|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
Scientific Prerequisites
for the
Human Exploration of Space
OCR for page 2
OCR for page 3
^ ~ ~ `.
bcle-< ]c Visited
for the
Human Explorudon of Space
CommUtcc on Human [~plor~ion
Space Studios Board
Commission on Pbysica1 Scicncos, Hathomadcs, and Applicabons
Nabona1 Rcscarcb CouncH
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, Day. 1993
OCR for page 4
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board
of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National
Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences
and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures
approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of
Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of
distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the further-
ance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of
the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to
advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president
of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the
National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is
autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National
Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National
Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs,
encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers.
Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences
to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of
policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility
given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the
federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research,
and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in
1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's pur-
poses of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accor-
dance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal
operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of
Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engi-
neering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute
of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice chairman,
respectively, of the National Research Council.
Support for this project was provided by Contract NASW 4627 between the National
Academy of Sciences and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Cover: Mars mosaic image courtesy of Alfred McEwen of the U.S. Geological Survey,
Flagstaff, Arizona. Lunar crescent image courtesy of Dennis di Cicco. Cover design by Penny
Margolskee.
Copies of this report are available from
Space Studies Board
National Research Council
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20418
Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page 5
COMMITTEE ON HUMAN EXPLORATION
NOEL W. HINNERS, Martin Marietta Civil Space and Communications
Company, Chair
RICHARD L. GARWIN, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
LOUIS J. LANZEROTTI, AT&T Bell Laboratories
ELLIOTT C. LEVINTHAL, Stanford University
WILLIAM J. MERRELL, JR., Texas A&M University
ROBERT H. MOSER, University of New Mexico
GEORGE DRIVER NELSON, University of Washington
SALLY K. RIDE,* California Space Institute
Staff
DAVID H. SMITH, Executive Secretary
BOYCE N. AGNEW, Administrative Assistant
*Former committee member who participated in writing this report.
iii
OCR for page 6
SPACE STUDIES BOARD
LOUIS J. LANZEROTTI, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Chair
JOSEPH A. BURNS, Cornell University
ANDREA K. DUPREE,* Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
JOHN A. DUTTON, Pennsylvania State University
LARRY ESPOSITO,* University of Colorado
JAMES P. FERRIS, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
HERBERT FRIEDMAN, Naval Research Laboratory
RICHARD L. GARWIN,* IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
RICCARDO GIACCONI, European Southern Observatory
NOEL W. HINNERS, Martin Marietta Civil Space and Communications
Company
JAMES R. HOUCK,* Cornell University
DAVID A. LANDGREBE, Purdue University
ROBERT A. LAUDISE, AT&T Bell Laboratories
RICHARD S. LINDZEN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JOHN H. McELROY, University of Texas, Arlington
WILLIAM J. MERRELL, JR., Texas A&M University
RICHARD K. MOORE,* University of Kansas
ROBERT H. MOSER, University of New Mexico
NORMAN F. NESS, University of Delaware
MARCIA NEUGEBAUER, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
MARK SETTLE, ARCO Oil Company
WILLIAM A. SIRIGNANO, University of California, Irvine
FRED W. TUREK, Northwestern University
ARTHUR B.C. WALKER, Stanford University
MARC S. ALLEN, Director
*Term ended during 1992.
in
OCR for page 7
COMMISSION ON PHYSICAL SCIENCES,
MATHEMATICS, AND APPLICATIONS
RICHARD N. ZARE, Stanford University, Chair
JOHN A. ARMSTRONG, IBM Corporation
PETER J. BICKEL, University of California, Berkeley
GEORGE F. CARRIER, Harvard University
GEORGE W. CLARK, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MARYE ANNE FOX, University of Texas, Austin
AVNER FRIEDMAN, University of Minnesota
SUSAN L. GRAHAM, University of California, Berkeley
NEAL F. LANE, Rice University
ROBERT W. LUCKY, Bell Communications Research
CLAIRE E. MAX, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
CHRISTOPHER F. McKEE, University of California, Berkeley
JAMES W. MITCHELL, AT&T Bell Laboratories
RICHARD S. NICHOLSON, American Association for the Advancement
of Science
ALAN SCHRIESHEIM, Argonne National Laboratory
A. RICHARD SEEBASS III, University of Colorado
KENNETH G. WILSON, Ohio State University
NORMAN METZGER, Executive Director
v
OCR for page 8
OCR for page 9
Preface
For the past 20 years, the future directions of the U.S. program of
human spaceflight have been a matter of discussion, debate, and contro-
versy within and among the government, industry, the scientific commu-
nity, and the public. Many advocates of human space exploration now
agree that the next steps in piloted flight after Space Station Freedom in-
volve returning to the Moon and, eventually, voyaging to Mars. The space
science community, however, is agreed that there is no a priori scientific
requirement for human exploration of the Moon and Mars. This view is
reflected in Toward a New Era in Space: Realigning Policies to New Reali-
ties (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1988), a report prepared
by the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engi-
neering, which stated that "the ultimate decision to undertake further voy-
ages of human exploration and to begin the process of expanding human
activities into the solar system must be based on nontechnical factors." In
that light it is proper to ask, then, what is a proper role for the scientific
community in any program of human exploration?
Well before a human exploration program is implemented, the U.S.
scientific community must involve itself by providing the scientific advice
and participation necessary for enabling human exploration. Then, because
virtually all mission concepts for human exploration incorporate scientific
research as a major goal, it is incumbent on the research community to
study how it should respond to the opportunities enabled by the existence of
human exploration. The time to do that is now, for it is during the
vii
OCR for page 10
vit!
PREFACE
conceptualization and initial development of exploration programs that the
research community has its greatest opportunity to shape the relevant politi-
cal, technical, and scientific decisions. Such participation is responsive to
the finding enunciated in the Report of the Advisory Committee on the
Future of the U.S. Space Program (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C., 1990), that science is "the fulcrum of the entire space effort."
Since its establishment in 1958, the Space Studies Board (SSB; for-
merly the Space Science Board) has been the principal nongovernmental
advisory body on civil space research in the United States. In this capacity,
the board established the Committee on Human Exploration (CHEX) to
examine many of the science and science-policy matters concerned with the
return of astronauts to the Moon and eventual voyages to Mars. The Board
asked CHEX to consider three major questions:
1. What scientific knowledge must be obtained as a prerequisite for
prolonged human space missions?
2. What scientific opportunities might derive from prolonged human
space missions?
3. What basic principles should guide the management of both the
prerequisite science activities necessary to enable human exploration and
the scientific activities that may be carried out in conjunction with human
exploration?
This report focuses on the first of these topics. Reports concerning the
second and third topics are in their final stages of preparation and will be
available in the near future.
The Space Studies Board and CHEX concluded that the existing re-
search strategies of several of its discipline committees form a solid basis
for determining the scientific research necessary to enable future voyages
by humans to the Moon and Mars. To establish a context for its study,
however, CHEX first examined the scientific aspects of various Moon/Mars
mission concepts and determined the appropriate role of science in a pro-
gram of human exploration. Having laid this foundation, CHEX then evalu-
ated and integrated the enabling requirements for human exploration con-
tained in the strategy documents of relevant SSB committees. (The details
of the individual scientific strategies and the goals of these SSB committees
are, however, not repeated in this report they may be found in the original
strategy documents listed in the bibliography.) These requirements were
then classified according to their relevance to basic human survival and
optimum mission performance.
Information on the conditions necessary to maintain the well-being of
humans in space was provided by the Committee on Space Biology and
Medicine. Requirements for data on the properties of planetary atmospheres
and surfaces and exobiology, needed for basic mission operations and sci
OCR for page 11
PREFACE
MIX
once research, were supplied by the Committee on Planetary and Lunar
Exploration. A Strategy for the Scientific Exploration of Mars (NASA, Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., 1991), a report written by NASA's
Mars Science Working Group, was consulted for additional information on
the planetological and exobiological aspects of Mars precursor science. The
space radiation environment, including its characterization and predictabil-
ity, is the responsibility of the Committee on Solar and Space Physics and
the Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Research. Advice on some technologi-
cal issues was provided by the Committee on Microgravity Research. Full
membership lists for these Space Studies Board discipline committees ap-
pear in the appendix.
OCR for page 58
44 SCIENTIFIC PREREQUISITES FOR THE HUMAN EXPLORATION OF SPACE
1. How to detect indigenous martian microorganisms and assess their
biological activities;
2. How to recognize and analyze fossil remains of such indigenous
. .
microorganisms;
3. How to search for the presence of chemicals that might relate to
past activities of life forms or that might relate to prebiotic chemistry;
4. Where to seek evidence for past life or prebiotic chemistry; and
5. How to detect the current, and understand the past, distribution of
liquid water and ice.
Beyond laboratory studies, answering these questions will involve ac-
quiring a more detailed knowledge of Mars and its history. The location of
ancient lake beds and of possible wind- and water-emplaced sediments will
surely play a major role in selecting martian sites of interest to exobiolo-
gists.
The development of new organic analysis instrumentation with perhaps
a 1000-fold improvement in sensitivity over the Viking mass spectrometer
is likely to be needed. This needs to be coupled with a flexible "wet"
chemistry input. If we are to adequately investigate the possible prehistory
of biology on Mars, we need to answer whether or not there are any organic
compounds of either abiogenic or biogenic origin on the surface or below
the surface. Determining the ratios of different stereoisomers of amino
acids will help distinguish between those of biogenic or abiogenic origin.
RESOURCE UTILIZATION
Long-term human exploration of Mars may require or greatly benefit
from landing sites in close proximity to exploitable resources. If, for ex-
ample, water needs to be acquired on Mars, it might be extracted from the
air, from surface materials containing chemically bound water, or from sub-
surface ice or permafrost. Which reservoir should be tapped depends on
trade-offs between various extraction technologies available and detailed
knowledge of the martian environment. The atmospheric abundance of
water is known adequately for this purpose, but the location (particularly
the depth) of subsurface ice is not.
If there is a requirement to mine water at the landing site, then precur-
sor flights should be designed to locate regions where subsurface ice may
exist. Similarly, detailed knowledge of the local mineralogy should be
obtained on precursor flights for in situ extraction of water from mined
minerals. If habitation is chosen as a long-term goal of Mars exploration,
then the technology necessary to locate subsurface water or permafrost will
probably need to be developed.
OCR for page 59
RESEARCH FOR MISSION OPTIMIZATION
NOTES AND REFERENCES
45
1. Space Science Board, A Strategy for Space Biology and Medical Sciences for the
1980s and 1990s, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1987, Chapter 4.
2. For an assessment of this problem in the context of Space Station Freedom, see
Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Guidelines for Developing Spacecraft Maxi-
mum Allowable Concentrations for Space Station Contaminants, National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C., 1992.
3. See Ref. 1, Chapter 2.
4. See Ref. 1, p. 32.
5. Mars Atmosphere Knowledge Requirements Working Group, SKI Engineering Re-
quirements on Robotic Missions, Roger D. Bourke (ed.), JPLD-8465, NASA, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., May 1991.
OCR for page 60
4
Conclusions
The Committee on Human Exploration finds that a program for the
exploration of the Moon and Mars by humans offers both challenges and
opportunities for the participation of the scientific community. Foremost is
the fact that particular, enabling scientific information is required if a Moon/
Mars program is ever to succeed in one of its prime goals, the expansion of
human presence and human activity beyond Earth orbit into the solar sys-
tem. This will remain the case even if a major Moon/Mars program is not
initiated for 5 years or 25 years. The information that the committee deems
critical is concerned largely with aspects of space biology and medicine and
associated characteristics of the radiation environment. This in itself is not
a new finding; recognition of the need for such information has been build-
ing over the past 30 years with little progress on solutions. What is re-
quired is that NASA (and other agencies involved in implementing a human
exploration project) make a long-term commitment to sponsoring a rigor-
ous, efficient, high-quality research program on the ground and in space.
The resources required will be significant and challenge NASA to structure,
market, implement, and ultimately manage an adequate plan.
To enable long-duration human flight to, and operations on, the Moon
and Mars, we must obtain critical relevant data. However, we must also
consider ah initio that the enabling research has a purpose above and be-
yond the simplistic, but prime, goal of achieving human presence and im-
plied elementary survival. If a Moon/Mars program is to accomplish more
than merely establishing a human presence in space, then achieving the
46
OCR for page 61
CONCLUSIONS
47
program's yet-to-be-established specific goals and objectives demands that
human performance and "pre-presence" preparation be optimized. This
imperative places additional weight on the acquisition of scientific data on,
for example, the distribution of potential lunar resources, details of the
atmosphere of Mars, and information on the physical, chemical, and bio-
logical properties of the martian surface.
Science permeates all aspects of human exploration, no matter which
architecture is finally selected and regardless of which set of candidate
goals and objectives evolves. The involvement of the scientific community
is needed to help set the goals for purely robotic missions, to analyze both
scientific and engineering data, to structure appropriate tasks for humans,
and to assist in the optimal integration of human and robotic activities.
This pervasive requirement for scientific input mandates that the piloted
spaceflight community develop a new understanding of and attention to the
conduct of space science. It simultaneously requires that the scientific
community interact constructively with those charged with implementation
of a Moon/Mars program. In fact, success will require a technical and
programmatic approach that eliminates the historical dichotomy between
the "manned" and "unmanned" spaceflight programs.
OCR for page 62
Bibliography
Advisory Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program, Report of the Advisory Commit-
tee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washing-
ton, D.C., 1990.
Committee on Human Exploration of Space, Human Exploration of Space: A Review of NASA's
90-Day Study and Alternatives, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1990.
Committee on Space Policy, Toward a New Era in Space: Realigning Policies to New Reali-
ties, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1988.
Mars Atmosphere Knowledge Requirements Working Group, SKI Engineering Requirements
on Robotic Missions, Roger D. Bourke, (ed.), JPLD-8465, NASA, Jet Propulsion Labora-
tory, Pasadena, Calif., May 1991.
Mars Science Working Group, A Strategy for the Scientific Exploration of Mars, JPLD-8211,
NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., 1991.
NASA Advisory Council, Exploring the Living Universe: A Strategy for Space Life Sciences,
Report of the NASA Life Sciences Strategic Planning Study Committee, NASA, Wash-
ington, D.C., 1988.
NASA Advisory Council, Strategic Considerations for Support of Humans in Space and in
Moon/Mars Exploration Missions, Vol. I & II, Life Sciences Research and Technology
Programs, Aerospace Medicine Advisory Committee, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1992.
NASA, Report of the 90-Day Study on Human Exploration of the Moon and Mars, NASA,
Washington, D.C., 1989.
National Commission on Space, Pioneering the Space Frontier, The Report of the National
Commission on Space, Bantam Books, New York, 1986.
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Guidance on Radiation Received
in Space Activities, NCRP Report No. 98, National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland, 1989.
Office of Exploration, Leadership and America's Future in Space, A Report to the Administra-
tor by Dr. Sally K. Ride, August 1987, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1987.
Office of Exploration, Beyond the Earth's Boundaries: Human Exploration of the Solar System
in the 21st Century, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1988.
48
OCR for page 63
BIBLIOGRAPHY
49
Office of Space Science and Applications, Cardiopulmonary Discipline Science Plan, Life
Sciences Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Controlled Ecological Life Support Systems (CELSS),
Life Sciences Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Developmental Biology Discipline Plan, Life Sci-
ences Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Human Factors Discipline Science Plan, Life Sci-
ences Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Musculoskeletal Discipline Science Plan, Life Sci-
ences Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Neuroscience Discipline Science Plan, Life Sci-
ences Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Regulatory Physiology Discipline Plan, Life Sci-
ences Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Space Biology Plant Program Plan, Life Sciences
Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Space Radiation Health Program Plan, Life Sci-
ences Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Office of Space Science and Applications, Space Life Sciences Strategic Plan, Life Sciences
Division, NASA, Washington, D.C., 1992.
Office of Technology Assessment, Exploring the Moon and Mars: Choices for the Nation,
OTA-ISC-502, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Space Environment Laboratory, Solar Radiation Forecasting and Research to Support the
Space Exploration Initiative, NOAA Space Environment Laboratory, Boulder, Colo., 1991.
Space Science Board, HZE-Particle Effects in Manned Spaceflight, National Academy of Sci-
ences, Washington, D.C., 1973.
Space Science Board, Post-Viking Biological Investigations of Mars, National Academy of
Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1977.
Space Science Board, Recommendations on Quarantine Policy for Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Ura-
nus, Neptune, and Titan, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1978.
Space Science Board, Strategy for Exploration of the Inner Planets: 1977-1987, National
Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1978.
Space Science Board, Life Beyond the Earth's Environment: The Biology of Living Organisms
in Space, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1979.
Space Science Board, Origin and Evolution of Life-Implications for the Planets: A Scientific
Strategy for the 1980's, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1981.
Space Science Board, A Strategy for Space Biology and Medical Sciences for the 1980s and
1990s, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1987.
Space Science Board, Space Science in the Twenty-First Century: Imperatives for the Decades
1995 to 2015-Life Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1988.
Space Studies Board, International Cooperation for Mars Exploration and Sample Return,
National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1990.
Space Studies Board, 1990 Update to Strategy for the Exploration of the Inner Planets, Na-
tional Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1990.
Space Studies Board, The Search for Life's Origins: Progress and Future Directions in Plan-
etary Biology and Chemical Evolution, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1990.
Space Studies Board, Assessment of Programs in Space Biology and Medicine 1991, National
Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1991.
Space Studies Board, Biological Contamination of Mars: Issues and Recommendations, Na-
tional Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1992.
Synthesis Group, America at the Threshold, Report of the Synthesis Group on America's
Space Exploration Initiative, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1991.
OCR for page 64
OCR for page 65
Appendix
COMMITTEE ON SPACE BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE
FRED W. TUREK, Northwestern University, Chair
ROBERT M. BERNE, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
PETER DEWS, Harvard Medical School
R.J. MICHAEL FRY, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
FRANCIS (DREW) GAFFNEY, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
EDWARD GOETZL, University of California Medical Center,
San Francisco
ROBERT HELMREICH, University of Texas, Austin
JAMES LACKNER, Brandeis University
BARRY W. PETERSON, Northwestern University
CLINTON T. RUBIN, State University of New York, Stony Brook
ALAN L. SCHILLER, Mt. Sinai Medical Center
TOM SCOTT, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
WARREN SINCLAIR, National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements
WILLIAM THOMPSON, North Carolina State University, Raleigh
FRED WILT, University of California, Berkeley
51
OCR for page 66
52 SCIENTIFIC PREREQUISITES FOR THE HUMAN EXPLORATION OF SPACE
COMMITTEE ON SOLAR AND SPACE PHYSICS
MARCIA NEUGEBAUER, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Co-Chair
THOMAS CRAVENS, University of Kansas
JONATHAN F. ORMES, Goddard Space Flight Center
GEORGE K. PARKS, University of Washington
DOUGLAS M. RABIN, National Optical Astronomy Observatories
DAVID M. RUST, Johns Hopkins University
RAYMOND J. WALKER, University of California, Los Angeles
YUK L. YUNG, California Institute of Technology
RONALD D. ZWICKL, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
COMMITTEE ON SOLAR-TERRESTRIAL RESEARCH
DONALD J. WILLIAMS, Applied Physics Laboratory, Co-Chair
ALAN C. CUMMINGS, California Institute of Technology
GORDON EMSLIE, University of Alabama
DAVID C. FRITTS, University of Colorado
ROLANDO R. GARCIA, National Center for Atmospheric Research
MARGARET G. KIVELSON, University of California, Los Angeles
DAVID J. McCOMAS, Los Alamos National Laboratory
EUGENE N. PARKER, University of Chicago
JAMES F. VICKREY, SRI International
NOTE: The National Research Council's Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Research (CSTR)
and Committee on Solar and Space Physics (CSSP) meet jointly as a federated committee and
report directly to their parent National Research Council boards, the Board on Atmospheric
Science and Climate for CSTR and the Space Studies Board for CSSP.
OCR for page 67
APPENDIX
COMMITTEE ON PLANETARY AND LUNAR EXPLORATION
LARRY W. ESPOSITO, University of Colorado, Chair
RETA BEEBE, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces
ALAN P. BOSS, Carnegie Institution of Washington
ANITA L. COCHRAN, University of Texas, Austin
PETER J. GIERASCH, Cornell University
WILLIAM S. KURTH, University of Iowa, Iowa City
LUCY-ANN McFADDEN, University of Maryland
CHRISTOPHER P. McKAY, NASA Ames Research Center
DUANE O. MUHLEMAN, California Institute of Technology
NORMAN R. PACE, Indiana University
GRAHAM RYDER, Lunar and Planetary Institute
PAUL D. SPUDIS, Lunar and Planetary Institute
PETER H. STONE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
GEORGE WETHERILL, Carnegie Institution of Washington
RICHARD W. ZUREK, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
COMMITTEE ON MICROGRAVITY RESEARCH
ROBERT F. SEKERKA, Carnegie Mellon University, Chairman
ROBERT A. BROWN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
FRANKLIN D. LEMKEY, United Technologies Research Center
WILLIAM A. SIRIGNANO, University of California, Irvine
THOMAS A. STEITZ, Howard Hughes Medical Institute
53
OCR for page 68
Representative terms from entire chapter:
space science
