Search

Our generation could realistically be the one to discover evidence of life beyond Earth. With this privileged potential comes responsibility. The magnitude of the question of whether we are alone in the Universe, and the public interest therein, opens the possibility that results may be taken to imply more than the observations support, or than the observers intend. As life-detection objectives become increasingly prominent in space sciences, it is essential to open a community dialogue about how to convey information in a subject matter that is diverse, complicated and has a high potential to be sensationalized. Establishing best practices for communicating about life detection can serve to set reasonable expectations on the early stages of a hugely challenging endeavour, attach value to incremental steps along the path, and build public trust by making clear that false starts and dead ends are an expected and potentially productive part of the scientific process. Here we endeavour to motivate and seed the discussion with basic considerations and offer an example of how such considerations might be incorporated and applied in a proof-of-concept-level framework. Everything mentioned herein, including the name of the confidence scale, is intended not as a prescription, but simply as the beginning of an important dialogue., (© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Human explorers on the surface of Mars will have access to a far wider array of scientific tools than previous crewed planetary exploration missions, but not every tool will be compatible with the restrictions of this exploration. Spectrometers on flyby, orbital, and landed missions are currently used to determine the composition and mineralogy of geological materials of various types and sizes, from small fragments to celestial bodies in the solar system. Handheld spectrometers that are capable of in situ analyses are already used for geological exploration on Earth; however, their usefulness for human exploration missions and how data from multiple handheld instruments could be combined to enhance scientific return must be further evaluated. As part of the Biologic Analog Science Associated with Lava Terrains (BASALT) research project, we incorporated two handheld instruments, a visible-near infrared spectrometer and an X-Ray Fluorescence spectrometer, into simulated Mars exploration missions conducted on basaltic terrains in Idaho and Hawai'i. To understand the data quality provided by these handheld spectrometers, we evaluated their performance under varying conditions of measurement time, distance, angle, atmosphere, and sample matrix, and we compared data quality between handheld instruments and laboratory techniques. Here, we summarize these findings, provide guidelines and requirements on how to effectively incorporate these instruments into human exploration missions to Mars, and posit that future iterations of these instruments will be beneficial for enhancing science returned from human exploration missions.

Consideration of the reaction to a SETI detection by the media, and the effect this will have on the public, is more than mere sociological speculation. An accurate forecast of the media's interest can lead to actions that will help ensure that correct and comprehensible information reaches the public. This is most critical in the first few weeks following a discovery. While a widely accepted protocol for dealing with a detection exists in the "Declaration of Principles Following the Detection of Extraterrestrial Intelligence," it gives scant consideration to the fact that the actual situation will be chaotic and not subject to easy control. The 1996 story about the possible discovery of martian microfossils has provided a useful precedent for what will happen if astronomers uncover the existence of alien intelligence.

Two tasks must be accomplished to provide planetary protection for Mars return missions: (1) sterilization of the scientific module to be landed on Mars and (2) reliable sterilization of all material returned to Earth, while ensuring the scientific integrity of martian samples. This paper examines similarity and differences between these two tasks, and includes a discussion of technological implementation conditions and the nature of terrestrial and hypothesized martian microflora. The feasibility of a number of chemical and physical (ultraviolet and ionizing radiation and heating) methods of sterilization for use on the ground and onboard are discussed and compared. A combination of different methods will probably be selected as the most appropriate for ensuring planetary protection on the return mission.

Sample return missions from a comet nucleus and the Mars surface are currently under study in the US, USSR, and by ESA. Guidance on Planetary Protection (PP) issues is needed by mission scientists and engineers for incorporation into various elements of mission design studies. Although COSPAR has promulgated international policy on PP for various classes of solar system exploration missions, the applicability of this policy to sample return missions, in particular, remains vague. In this paper, we propose a set of implementing procedures to maintain the scientific integrity of these samples. We also propose that these same procedures will automatically assure that COSPAR-derived PP guidelines are achieved. The recommendations discussed here are the first step toward development of official COSPAR implementation requirements for sample return missions.