the beginning of time, people looked up into the starry night and wondered what is up there. Their feelings about this strange space above their heads were constantly changing: fear, adoration, incomprehension, a myriad of other things. But one feeling was always there. The one that, some people believe, was incorporated in our nature. The desire to know, to learn, to explore has brought us not only to the farthest places on Earth but to space, far above our planet. There grew up already a few generations of people who did not know the world without space missions like my grandparents. In my lifetime, I do not remember a time without seeing the International Space Station on the news, which celebrates its twentieth anniversary this year. It has been part of our daily life. We cannot imagine not going to space anymore, can we? And all of that was and is happening because of one feeling. Curiosity was not just about the rover – it was about its creators, people.
Advertisement
Current plans of humanity on space exploration are strictly focused on one particular destination. We aim to Mars, the red planet, and we have never been so close to it.
The dream of the first people developing rockets – soviet physicist and rocket scientist Konstantin Tsiolkovsky and German-born NASA aerospace engineer Wernher von Braun – was actually multiplanetary traveling. The Moon was planned to be only a small step in between. But with the end of the cold war, the space race ended too, and so these bright minds could not see their dream come true. Moreover, the expensive shuttle program which was started in 1981 pushed traveling to Mars a few decades farther.
However, the level of excitement about space missions has risen again. One of the reasons for it is the continuous success of the first private space exploration company SpaceX. It was founded in 2002 by Elon Musk, and its mission was to rethink space-traveling by developing a cheaper way of flying through the atmosphere thus opening the gate for multiplanetary traveling and, at the end of the day, for Mars colonization. The main issue of space missions was their cost. A major part of the launch costs come from building a rocket which is supposed to burn down completely during the flight. It makes space-traveling extremely unprofitable. And it can be compared to building a new airplane for each and every flight. So, the company SpaceX believed in fully reusable rockets, which can not only withstand reentry to the atmosphere but also be able to safely refly after the successful landing.1
And they made it into history. In 2008, Falcon 9 was the first privately built rocket to reach Earth’s orbit, and in 2015 Falcon 9’s first stage was able to return and land back on Earth. These events turned the whole industry of space exploration on its head. Therefore, the new space race began – this time between government agencies and the private sector. Or is it between humanity and time now?
I think one of the reasons why SpaceX has succeeded is its charismatic leader Elon Musk. Musk is often being compared to Tony Stark, a fictional character of the Marvel universe, “genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist.” 2 Elon Musk is a very passionate man that dreams big, he has good rhetoric skills, almost unlimited budget as well as a sense of humor. Take his Twitter account where he writes about his unbelievable plans. Most people think of these tweets as of silly jokes, however, all of these proposals and predictions sooner or later become reality. That is why people tend to believe in him. Yet he is a very controversial character. While implying to be an environmentalist, Musk popularizes space travel and e-vehicles that actually do a lot of harm to the nature contrarily to popular belief.
First of all, Elon is a businessman, so he does everything just to sell his products. However, he can be very poetic and inspiring too. The SpaceX website quotes him: “You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great - and that’s what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It’s about believing in the future and thinking that the future will be better than the past. And I can’t think of anything more exciting than going out there and being among the stars.” 1
The destiny of humanity lies beyond the Earth, that is what Elon Musk believes in. Is it not quite romantic to think of? I have to agree: once I had started my research on the topic of moving to Mars, I found his point of view extremely promising and inspiring. To say the least, not only people, who are far from rocket science, find him trustworthy and right: Experts in this field find his ideas and contribution very valuable and helpful too.
A good example of this, is one of the greatest physicists of our time – Stephen Hawking. In his last book Brief Answers to the Big Questions Hawking mentions Elon’s plans to establish a Moon base and then go to Mars in 2020th. In the chapters “Will we survive on Earth?” and “Should we colonize space?” he agrees with him upon the necessity of Mars colonization. He believes that until we find a place to escape to and leave the Earth, until there is a plan B, we are at an incessant risk of being destroyed forever as a civilization. 3 And unfortunately, there are a lot of ways to end our existence.
One of the biggest risks, now and in the long run, is climate change. The change, or crisis, was initially provoked by the rapid growth of humanity, our consumption, and our needs. In his book, Stephen Hawking refers to our history: every time humanity faced the crisis of outgrowing our habitat in the past, there has always been a place to colonize. Americas, Africa, Asia, Australia: Europeans arrived in every part of the world and conquered it. Now we occupied everything, we even won a few battles for a territory against nature. But nature can strike back, and this is what is happening. “We are running out of space and the only places to go to are other worlds,” – claims Stephen Hawking.
He also understands that moving a part of civilization to another place, “will not solve any of our immediate problems on Earth completely”, but it will give us a new perspective as well as some time to strategize and figure out how to proceed. There will always be people who will argue that it is better to spend money and resources to face the problems we already have on Earth. However, his counter-argument to it is, that no one is “denying the importance of fighting climate change” and no one is going to stop spending money on Earth, instead he proposes to invest an additional quarter of a percent of the world’s GDP for space projects. “Isn’t our future worth a quarter of a percent?” 4
State of art of space exploration studies
The date that is considered to be the starting point of space exploration history is the 4th of October 1957. On that day the Soviet Union launched the first human-made object into the Earth’s orbit – Sputnik 1 (“sputnik” literally means “companion” in Russian, later it also became a synonym to the word “satellite”). This event kicked off the space race and space exploration itself. Throughout 63 year of history we reached a lot of milestones in this field such as delivering humans into space, orbiting the Earth, spacewalking, and even the Moon landing. Since our actions were just brief, harmless investigations carried out in the name of science, humanity was not burdened by the need to develop any special ethics and morals for further exploration outside of the planet. But with the continuous development of this field of study, space exploration very soon will be commercialized.
The main problem of commercialization is that often when it comes to profits, which is an inseparable part of any commercial activity, morals fade into the background. Having certain ethics is necessary in this case, for commercialization can lead towards destruction, therefore, some regulations to ensure space is protected. And it is the task of the scientific community to remind our civilization to stay humane and make sure that no harm will be done to other species, should we be lucky enough to meet some. Working on ethics of space exploration is extremely important right now, since we may come to another world – e.g. Mars – way sooner than we think and we need to be morally and ethically prepared before deciding to “colonize” and “exploit”.
One of the goals of this chapter is to find out which blind spots exist in the field of ethical space exploration and which topics are not sufficiently discussed by the publicity. In order to accomplish this task we need to answer the question: What is this quarter of a percent of the world’s GDP mentioned by Stephen Hawking being spent onto? Specifically, which projects, experiments, and researches are being conducted in this field?
Mars500
With Mars being the main focus of this work, because of it being the closest destination, which makes it the obvious next target to explore, the first project coming into sight is Mars500. Mars500 is an international study conducted by the Russian Institute of Biomedical Problems (IBMP) with the active participation of the ESA (European Space Agency) conducted in 2010-2011. Its task was to simulate the first full durational manned flight to Mars to prepare for future space flights to the Moon and Mars. During 520 days of the experiment 6 male participants were completely isolated from the rest of the world, with the exception of the control center, communications were realistically delayed by a period of 8 to 736 seconds in both directions. The goal of the study and of all the conducted experiments was to learn how long term isolation affects astronauts’ physical and psychological states: hormone regulation, immunity, sleep quality, mood, stress-levels and the effectiveness of dietary supplements.5
Researchers registered that, during 17 months of living in four hermetically sealed interconnected modules, the crew’s ability to perform complicated tasks decreased. Some of the participants later confessed to the press that they had insomnia and anxiety problems. One year after the beginning of the experiment, the crew also participated in interviews about their feelings, sensations, and other points that usually are not described in scientific reports. I was most interested in two questions: “Did you feel yourselves really flying to another planet?”, “Do your family and friends support you?” 6
Regarding the first question, only 1 out of 6 participants said that he really felt like being in a long space flight and was excited about it. All the rest of the crew stated, that they were fully aware of time and space and realized that they were on Earth, even though sometimes they did not think of the modules as being located directly in the Moscow suburbs. Concerning the second question, every member of the crew answered the same: they were all actively communicating with the outside world via email and were missing their closest ones. In reality, the authors of the research were not aiming to completely simulate the process of the flight, since the simulation of zero gravity during 1,5 years on Earth technically was not quite possible, instead they tried to only study the effect of isolation. Nevertheless, I found these exact answers critical for my project. Later in this work, I will return to these questions and explain their importance in the context of my installation.
Another one of the problems of the study and the cause for criticism was the complete absence of female members inside the crew. Study organizers claim that they received applications from female participants, but none of them met medical requirements. And they actually believe that maybe it is for good, because “women definitely complicate psychological climate.” 7 This point of view is extremely common in post-soviet Russia. For example, in some interviews concerning other space travel experiments conducted by Russian agencies, statements may be found, claiming that women were the main problem of the mission since they caused a rivalry between male crew members and that for this reason they were preferred to be left out for the sake of science. I find that these comments are highly inappropriate and inhibiting the development of this field of study.
HI-SEAS
Contrarily to Mars500, HI-SEAS (Hawai’i Space Exploration Analog and Simulation) research program was never exclusively for males. Founded in 2012 at the University of Hawai’i at Manoa and funded by NASA, it has operated long term planetary surface missions.8
The program included a series of 4-to-12-months-long missions, during which crews of 4 or 6 people, half of them male and half female, completed routine tasks to run the module, called the Habitat, and weekly practiced skills in the field needed for the actual investigation of Mars. The Hawaiian project offered higher crew autonomy over their daily tasks and over the mission itself than its Russian analogue, Mars500, as well as it gave a possibility of using real Mars-like landscape in the simulation. The focus of the research also radically differed from the one of the Russian project. HI-SEAS was designed to test the equipment, but not the Habitat itself, nor any rockets, or spacesuits. It was built to test a far more critical piece of the simulation – humans.9
This dialogue between the scientific journalist Lynn Levy and the principal investigator for HI-SEAS Kim Binsted was recorded during the HI-SEAS IV mission for the podcast The Habitat that aired on Gimlet Media in 2018. This iteration of the mission lasted for one year from Summer 2015 till Summer 2016. The audio-documentary format showed not only technical problems of the mission but also a lot of social issues. Furthermore, the podcast is able to deliver a good impression of what people were actually testing and what is usually hidden behind long, unclear and dry scientific reports.
HI-SEAS II crew members inside and outside of the Habitat.
Source: hi-seas.org © HISEAS
Researches wanted to know how a group of strangers, isolated for a long period of time, behaves and how their relationships evolve under the pressure of extraterrestrial routine as well as of extreme situations. Already from the first episodes of the podcast it is noticeable that the Hawaiian experiment is far more alive and social, than Mars500. I could definitely tell that it is an improvement in space flight studies and a step in the right direction.
Biosphere 2
Mark Nelson, Biosphere 2: What Really Happened?, Dartmouth Alumni Magazine
Before studying some particular and narrow topics like the effect that long term isolation has on social lives or on physiological and mental health, people tried to conduct way more ambitious and big experiment. They wondered whether it was possible to build an enclosed artificial ecosystem just like Earth, put humans inside of it and see if and for how long it would sustain?
On the 26th September 1991, a project called Biosphere 2 was launched. The construction covered 12,700 square meters and hosted 3000 species of animals and plants in total. The facility was in fact a human-sized terrarium containing six zones representing different Earthly biomes, two of which were assigned to humans and their vital activities.10
Eight crew members were supposed to be isolated in the park for 2 years without any help from the outside world, growing food by themselves, regulating the weather conditions of the climate zones, controlling populations of plants and animals, and eliminating any imbalance of the system.
The results of the study were fascinating. Mark Nelson, the crew member of the first mission, later in 2018 writes about his experience in the book Pushing Our Limits: Insights from Biosphere 2. He believes that participating in such a project made him and the crew more conscious about sustainability and more aware of the natural processes happening on Earth. Because of the relatively small size of the ecosystem, Mark Nelson and his colleagues could observe the consequences of their every action. They came to the understanding that it is really hard to recreate Earth-like conditions in a closed system and that we definitely should not take Earth’s wealth such as its fresh and breathable air for granted. But the experiment also showed that this kind of living was possible: they left no trash behind and lived in a fully organic world which was extremely sensitive and therefore fragile. It seems like this experience could be very helpful in building habitats on Mars in the near future. But what does the scientific community have to say about it?
The complex of Biosphere 2 in 1991.
© John Miller / Associated Press
Biosphere 2 was one of the most controversial experiments in the history of ecological studies. Some claimed that the researchers were 50 years ahead of their time. Others called the experiment “show-biz, not science.” 11 The experiment was receiving a lot of critiques since its beginning. Firstly, because the owners and investors were pursuing mercantile interests: the facility was functioning as a commercial attraction as well – a human zoo. Thousands of tourists were visiting Biosphere 2. It also received a huge promotional media campaign in 1991 and its launch was celebrated with a party for 2000 guests right in the Biosphere itself. Then why was this project forgotten and abandoned after its remarkable entrance?
Scientists labeled the experiment as scam as soon as it became known, claiming that organizers were cheating: hiding safety stocks of food in the facility, secretly pumping oxygen under the dome and provisioning the crew with vitamins, seeds and other products and tools.12 After all these reveals, Biosphere 2 was not considered trustworthy and realistic anymore.
However it is not a reason to put all the gained data into the drawer. Despite the received critique the project led to a lot of important conclusions and helped to gain special experience. Apparently, it is not so easy to recreate an Earth-like ecosystem, and that is the argument that we need to keep in mind while thinking of inhabiting Mars or any other celestial body. Life on the red planet will not be possible in the same way as we know it on Earth.
NASA 3D Printed Habitat Challenge
The idea of colonizing space, making it ours, drives humanity not only to improve transportation technologies. After all, when we arrive in another world we will need a more comfortable stay than just a tight spaceship.
In 2014 NASA announced “competition designed to advance additive construction technology needed to create sustainable housing solutions for Earth, the Moon, Mars and beyond.” 13
The purpose of the challenge was to encourage a broader group of architectural and design teams, studios, and agencies to work in the direction of space. NASA intended to harvest ideas on how modern technologies, tools, and materials could be used in terrestrial and space architecture. And this was a technically tough challenge.
As every part of the Earth has its special qualities like natural resources, landscape type, climate, and others, each of them has different requirements for housing and architecture in general. In some places buildings must resist extremely low temperatures, some must be prepared for tornadoes or earthquakes, and in some places only bamboo trees could be used for construction. The same applies to other planets and celestial bodies. While Earth has spoiled us with plenty of materials to make, create and build whatever we want and how we want it, the Moon and Mars, for example, do not own many resources on their surfaces. Moreover, they have physics very different from the ones that we have here.
Despite some similarities between Mars and the Earth, like being located in the Goldilocks zone of the solar system and having almost the same duration of the day, they have different parameters. Mars is 2.5 times smaller than Earth and it means that gravitation on the red planet is only 37.6% of the Earth’s. This is bad for our organisms but could be good for architecture. The smaller force of gravity will allow building bigger structures with fewer supports.14
The concept of a Martian habitat by the studio Hassell
Source: hassellstudio.com © Hassell
This advantage can change the appearance of architecture completely as well as the main constructing method. However, there is one more major problem for architects on Mars that has to be solved: the weaker magnetic field of the planet allows deadly sun and space radiation to come through the thin atmosphere and hit the surface. So architecture must also include one important feature – sufficient radiation protection.
Coming back to the competition itself, in 2018 the short-list of 10 projects was announced. As the name suggests, one of the main requisitions of NASA 3D Printed Habitat Challenge was the constructing method – 3d-printing - so all the participants had to adapt this technology to Martian resources and climate, designing not only housing but the whole process including delivery of the printers and their appearance.
I was the most drawn to one of the short-listed entries, the work by the studio Hassell. Their idea was to deliver to Mars autonomous modular robots which can unite in formations to perform different tasks. These robots’ mission is to 3d-print protective domes or shells from an easily accessible Martian surface material – regolith. After completing the shell, it becomes possible to unfold underneath it a series of inflatable ‘pods’, architectural units containing all the equipment necessary for life and exploration. Authors of the project explained that as designers they were aiming first of all “to bring a more human element to space design, typically all about maximum efficiency and performance.” 15 They believe, that besides having in mind all the technical problems and their solutions, space architects should take into consideration that this habitat is most importantly “a home away from home.”
I have to agree that living conditions do highly affect performance and mental state. Therefore, it is a good idea not to neglect the necessity of an actual home feeling, especially when it comes to such a long term mission as an expedition to Mars.
