I gave a talk about the future of science on Friday night at Bryanston School in Dorset (quite a place, I have to say). I had a warm-up act, Milly - I forgot the surname, sorry - who gave a short talk about the future of space travel. She took two questions afterwards, and they were good ones. First, should we travel to other worlds, are we likely to mess them up? And second, is it all worth it anyway?
I'm fond (probably over-fond) of telling people that England's Astronomer Royal, Sir Martin Rees, once said finding life on other planets is the most important task in science. That's because, he believes, it will tell us an enormous amount about ourselves - whether we're somehow special or not, for a start - and about evolution. If life evolved elsewhere, it might have seeded life on Earth. Or we might answer Christian De Duve's question over whether life is a cosmic imperative; whether it is somehow a product of the laws of physics and will always happen given enough time and physical resources.
Is it worth the investment? I believe it is, as I've said publicly. But I can have an opinion without having to put up any money - unlike the US government at the moment. This is a crunch time for NASA. The current adminstration is having to decide whether to invest further in human space exploration, a "Kennedy vs Nixon moment", according to NASA's former head honcho Mike Griffin.
Me? I'd be Kennedy. You?
Subscribe