The way I understand it, the decision which of the competing mission will be implemented by ESA alone (LISA is one of them) was delayed until early 2012 to allow science teams to downsize the missions. Yes, NASA pulled out of all three candidate missions: LISA, IXO and Laplace.
Hmm....I doubt it. The story on that page is from 2010. Without NASA funding, I don't see how JPL could have a long term role in LISA anymore. I doubt ESA will push money over the Atlantic, they will have trouble keeping the European part of the project funded (if the project continues at all beyond 2012
If LISA continues, a couple of individual scientists and smaller groups from the US will apply for funding e.g. from NSF to continue their work on LISA. Not sure, though, how this will come out and whether this applies to JPL, too.
I'm not sure ( wrong continent ) but is it self evident to say that a LIGO gravitational wave detection could have made the difference to LISA funding?
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Well, this is pure speculation. LISA (and the two other missions) was dropped because of budget restrictions, not because the scientific benefit was questionable. So I tend to think even a detection wouldn't have made much difference in the end.
Unfortunately Europe is spending most of its research funds on the ITER nuclear fusion experiment in Cadarache, France, whose costs have soared from 5 billion dollars to 15 billion dollars and are still rising. ITER is being built mostly for political reasons.
Tullio
Sadly, the Obama administration is turning out to be not nearly as science friendly as first believed. NASA's budget was simply cut, even for the big science projects that are in favor, namely the James Web Space Telescope and others.
I attended a seminar last night at the Griffith Observatory presented by the project managers of JWST from Northrup Grumman here in Redondo Beach where the JWST is being built and they were all lamenting about the cut budget which will delay their project and launch.
The same has happened with LISA, NASA pretty much abandoned their participation and so ESA will take up the slack (maybe, if they choose LISA over another x-ray mission or Laplace). I just hope that LISA Pathfinder launches sometime soon so that LISA can be a reality before 2030.
As I wrote often, Europe is throwing its research money after the fusion dream. Now a fusion reactor needs tritium as a fuel. A recent report of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission shows that 48 out of 64 US fission reactors percolate tritiated water to the outside, with serious health danger if you drink it.So a fusion reactor would be a probable source of contaminated water when used as a coolant, like light water cooled fission reactors.
Tullio
RE: Latest article on LISA
)
Dang, am I reading it right that if ESA chooses to go with LISA, it will pull out of the joint project with NASA for the Europa mission (Laplace)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Jupiter_System_Mission
As much as I want to find gravitational waves, looking for sub-surface oceans on Europa is just too awesome to pass up.
Edit: Just reading further elsewhere... Has NASA killed their involvement in Laplace as well?
Hi! The way I understand
)
Hi!
The way I understand it, the decision which of the competing mission will be implemented by ESA alone (LISA is one of them) was delayed until early 2012 to allow science teams to downsize the missions. Yes, NASA pulled out of all three candidate missions: LISA, IXO and Laplace.
:-(
HB
JPL still works on
)
JPL still works on LISA:
JPL
Tullio
RE: JPL still works on
)
Hmm....I doubt it. The story on that page is from 2010. Without NASA funding, I don't see how JPL could have a long term role in LISA anymore. I doubt ESA will push money over the Atlantic, they will have trouble keeping the European part of the project funded (if the project continues at all beyond 2012
:-(
HB
If LISA continues, a couple
)
If LISA continues, a couple of individual scientists and smaller groups from the US will apply for funding e.g. from NSF to continue their work on LISA. Not sure, though, how this will come out and whether this applies to JPL, too.
BM
BM
I'm not sure ( wrong
)
I'm not sure ( wrong continent ) but is it self evident to say that a LIGO gravitational wave detection could have made the difference to LISA funding?
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Well, this is pure
)
Well, this is pure speculation. LISA (and the two other missions) was dropped because of budget restrictions, not because the scientific benefit was questionable. So I tend to think even a detection wouldn't have made much difference in the end.
BM
BM
Unfortunately Europe is
)
Unfortunately Europe is spending most of its research funds on the ITER nuclear fusion experiment in Cadarache, France, whose costs have soared from 5 billion dollars to 15 billion dollars and are still rising. ITER is being built mostly for political reasons.
Tullio
Sadly, the Obama
)
Sadly, the Obama administration is turning out to be not nearly as science friendly as first believed. NASA's budget was simply cut, even for the big science projects that are in favor, namely the James Web Space Telescope and others.
I attended a seminar last night at the Griffith Observatory presented by the project managers of JWST from Northrup Grumman here in Redondo Beach where the JWST is being built and they were all lamenting about the cut budget which will delay their project and launch.
The same has happened with LISA, NASA pretty much abandoned their participation and so ESA will take up the slack (maybe, if they choose LISA over another x-ray mission or Laplace). I just hope that LISA Pathfinder launches sometime soon so that LISA can be a reality before 2030.
Big science needs a new funding paradigm!
Daniel
As I wrote often, Europe is
)
As I wrote often, Europe is throwing its research money after the fusion dream. Now a fusion reactor needs tritium as a fuel. A recent report of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission shows that 48 out of 64 US fission reactors percolate tritiated water to the outside, with serious health danger if you drink it.So a fusion reactor would be a probable source of contaminated water when used as a coolant, like light water cooled fission reactors.
Tullio