Dr. Bruce Jakosky He has been a Mars researcher for almost 50 years and was the main researcher of the Maven Mission who explored the Martian upper atmosphere.
Dr. Scott Hubbard It served as the first director of the Mars Exploration Program, created the NASA Institute of Astrobiology, was Central Director of NASA AMES and founded the Stanford commercial space transport center.
Explore Mars and looking for life in other places has been among NASA’s highest priorities for at least 30 years. Returning samples of the Martian surface to Earth to study is the next logical step in these efforts. But NASA’s planning for said sample return mission has been eliminated from the president’s proposal budget. The Office of Management and Budget argued that the first human mission could show. We want to describe the value of having samples and expressing our sense of urgency to achieve this goal.
The scientific arguments to return Mars samples are convincing. Having samples in our laboratories here on Earth will allow us to answer fundamental questions about the history of Mars, the evolution of the planets in general, the potential of the life of having existed on Mars, and if there really was life there at any time on his part in his in it. Finding life, or looking and not finding any, would have deep implications for our society and for our understanding of the universe that surrounds us.
Our knowledge about Mars has progressed to the point that the questions we are drowning can be best addressed with the samples returned. While some have simply defended adding more terrifying and rovers, the analysis that can be done in laboratories on Earth will provide a lot of information that can be obtained on Mars with on -site assets that have extremely limited instrumentation, or need.
The worldwide participation of hundreds of researchers in shared samples will increase the certainty of our knowledge, in part if the digital traces of life are detected. And, as we know from the experience of Apollo, the samples are the gift it can continue giving, only 50 years after the acquisition. If we had to decide not to return samples, or to postpone it to an uncertain future moment to be returned by astronauts, we would be taking an important step to explore the solar system.
In addition, if NASA delays the return of the samples so carefully gathered by the rover of perseverance, critical engineering and technological knowledge or how to land on Mars can be in the United States as dismissals occur. Only two countries have demonstrated the ability to navigate through the dim atmosphere of Mars, the earth successfully and carry out a significant science: the United States and China. When leaving MSR, the United States will hire the first MSR to China, which has announced plans to return samples by 2031.
In addition to the scientific value, the analysis of samples returned will help us drastically prepare the next human missions. To do this would ensure that, when we sent humans, they would make the most convincing science possible. People bring incredible skills and ideas that can be used to collect the best samples and understand the context in what happened. If, on the other hand, we use astronauts to return the samples that the perseverance rover has collected in the Jezero crater, we would not be taking advantage of these skills. In essence, we would send astronauts to do what a robotic mission could do.
Returning samples before human missions also allows us to reduce the risk in human missions. We could use if there is a risk to human health of Martian dust. We could demonstrate the first round trip to Mars, and we could avoid important problems in planetary protection so as not to jeopardize the land of possible Martian microbes. While the implementation of these solutions certainly won the same for human missions that for samples, resolving them for samples first gives us an incredible advantage to determine how we would solve them for human missions.
The underlying justification for sending people must be convincing enough to justify the risk of life and the cost of missions. Science provides much of that logic. Today we have the opportunity to implement exploration and science in a way that makes sense from a programmatic, budgetary and risk perspective, start with the Mars sample return mission. The results will be worth the effort and cost, not only to understand the world that surrounds us in general, but also to determine if it ever has life on the legs on Mars. And isn’t space exploration about?
