The
President’s budget does not contain money for a servicing mission to repair and
maintain the Hubble Space Telescope. We think that this is a historic mistake,
comparable to the mistake made in 1976 when the president’s budget proposal
zeroed out all support for the Large Space Telescope (later named the Hubble
Space Telescope). In 1976, an intense lobbying effort by astronomers and
physicists elicited enthusiastic support in congress for the telescope and funding
was ultimately restored. We hope
something similar will happen in the present situation and a bipartisan
coalition of congressional leaders will be able to restore funding for the
Hubble Telescope.
In
open hearings on the future of the Hubble Telescope, Chairman Boehlert and the
ranking member Congressman Gordon of the House Committee on Science raised
three important questions about options for servicing the Hubble
telescope. We would like to provide
answers to those questions and place them in the larger context of astronomical
research in this country and of the future of NASA. We rely in part on our
experience as Chair and Co-Chairs, respectively, of the last two
priority-setting exercises of the astronomical community, exercises in which
astronomers successfully set priorities for funding in the decades beginning in
1990 and in 2000. We also base our answers upon the recently completed National
Research Council (NRC) study of all aspects of a servicing mission to Hubble.
The
NRC study involved a number of the nation’s most distinguished contributors to
activities in space, including astronauts, engineers, managers
of space programs, astronomers, and Nobel Prize winning physicists. The conclusion of the intensive NRC study was
that a shuttle servicing mission was the best option and was in the nation’s
interest. We strongly concur with this
view, as our answers to the questions below will show.
*)
How important will the future contributions of the Hubble be to understanding
the cosmos in which we live?
Hubble is a scientific workhorse in the prime of its life. It is also the privileged photographer of the universe. Whether the images are of solar systems at birth, galaxies colliding, or the death throes of a star in supernova, Hubble’s photos reveal the ferocity and tranquility of our universe. Most importantly, the photos reveal our place in the universe. And yet, as staggering as its revelations have been over the last 15 years, Hubble’s most important discoveries could be in the future.
Hubble is also a tremendous national asset: a source of pride for all Americans and an enormous stimulus to young people to learn the techniques of mathematics and physics that are important to keep our nation economically competitive.
*)
What are the advantages and disadvantages of extending the life of Hubble
through a) a shuttle repair mission, b) a robotic repair mission, or c)
developing a Hubble replacement?
As
Chairs of the astronomy community’s most recent self-prioritizing task forces,
we are firmly committed to the process of systematic peer review that
ultimately leads to the consensus selection by the science community of a small
fraction of the most important proposed new science projects. The proposed new
satellite to host some Hubble instruments and other scientific capabilities is
very attractive, but we think it should be considered together with other attractive
possibilities in the next decade study that will be organized in another few
years. It would be premature to push a
new satellite with Hubble-like instruments ahead of other projects that may be
proposed for the next decade.
*) Should a Hubble servicing mission be a higher priority for funding
than other astronomical programs at NASA?
We
believe that the NASA programs, including the Hubble servicing mission, should
continue as planned with the priorities that have been established by previous decadal
surveys.
For
years, the Hubble servicing has been part of the NASA planning.
In
a written response to Congressman Gordon, NASA administrator Sean O’Keefe wrote
in 2002 that: “ The next Hubble Servicing Mission is …considered ‘grandfathered
in’ under this policy, and the projected budget for the mission was included in
the five year budget run-out under the Office of Space Flight.”
Some NASA officials have said publicly that astronaut safety is a reason for not servicing the Hubble with a shuttle flight. However, 26 retired astronauts disagreed in a written statement.
Moreover, the NRC study found no significant difference in safety between a shuttle flight to the Space Station and a shuttle flight to the Hubble. No one has claimed that the planned 25 shuttle flights to the space station are collectively safer than a single shuttle flight to Hubble. And it will of course be much more dangerous to travel to the moon and Mars. But, no one at NASA headquarters is suggesting that we not support the President’s exploration mission because it is too dangerous.
We
believe that the argument over whether or not Hubble should be serviced is
really an argument over competing priorities and whether NASA should continue
to give high priority to science. Since
its founding, NASA has provided a steady stream of scientific discoveries that
have revolutionized our understanding of the universe. We believe that keeping
science as part of its core mission will benefit NASA and the nation, as well
as science. The best way to support this view is to authorize a shuttle
servicing mission for Hubble.
John
Bahcall is
a professor of astrophysics at the Institute for Advanced Study and recipient
of the National Medal of Science. Christopher McKee is professor
of physics and of astronomy and former chair of physics at the