Cambridge, MA – Using publicly available data from NASA’s Kepler space telescope, astronomers at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) have found that six percent of red dwarf stars have habitable, Earth-sized planets. Since red dwarfs are the most common stars in our galaxy, the closest Earth-like planet could be just 13 light-years away.
“We thought we would have to search vast distances to find an Earth-like planet. Now we realize another Earth is probably in our own backyard, waiting to be spotted,” said Harvard astronomer and lead author Courtney Dressing (CfA).
This artist’s conception shows a hypothetical habitable planet with two moons orbiting a red dwarf star. Astronomers have found that 6 percent of all red dwarf stars have an Earth-sized planet in the habitable zone, which is warm enough for liquid water on the planet’s surface. Since red dwarf stars are so common, then statistically the closest Earth-like planet should be only 13 light-years away. Credit: David A. Aguilar (CfA)
Regency-Superior Ltd. will conduct free appraisals of early space memorabilia, including cloth patches, access badges, astronaut autographs, spacecraft models, photographs, items flown in space, booklets, manuals and jackets.
Referring back to the mandate of the NRC committee, its mandate was to establish how this national consensus and strategy might be established and communicated. In their recommendation that a space policy be developed there is a continuing flaw in the philosophical underpinning that equates space with NASA and the development of a strategic direction as sole the province of the government as it relates to the civilian space agency. Here is what the report says in this area….
…….If the United States is to continue to maintain international leadership in space, it must have a steady, bold, scientificallyjustifiablespace program in which other countries want to participate, and, moreover, it must behave as a reliable partner.
The above sentence in its implication says that a scientifically justifiable space program is the only means to continue its international leadership in space. This has been the underpinning of all NASA related strategic thinking for the past thirty years but is it still tenable, is it still complete to say so? It is my opinion that the answer is no and indeed it has never truly been the case and to think of space through this narrow lens is actually the reason that we have been unable to come to any kind of national consensus on space. The key word in their mandate is national consensus, not just a presidential fiat or even a consensus between the congress and the president. If we are to move forward toward a national consensus we must look beyond the scientific justifications for a space program and look at the broader aspects of national interest to underpin our reasoning.
![lores[1]](https://i0.wp.com/www.cfa.harvard.edu/image_archive/2013/13/hires.jpg)