The Space Show by Dr. David Livingston

The Space Show Presents KATHRYN BOLISH, WEX Foundation, Friday, 11-21-25Brief Summary:The program focused on discussing the WEX Foundation’s educational programs, particularly their space STEM initiatives for K-12 students through their LCATS program, which provides free education and mentorship in space-related topics. The discussion covered the foundation’s approach to teaching mathematics and programming, as well as their collaboration with NASA and other aerospace companies to develop student projects and curriculum. The conversation concluded with an exploration of the program’s impact on student engagement and academic performance, while addressing challenges related to the COVID pandemic, funding, and policy issues in public education.Detailed Summary:David, John Jossy, and Kathryn Bolish, our guest from the WEX Foundation, discussed the WEX Foundation, its projects, and its namesake, Judge Waldo Jimenez. Kathryn explained the power outages at her office causing WIFI issues for this broadcast. We lost audio and video with our guest a few times during the program but were fortunate that we were able to reconnect with a minor delay. We do apologize for the audio/video issues during this discussion.Kathryn discussed her passion for mathematics and her plans to pursue a PhD at UTSA. John Jossy and I welcomed Dr. Ajay Kothari to the meeting and others as they joined us. I provided a formal introduction for Kathryn Bolish, a mathematician pursuing a PhD, who discussed her passion for mathematics and its applications in space travel. They explored the disconnect between theoretical and numerical mathematics in education, with Kathryn highlighting the importance of teaching math theory and logic from an early age to improve understanding and reduce remedial needs. Before commencing with the full program, I announced upcoming guests and program changes, including a fundraising campaign after Thanksgiving which is essential for supporting The Space Show for 2026.Kathryn discussed the importance of teaching propositional logic and set theory to students early on to help them understand math as a tool rather than a monster. She explained how WEX Foundation provides free space STEM education to K-12 students, focusing on lunar exploration. The program, called LCATS, accepts 30-40 students annually for a three-year commitment, meeting bi-weekly Saturdays at San Antonio area universities. Kathryn emphasized the need for teachers to understand basic programming and math theory to effectively teach these subjects. The discussion also touched on the challenges of AI in education, with Kathryn advocating for using AI as a tool for learning rather than for cheating. David inquired about the program’s impact on students’ general academic performance, including students not in a WEX program but in the class with a WEX student. Kathryn replied that it has led to increased interest and engagement in STEM subjects among participating students.Kathryn explained that the WEX Foundation’s LCATS program, which was piloted by NASA in 2017, faced challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic and staff changes in 2020. She emphasized the importance of ensuring that the program’s content remains relevant to the space industry and highlighted the need to find suitable locations and teachers willing to conduct classes on Saturdays. Kathryn also discussed the foundation’s approach to connecting young students with space industry experts, noting that while the experts may initially seem intimidating, the students often view their feedback as valuable learning opportunities. She mentioned that the foundation plans to finalize a comprehensive LCATS curriculum by May 2026, which will then be used to expand the program to other regions.Kathryn discussed the benefits of exposing students to industry challenges, noting that while some SMEs may be harsh, the experience helps build student confidence. She shared an example of a student project that led to a 3D printer prototype for lunar construction, now displayed at a museum. David raised concerns about magical thinking among graduate students and asked how Kathryn addresses it with young minds, to which she responded that embracing the “magic” of unknown possibilities is crucial for innovation, drawing parallels to historical achievements like the moon landing.The meeting discussed the NASA-funded New Worlds program, which trains pre-service educators in lunar habitat design. Kathryn explained that the program teaches students about lunar lava tubes and challenges them to design habitat systems. Ajay raised concerns about landing on the lunar surface, suggesting that the program could help address this issue by developing solutions for landing on uneven terrain. Marshall inquired about the transition from Earth-based biospheres to lunar habitats, and Kathryn mentioned that the program partners with experts in this field to provide students with relevant constraints and knowledge. The conversation ended with a reminder that the show had a strict 60-minute time limit.Kathryn explained that her parent company, Astroport, evaluates student proposals for space-related projects by assessing their feasibility for terrestrial demonstrations before advancing to lunar applications. She noted that while Astroport works with major aerospace companies like Boeing and SpaceX, WEX focuses on space STEM education and collaborates with these organizations through mentorship and partnerships. Kathryn also mentioned that WEX operates from the same building as Astroport and occasionally hosts engineers to help students brainstorm solutions for their projects, while acknowledging the challenges of addressing policy and regulation issues in their curriculum.Kathryn explained that WEX Foundation’s space education programs are structured to be self-sustaining and low-cost, allowing them to continue operations despite NASA’s education budget cuts. She clarified that while students can propose their own ideas for lunar projects, the program focuses on teaching established concepts like lava tube habitation and letting students develop their own solutions. The discussion concluded with Ajay offering to share a paper about space exploration with Kathryn, who expressed gratitude for the collaborative spirit among the participants.This program featured a discussion with Kathryn from the WEX Foundation, who shared insights about her math-focused educational programs in San Antonio. She explained how her mathematical background supports her work in program management and curriculum development, despite not directly using advanced math in her current role. The conversation highlighted the diversity of her student cohorts and the collaborative nature of her programs, which bring together students of different ages and backgrounds. The discussion concluded with questions about the demographics of her students and plans for program expansion, as well as a brief conversation about the challenges of public education and the role of money in society.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 4466: ZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb | Sunday 23 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Abraham (Avi) LoebZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb returns to discuss our latest interstellar visitor and more. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Hotel Mars with Eric Berger, Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2025John Batchelor and I introduced Eric Berger of Ars Technica as our guest to discuss the recent very successful launch and flight of the Blue Origin New Glenn rocket. Eric Berger described the successful second launch and booster landing of Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket as thrilling. We noted the accuracy of the return of the first stage to return to the barge pad, hover, move sideways and then land dead center in the zero target on the barge. This was a huge step forward. It also successfully deployed a NASA payload to Mars which our guest discussed. New Glenn is the world’s third largest rocket and is crucial for Amazon’s LEO constellation and NASA’s Artemis moon program. We also asked Eric for his opinion regarding Jarod Isaacman as the NASA Administrator. Eric shared many important thoughts regarding this nomination.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 4466: ZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb | Sunday 23 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:Dr. Abraham (Avi) LoebZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb returns to discuss our latest interstellar visitor and more. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Leonard David for Tuesday, 11-18-25Brief SummaryThe program focused on discussing various aspects of the space industry, including current challenges with space safety standards, rescue capabilities, and NASA’s progress on lunar exploration programs. The participants explored potential solutions for space rescue missions, debated the feasibility of alternative lunar exploration approaches, and discussed the challenges of developing a cislunar economy. The conversation concluded with discussions about environmental impacts of space activities, the potential for AI data centers in space, and the upcoming release of a film about UFOs/UAPs.Detailed SummaryDavid and Leonard discussed the Chinese space program’s current issues with their rescue vehicle and the need for international standards in space safety. They also touched on NASA’s current state and the upcoming visit to the International Space Station by Jared Isaacman. David announced upcoming guests for the space show, including Avi Loeb, and reminded listeners about the annual fundraising drive.Leonard discussed his extensive experience in space documentation and emphasized the importance of archiving current space activities for future reference. He highlighted the need for a space rescue capability, citing the Chinese space program’s backup plan as a wake-up call for the United States to develop similar capabilities, especially with the increase in private space flights. David agreed with Leonard’s concerns and mentioned the ongoing discussions about space rescue at AIAA Ascend conferences, expressing concern about the lack of progress and interest in this critical area.Leonard and David discussed the potential for SpaceX to assist in a possible Chinese rescue mission, highlighting the need for compatible docking standards with the Chinese space station. They also touched on the challenges NASA faces, including leadership uncertainty and the need for decisive action on key decisions. Leonard expressed frustration with the lack of clear direction and the need for a strong, decisive leader at NASA to move forward with important projects.Leonard expressed concerns about NASA’s progress on the Artemis program, noting delays and uncertainty about the February launch date for Artemis II. He compared the current situation to the space race with the Soviet Union, suggesting that the U.S. is falling behind China in lunar exploration efforts. Marshall asked about key milestones for NASA’s moon mission, and Leonard highlighted the importance of SpaceX’s Starship program, praising its development pace but expressing uncertainty about NASA’s decision-making process and timeline.The SS Wisdom Team discussed China’s aggressive lunar program, with Leonard noting their goal to achieve significant milestones before 2030, including robotic missions and a lunar research station. They debated alternative approaches to reaching the moon beyond the Artemis program, with Leonard expressing optimism about Blue Origin’s business plan for the moon and its potential to contribute to a cislunar economy. David inquired about the feasibility of alternative methods, and Leonard suggested consulting NASA Watch for insights into NASA’s decision-making processes. Dr. CJ inquired about Mark 1.5, a proposed spacecraft capable of carrying four astronauts and 3,000 kilograms to the moon, but Leonard was unfamiliar with this concept and could not confirm its validity.We discussed challenges in the space industry, including the difficulty of filtering credible ideas from speculative ones, and the problem of maintaining workforce stability in startup companies. They explored various launch technologies with some expressing skepticism about Spin Launch on Earth due to drag and heating issues, while noting its potential feasibility on the Moon. The conversation concluded with a discussion about electromagnetic launch systems, with Leonard sharing his experiences from Princeton’s Space Studies Institute and noting how technology advancements could revive interest in these systems.The tea, discussed the potential for economic development in cislunar space and on the Moon. Leonard expressed optimism about lunar surprises, citing recent Chinese sample findings. David questioned the feasibility of a cislunar economy, noting high launch costs and the lack of infrastructure. He suggested that economic opportunities might be better suited for in-space markets rather than Earth-bound returns. The discussion highlighted the challenges of envisioning markets without existing infrastructure and the need for creative solutions to develop a lunar economy.Another topic we discussed was the potential for AI data centers in space, with Marshall noting that the Pentagon had offered $12 billion to build a 5 gigawatt solar panel, though David questioned whether the funding was secured. Leonard expressed concerns about the militarization of space, highlighting the U.S. Space Force’s growing capabilities and the potential for conflict with other nations. The conversation also touched on Russia’s development of the Poseidon torpedo and the ongoing arms race between major powers, with Marshall mentioning SpaceX’s Starshield program and its potential for advanced surveillance capabilities.The team covered the challenges and benefits of nuclear power, both on Earth and in space. Also emphasizing the advantages of using advanced nuclear reactors on Earth, such as molten salt reactors, which are safer and more efficient than current technologies. The conversation touched on regulatory issues and the reluctance to adopt new nuclear technologies, with David highlighting China’s progress in this area. Leonard mentioned his recent article on space waste and the increasing concern about human-made debris entering Earth’s atmosphere, which could have detrimental effects on the ozone layer. The group agreed that more research and regulation are needed to address these issues.The group discussed the environmental impact of space activities, with Phil noting that aerospace emissions are 3-4 times worse than ground-based CO2, and Marshall sharing that 44 metric tons of meteorite material falls to Earth daily. David shared that a USC student paper by Jose Ferraria examines the toxic materials released into the upper atmosphere during rocket re-entry, and the group discussed the need for better measurement and understanding of this environmental impact. Looking ahead to 2025, Leonard expressed concern about potential space accidents affecting public interest, while David noted that space tourism has not yet become truly commercial despite earlier predictions, and AI’s influence on rhetoric and belief systems remains a wildcard factor.David expressed optimism about space research and development, highlighting medical advances from microgravity studies and the potential for private space stations to drive innovation. He emphasized the importance of affordable and reliable power sources for space research, while expressing concerns about budget cuts and the devaluation of science. The team discussed the progress of private space companies like Blue Origin and SpaceX, with John suggesting that Elon Musk’s Starship could be ready in 5 years. Leonard and others agreed that human spaceflight may not be the focus of major advancements in the next 5 years, but space technology could still significantly impact life on Earth.Leonard brought up the upcoming film “Disclosure” about UFOs, which will be available for free on the producer’s website and on Amazon Prime. They debated the potential impact of revealing government secrets about UFOs, with John expressing concerns about national security and the complications that disclosure could create. Leonard shared his personal belief that something significant is happening in the UFO community, while David noted a shift in cultural acceptance of the idea of extraterrestrial life over the past five years. The conversation concluded with plans for future shows featuring Katheryn Bolich of the WEX Foundation and Avi Loeb.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 4466: ZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb | Sunday 23 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:Dr. Abraham (Avi) LoebZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb returns to discuss our latest interstellar visitor and more. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Dr. Doug Plata on Elon Musk, Sunday, 11-16-25Brief Summary: The program began with technical discussions and introductions for a space show featuring Dr. Doug Plata as the guest, followed by coverage of Blue Origin’s successful New Glenn launch and their future plans including a NASA moon mission. The conversation then delved into Elon Musk’s motivations and ventures, exploring how his philosophical beliefs about life’s meaning and civilization’s future have driven his various companies including SpaceX, Tesla, and Twitter. The discussion concluded with an analysis of Musk’s influence on AI development, population concerns, and his acquisition of Twitter, while emphasizing the importance of truth and careful decision-making in his future endeavors. Dr. Plata said he that for this discussion, he wanted to “address how Elon came to his personal philosophy after an existential crisis of meaning when he was age 12 and his belief that what is most important is the survival of human intelligence and civilization explains very well why he puts his personal time into some ventures (e.g. SpaceX) and why he doesn’t put much time into others (e.g. Boring Company). The civilizational aspect explains his pro-natal arguments / actions and also his apparently counter-productive foray into Twitter and politics.”Detailed Summary: We started out by talking about the significance of the recent Blue Origin launch before David introduced Doug as the guest for the Sunday afternoon West Coast Space Show. David mentioned upcoming guests for the week, including Leonard David, Eric Berger, Cat Bolish, and Dr. Avi Loeb. As Wisdom Team then discussed Blue Origin’s successful New Glenn launch, which delivered two NASA satellites to Mars and landed on a drone ship. They praised the landing accuracy and the innovative landing system that uses sparks to secure the rocket on the ship. Doug mentioned that Blue Origin is planning to launch their own Kuiper (rebranded to Leo) constellation, which will provide revenue for the company. We also discussed Blue Origin’s upcoming moon mission for NASA’s Artemis program and potential future launches for the Department of Defense, pending certification by the Space Force.Our team discussed Elon Musk’s philosophy and ventures, with Doug presenting a hypothesis that Musk’s search for the meaning of life drives his focus on advancing human civilization through technology. They explored how Musk’s experiences, including an existential crisis at age 12 and his fascination with “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” shaped his belief that the path to understanding the universe’s meaning is through technological advancement and exploration. The discussion highlighted how Musk’s ventures, from SpaceX to Twitter, align with this philosophical perspective, though some participants expressed concerns about his political involvement.The team discussed Elon Musk’s motivations and communication style, with David questioning whether Musk cares about public perception and Marshall comparing him to other engineers who pursue leading-edge technology. Doug presented research on Musk’s childhood, including his struggles with bullying and depression, and how reading “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” helped him develop a philosophy of curiosity. The discussion touched on Musk’s autistic traits and his ambitious projects, with Marshall noting that his success allows him to pursue risky ventures without financial ruin.Doug discussed Elon Musk’s ventures and philosophy, focusing on how his actions align with his existential goals of preserving human intelligence and finding the meaning of life. Doug explained that Musk’s creation of SpaceX and Tesla, despite their initial financial risks, were driven by his desire to establish a self-sustaining city on Mars to ensure humanity’s long-term survival. The discussion also touched on Musk’s transition to sustainable energy through Tesla and his role in the current administration, with Peter noting that the media’s portrayal of Musk has changed over time.Doug led a discussion about Elon Musk’s motivations and ventures, focusing on his founding of SpaceX in 2001 after being frustrated by the lack of access to rocket launches for his Mars Oasis project. They explored how Musk’s concerns about energy sustainability and civilization’s future influenced his decision to start Tesla, which he viewed as part of a broader strategy to transition to an electric economy. The discussion also covered Musk’s approach to other ventures like The Boring Company, noting that while he supported and promoted these projects, he delegated day-to-day leadership to others as they didn’t align as closely with his existential and civilization-focused goals as SpaceX and Tesla did.We discussed Elon Musk’s ventures and their potential connection to his goal of establishing a human colony on Mars. They explored how projects like Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink, and humanoid robots could indirectly support Mars development through revenue generation. Marshall and Doug agreed that while these ventures aren’t essential for Mars colonization, they have valuable side benefits. The conversation also touched on Musk’s concerns about AI’s existential risks, including his involvement with OpenAI and his recent call for a pause in AI development to address these concerns.Our Wisdom Team discussed Elon Musk’s views on AI and population decline. Doug explained that Musk has shifted from being an observer to an active participant in AI development, aiming to direct its growth in a beneficial way. They also discussed Musk’s pronatalist views and concerns about population collapse in Japan and South Korea. Marshall and Doug shared statistics on fertility rates in China and the United States. David raised concerns about Medicare fraud and suggested that government support for IVF could help address declining birth rates. This part of the conversation concluded with a brief discussion on Musk’s involvement with Twitter and his political stance.The team discussed Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter and his philosophy regarding free speech as essential for technological advancement and civilization’s progress. They explored how Musk’s political actions, including his support for Trump and concerns about immigration, were motivated by his belief in preserving Western civilization and free speech. The discussion concluded with concerns about misinformation surrounding Musk and the challenges of finding accurate information about his ventures, with Philip suggesting the need to combat misinformation with truth rather than counter it with more misinformation.A big part of the discussion focused on Elon Musk’s influence and future impact, with Doug presenting a comprehensive analysis of Musk’s ventures and motivations. They explored Musk’s role in AI development through Neuralink, with concerns raised about AI’s potential to outpace human capabilities. The panelists agreed that while Musk’s ventures have been largely positive, he should be cautious about AI development and political involvement. The discussion concluded with messages to Musk emphasizing the importance of truth, careful decision-making, and continued focus on space exploration.\Please note that our guest, Dr. Doug Plata, is a practicing medical doctor, not a psychologist or psychiatrist. The analysis and ideas he presented regarding Mr. Musk were his own.If you are listening to the audio of this program on The Space Show website, you might want to check out the Zoom video on our Substack page, doctorspace.substack.com.Please remember we are in our annual fundraising drive to support the program for 2026. Please donate either through PayPal on the right side of our home page, www.thespaceshow.com, Zelle using david@onegiantleapfoundation.org or Substack using doctorspace.substack.com.Thank you.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 4463: ZOOM: Leonard David | Tuesday 18 Nov 2025 700PM PTGuests: Leonard DavidZOOM: Leonard returns with news and perspectives that only he has for our space industry. You don’t want to miss our program.Broadcast 4464 Hotel Mars with Eric Berger | Wednesday 19 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: Eric Berger, John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonEric reports on the Blue Origin New Glenn successful test flight and moreBroadcast 4465: ZOOM: Kathryn Bolish | Friday 21 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: Kathryn BolishZOOM: Kathryn Bolish is CEO of WEX Foundation re stem and much more Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Dr. Daniel Whiteson on his new book, “Do Aliens Speak Physics” Friday, 11-14-25Brief Summary:Our program began with introductions and discussions about alternative physics theories, including hyperdimensional physics, and the challenges of accepting unconventional ideas in the scientific community. The group explored various topics related to extraterrestrial life and communication, including the nature of mathematics, the potential for alien civilizations, and the challenges of decoding alien messages. They concluded by discussing unidentified aerial phenomena, the possibility of discovering extraterrestrial life, and the difficulties of communicating with alien civilizations, while acknowledging the skepticism of most physicists regarding philosophical questions about the nature of physics and reality.Detailed full summary:David, Dr. Daniel Whiteson (our guest) and John Jossy discussed alternative physics theories, including the brief mention of hyperdimensional physics (if real), and the challenges of accepting unconventional ideas in the scientific community. John Jossy, a physicist & astronomy major at Cal and now a retired engineer, shared his educational background and interest in astronomy, expressing excitement for the upcoming discussion on life and the universe. The group also touched on the importance of traditional science education and the evolution of science requirements in universities that seem weaker today than yesteryear.The meeting recording started with a discussion about Andy Weir’s book, “Project Hail Mary,” including its screenplay adaptation by the same person who wrote “The Martian.” Daniel expressed admiration for the book’s creativity, particularly in its portrayal of alien interactions. David then introduced the show’s format and Wisdom Team participants, including Marshall Martin, a retired software engineer with an engineering perspective, and John Hunt, a physics advisor to David and TSS. David explained his background in business and his interest in space and science, as well as his son’s experience with cystic fibrosis and the advancements in medical technology which led him to many lessons learned re media, science and medical reporting, narrow versus broad minded thinking while remaining grounded in reality. The Team discussed the potential for alien contact and the importance of science and media in shaping public perception of future technologies. The conversation ended with an announcement of upcoming guests and a reminder about the show’s fundraising campaign which is essential to Space Show continuance as it is a 100% listener supported non-profit program.Daniel discussed his book “Do Aliens Speak Physics?” which explores the question of whether physics is universal and if aliens would necessarily understand it in the same way as humans. He emphasized the importance of remaining open-minded about potential alternative ways of understanding the universe, as current data only supports the universality of physics within our observable universe. Daniel explained his decision to write the book in a light-hearted, accessible format with humor and illustrations to make complex concepts more approachable for readers. David raised the possibility that aliens might perceive and interact with the universe in fundamentally different ways than humans, potentially challenging our current understanding of physics and conservation laws.Daniel discussed the nature of physics and reality, exploring the possibility of multiple ways to describe the universe. He explained that while our current models of physics work well, they are based on philosophical assumptions rather than scientific evidence. Daniel suggested that the universe could be much stranger than we imagine, and that our intuitive understanding may not align with the true nature of reality. He also touched on the limitations of our senses and how they shape our perception of the universe, highlighting the potential for alien physics to be fundamentally different from our own.The Wisdom Team discussed the challenges of communicating with extraterrestrial life, focusing on two scenarios: receiving a message from aliens and their physical arrival on Earth. Daniel and David explored the difficulties of decoding alien messages, highlighting the arbitrary nature of language encoding and the lack of a Rosetta Stone for alien languages. They emphasized that even understanding human languages without cultural context is challenging, making the prospect of decoding alien messages seem hopeful but uncertain. The discussion concluded that direct physical interaction with aliens might offer a more promising avenue for communication, as it would provide a shared context for building understanding.The Wisdom Team discussed the possibility of extraterrestrial intelligence and the nature of mathematics in the universe. Daniel and David explored the idea that mathematics might not be universal, while John Hunt suggested that alien species could have different senses and physical capabilities. Daniel shared his experiences with the elegance of mathematical descriptions in physics, but also acknowledged the arguments of mathematician Field, the author of the classic “Science Without Numbers,” that mathematics could be a human construct rather than a universal language. The discussion raised questions about whether aliens could understand the universe differently, and whether mathematics is necessary for explaining physical phenomena.We continued discussing the nature of mathematics and its potential alternatives, with Daniel explaining that while mathematicians seek universal axioms, physicists are more flexible in their approach, often modifying axioms to better describe observations. Marshall challenged the notion of alternative foundations to Euclidean geometry, while John Jossy focused on the universality of the four fundamental forces, suggesting that even aliens would likely recognize these forces despite different methods of perception and communication.Daniel discussed the possibility that alien civilizations might not share humanity’s scientific approach to understanding the universe, suggesting that technological advancement could occur without a deep understanding of fundamental physics. He emphasized that human descriptions of the universe are approximate and historically contingent, leading to the idea that there could be multiple valid ways to describe and interact with the universe. David asked about the best way to attempt contact with aliens, given potential incompatibilities in communication methods. Daniel suggested building von Neumann probes for exploration, noting the large distances involved and the potential for exponential reproduction, while acknowledging the ethical and practical challenges of such an endeavor.Daniel and David discussed the possibility of extraterrestrial life and the potential for discovering intelligent beings with different ways of understanding the universe. Daniel emphasized the excitement of finding colleagues with similar interests but also highlighted the value of encountering beings who challenge human assumptions about mathematics and physics. He suggested that discovering alien intelligence that operates differently from humans could offer profound insights into the nature of human existence. David raised a question about the role of a universal God in the context of alien life, prompting Daniel to reflect on the possibility that such a God might not necessarily be the same for all intelligent beings.Daniel and David discussed the potential for extraterrestrial life and the implications for human understanding of the universe. Daniel suggested that aliens might have diverse beliefs and cultures, including religious and scientific perspectives, which could challenge human concepts of God and faith. David shared a perspective from a Chabad rabbi that equates scientific and religious faith, but Daniel emphasized the self-correcting nature of science as a key distinction given that scientific faith requires data. Religious faith is usually based on stories, not quantifiable data. Marshall raised the possibility of using artificial intelligence to communicate with aliens, but Daniel expressed doubt that AI could truly understand the universe, though it might assist in decoding alien communications.As we were nearing the end of the program, our Wisdom Team discussed the possibility of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) and extraterrestrial life, with Daniel expressing skepticism despite wanting to believe in aliens. John Hunt shared his perspective on the pervasive nature of UAP reports over the past 80 years and the government’s history of disinformation. They explored potential methods of communication with aliens, with Daniel suggesting starting with mathematics and using a broad range of sensors to detect signals. David raised questions about Earth’s signal leakage and the potential for extraterrestrial civilizations to detect us, suggesting that light-based communication might be more effective than radio waves, assuming we used the best wave lengths for such communication.In conclusion, our discussion focused on the challenges of communicating with extraterrestrial civilizations, with Daniel explaining that while powerful astrophysical phenomena like quasars emit intense signals, harnessing such energy for communication would be impractical and potentially dangerous. Daniel emphasized the difficulty of distinguishing between natural signals and potential alien communications due to our limited understanding of the universe, using examples like the WOW signal and cosmic rays to illustrate this challenge. The conversation concluded with Daniel expressing optimism about the possibility of discovering extraterrestrial life, while acknowledging that most physicists are skeptical of philosophical questions about the nature of physics and reality.If you are reading the sum

John Batchelor and I welcomed Cal Tech Professor Matthew Graham to Hotel Mars to discusses the most powerful black hole flare ever recorded, equal in brightness to about 10 trillion suns known and referred to as an Active Galactic Nucleus (AGN). It is believed and our guest explained that material falling into the supermassive black hole forms an accretion disc which releasing both massive and intense radiation. This 10-billion-year-old event (10 billion light years from Earth) was detected using computer cameras and multiple terrestrial telescopes. Dr. Graham explained that these black holes are ancient “seeds” of galaxies, acting as cosmic vacuum cleaners, such as when a large star gets shredded. This Hotel Mars program was in two segments totaling about 19.5 minutes.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 4462: Zoom: Dr. Doug Plata | Sunday 16 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Doug Plata Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Brief SummaryOur main program focus was on space exploration, where participants discussed various aspects including NASA’s role, commercial space initiatives, and the future of human spaceflight, with particular emphasis on SpaceX’s development timeline and capabilities. The conversation concluded with discussions about space markets, orbital data centers, and the broader implications of space exploration on American society and politics. The Space Show Wisdom Team including myself, guest Bob Zimmerman, Marshall Martin, Phil Swan, Dr. Doug Plata, John Hunt and Zoom phone caller Daniel. Note that in this program I experimented with various Zoom speaker layout positions. If you have a preferred format, please let me know by sending an email to drspace@thespaceshow.com or posting a blog message on the blog page on our website, www.thespaceshow.com/show/11-nov-2025/broadcast-4459-zoom-bob-zimmerman-returns.Detailed Summary:David and Bob discussed potential candidates for the position of NASA Administrator, expressing reservations about Isaacman and Sec. Duffy. They agreed on the importance of maintaining professional decorum during these discussions. The conversation also touched on the upcoming appearance of Avi Loeb on their show and the breaking up of the comet 3i Atlas.During the program Bob made some predictions about the future of space exploration. Zimmerman claimed that SpaceX, rather than NASA, is currently the most effective American space program. He predicted that in two years, everyone would recognize SpaceX’s dominance. Zimmerman also suggested that NASA’s role should become less significant, with its focus shifting to supporting private space endeavors rather than leading space exploration efforts.Bob predicted that Isaacman’s nomination as NASA administrator would successful despite potential challenges, as he expects Isaacman to be confirmed. He speculated that Trump’s initial withdrawal and subsequent renomination of Isaacman were influenced by Isaacman’s past Democratic Party affiliations and his recent statements at a Turning Point USA event, which may have reassured Trump about Isaacman’s loyalty. Bob expressed hope that Isaacman would reshape NASA to focus on public-private partnerships, making it more efficient and less relevant, though Congress’s involvement could complicate this process. He also hoped that Isaacman, as a former astronaut, would prioritize safety and engineering over schedules, potentially delaying the Artemis mission to test critical systems without risking human lives. Bob believe it is unsafe or at least very risky to fly humans on the first mission with the Orion spacecraft.Our Wisdom Team discussed the Artemis program and its workforce, with Bob estimating around 2,000 people directly involved in building Artemis missions, plus additional contractors. They debated the future of human spaceflight, with Bob expressing skepticism about the long-term value of the Artemis program compared to private space initiatives like SpaceX’s Starship. This part of the discussion concluded with Bob advocating for a more flexible approach to space exploration that focuses on building American space industry capabilities rather than competing with China to be first to return to the Moon.Phil and Bob discussed the challenges and approaches to space exploration, focusing on the differences between NASA’s cautious engineering approach and SpaceX’s faster, iterative testing method. Bob expressed concerns about the Orion spacecraft’s heat shield issues and NASA’s tendency to prioritize schedules over engineering safety, drawing parallels to past accidents. He emphasized the importance of rigorous testing and learning from failures, advocating for a SpaceX-like approach of frequent testing and flying. Bob also criticized Blue Origin’s slowdown under new leadership, highlighting the need for continuous testing and improvement in space technology development.The Wisdom Team discussed SpaceX’s upcoming launches and development timeline. Bob predicted that SpaceX’s Flight Test 12 would be successful and occur around the end of December, with Flight Test 13 potentially featuring a double catch around February. He noted that SpaceX aims to conduct an orbital mission next, followed by tests of controlled re-entry and in-orbit refueling. We also discussed SpaceX’s financial independence, with Bob emphasizing that Starlink revenue is solid and will allow SpaceX to pursue its own space program without relying on NASA. He predicted that in 2-3 years, SpaceX will be close to operational with Starship, capable of lunar missions and demonstrating refueling in space.Our team talked about Elon Musk’s space ambitions and political stance, with Bob noting that while Musk’s trillion-dollar bonus is not yet earned, his Mars colonization plans remain a key goal. David raised concerns about political polarization affecting space policy, particularly regarding Musk’s relationship with NASA and the FAA’s handling of SpaceX permits during the Biden administration. The discussion concluded with Bob comparing Musk to Cornelius Vanderbilt, emphasizing that despite Musk’s failed attempt to create a new political party, his primary focus remains on engineering and space exploration rather than politics.The Wisdom Team went on to discuss the scientific analysis of comet 3i Atlas, with Bob expressing frustration that Avi Loeb’s claims about it being an alien spacecraft have distracted from the significant finding that it is a typical interstellar comet, similar to others in the solar system. Bob criticized Loeb’s approach as overanalyzing and not supported by the data, while Phil and John suggested that Loeb’s intentions might be more about raising awareness and preparedness for such phenomena rather than genuinely believing in an alien origin.We shifted to a discussion about space exploration, with Bob predicting a busy year for commercial space launches, including attempts from several companies like SpaceX, Rocket Lab, and various Chinese and Indian startups. David inquired about the timeline for establishing private lunar habitats, to which Bob suggested that within two decades, thriving commercial operations could be established on the Moon, Mars, and other celestial bodies, pending the freedom for private enterprise in space exploration.We went on to talk about the role of robots and AI in space exploration while emphasizing that while AI and robots are valuable tools, they should not replace human exploration. Bob noted that SpaceX’s Elon Musk uses AI sparingly in their operations and views robots as tools to enable human achievement rather than as the primary goal. The conversation then shifted to Mars exploration, where Bob highlighted that current rovers have focused on scientific research rather than potential colony sites, and he suggested that future robotic missions should focus on scouting locations where humans might establish colonies. David raised concerns about Space Show programs continued heavy focus on SpaceX, noting that while SpaceX dominates the American space program, he strives to diversify the discussion topics. Not always do the participants pay attention to that effort at program diversity.The Wisdom Team started talking about development of space markets and the cost of accessing space. Bob argued that while launch costs have decreased, they are still high enough to support private investment in space companies, citing examples like SpaceX’s success and new competitors like Rocket Lab and Stoke Space. Phil countered that launch costs have not significantly decreased, with Falcon 9 still costing around $6,500 per kilogram, and emphasized that more significant cost reductions are needed for a major increase in space businesses. Collectively we discussed how competition could eventually drive down launch costs, with Robert expressing regret that Blue Origin’s delays have hindered competition with SpaceX.The Wisdom Team discussed the economics of space launch vehicles, with Bob and Phil debating the extent to which SpaceX has achieved “cheap access to space.” While Phil noted that SpaceX’s prices haven’t significantly decreased from historical rates, Bob emphasized that SpaceX’s reusable rockets provide a cost advantage over other launch providers. The discussion then shifted to Daniel’s question about space-based data centers, with Phil providing engineering insights about the challenges of power and heat management in different orbital locations.As our program was ending, phone listener Daniel brought up for discussion the feasibility of orbital data centers, with Marshall proposing the idea of using Starlink satellites equipped with AI processors and solar panels. Bob emphasized that while the concept might be promising, it would require investment capital and launch capacity. David shared his concerns about the practicality of orbital data centers, citing the challenges of energy supply and cooling in space. The discussion concluded with suggestions for future projects and the need for concise communication with our team members and the guest in future shows.HISTORICAL NOTE:During the discussion, I mentioned an older show with the student posting cube sat instructions on the web back in the day when cube sats were not a common term or space hardware item. The program in question featured Zac Manchester who was doing a Kickstarter program and he posted cube sat diagrams on the web. The program link is www.thespaceshow.com/show/05-feb-2013/broadcast-1944-special-edition. This program with Zac was dated Feb. 5, 2013. If any of you know what Zac is doing today, I would like to catch up with him, maybe have him return as a Space Show guest. If you have trouble playing this oldie but goodie, 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 Corpor

The Space Show Presents Open Lines Sunday, Nov. 9, 2025Brief Summary: The program began with discussions about the delayed New Glenn rocket launch due to weather concerns, followed by conversations about space policy, regulations, and the future of the International Space Station. The group explored various space exploration programs and technologies, including NASA’s Orion program, commercial space stations, and potential human settlements on the Moon and Mars. They concluded by discussing upcoming launches, space policy uncertainties, and more.Detailed Summary:Our program began with a discussion about the New Glenn rocket launch, which was delayed due to weather conditions. Bill Gowan provided updates on the launch window and weather concerns. David discussed potential changes to the Space Show which might include plans to post videos on YouTube for a broader audience. The Space Show (SS) Wisdom Team also touched on upcoming Space Show guests and programming changes for 2025. Ryan Watson, a caller, joined the discussion to share his concerns about the FAA’s new regulations on rocket launches and the current state of air traffic control.The Space Show Wisdom Team discussed an article by Casey H. that critically assesses NASA’s Orion program, highlighting concerns about cost, schedule, and technical issues. Bill shared this article with the participants, noting his interest in further investigating these concerns. David mentioned inviting the author back to his show for a future discussion which will be Dec. 2. Peter raised questions about the future of the International Space Station (ISS), expressing concern about its planned deorbiting in 2030. Marshall explained that the ISS, like any aircraft, experiences stress and wear over time, making its continued operation unsafe beyond a certain point. He suggested that the modular design of the ISS could allow for partial reuse in a new station or other projects. David noted that space biomed researchers would like to see the ISS continue due to its valuable contributions to medical research, but he expressed doubt about its extension given budget constraints and the high cost of maintenance.The Wisdom Team discussed the future of the International Space Station (ISS) and its potential replacement with commercial space stations. Doug cited a high cost per paper ($700,000) produced by ISS research, questioning its value for American taxpayers. Phil and Doug agreed that NASA should focus on Moon and Mars programs rather than extending ISS operations, as commercial space stations are unlikely to become commercially viable without NASA funding. Bill inquired about the potential value of relocating ISS to a resource-rich location, but Doug expressed skepticism about the feasibility and cost of such an operation.The Wisdom Team discussed the value and necessity of maintaining a human presence in space, particularly focusing on space stations, the Moon, and Mars. Doug expressed skepticism about the economic benefits of space stations, emphasizing the potential for national prestige and military applications, though he questioned whether these justify human presence in orbit. The conversation shifted to the long-term potential of establishing human settlements on the Moon and Mars, with Phil and Doug agreeing that such endeavors would require a long-term perspective and careful consideration of each step. John Jossy highlighted Elon Musk’s focus on infrastructure and transportation for Mars, while also noting the need to address the question of human reproduction in space. Bill shared an update about a recent incident involving Chinese astronauts being stranded at their space station due to debris damage.The Wisdom Team took on the challenge to discuss hardware incompatibility between different space programs, particularly regarding the Chinese space station, with Bill suggesting that an adapter similar to the Apollo-Soyuz test flight project could be a solution. They also explored the Artemis program’s future, with Phil expressing optimism about its success despite public perception issues regarding cost, while Doug and Marshall discussed the potential for SpaceX’s Starship to eventually replace the Artemis program, particularly for missions beyond Artemis III.Next, the Wisdom Team discussed the upcoming New Glen launch, with Phil expressing confidence in its engineering capabilities and potential to compete with SLS. Doug highlighted Blue Origin’s Blue Moon program as a significant alternative to SpaceX’s Starship, noting its hydrogen upper stage for lunar resource utilization. David raised concerns about the lack of constants in current space policy and the challenges of planning in such an uncertain environment, while Peter suggested that private industry might be more reliable than government policies due to their focus on profitability.Our Wisdom Team discussed several key topics related to space exploration and technology. They examined the potential for data centers in space, with some skepticism about the feasibility due to thermal and cost constraints. The conversation also covered the upcoming New Glenn launch and NASA leadership candidates, with particular focus on Jared Isaacman’s potential appointment as NASA administrator.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 4459 ZOOM Bob Zimmerman returns | Tuesday 11 Nov 2025 700PM PTGuests: Robert ZimmermanZOOM. Bob is back and policy and news plus a look at space 2025.Broadcast 4460 Hotel Mars: Dr. Matthew Graham, an astronomer at the California Institute of Technology | Wednesday 12 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Dr. Matthew GrahamDr. Graham discusses the slow consumption of a star by a black holeBroadcast 4461: ZOOM Dr. Daniel Whiteson | Friday 14 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Daniel WhitesonZoom: Dr. Whiteson discusses his book “Do Aliens Speak Physics?”Broadcast 4462: Zoom: Dr. Doug Plata | Sunday 16 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Doug Plata Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Brief Summary: The program focused on a discussion with Roger Launius, a retired NASA historian, about his book covering NASA’s history from its origins as NACA to the present day. The conversation explored NASA’s relationship with commercial space industry, historical organizational changes, and the challenges of accessing NASA’s historical records and archives. The discussion also covered various technical and political aspects of space exploration, including decision-making processes, military roles in space, and the evolution of NASA’s approach to partnerships and innovation. Roger shared his thoughts on the future of space exploration, expressing uncertainty about the timeline for lunar missions and human presence on Mars. Space Show team participants included myself, John Jossy, Bill Gowan, Marshall Martin, John Hunt, Dr. Ajay Kothari, and Phil Swan.Detailed Summary: As host I welcomed Dr. Roger Launius back to the Space Show to discuss his new book, “From NACA to NASA to Now.” Launius explained that the book, published in 2025, provides a concise history of NASA from its origins as the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) in 1915 to its transformation into NASA in 1958. He highlighted the ongoing role of NASA’s legacy research centers in aeronautical research today. Launius also discussed the evolution of the aerospace industry, emphasizing that the distinction between “old space” and “new space” is complex and not clearly defined. He noted that private sector activities in space have a long history, dating back to the 1950s, and that NASA’s approach to commercial partnerships has evolved over time, particularly with the creation of separate entities to handle launch services in the 1990s.Bill Gowan and Roger discussed the evolution of NASA’s relationship with commercial space, noting that while NASA has always relied on commercial industry for spacecraft design and construction, there has been a shift towards non-cost-plus contracts. Roger highlighted that while NASA innovations have contributed to commercial space advancements, the designs are not entirely independent of NASA’s influence. They also explored the partisan nature of NASA’s early years, with Roger explaining that the Apollo program faced political challenges from both the left and right, and was subject to budget cuts after its initial success.The discussion focused on the impact of the government shutdown on NASA’s historical resources and archives. Roger explained that while NASA facilities are currently closed, their websites and online historical resources remain accessible, though not updated. He detailed the complex federal records system, noting that most NASA records are stored at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., and other federal record centers across the country, with access often delayed by years, especially for recent or classified materials. Marshall inquired about accessing Elon Musk’s communications with NASA and the President, to which Roger clarified that such recent records would not be available in the National Archives yet and suggested using interviews and publicly released documents for journalistic research on recent events.Roger explained that separating historical facts from salesmanship in space exploration is a challenging task due to the varied motivations behind statements. He emphasized the importance of understanding these motivations and balancing contradictory perspectives. David inquired about the feasibility of modernizing old Apollo lunar lander plans, to which Roger confirmed that NASA possesses extensive technical drawings and records of past hardware in federal records centers and has historically allowed access for analysis. Roger also described the difficult transition from NACA to NASA in 1958, highlighting resistance from the military, particularly over the transfer of the von Braun team and the Army Ballistic Missile Agency’s resources, which was a prolonged and contentious process.Our discussion addressed historical NASA consolidations and organizational changes, with Roger explaining that efforts to close or merge NASA facilities have been ongoing since the 1960s, though political opposition from congressional delegations has typically prevented closures. The conversation also covered the history of the National Space Council, which was established in 1958 but became less active after the 1960s, particularly under Nixon, before being revived by the Trump administration. John Hunt raised questions about military roles in space, noting how the Army developed its own ballistic missile programs while the Air Force maintained separate capabilities, highlighting ongoing challenges in service roles and missions.Roger explained that Space Council issues are now handled through the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the White House. He discussed the difficulty in finding detailed information about NASA’s decision-making process for certain projects, such as the Mars Sample Return mission. Roger mentioned that some individuals, like George Lowe and Bob Siemens, kept detailed records of meetings and decisions, which are now available at Rensselaer and MIT respectively. David asked if there would be a “post-NASA era,” to which Roger responded that there is no known impetus for such a transition. The conversation also touched on the public and intellectual resistance to using Nazi engineers, like Wernher von Braun, in the early American space program, and the debate within the federal government about this issue.Roger discussed the history of supersonic flight, clarifying that Chuck Yeager did not demand a million dollars to fly the X1 and that Slick Chalmers flew multiple supersonic flights. He also addressed a controversy about whether the F-86 pilot beat Yeager’s speed record, noting that the evidence was unreliable. Roger emphasized the importance of data-driven decision-making in engineering, using examples from the Challenger disaster and flight readiness reviews. Marshall inquired about decision-making processes, and Roger highlighted the need for comprehensive data and proper training in engineering education.The group discussed historical space program decisions, focusing on the Challenger launch and the X-30 National Aerospace Plane program. Roger explained that while data existed showing risks of cold-weather launches, the decision-making process was complex and the data wasn’t presented clearly, leading to the catastrophic failure. The discussion also covered the X-30 program, which was announced by Reagan in the 1980s but ended in the early 90s due to technological challenges and cost concerns, though some research continued.Roger discussed the NACA’s contributions to aeronautics, highlighting its approach to research and development. He explained how the NACA hired young engineers and provided them with advanced research tools, such as the variable density wind tunnel, which led to significant advancements in airframe and wing design. Roger also mentioned the NACA’s involvement in rocket research during World War II, which eventually led to the establishment of NASA and the transition of key personnel to the new space agency.Roger discussed his friendship with Dr. John Anderson and shared details about a 2009 incident involving Mike Griffin and Laurie Garver at a launch party for John Logsdon’s book. He explained that Mike Griffin expressed concerns about Laurie Garver’s involvement in the Constellation program, emphasizing her need to step back from technical details. Roger also highlighted Laurie Garver’s significant role in transitioning NASA to the commercial crew program, advocating for private sector involvement in space exploration. The conversation touched on the challenges NASA faced in the 1990s, including the cancellation of the X-33 program and the search for alternatives to the Space Shuttle.Concluding Summary: The meeting featured an interview with Roger, a retired NASA historian, who discussed his book on the history of NASA and its predecessor organizations. Roger shared his plans for future conferences and mentioned his current residence in Auburn, Alabama. The discussion also covered the availability of Roger’s book for free download from NASA. The conversation ended with thanks to the show’s sponsors and participants, and a reminder about an upcoming open lines session.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:Tuesday, 11-11-25; 7 PM PDT, 10 PM EDT:Bob Zimmerman returns with space news and updates plus a look at space 2025. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Hotel Mars, Weds, Nov. 5, 2025Guest Dr. Ajay KothariSummary:John and I welcomed back to Hotel Mars Dr. AJ Kothari for one segment to discuss Russia’s successful test of the nuclear-powered Burevestnik cruise missile which Russia claims flew 14,000 km for 15 hours. The missile does this by capturing and compresses air, heating it over a nuclear reactor to create thrust. Dr. Kothari emphasized the attack danger of this missile because it flies low (50 to 100 m above the terrain) and is hard to detect. When asked if look down tech such as an AWAC or something similar could pick it up it, he said but he also explained his answer so don’t miss it. He notes this nuclear propulsion technology, or similar ramjet designs, could revolutionize commercial travel and be applied to flight on Mars, using its CO₂ atmosphere for heating. That said it would not be good for in space or the Moon due to no atmosphere. In such cases it would need to take fuel with it which might negate any advantages it might otherwise have.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 4458 ZOOM Open Lines Discussion | Sunday 09 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines Discussion Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Arkisys CEO DAVE BARNHART Sunday, 11-2-25David Barnhart (Dave), CEO of Arkisys and research professor at USC, discussed the company’s progress in space operations and their unique business platform called “The Port” in Los Alamitos, Ca, including their work with NASA’s Astrobee facility and development of a free-flying space platform called “The Port.” The discussion covered various technical aspects including funding sources, modular space platforms, and navigation systems, while addressing challenges in hiring engineers and developing flexible infrastructure for space servicing. The conversation ended with conversations about future plans including lunar applications, and company security measures. Before ending, Dave highlighted the potential environmental impact of satellite debris and mentioned a USC PhD student’s research on the topic presented at the United Nations. I referenced future Space Show programs with Hotel Mars Dr. Kothari and Dr. Roger Lanius on Friday to discuss his new book.CEO Dave discussed his role in managing the Astrobee facility, a robotic free flyer inside the International Space Station. He explained that Arkisys, where he works, had taken over the commercial maintenance and operation of Astrobee which is used for microgravity experiments inside the ISS. The facility allows for testing in full 6 degrees of freedom in a zero-G environment, with capabilities for various payloads and operations lasting about 3 hours per session. Our guest noted that while NASA does not pay for the service, it aligns with his company business model focused on services, and they are responsible for helping customers through the necessary paperwork and procedures to use Astrobee.David went on to discuss the development of his free-flying space platform called “The Port,” which will provide a stable environment for autonomous robotics and payload hosting. He explained that the first flight of key technologies, carried by a 250-kilogram vehicle called the Cutter, is planned for late 2026, with the goal of demonstrating rendezvous capabilities with a port module in a 525-kilometer Sun Sync orbit. Barnhart noted that while there is competition in the space infrastructure and logistics sector, the market for hosted payloads and space servicing is projected to grow significantly, with potential revenue from existing markets like hosted payloads.Barnhart discussed his company’s funding, which includes government grants, SBIR, STTR, and contracts from DIU and the Space Development Agency. He explained their development of a modular space platform with propulsion capabilities, including the use of chemical systems and potential partnerships with companies using electric propulsion. Barnhart also addressed the challenges of refueling and connecting different interfaces for their platform, noting that they conducted a study on various interfaces worldwide and are working on creating a flexible system for future growth.David discussed the evolution of his satellite concept from a DARPA challenge focused on modular orbital functions to the development of “satlets” and port modules. He explained how the concept of cellularization led to the creation of scalable, multi-functional satellite components that could be aggregated, addressing the challenge of building cost-effective satellites. Barnhart described his company’s current size of 4 full-time employees plus himself, with plans to expand to 10-12 people, and mentioned their upcoming move to a larger facility to accommodate growth and develop a flat floor testing platform for robotic arm movements in space.Barnhart further discussed the challenges of hiring engineers for innovative space projects, noting that while experienced engineers are valuable for technical expertise, they may struggle with new concepts, while less experienced engineers might be more adaptable but lack depth. He emphasized the importance of finding a balance between technical expertise and innovative thinking. Ryan inquired about the potential internal applications of the Astrobee partnership with NASA, to which Barnhart confirmed that the learnings would be applied to Arkisys port module for validation and verification post-launch. Barnhart also explained the company’s use of an AI-based system, powered by a large language model, to assist in identifying potential issues with connectivity and safety. He highlighted the flexibility of the port module, which can be reconfigured and expanded in multiple dimensions to meet various customer needs, and emphasized the company’s focus on creating a versatile infrastructure for space servicing rather than specializing in a single service like refueling.The team discussed navigation systems for their spaceport module, which includes onboard cameras, GPS, IMU, and a partnership with Fugro for high-precision navigation down to centimeter accuracy using differential GPS and L-band signals. Dave explained their power management strategy, noting they have 500 watts on the cutter and plan for 1,000-1,500 watts on the port module, with power optimization software to manage shared infrastructure. Marshall inquired about lunar applications, to which he confirmed the system could be adapted for lunar and Mars orbits, including potential use as a communications router to handle different frequency standards around the moon.David also discussed the challenges of selecting the right mix of connectors for their first port module to ensure flexibility over the next five years, particularly in light of Europe’s space servicing push. He mentioned they have letters of intent from prospective customers and have conducted over 20 tests with 15 different types of customers using a full-scale port module mock-up. Barnhart also addressed cyber and IT theft protection, noting they are NIST certified and going through the audit process for CMMC, with a focus on mitigating attacks from overseas. He explained they are developing software for security, including the ability to encrypt payload data with customer-specific keys, and are allocating 5% of their monthly budget to IT security.David Barnhart discussed the company’s approach to satellite connectivity, explaining they are working with AWS ground stations and exploring optical beam communication options. He addressed Marshall’s question about interfacing with satellite constellations, noting they are currently independent but considering multiple ground station providers. Our guest responded to David’s question about succession planning, confirming they have explored directors and key people insurance and identified Dr. Raul Rugani as a potential successor. Ryan inquired about the company’s growth strategy, to which he explained they are focusing on key modularization challenges while being open to partnerships for specialized technologies like robotics, with the goal of creating flexible port modules that can accommodate various capabilities.Dave discussed the challenges and potential solutions for exploring lava tubes on Mars using a modified Ingenuity helicopter, emphasizing the need for a hybrid approach involving both aerial and rover-based systems. He explained the technology behind cave navigation using SLAM and highlighted the importance of energy and data distribution. Barnhart also described the Bosun Locker project, which provides students with 3D printable files to design and test hardware for space applications. Additionally, he addressed the environmental impact of space debris reentering the Earth’s atmosphere, noting the potential for nanoparticles to affect the atmosphere’s composition and radiation effects.David and Dave discussed the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday and both expressed gratitude to the Space Show team. They encouraged listeners to support the show through donations and subscriptions. David mentioned the next shows will feature Dr. Roger Lanius, then an open lines discussion.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 4457: ZOOM Dr. Roger Launius | Friday 07 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Roger LauniusZoom: Dr. Launius talks about his new book, “NACA to NASA to Now.”Broadcast 4458 ZOOM Open Lines Discussion | Sunday 09 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines Discussion Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Doug Messier was our Hotel Mars guest to discuss the challenges and the struggles concerning NASA getting back to the Moon before China even gets to the Moon. and the Moon Race Douglas Messier both responded to questions by John and David and he discussed a power struggle over NASA, including acting administrator Shawn Duffy’s interest in folding NASA into the Department of Transportation and his concern that the United States might lose the Moon Race 2.0 to China. The race is such a high priority to the administration that Duffy has even challenged SpaceX’s contract for the Artemis 3 moon landing, aiming to accelerate lander development amid fears that dependence on the complex Starship/Superheavy architecture might delay the mission beyond 2029. Doug breaks it all down for us in this edition of Hotel Mars. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Bill Gowan, Tuesday, 10-28-25Quick Summary:The main focus of the discussion was Bill’s experience participating in The Planetary Society’s advocacy efforts on Capitol Hill, where he and other volunteers met with congressional representatives to advocate for increased funding for NASA’s science programs, which faces a proposed 47% budget cut in 2026.Detailed SummaryDavid Livingston hosted a special early Tuesday space show program featuring Bill Gowan, a retired electrical and systems engineer with experience in medical comms and aerospace. Bill discussed a recent citizens lobbying event in D.C. where 300 people met with their representatives to advocate for saving NASA science, which faces a proposed 47% budget cut in the 2026 NASA budget. The discussion highlighted how NASA science benefits American society through economic, medical, and technological advancements, while also addressing concerns about NASA employee reductions, with 20% of employees expected to leave by year-end. Bill was one of the 300 participating in the advocacy event.Bill explained that the 20% net figure for employee retirements and departures to private industry includes normal attrition and is considered a legitimate concern. He clarified that the advocacy work he and others were involved in was not lobbying, as it was done on a volunteer basis without payment. Bill described his decision to participate in the October advocacy event, which involved 19 other organizations, despite the success of a similar effort in March, due to the ongoing need to encourage Congress to do more for NASA and address the organization’s weakening foundation.Bill described a two-day training event organized by The Planetary Society for over 300 participants, including meetings with congressional representatives. The training covered NASA’s budget, with President Biden requesting $3.9 billion for NASA science, while the Senate proposed $7.3 billion and the House $6 billion, though with a “not less than” clause. Bill explained that participants met with their senators’ offices and representatives, with the logistics managed by a third party to ensure efficient scheduling.Bill and David discussed strategies for advocating for NASA’s space and science budget before Congress. They highlighted the importance of preparing clear messages, leveraging public support, and emphasizing the economic benefits of NASA’s science missions. Bill shared his experience with his own North Carolina delegation, where they met with seven members, including some first-time advocates. They emphasized the need to prioritize space science, referencing China’s increased investment in space exploration, and highlighted the return on investment for NASA’s science programs. Bill also mentioned the case of Christina Cook, a North Carolina native who will be the first woman to walk on the moon, to underscore the state’s connection to NASA’s missions.Bill discussed his experiences with meetings, noting that they lasted between 15 and 30 minutes. He shared that he had not seen individuals using meetings to advocate for personal issues, but he believed it would be permissible as long as the person was clear they were speaking as a citizen, not for any organization. Bill also mentioned meeting with Representative Fushi’s staffer, who was knowledgeable and supportive of NASA funding. Dr. Ajay Kothari inquired about the responses from Congress members, and Bill explained that both his representative and Senator Fushi were supportive of NASA funding. They briefly discussed the Senate’s $7.3 billion NASA science budget and how it relates to the $10 billion added by Senator Cruz, which Bill clarified was part of a reconciliation bill outside the normal appropriation process.Bill shared his previous experience participating in NASA advocacy meetings on Capitol Hill, noting that congressional staff generally receive space advocacy messages positively but express concerns about the 47% budget cut proposed by the administration. He explained that while there’s no significant difference in reception between Democratic and Republican-controlled White Houses, the current proposal faces resistance due to the large percentage cut being implemented in one year. The meetings, which involve approximately 300 advocates, are organized by Casey Dreyer and Jack Corrali, with participants completing feedback forms after each meeting to help improve future advocacy efforts.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 4455 ZOOM: Arkisys CEO David Barnhart | Sunday 02 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:ZOOM, Dave Barnhart, CEO of Arkisys updates us with interesting news and developments Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. Arun Sharma Monday 10-27-25 Space ShowQuick Summary:Our program focused on the establishment and operations of Cedars-Sinai’s new Space Medicine Research Center, including its research programs, educational components, and institutional support. Arun discussed their stem cell research initiatives, particularly the creation of 3D heart tissue organoids grown in microgravity on the ISS, and explained their approach to training astronauts and conducting space-based medical research. The conversation covered the potential of AI and telemedicine in space missions, regulatory challenges in stem cell research, and the future opportunities presented by commercial space stations for conducting biomedical research. David and Arun were joined by participant Dr. Sherry Bell.Detailed Summary:David and Dr. Sherry Bell discussed the establishment of the Center for Space Medicine Research at Cedars-Sinai, led by Arun. Arun confirmed the center’s functionality and its institutional support, emphasizing its research and educational components. After Arun was welcomed back to The Space Show to discuss Cedars-Sinai Medical Center’s new Space Medicine Research Center. Arun explained that the center, established about a year ago, builds on their 10 years of work in stem cell and biomanufacturing research, including 8 missions to the ISS. He noted that the center has both research and educational components, offering courses in space medicine and biosciences as part of their master’s and PhD programs. Arun emphasized their institutional support and goal to become an academic partner for the growing private space industry in Los Angeles.Arun discussed Cedars’ expansion beyond cardiovascular focus to broader biomanufacturing and space research, with plans to establish a clinical arm leveraging their hospital’s expertise. He mentioned ongoing conversations with local space industry players in LA, though details are not yet public. Arun also outlined their vision for a comprehensive space medicine program, including pre-flight workups, in-flight diagnostics, and post-flight checkups, while acknowledging the need for space medical training for their network of providers.Arun further discussed his research on 3D heart tissue, or cardiac organoids, created from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). He explained that these tissues are grown in microgravity on the ISS, as microgravity may improve their growth compared to simulated microgravity on Earth. Arun clarified that the iPSCs and necessary chemicals were launched on SpaceX 33 in August and are now orbiting Earth. David inquired about astronaut training, and Arun explained that they work with engineers and partners like BioServe Space Technologies to train astronauts, as most are not life scientists. Arun expressed a desire for more direct communication with astronauts in the future.The discussion then focused on stem cell research and space medicine training. Arun explained that stem cells are sourced from de-identified donor samples at Cedars-Sinai, with consent for medical research use. The long-term goal is to create patient-specific bioengineered organs, starting with heart tissues, though this remains an area of ongoing research. Arun clarified that the initial training program will focus on biosciences for research scientists, with plans to expand to clinical training in the future.Arun did talk about the potential of AI and telemedicine in supporting deep space missions, emphasizing the value of human-focused research over animal studies. He clarified that his lab uses patient-specific stem cell models, focusing on human biology, and does not work with embryonic stem cells. Arun also addressed the cost and funding challenges of conducting research in space, mentioning partnerships with government agencies and the need to explore alternative funding sources for future collaborations. David inquired about simulating microgravity studies, to which Arun explained that while some ground-based simulations exist, they do not perfectly replicate the conditions of true space microgravity.Arun explained that the stem cell research at Cedars Space Lab involves creating three-dimensional organoids to study human biology and potentially identify new drugs, but emphasized that these cells cannot be transplanted back into people due to ethical and regulatory constraints. He clarified that the research is outcome-oriented, focusing on whether stem cells can be improved in space, with the goal of creating better models for understanding heart development and drug efficacy. David raised concerns about potential regulatory differences between countries, particularly regarding stem cell research, and Arun acknowledged that while the US has strict guidelines, some international research may go unpublished, making it difficult to track all ongoing work in this field.Arun discussed his work as a stem cell biologist and highlighted the potential of space biology research, mentioning a recent publication by UC San Diego on growing cancer cells in space. He expressed concerns about the transition from the ISS to commercial space stations, acknowledging the ISS’s valuable contributions to research but seeing an opportunity for the commercial industry to fill the gap. Arun also considered the possibility of conducting research on a commercial space station, emphasizing the potential for more biomedical researchers in space and the possibility of accelerated training in a private space capacity. He expressed interest in the idea of conducting his own research on a private space station, such as SpaceX’s Starship, and noted the importance of access and opportunities for further research.Arun discussed the differences between microgravity and partial gravity environments in space, highlighting the potential for developing unique therapeutic options that may only be applicable in space. He explained that while some treatments could be brought back to Earth, others might require patients to travel to space for treatment. Arun also touched on the current state of stem cell research, including clinical trials for various applications, and expressed optimism about future advancements in bioprinting and organoid manufacturing in space. He emphasized the importance of personalized medicine using patient-specific stem cells and encouraged continued interest in both stem cell and space biology research.Be sure to see the video of this program at doctorspace.substack.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 4455 ZOOM: Arkisys CEO David Barnhart | Sunday 02 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:ZOOM, Dave Barnhart, CEO of Arkisys updates us with interesting news and developments Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Open Line Discussion – 4451 10-26-25Quick Summary: The meeting began with technical discussions about audio issues and upcoming show scheduling, including a fundraising campaign for The Space Show. The group then engaged in extensive discussions about space exploration, focusing on SpaceX’s Starship program, NASA’s lunar lander projects, and the geopolitical competition with China regarding moon missions. The conversation concluded with debates about rocket system capabilities, cost effectiveness, and the need for strong leadership at NASA to navigate both technical challenges and political considerations.Detailed Summary:Our program started out with David making a few general program announcements. We talked about upcoming shows, including a potential cancellation for Friday. The conversation then shifted to space settlement, with John mentioning a recent podcast about Tesla’s financial results and its focus on automation and robots for future space missions. David expressed skepticism about Starship’s readiness to take humans to the moon before China and before Trump leaves office, emphasizing the political importance of achieving these goal before the end of 2028.David announced the start of the annual fundraising campaign for The Space Show, a non-profit 501C3 program, which begins around Thanksgiving. He encouraged listeners to call into live programs using Zoom Phone lines, which offers better audio quality than the previous toll-free line. David expressed gratitude to the donors who have supported the show for nearly 25 years, allowing it to continue. He also invited non-donors to participate in the program and contribute to the fundraising campaign through various payment methods on both The Space Show website, www.thespaceshow.com and our Substack site, doctorspace.substack.com.Early on I shared excitement about a new physics book by Daniel Whiteson that explores universal scientific concepts, including the possibility of alien understanding of our known physics. I also highlighted the ongoing debate between Transportation Secretary/NASA Administrator Sean Duffy and Musk regarding the delays for both the SpaceX’s human lunar lander but also Blue Origin’s human lunar lander projects, emphasizing the need for the U.S. to prioritize returning to the moon and beating China to it. Phil suggested a structured debate to address the technical aspects of NASA’s decision to open lunar lander bidding, advocating for a more in-depth analysis of the issue.Our Zoom group discussed the possibility of organizing a debate on the Starship Human Lander Engineering Design Program, with Phil suggesting it could be a shorter, 40-minute format to attract a wider audience. David expressed concerns about the debate’s impact, noting that previous attempts to influence policy through debates were unsuccessful. The group also touched on the potential for sharing debate clips on platforms like YouTube and Substack to increase exposure.The group talked about SpaceX’s position and the challenges of organizing an independent audit of SpaceX’s delays. They debated the feasibility of an independent panel examining technical and policy factors contributing to SpaceX’s delays, with concerns raised about SpaceX’s proprietary information and the current hyper-partisan environment. The conversation shifted to the broader context of U.S. space exploration, with Charles suggesting focusing on establishing a long-term lunar facility rather than rushing to beat China to the moon, while others emphasized the importance of cislunar economy and political competition in reaching the moon as soon as possible.Our Space Show participants looked at options for returning to the moon, with Ajay presenting two possible solutions: an Apollo-like lander or a modified Blue Moon Mark 1.5. Charles and others expressed concerns about the feasibility and wisdom of using old Apollo technology, arguing for a more modern approach. The discussion also touched on potential NASA administrators, with Sean Duffy and Jared Isaacman being considered as candidates. David emphasized that the NASA administrator serves at the president’s pleasure and would likely follow the president’s agenda rather than any personal or corporate interests.The group discussed the influence of political leaders, particularly Trump, on space policy and the role of advisors like Jared Isaacman. They explored the potential impact of a major incident involving China’s space program on U.S. policy and SpaceX’s development timeline. The conversation also covered milestones for both SpaceX’s Starship program and China’s lunar mission plans, with Marshall inquiring about China’s key milestones for moon travel. The discussion concluded with an acknowledgment that the topic had been covered extensively, and David invited participants to bring up other topics for further discussion.The conversation went back to discussing the challenges and limitations of SpaceX’s Starship and Falcon Heavy systems, while expressing concerns about Starship’s current performance and suggesting a hypothetical collaboration between SpaceX and another company that was quickly dismissed by Michael and others due to interpersonal conflicts. Marshall presented data on Falcon 9’s cost-effectiveness, claiming it had reduced space transportation costs to $2,500 per kilogram, though Phil disputed these figures, suggesting a more realistic cost of around $6,000-10,000 per kilogram. The discussion concluded with Phil explaining the mass-to-orbit ratios of different rocket systems, noting that Starship’s approach was closest to the Space Shuttle’s method of transporting large amounts of mass to orbit.The focus continued on the challenges and limitations of SpaceX’s Starship program, particularly regarding the mass fraction required to reach orbit and the reusability concerns. They debated whether Starship could achieve the goal of 100 flights before carrying humans, with Charles and Marshall expressing skepticism about meeting this target within the given timeframe. The conversation also touched on the cost and complexity of refurbishing reusable rocket stages, comparing it to the Falcon 9 program.We talked about the potential of China beating the U.S. to extract lunar water, while I emphasized the geopolitical risks of China’s lunar ambitions and the need to prioritize returning to the moon before them. John Hunt raised concerns about the government shutdown potentially hindering NASA’s observations of the 3i Atlas comet, leading to a decision to invite Avi Loeb back on the show to discuss it further. The conversation also touched on ESA’s planned probe for the 2030s and the Europa Clipper mission’s potential to observe the comet.As we neared the end of our program we discussed the geopolitical implications of China potentially establishing a presence at the South Pole, with Marshall expressing concern about mining rights claims. Phil suggested focusing on demonstrating technological superiority rather than racing China to specific destinations. John Hunt argued that being beaten by China might actually motivate the U.S. space program, while others noted that the current political climate makes long-term planning difficult. The conversation concluded with a debate about NASA’s future leadership and potential reorganization, with some emphasizing the need for someone with both technical knowledge and visionary leadership.Please see the video of this program at doctorspace.substack.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 4455 ZOOM: Arkisys CEO David Barnhart | Sunday 02 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:ZOOM, Dave Barnhart, CEO of Arkisys updates us with interesting news and developments Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show presents Phil Swan, Friday, 10-24-25Quick recapThe program focused on economic and technological aspects of space exploration, particularly Mars voyages, with Phil Swan presenting his analysis of kinetic energy costs and the need for long-term strategic planning. The discussion covered various propulsion technologies, cost considerations for different rocket systems, and the potential for in-situ resource utilization on Mars. The group explored concepts like mass drivers, lunar industries, and the economic viability of Mars cyclers, while emphasizing the importance of developing cost-effective solutions for human space travel and long-term settlement on Mars and the Moon.Detailed Summary: Phil Swan, the lead principal engineer for the Atlantis project, presented his recent Mars Society Conference talk, focusing on the economic aspects of kinetic energy for Mars voyages. He emphasized the need for a long-term strategy that makes Mars valuable to humanity, beyond just the initial journey. The discussion touched on the historical reluctance to use terms like “colonization” due to negative connotations, and Phil noted the importance of understanding the economics of kinetic energy in space travel. The program also included updates on podcast availability and ways to support the Space Show.Phil discussed the importance of developing a sophisticated space strategy that combines high-level merit with institutional capacity to support it. He compared humanity’s expansion across Earth to potential space exploration, noting that exponential thinking is necessary to set realistic goals and expectations for space travel. Phil emphasized the need to apply exponential thinking to space problems rather than relying on linear thinking, as this approach could lead to more accurate timelines for reaching celestial destinations like the Moon and Mars.Phil referenced the technological advancements required to reach the Moon and Mars, highlighting the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous as a pivotal innovation. He emphasized the need for new technologies to enable human settlement on Mars and addressed the challenge of long-term value recognition for such endeavors. Our guest proposed a staged approach to Mars exploration, outlining key stages like “Boots on Mars,” “Research Outpost,” “Expansionist Drive,” and “Keystone Industries,” each with its value proposition and enablers. He concluded by identifying the high cost of interplanetary transportation as a significant barrier to progress, emphasizing the need for cost-effective solutions to make Mars exploration feasible.The group discussed the concept of Mars cyclers, with Phil explaining that they would serve as infrastructure for repeated Mars travel, though questions remained about their economic viability and technical feasibility. They explored the idea of self-sustaining biospheres on Mars cyclers and Mars bases, with Phil noting that technology would play a crucial role in maintaining these environments. The discussion concluded with Phil addressing the question of Mars’s independence, comparing it to the interdependence between continents and suggesting that Mars would eventually become more self-supporting over time, though it would initially rely on supplies from Earth.We also discussed the need for more advanced propulsion technologies beyond chemical rockets, such as nuclear plasma or fusion rockets, to enable more efficient space travel. Phil highlighted the challenge of securing funding for long-term space exploration projects compared to immediate investments like Starlink, attributing this to society’s short-term focus. Marshall and Phil agreed that governments might be better at making long-term investments, while David noted cultural differences in budgeting practices, particularly between the U.S. and China. Phil suggested that future space missions could serve as a test to compare different economic and political systems, similar to the Cold War moon race, which he argued was won by the American free-market system. John Hunt observed that the lack of competition from the Russian space program in the 1970s led to a reduction in space technology development in the U.S.Our guest presented a slide showing the delta V requirements for various destinations in the solar system, emphasizing the need for cheaper and faster transportation methods. He discussed the potential for using aerobraking and the economic benefits of lunar industries producing products for low Earth orbit. John Jossy suggested considering near-Earth asteroids for mining, which Phil acknowledged as a viable option with lower delta V requirements. The group also touched on the economics of low Earth orbit and the potential for lunar materials to be used in space industries.Phil explained the concept of delta-v and air braking, noting that while aero braking reduces the need for fuel, some mass is still required for the heat shield and other landing equipment. He discussed a paper titled “Cost vs. Delta V” that outlines the methodology for converting air braking delta-v into an equivalent rocket-based delta-v. Phil then presented a graph illustrating the relationship between delta-v and cost per kilogram for various missions, highlighting that costs scale exponentially with delta-v requirements. He noted that reusable rockets and infrastructure-based solutions could potentially reduce costs and provided examples of how different launch systems performed compared to the cost curve.The group discussed the cost-effectiveness of different rocket technologies, particularly comparing the Space Launch System (SLS) to Falcon Heavy. Phil noted that while Falcon Heavy was slightly more cost-competitive for some missions, SLS was still a viable technology that offered good value for its Delta V capabilities. John Hunt highlighted the issue of low production quantities for SLS, which limited cost savings from experience curve effects. The discussion concluded with an examination of Mars mission costs, with Phil presenting estimates for sending humans to Mars, including the cost of crew, provisions, and life support systems.Phil presented a detailed analysis of Mars mission costs, highlighting that a round-trip mission would cost $38 trillion, but could be reduced to $2.7 trillion through in-situ resource utilization and a Mars propellant plant. The discussion clarified that the Europa Clipper mission was launched by Falcon Heavy, not SLS, and Phil agreed to review the cost numbers later. Phil also explained the energy efficiency advantages of mass drivers compared to rockets, suggesting that Mars should consider implementing mass drivers for future space operations.Phil then presented a detailed analysis of mass drivers, discussing their potential for Mars and Earth-based applications. He explained the physics and economics of mass drivers, highlighting their cost advantages over rockets for Mars missions. The group discussed technical challenges, including G-forces and atmospheric entry, with Phil addressing concerns about safety zones and aiming. The conversation ended with a brief discussion on human transportation to Mars, noting the need for further exploration of options beyond cargo transport.Our guest discussed the challenges of improving human space travel to Mars, focusing on reducing costs and enhancing comfort and safety. He suggested increasing the mass budget, improving ecosystems, and using more efficient propulsion methods like mass drivers. David inquired about nuclear propulsion, but Phil explained that it may not be practical due to the weight of radiators compared to solar panels. They also discussed the limitations of current mass driver technologies, such as SpinLaunch, which can only replace the first stage of a rocket and cannot achieve the necessary delta V for Mars travel. Phil emphasized the need for a 1,000-fold cost reduction to enable long-term human settlement on Mars and the Moon.As we were moving to the end of the program, Phil discussed the challenges and inefficiencies of using aircraft carrier electromagnetic catapults for launching rockets into space, explaining that such systems would be too expensive and impractical compared to traditional rockets. He also explored the concept of linear motor launchers for space travel, noting that while they could potentially compete with rockets for long-distance missions like Mars travel, they are not cost-effective for low Earth orbit missions. The discussion highlighted the importance of developing a long-term strategy for lunar and Martian exploration, as well as the need for better institutional and public evaluation of complex space travel ideas.Audio is posted at www.thespaceshow.com for this date and Substack, doctorspace.substack.com. Video is also posted on the Substack site for this program.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 4455 ZOOM: Arkisys CEO David Barnhart | Sunday 02 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:ZOOM, Dave Barnhart, CEO of Arkisys updates us with interesting news and developments Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doct

Hotel Mars, #4449 with Rick Fisher as guest, Wednesday, Oct. 22,2025:Brief program summary:The Hotel Mars team discussed the US Acceleration of the Moon Race Against China. Guest Rick Fisher, John and David discussed how the US moon race is accelerating, driven by President Trump’s demand to land on the moon by 2028 and concerns that China, using the Long March 10 booster, might get there by 2029. Interim NASA Director Sean Duffy reopened the lunar lander contract, previously held by SpaceX’s Starship, to Blue Origin and potentially Lockheed Martin, seeking multiple pathways. The Chinese space program is viewed as a strategic maneuver aimed at distracting the US from other global conflicts.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 4455 ZOOM: Arkisys CEO David Barnhart | Sunday 02 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:ZOOM, Dave Barnhart, CEO of Arkisys updates us with interesting news and developments Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Quick recap: The program began with a focus on Neil Armstrong’s academic background and connections to USC, including his completed coursework and potential master’s degree, as well as his compensation as a NASA civil servant. The discussion concluded with an examination of space engineering education and industry practices, including the balance between government oversight and contractor responsibility, and the challenges of returning to the moon and planning future space missions. We were joined by Marshall Martin, Phil Swan, John Hunt and Dr. Ajay Kothari.I hosted this Space Show program featuring Dr. Mike Gruntman, who discussed his latest book about Neil Armstrong’s connection to USC. Gruntman revealed that Armstrong, while serving in the Navy during the Korean War, took courses at USC from 1955-1962, eventually completing all coursework for a master’s degree in aeronautics except for his thesis, which he never completed due to his NASA commitments. I also announced upcoming programs with Phil Swan, and Bill Gowan as well as a special day Halloween show featuring Dr. Sharma from Cedars-Sinai discussing their 3D printing of cardiac tissue and new space medical lab research unit.Mike discussed the history of the Apollo program, focusing on Neil Armstrong’s involvement with Purdue University. He detailed Armstrong’s earned Master of Science degree and shared insights from his personal archives, including his grades and the content of his lecture at USC on the moon landing. Mike also highlighted the significant workforce reduction following the Apollo program and the practice of bringing in top industrial talent to lead NASA projects, which he suggested could be relevant for future space missions. He drew a link to workforce reductions planned for NASA at this time.I informed Mike and the audience about Roger Launius upcoming appearance as a guest on their space show program on November 7th. Mike shared interesting findings about Neil Armstrong’s compensation as a NASA civil servant in 1969, which was significantly higher than Michael Collins’s salary as the latter was still in the military. They discussed Armstrong’s academic background and his desire to become a professor, as well as his contributions to NASA and his subsequent career as a university professor. Marshall commented on the astronauts’ reputation for being “rock-hard” test pilots, and Mike explained NASA’s development of a lunar lander research vehicle and simulator for training astronauts to land on the moon.Mike discussed the unique space engineering department at USC, highlighting its success and the contributions of its students. He mentioned that Buzz Aldrin visited the campus several times, inspiring students. Mike also shared insights into the history of the Apollo program and the impact it had on the aerospace industry. David inquired about the current mood regarding the Artemis program at USC, to which Mike responded that faculty opinions vary, with most not having detailed knowledge of the program.Mike discussed the evolution of space engineering education and industry practices, highlighting the shift from performance-driven government programs to financially-driven commercial space initiatives. He explained that while commercial space has grown to be six times larger than government space worldwide, government programs remain crucial for technological advancement and fundamental research. Mike emphasized that both approaches are necessary, as government programs provide the performance-driven environment needed for technological innovation, while commercial space drives cost efficiency and rapid development.Mike discussed the balance between government oversight and contractor responsibility in space exploration, drawing on Apollo-era practices where NASA maintained discipline while granting significant autonomy to contractors like Grumman. He noted that today’s government centers have varying levels of expertise, with some being effective while others are ossified, making it challenging to remove ineffective parts without harming the whole. Mike also compared Soviet space programs’ heavy bureaucratic oversight with the U.S. approach, suggesting that while Soviet control could prevent fraud, it often stifled innovation. He concluded that while there are no easy solutions, NASA needs to make clear decisions about lunar exploration and contractor roles, particularly given SpaceX’s current delays in meeting launch schedules.Mike discussed the challenges and considerations for returning to the moon, emphasizing the need for a strategic plan that could include a lunar gateway for long-term infrastructure. He highlighted the importance of strong leadership and the influence of politics on space programs, noting that NASA should provide a feasibility assessment for any mission. Mike expressed optimism about long-term lunar exploration but expressed concerns about the lack of investment in technologies like artificial gravity and nuclear reactors, which are crucial for sustained human presence on the moon and future Mars missions. He suggested prioritizing a return to the moon before attempting a direct trip to Mars, as it could serve as a stepping stone for future exploration.The discussion focused on space exploration and the challenges of congressional oversight. Dr. Gruntman, a space expert, explained how SpaceX’s approach to rapid development and testing, reminiscent of NASA’s George Mueller’s strategy in the 1960s, differs from traditional government methods. They discussed the importance of the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous strategy in enabling the moon landing. John raised concerns about potential delays in Elon Musk’s Mars colonization plans due to on-orbit refueling challenges. The group also discussed the need for better congressional oversight of space programs, with David questioning how to educate lawmakers on space issues. Mike noted that professional societies could play a role but have become politicized. The conversation concluded with a brief discussion about the Mars Society presentation scheduled for Friday by Phil Swan who participated in this program today.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 4450 ZOOM Phil Swan | Friday 24 Oct 2025 930AM PTGuests: Phil SwanZoom: Phil talks about going to Mars with kinetic energyBroadcast 4451 Zoom OPEN LINES | Saturday 25 Oct 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David Livingston, The Space Show Zoom Team & Zoom callersZOOM Open Lines discussion Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Brief Summary:John Batchelor and I welcomed our guest, Anatoly Zak of the RussianSpaceWeb.com. Anatoly updated us regarding the continued Russian debates about orbits and costs for a new space station after the ISS is deorbited. Anatoly Zak went into detail about Roscosmos facing challenging questions over the orbit of its new space station, considering both a low-inclination 51-degree orbit or a more expensive near-polar orbit. Our guest outlined the pluses and negatives for both choices. The polar orbit offers an valuable strategic Arctic observation but increases radiation risk and reduces the all important payload capacity for such a mission. Russia’s economic realities given the war in Ukraine and sanctions may force Roscosmos to take the cheaper 51-degree orbit, even possibly using existing ISS infrastructure, to ensure an operational station for cosmonauts by 2031. Don’t miss this two part discussion what Russia is considering post ISS. Do check out www.russianspaceweb.com for all the space news, both current and historical, for the Russian space program.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 4450 ZOOM Phil Swan | Friday 24 Oct 2025 930AM PTGuests: Phil SwanZoom: Phil talks about going to Mars with kinetic energyBroadcast 4451 Zoom OPEN LINES | Saturday 25 Oct 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David Livingston, The Space Show Zoom Team & Zoom callersZOOM Open Lines discussion Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Quick Summary: The program focused on discussing space architecture developments over the past 18 years, including the impact of reduced launch costs and the current state of lunar mission initiatives. The conversation covered technical details of lunar construction projects, including power requirements, reactor deployment, and the development of construction equipment and materials for moon bases. The discussion concluded with an overview of funding sources, regulatory challenges, and educational programs related to lunar exploration, emphasizing the importance of NASA partnerships and commercial opportunities in space infrastructure development. Joining us in the program were John Jossy, John Hunt, Bill Gowan, Marshall Martin, and Dr. Ajay Kotari.David and Sam discussed the significant changes in space architecture over the past 18 years since he was first a guest on The Space Show. Sam highlighted the reduction in launch costs as a key enabler. Sam explained his focus on using plant material for industrial processes like 3D printing on the moon. The discussion concluded with an overview of upcoming Space Show programs and a reminder about listener-supported fundraising efforts including Substack subscriptions.Sam discussed the significant impact of reduced launch costs on space exploration, highlighting SpaceX’s role in this development. He expressed concerns about the U.S. lagging behind China in lunar missions and emphasized the importance of maintaining a strong pace in space leadership. Sam also detailed Astroport’s efforts to build moon ports, including the development of a 15-acre testbed in Midland, Texas (west Texas) to simulate lunar conditions for testing construction and engineering techniques. He stressed the need for further research into civil engineering and geotechnics for moon base construction, as well as the importance of cargo complement and autonomous construction technology.We talked quite a bit about landing pads and Sam showed creative videos of their lunar development, construction and land pad plans via Zoom screen sharing. Sam explained that while the Artemis III landing pad is planned for the 2030s, their fusion surface power program might require building the power reactor foundation first, which would involve bringing construction equipment in the first landing. They are developing a brick bot as a technology demonstrator to be launched by 2028, and while they have some interface with Starship, they are not directly working with them. Sam emphasized the importance of standardized containerized cargo for logistics, Our Space Show program team asked about the power requirements for various tasks, noting that NASA mentions 100 kilowatts but questioning if more power would be needed for activities like sintering regolith and building roads.Sam also explained the power requirements for their lunar construction project, noting that while 20 kilowatts is sufficient for brickmaking, more power is needed for other tasks. He described plans to use portable solar power towers to generate energy for rovers and construction equipment, with potential suppliers including Astrobotic and Honeybee. Our guest also emphasized that they would act as general contractors, subcontracting various components to partners like Astrobotic for mobility platforms and other utilities. He concluded by showing an additional video of the construction layout and deployment process for the reactor and associated equipment.We discussed the development of lunar landing pads give I asked him to describe one in detail. Sam said that they would be 100 meters in diameter with a 50-meter target landing area and a 25-meter apron. He described the construction materials, including interlocking bricks that are 50 millimeters thick, and highlighted challenges in creating bricks in a vacuum environment due to outgassing. He also presented their work on material science, including the use of biomass to create 3D-printed tiles and the development of an excavator with interchangeable implements for lunar construction.Our guest explained the system architecture for a brick-making demonstration on the moon, aiming to combine multiple processes into one platform to create bricks in a vacuum by 2028. He described a subscale vibrating compactor being developed and its power requirements. The group discussed the layout for a lunar base, including the need to place a nuclear reactor over a kilometer away from the habitation zone for radiation protection and to prevent blast effects from affecting assets. John Jossy questioned why the initial landing couldn’t be closer to the reactor site, but Sam clarified that the initial landing would be automated and not intended for return, with the goal of establishing a permanent outpost. Radiation exposure was a reason and safety measure were being carefully planned and designed into the project.The team discussed the logistics of deploying a nuclear reactor and associated equipment on the moon, focusing on the challenges of cargo capacity and the need to bring multiple pieces of equipment for both the reactor and landing pad construction. They explored options for power transmission, including the possibility of wireless power transmission, and discussed additional radiation protection measures, with Marshall suggesting the use of topology and walls to shield the reactor. Sam mentioned their work on the Lido mission in the Marius Hills area, which includes developing technologies for accessing and utilizing lava tubes, though these are not currently present at the South Pole site being considered.I asked about his sources o funding and if he was already generating revenue. Sam explained that Astroport is funded through NASA contracts and DOD contracts, with revenue generated through R&D, and they are preparing for Phase 3 funding next year. The team discussed reactor options, with John Hunt suggesting a pebble bed reactor, and Sam noted they will follow NASA’s chosen provider for the reactor. I inquired about his regulatory issues and challenges for putting equipment on the Moon and developing it much like the development of a large r/e project here on Earth. Sam mentioned regulatory and legal challenges for lunar operations, including the need for state government sanction and licensing, while John Hunt raised concerns about radiation exposure during human landings, which our guest suggested could be addressed by shutting down the reactor temporarily.Sam discussed the progress and challenges of developing lunar infrastructure in collaboration with Orbit Fab, focusing on water supply and fuel processing. He highlighted the need for further research on lunar dust impact on machinery and potential partnerships with humanoid robotic companies.Before concluding, I asked Sam to discuss his nonprofit WEX Foundation for middle school stem programs. I also stated I would like to do a separate Space Show program focused on WEX. Sam shared insights into the WEX Foundation’s STEM education program, which aims to engage middle school students in space exploration. Listen to the program which he described in some detail.Our discussion concluded with a conversation about the logistics and funding of lunar missions, with Sam emphasizing the importance of NASA as an anchor customer and the potential for commercial customers in 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:Upcoming ShowsBroadcast 4448 ZOOM Dr. Mike Gruntman | Tuesday 21 Oct 2025 700PM PTGuests: Dr. Mike GruntmanZoom: Mike talks about his new book, “Neil Armstrong at USC and on the Moon”Broadcast 4449: Hotel Mars with Homer Hickam | Wednesday 22 Oct 2025 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Homer HickamHome Hickam is the Hotel Mars guest this weekBroadcast 4450 ZOOM Phil Swan | Friday 24 Oct 2025 930AM PTGuests: Phil SwanZoom: Phil talks about going to Mars with kinetic energyBroadcast 4451 Zoom OPEN LINES | Saturday 25 Oct 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David Livingston, The Space Show Zoom Team & Zoom callersZOOM Open Lines discussion Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe