Beyond Kepler: Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite Set For 2017 Launch 43
astroengine writes "NASA has selected a $200 million mission to carry out a full-sky survey for exoplanets orbiting nearby stars. The space observatory, called the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite, is scheduled for a 2017 launch. Like the currently operational Kepler Space Telescope, TESS will be in the lookout for exoplanets that orbit in front of their host stars, resulting in a slight dip in starlight. This dip is known as a "transit" and Kepler has revolutionized our understanding about planets orbiting other stars in our galaxy by applying this effective technique. As of January 2013, Kepler has spotted 2,740 exoplanetary candidates. "TESS will carry out the first space-borne all-sky transit survey, covering 400 times as much sky as any previous mission," said TESS lead scientist George Ricker, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research. "It will identify thousands of new planets in the solar neighborhood, with a special focus on planets comparable in size to the Earth.""
imagine (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
SyFy (Score:2)
Re:imagine (Score:5, Insightful)
We don't know. That's one reason to do it.
What does it mean if the survey shows that for a group of 10 stars you have a 95% probability of at least 8 having at least one planet?
What does it mean if the survey shows this for 95% of the surveyed area except for a continuous section where there is only 1 planet per 100 stars?
What new knowledge would come from trying to understand what caused this? Perhaps we discover something new about fundamental physics?
The point is that we don't know what we don't know. This may be what discovers something previously completely unsuspected and with earth-shattering possibilities... or... we could just learn that there's a lot of planets out there and nothing more. But without doing it, there's no chance of discovering the former. Observing what's around us is how we learn more and start to question things we otherwise never would have known even existed to question.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
So?
Does this sound heartless? Maybe it is, but your "think of the children" argument is pretty fucking manipulative (as is fas etash's F-16 counterargument).
Will science eventually cure disease and poverty? It is plausible. But any delay in research is compounded. What if we took all the money we spent on healthcare and used it for research? Millions would die. But it might achieve the technology to save millions more. What if we killed social security and used it to figure out how to mine asteroids? Millio
Re:imagine (Score:4, Interesting)
Here is something I do know: over 5 million children in the United States will go to bed hungry tonight.
No they won't. That sound bite comes from a series of ridiculous distortions of the underlying data. In essence, 5 million children are at risk that some time during the month their parents (or other caregivers) will not provide them the meals they had planned to--and at that meal most of them will not even go hungry, they'll be fed cheaper food, and probably never even know about it.
Re: (Score:2)
over 400,000 Iraq women and children won't be going to bed hungry, because we spent billions of dollars and fucking killed them.
shut up about spending $200M, it's peanuts, no one will be killed, and it might just make the most profound discover in the history of human science.
Re: (Score:3)
over 5 million children in the United States will go to bed hungry tonight. $200 million would solve that problem for a month.
What about the next month? Should we sacrifice another long term program to temporarily alleviate a *symptom*? If people had listened this type of argument a hundred years ago, we might not have commercial aviation or satellites today. Those may not feed people directly, but they've contributed a great deal to flattening out the world, reducing conflicts and improving education.
World hunger is not a symptom of lack of food. If you keep throwing food at the problem, it'll never go away.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about gains in applied sciences, but just imagine if we subject these planets to closer scrutiny and discover something like EM emissions that could only be from something artificial? Of all the things that have ever awed or shocked humans, I think nothing would compare with the discovery of intelligent life outside our planet.
We can't possibly imagine how people will react. But I imagine it will adjust the sense of proportion for a lot of people, politically and spiritually, as in "We're a lot
Re: (Score:2)
what does a study like this hope to learn? What does this one gain us? (other than the already stated updates to basic science and technology). I mean the data they are gathering - what use is it going to be?
Another mystery has fallen under the concerted scrutiny of human curiosity. Another jewel we've acquired to bring wonder and awe to our children. And during this journey, we - some of us - have discovered something about what we are capable of achieving when we put our minds to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:imagine (Score:4, Insightful)
We'd be at least at Alpha Centauri, possibly further out by now.
I like spending big money on space exploration as much as the next guy, but Alpha Centauri is 4.3 light-years away. If a mission to Alpha Centauri was launched in 1958 (the year NASA was created), it would have had to travel at an average speed of .078c in order to arrive this year.
It's hard to imagine that we could have come up with technology capable of that, even if we spent our entire GDP on developing space technology.
Mars, OTOH, or other locations in our own solar system, sure.
Re: (Score:3)
Good! (Score:2)
This is good, I think this is more interesting than looking at distant galaxies.
Re:Good! (Score:4, Insightful)
What's the use? (Score:2)
I tried to explain to someone who was born after the trips to the moon (I am too) what the importance of space exploration is and how it benefits us all across the board, but he didn't personall
Re: (Score:2)
Probably not, but the people who don't see further than their nose saying "How will this make MY life better?" to everything will say no to all basic science and plenty other subjects that don't result in any direct, tangible returns. When finally you have graphene transistors to make the iPhone 23GS then he'll care to spend money on it, but not today on what might possibly emerge as a technology in a decade or three. I don't know, maybe we find out something useful about our own planet by studying others l
Re:What's the use? (Score:5, Insightful)
no, $200M is not a large amount of money; we spend billions to kill and maim innocents for power and wealth; and you're fixated on this chump change?
"pursuing the sciences" has doubled human lifespan, raised the standard of living over the last four centuries, made possible global communication and the storage of mankind's accumulated knowledge. it's worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
only the most important scientific discovery in the history of man might be found. Remember this project will be part of a *system* that will find earth-sized exoplanets and then determine atmospheric composition (in conjunction with other projects). Do you realize what free atmospheric oxygen would mean on a world in habitable zone? LIFE. And then suppose optical SETI or some other means found a signal from such a place. what do we want to learn from this indeed.
a better way to spend the money (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
exactly, this new satellite will be able to analyze the atmosphere of exoplanets, even the earth sized ones. find one within ten light years with free oxygen, have a breakthrough in controlled fusion....
Terminology (Score:2)
Coordination, please (Score:1)
In these days of very lean budgets, a bit of coordination between NASA and ESA would be appreciated. :
ESA announced a similar mission a while ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHEOPS_%28spacecraft%29
We are also going to have TWO Mercury's orbiters : Messenger (NASA, in orbit now) and Bepi Colombo (ESA, to be launched).
I mean, Mercury is interesting enough only for one orbiter, especially if there's no mission to the much more interesting Titan and
Europa.
For Mars, NASA withdrew from ESA's Exo Mars rover missio
For every winner there is at least one loser (Score:2)
TESS was competing w/ another exoplanet survey instrument:
http://finesse.jpl.nasa.gov/ [nasa.gov]
Roughly the same amount of money, same launch date, different people working on it.
Good luck to the TESS team, too bad it wasn't FINESSE.