>> host: kofi annan, the book is "interventions." thank you for joining us. >> guest: thank you very much. ..

[applause] >> well, thank you. my presentation is about the mars exploration rovers, which were twin robotic laboratories that began operating -- you're working on the feedback -- eight years ago on mars, one of which is still being used to explore the martian surface today. and as of course most of you know, i am sure, curiosity, another rover, and landed a few weeks ago and i have a few words to say about that at the end of my presentation. so, my story is about how people relate to these robotic systems. the mars exploration mission also known as mer or m-e-r challenges the way we think about raybould since this exploration. it provides a new way of understanding how computer tools

and a proper social organization could be orchestrated to extend to human capabilities. but for over 40 years we have been exploring other planets and their moons with robotic spacecraft. with their flying by beautiful neptune's like voyager in the 1970's orbiting saturn or approving mars like mer, the spacecraft must be computer controlled because the communications of time delay at the speed of light coming into the great distance makes it impractical to control them directly from earth. now, we come deutsch did a rover on the earth's moon. it takes about one and a half seconds for the signal to be received. but the speed of light, mars is at least five minutes away and sometimes 20 minutes. radio time to jupiter is on average about 45 .

and saturn is twice that. when the new horizons spacecraft reaches pluto and its moon in 2015 after a nine year flight it will take about four hours before we know whether the mission was a success and will be long gone past pluto by that time. given the great distance as we can't go to these places in person any time soon cost to carry out a scientific study we must repeatedly reprogram and redirect the spacecraft specifying where to go and how the various instruments are going to be used. science teams working together for fifer ten years or more interpret the data that is returned and discuss with engineers what is interesting and what's possible to do next. so at its heart, the story of planetary exploration today is

about the relationship of people and robotic spacecraft. machines that are actually complex laboratory capable of operating in extreme cold with little power package to handle the vibrations of launch and worked for years without repair. sending the scientific instruments throughout the solar system is one of the great successes of the computer age and will surely marked our place in history of science and exploration but these missions also show that we understand how to design machines and organize people so everything fits. that's my story today about the mars exploration rovers held the design of the spacecraft, as you see mer, the organization of people, the software tools and the work schedule makes it possible for scientists to work

on mars. in the skill of the universe mars is right next door. it's about nine months travel using conventional chemical rockets and it's about half the diameter of your but it lacks oceans so it has roughly the same surface area as the earth and that is a lot of landscape to explore. the climate is often colder than the atlantic but with great extremes during the day. but on a summer afternoon, on the mars equator, you could survive wearing something like a light weight scuba suit and a pressurized helmet. a scuba suit might have the diprete 3 billion or 4 billion years ago. we believed then mars was more like the earth: wet with a thicker atmosphere. one striking elevation have created from orbit shows the

lower areas colored blue and suggests that large parts of the northern hemisphere might have been covered in seas and there's evidence for ancient shorelines. so what happened? did life form on mars? why was its atmosphere lost? are the microorganisms living today below the surface? and if life formed there, did it form separately from earth, or are we related? these are the big questions that make many of us very excited about mars. now, as i said it's not practical to directly control spacecraft on mars because of the speed of a radio wave, which is the same as of the speed of light. and it causes a time delay in seeing and affecting what is happening. but by acting indirectly, through computer programs that

monitor and control the rovers and other instruments throughout the work day, people have been working on mars for over eight years. two teams of scientists and engineers operating in the of rover's called spirit an opportunity have driven together over 25 miles of sand dunes in and out of a dozen traders climbed hills hundreds of feet high to analyze the early years of deposits and they've also stopped to admire the view and take photographs. the scientists have scraped the surfaces and analyzed the molecular composition. in february of 2000 for a month after the landing, i had the privilege to observe of aladdin pasadena for almost two weeks. to reverse that trend facilities on different floors of a given

building and they lived and worked according to the time zone of the rover. because today it is longer than earth, that means they've reported for work about 40 minutes later each day. if you were at the gate of jpl would see people coming in later than the day before. the main science meeting room the starters of the orient to what they call local time. each team had about 75 scientists and student researchers organized into what were called science seemed groups and geochemistry soil and rocks, geology atmosphere. they were arranged their own tools and gave presentations interpreting what they were learning and what they would like to do of tomorrow. the long term planning group sitting off to one side grieving

the objectives and measures of how far they have travelled, the number of images they have taken, all the instruments have been used and how they affected the plan for tomorrow. in the words of steve squire's the principal investigator of the mer mission, this has been the first overland expedition on another plan that. applying the tools of the spots on the landscape we've learned how water has affected the chemistry of soil and rocks and we found places in the past that were similar to wear life thrives on earth. home plate for example an area behind the columbia hills about 100 meters across. it might be a remnant of hot springs like those we find of the yellowstone national park. as of this is how the planet reveals science proceeds.

by recognizing minerals, formations and processes that are familiar to what we understand on our home planet. the success of what is called comparative planetology on mars as part latest such an exciting place to study. we are on another planet, but looks and feels a bit like home. just as the scientists make analogies with earth, my study of field science on mars started by comparing it to help yield science is done on earth. since the late 1990's i have been joining the scientists on an expedition in the canadian arctic a nearly lifeless landscape on the devin island. the science shows this place because it is like mars allowing them to understand how and where life exists in extreme

environments. in the expedition itself reveals how people might live and work on mars if they are studying and that is of interest to the mission planners. in the aisle and i followed the science in the field to understand how the explorer eight. it's a big topic, exploration but we've never even in cognitive science like my home discipline ever studied exploration in the field townspeople really explores a new landscape. how did they decide where to go? what tools to the use? i documented how they collected in organized samples that they would analyze with instruments in their laboratories back on earth. i studied how they did a diagram and describe their work in the notebook and how this related to the published work. i observed especially how they tended to work along them or in small groups but observing the

scientists of pasadena i was taken by the incredible contrast the scientists are indoors in a darkroom part of a large team doing everything by consensus. people from different disciplines are required to work together. geologists who in the arctic would race to the nearest crop on the hell to survey the landscape working with them to make of rover stop and take a new sample every few meters along the way, and among them were laboratory scientists who had never done field work before. so working remotely through the rover creates a new way of doing field science, and this new practice changes the scientists and leads them to relate to their tools of the rovers in unexpected ways. how could the scientists' work together under these conditions?

how could they accepted the anonymity of the team where their names would never be associated in the public press with any of the decisions of what to analyze, how long to stay and put the data means to be of help the people that will study a lammas and through a program laboratory? how was it possible at all to do field of science on another planet while remaining here on earth? let alone to keep these people engaged for eight years. the key is although they cannot directly see and control what is happening, the design of the rover instruments and computer software makes it possible for them to be virtually present on mars for the competition of stereo and spectral images and being able to move around and scuff the soil and the rocks

they've experienced being there. steve describes the landing, quote, we realized we had landed in a crater and that is where we were then we noticed 800 meters away maybe we can make it. there is the endurance crater. wouldn't it be great to get their. his descriptions are all first person. we have landed. we notice. maybe we can make it. in this imaginative protection, the scientists become the rover into this experience of being on the mars is essential to the success of the mission. it enables them to actually do field science. to know what the rocks and soil are nearby and what they can reach or how long it might take to get somewhere the use a combination of 3d images, computer graphics and

simulations often over laying them. the use of visualizations allow them to point to places, give them names and control precisely where a new photograph is taken and where the instruments are placed. so, for example, the control a yellow box to specify where our camera should zoom in for more detailed image. each photograph can be used like a map of an area on mars because its location relative to the rover is precisely registered in the planning program. as we move into the images of the crops to the microphotographs, we can see and mark tells. even small rocks and patches of soil might be named and become targets for the analysis or microphotograph.

combining these tools in their imagination the scientists can work as if they were on mars. jim rice a geologist on a mission said i put myself out there with to boots on the ground for trying to figure out where to go and what to do and how to make that what we are observing with the instruments. a day in and day out it was always the perspective of the on the surface trying to draw on your own field experience in places that might be similar. david, and astro biologist described it this way colin quote the first few months of the mission they had these huge charts on the wall into during the drawings of the rover with all of these tensions we have geometrics questions. well, can we see this and reach that?

is this rock going to be in the shade or what be in the sun? we would go and stand and stare at those charts and over time, we stopped doing it so much because we began to get a sense of the body. that is protecting yourself into the rover. it's an amazing capability of the human mind that you can reach full yourself. acting through the robots they control, the scientists look around and manipulate materials and the move over the landscape. they may pretend to be the rover crawling down jester in to imagine what is reachable. through the eyeglasses of the special cameras they can directly see the iron minerals and rocks. they are transformed in a way to a kind of soil or on mars. that is all pretty different

from doing field science and this is an odd expedition for another reason. usually scientists go in different directions and different times using their own tools. fer mer the team was altogether. 150 scientists and engineers balancing together as it were like on a huge skateboard keating over the sand, up and down the hills and craters meters at a time. something like being on the ship on an early volume of discovery the scientists and the crew were all having to come together. they had to negotiate how long are we going to stay year, where are we going to go next and what should we do on each site and this requires a well coordinated understanding of the voyles, schedules, resources and long-term plans and the clear

chain of command. if you've visited the science and engineering coordination meeting during the prime mission which was the first 90 days of landing on mars in 2000 for the same thing that we are going through now with 'curiosity' during these 90 days. you can see the scientists up front on the bridge as it were with huge displays of the martian surface fleeing before them behind the science as if below the index on the ship or the engineers behind square monitors showing the power, memory and evil thing timeline for tomorrow's work. this meeting would occur about 6 p.m. just before dinner local jpl time every day. the scientists arrived at work about three hours before. midafternoon where overtime. they were ready to receive for the ducks and other analysis

coming back from the work during the day. so you see the mer solar power so they work roughly on the nine to five schedule. every morning each rover would receive a new program for its day's work so between dinner time on mars and assigned summarize the engineers must finalize the plan for the next ak and this requires a second shift of engineers who refine and test the program before it is sent to mars am i this call will be a plank. if not were not enough to the mind we were simultaneously operating of rover's on mars for over five years. a spirit and opportunity were in fact the two missions operating in parallel. they had their own meeting rooms as i said for the science operations. they have their own engineering programming teams. 6 p.m. coordination meetings and

their own cash of course of a free ice cream. but the team shared a single mission control center where the engineers intend to monitor it's like you could find the houston mission control. the computers are connected to the banks of satellites that allow them to communicate with the reverse. this, an engineering activity showing in this room that i showed a moment ago required emissions to be coordinated in a special way. if you look at the map mars with a landing sites of the rovers up the opportunity and the crater spirit you will notice that we landed about 180 degrees apart near the equator. most people realize that the inglis plan to be important because the rivers are solar power so that is why we put them near the equator.

few people realize how the geography of the mission relates to the problem of commanding the rovers everyday. placings. an opportunity on opposite sides of a single command center and management organization operating around the clock to focus on one at a time. controlling them is separated by half a day on mars. so this illustrates very clearly why the understanding and the designing of the mission has to be comprehensive as what we call a total system. the choice of the landing sites itself affect the scheduling of the facilities and operations in pasadena. i describe the putschists, the tools and the mental projections involved in the working on mars. but there's another angle how people talk and think about the rover i found fascinating and

strange. it's what becomes the hero of the story in officials reports on the web, on the press and even in a scientist's own publications. what i have learned is that anthropomorphizing their rover is both practical and political. it facilitates the scientists' work helping them work together as a team and it provides a way for them to express their feelings. nasa's 2001 press release screen de announcing the mer personifies the robot. quote, in 2003, nasa plans to launch a fund relative now famous 1997 rover. this larger cousin is expected to reach the surface in 2004. this new robotic explorers will be attractive to 100 meters across the surface each day. space hubbard, the program

director of the headquarters said, quote, this mission will give us the first ever robotic field geologist on but mars. the metaphors on this narrative such as referring to the earlier mission as the cousin simplify for the public understanding. but they also serve as a kind of cultural cheerleader in praise of america's new robotic explorers. but years later the tone was distinctly sentimental. when the associated press reported spirit's demise, quote, the scruffy robotic geologist that captivated the world with a zandt tax on mars before getting stuck in the sand trap is about to meet its end. so the rover is told here in the genre of a lost person is said to be incommunicado in its

personified like characters in the disney animation, quote, as far as sibling rivalry went, opportunity was the overachiever, while it was every bit the drama queen of underdog. [laughter] surprisingly the leading scientists on the mission are quoted as speaking in the same matter-of-fact way. the mission devotee investigator of washington, d.c. said he would remember it as a fighter. it wouldn't quit just like the little engine up the hill. sometimes this poetry appears overdone. but then we find quite serious discussions of the character and its accomplishments like the children's bedtime story. the rover will be remembered to

the masses. this is a story of perseverance. talking about the rover in this way in the third person picks it possible for the scientists to tell us about themselves, how they feel about the reverse and the challenges they encounter. this is a personal presentation you will not find in the journal science. the robotic explore rapidly appeared in the first books about planetary spacecraft in the 1970's and it's become a journalistic cliche. a few years ago the subtitled his book intertek exporters of the red planet. the book is about scientists passion for mars. but in the public grabbing, the exporters are the spacecraft. over the past decade, the cliche

become a conceptually somewhat confused the dates in the space exploration community between the advocates of science meaning a robotic spacecraft and the ad because of exploration manning human spaceflight. partly this was a debate about the control for money but the genuine question remains about the relative roles people and robots as the distance beyond mars next daily reprogramming more and more difficult and the robots become more able to live in the fight with is worth studying. some summarize the dichotomy has human explorers verses robot explorers and stanford university symposium that i attended in 2008 called humans and robots and exploration. one topic was quoted to us as when does the human become the tool of choice for the solar system exploration?

by this freezing people and robots are both tools. then they ask very puzzling now what is the right mix? of course of giving people and robots as interchangeable tools from the start is absurd to i believe some of the difficulties that arise are occurring because it is hard for us to understand this new working relationship between people and robots. spacecraft that flyby the planet and carry out the program and send back the data is a onetime package very different from mobile, greece with centers and manipulators that are programmed by u.s. every day for years and gives a totally different experience to the scientists carrying out the mission. this new way of working which the allies can be difficult to think about because it's a

relationship among people, technology and work processes. it's not a party or a capability that can be ascribed to people or robots independently. and that's why the term robotic geologist is so misleading. the relationship of people and robots and practical work is difficult even for the scientists to describe. mer scientists have said they could do in a day what a rover many months that they are thinking mostly about those long drives. astronauts would leave the rover in the dust, there is no short cut for the hours required to do the analysis or the pixel by pixels can of van infrared panorama. nobody has use instruments like these in the field before. so how do the reverse automation and human actions are dependent on each other can be difficult

to explain because we don't think about it in practice. in terms of what is called phenomenology it is seen through as we say like using a cane. it is embodied in our activity. it becomes transparent like a hammer, a bicycle or an automobile. we hit and run it and go places. we don't have to think about the machinery. it becomes part of last. the roe versus orie and reaching out as the mer scientists arm touching a raw on mars. this shows the difficulty of talking about this in body meant. the title was postcards from mars the first photographer on the planet as the kamrar lead he is referring to himself. he writes that they have allowed us to be the first photographers

on the red planet triet now keeps the scarecrow's around photographers but i would have put the quotes on the red planet because bell and his colleagues took the pictures that they are not actually on mars, the hour photographers. how should we describe this? present the postcards? i believe some of this poetry is revealing this joint action between machinery, robotics systems and people is difficult to think about. these cameras many of you are carrying on of our pockets provide a good example of how viewing robots were free agents robotic geologists' and giving them credit for doing the work can easily arise. cameras like this today are all computerized. as a call when you press the button, computations determine

the exposure and other settings. they might even decide you are taking a portrait and compensate for backlighting but still you are going to say i took this photograph. separate that press and the creation of the photograph by simple language and to under 40 million miles an added the overnight delay. now you want to say spirit took this photograph today. the people in the technology between just drop out. it is a narrative. philosophically it raises the question that we call agency and its at the heart of this human verses robots dichotomy triet ascribing agencies appears throughout the scientists writings for example in the plan to report in 2007, the lead

scientist provided a superbly readable technical summary of the science. the title spirit and opportunity martian geologists'. in a clear presentation about the proceeds of the altar dhaka and send material near the mer sites, they alternate public attributions about the actions with the science observations and conclusions listen to this. after exploring the endurance crater, opportunity drove south to investigate the heat shield that it used during the landing. next to the heat shield, we noticed the only rocks seen for kilometers on the plains. opportunity's investigation of a rock revealed that as nickel iron meteorite. a very exciting finding as it was our first discovery of the

media right on a planet. since then, spirit discovered others. it appears they call on pretty quickly to recognize the media rights, doesn't it? what i heard the term robot geologist i thought it was just hype unfair to the people doing the work and it turned the mission story into the kind of public show something like the wizard of oz. paid attention to the scientist behind the curtain. i worried that this was going to confuse the public and was of securing the story about how people were able to work on mars. people might begin to wonder why should we send scientists to mars if we already have a geologist working there? now i've already mentioned how viewing of the rover s third person provides a way for the scientists to talk about

themselves over time have come to realize this perspective has many practical benefits as an obvious example superimposing the route on orbital images, that's why the senate is fuzzy provides a bird's-eye view of the region that we have been exploring. we hovered over the landscape and we see mer from orbit. the third person view is also expressed vividly in the computer composites like fiscal that showed working along on mars and it makes you wonder who took this photograph? does this express' the wish for us to be present in the seat or does it make tangible the images the scientists and engineers on imagining in their mind? is it another practical protection, another way of understanding of the orientation and its context which actually makes the fuel science possible?

here we see the interplay of art, imagination, science and technology all motivating and enabling each other. other less dramatic computer graphics composed with mars images for used routinely to orient the planning and programming of the routes and target's. such a third person views provide an important way of locating the rover and then my projection locating yourself in the work on mars. yet there is another way of relating to the rover, the second person perspective. when the lead mer planner said he would view wind as a partner, i was shocked. he told me of the rover and i work as a team. he didn't mean it was the same as working with a jpl colleague. instead, he was using the best words he could find relating to

it as a peer to express how he delegated work to the rover. so they would plan portions of the route that he didn't have sufficient time or data to analyze the program himself. he relates in terms of what i do and what you do. for him the second person relation is practical. it as an agent you can rely on. now, talking about spirit and letter to india is investigating, driving and so on, has also taken hold because it sets so well the convention of scientific writing in which we depersonalize our contributions. reports focus on begole, the methods and the data, the emphasis is on mars, not on the scientists or how they do their work. individual scientists are also properly wary of taking of the

limelight. everyone knows they work as a team. this is to find out this phrase robotic geologist was pivotal in designing the rover itself and promoting teamwork's. the central concept in the mission proposal the geologists' that say physical circuits for the science team unlike the spacecraft or flyboy other planets was deliberately designed to personify a scientist a little short with stereo vision, mobile holding a hammer and other sensors. combining the disciplinary teams in one persona he realizes the vision that they called one instrument, one team.

the ability to identify is fundamental to the design as steve squire's explains. he says the whole idea is that these tools work together. look at the discovery of silicon. the mobility system by which he means the wheels trench up some soil. we notice it with the camera, the wide angle camera. we hit it with the tests to check for iran. looks interesting. we figured out its molecular composition. everything works together. having instruments that work together encourages the team's to work together. this was squire's vision which he calls systems engineering. he says you've got those sensors and each of them provide complementary bits of knowledge. you are going to use the payload to the fullest advantage if

people look at it as being entirely at their disposal. if you're looking at the field dillinger geology with your fuel partner your current br during should we use the rot camarota compass geologists' charging with chemists about exploration. to appreciate that, you need to know that this design and organization stark contrast with almost every other planetary mission with the current mission 'curiosity'. for example, the spacecraft now orbiting saturn has 12 instrument teams fifa. remember that mer had one principal investigator. 'curiosity' has henry levin.

the moon titan or the moon's, the other moons. sharing the single platform jockeying for the control and other resources who gets to use their instrument now and for how long? the skills and the reality of being too boots on the ground enables and requires a completely different technical design and social organization. rather than feature a planet rescale seen as you are from the orbit of flying by, mer's instrument targets are probable and oracle manipulated the geologist as a pollster get mixed sense. untypically a robot is used as

an automated machine that without an intervention. with the vision of the julca just was multi dimensional. instead of replacing the scientists, the robotic geologists' were conceived as a club ret toole to getting the disciplinary team to work together had a way for them to work together. very, very different. combined with a virtual reality planning tool and the commanding everyday that enabled frequent individual contributions. the mer exploration system helped the scientists forge a new kind of collaboration. it made them agents on mars working through a mobile program lubber three. although many people speak about humans and robots and space as if there is deutsch place -- is a place, the human explorers,

our relationship to these devices is more complicated. envisioning the field scientists come they have become the rover. a first person of view they are on the mars proving the strife and they would do the work as a joint accomplishments. a second person of view and then working as an ensemble. acting together through the hardware and software systems and everything turns inside out in its third person perspective. the rover becomes the team and they can write about its exports to the court exploits promptly. i would paraphrase the associated story about spirit's the - saying this intrepid team of the scientific explorers will be remembered for demystifying mars to the masses. this is a story of perseverance. the mer scientists and engineers have invented a new practice of

planetary field science. these are their footprints on mars. the robotic geologist metaphor can in this metaphor tolerates and in some ways they free velt and their anonymity. the more fantastic explorer of spirit and opportunity to more proud you can feel to play even a small part in this mission. it is projecting a personal ambition to the group's effort and its accomplishments is no small part of our power and chollet as human beings. so the accomplishment of mer are based on relating technology to the psychology and sociology of people. it's a textbook example of how to design a complex system of people and machines. so, reaching the conclusion now,

the mer objective was to travel about a third of the mile and a 90 the mission taking perhaps dozens of photographs learning something about the history of mars. in this extended mission, over an unimaginable eight and a half years, we've traveled over 25 miles, two and 300,000 images and stands. the science itself could fill a textbook or to. now with a somewhat elderly craft we have arrived with the opportunity at a deep crater 14 miles wide called endeavor mcfate. other haven with ofs commanding view of the endeavor crater tilted towards the north to catch the site on the dusty solar panels. this image from an amazing

panama was completed in may. as of july we have been working on mars for over 3,000 marchand days and the voyage of scientific discovery continues. using a high-resolution images and scans we've identified and interesting mineralogy how long to come on the rim. since arriving we have been exploring cape york can we might set the course for the point. opportunity will almost certainly spent its last days or years. endeavor. meanwhile as you know, another rover, a relative has landed in the crater and will climb and explore the mounds of the mount shaara over several years. it towers 3 miles high over the floor of the crater and has been built over perhaps 2 billion

years. we will be looking for the carbon these materials that are essential for life and that is -- nasa calls this the space laboratory or msl and has five times mer. perhaps with the name science laboratories. the experience has clarified the true nature if the spacecraft as tools for the scientists and perhaps this time they will place themselves more publicly in the driver's seat. they've been personified by a nickname. they call her curiosity. perhaps you can already see how this will play out. thank you for your attention. [applause]

thank you for that. >> we do have some of your questions already but we will continue to take them. we are going to talk from another 20, 25 minutes if you can do so by the back because much quieter that we value to consider all the questions. >> you will be staying for signing. >> as a servant of the government i don't receive royalties so the price is very low and i hope you'll enjoy it. [laughter] >> let's talk a little bit about the idea that these machines have preceded us to mars is it

still the target to put a human being there >> for short and it's surprising if you talk at all of the scientists talk to really want to be there a need to be there to exploration. part of it has to do with all of those limitations i talked about their accomplish more with six people standing on a skateboard it's become more real. that we could offer a reasonable cost with these rovers in different places around mars and figure out where would we want to go what's the timeline? it's all about priorities.

>> one of the things in human could accomplish that you mention the limitations of the roe versus your dependent on the sun and the need to stay near the equator is what strikes me some of the scientists we are missing out on has to do with the polar caps and of the water systems and that sort of thing rather other signs that would have to wait until a human can get up there without those limitations? >> we actually have had a lander in 2008. went to the mars arctic so we were looking specifically at landing on the ice as we did and understanding what causes different formations and understanding of chemistry. so there are limitations. i think with curiosity though we have learned now with this combined retrofire and soft landing that's quite general. for the air bags we were limited

to areas where the atmosphere was strong enough so that you slowed down enough before you drop the bag. it's more apology. many people would like to land in this area that is like the grand canyon that extends for 3,000 miles across the land to do that kind of a landing would be very tricky but we have now gotten pretty close to that. >> as a percentage how much how the various programs discovered and that includes the polar. >> well, you know, i describe this as one of the couple of scientists as an easter egg hunt it's like okay mars has some easter eggs. if you think about it there is no way that you know that you can tell quite a bit from orbit about different the -- tauter

fees'. there are taverns were the latitudes have collapsed and we see the skylights so there is the mission that was recently announced to send their rover down into this latitude because they think that is where the life of most likely be today protected by the radiation and maybe there is more lobster down there. there's different habitats might be the word to use. the answer is we have no percentage. we've scratched the surface. you might think about that landing, the vikings landing in north america and the word of viking is appropriate having been the 1976 mission. now you were asking how much you need to see before you understand north america asahel have you know what time is on mars? >> this to answers to that.

it turns of the whole issue of time on mars is very complicated and once you get into it you realize time on earth is more complicated than you thought it was. when you know about the leak here is a simplification of something that's a lot more complicated about the time on mars, just on that topic. the whole issue that mars has 24 hours so what does that mean? that meant they had to decide that a second on mars is longer than a second on earth. that sounds very weird. why don't you just say that it's more than 24 hours because the would make the clock look rather funny, but you could do that. i thought a second to us is like

a physical basic notion like we would define a kilogram or a meter but it's not. >> gets more flexible. >> as you are coming up through the science especially with planetary science you discover pretty early you can't stay on the same block as the rest of the human beings. there are black out window shades and you were up and working all night. once you get to the level you are working on the martian mission does that take a toll on the body even though you are earthbound? >> when i did my two weeks of pasadena. to figure out how to program everything but a conveniently chose 6 a.m. on mars was 5 a.m. on pasadena. and then every day it got later and later said it was easy for me to get on board and i did the same thing for phoenix as well

but the scientists of course are just moving. the bottom line is it affects people differently, but they have gone ahead and continue to do it and they are doing it right now for 'curiosity', the scientists in pasadena are on martian time. there is a wrinkle that we have learned they don't need to be exactly 40 minutes. they should report for work when the data is coming down and that has to do with when is the relay satellite odyssey or one of the other satellites sending the the the backs of give them a special schedule and they might come at the same time and then shift but the bottom line is talking you can't keep the team going for too long. they have more time zones to worry about. >> would get advantages, question from the audience with advantage is there a while interfacing with the robotics conducting it from earthquakes.

that is what went become too. sure. they have blue sky meetings where we bring people together and we do imaginings of let's say that's the case. we've been saying around the moon and we have something like these mer. you drop them off of the rover the pressure on '04 in the vehicle and they might send them ahead and have them do the reconnaissance so there's all kinds of possibilities. we will definitely have these program devices and maybe some of them will be able to stop and look for things and look for play and to get picture and let us know when you get there. i will have another on bolstering backend be surprised. spread the joe gezer sticking

around so they can't be caught by the camera. [laughter] that came from 1976 and '77. yeah. >> when you talk about life on mars you are talking about from the tiny microbial as one of our audience members pointed out yes there is or there was life, what next how does that information helpless? >> we don't need to be analyzing. this is going to be the biological line at the time of the year how they put together does it appear to be something like nra that consists of another essence of the order. that -- the significance you can imagine one, there will be some possibility that means life

started first on mars and we are marcion's. there would be a surprise, or life was independently created on mars, the closest planet it looks like it is in habitable and now we are discovering thousands of pilots out there and we will soon know of many where life could be. so much more likely that the mission if they're finding could have life of a that will raise the probability incredibly. >> is there an ultimate goal whether expressed or implied when nasa goes out in search of possible life forms is ferre the idea exploring places for the human colonization the expansion of where it is? >> there is like a parallel -- multiple parallel lines and definitely people who are thinking more about if you look at their articles they are saying look at this cavern, this

regime. we could have a habitat on wall inside. they're coming from the ice over here and that is what they are imagining. so, the direct connection is not that strong right now and it seems to be water throughout the planet when there would be something we would want. >> one of our audience members wants to know about recording sound on mars. or the recording and will they? >> let's see this was an issue for phoenix and i think there was a problem but i'm almost certain to go look on the web site and look under msl i believe there is an instrument from that. >> i'm not sure it seems like somebody could have done a simulation of what it would sound like. as you can imagine if you were

to blow against that microphone i could sound like a hurricane this relationship does not necessarily into it. >> you could hear the marcion's jumping around outside of the camera. >> we would get the vibrations i think. >> with danger to the half from solar flares. >> it's best to think of radiation in general you have cosmic rays and solar flares. the bottom line is the computer circuit systems or radiation. that's why if you look at what curiosity has, you will see that it's not quite as good as the phone computer i have in my pocket and it has to do with what it takes to shield them and deal with the temperature differences. so absolutely that is a consideration. ..

>> you read about expeditions at the high andes lakes. they are all being explorers while there on this mission. >> to keep things flowing and take advantage of that extended time. >> it is actually perfect. the perspective of bringing in new people in my book i

introduce a person who is part of the second rotation. and very early on, i forget what the year was, but excuse me. they brought in a whole new set of scientists. and she writes about what it's like to come onboard. she says of like drinking from a firehose. of course, you have the team that is well-established. it is a very interesting thinker and that has been ongoing over this. back of eight years. you bring in your graduate students and then you have summer interns. there has been a lot of turnover. >> you mentioned the word funding grant funding is a big deal. especially the science. you have a high-profile and support for that and that is the peak of funding and public approval. you have a congressman holding up the little green man on the

floor. how do you whether that is a scientist knowing that you are funding to some extent, it is a measure of popularity. >> it is interesting. i think that the most important constraint i now come out we have a national budget problem that is being treated fairly. innocent of getting what it has always gone. it is facing a huge cut. our biggest problem is more internal and that we have two nations that cost a lot more than we expected. one is curiosity, and one is the james webb observatory, which is the next generation james webb is up to 8 billion. this hurts some of the other mission and transmissions.

one might argue that they deserve some slack and to be given war. but i don't think it's so much popularity as dealing with the fact that they have a fixed budget. >> it might be great if the public want to argue that their budget should not be so fixed and there would be a separate issue. >> some people say we have americans starving. why are we throwing money into the planet mars. we think this? >> the cliché responses, well, the money is being spent on earth. it's not being spent on mars. it's leading to new technologies. anyone who looks at the curiosity landing can see that we have just demonstrated how to land quite heavy pieces on mars. that is now a very general thing that is going to be done for decades to come. you could have a pair of modules, power plants, pressurized vehicles -- you can start bringing down these

precision landings a bunch of separate missions. you don't have to have a check on it were a draconic mission. so that was the important answer, but i forgot the question was. [applause] >> we were talking about justifying it. >> yes, you are seeing a capability development is very general. if you ask what would be the effects on our sense of pride and enthusiasm to have an american on mars, comparing that to other things. a matter of prioritization. >> what about the rise of privately funded space exploration? >> i think it's extremely important. we have a major transition on human spaceflight. there's a lot of us in the

program, five or 10 years from now, low earth orbits, sending pies intensifies back and forth to the space station, a hotel that they want to build committee's suborbital spacecraft the 20 sending people up. where the money is to be made? welcome in the big idea that everyone has caught onto is what you have these for-profit companies contracting to provide fuel and water in lunar orbit taking it from lunar orbit to an asteroid or to mars. once you get out of the gravity. there is a lot of value for nasa and it will be much more

competitive. and also better priced. >> we talked about the probes reaching further and further into the solar system. what kind of human operation protocols are eventually going to be automated when they are reaching out our way? >> you know, you can see with pasini, it's not planned day by day. they know more over several months the program is going to be. it might be -- the way you can compare it to hubble, where they don't decide today what they're going to look at tomorrow. this is scheduled way in advance. so there would have to be another study. an anthropologist on the pasini team is starting mess. i am looking forward to her report, which i think will show that they don't have the same engagements. because they are not able to get in there and individually say, i have this idea. this is what i would like to do. they might have to wait months before their idea could be

realized. they have all of these competing teams. maybe a night of chumming around. paul: >> you're talking so much about the community involved in the human side of this. humans are going to be contributing significantly to programs that they may not see beyond that. you can work on something and see the glass half empty so please comment pleased, and by the time it gets going and starts to come back from a you may not be there to see it. i'm sure some scientists think about that. >> for sure. they would like it to be in their lifetimes. i found more of that than i had expected to find. a lot of the motivation was -- they wanted to know how do they get these answers in their lifetimes. it isn't just the missions, but scientifically, are they going to find out sometime?

even after they are retired. >> when you talk about moving closer to the sun -- >> these are multigenerational missions. there are people who started this that are retired. one of the people, and i deliberately chose michael carr is one of the scientist who i interviewed for my book. he retired right after he was at jpl. to see that kind of transition. >> let's talk about that dangers of anthropomorphizing our rovers. i was following the twitter feed of the curiosity. it was great fun. it was wonderful. but as soon as you start injecting humanity, a lot of people get in trouble on twitter. i just wondered how much of a burden it is to say, oh, now, this is as much a mascot as it is our scientist.

>> i think that is the truth. that was probably my biggest surprise in going through my work over the years. because i did start, as i said, rather upset. when i first saw the press release. it was july when it came out and i remember ranting and raving to anyone who would listen to me, who is this and why is he saying these absurd things. the last thing you want to say to the public. to find out that it was actually useful, that it played a role in the design and enable them to say things that they wouldn't be able to say, i don't know how many people really fooled. so it is complicated. i think also the way i put it in the book is to say, you know,

you can be a scientist and you can be poetic at the same time i think the team just epitomizes that. saying that we went to the top of the hill and we took a photograph. because it was a cool thing to do. he said didn't have scientific value. he was willing to say that it didn't matter. even though you work out how much it might cost him it's a great image. that willingness to be a person as well as a scientist. i saw that throughout. and i think that's what we need to realize. you don't have the poetic aspects and artistic interests. >> we are down to just the last couple of questions. one of these, curious minds want to know the wake of signs science for the rovers have been different over the years.

the wake-up songs have been love me like a rock by paul simon. come fly with me by frank sonata, wake up little susie by simon and garfunkel, and greater love and the theme from mission impossible and my favorite, where is my mind. [laughter] the burning question is, who gets to pick a song? >> i recognize what you're telling me. i really don't know. sometimes it's nice to talk to somebody to get into that. >> i know you are the authority. >> i would probably say jpl. >> that explains a lot of your songs. the last question i know you are an expert in common that is your own trajectory of planetary science and living with and enjoying it, i can see you are still enthusiastic about it.

what has been the high points and low points for you in the world of science, and what keeps you enthusiastic about it? >> well, my full-time at nasa, which is almost 15 years is the high point in my career. so computer sciences, really, the psychological philosophical ideals. i'm interested in taking photographs. i like being outdoors. and doing it all with nasa. and i never anticipated that. i certainly remember the landing on the moon and i could have recited to you all of the different astronauts and neil armstrong we just lost. so i was always -- i didn't realize that you didn't have to be a rocket scientist or a military pilots work for nasa. i have hired anthropologist and

psychologist on my team. so that is a real high point for me. the downside is that i haven't yet gotten jpl at curiosity and maybe someone else is doing that. >> thank you so much, this has been great. i hope that you have all enjoyed this program. [applause] >> you're watching booktv on c-span2. forty-eight hours of nonfiction authors and books every weekend. >> you know, as important as this project has become, i can scarcely remember the first time i learned about this historic congressional race between two future president in 1789. what i do remember is reading about it in a book and it was treated with the typical one or two sentences that you would see about this congressional inquiry. and i thought to y