The Space Show by Dr. David Livingston

The Space Show Presents Dr. Ajay Kothari, Sunday, 1-25-26.Quick summaryThe meeting focused on Dr. Kothari’s presentation of a cargo delivery concept to the moon using multiple Falcon Heavy upper stages docked together, which he proposed as an alternative to NASA’s current Artemis program. Ajay argued this method could be implemented more quickly and cheaply than the Starship program, with the potential to establish a permanent lunar presence before China’s planned International Lunar Research Station. While the Trump administration aims to land humans on the moon by 2028, several participants expressed skepticism about meeting this timeline, with Bill suggesting this concept could be better aligned with later Artemis missions. The discussion included technical details about fuel requirements, landing capabilities, and cost comparisons, with Marshall proposing a stacked configuration as an alternative design approach.Detailed SummaryDr. Ajay Kothari started his discussion by sharing his recent experience presenting at an international conference on sustainable energy propulsion in India, where he was the only speaker focused on space. He emphasized the importance of not underestimating the technical capabilities of other countries, particularly India and China, and highlighted the impressive work being done at Indian Institutes of Technology. Ajay presented the paradigm for space exploration and discussed the potential of thorium nuclear energy for various applications, including data centers and small modular reactors. The presentation was well-received, and he plans to share some slides during the meeting.After sharing his experience at a conference in India, where he was impressed by the hospitality and technology, and received an award for his presentation, Ajay then discussed the importance of establishing a sustainable and cost-effective lunar settlement, criticizing the current plans for Artemis missions as they do not address the need for permanent infrastructure. Ajay emphasized that the real competition is not about the first human landing, but about creating a permanent presence on the Moon with habitats and outposts, which was not adequately addressed in recent congressional actions.Our guest presented a proposal for a lunar cargo mission using Falcon Heavy, emphasizing its cost-effectiveness and potential to beat China to a permanent lunar presence. He highlighted the need for reusable booster stages and low-drag upper stages to reduce mission costs and mass requirements. David questioned the funding and necessity of the cargo mission, to which Ajay explained the urgency due to China’s plans for an International Lunar Research Station and the importance of establishing a presence on the moon. Bill inquired about Artemis baseline architecture, and Dr. Kothari acknowledged familiarity with Artemis 4 and 5 but noted uncertainty about later missions.Ajay and Bill discussed the timeline for the Artemis 8 mission, which is currently scheduled for 2033 but is likely to be delayed to the mid-2030s. Ajay emphasized the need for an earlier presence on the moon to compete with China’s space station plans by 2030. Bill presented details on the Artemis 8 module, which can house up to four astronauts for short stays. Ajay calculated the delta V required for lunar missions and discussed propellant fractions and payload capacities for different launch vehicles, including the Falcon Heavy and New Glenn.Ajay presented a comparison of different rocket systems for cargo transport, focusing on the cost-effectiveness of Falcon Heavy and New Glenn compared to the SLS. He demonstrated that using Falcon Heavy for four flights could save up to 80% compared to the SLS, while New Glenn was also competitive with similar cost savings. He emphasized that these proven systems should be preferred over the unproven SLS for cargo missions, and suggested that TSS should push for this approach, particularly for missions up to Artemis V.Ajay and Bill discussed the implications of using cargo components in a human mission to the moon, with Bill raising concerns about potential risks to human safety if cargo missions fail. Ajay clarified that cargo missions would occur before human missions, minimizing risk. Bill also inquired about propellant loss in upper stages for the Falcon Heavy, to which Dr. Ajay explained that redesigns would be necessary to accommodate additional fuel and cargo, including potentially larger tanks and increased dry weight. Ajay emphasized the importance of repurposing upper stages for missions beyond Earth, contrasting this with Elon Musk’s focus on reusability.The group discussed NASA’s Artemis mission plans, with David explaining that the current administration’s goal is limited to landing humans on the moon by 2028 before China does, rather than establishing a permanent presence. Ajay emphasized the importance of building a permanent lunar base, suggesting it could be achieved within two years with additional funding from Congress, though he acknowledged this might not be realized until after 2028. The discussion highlighted a disconnect between long-term planning needs and current budget constraints, with David noting that future mission planning would likely depend on the next administration’s priorities.Ajay proposed a plan to establish a permanent lunar presence before Artemis 3, suggesting the construction of structures on the moon with a budget of $500-600 million and the capability to transport 15 tons of cargo. He emphasized the importance of this initiative for the country and suggested that it could be implemented alongside SpaceX’s Starship program. The group discussed the challenges of convincing Elon Musk to shift from the Starship plan, with Phil highlighting the political and logistical obstacles. Marshall suggested setting a baseline design for a lunar station and challenging SpaceX to improve upon it, while John proposed this plan as a potential alternative if Starship encounters technical difficulties.The group discussed a proposal for a moon landing mission using multiple Falcon Heavy upper stages. Ajay presented his concept of using four stages, with one in the center and three at 120-degree intervals, connected and fired together for translunar injection. Bill suggested creating drawings to better illustrate the concept, while Philip proposed an alternative architecture involving fuel transfer between stages before landing. The discussion highlighted concerns about the feasibility of completing the mission within the proposed timeline of 2028, with David expressing skepticism about the three-year timeline given the complexity of testing and approvals.Our guest discussed his ongoing efforts to publish a detailed mission architecture proposal, including a recent contact with the White House and an upcoming meeting with Trump’s political advisors. He is awaiting publication confirmation from Jeff Faust, who has previously published several of Ajay’s articles. The group discussed the likelihood of reaching the moon in 2028, with Dr. Sherry Bell and others expressing doubt about government timelines, while noting that China has its own lunar ambitions. The conversation ended with updates on upcoming Space Show guests and a call for ISDC presenter submissions, with Dr. Bell offering priority to meeting participants.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4494 ZOOM Dr. Ethan Siegel | Tuesday 27 Jan 2026 700PM PTGuests: Dr. Ethan SiegelZoom: Dr. Siegel talks with us on the latest factual science, science plus, terrific cosmic story telling, astrophysics and moreBroadcast 4495: Zoom: Hotel Mars TBD | Wednesday 28 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars TBDBroadcast 4496 Zoom Sarah Scoles | Friday 30 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Sarah ScolesZoom Sarah Scoles, top space journalist returns with lots of space new stories to discussBroadcast 4497 Zoom Mark Whittington | Sunday 01 Feb 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Mark WhittingtonZoom: Author, Journalist, Writer Mark Whittington returns a discussion about his latest O-Eds and space opinions. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Dr. Antonino Del Popolo, Friday, 1-23-25Quick summaryThe Space Show hosted Dr. Antonin o del Popolo, an Italian astrophysicist, to discuss his book “We Are Not Alone: The Search for Extraterrestrial Life.” Dr. del Popolo explained the various theories on the origin of life, including panspermia and abiogenesis, and discussed the challenges in detecting extraterrestrial life, such as the distance between stars and the lack of confirmed signals from other civilizations. He highlighted the potential for microbial life on exoplanets and the importance of future telescopes like the James Webb Space Telescope in confirming its existence. The discussion also touched on the Fermi Paradox and the possibility of advanced civilizations, though Dr. del Popolo expressed skepticism about the likelihood of contact with such civilizations anytime soon.Detailed SummaryDavid and Antonino discussed the possibility of extraterrestrial life, with Antonio explaining that while there have been claims of life on other planets, such as the detection of dimethyl sulfide on an extrasolar planet, these claims have been discredited. He suggested that future telescopes like the James Webb Space Telescope might provide clearer evidence of life in the next 10 years. David mentioned his listeners’ interest in UAP phenomena and the possibility of alien visitation, but Antonino dismissed these ideas as not supported by the scientific community.We formally started with introductions and small talk about volcanoes, with participants discussing locations like Sicily, California, and Idaho. David introduced the main guest, Antonino del Popolo, a physicist from Sicily with a new book on extraterrestrial life. Antonio explained that he would summarize the book’s contents rather than use slides to save time for discussion. The host announced upcoming guests and programs, including Dr. Kothari, Dr. Ethan Siegel, and Greg Autry. The conversation ended with David introducing Antonio to discuss his book, “We Are Not Alone.”Antonino discussed his book on the origins of life, exploring two main theories: panspermia, where life originated elsewhere in the universe and was brought to Earth by comets, and abiogenesis, which posits that life arose from non-living matter on Earth. He also covered the iron-sulfur world hypothesis and the lipids world theory, highlighting the challenges in replicating cellular life in laboratories. Antonio concluded by discussing the potential for life in our solar system, particularly on moons like Europa and Enceladus, as well as on exoplanets, noting the discovery of the first exoplanet in 1991 and the ongoing search for habitable conditions beyond Earth.Antonino discussed the potential for microbial life on exoplanets, noting that while many planets in the habitable zones of their stars might support liquid water, confirming the presence of life is challenging due to the distance and limitations of current technology. David inquired about the difficulty in detecting life, to which Antonino explained that while spectroscopy can identify biosignatures like water and oxygen, only one exoplanet, K218b, has shown such signs, and it will take time to confirm life on more planets. Antonino also highlighted the challenges in detecting advanced civilizations, citing the “Great Silence” and the Fermi Paradox, which suggest that either civilizations are extremely rare or there are significant barriers to communication across vast interstellar distances.Antonino discussed the possibility of extraterrestrial life and civilization, mentioning Fermi’s paradox and various theories such as the Great Filter and Kardashev’s scale. He explained that recent studies, including work by Frank and Sullivan in 2016, suggest that technological civilizations have likely existed in the universe, based on statistical calculations of astrophysical and biological factors in the Drake Equation. John Jossy asked about the certainty of these studies, and Antonino clarified that while the calculations are statistically sound, the unknowns in biology could potentially invalidate the results.Antonino discussed the probability of life evolving on planets similar to Earth, noting that calculations for our galaxy suggest a high likelihood of inhabited planets, especially those orbiting red dwarfs. He explained that while exact probabilities are difficult to determine, estimates indicate around 6 billion such planets in our galaxy and potentially 10^22 in the universe. Antonino also addressed the perspective of believers, suggesting that the existence of life beyond Earth aligns with religious beliefs, while non-believers might find it harder to accept.The Space Show Wisdom Team discussed the probability of life and civilizations in the universe, with Antonino presenting estimates of 6 billion Earth-like planets around Sun-like stars, though Joe noted that only super-Earths have been discovered so far. They explored the concept of biosignatures, including carbon dioxide, water vapor, and methane, as indicators of life, with Antonino mentioning the discovery of dimethyl sulfur on the exoplanet K218b. The conversation concluded with a discussion about the possibility of past life on Mars, based on Viking lander experiments and recent findings of organic matter and water on the planet.Antonino talked about the presence of methane in the universe, explaining that while methane can be found on Jupiter and Saturn, its presence alone is not sufficient to prove the existence of life. He emphasized the need for precise biosignatures to confirm life and noted that microbial life could still exist despite the Fermi Paradox, which questions why we haven’t detected any extraterrestrial civilizations. Dr. Ajay inquired about the historical context of the Fermi Paradox and the Drake Equation, and Antonino clarified that the paradox preceded the equation, though the exact timeline was not fully discussed.The team discussed the possibility of extraterrestrial civilizations and the Kardashev scale, which measures a civilization’s ability to harness energy. Antonino explained that while the Fermi Paradox suggests no advanced civilizations in our galaxy, microbial life could still exist. Marshall proposed a theory about civilizations moving to galactic arms with more stars, and Antonino mentioned the concept of Dyson spheres as a way for advanced civilizations to harness energy from stars. Dr. Sherry Bell asked about the next steps if biosignatures were found, and Antonino explained that the James Webb Space Telescope would be used, with a more powerful telescope called Ariel planned for the future. He also noted that it would take a long time to confirm the existence of life on a distant planet, even with current technology.Antonino mentioned the time it takes to observe potential biosignatures with James Webb, explaining it could take several months to a year, and highlighted that the existence of life on K218b remains uncertain despite observations starting in 2023. He explored theoretical possibilities of faster-than-light travel using general relativity, though he considered such advancements unlikely within 50 years. The discussion also covered alternative chemistries for life, with Antonino noting that while silicon-based life is possible, carbon remains the most probable basis for life as it forms stable and complex structures. He concluded that microbial life likely exists in the universe, with intelligent life potentially following as evolution progresses, though he expressed skepticism about the likelihood of detecting extraterrestrial civilizations.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4496 Zoom Sarah Scoles | Friday 30 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Sarah ScolesZoom Sarah Scoles, top space journalist returns with lots of space new stories to discussBroadcast 4497 Zoom Mark Whittington | Sunday 01 Feb 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Mark WhittingtonZoom: Author, Journalist, Writer Mark Whittington returns a discussion about his latest O-Eds and space opinions. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Broadcast 4491, Hotel Mars with Doug Messier, 1-21-26John Batchelor and I welcomed back Doug Messier to discuss the global launch industry from 2025 plus the expectations of said industry for 2026. Doug called out SpaceX, the US, China, Russia, India and a few other launching nations. He talked about many of the private companies either developing their launchers or actually starting to launch rockets. He provided the statistics for the companies and launching nations as well. All of this jampacked into one Hotel Mars segment.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4494 ZOOM Dr. Ethan Siegel | Tuesday 27 Jan 2026 700PM PTGuests: Dr. Ethan SiegelZoom: Dr. Siegel talks with us on the latest factual science, science plus, terrific cosmic story telling, astrophysics and moreBroadcast 4495: Zoom: Hotel Mars TBD | Wednesday 28 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars TBDBroadcast 4496 Zoom Sarah Scoles | Friday 30 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Sarah ScolesZoom Sarah Scoles, top space journalist returns with lots of space new stories to discussBroadcast 4497 Zoom Mark Whittington | Sunday 01 Feb 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Mark WhittingtonZoom: Author, Journalist, Writer Mark Whittington returns a discussion about his latest O-Eds and space opinions. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show presents Bob Zimmerman, Tuesday, 1-20-26Quick SummaryWe started this Space Show program with Bob Zimmerman with discussions about space exploration policies, private industry involvement, and the current state of various space companies, including ULA and Blue Origin, along with a brief mention of Robert’s book “Conscious Choice.”Detailed SummaryBob and David discussed the potential impact of a space program incident with Artemis, comparing it to past accidents and suggesting it could lead to a significant overhaul of NASA’s programs. The conversation touched on the Artemis flight and the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. Bob opened up referring to his Op-Ed in which he criticized the press coverage of NASA’s Artemis II mission, accusing journalists of being overly positive without addressing engineering concerns. He expressed concerns about the mission’s safety, particularly regarding the untested life support system and the damaged heat shield, which NASA has only partially addressed by adjusting the flight path. Zimmerman compared the situation to SpaceX’s more rigorous testing requirements for its Crew Dragon capsule, highlighting NASA’s double standard in demanding multiple uncrewed test flights from commercial partners but not from its own SLS rocket.Bob also expressed concerns about NASA’s decision to proceed with the Artemis II mission, citing inadequate testing and a culture that prioritizes schedule over engineering safety. He highlighted that the mission lacks critical testing, such as a heat shield test using Falcon Heavy, and criticized NASA’s management for not standing up to political pressure to achieve a lunar landing before the current administration’s term ends. Marshall suggested using an alternative method to test the heat shield, but Bob explained that NASA had already lost valuable time and was planning to use a different design for the next mission. Several in the group agreed that the Artemis II mission, while potentially successful, could be counterproductive by allowing NASA to continue misleading the public about the program’s readiness.Next, Bob went after the Senate launch system as poorly managed and equipment-poor, noting that Congress created the rocket without a clear mission, which NASA is now struggling to define. He expressed more concerns about the Orion heat shield’s untested design and emphasized the importance of fixing problems rather than working around them, especially when human lives are at stake. Phil suggested that sophisticated simulations could reduce the number of flights needed, but Robert argued that ultimately, hardware must be tested in real-world conditions. David pointed out that NASA’s statements indicate they plan to use a new heat shield design in a future mission, which Phil initially criticized but Bob defended as a necessary step, albeit one that should have been tested beforehand.The Wisdom Team discussed concerns about NASA’s approach to the Orion and SLS mission, with Bob being critical of NASA’s management and politicians for prioritizing cost savings over safety by reusing shuttle parts. Dallas and Joe expressed skepticism about the mission’s cost-effectiveness and engineering decisions, while David emphasized the need for Congress to question NASA’s choices. The discussion highlighted the tension between political pressures and engineering realities in space exploration, with no clear solutions proposed by the end of the meeting.Bob went on expressing skepticism about NASA’s Artemis program and the Space Launch System (SLS), arguing that the real space program in the United States is currently led by SpaceX. He criticized the Artemis mission as trivial and not historically significant, advocating instead for fostering a robust American private industry in low Earth orbit and beyond. Dr. Kothari questioned Bob’s views, particularly regarding his recent op-ed, and discussed the potential dangers of the Artemis II mission. They also touched on alternative testing methods for the Orion spacecraft and the need for infrastructure development on the Moon.The Wisdom Team discussed the role of government and private enterprise in space exploration, with Bob emphasizing the importance of competition and innovation among various American space companies. Phil argued that NASA’s leadership is crucial for guiding private industry and managing risks, while Bob suggested that NASA should set goals and provide a framework for private companies to achieve them without micromanaging the process. Joe noted that the Artemis Accords might be the most enduring legacy of the Artemis program.The tem discussed the Artemis Accords, which Bob explained were initially introduced by the Trump administration as a way to encourage private enterprise in space and potentially lead to changes in the Outer Space Treaty that prohibits property rights. Joe noted that Portugal had recently joined the Accords, bringing the total to 60 nations, with many post-Soviet countries participating. Phil suggested that allowing property rights in space could help redirect expansionist leaders’ attention from Earth to space exploration, while Bob agreed with this approach and proposed establishing international rules similar to the Homestead Act to allow nations to claim territory under specific conditions.Bob discussed the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter’s aging issues, noting an increase in anomalies and color dropouts due to the camera’s degradation. Alfred McEwen explained that the problem is being managed by adjusting the camera’s temperature, but more funding is needed for calibration. Robert highlighted the orbiter’s importance in revealing Mars’ icy nature and its potential for future human settlement. The group also discussed private and government missions to Venus, including Rocket Lab’s delayed mission, NASA’s canceled missions, and India’s planned Venus orbiter. Phil mentioned China’s proposed Venus Volcano Imaging and Climate Explorer mission, though its launch details remain unclear.The group discussed current and future planetary missions, with Bob noting that NASA’s Venus missions are on hold and the U.S. has limited active planetary exploration compared to other countries. They explored Blue Origin’s potential to increase competition in space travel, with Bob expressing hope that under new CEO David Limp’s leadership, the company could become more competitive with SpaceX. The discussion also covered Blue Origin’s orbital reef project, which our guest described as currently inactive, and Marshall inquired about cost reduction goals in space travel, to which Bob and Phil noted that while Blue Origin’s David Limp has mentioned reducing costs by two orders of magnitude, no company has yet achieved even a one-order reduction.The group discussed the potential for terrestrial nuclear power plants, noting that while there is growing demand due to AI data centers, there remains significant public resistance. Bob expressed concerns about the “delusional” enthusiasm for AI, particularly in journalism where AI-generated articles are often inaccurate and inappropriate. The conversation shifted to space industry developments, with Ajay discussing small modular reactors (SMRs) and Generation 4 reactors that could serve both propulsion and energy needs. The discussion concluded with Bob emphasizing the need for multiple space companies beyond SpaceX, highlighting the importance of competition and redundancy in the industry.As we were nearing the end of the discussion, we focused on the current state and future of ULA, with Bob noting that while ULA has significant contracts with Amazon and Boeing, its Vulcan rocket lacks reusability and may struggle to compete with emerging reusable rockets like Starship and Neutron. The team discussed the leadership changes at ULA, with an interim leader appointed but no permanent replacement named yet. The conversation concluded with a plug for Bob’s book “Conscious Choice” which explores the origins of slavery in Virginia and its relevance to space exploration, with David and Phil confirming they had read the book and found it informative.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4491 Zoom Dr. Antonio Del Popolo | Friday 23 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr/. Antonio Del PopoloZoom: Dr. Popolo talks about hs new booik, “Extraterrestrial Life: We are not alone.”Broadcast 4492 Zoom Dr. Ajay Kothari | Sunday 25 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Ajay KothariZoom Dr. Kothari on “MUCH NEEDED CARGO TO MOON” Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Dan Adamo, Sunday, 1-18-26Quick SummaryOur program focused on a detailed discussion of lunar exploration architectures and orbital dynamics, led by Dan Adamo, a former NASA mission controller with extensive experience in orbital rendezvous. Dan explained why NASA’s current Artemis program uses a nearly rectilinear halo orbit around the Moon, despite its instability and operational challenges, primarily due to constraints imposed by the Orion spacecraft’s service module and the Space Launch System (SLS). He advocated for a lunar surface rendezvous architecture as a more sustainable and flexible approach for human lunar missions, emphasizing the importance of minimizing rendezvous and having infrastructure pre-positioned on the lunar surface. Dan also criticized the current Artemis timeline, expressing concerns about the program’s risk tolerance and the marginal safety margins built into the mission design. The discussion highlighted the trade-offs between meeting political timelines, managing risks, and achieving a sustainable human presence on the Moon.Detailed SummaryDan Adamo discussed his views on NASA’s Artemis program and lunar exploration strategies. He criticized the current plan for using a complex lunar orbit that may not be optimal for human missions. Dan suggested that NASA should consider using lunar surface rendezvous, where cargo and crew launches would meet on the moon’s surface, rather than relying on in-space propellant depots. He emphasized the importance of having a robust and flexible architecture that can adapt to delays and other challenges in spaceflight. Dan also expressed concerns about the current schedule for lunar missions, suggesting that taking more time to develop a better architecture might be worth it if it leads to a more successful and sustainable program.Dan discussed his experience with orbital dynamics and rendezvous operations, highlighting his work with NASA’s shuttle program and his advocacy for a lunar architecture inspired by the “land anywhere, leave anytime” mantra. He expressed optimism about private space stations, noting their increased payload capacity compared to the shuttle and the potential for more efficient operations. Dan also addressed challenges in launching and operating spacecraft, including environmental factors like solar flares, meteor showers, and collision avoidance, emphasizing the importance of careful planning and coordination.Our guest continued by explaining the challenges and benefits of different space launch architectures, expressing a preference for heavy-lift launches to lower Earth orbit for cargo missions before heading to the moon. He shared a detailed diagram of the Capstone mission’s orbit around the Sun-Earth L1 point, which is about 1.2 million kilometers away, or five times the Earth-Moon distance. Dan also described the Apollo missions’ lunar orbit characteristics, noting that they operated at an altitude of 100 kilometers with a 2-hour orbit period, and highlighted the Apollo service module’s capabilities for large plane changes and emergency returns.Dan went on to discuss the challenges of the Artemis program’s lunar orbit, highlighting the one-week orbital period and the limitations of the Orion service module. He criticized the decision to reuse Space Shuttle parts and the concept of using Orion as a crew return vehicle from a Mars mission, noting the high risks and costs involved. Dan also explained the instability of the planned orbit and the need for frequent course corrections, contrasting it with the more stable lunar orbits of the Apollo missions. David questioned the reasoning behind these plans, suggesting that the pros may not outweigh the cons.Dan and David discussed the challenges of space exploration, particularly the political influences and financial constraints that affect mission planning. Dan explained that while engineers and mission planners strive to create sustainable programs, the lack of a clear business case for lunar and Mars exploration means that politics often drives funding decisions. They compared the Chinese space architecture to NASA’s plans, noting that China’s approach involves fewer launches and a simpler mission profile, though it still presents challenges with debris disposal and rendezvous. Dan emphasized the importance of careful planning and the need for reliable systems to avoid damaging valuable lunar infrastructure.Dan repeated that lunar surface rendezvous as a preferred architecture for human lunar missions, emphasizing its advantages over other approaches. He argued that this method minimizes rendezvous, reduces orbital debris, and allows for a “land-anywhere-leave-any-time” capability, which is crucial for sustainable lunar exploration. Dan also highlighted the challenges of current architectures, such as the Artemis program, and expressed concerns about the lack of exploration capability in the Chinese lunar mission. While he would be happy to share his expertise with decision-makers, Dan noted that any changes to the Artemis program would likely face delays and political challenges.The discussion went on to focus on the stability and operational considerations of lunar orbits, particularly the nearly rectilinear halo orbit chosen for the Gateway. Dan explained that while the orbit appears stable, it requires frequent propulsion corrections due to perturbations from various celestial bodies, including Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars, as well as solar winds. He suggested that a more stable alternative would be a distant retrograde orbit at approximately 10,000-12,000 kilometers from the moon with a one-day period. The conversation also touched on the Gateway’s propulsion system, which will use xenon gas in Hall-effect thrusters, though Dan noted that the exact propellant type is still uncertain.Dan expressed excitement about Artemis II but noted that Orion cannot safely enter lunar orbit due to performance constraints. He discussed the mission’s trajectory, explaining that it will fly by the moon’s far side at a specific altitude for a free return to Earth, potentially not setting a new human altitude record. Dan also shared his thoughts on human lunar landers, expressing concerns about SpaceX’s Starship design and suggesting Blue Moon as a potential alternative. He concluded by explaining the need for specific launch windows to mitigate heat shield issues on Orion’s return trajectory.In summary, we focused on the Artemis program and its challenges, with Dan expressing concerns about taking unnecessary risks to meet the 2028 moon landing timeline. He emphasized the need for calculated risks and highlighted the marginal nature of the current architecture. The group discussed the program of record for Artemis III, including the timing of launches and rendezvous with the Starship lander. They also explored the potential for robots and AI to assist in lunar missions and the possibility of a space elevator to the moon. Dan shared his plans to develop a launch simulator to better understand and share launch trajectories, which raised questions about space traffic management.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4491 Zoom Dr. Antonio Del Popolo | Friday 23 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr/. Antonio Del PopoloZoom: Dr. Popolo talks about hs new booik, “Extraterrestrial Life: We are not alone.”Broadcast 4492 Zoom Dr. Ajay Kothari | Sunday 25 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Ajay KothariZoom Dr. Kothari on “MUCH NEEDED CARGO TO MOON” Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Dr. Armen Papazian, Friday, 1-16-26NOTE: THERE WERE TECHNICAL VIDEO DIFFICULTIES WITH ARMEN’S SYSTEM NEAR THE END OF THE PROGRAM BUT THEY WERE RESOLVED.Quick SummaryThis Friday morning space show featured Armen Papazian, a financial economist discussing his research on cryptocurrency and its limitations for space development. Armen explained how the current monetary system, based on debt and calendar time, restricts space exploration funding and proposed a new concept of “public capitalization notes” to enable more effective space investment. The discussion explored how traditional banking systems and central banks are adapting to cryptocurrency technology while maintaining debt-based money systems, and how space property rights might be structured in a lunar or Martian context. The conversation addressed practical questions about funding space projects, with Armen emphasizing that current financial models are inadequate for supporting large-scale space development. The meeting included technical difficulties with Armen’s connection but concluded with a productive discussion about monetary reform and space finance.Detailed SummaryDavid and Armen discussed Armen’s 72-page paper and its potential adaptation to include space-related themes, given the current interest in cryptocurrency among tech enthusiasts and space industry figures. Note that his paper has been uploaded to The Space Show blog page for this program on this date. Armen explained that his paper explores whether cryptocurrency could transform monetary systems to enable space exploration, but concluded that current crypto systems are not viable due to their reliance on pseudorandomness rather than debt logic. The conversation ended with Armen agreeing to a longer discussion if the topic continued to interest Space Show participants.Pre-program discussion notes: Armen discussed the recent crypto market downturn, noting that Bitcoin lost 35% while others lost up to 62%, with Monero being the only top 30 cryptocurrency to gain value. He explained that Monero’s success was due to its commitment to anonymous, untraceable payments, which appeals to dark money transactions. The group discussed the U.S. government’s stance on cryptocurrencies, with Armen mentioning ongoing debates about central bank digital currencies and President Trump’s crypto. John Jossy inquired about Monero’s location, to which Armen responded that it is decentralized but has some presence in Singapore, South Africa, and Australia. The conversation ended with David announcing the start of the program and providing an update on blog comment issues, suggesting Substack as an alternative for posting comments.Dr. Armen Papazian discussed his research on the limitations of the current monetary system in funding space exploration, highlighting how the debt-based and Earth-centric nature of the financial framework hinders investments in off-planet projects. He explained that the entire money supply is linked to Earth’s fixed movements, making it challenging to invest in leaving Earth’s orbit. Armen also presented a recent study on cryptocurrencies, analyzing the top 30 as of September 2025, and concluded that while cryptocurrencies have improved money’s technology, they have not yet offered a better logic than the debt-based system.David and Armen discussed the limitations of cryptocurrency in funding large-scale projects like space colonization, noting that crypto remains tied to terrestrial economic systems and calendar time. Armen explained his study on the top 30 cryptocurrencies, highlighting their diverse creation logics, including pre-minted supplies, stablecoins, and randomness-based issuance. He concluded that while cryptocurrencies offer a payments revolution, they lack true monetary evolution and are still largely controlled by developers rather than democratizing finance.The discussion focused on the challenges of financing space development, with Armen and John Hunt agreeing that the main issue is the lack of profitable products in space, similar to Starlink’s success. Armen explained that the space economy is Earth-bound, with only a small fraction focused on human expansion into outer space, and highlighted the need for a new monetary framework that values space-based activities differently from Earth-bound ones. Marshall contributed by noting the difficulty of valuing space activities compared to traditional commodities, while David raised practical concerns about how to implement Armen’s ideas in the current financial system.Phil discussed the concept of non-linear growth and debt, comparing it to personal and industrial contexts, and suggested adapting Earth-based growth experiences to space-based enterprises. Arman agreed with Phil’s points, emphasizing that the logic of debt, rather than the amount, influences prioritization and policy actions, and highlighted how debt can undermine economies if not sustained by growth. David asked if there is a natural evolution of current systems or if intervention is necessary, to which Arman responded that humans typically change only when faced with significant pain, and he expressed concern about the need for transformative change. Arman also noted that the crypto phenomenon has led to the reinvention of the fiat architecture, with banks and central banks adopting blockchain technology while maintaining the logic of debt-based money.Marshall and Armen discussed the causes and solutions for inflation, focusing on the role of central banks and commercial banks in money creation. Armen explained that quantitative easing involves typing new digits into banks’ accounts, but the actual source of inflation lies in banks’ credit policies and loan decisions. He proposed a new monetary instrument called public capitalization notes, which would direct new money into productive capacity and technology creation rather than banking systems. They also touched on the impact of cryptocurrencies and stablecoins on traditional banking systems, with Armen suggesting that central banks may eventually need to reinvent the framework of money.Armen discussed the challenges of financing space exploration, arguing that current financial systems are too dependent on calendar time and risk, which limit investment in risky ventures like space travel. He proposed creating a new type of money that is not tied to calendar time or risk, but rather to the impact of space exploration. Armen also touched on the historical impact of the gold standard and the potential effects of returning to it, suggesting that it would limit economic growth and innovation. The discussion was cut short due to technical issues with Armen’s connection.The group discussed the potential impact of a SpaceX IPO on space infrastructure development, with Armen explaining that while the capital raised could be significant, it would still be subject to regulatory requirements and profit expectations for new investors. David noted connectivity issues with Armen, who was experiencing technical difficulties. John Jossy raised a question about how central banks might be involved in financing space companies, particularly regarding property rights and resource value in the solar system.The group discussed the challenges of financing space exploration and property rights in outer space. Armen proposed a new model for financing space projects called public capitalization notes, which would be based on responsible space value creation rather than debt. This model would involve a public-private partnership to prioritize and allocate funding for space projects. The group also touched on the need for accountability in managing public capitalization notes. Armen emphasized that this new approach would help overcome the limitations of current debt-based monetary systems and enable more sustainable development in space.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4489 Zoom Robert (Bob) Zimmerman | Tuesday 20 Jan 2026 700PM PTGuests: Robert ZimmermanZoom Bob brings us news and perspective unique only to himBroadcast 4490 Hotel Mars with Doug Messier | Wednesday 21 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Douglas MessierDoug updates us on global launch informationBroadcast 4491 Zoom Dr. Antonio Del Popolo | Friday 23 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr/. Antonio Del PopoloZoom: Dr. Popolo talks about hs new booik, “Extraterrestrial Life: We are not alone.”Broadcast 4492 Zoom Dr. Ajay Kothari | Sunday 25 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Ajay KothariZoom Dr. Kothari on “MUCH NEEDED CARGO TO MOON” Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Hotel Mars, Weds, Jan. 14, 2026Hotel Mars presents Dr. Devesh Nandal with John Batchelor and Dr. David Livingston discussing Dr. Nandal’s research regarding the cosmological mysteries known as the “little red dots.” The discovery consists of compact, bright objects in the early universe that are not easily explained as galaxies or accreting black holes. The findings challenge the standard model of cosmology and may suggest the universe matured much earlier than previously thought by 21st-century scientists.Dr. Nandal and other scientists rely on the James Webb 2.0 with larger mirrors plus a successor to the Chandra X-ray telescope. As to be expected, substantial funding is needed for researchers to develop new mathematical models to fit this discovery. In addition, new data is constantly being added to the pool of research and more and more scientists are examining this little red dot mystery.Note: This summary is largely taken from the program summary used by John Batchelor for this program.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4489 Zoom Robert (Bob) Zimmerman | Tuesday 20 Jan 2026 700PM PTGuests: Robert ZimmermanZoom Bob brings us news and perspective unique only to himBroadcast 4490 Hotel Mars with Doug Messier | Wednesday 21 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Douglas MessierDoug updates us on global launch informationBroadcast 4491 Zoom Dr. Antonio Del Popolo | Friday 23 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr/. Antonio Del PopoloZoom: Dr. Popolo talks about hs new booik, “Extraterrestrial Life: We are not alone.”Broadcast 4492 Zoom Dr. Ajay Kothari | Sunday 25 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Ajay KothariZoom Dr. Kothari on “MUCH NEEDED CARGO TO MOON” Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Guy Schumann, CEO of RSS-Hydro, Tuesday 1-13-26Quick summaryThis program focused on discussing Guy Schumann’s transition from academia to founding RSS-Hydro, a company specializing in disaster response and monitoring services using space technology. The discussion covered RSS-Hydro’s capabilities in fire and flood monitoring, their business model flexibility, and Guy’s academic background in hydrology. The conversation concluded with discussions about the regulatory environment in Luxembourg, the company’s future plans including potential AI integration and expansion into new markets, and the broader implications of space technology for disaster management and public awareness.Detailed summaryOur guest, Guy Schumann, discussed his company RSS-Hydro, which provides disaster response and monitoring services using space technology. He explained that while the company is known for flood monitoring, they also offer fire monitoring services due to the ease of detecting fires and heat from space. Guy emphasized that RSS-Hydro is not primarily focused on prevention, but rather on providing rapid insights and assistance during disasters. He also described the company’s flexible business model, which allows for both subscription-based and on-demand services, particularly for governments and municipalities with limited budgets.Guy discussed his academic background, transitioning from a professorship at Bristol University to post-doctoral positions at Caltech, JPL, and UCLA, where he was hosted by JPL. He shared his experience working on research projects related to hydrology, focusing on floods, rainstorms, and drought systems. Guy explained how he moved into the private sector in the US, collaborating with companies like Remote Sensing Solutions and Tomorrow.I/O. He mentioned starting his own company, RSS-Hydro in Luxembourg, during the COVID-19 pandemic, while maintaining connections with US research projects through ImageCat. Guy acknowledged the challenges of transitioning from academia to entrepreneurship, noting his lack of business experience compared to his expertise in hydrology.Guy discussed his experience with California’s severe drought during his 7-year residence there, highlighting the challenges of managing water resources in the face of climate variability. He explained that his company focuses on providing rapid response and first insights during disasters, using space-born data to offer affordable and comprehensive flood mapping and fire monitoring services globally.Guy explained that fires are easier to monitor from space compared to flooding, and described their data sources, which include public missions from NASA and ESA, as well as partnerships with private satellite operators. He mentioned owning an in-space computer with sensors and the ability to process data from other satellites. Guy also discussed their collaboration with tech companies like Nvidia, Google, and Microsoft to improve data visualization and forecasting tools. David inquired about the future of forecasting and preventing disasters, to which Guy responded that they are developing and refining forecasting models, aiming to commercialize them for easier interpretation of complex data. David concluded by asking about the regulatory environment for private space businesses in Luxembourg, to which Guy did not provide a direct answer.Guy was asked to discuss the business environment in Luxembourg, noting its regulatory challenges compared to the US but highlighting its favorable taxation and government support for space industry startups through accelerator programs. He mentioned that Luxembourg’s space agency focuses on business and economic returns rather than research, making it easier for startups to enter the space industry. Guy also explained that Luxembourg has space-based solutions for monitoring soil moisture and predicting floods, with applications like Hydrosense that incorporate rainfall, soil parameters, and vegetation changes.Guy further explained that his company can monitor vegetation and soil moisture through satellite data, which is useful for hydrological applications and fire risk assessment. He noted that while they can measure vegetation indices and assess fire fuel availability, they haven’t been specifically requested for this purpose by fire monitoring teams. Guy also mentioned they are currently developing a fire spreading mechanism for their applications. David then posed a hypothetical scenario involving Mayor Bass of L.A. and Governor Newsom seeking a comprehensive space-based solution to manage California’s fire and drought risks, to which Guy responded that they could develop a multi-step plan incorporating vegetation monitoring, fire risk assessment, and predictive modeling, but would need to work closely with local experts to tailor the solution to specific needs. He also talked about the importance of key consortium building.Guy discussed the challenges of addressing large-scale infrastructure problems in cities, such as stormwater management, and proposed forming a consortium of companies to develop comprehensive solutions. He emphasized the importance of building partnerships with tech companies and leveraging expertise from various sectors. Guy also highlighted the difficulty of securing political support and budget allocation for such projects, noting that maintaining long-term commitment from city officials can be challenging.David and Guy discussed the current state and future of space technology, emphasizing that while the technology is advanced, there is a need to integrate it affordably and collaboratively. Guy highlighted the importance of democratizing space infrastructure and moving away from high-cost, limited-access models to make space data more accessible and useful for everyday insights. David raised concerns about public understanding of space capabilities, noting that many people, including policymakers, lack basic knowledge about space’s role in disaster management and environmental monitoring. Guy agreed, explaining that satellites are crucial for weather forecasting and other Earth observations, and their data significantly improve predictive models. Both emphasized the need for better public awareness and political pressure to leverage space technology for broader societal benefits.Guy took us through the RSS-Hydro’s current status and potential future as an AI-driven disaster response company. He explained they are not publicly traded but open to private investment, though they prioritize finding the right investors who align with their mission. Guy and David also discussed the role of AI in their operations, with Guy emphasizing its benefits but also the need for expertise when using AI tools. Marshall raised a question about the balance between real and artificial intelligence, which Guy addressed by highlighting both the potential of AI and the importance of human expertise in its application. David concluded by asking about RSS-Hydro’s 5- and 10-year plans. Be sure to listen to it and do post comments on the response on our comment blog and systems.Guy discussed the company’s growth trajectory, expressing confidence in doubling revenue annually and potentially exploring public offerings in 5-10 years. He emphasized the importance of maintaining the company’s mission of rapid disaster response while expanding its impact. David explored the possibility of utilizing the company’s assets for lunar imaging and settlement development, to which Guy responded positively, noting their experience with modeling floods on Mars. They also discussed the company’s current focus on disaster response and its potential foray into insurance and proactive risk management. Guy highlighted their work with various clients, including cities and NGOs, and mentioned their participation in upcoming events like the Stormwater Show in Anaheim.This summary is available in full at www.thespaceshow.com and doctorspace.substack.com.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4488 Zoom, DR. ARMEN PAPAZIAN | Friday 16 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Armen PapazianArmen presents his latest space economics paper which is posted on The Space Show blog for this program.Broadcast 4489 Zoom Dan Adamo | Sunday 18 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dan AdamoZoom: Dan discusses the special lunar orbit being used for the Artemis program Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents A Special Open Lines Discussion, Sunday, 1-11-26Quick summaryThis program focused on discussing space industry developments and future predictions for 2026, with participants exploring topics like advancements in AI, robotics, and space technology. They debated the influence of private sector leaders like Elon Musk and Eric Schmidt on space policy and innovation, while also examining educational requirements needed to support future space endeavors. The group discussed the potential for breakthroughs in propulsion and energy solutions, as well as the search for extraterrestrial life, though they agreed current technologies would not yield significant results by 2026. The conversation concluded with reflections on how space advocacy might evolve over the next decade, particularly as costs decrease and more private sector involvement emerges.SummaryOur program got underway by discussing Dr. Phil Metzger’s list of 20-21 important developments for the space industry in 2026, with John Jossy presenting key items. The discussion highlighted significant developments such as declining launch costs, reusable rocket technology, satellite broadband constellations, and AI-driven applications of satellite data. Negative impacts were also discussed, including supply chain volatility for semiconductors and potential delays in mega constellations due to AI demand and export rules. The Wisdom Team also touched on upcoming programs, including a special edition of the space show and a new Tuesday program featuring a CEO from a European company.We discussed Elon Musk’s vision for medical robots and AI, with Marshall expressing both optimism and discomfort about the rapid pace of technological advancement. They explored Musk’s plans for Starlink satellites, including in-space maintenance and potential cost savings, though settlement on Mars and the Moon was not extensively discussed. The conversation covered broader topics including AI’s impact on labor, universal basic income, and the role of education in a changing world, with John Jossy noting that the discussion was part of Peter Diamandis’ Moonshot podcast series.I believe that a valuable part of our overall discussion looked at the influence of innovative leaders in the space sector, with Manuel expressing concerns about the dominance of a few individuals, while David and John Jossy highlighted the need for ethical regulations and oversight. They debated the challenges of supervising innovative leaders like Elon Musk and David Sachs, with John Jossy emphasizing Sachs’s role in advising the administration on AI regulations. Marshall agreed with David’s point about the difficulty of overseeing geniuses, suggesting that market forces often limit harmful innovations. The part of the program concluded with a discussion on the future of space, including the role of private sectors and state actors, and the potential for partnerships between governments and the private sector.The Space Show Wisdom Team discussed future space exploration and technology developments over the next 10 years. Ryan predicted increased automation and robotics in orbital operations, while Marshall envisioned multiple lunar bases and the construction of space cities for manufacturing and AI development. David noted the absence of discussion on breakthrough propulsion technologies and emphasized the need for innovations that could benefit humanity on Earth. John Hunt mentioned Jared Isaacman’s interest in nuclear propulsion for NASA, and Marshall suggested that nuclear fusion could be developed and used for space exploration, though primarily for pushing exploratory satellites.Future space technology and innovation was a topic, focusing on the potential of fusion energy, space solar power, and reduced costs for launching payloads to low Earth orbit (LEO). Marshall highlighted the significance of Starship Block 3, which is expected to significantly lower the cost per kilogram to LEO, enabling more projects and innovations. John Jossy mentioned ongoing developments in wireless power transmission and space-based solar power for AI data centers. David raised questions about the dependency of space innovation on government policies, suggesting a needed potential relationship between public sector support and private sector progress. The group agreed that 2026 could mark a significant breakthrough in space technology, driven by advancements in Starship and reduced launch costs.W also pointed to the potential political influence on emerging technologies, particularly in sectors like transportation and communications, with Ryan noting the significant financial interests at play. Marshall highlighted the challenges of adapting government agencies to innovations like robo-taxis and robo-airplanes, predicting major shifts in how air traffic control and state regulations function. John Jossy emphasized AI as the primary driver of current innovation, citing its impact on industries and venture capital investments, while Marshall and David agreed that AI development is closely linked to changes in energy production and societal education. David stressed the need for a strong educational foundation to support advancements in space and AI, expressing concern about the United States’ declining educational performance compared to countries like China and Japan.The Wisdom Team discussed educational challenges in the United States, with John Jossy emphasizing the need to address root causes of poor educational outcomes at local and state levels. Manuel shared examples from Peru and Europe, including a public sector initiative for high-performing students and apprenticeship programs, while John Hunt noted increased STEM requirements in Missouri schools. The discussion highlighted the importance of educating competent individuals to meet future innovation and technology demands, with no clear consensus on specific solutions.The group discussed educational changes over time, with David and Marshall sharing their experiences with calculus and practical applications. They explored the possibility of using AI to improve education systems. The conversation then shifted to the search for extraterrestrial life, with John Jossy stating that current technologies are not advanced enough to detect extraterrestrial life in 2026. The group also discussed the recent announcement by Eric Schmidt of Relativity Space regarding funding for a replacement for the Hubble Space Telescope and three additional telescopes, with a projected cost of at least half a billion dollars. Finally, David posed a question about the future of space advocacy over the next 5-10 years, but the group did not reach a consensus on this topic.Also discussed were future trends in space advocacy and conferences, with Marshall suggesting that in 10 years, conferences might focus more on financing and promoting personal space projects rather than academic presentations. Dr. Zubrin’s potential future involvement in space advocacy was mentioned, noting that at 74, he could continue his Mars advocacy work for another 20-25 years. The conversation ended with David announcing upcoming guests for the show, including Guy Schumann from Luxembourg, and a discussion about foreign spaceports, with Mark Whittington preparing a program about international spaceport developments.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4487 ZOOM Guy Schumann | Tuesday 13 Jan 2026 930AM PTBroadcast 4488 Zoom, DR. ARMEN PAPAZIAN | Friday 16 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Armen PapazianArmen presents his latest space economics paper which is posted on The Space Show blog for this program.Broadcast 4489 Zoom Dan Adamo | Sunday 18 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dan AdamoZoom: Dan discusses the special lunar orbit being used for the Artemis program Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Melodie Yashar, Friday, 1-9-26Quick summaryOur discussion started with a focus on Melodie’s transition from architectural engineering to space architecture, particularly her work on 3D printing concepts for Mars habitats and her journey through various organizations including NASA and Icon. The discussion covered technical challenges and opportunities in space colonization, including the development of lunar and Martian habitats, autonomous systems, and robotic construction capabilities. The panel explored the broader implications of space exploration, including technological benefits for Earth industries and the importance of long-term projects in advancing space settlement goals.Detailed SummaryDavid and Melodie discussed Melodie’s transition from architectural engineering to space architecture, focusing on her work with 3D printing concepts for Mars habitats. Melodie explained that her interest in space architecture was sparked by the unique challenges and opportunities it presents, particularly in creating sustainable and habitable environments on other planets. She highlighted the importance of collaboration with engineers and researchers to develop innovative solutions for space habitation. Our Wisdom Team also touched on the potential for future publications and exhibitions related to Melodie’s ongoing research in space architecture.Melodie discussed the evolution of space architecture, highlighting how commercial development in low Earth orbit has increased interest in creating hospitality-focused spaces for tourists and citizen astronauts. She shared her journey into space architecture, including her involvement in a NASA Centennial Challenge for a 3D printed habitat on Mars and subsequent work with NASA and private aerospace companies. Melodie also described her role at NASA Ames, where she researched the relationship between astronauts and autonomous systems, and her transition to Icon, where she helped commercialize large-scale additive manufacturing for housing and lunar applications.Our guest discussed her background in spatial planning and environmental design, highlighting the challenges in developing 3D printed structures for space habitats. She explained that while there is research on spatial planning, many questions remain about additively manufactured structures, particularly for large-scale, pressurized habitats. Melodie also described a recent project for a Mars habitat concept, expected to be completed by 2075-2080, and emphasized the importance of developing technologies that can integrate with both hard shell structures and soft goods for both lunar and Martian missions.Melodie and David talked about the feasibility of space colonization, particularly focusing on Mars and the moon. Melodie expressed skepticism about Elon Musk’s timeline for sending humans to Mars, citing numerous unknowns and challenges. She emphasized the importance of publishing and sharing information to ensure the project’s continuity beyond the current team. Melodie also mentioned her research on robot-to-robot interaction for autonomous operations in space, highlighting the need for further development in this area.The Space Show Wisdom Team discussed the challenges and potential of 3D printing habitats on the Moon and Mars, focusing on material properties and testing protocols. Melodie highlighted the need for Mars sample return data to understand regolith properties, while Haym noted that lunar soil testing on Earth could streamline processes but would still face challenges like electrostatic charging on the Moon. The conversation touched on AI’s role in anticipating anomalies in 3D printed structures and the importance of sending small-scale tests to the Moon before launching a habitat-scale program. Melodie suggested that the technologies are ready for deployment, but a timeline for lunar construction was not explicitly stated.Our guest talked about plans for lunar construction, predicting infrastructure development within the next 5-10 years, and emphasized the need for multiple redundant construction systems, including hard shell structures and additively manufactured components. She expressed skepticism about the viability of orbital hotels in the near term, noting that sustained human presence on the Moon would require significant infrastructure development and resource processing capabilities. Melodie acknowledged being in contact with commercial space station companies but highlighted the challenges of transferring technology from low Earth orbit to lunar surface operations, including the need for regolith processing and resource utilization.Melodie discussed her research on 3D printing with Martian regolith, explaining that while her previous work at Icon assumed no Earth-bound materials, she is now exploring binders and additives for Mars construction, including geopolymers and sulfur concrete. She clarified that her team did not use Martian soil simulants but instead relied on existing research from rover data to analyze regolith composition for a hypothetical 11-meter diameter habitat. When asked about other research using Martian simulants, Melodie confirmed their existence but noted that current simulants may not accurately represent all Martian regions of interest for settlement.The group discussed the challenges and opportunities in space exploration, particularly focusing on commercial versus government projects. Melodie highlighted the rapid development in the commercial sector and expressed optimism about future progress in in-space construction and lunar habitats. Haym Benaroya emphasized the value of contributing to a long-term project, even if specific concepts may not be realized during one’s career. David posed a hypothetical question about using an unlimited budget to expedite work, with Melodie suggesting that increased funding could accelerate testing and development of large-scale additive manufacturing and pressurized habitats. The conversation concluded with a brief discussion about lava tube habitats, though no specific work on this topic by Melodie’s team was mentioned.The lava tube topic continued with an examination of the feasibility of living in lava tubes for deep space radiation protection, noting that while this is viable, traditional construction methods and pressurization remain challenges. They explored the difficulties of deploying construction equipment in lava tubes and considered large-scale space elevators as potential solutions. David emphasized the significant gap between current reality and the vision of space settlement, while Haym Benaroya highlighted the additional complexity of biology in space. Melodie shared her research on robotic construction in space, discussing the shift from single-task robots to humanoid robotics, though she expressed skepticism about their effectiveness in space environments due to radiation and regolith challenges.David and Haym Benaroya discussed the current limitations of robotics in construction, particularly on the Moon and Mars. They highlighted that while robots can perform simple tasks in controlled environments like manufacturing plants, replicating complex human movements for construction is still far from being achieved. David referenced a recent 60 Minutes segment on Boston Dynamics’ Atlas robot, which struggled with basic movements like a jumping jack, emphasizing the technological challenges ahead. Haym added that reliability and maintainability are crucial for space missions, noting that even advanced robots require constant maintenance and support systems. They concluded that while automation in space construction is a long-term goal, significant progress and adaptation of current technology are necessary before it becomes feasible.The panel discussed the value and feasibility of space exploration, with Melodie emphasizing that space technology benefits multiple industries on Earth, though the benefits may take decades to manifest. Haym Benaroya highlighted space as a positive mission attracting bright students and fostering economic growth through dual-use development. The group explored the potential for naming lunar or Martian structures after key figures, though Melodie noted differences in procurement mechanisms for space versus terrestrial architecture. John Jossy invited Melodie to speak at the National Space Society’s ISDC conference in June, and the panel discussed the formation and goals of Melodie’s company, Anara, which focuses on 3D printing and robotic construction in space. The program concluded with my continuing to wanting to see Yashar Towers and Benaroya Park on the Moon!Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 448t ZOOM Guy Schumann | Tuesday 13 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Guy SchumannOur guest is the CEO of RSS-Hydro in Luxembourg. The company helps assess and mitigate the risks of natural extremes, safeguarding both your communities and assets with resilience and security from space assets.Broadcast 4487: Hotel Mars TBD | Wednesday 14 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars TBDBroadcast 448

Anatoly Zak, Hotel Mars, Jan. 7 Weds:The summary below is provided by John Batchelor. You can see this program’s video on John’s Substack page.Dr. David M. Livingston, doctor of space himself, is here. He is my colleague and co-host and friend and copilot, as we’re getting not only into time and space, but we’re going back to 1972 to go forward to the moon.We welcome Anatoly Zak, who keeps the very helpful RussianSpaceWeb.com, a subscription site. I heartily recommend it for those of you who lived through the first moon rays during the Cold War of the 20th century.Now we’re witnessing a new moon race, this time with a new player on the field: the Chinese space program.However, in 1972, America had won the moon race. In 1969, there were subsequent moon ventures by the Russians and the Americans. We’re talking detente, and that would lead to a joint space mission in Earth orbit. But as of that point, the Russians and Roscosmos had ambition to get to the moon—and they still have ambition to get to the moon.And it’s totally wonderful to travel to 1972, when I was a much younger fellow and didn’t see or didn’t know about all these developments in Russia. What was L3m?Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 448t ZOOM Guy Schumann | Tuesday 13 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Guy SchumannOur guest is the CEO of RSS-Hydro in Luxembourg. The company helps assess and mitigate the risks of natural extremes, safeguarding both your communities and assets with resilience and security from space assets.Broadcast 4487: Hotel Mars TBD | Wednesday 14 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars TBDBroadcast 4488 Zoom, DR. ARMEN PAPAZIAN | Friday 16 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Armen PapazianArmen presents his latest space economics paper which is posted on The Space Show blog for this program.Broadcast 4489 Zoom Dan Adamo | Sunday 18 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dan AdamoZoom: Dan discusses the special lunar orbit being used for the Artemis program Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Open Lines Discussion, Sunday, Jan. 4, 2026Quick SummaryOur program focused on space industry developments and future missions, including discussions about Artemis III, SpaceX’s priorities, and various private sector lunar missions planned for 2026. The group explored space technology advancements, investment trends, and launch cost reduction possibilities, while also addressing challenges in pharmaceutical pricing and international space cooperation. The conversation concluded with updates on space missions and budget concerns for 2026, as well as discussions about UAP evidence and plans to expand the show’s reach through streaming and social media promotion.Early on we discussed space solar power and its potential applications, including AI data centers in space. Bill mentioned his connection to Virtus Solus, a space-based solar power company, and shared their recent announcement of a 97% efficiency rate for their rectenna. The conversation then shifted to Artemis III, with David expressing concern about delays hindering progress towards 2028 goals. Joseph provided an update on Artemis III hardware development, noting that while the SLS is far along in integration, both the Blue lander and Starship are still in early stages. The group also discussed the challenges and requirements for Starship refueling tests, with Joe expressing doubt about meeting timelines due to multiple technical hurdles.Our Wisdom Team discussed the Artemis program’s goal of returning Americans to the moon by 2028, as outlined in a recent executive order. They debated the feasibility of meeting this timeline, considering the technical limitations of SpaceX’s launch frequency and the need for reliability improvements. The conversation touched on the potential for multiple launch platforms and the possibility of using Starship for refueling missions. David raised concerns about the need for a decision on whether to stick with the current program or make changes, while Bill and others expressed worries about the timeline and the pressure on NASA management to meet it. We also discussed the executive order’s mention of establishing initial elements of a permanent lunar outpost by 2030 and the potential for using nuclear reactors on the moon.SpaceX’s priorities were discussed by Doug noting that while Mars is SpaceX’s top priority, lunar development is a secondary focus. Joseph highlighted that once Starship achieves reusability, it could significantly increase launch capacity to 20,000 tons annually, with a target launch for in-orbit refueling and docking by Q3 or Q4 2023. The discussion also covered multiple private sector lunar missions planned for 2026, including Blue Origin’s Mark 1 lander carrying the Viper rover, and the potential for commercial satellite communications to provide cellular service in underserved regions.The Wisdom Team talked about satellite positioning systems, particularly in Japan, where 4 out of 7 satellites must be visible over Japan at any given moment for non-GPS positioning. They explored potential business opportunities in space, including semiconductor manufacturing, medical products, and solar panels, though Joe noted that space manufacturing capabilities are not yet advanced enough to support these ideas. John Jossy shared that venture capital is primarily flowing to low Earth orbit companies, with recent large rases by companies like Stoke Space ($510 million) and Impulse Space ($300 million), while lunar ventures receive less attention.Later we discussed the state of space technology and investment, with Joe noting that venture capital investment in space has increased significantly, leading to companies raising hundreds of millions of dollars. They debated the potential for launch cost reductions, with Joseph suggesting that a factor of three reduction could be possible, though not necessarily reaching the extremely low costs Elon Musk has proposed for Starship. The conversation touched on the separate tracks of government programs like Artemis and commercial space development, with Bill and Joseph agreeing that these developments are largely independent. David raised questions about the incentives for launch companies to significantly reduce costs, given the current profitability of launches, and the group discussed the potential for new low-cost launchers, including a Chinese Starship-like vehicle, though its market impact in the West remained uncertain.The team talked about the challenges faced by pharmaceutical companies due to pressure to lower drug prices, contrasting this with the lack of similar pressure on commercial launch services. They also talked about recent repairs to the ISS, where Russian cosmonauts successfully sealed leaks using a patented sealing agent. The conversation concluded with a discussion about international space cooperation, particularly highlighting India’s growing space program and its potential for future partnerships with Western countries.In addition, we discussed several space industry developments, including SpaceX’s potential Mars mission and the status of various space vehicles. John Jossy shared information about SpaceX’s planned Mars mission, while the group expressed uncertainty about the future of Boeing’s capsule and Dream Chaser. They also discussed the transition of Tory Bruno from ULA to Blue Origin, and the potential implications for ULA’s future. Bill provided an update on the Starliner program, noting that the next flight would be cargo-only in April, with crewed missions not expected until late 2026 or early 2027.As we were nearing the end of the program, various space missions and budget concerns for 2026 were mentioned. They talked about a private Rocket Lab mission to Venus in collaboration with MIT, scheduled for summer 2026. Bill provided updates on U.S. Venus missions, noting that the Senate version of the budget would preserve both Venus missions, while the House version funds the Mars sample return. The group also discussed the status of the NASA SBIR program, which has not been reauthorized for 2026, though ongoing projects from prior awards can continue. David expressed frustration about the lack of credible evidence regarding UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) claims, questioning why the topic remains so mysterious and unsubstantiated.The group discussed the challenges and secrecy surrounding UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) evidence and the potential for public disclosure, with John Hunt suggesting that classified information might be harder to prove than assumed. David expressed skepticism about the truthfulness of statements and emphasized the need for tangible evidence to gain public trust. The conversation also touched on the popularity of UFO topics in media, with Joseph suggesting that increased discussion of UAPs could boost listener numbers. The conversation ended with plans to explore options for streaming Zoom programs on YouTube and promoting the show on social media to reach a broader audience.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 448t ZOOM Guy Schumann | Tuesday 13 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Guy SchumannOur guest is the CEO of RSS-Hydro in Luxembourg. The company helps assess and mitigate the risks of natural extremes, safeguarding both your communities and assets with resilience and security from space assets.Broadcast 4487: Hotel Mars TBD | Wednesday 14 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars TBDBroadcast 4488 Zoom, DR. ARMEN PAPAZIAN | Friday 16 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Armen PapazianArmen presents his latest space economics paper which is posted on The Space Show blog for this program.Broadcast 4489 Zoom Dan Adamo | Sunday 18 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dan AdamoZoom: Dan discusses the special lunar orbit being used for the Artemis program Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents JATAN MEHTA, Friday, Jan. 2, 2026Quick Summary:Our conversation with our guest from India focused heavily on India’s space program, including its current capabilities, future plans, and comparisons with other countries’ space programs, particularly regarding lunar exploration and human spaceflight initiatives. The conversation ended with discussions about potential new content initiatives and program updates, including plans for future space coverage and the need for financial support to maintain operations.Detailed Summary:I welcomed Jatan to the meeting and also AJ who would act as co-host for today’s one hour program. We began with casual conversation about travel and the history of Mumbai’s name change from Bombay, which was explained as part of a nationwide effort to revert to indigenous names. Bill joined the call and mentioned not receiving Jatan’s newsletter for a few weeks, which Jatan confirmed was being sent but might be ending up in spam folders. David introduced plans to discuss Jatan’s newsletter and work, as well as questions about the Indian space program.Jatan Mehta, a space writer and journalist, discussed his work covering moon missions and India’s space activities. He explained the origins and goals of his newsletter Moon Monday, which archives moon mission developments, and his Indian Space newsletter, which provides a holistic view of India’s space activities. Jatan also mentioned his poetry on space exploration, which he recently published to celebrate milestones in his career.Jatan explained his focus on the Moon rather than Mars, citing existing extensive coverage of Mars and his goal to provide unique value through his independent writing. He discussed his passive approach to educational outreach, including speaking to students across various age groups in India about space exploration. Jatan also shared his experience writing poetry sporadically and expressed his inability to teach poetry due to lack of formal training. David, on behalf of John Jossy who was not with us today, inquired about India’s space program, asking if Jatan believed it would be driven primarily by the private sector or government.Jatan explained that while the private sector in India’s space industry is growing, ISRO will remain the dominant player for the foreseeable future, similar to NASA’s role in the US space program. He noted that the 2023 National Space Policy emphasizes ISRO’s role in cutting-edge R&D for space exploration, while private players focus on production. Regarding India’s human spaceflight program, Jatan reported that while the original 2025 target was missed, the program is making progress with the LVM3 launch vehicle now human-rated, and three uncrewed tests are planned before human missions begin, with a target launch date of late 2027.The discussion focused on India’s space program, particularly the Gagan Yan (Sky Craft) program for astronauts, where Jatan explained that the initial capsule will carry two Gaganyatris (sky-farers) for the first few missions, with plans to expand to three astronauts later. Jatan clarified that while Gagan Yan refers to spacecraft, the upcoming space station will be called The Bharatiya Antariksh Station(BAS). When asked about India’s progress compared to China, Jatan acknowledged that China has surpassed both India and the US in recent moon missions, though India’s program remains significant with plans for a space station by 2035.Jatan mentioned that India’s space program, noting that while India and China were neck and neck in space capabilities in the 1990s and early 2000s, China has since surpassed both India and the US in certain areas due to a larger budget. He explained that India’s space budget of approximately $1.5 billion USD over the past five years is less than a tenth of NASA’s budget, limiting its ability to catch up in all areas. However, Jatan emphasized that India is prioritizing certain key areas, such as the Moon, with plans for a sample return mission in 2028. He also highlighted the importance of political support and policy excitement in driving progress in India’s space program.India’s space program aims to achieve several key milestones over the next 5-10 years, including the Chandrayaan 4 and 5 missions, collaboration with Japan for a lunar rover, and the development of a human spaceflight program with a space station module by the end of the decade. The country is also working on upgrading its LVM3 rocket to a semi-cryogenic engine and developing the Next Generation Launch Vehicle (NGLV) for heavy-lift capabilities by 2032-2034. Long-term goals include expanding India’s regional NAVIC navigation constellation, conducting a Venus orbiter mission in 2028, and sending an Indian astronaut to the moon by 2040.The discussion focused on India’s space program and its development of reusable rockets. Jatan explained that while India has received some technology assistance from Russia, it doesn’t have the same level of partnership as China’s with Russia. He noted that India’s current rockets are not designed for reusability, but the upcoming NGLV rocket will have a reusable booster stage. The group discussed India’s decision not to pursue a super-heavy lift rocket, instead opting to develop a heavy upper stage that can be launched multiple times and docked in orbit. Jatan emphasized that while reusable rockets would be beneficial, India’s focus has been on addressing a backlog of existing missions and developing new launch capabilities.Jatan discussed his top lunar coverage stories from 2025, highlighting three key pieces: covering lunar sample science updates from China’s Chang’e 5 and 6 missions, his year-end summary on Moon Monday that reviewed both successes and failures in lunar exploration, and an analysis piece on the current orbital capabilities of various countries, particularly focusing on the US’s lack of modern lunar orbiters and the importance of understanding lunar water ice for future human missions.Jatan explained that Indian space mission budgets are allocated on a year-by-year basis, unlike NASA’s multi-year planning, and described how infrastructure costs are incorporated into mission budgets differently between the two countries. He outlined his plans for 2026, including covering moon missions weekly, publishing additional space-related booklets, and tracking developments in India’s Gaganyaan program and semi-cryogenic engine upgrade for LVM3. Jatan emphasized his commitment to keeping his space coverage and publications free to access through sponsorships and expressed excitement about upcoming missions including Chang’e 7 and Intuitive Machines’ third lunar landing mission.This part of the program primarily focused on a discussion about potentially establishing a “Mars Tuesday” to complement “Moon Monday,” though Jatan noted this would be more feasible in the future, possibly during the Moon-to-Mars transition. Jatan shared his background in astrophysics and his shift to space communication, emphasizing his interest in bridging the gap between researchers and the public. David made announcements about upcoming programs, guest suggestions, and the need for donations to support the space show’s operations, while also inviting major donors to join the advisory board. The conversation ended with plans for Ajay to share updates about his talks in India on the next Sunday’s show.Special thanks to our sponsors: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4482: Zoom: Open Lines to kick of 2026 | Sunday 04 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines to start the New Year Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Special Open Lines as the last Space Show for 2025, 12-30-25Quick SummaryWe explored various rocket systems’ capabilities and development status, including SpaceX’s Starship, Blue Origin’s New Glenn, and NASA’s SLS, while discussing the Artemis missions and Gateway project funding. The program ended with discussions about space infrastructure development, sustainable technology implementation, and the future of space exploration, including private sector initiatives and the potential for dual-use technologies.Detailed SummaryI discussed my appearance on Tom Olson’s radio show. We then discussed the phenomenon of SpaceX employees potentially leaving to start their own space businesses after the company’s IPO, which John Jossy clarified as similar to the “PayPal mafia” concept. Doug expressed skepticism about Mike Griffin’s plan to meet the 2028 moon timeline using existing architecture, noting that Starship’s development is crucial for Artemis III’s success. The conversation also touched on the U.S.’s withdrawal from the Gateway project as depicted by Tom, with ESA now taking full responsibility for its development. This was later challenged and clarified.We talked about the status of the Gateway project for the Artemis missions, clarifying that Congress has provided full funding for Gateway despite the President’s budget proposal to end it. They debated the necessity of Gateway and the NRHO orbit, with concerns raised about astronaut safety and the potential to strand individuals on the moon. David shared insights from a recent show featuring Mike Griffin, noting lower-than-expected viewership despite high expectations, perhaps due to the holidays. Later we discussed the success of Blue Origin’s New Glenn launch.Also discussed were the capabilities and development status of various rocket systems, including SpaceX’s Starship, Blue Origin’s New Glenn, and NASA’s SLS. Doug explained that SpaceX’s Starship version 2 is still in development and its payload capabilities are not yet proven, while Blue Origin recently announced plans to stretch their New Glenn rocket to increase its payload capacity. We touched on SpaceX’s Mars cargo landing plans, with Doug noting that Elon Musk’s target of 10-30 tons for initial cargo landings seems low to reduce the number of refills needed, potentially eliminating the need for propellant depots or tanker flights. Marshall raised questions about the orbital reentry and heat shield capabilities of the Starship, suggesting that SpaceX may not fully understand how to handle the heat shield requirements for both lunar and Martian landings until they attempt a test flight.Our Wisdom Team discussed SpaceX’s progress with their Starship program, noting that while they have had successful ocean landings, a double catch test is an important benchmark for evaluating shield performance. John Jossy mentioned that Relativity Space, led by Eric Schmidt, plans to launch their Taren R rocket late next year with the goal of building data centers in space. The conversation ended with welcoming two new participants, Benjamin Ayala and Twain Knight, who expressed interest in learning about space and discussed their academic backgrounds in physics and aerospace engineering both were students but as you will hear, fizzled out as being guests on the program.The group discussed the need for NASA to develop a sustainable infrastructure plan for a permanent presence in space, with Gary Barnhard (he joined us via Zoom) emphasizing the importance of establishing clear driving requirements from a science, systems engineering, and architectural design standpoint. Gary shared an example from the International Space Station’s development to illustrate the impact of controversial requirements, highlighting the need for careful consideration of system capabilities. The discussion concluded with Gary outlining plans for a collaborative design charrette leading up to IAC 2026, which aims to gather insights and explore potential synergies for improving space infrastructure, with a focus on leveraging international partnerships and developing interoperability specifications for power beaming and communication networks.Gary discussed a novel approach to micro and partial gravity adaptation, emphasizing the importance of implementing technology with real-world applications and tangible data. Doug inquired about the goal of a design charrette, which Gary explained is to articulate driving requirements rather than provide prescriptive architectural recommendations. They discussed the development of SpaceX’s Starship and the potential for propellant depots, with Gary highlighting the need for sustainable infrastructure and the importance of understanding various propulsion solutions. The conversation touched on life support systems for space missions, with Gary emphasizing the need for systems with multiple degrees of failure tolerance and a buffer for self-stabilization.The discussion continued to focus on the future of space exploration and commercial space activities. Gary emphasized the importance of private sector initiatives and the need for companies to take responsibility and authority in driving progress. He noted that the cost of launching payloads to the moon has decreased significantly, with potential for further reductions. Marshall highlighted SpaceX’s achievements in 2025, including the success of Falcon 9 and Starlink satellites, and predicted that SpaceX could become the leading force in space exploration by 2027. The group discussed the economic implications of these developments and the potential for dual-use technologies that benefit both space and terrestrial applications.We discussed challenges and progress in space exploration, with Marshall highlighting SpaceX’s successful recovery of its first stage and Blue Origin’s advancements with hydrogen-oxygen upper stages. David expressed concerns about the lack of substantial progress in human spaceflight and space settlement, comparing it to the slow development of nuclear power. John Hunt suggested that developing a continuously inhabited moon base could provide more experience for long-term space living before considering permanent settlement. We emphasized the potential for private enterprise to drive future space missions, citing its willingness to take risks and its ability to operate without government scrutiny. The conversation also touched on the psychological impacts of sending couples and families into space and comparing it to the spirit of early American settlers.Gary presented an overview of XISP Inc.’s mission development efforts, highlighting their work on space wear technology that combines electro muscular stimulation with kinetic fabrics for exercise in variable gravity environments. He explained that the technology, which can provide equivalent of a 4-hour workout in 20 minutes, is already available commercially and is being tested with a broad demographic group. David expressed interest in featuring Gary in a dedicated Space Show segment and discussed the potential for using similar technology with animals, particularly dogs, for space missions. The group agreed to schedule Gary’s next appearance on the Space Show for February.\ or later, then program concluded its broadcast.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4482: Zoom: Open Lines to kick of 2026 | Sunday 04 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines to start the New Year Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Tom Olson, Sunday, 12-28-25.Quick Summary:Our program focused on reviewing key space industry developments and trends in 2025, with Tom Olson leading a discussion on global launch statistics, commercial space progress, and future outlooks. The group examined SpaceX’s dominance in launches, China’s growing space capabilities, and the status of NASA’s Artemis program, while also discussing emerging technologies like space-based data centers and AI computing. The conversation covered space debris concerns, the potential for nuclear power in space, and the future of human spaceflight, including the upcoming retirement of the ISS in 2030. The participants also touched on the commercialization of space resources, property rights discussions, and the increasing investment in space startups, with particular attention to Starlink’s market expansion and its $80/month pricing in the US market.Detailed Summary:Tom and I discussed our plan for this year-end show, covering topics such as global launch, SpaceX Starship, and future policy ideas. Before moving on, I reminded listeners about the upcoming open line discussion on Tuesday, the last program of 2025 for The Space Show, with my making our Zoom program an open invitation program with the requirements of civility, no eating on camera, no name calling, no shouting and talking over people. Otherwise, even if you disagree with what is being said, be civil about it as you let us know your thoughts on the topic.Tom discussed upcoming events, including Starship’s launch and a trip to India. He also shared details about his radio show and podcast, “The Unknown Quantity,” which focuses on the intersection of space and money. He highlighted the rapid growth of the space industry and his involvement in various events, including a pitch competition for young entrepreneurs and a panel discussion on lunar space economy. Tom expressed enthusiasm for these opportunities to engage with the space community and influence future developments.Our Wisdom Team brought up property rights in space, particularly regarding the moon, and the potential for helium-3 mining for quantum computing. Tom shared insights from a recent discussion with government officials about lunar economy development. The conversation touched on the Outer Space Treaty’s limitations and the potential for private sector claims. Marshall raised questions about claim jumping and enforcement, while China’s potential role in lunar development and the need for quick U.S. presence to establish dominance was highlighted. This part of our discussion concluded with a brief mention of 3D mapping technology’s potential to resolve border disputes diplomatically.Tom reported that global launches in 2023 set a record with 328 launches, with the U.S. leading at 198 launches and only 4 failures, followed by China with 91 launches and 3 failures. He noted that SpaceX dominated U.S. launches with 150 flights, while Russia had 17 successful launches. Tom also discussed SpaceX’s progress with Starship, including two successful test flights and plans for six Block 3 launches starting in late January, aiming to reach low Earth orbit and demonstrate refueling. As a group we briefly touched on Blue Origin’s development of the Blue Moon lander and Rocket Lab’s plans to launch from Wallops, with Thomas mentioning that SpaceX has received permission to launch from the Cape, potentially as early as late next year.Tom and David discussed the regulatory environment for space launches, noting that while intentions are good, legal challenges have slowed progress. They debated the future of NASA’s Artemis program, with Tom suggesting that Artemis III will reach the moon before China but may be unsustainable at its current cost. The conversation also touched on commercial space activities, including Russia’s recent launch facility accident and the status of the Starliner spacecraft after a long-duration mission.The group discussed the status of the Gateway project, which ESA and the EU have decided to build independently, taking it off NASA’s hands. Tom said that European countries will continue to build components for Gateway, but now ESA will own and operate it. The discussion also touched on the increasing investment in space operations, with our guest mentioning that $3.5 billion in new money had been put into space operations by the end of Q3. Joe noted that Voyager, a space station company, has a European footprint through its partnership with Airbus. The conversation concluded with a brief discussion about space solar power, with Thomas expressing skepticism about its current feasibility due to challenges in power transmission.The group discussed several space-related topics, including a new startup using near-infrared light for energy transfer and the status of space solar power projects. Tom expressed skepticism about space solar power’s feasibility, while also advocating for thorium reactors as a potential solution. The conversation touched on space debris concerns and the development of Starlink satellites. Tom shared insights on his company Avealto’s plans to address the digital divide by building high-altitude platforms to provide affordable internet access in developing countries.The group discussed Starlink’s pricing and availability, with David noting its $80/month offer in the US, while Tom mentioned plans for testing in Malaysia by year-end. Joe shared his experience with Starlink, paying $120 monthly for 200 Mbps download speed. The conversation then shifted to astronomy and space science updates, including the discovery of 6,000 extrasolar planets, new analyses of TRAPPIST-1E, and the first images from the Vera Rubin Observatory. Tom and John Jossy discussed upcoming developments in dark energy research and potential discoveries about dark matter. The conversation ended with a discussion about future trends in space exploration, with Tom predicting increased focus on AI and space-based data centers.The Wisdom Team discussed the feasibility and challenges of AI data centers in space, with Joe presenting an economic analysis suggesting it would cost three times as much as building data centers in Oregon. They explored the technical aspects, including latency concerns and the potential for clusters of satellites in sun-synchronous orbit. The conversation also touched on the future of the ISS, with concerns about maintaining research capabilities after 2030 and the potential for private sector involvement. Tom mentioned his organization, Center for Space Commerce, planning a Space Investment Summit in Turkey next year. John Jossy shared information about Rendezvous Robotics, a company working on space infrastructure, and their partnership with StarCloud for orbital data centers. David noted the absence of discussion on fusion energy, a topic he intended to address.The group discussed fusion energy, with Thomas expressing skepticism about its timeline and Jossy mentioning Microsoft’s partnership with a fusion startup aiming for data centers by 2028. They also discussed nuclear power plants, including Microsoft’s plans for Three Mile Island and the status of Diablo Canyon in California. Tom announced he would be running a business track and panel at the upcoming ISDC conference in McLean, Virginia. The conversation concluded with a discussion about the rapid development of AI processors and the need for new data center buildings in the coming years.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4480: Zoom Open Lines Discussion For All | Tuesday 30 Dec 2025 700PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines. Come One Come AllBroadcast 4481: Zoom from India with JATAN MEHTA | Friday 02 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Jatan MehtaZoom: Happy New Year from India with guest JATAN MEHTABroadcast 4482: Zoom: Open Lines to kick of 2026 | Sunday 04 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines to start the New Year Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Special End of Year Messaging From Space Show Supporters To All, Friday, 12-16-25Quick Summary:Our program began with discussions exploring technical and political challenges related to NASA’s Artemis program and the 2028 moon landing timeline, including concerns about safety, funding, and competing lunar missions. The conversation ended with discussions about autonomous systems in space, regulatory requirements for pilots, and the current state of the Space Show’s funding and operations. Space Show participants included myself, Marshall Martin, John Jossy, John Hunt and later we were joined by Phil Swan.David began by promoting a recent segment highlighting past programs and encouraging donations to support the show during the final days of our 2025 campaign. Marshall shared his long-standing interest in space and support for the Space Show, recalling a childhood fascination with space and his daughter’s involvement in a Loral tour. He talked about his compelling need to continue financially donating to The Space Show and urged other listeners to do the same given the importance of the program and its unique format. Marshall and David then discussed the political aspects of space exploration and the importance of understanding political issues to predict future developments. They talked about Jared Isaacman’s presence at NASA headquarters and the need for quick decisions regarding the 2028 moon landing timeline. John Hunt expressed concerns about the readiness of the Starship lander for the 2028 mission and suggested that an alternative, human-rated lander would be needed. The Wisdom Team also discussed the potential impact of China’s space program on U.S. efforts and the historical context of space race reactions.Team members discussed concerns about the Artemis program’s timeline and safety, particularly focusing on Mike Griffin’s warning about a 6.5-day wait period before a crew could return from the moon and the potential for crew strandings in crisis situations. They noted that while the 2028 deadline might be unrealistic, Elon Musk’s company could potentially develop a competing lunar mission, though Marshall acknowledged this was currently only a 10% possibility. The discussion concluded with John Jossy suggesting that Artemis III might be delayed until a reliable and safe human landing system is developed, while Marshall emphasized that the lunar mission race includes both Artemis and China’s space program, with funding and technical challenges remaining significant obstacles for both.The Wisdom Team discussed the challenges of a 2028 moon mission without the Gateway, with David highlighting that Starship would need orbital refueling, a lunar landing system, spacesuits, and an elevator like lander to reach the surface, none of which are currently ready. John Jossy added that Artemis 3 does not plan for a landing pad, and John Hunt suggested that Jared might need to inform the Chief of Staff about the timeline concerns, as President Trump probably wants the mission to happen during his presidency. The discussion concluded with Hunt noting that careerists might be hesitant to speak up due to job security concerns, while Trump might be more willing to take risks.Together we talked about the challenges and potential timelines for returning to the moon, considering both technical and policy aspects. Marshall suggested that Congress might continue to fund a lunar program even if it faces delays, while David proposed a hypothetical 2029 deadline to potentially allow more time for engineering and safety improvements. The discussion highlighted concerns about technological breakthroughs, funding, and the availability of top talent, with John Hunt emphasizing the need for better program management and funding levels to meet goals.The Wisdom Team discussed the challenges and timelines for NASA’s Artemis program, particularly focusing on the 2028 deadline for returning to the moon and what it might mean to the administration if that goal is not met. Phil Swan explained his support for the Space Show, emphasizing its focus on scientific depth and honesty in space industry coverage. The panelists then debated whether NASA could meet the 2028 target, with Marshall expressing skepticism about the timeline, while Phil suggested it might be achievable with a more conservative approach using the SLS rocket. The discussion concluded with a hypothetical bet on whether the program would meet the 2028 deadline, with most panelists expressing doubt.Marshall then presented his paper (see it on our blog at www.thespaceshow.com for this program on this date) on defending Earth and space stations from interstellar objects using large mirrors to either melt or redirect the objects. Phil suggested using a solar power satellite with laser beaming instead, as it could provide better range and dual purpose functionality. Marshall agreed to allow John Jossy to post his paper on the blog for further critique and feedback, as he is still working on it and seeking input from informed individuals. Phil also introduced the Evidence Ledger, an open-source peer review process where concepts and claims are reviewed by experts in the field.We then talked about both flight and human spaceflight training and regulations, with Marshall sharing his experience of obtaining a pilot’s license in 1973 and David recounting his university flight training back in 67-68. They explored changes to FAA medical certification requirements for pilots, noting that private pilots no longer need a Class 3 medical certificate if their aircraft has a stall speed below 65 knots. The conversation concluded with a discussion about regulatory requirements for human spaceflight crew members, particularly whether they would need pilot licenses for atmospheric portions of their missions. This was answered in emails after the show but the short answer is no but covered in other regulations.Our Wisdom Team discussed the challenges and readiness of autonomous systems in space versus automotive technology, with David comparing the current state of self-driving cars to potential space systems. Phil and Marshall shared insights about space shuttle launches and Apollo missions, emphasizing the role of human pilots and the importance of thorough testing and quality engineering. The conversation highlighted the balance between perfect systems and acceptable risk levels, with Marshall noting that humans can often handle unexpected situations better than computers. The discussion concluded with Marshall’s observation about the shift in focus from Mars to the moon, suggesting that solving the moon mission might be a more immediate challenge.Nearing the end of the program, we discussed the challenges and similarities between missions to the Moon and Mars, with Phil arguing that the engineering difficulties are more similar than the distances suggest. David shared updates on the Space Show’s funding status, noting they are currently at 35% of their annual target. David took the opportunity to again ask listeners to support The Space Show with donations prior to the end of the year. Previous donation instructions have been provided so they are not repeated here but if one requests assistance or has questions, they can reach out to David at drspace@thespaceshow.com.David and the team discussed betting on the likelihood of Artemis III with the Program of Record making it to the Moon and back within the 2028 timeline. We talked about betting on the Polymarket, the legality facing Americans as its against the law with David wondering how people get around and do it given he hears about it all the time on various podcasts. It was suggested that Polymarket users might be using a VPN to hide their location. David said he would do some research on it for the Tuesday, Dec. 30 program, mainly out of his curiosity. John Jossy inquired about posting Marshall’s papers on space mirrors and space settlements on David’s blog. (Note: There is now a regulated US version of the Polymarket but you have to apply to use it and their may be a waiting list. You can find out more with a Google or AI Search for legal ways for US citizens to engage in the Polymarket).The Team wished all a Happy New Year and encouraged listeners to support The Space Show during this year’s campaign.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Thomas A. Olson Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Note: A PDF of his House testimony including factual and quantitative analysis is available on line & at www.thespaceshow.com for the Dec. 21, 2025 Space Show program with Mike. He testified before the House on Dec. 4, 2025.The Space Show Presents Dr. Mike Griffin, Tuesday, Dec. 23, 2025Quick Summary:Our program with guest Dr. Mike Griffin primarily focused on discussing NASA’s current lunar exploration program and its challenges, with extensive testimony from Mike about the technical limitations and risks of the Artemis III plan. The participants explored alternative architectures and technical solutions, including the need for orbital flight tests and cryogenic propellant management capabilities. The discussion concluded with concerns about the program’s timeline and infrastructure limitations, while emphasizing the importance of U.S. leadership in space exploration and the need for more diverse expert participation in future discussions.David and Mike discussed the challenges and concerns surrounding NASA’s current approach to returning to the moon, with Mike emphasizing that the existing plans with SpaceX and Blue Origin are unlikely to succeed. They highlighted the need for a different launch system and expressed frustration over the perceived mismanagement of the mission timeline. The conversation also touched on the potential for additional space vehicles to support lunar missions, though Mike noted that the current architecture does not require them. David introduced the evening’s program and mentioned that Mike’s testimony would be a key focus, setting the stage for a detailed discussion on the future of lunar exploration.Dr. Griffin testified before Congress about China’s moon program and the United States’ response, emphasizing that China is actively developing lunar capabilities while the U.S. lacks a coherent strategy at a special House committee meeting on Dec. 4, 2025. He criticized the Artemis III plan, arguing it cannot succeed due to technical challenges with cryogenic propellant storage and the near rectilinear halo orbit design, which leaves crews stranded for extended periods. Dr. Griffin proposed an alternative dual-launch architecture using the SLS, similar to China’s approach, but acknowledged that the U.S. needs more heavy lift capacity.Mike explained that switching the program of record to a new architecture would require a significant commitment and involve multiple steps, including the new NASA administrator investigating the controversy, the president approving a change, and Congress appropriating funds. He emphasized that the current Artemis program architecture will not work and offered an alternative solution, while noting that other approaches could also succeed. I inquired about the process to switch the program of record, and our guest outlined the steps that would need to be taken, including potential sole source assignments to contractors.Our Space Show Wisdom Team discussed the technical challenges and feasibility of NASA’s lunar mission concept, focusing on the difficulties of cryogenic propellant management and boil-off control in the lunar environment. Mike emphasized that the mission’s current design lacks necessary expertise and experience, particularly in maintaining cryogenic temperatures for extended periods, and expressed concerns about the potential risks to crew safety. The participants agreed that the concept, as currently proposed, is unlikely to succeed within a reasonable timeframe. Marshall highlighted the specific challenge of managing heat on the sunlit lunar surface. I inquired about SpaceX’s perspective regarding the challenges and risks, but Mike clarified that he could not speak for SpaceX engineers and emphasized that no amount of engineering brilliance can rescue a fundamentally flawed concept.We continued discussing concerns about the U.S. lunar exploration program and its competitiveness with China. Mike expressed frustration that the current architecture lacks sufficient delta-V and a credible lunar lander, while Ajay raised questions about the feasibility of multiple refueling missions. The discussion highlighted tensions between using cryogenic versus storable liquid propulsion systems, with Griffin advocating for storable liquids for the first crewed mission due to infrastructure limitations on the moon. The conversation concluded with his emphasizing the importance of U.S. leadership in space exploration and his preference for a simpler, safer approach to lunar missions.Mike and Ajay discussed the challenges of refueling in space, particularly for cryogenic liquids, and the risks associated with multiple launches. They expressed skepticism about the Blue Origin architecture and the feasibility of the NRHO concept due to technical limitations and the lack of demonstrated technology. Mike emphasized that if a mission failed, the fleet would likely be grounded until the problem is understood and solved, similar to historical practices in air and spaceflight. David asked about a potential point of no return for a new mission design, but Mike suggested there isn’t a definitive point where re-engagement would be impossible. He expressed concern about the U.S. not being actively involved in lunar exploration, noting that China’s success is not guaranteed lunar success either.Mike further emphasized the necessity of conducting an orbital flight test to demonstrate cryogenic propellant transfer and boil-off prevention before committing to a mission that involves significant national investment. He highlighted the importance of seeing such a test to validate the technology, as calculations alone would not be sufficient. Phil noted the success of the space shuttle’s test flight and asked if thorough analysis and ground tests could convince Mike to which Mike responded that the shuttle’s testing was significantly more extensive than what had been proposed for Artemis. Marshall suggested building a high-quality space station as a more efficient use of national resources than a moon mission, but our guest argued that space stations should serve mission needs and not be the initial focus. John proposed the idea of constructing a propellant depot with refrigeration capabilities to support future lunar missions, which Griffin supported as a viable option for refueling architecture.Our guest discussed the technical limitations of NASA’s current approach to lunar missions, emphasizing that the proposed method of refueling in Earth orbit before heading to the moon is not feasible due to the lack of cryogenic fluid management capabilities. He compared this to a hypothetical cross-country flight that requires frequent refueling, highlighting the impracticality of the current plan. Mike expressed concern that the project may eventually stall due to technological constraints, noting that previous attempts to address similar issues in NASA’s history faced significant political and public backlash. He also acknowledged the challenges faced by Jared Isaacman, the new NASA administrator, in making major changes to the current plan, but declined to offer specific advice on how to navigate these challenges.We also focused on NASA’s responsibility for selecting the right approach to return to the moon, with Mike emphasizing that technical decisions should not be made through public votes. David expressed appreciation for Mike’s insights and mentioned plans to share the discussion on Space Show global media accounts. The conversation ended with a reminder about supporting the Space Show through various payment methods, including PayPal, Zelle, and checks, with details provided for each option.Our Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4477 Zoom: Special Space Show Msg Program | Friday 26 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZOOM: To Be DeterminedBroadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Thomas A. OlsonZoom: Tom returns for his annual year in review program. Always exciting and fun. Don’t miss it. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Michael Listner, Sunday , 12-21-25Quick SummaryOur program focused on analyzing the newly released Trump Space Policy Executive Order and its implications for NASA’s moon return mission by 2028, with discussions around commercial space initiatives, infrastructure challenges, and geopolitical considerations. The Wisdom Team explored NASA’s current plans, leadership changes, and the evolving role of private investment in space exploration, while examining international reactions and regulatory challenges. The conversation concluded with discussions about space governance, technological advancements, and future policy directions, including the potential for reduced launch costs and the importance of spectrum management in space policy.SummaryThe Wisdom Team discussed the newly released Trump Space Policy Executive Order, which Michael noted pushes for commercial space initiatives rather than the expensive rocket version, aiming for a moon return by 2028. David expressed skepticism about meeting this timeline without radical program changes, and mentioned Dr. Mike Griffin’s upcoming appearance to share his perspective. David and Michael discussed the newly released executive order on space policy, which aims to return humans to the moon by 2028. Michael explained that the order emphasizes a sustainable and cost-effective lunar presence, including greater commercial space involvement. He noted that while the order is significant, its reception and implementation may face challenges, particularly due to potential conflicts with previous legislation. David raised concerns about the feasibility of the 2028 timeline, citing skepticism about current infrastructure and project delays. Michael acknowledged these concerns but suggested that the administration’s focus on achieving this goal before the end of the president’s term could drive progress.We continued talking about NASA’s plans to return to the moon, with Michael emphasizing that the Space Launch System (SLS) is currently the only viable option for achieving this goal within a reasonable timeframe, despite its limitations and high costs. The group discussed the potential influence of lobbying by contractors with stakes in SLS, as well as the geopolitical considerations of competing with China’s lunar ambitions. John Jossy mentioned the recent executive order requiring NASA to review major space acquisition programs, potentially opening the door to cuts or cancellations, though Michael suggested that SLS would likely continue until at least Artemis 3 or 4 due to political realities and geopolitical interests.Our Wisdom Team discussed the implications of recent changes in NASA leadership and broader space policy, with Michael sharing insights about the challenges faced by former NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine and others. They explored the future of space exploration, with Michael predicting that private investment would become more important than government funding over the next 10-15 years, leading to the formation of large space-focused conglomerates. The discussion concluded with an analysis of international reactions to U.S. commercial space initiatives, noting that many countries, particularly Russia and the European Union, are resistant to the commercialization of space and have implemented restrictive regulations to limit private sector involvement.Next, we focused on the shift towards national sovereignty in space governance, highlighted by recent conferences on regulating lunar activities and space resources. Michael noted that while the U.S. participated in these conferences, it aimed to influence rule-making rather than comply fully. Marshall brought up Elon Musk’s plans for AI data centers in space, including a potential IPO and a Pentagon proposal for a $4 billion AI center. Michael clarified that regulatory hurdles, rather than legal ones, would be the main challenge for such initiatives, while also cautioning about the potential for overhyped expectations similar to those seen with space resource laws. David inquired about efforts to extend environmental protection laws to space, to which Michael responded that while such attempts occur, they often lack specific legislative backing and have faced setbacks in recent court decisions.The Wisdom Team discussed tax incentives for space investment, with Michael noting that Florida had considered such measures and federal proposals existed previously. Marshall raised concerns about SpaceX’s potential market dominance following its IPO, which Michael addressed by explaining that antitrust considerations would require government approval for monopolistic behavior, though he noted SpaceX’s competition with other launch companies. Michael predicted that 2025 would be a transition year for space policy, moving commercial space to a higher priority, and anticipated continued steady progress in 2026, with over 100 launches expected from Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg that year. John Jossy mentioned the upcoming 60-day timeline for issuing guidance on American space nuclear power initiatives.Michael discussed the challenges of developing nuclear propulsion systems, citing the example of DARPA’s project being abandoned. He explained that the new nuclear power directive from the administration aims to move initiatives forward, with multiple agencies involved in authorization processes. David raised concerns about Congress potentially being a stumbling block to space exploration efforts, given its current focus and past legislative conflicts. Michael noted the ongoing competition between NASA authorization acts and the CHIPS Act, suggesting that the White House might find a way to align these directives.Michael went on to explain that space settlement lacks regulatory infrastructure and requires a national space policy prioritizing it, which currently does not exist. He noted that the FAA’s 2015 Commercial Space Launch Act was not fully implemented, particularly regarding space resources, and highlighted the need for Congress to provide clear authorization for such activities. Marshall raised a question about the relationship between SpaceX’s Starlink revenue and NASA’s budget, to which Michael responded that this shift aligns with Reagan’s vision for commercial space, emphasizing private innovation surpassing government capabilities.Nearing the end of our program, we focused on the current state and future of national space policy, commercial space initiatives, and technological advancements. Michael noted that the Trump administration’s first-term national space policy remains in effect. The Biden administration did not replace it. The Trump pro-commercial space stance continues to influence the industry. The team discussed the potential for reduced launch costs due to increased competition, with Rocket Lab’s success highlighted as a significant player in the market. They also explored the implications of the Golden Dome initiative, emphasizing its potential geopolitical and defense implications, as well as the challenges it may face in the future. The conversation concluded with an examination of upcoming technologies, such as SpaceX’s Starlink and its potential impact on global communication, and the importance of spectrum management in space policy.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4477 Zoom: To Be Determined | Friday 26 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZOOM: To Be DeterminedBroadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Thomas A. OlsonZoom: Tom returns for his annual year in review program. Always exciting and fun. Don’t miss it. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Hotel Mars with John Batchelor for Thursday, Dec. 18, 2025 featuring from India, Dr. Sabayashi Pal.John Batchelor and I introduced The Hotel Mars audience to DR. SABAYASHI PAL regarding his discovery of giant radio galaxies and supermassive black holes. Dr. Pal reported that astronomers have discovered 53 giant radio galaxies, some 75 times larger than the Milky Way, powered by active supermassive black holes emitting radio jets. These ancient objects offer insights into galactic evolution, contrasting sharply with the Milky Way’s smaller, dormant black hole in the center of our galaxy that allows life to exist safely.In Part Two of our Hotel Mars discussion with Dr. Pal, he said that with an unlimited budget, he would use it for investing in human intelligence over that of any AI. Dr. Pal prefers to prioritize human resource development over new telescopes, proposing a space study institute in Africa to train experts. He said that while AI is a useful tool, a quality science education is essential for humans to interpret data and appreciate the machinery rather than being replaced by it. Dr. Pal strongly believes that human intelligence is a far more valuable resource than artificial intelligence, even for the future.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4476 Zoom Dr. MIKE GRIFFIN | Tuesday 23 Dec 2025 700PM PTGuests: Dr. Michael D. GriffinZoom: Dr. Griffin discusses how best to promptly get to the Moon and more.Broadcast 4477 Zoom: To Be Determined | Friday 26 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZOOM: To Be DeterminedBroadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Thomas A. OlsonZoom: Tom returns for his annual year in review program. Always exciting and fun. Don’t miss it. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Welcome to this special fundraising program featuring several long time Space Show listeners and supporters. Each one of them has a short message for you about why space is so important, why The Space Show is so important, and why they support and continue to support The Space Show. Each one also asks you, yes you the listener, to also join in and support space and The Space Show during The Space Show’s annual fundraising 2025 drive. We want everyone to understand the importance of space to ur future and the role The Space Show has played and will continue playing in bringing this space future to reality.The Space Supporters wanting to give you their direct message for this 2025 campaign include Dr. Sherry Bell, John Jossy, Bill Gowan, Dr. Haym Benaroya, Peter Foreman, Bob Zimmerman, John Hunt and Dr. A.J. Kothari.The Space Show is a 501C3 nonprofit with the One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. If you are a US taxpayer, your gift may be tax deductible but please check with your own tax advisor on this matter. The easiest way to support The Space Show is to visit our home page, www.thespaceshow.com on the right side of the page. Look for the large PayPal button. You can use PayPal for your contribution and Zelle if you use a U.S. Bank. If you do use Zelle, our special email address is david@onegiantleapfoundation.org. If you want to make a check to us, please make it payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail it to the Las Vegas, NV address on the PayPal button. Should you have any questions, please feel free to email me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4476 Zoom Dr. MIKE GRIFFIN | Tuesday 23 Dec 2025 700PM PTGuests: Dr. Michael D. GriffinZoom: Dr. Griffin discusses how best to promptly get to the Moon and more.Broadcast 4477 Zoom: DR. ANTONIO DEL POPOLO | Friday 26 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr/. Antonio Del PopoloZOOM: Dr. Popolo from Italy will use slides in our discussion regarding his new book, “Extraterrestrial Life: We Are Not Alone.”Broadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Thomas A. OlsonZoom: Tom returns for his annual year in review program. Always exciting and fun. Don’t miss it. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe