Science Blog

Science news straight from the source

Navigation

  • Topics
    • Aerospace
    • Animals
    • Anthro and Archaeology
    • Bio and Medicine
    • Brain and Behavior
    • Business and Economy
    • Computers and Electronics
    • Education and Outreach
    • Energy and Environment
    • Geoscience
    • Humor
    • Internet and Communication
    • Media and Entertainment
    • Nanotech, Chem and Materials
    • Physics and Numbers
    • Security and Defense
    • Software
    • Space
    • Transportation
  • Reader Blogs
  • Commerce
  • Register/Login
  • RSS
Home Has Gravity Probe B been a Big Flop?
  • Contact
  • Home
× Close

Reader Blogs

  • Lions and Tigers and Giant-Man-Eating-Catfish, Oh My!
  • Russell Towle: 1949--2008
  • 15 Russian Rovers Head for Mars
  • Psychic word learning. No, seriously.
more

Recent Comments

  • global warming!!!!!!!
  • Choosing not to speak with a forked tongue...........
  • Primrose Path
  • unification theory
  • unification theory - dark bang theory
more

NASA panel confirms: GPB has flopped!

Submitted by Burt on Thu, 2008-05-29 07:12.

Now it's 'official'!

GP-B STATUS UPDATE -- MAY 23, 2008
In March 2008 at NASA's invitation, we submitted a proposal to the Science Mission Directorate, Astrophysics Division Senior Review of Operating Missions (Sr. Review), requesting a final 18-month (October 2008 through March 2010), $3.8M extension of GP-B to complete the data analysis and publish the results. In April, as part of the Sr. Review process, GP-B Principal Investigator, Francis Everitt, and Program Manager, William Bencze, made a presentation to the Sr. Review Committee at NASA Headquarters, where it appeared to have been favorably received.

Thus, we were greatly surprised last week to discover that the Sr. Review had recommended that NASA not grant our final funding extension, particularly since another NASA committee--the GP-B Science Advisory Committee, chaired by relativistic physicist Clifford Will--stated in its report following the November 2007 meeting: "The SAC was impressed with the truly extraordinary progress that has been made in data analysis since SAC-16 [Mar 2007] Š and we now agree that GP-B is on an accelerating path toward reaching good science results."

The Sr. Review evaluation is an unexpected setback, but we are determined to push ahead and drive to the very best possible result within the resources available.

The science team may still prevail, though. If they 'only' need $3.8M to complete the analysis (while $800M has been spent on the mission), it seems silly to pull the plug now. Or is it a case of no good money after bad money?

Burt Jordaan (www.Relativity-4-Engineers.com)

Reply

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Copyright, Science Blog.
Think. It's not illegal yet. Read our Privacy Policy.
RoopleTheme