On 26 January, 2009, NASA announced that despite several weeks of effort, the Mars Rover Spirit had become stuck in the soft Martian sand and would not move again. The press release came shortly after the sixth anniversary of Spirit and its twin, Opportunity, making it to Mars a few weeks apart in January of 2004. Given the remote location of Spirit, NASA could not give it the Old Yeller treatment and instead “decided” to reclassify it as a stationary science platform.
Spirit and Opportunity were supposed to have mission lives of ninety days. They exceeded expectations and are still active after more than twenty two hundred days.
But what in the name of The Celestial Teapot does a tandem of robots need to do to get a little love in the mainstream media? It should be appreciated by even the most oblivious, mushy-headed observer that the scientific spiffiness of the rovers knocks the guts right out of their competition for space on Page 1. Sadly, we become bored with amazing things twelve minutes after we hear about them.
These two objects are fired one hundred and eighty million miles through space and play super-sonic bocce ball. One giant ball moving thirty five times faster than a rifle round fires two teeny marbles to another giant ball moving twenty eight times faster than a rifle round, and then the marbles have to park. That’s a tough gig when you consider how many people can’t negotiate the parking lot at the Piggly Wiggly without initiating a bodily injury lawsuit and a phone call to Pep Boys.
Since landing, the rovers have trundled for miles about the Martian surface like… well, like no other damn thing in human history. The rovers have drilled holes, taken samples, performed experiments, been attacked by aliens, and returned reams of information giving us the closest thing to the experience being there that we could reasonably hope for. It is no exaggeration to say that the rovers may have produced more new information about Mars than any other source. They have rediscovered the Red Planet.
The fact that the mission still going on after five years is a singular achievement and should make you scream at your monitor right now in utter amazement. Imagine you’ve won the Publishers’ Whoever-They-Are Sweepstakes and the giant check was delivered to your home by Ed McMahon despite the fact that he has been dead since June. Scream like that.
Take a moment, the Internet can wait.
The complexity of this event and its accomplishments are such that to state them just as they are can miss the forest for the trees. Some perspective: In an average episode of Iron Chef: America, Mario Batali needs to prepare a full course meal for three judges in precisely one hour. If you up the difficulty level from “Pudgy Ginger Dude’ to “Mars Rover,” Batali would need to churn out 122 dishes in a kitchen the size of an NFL football field and deliver them via Predator UAV to 73 separate judges each hidden in the hold of their own stealthed-out Sikorsky helicopters traveling across the entire globe in random directions.
Allez cuisine and best of luck, pasta-boy!
The rovers were leaning in to it too. Spirit had a little doohickey on it for drilling into rocks, and used it so much that it wore the doohikey to a nub. So disadvantaged, the Rover can now only scratch at the dirt, becoming the first Dickensian character on another planet.
When this anniversary came and went the MSM coverage was predictably anemic. The distilled awesomeness of the endeavor was met by a generous round of indifference. The twin automata getting headlines that week were named Jay and Conan.
But even if it wasn’t covered in any depth and the public seemed indifferent, remember that these are the real things that scientific and critical minds can accomplish. Remember that these things last, and will be remembered long after those two other automata are footnotes, or less.
Love the story! written by nasagirl,
February 13, 2010
I love this story! It is so true, and so amazing. The thought about what goes into achieving a feat like this rarely crosses the mind of the layperson. I actually had the pleasure of working on the design of Spirit and Opportunity (long before they were even named!). Having been part of the team to make such a feat possible, I am still amazed every day that it is possible. There is so much that goes into making something like this happen. I happened to work on the actual "brains" of the Rovers themselves, which to me was wonderful, but seemed so small in comparison to the job of having to send it over and have it hit it's target on Mars. I have also heard it compared to throwing a pea from here (California) and having it land in a flower pot in China. Thanks for the awesome story
I shared Vino's curiosity about the use, and then I looked up Faraday's response. Epic.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
@Steel Rat written by KWC,
February 13, 2010
I was assuming that the reason that it is wrong is because its not a picture of Spirit. I could be missing something here but that is my assumption. Wall-E is not equal to Spirit!
I was assuming that the reason that it is wrong is because its not a picture of Spirit. I could be missing something here but that is my assumption. Wall-E is not equal to Spirit!
I sure hope that wasn't it, because that was WAY too obvious. It wasn't wrong because it there was no claim that the picture was anything other than what it was, so I didn't understand why it was there and had that silly caption.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -4
Re robot written by Rustylizard,
February 14, 2010
@ Steel Rat & KWC
Just a wild guess, but the lacrimal ducts don’t look like they are in a good position to drain tears. Then again, why would a robot need tears? It apparently doesn’t need eyelids.
But I’m no expert. The last time I tried to build a robot was in the dark ages – I was a kid with an Erector Set. Even the family dog was unimpressed.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
Regarding the picture written by MrIncredible,
February 14, 2010
I believe what Sean meant is that most people's perceptions of robots comes from the movies. When we hear the word "robot" we do not think of assembly line robots or Spirit, but rather of C3PO, Wall-E, and Johnny 5. Fiction trumps the fascinating reality for most, which is unfortunate.
By the way, Happy Valentine's Day to all, even though it was named after a saint. Even us hardened atheists can rally around a day celebrating love, right?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
Allez cuisine and best of luck, pasta-boy! written by RichVR,
February 14, 2010
Was that really necessary?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
... written by I'm A Secret Formula,
February 14, 2010
Allez cuisine and best of luck, pasta-boy!
written by RichVR, February 14, 2010 Was that really necessary?
I thought it was cute - it's obviously a light-hearted post.
I believe what Sean meant is that most people's perceptions of robots comes from the movies. When we hear the word "robot" we do not think of assembly line robots or Spirit, but rather of C3PO, Wall-E, and Johnny 5. Fiction trumps the fascinating reality for most, which is unfortunate.
Maybe Sean should have explained it better, then.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -3
... written by I'm A Secret Formula,
February 14, 2010
Maybe Sean should have explained it better, then.
I'm just guessing, but you're still upset about the last Star Trek movie, aren't you?
I'm just guessing, but you're still upset about the last Star Trek movie, aren't you?
Oooh, bad guess! But thanks for playing!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
I doubt Faraday said that... written by mohmoo,
February 14, 2010
@Grim
Although the quote in your link is very relevant, and funny, it is unlikely Faraday ever said it. It seems to be more commonly attributed to Franklin, but still a bit of an urban legend I think.
Michael Faraday is visited by a delegation of government dignitaries. They are shown his electric motors and other demos. One person says "This is all very interesting, but of what possible use are these toys?" Faraday responds: "I cannot say what use they may be, but I can confidently predict that one day you will be able to tax them."
@ RichVR
I also found the whole 'Allez cuisine' bit a pretty lame effort to be humourous.
I think we need to be periodically reminded of the amazing things we humans can do. Since I'm a hobbiest cook, I happen to enjoy Iron Chef America quite a bit, but you are absolutely right, as far beyond my abilities as it is to churn out four or five spontaneous gourmet delights ala Mario Batali (and if you get behind the scenes of the show, it's not quite as spontaneous as they edit it to seem) the fact of those Mars rovers is orders of magnitude more amazing. I think it's that old idea of future shock: in this modern world we are so used to technological miracles that the impact of some of them is lost on us.
"...the Rover can now only scratch at the dirt, becoming the first Dickensian character on another planet."
That is just brilliant prose right there
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +8
... written by Captego,
February 20, 2010
At what point do the high functioning autisitcs in the neighbourhood need to be reminded that Sturgeon's articles are clearly satirical and humorous? They contain valid points but those readers who need all references 'explained' should perhaps excuse themselves and brush up on their 'how to act like a human being' manuals.
As usual entertaining stuff Sean...more please.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
Well, maybe he wanted to ... written by Grim,
February 23, 2010
@mohmoo,
Yeah, there's always a question about such responses as to whether they were actually made, and if so, when and by whom, or whether somebody - not necessarily the attributed quotee(s) - just wishes they had been made. A little like the attribution to Voltaire of "I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it" which apparently was actually written by a Voltaire biographer (Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Wikipedia assures me) providing a pithy summary of what the Great Man might have said if he'd thought of it at the time.
When I first encountered the "baby" quote attributed to Faraday, it was supposedly at one of the regular Royal Society 'show and tell' do's and the question was purportedly asked by His Royal Highness. But I couldn't seem to find a reference to that version, so I went with the one I found.
Nonetheless, it's an effective response, and one that somebody famous should have made at some stage. After all, what exactly is the use of a baby ? It depends a lot on a combination of 'inherent' qualities with how much 'investment' (love and security, good nourishment, education and opportunity etc) comes its way.
So I guess that time will tell just how those factors work out with the Rovers. But even if things don't turn out all that wonderfully, we'll still cherish the Rovers and we'll try again (and again) with other things because were human, and it's what we do.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Excellent! written by sintesi,
March 03, 2010
Awesome awesome article.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please
register if you do not have an account yet.
On 26 January, 2009, NASA 
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
