Results for “Permanent Magnets” — Page 35

NASA NTRS2008

Science on the Moon: The Wailing Wall of Space Exploration

Science on and from the Moon has important implications for expanding human knowledge and understanding, a prospect for the 21st Century that has been under discussion for at least the past 25 years. That having been said, however, there remain many issues of international versus national priorities, strategy, economy, and politics that come into play. The result is a very complex form of human behavior where science and exploration take center stage, but many other important human options are sacrificed. To renew this dialogue about the Moon, it seems we are already rushing pell-mell into it as has been done in the past. The U.S., Japan, China, India, and Russia either have sent or plan to send satellites and robotic landers there at this time. What does a return to the Moon mean, why are we doing this now, who should pay for it, and how? The only semblance of such a human enterprise seems to be the LHC currently coming online at CERN. Can it be used as a model of international collaboration rather than a sports or military event focused on national competition? Who decides and what is the human sacrifice? There are compelling arguments for establishing science on the Moon as one of the primary goals for returning to the Moon and venturing beyond. A number of science endeavors will be summarized, beyond lunar and planetary science per se. These include fundamental physics experiments that are background-limited by the Earth's magnetic dipole moment and noise produced by its atmosphere and seismic interior. The Moon is an excellent platform for some forms of astronomy. Other candidate Moon-based experiments vary from neutrino and gravitational wave astronomy, particle astrophysics, and cosmic-ray calorimeters, to space physics and fundamental physics such as proton decay. The list goes on and includes placing humans in a hostile environment to study the long-term effects of space weather. The list is long, and even newer ideas will come from this COSPAR conference. However, whatever the list the issue of cooperation and binding collaboration remains. As observers of Moon and other space enterprises, we all know that a room full of 60 scientists will not agree on much of anything and there will probably be 60! please for more funding. People have special interests and little common sense (e.g., conflict between NSF- and NASA-funding roadmaps). Scientists are no exception. Nevertheless, CERN has done it on Earth! Can we do the same on the Moon? Some of the present generation of proposals for science from and on the Moon, plus new ones, will witness a place in space exploration's future. It is clear, however, that the world has not thought this through adequately, except for talk about an international space federation whatever that is. An outpost on the Moon with humans permanently living there much like Antarctica on Earth may be in our future. However, such planning is our collective international responsibility and not that of special-interest investigators from individual nations unless they intend to pay for it.

Wilson, Thomas↗

NASA NTRS2001

Constraints on Variability of Brightness and Surface Magnetism on Time Scales of Decades to Centuries in the Sun and Sun-Like Stars: A Source of Potential Terrestrial Climate Variability

These four points summarize our work to date. (1) Conciliation of solar and stellar photometric variability. Previous research by us and colleagues suggested that the Sun might at present be showing unusually low photometric variability compared to other sun-like stars. Those early results would question the suitability of the technique of using sun-like stars as proxies for solar irradiance change on time scales of decades to centuries. However, our results indicate the contrary: the Sun's observed short-term (seasonal) and longterm (year-to-year) brightness variations closely agree with observed brightness variations in stars of similar mass and age. (2) We have demonstrated an inverse correlation between the global temperature of the terrestrial lower troposphere, inferred from the NASA Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) radiometers, and the total area of the Sun covered by coronal holes from January 1979 to present (up to May 2000). Variable fluxes of either solar charged particles or cosmic rays, or both, may influence the terrestrial tropospheric temperature. The geographical pattern of the correlation is consistent with our interpretation of an extra-terrestrial charged particle forcing. (3) Possible climate mechanism amplifying the impact of solar ultraviolet irradiance variations. The key points of our proposed climate hypersensitivity mechanism are: (a) The Sun is more variable in the UV (ultraviolet) than in the visible. However, the increased UV irradiance is mainly absorbed in the lower stratosphere/upper troposphere rather than at the surface. (b) Absorption in the stratosphere raises the temperature moderately around the vicinity of the tropopause, and tends to stabilize the atmosphere against vertical convective/diffusive transport, thus decreasing the flux of heat and moisture carried upward from surface. (c) The decrease in the upward convection of heat and moisture tends to raise the surface temperature because a drier upper atmosphere becomes less cloudy, which in turn allows more solar radiation to reach the Earth's surface. (4) Natural variability in an ocean-atmosphere climate model. We use a 14-region, 6-layer, global thermo-hydrodynamic ocean-atmosphere model to study natural climate variability. All the numerical experiments were performed with no change in the prescribed external boundary conditions (except for the seasonal cycle of the Sun's tilt angle). Therefore, the observed inter-annual variability is of an internal kind. The model results are helpful toward the understanding of the role of nonlinearity in climate change. We have demonstrated a range of possible climate behaviors using our newly developed ocean-atmosphere model. These include climate configurations with no interannual variability, with multi-year periodicities, with continuous chaos, or with chaotically occuring transitions between two discrete substrates. These possible modes of climate behavior are all possible for the real climate, as well as the model. We have shown that small temporary climate influences can trigger shifts both in the mean climate, and among these different types of behavior. Such shifts are not only theoretically plausible, as shown here and elsewhere; they are omnipresent in the climate record on time scales from several years to the age of the Earth. This has two apparently opposite implications for the possibility of anthropogenic global warming. First, any warming which might occur as a result of human influence would be only a fraction of the small-to-large unpredictable natural changes and changes which result from other external causes. On the other hand, small temporary influences such as human influence do have the potential of causing large permanent shifts in mean climate and interannual variability.

Baliunas, Sallie L.↗