[LC]

Notes on Space Science

by
Hugh Odishaw *

[N.B. -- These notes are submitted solely for discussion purposes among participants in the Rand conference on political implications of space. Quite aside from questions of propriety, they are in many ways incomplete and perhaps only suggestive.]

## 1. The IGY-IGC Period

The first few years of space science are of interest for historical reasons and because they suggest important scientific implications, illuminate the international environment which was their background, and raise some questions as to national policies.

Advances in rocket technology, stemming heavily from German V-2 developments during World War II and from American rocket soundings developments in the following decade, indicated to Western scientists the technologic feasibility of launching satellites. The interest of the U.S. National Committee for the IGY (USNC-IGY) in earch-circling research satellites began with the adoption of international resolutions, during the summer and early fall of 1954, regarding the desirability of such vehicles. These resolutions were adopted by three international scientific bodies: the International Scientific Radio Union (URSI), the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG), and the Special Committee for IGY (CSAGI) of the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU). The crucial resolution, essentially similar to those of URSI and IUGG, was the one adopted on 4 October 1954 by the CSAGI:

* Executive Director of the U.S. National Committee for the IGY and of the Space Science Board, National Academy of Sciences.

-2-

[LC]

"In view of the great importance of observations during extended periods of time of extra-terrestrial radiations and geophysical phenomena in the upper atmosphere, and in view of the advanced state of present rocket techniques, CSAGI recommends that thought be given to the launching of small satellite vehicles, to their scientific instrumentation, and to the new problems associated with satellite experiments, such as power supply, telemetering, and orientation of the vehicle."

In view of these international recommendations, and in view of the state of U.S. rocketry developments, the Executive Committee of the USNC-IGY considered the possibility of constructing, launching, and observing an instrumented satellite. A special group was established for this purpose, composed of various members of the USNC Executive Committee and the USNC Technical Panel on Rocketry.

On the basis of recommendations made by the special study group, the Executive Committee decided that an instrumented satellite program not only was of scientific importance but was feasible, and it adopted a resolution which reads in part as follows:

"The Executive Committee of the USNC-IGY feels that a small artificial satellite for geophysical purposes is feasible during the International Geophysical Year if action is initiated promptly, and that the realization of such a satellite would give promise of yielding original results of geophysical interest."

The Executive Committee authorized the transmittal of its findings and this resolution to the President of the National Academy of Sciences and the Director of the National Science Foundation. This was done on 14 March 1955. Meanwhile the scientific and technical studies of the committee's special satellite group continued. By the early part of May, a preliminary scientific program had been developed, and this was transmitted to the federal government through the National Science Foundation on 6 May 1955.

Late in July 1955, the government's approval of the satellite program permitted the USNC to notify the CSAGI of the plans in a letter of 26 July 1955 to the president of CSAGI:

"The Committee on behalf of the National Academy of Sciences wishes to inform you at this time that, in response to the CSAGI resolution, the program of the United States for the International Geophysical Year now includes definite plans for the launching of small satellites during the International Geophysical Year.

-3-

[LC]

"The United States National Committee believes that significant data may be gathered as a result of this program in such fields as geodesy, atmospheric physics, ionospheric physics, auroral physics, and solar radiation. The participation of other nations engaged in the International Geophysical Year is invited, and to this end we shall provide full scientific information on the orbiting vehicle so that other nations may monitor the device and make appropriate observations. The United States National Committee looks forward to the interest and cooperation of other nations in what it hopes will be one of the great scientific achievements of our time."

On 29 July 1955, CSAGI released this letter to the public at Brussels. A few minutes later, the President's endorsement of the program was made public at the White House by the President's press secretary:

"On behalf of the President, I am now announcing that the President has approved plans by this country for going ahead with the launching of small, unmanned, earth-circling satellites as part of the United States participation in the International Geophysical Year which takes place between July 1957 and December 1958. This program will, for the first time in history, enable scientists throughout the world to make sustained observations in the regions beyond the earth's atmosphere.

"The President expressed personal gratification that the American program will provide scientists of all nations this important and unique opportunity for the advancement of science."

Not until the second half of 1956 were Soviet intentions known, although some literature and public announcements in the press indicated Soviet competence in rocket systems technology and interests in space. At the Barcelona general assembly of the IGY, 10-15 September 1956, Soviet delegates announced USSR plans to participate in the IGY rocket and satellite programs:

"The USSR intends to launch a satellite by means of which measurements of atmospheric pressure and temperature, as well as observations of cosmic rays, micro-meteorites, the geomagnetic field and solar radiation will be conducted. The preparations for launching the satellite are presently being made."

The period following the White House announcement of U.S. plans was characterized by extensive publicity of the American program. The period

[LC]

-4-

following the Soviet announcement of intentions was characterized by almost no public statements on this subject. On October 4, 1957, the first satellite, Sputnik I, was launched by the USSR. Since then the following satellites and space probes have been launched: Sputnik II (Nov. 3, 1957), Explorer I (Jan. 31, 1958), Vanguard I (Mar. 17, 1958), Explorer III (Mar. 26, 1958), Sputnik III (May 15, 1958), Explorer IV (July 26, 1958), Pioneer I (Oct. 11, 1958), Pioneer III (Dec. 6, 1958), Mechta (Jan. 2, 1959), Vanguard II (Feb. 17, 1959), Pioneer IV (Mar. 3, 1959), Explorer VI (Aug. 7, 1959), Lunik II (Sep. 13, 1959), and Vanguard III (Sep. 18, 1959).** From an international point of view, perhaps two considerations are of most interest. First, IGY space activities were conducted under the aegis of international agreement. Even though the aegis was non-governmental, since the International Council of Scientific Unions and its IGY committee are non-governmental, nations at any rate acquiesced in the conduct of activities in space by the Soviet Union and the United States. Moreover, many of them actively participated in the observational effort while 13 nations abroad agreed to the establishment of major, high-precision radio and optical tracking facilities on their soil.

Second, that harmonious cooperation, including the interchange of data, which remarkably characterized all the IGY, held appreciable sway in the field of rocket and satellite research. Although Soviet scientists were unwilling to extend interchange agreements as far as Western scientists wished, and although their disclosures have not been as complete as ours, the formal interchange agreements appear to have been adhered to reasonably well.

## 2. An Appraisal of Space Science

Assessment of the impact of space science in coming years -- both in terms of science and in more general terms as affecting man -- is difficult for many reasons. Some of the difficulties stem from confusion between the hot thrust of rocketry and the cool passion of science -- between interests associated with "space cadets" and those with fundamental research. Realization of man-in-space and manned space platforms, etc., is incredibly difficult and costly; and neither science nor mankind will profit, appreciably and directly, from such excursions for a long, long time because so much needs to be done, and

* This list excludes the Atlas launching on December 18, 1958, as well as all of the Discoverer series.

** Since these notes were prepared, the USSR launched Lunik III, intended to reach the vicinity of the moon and to return to earth.

-5-

[LC]

can be done, through instrumented vehicles*. But, turning to space science, much has already been grasped and more lies within reach.

From time to time an area of science, after years of slow progress, assumes a dynamic and even explosive quality. Nuclear physics affords one example. Its beginnings rest upon the discovery of natural radioactivity in 1896. Successive discoveries, coming slowly at first, of atomic and sub-atomic particles, led to the artificial fission of the uranium nucleus in 1939. This achievement acted in a powerful catalytic way, spawning extensive activity in nuclear physics with its attendant military and peace time developments. In a similar fashion, the pioneering radio efforts of Marconi and the development of vacuum tubes led in a rather short period of time to the establishment of a communications and electronics industry whose activities now engage the energies of hundreds of thousands and whose annual products and services mount to billions of dollars. In both of these examples we see a pattern (i) involving an extended period of exploratory work, (ii) succeeded by a period when a significant breakthrough is attained (often accompanied by cohesion of many previously isolated or unassimilated findings) and (iii) culminating within a few decades in most extensive human activities of great importance technically, socially, economically, both on national and international levels.

During the last two or three years, geophysics has unquestionably experienced stimuli of the second period. By and large, over the course of many centuries, information and ideas accumulated in the geophysical sciences based upon empirical and observational approaches. More quantitative experimental approaches with consequently better theoretical concepts were made possible only in the second quarter of this century through application of fundamental physics and with the advantage of much more advanced measurements that capitalized on electronic instrumentation. The planetary and interplanetary nature of most geophysical problems, the inevitable masses of data requiring the aid of applied mathematics, statistics, and automatic electronic processing devices -- all of these factors, prior to recent times, have imposed restraints upon attaining extensive synoptic data and their proper synthesis. Only within the last decade have the conditions been suitable, and this suitability accounts for man's ability to conduct successfully the International Geophysical Year, in the wake of which stand the trends of future research.

* My own general appraisal of space science prospects, etc., coincides with that of L. A. DuBridge (see, e.g., his popular article in Harper's, August 1959).

[LC]

-6-

At the heart of this flowering of geophysics lies space science. Quite aside from its incontestable sovereignty over its commonly accepted domain -- near space, distant space, the moon and other planets -- its earthly suzerainty is considerable. For through it much can be learned of interface phenomena (the earth's heat and water budget, embracing every aspect of oceanography, glaciology, and meteorology) and of the depths beneath (the figure of the earth and its interior structure and dynamics).

In the decade or two before World War II, remarkable progress was made in learning something about the nature of the upper atmosphere -- from about 20 to 300 kilometers -- through indirect, ground-based measurements and deductions. This was particularly true in ionospheric physics that employed advanced radio pulse techniques from which radar was derived. In the decade that has just passed, our knowledge has increased some ten-fold and perhaps towards as much as a hundred-fold largely for three reasons:

(a) The coordinated, vastly extended and intensified ground-based, balloon, and aircraft IGY studies in geomagnetism, cosmic rays, ionospheric physics, aurora, airglow, and solar activity. The continuous patrol of the sun, permitting conduct of special experiments and intensified normal observations, added immensely to our knowledge of solar-terrestrial relations. Many significant discoveries were made, which open a host of new research possibilities, but this unprecedented body of synoptic data still represents a rich reservoir for analysis and theoretical research.

(b) The availability of sounding rockets shortly after World War II permitting direct, *in situ* measurements of particles, radiations, and fields. The IGY rocket program represented a climax to the preceding years of rocket soundings. Perhaps two examples may be suggestive: first, x-rays were found to reach into the lower D-region of the ionosphere, accounting for the ionization that leads to sudden ionospheric disturbances that create communication difficulties; second, during the eclipse expedition during totality only x-rays were measured, while before and after total eclipse both x-rays and ultraviolet radiation were measured, suggesting the localized nature of the source of these solar emanations. Likewise, direct ultraviolet photographs of the sun in Lyman-alpha radiation have been obtained from rockets above the atmosphere.

(c) The conduct of experiments in the high atmosphere -- for example, release of nitric oxide and sodium vapor, and the injection of electrons through small atomic bursts during the Argus experiment -- has yielded remarkable results. The first two examples provide a way of determining atmospheric composition at various heights. The third has yielded insight into the aurora and the control function of the earth's magnetic field.

[LC]

-7-

The trend in research of the upper atmosphere is likely to follow for some time the outlines realized during the IGY as science seeks to acquire a four-dimensional insight into near space. Experimentally, the principal tools will continue to be rocket and satellite vehicles, equipped to measure with more discrimination, sensitivity, and accuracy fields, particles, radiations and processes.

(a) To heights of 300 kilometers and even more, rockets are crucial for satellites cannot long survive drag effects; moreover, rockets uniquely afford a means for determining altitude dependence of the phenomena of interest. It is important that rocket soundings be extended in geographic coverage and in frequency of launchings.

(b) Satellites will become even more important in terms of the upper atmosphere for two reasons: (i) with large, but highly elliptic orbits, satellites can plunge deep into the upper atmosphere from their apogee on each revolution, thus obtaining repeated cross sections through the exosphere and upper ionosphere; (ii) instruments can look down, and here perhaps the most obvious utilization of this capability (aside from the meteorological application noted earlier) is investigating the ionosphere by satellite transmissions.

(c) All available methods together with massive theoretical studies should be concentrated on the external configuration of the geomagnetic field with related exospheric, ionospheric and auroral phenomena during quiet and disturbed intervals. Polar IGY data show auroral frequency is considerable within the area bounded by the zones of maximum auroral activity. Soviet and U.S. rocket data show that the trapped particles in the outer Van Allen belt diminish toward free space values at seven or eight earth's radii outward. A geomagnetic field line at this distance originates at the surface near the auroral zone. IGY cosmic ray data, and calculations on solar particle streams, suggest important magnetic fields moving in space. These elements of evidence suggest that magnetic field lines originating from the polar regions suffer a serious and variable distortion, and like the magnetic field of the sun may not close on the earth in any simple way. Thus we are drawn toward a dynamic view of the earth's field in which, under certain circumstances, particles can enter and be trapped during the time variations of that distortion. With the opportunity to map the earth's field in situ through the exosphere, we may be on the threshold of solving the century-old scientific problem of magnetic storms and aurora, which is of major scientific importance.

(d) Accompanying the work in space must be close-control related research on the surface. (Here the IGY program should be continued and more widely extended in the polar regions.)

[L.C.]

-8-

Because the ionosphere has so long been associated with radio communications, this section is an appropriate place to note the applicability of satellites to communications. It is only a matter of time before satellite systems will revolutionize the entire communications industry. Carrying transmitters and receivers, using negligible power, taking advantage of highly directional antennas where called for, satellites will dominate the communications field. Other methods of satellite communications can also be visualized. It is this application of satellites, plus the meteorological one noted below, which affords most immediate results of direct interest to mankind. Results of even greater impact will probably come more slowly as satellites yield new knowledge of the upper atmosphere and space.

The discovery of the Van Allen Radiation Belts, in which both satellites and deep space probes were used, stands as one of the greatest basic discoveries in all of geophysics. The achievement entails not only the discovery of two vast regions of space and of the population of these regions, but also provides the basis for relating the earth's magnetic field, the aurora and solar particles in an exciting way.

The inner Van Allen belt was first publicly reported on May 1, 1958, at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, based on measurements aboard the Explorer satellites, and confirmed by the Soviet satellite report at the Atoms for Peace Conference, Geneva, September 1958. The Van Allen particles in the inner belt appear above 120 kilometers in northern latitudes and 360 kilometers above the equator and extend beyond their maximum at about 4000 kilometers. Stoermer's theoretical studies postulated long ago that charged particles could be trapped in the earth's field and forced to spiral between northern and southern mirror points. Over a period of time, the number of such particles can increase appreciably, accounting for the formation of the Van Allen belt. It is probable that at least some of the Van Allen particles in the inner belt arise from beta decay of cosmic ray neutrons.

Van Allen and his colleagues obtained further striking results from space probes Pioneer III and IV: the second Van Allen belt was discovered to range from 10,000 to 60,000 kilometers beyond the earth's surface. This has also been confirmed by flights of Soviet satellites. This outer zone appears to depend upon solar plasma as demonstrated by the greatly increased intensity of particles between observations of Pioneer III, present in space during a relatively quiet period of the sun, and Pioneer IV which traversed the layer five days after a period of very high solar activity. The particles in this zone leak out near the magnetic poles, providing a mechanism for auroral displays by collision with atmospheric atoms.

[L.C.]

-9-

Moreover, the Van Allen belts provide an explanation for latitude variations in temperatures. IGY rocket experiments in New Mexico and in the Canadian Arctic showed temperatures of some 4000° F over Fort Churchill in contrast to 2000° F over white Sands between altitudes of 54 and 84 kilometers. Thus the Van Allen belts, aside from their intrinsic attributes, are of fundamental significance in terms of a variety of geophysical phenomena and processes. The Soviet satellites have demonstrated the presence of electric currents in the outer Van Allen belt during magnetic storms with corresponding magnetic variations. Whether these were primary or secondary effects are not yet known.

The second great achievement made possible by IGY satellites relates to the shape of the earth. Here, the first small Vanguard satellite has permitted O'Keefe and his associates to make detailed studies of its orbits. Their findings result in the new "pear-shaped" figure for the earth. The variation (10 to 15 meters) is small in comparison with the 21 kilometer difference between equatorial and polar radii, but it is extremely important in terms of the earth's structure and composition.

Satellites of both the U.S.S.R. and U.S.A. also provided valuable data on drag and density and satellite environmental conditions -- e.g., temperatures. Soviet satellites, with transmissions at 20 and 40 megacycles, afford an opportunity for ionospheric studies when the receptions can be coupled with precise positional data. One of the most striking findings relates to drag. Jacchia has established a correlation between the drag on Vanguard I and solar activity: the correlation between Vanguard I drag and (i) solar flux at 10.7 cm and (ii) magnetic index is remarkable. This major advance in terms of understanding solar-terrestrial relations suggests the order of concentration of solar streams of particles and their effect in heating and expanding the high atmosphere.

These discoveries thus suggest the trend in space research from the physical point of view: the discovery, description, mapping, and monitoring of fields, particles, and radiations in interplanetary space and ultimately in space beyond our solar system. A host of other subjects lies at hand in space science, ranging from studies of the moon to exploration of extraterrestrial life on Mars. The primordial character of the lunar surface has a major implication concerning the character of the earth when it is explored and defined physically and chemically. However difficult the tasks implicit in such ventures, progress will be made in launching systems not only for earth satellites and deep-space probes but for lunar satellites and planetary satellites. The

[Lc]

-10-

scientific challenges and tasks, as man stands at the threshold of a new age of study of the cosmos, are probably equal to all that has gone before. We need only consider the following: atmospheric attenuation limits the earthbound observer to the use of about 20 octaves in the electromagnetic spectrum above 100 kilocycles per second; additional scores of octaves are in principle accessible to instruments flown outside the earth's atmosphere. With the aid of artificial satellites and space probes, fields, radiation, and particles in interplanetary space and in the vicinity of the earth, the moon, and the nearer planets become accessible to direct observation for the first time.

In recapitulation, the utility of space vehicles can be represented thus:

(a) They provide a means for looking down upon the earth from a point of remarkable advantage. This feature has four consequences: (i) it permits man to study the size and shape of the earth and, from perturbations in satellite orbits, its mass distribution; (ii) it provides a new and potentially highly accurate tool in geodesy and navigation; (iii) it provides an opportunity for detailed study of the entire atmosphere beneath from every conceivable point of view; and (iv) it provides for a new order of communication capability that may have a very great impact on science itself.

(b) They provide a means for looking about their own immediate environment. Thus man can study *in situ* the particles, radiations, field, and processes in the regions traversed by satellites and probes.

(c) They provide a means for looking out into the solar system and the universe above the masking atmospheric layers.

(d) They offer means for exploring the moon, other planets, and the sun through deep space probes and eventually through satellites orbiting about these bodies and even landing on some.

(e) They provide for practical applications in meteorology and communications in the near future.

-11-

### 3. Some Implications

Some prospects in space science and their general implications may be suggested by the following comments:

(i) Meteorological satellites. The technology is reasonably close at hand for realizing the launching and operation of satellites which can follow cloud and storm patterns. No *a priori* technical barrier appears to stand in the way of this development within a decade or less. The utility of cloud and storm data relates mainly to the saving of thousands of lives although advance warnings should be of some use in the saving of property, tens of millions of dollars of which are annually paid in tribute to weather vagaries.

These very same satellites could, in theory, provide synoptic weather data, but advances in instrumentation are a prerequisite that may require, if pursued vigorously, a decade or two. Practically speaking, only synoptic satellites (probably with built-in data processing) promise global weather data important to improved forecasting and thus important to agriculture, transportation, and commerce.

The very same satellites can begin measurements of the radiation balance -- the ratio of incident solar energy to reflected and re-radiated energy. This, improved data on a global basis of meteorological parameters, better data on the water cycle (water in all three states: vapor, liquid, solid), in conjunction with basic experimental and theoretical studies, afford several long-range projections. First, such knowledge will make possible some measure of weather "control." In its simplest sense, such "control" may only be the adjustments that man can make in the light of better understanding. In its most remote and complex form, "control" may be understood in its common meaning. Such control will inevitably have revolutionary impact upon societies and will raise most recalcitrant international problems: but that day will probably come.

Even cloud-and-weather-pattern satellites will raise their international heads. That nation which can first provide such service will acquire considerable prestige. Questions of read-out of data will arise -- e.g., shall it be centrally, followed by world-wide dissemination of results; or shall it be decentralized -- e.g., a few major receiving and computing centers about the world? If the latter, where? (Both technical, geographic, and political considerations arise.) And how arrange the cooperation internationally?

-12-

(ii) Communication satellites. There appears to be no *a priori* technical reason preventing the development of such vehicles within the next decade or two. Their application yields two results: first, a revolution of the multi-billion dollar communications industry and, second, a vast extension of the numbers of useful channels. Both of these consequences carry large burdens vis-a-vis national and international economics and negotiations.

(iii) Geodetic satellites. There exists no *a priori* technical problem preventing their realization within a decade or two. While commercial navigation application of such vehicles does not now appear to confront nations with unusual problems, either in economic terms or in negotiations, concern with their use in directing military aircraft and missiles will be a major issue. The application of geodetic satellites to surveying will have some beneficial, practical results in surveying topographically difficult regions.

(iv) Knowledge. Setting aside (i) through (iii), and equating their social and economic impacts to zero, their political implications to naught, mankind must yet contend with the unknown. History may err, but in estimating the consequences of man's encounters with major new frontiers it errs most conservatively. Where was that practical politician in the 15th or 16th centuries, bent on wealth and power, who foresaw even a shadow of mid-Twentieth-Century Americas? Who was that scholar of political science and economics who sensed the unseen dimensions of the industrial revolution? Who among scientists late in the 19th century or in the first quarter of this century forecast the harnessing of the nucleus? These, and a host of similar questions that could be asked, clamor against brushing aside the unknown. Moreover, some signposts to the space age stand.

Unlike, for example, the situation in nuclear physics earlier this century, there are, in geophysics, centuries of observations and several decades of significant experimentation and analysis, quickened both by recent powerful tools and the Damoclean exponential curve of science, which outline, however blurredly in revealing the unknown, our interests -- specifically, the radiations, particles, and fields of space: the heart of matter and intertwined with energy. This population can be numbered, measured, described, and thus intellectually captured by space devices.

(v) Symbols. Setting aside, in turn (i) through (iv), societies and scholars must contend with the symbolic implications of space science developments. The national repercussions of Sputnik I were and

-13-

are appreciable; they were matched by international ones: even trade appears sensitive to symbols, as the following report suggests. On November 20, 1958, The Wall Street Journal printed a report on Soviet trade successes in South America, offering the explanation:

"U.S. diplomats and businessmen in Latin America attribute the increase in Red trade with this part of the world to two factors: One is the gain in Soviet prestige as a result of the launching of the Sputniks last year. Increased respect for Russia's technical and scientific achievements has given them a degree of respectability they've seldom enjoyed here.

"But perhaps more important in the Communist trade drive is the fact they are tilling fertile soil. The economies of many South American countries have been hard hit by dwindling world demand for and overproduction of some of their major export commodities."

Richard Pipes, writing in the *New Leader* (August 31, 1959), merits liberal quotation here:

"If someone who had left the United States eight or nine years ago, when McCarthyism was at its height, were to return today after being completely out of touch with this country, he would undoubtedly be struck by the change in the public attitude toward things Russian and Soviet. In the early '50s, thanks to sweeping and often foolish accusations, it was impossible to express any balanced opinion of the Soviet Union without risking suspicion. Today the situation is neatly reversed: We are in the midst of a wave of pro-Soviet sympathy of an intensity and grass-roots appeal probably without parallel in our history.

"Most of the mass media give priority to news from and about Russia, its life, achievements and aspirations. Even the New York Times devotes its leading pages each day to news reports and surveys concerned with the Soviet Union. More than a million people thronged to the Soviet Exhibition of Science, Technology and Culture in New York's Coliseum, thousands are going to see the Soviet Union with their own eyes, and an American politician risks losing his professional status these days unless he secures at least a one-hour interview with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev. Then there is an endless succession of ballet troupes and professional and scientific delegations of all sorts. Soon we are to welcome to our shores -- for the first time in history -- the ruler of Russia himself.

"What accounts for this startling turnabout in public opinion? The question answers itself if we date the beginning of this

-14-

change. It occurred on that fateful day in the autumn of 1957 when the newspapers headlined the report that the Soviet Union had launched the first successful earth satellite, thereby demonstrating a level of scientific and technological achievement for which the broad public was entirely unprepared. Nothing was as certain to touch upon the rawest, most sensitive nerve of the American national character.

"For proud as we are of our freedom, we are prouder still of our technological achievements. Since 1945, when the collapse of Europe unexpectedly imposed upon us the onerous obligation of world leadership, we have derived from this technological superiority much comfort as well as security. In the minds of most Americans there exists some sort of ill-defined but very real interdependence between our freedom and our material well-being: the latter, as it were, flowing from the former, and then, in turn, serving as its guarantee."

"It is by challenging this (very questionable) interdependence that the sputnik, and all the revelations of Soviet material achievement that followed in its wake, triggered the popular reaction we now witness. This popular reaction, in the short run, represents perhaps merely one of those mass-hysterias to which democracies are especially prone, but in the long run it may well mark a profound crisis in American culture. That a country which to most Americans was primitive, peasant-like, traditionally despotic, and, to boot, ruled by a band of unscrupulous, fanatical social experimenters -- a sort of vast Lower Slobovia, an epitome of backwardness and slavery -- that such a country should be able to outmatch us in a vital realm of modern science and technology was profoundly disturbing. To most people it could mean only one of two things: that Russia had been misrepresented, or that there really is no necessary connection between liberty and material progress."

While Mr. Pipes' assertion of the "turnabout in public opinion" may be debated [and I personally think he has gone much too far], he serves to emphasize the impact of scientific or technical achievement upon peoples.

What is contended here relates to symbolism in two ways: First, the Soviet achievement in space had negligible direct values in the coin of conventional politics, business, and public affairs. What tangible "good" came of Sputnik I in the conventional sense, or of the moon-reaching rocket? But it symbolized scientific and technical achievement of an advanced kind. Second, in view of peoples as they

[LC]

-15-

are, pure symbols of science -- divorced even from such "worthless"
achievements as those above -- now are seen to have power. They stand
to suggest dynamism and leadership. A modern Machiavelli might well
advise the science-poor prince to fabricate these symbols if capacity
to realize them legitimately is absent.

4. Public Affairs

Past and present domestic actions and words are of some interest.
To take words first, an anecdote may be ironically useful: A government
official recently complained that, while the USSR had been so successful
in deriving propaganda from their space efforts, we had not thrust
forward our best foot -- namely, publicizing our appreciable scientific
findings. Yet this same official, in concert with his governmental
colleagues, had in fact set the stage for the USSR by the publicity
devoted to our hopes and plans, from the middle of 1955 on. Not that
"firsts" in launching exploits would have fallen flat upon the world:
so dramatic, romantic, and historic an event as the launching of the
first satellite would in any case have stirred peoples everywhere.

Domestic publicity policies achieved two ends: first, they alerted
the world to our estimate of satellite achievements, whetted appetites
for accomplishment, and heightened interest admirably for exploitation by
a doer; and, second, they made possible the Greek reversal, long having
led the world to believe that we would be first in space.

From the beginning, information and publicity on the domestic IGY
satellite program were in governmental hands. In a profile of the White
House press secretary, the learned journal *Esquire* reports his role in
assuming the information disseminating role. Nor did the pattern change,
in terms of sensitivity and care, after Sputnik I, as the *Atlas* satellite
(December 13, 1958) publicity shows. This enterprise is of two-fold
interest to the student -- first, on what might be called a factual plane
and, second, on an international policy level.

From a strictly technologic point of view the *atlas* launching was a
genuinely impressive launching: (i) what was hurtled into orbit was
large (8700 pounds); (ii) the launching showed excellent guidance techno-
logy; and (iii) a communications circuit was established with a vehicle
in orbit for the first time in history, of interest not technically (for
nothing new in this sense was involved) but historically. Yet the infor-
mation released led to world-wide headlines to the effect: (i) that

[L]

-16-

the U.S. had caught up with the USSR, (ii) that the object was the heaviest ever orbited, and (iii) that significant scientific ends were achieved.
A few days later, these came home to roost -- e.g., the Washington Post editorial, December 23, 1958, "Candor Didn't Orbit."

From an international point of view (aside from the implications of the above), one may note: (i) the Atlas vehicle was the first space vehicle to be launched outside an international agreement and (ii) it was the first vehicle itself issuing "propaganda" by transmission to all earth.

It is difficult to believe that proper care and diligence have been exercised in the verbal area. At best, one suspects that dichotomy, between what officials feel needs to be said domestically as against internationally, plagued officials.

Turning to actions: one serves no constructive end in regurgitating details of the past relating to (i) the state of rocket engine work in this country during the decade before Sputnik I, (ii) the difficulties with Vanguard [actually the record is not at all bad for a new system], and (iii) reliability problems still at hand. At present, some of our problems relate to late starts, some to program, budget, and publicity rivalries, some to the exponential curve of science and engineering. The first two of these, in theory at least, have solutions or may be ameliorated in one way or another. The third is most recalcitrant, calling for efforts on an order of magnitude <u>or more</u> above even generous support and probably also for radical departures in the solution of vehicular problems.

It is highly probable that such approaches will be called upon as our lag increases. Public pressures will see to this. To the question, Why will billions of dollars be spent on space?, I should reply as follows: First and foremost, national leadership. This may be called prestige; it may be related to domestic politics; it may be tied to international politics broadly or in the narrow, cold-war sense; but it should also be linked to the term "leadership" in a less calculating sense -- as relating to people's expectations of vigorous cultures. Second, irrational desires of peoples -- somehow to venture away from earth and to engage in adventure -- serve as a force. Only lastly do we have science which, left to itself, would proceed slowly and conservatively. But since vast sums will be devoted to space, science must shoulder the burden of attempting to maximize the yield from these efforts.

Turning more specifically to international matters:

The space age was born a child of the IGY, as section (1) indicates, and this informal international framework elicited cooperation and provided a harmonious setting that, in my opinion, at least somewhat

-17-

ameliorated political considerations. The space age really requires international cooperation: quite aside from tracking and telemetry problems of pure space science, aside from international negotiations of a strictly governmental kind (relating, say, to frequency allocations), and aside from questions of military implications, the vastness of space and its unknown afford opportunities for engaging the energies of thousands of people throughout the world.

Here care must be exercised in several areas. The one of most interest to science is, of course, scientific cooperation. Scientists generally prefer to use purely scientific organizations like COSPAR, established by ICSU for this purpose. Government officials and politicians tend to think in terms of governmental and inter-governmental vehicles -- e.g., U.N.

Perhaps two examples may suggest what I have in mind: First, the IGY. It worked with a minimum of difficulty and with no panoply (domestic or international) of bureaucratic offices. Second, the International Atomic Energy Agency: replete with an international bureaucracy, where are its accomplishments?

Governments and their agents are most properly concerned with regulation and control. Private bodies, free of "political face" considerations and concerned with substance as against quid-pro-quo elements and procedures, have shown capacity for eliciting cooperation from competent specialists. It is one thing to establish administrative determinations and structures for achieving scientific objectives, and to allocate funds; it is another thing to create an environment where the interests and energies of creative experts are engendered in a natural, compelling, and individual fashion. The first at best yields purchased performance from some and at worst collapses; the second, as the IGY demonstrates, reaps a rich harvest in results and yields a sum greater than the sum of the parts, among whose intangible products lies the good of effective cooperation among diverse peoples and societies.