Failing The Heinlein Test

I've been trying, unsuccessfully, to find the exact chapters or book passages from Robert Heinlein's writings where I first came across the concept of The Heinlein Test. He didn't call it that. It's how I thought about his ideas.

Heinlein envisioned a universe that is pretty much the opposite of the "Where IS Everybody?" Fermi Paradox. In Robert Heinlein's universe, solar systems and galaxies are teeming with intelligent life forms that evolve to develop spaceflight and move on from there. He also theorized that in such a universe, the likelihood of evolving into a multi-planetary species could be predicted by how soon an intelligent species utilizes spaceflight to the fullest extent possible, after developing the capability. A species that embraces and relishes this evolutionary milestone would flourish. Those species approaching it with temerity, risk aversion, trepidation and disinterest would perish. The longer this hesitation goes on after developing the capability for creating a multi-planetary species without actually using it, the more likely the species is to become extinct in the long term.

This may well be bullshit, but it has a certain intuitive symmetry to it. A species that embraces multi-planetary life to the fullest extent possible has an excellent long-term survival outlook. Species that hesitate years before taking this step don't have such a rosy prognosis. It starts to look pretty grim for species that take a decade, or decades to get their asses to Mars, to quote Buzz Aldrin. It's not a new idea. Entire sci-fi universes have plot lines based on multiple species with more or less aggressive expansion and colonization tactics. The more hesitant and non-spacefaring species don't do too well in this scenario, in the long run.

If there is even a smidgen of truth to this idea, it's worth noting that homo sapiens is failing the Heinlein Test, badly.

"Yeah, it got us, too." - The Dinosaurs

Water on Mars Revisited

From Giovanni Schiaparelli to Robert Heinlein the notion of water-filled "canals" on the surface of Mars was a popular one in science and science fiction during some of the late 19th and early 20th century. By the time I discovered science (fiction), the hypothesis of straight canals with flowing water on Mars had long since been dispelled. By the time I began to study Mars, Mariner and Viking had already sent back images from the Martian surface that meant I didn't have to imagine it. I could just look up the images. As I looked at Martian landscapes apparently devoid of any visible water, the notion of streams with flowing water on Mars appeared quaint and naive. 

Now, Curiosity has sent back images from Gale Crater that contain evidence of ancient, quick-flowing water on Mars. NASA's newest rover on the Red Planet found a tilted block of rock that is part of an ancient streambed, along with gravelly rocks whose shape and size indicate they were formed by having been tumbled in water, for a long time. The gravel is too heavy to have been shaped by wind. This is the first time that water-transported gravel has been found on Mars.

Evidence of an ancient streambed on Mars (left), compared to a similar formation on Earth

The size and shape of the gravel also provides clues about flow rate and duration: The water was between ankle- and hip-deep and flowed at a rate of 3 feet (1 meter) per second. That is a pretty brisk-moving stream. When water did flow on Mars in this location, it flowed for a very long time, a very long time ago.

We are certain to find additional clues as Curiosity continues its journey towards the Glenelg area of Mt. Sharp on Mars. In the meantime, I am left with a whole new, awesome dimension of Martian geological history. While Gale Crater was picked as the rover's landing site partly because orbital data indicated the presence of an alluvial flow, I have to ask: If Curiosity practically landed in an ancient Martian streambed, how common was water on Mars back when Gale Crater sported at least one knee-deep, briskly moving stream of water? Was it common or rare? Did the flowing water environment support any life? What happened to the planet between then and now? How did it change from an environment supporting liquid water to what it is today? Where did all that water go? 

We may not have reliable answers to these questions for a while but the fact that we can now ask them and look for clues in data directly from the Martian surface is a spectacular achievement of planetary science. 

Go Curiosity!

For my coverage of Curiosity's landing on Mars from Planetfest 2012, click here and here

For my coverage of the NASA/JPL tweetup featuring Curiosity in June 2011, click here