Which of ESA's 5 proposed M-class missions do you think most deserves the M3 slot?

[nhnifong]

To quote Wikipedia on the Comic Vision program:

M-class projects will usually be relatively stand-alone ESA projects. The two first M-class missions, M1 and M2, have been selected:

M1, Solar Orbiter, an adopted mission for close-up observations of the sun; launch planned in 2017.

M2, Euclid, a selected mission to study dark energy and dark matter; launch planned for 2020.

The third M-class mission, M3, is planned for launch in 2024. ESA released a call for missions proposals for M3 in July 2010. On February 25, 2011, ESA announced the selection of four missions to undergo an initial assessment phase. In addition, Plato, which was in competition for M1/M2, is allowed to compete for M3. The five M3 candidate missions are:

EChO (Exoplanet Characterisation Observatory), a proposed mission to study exoplanet atmospheres

LOFT (Large Observatory For X-ray Timing), a proposed mission to study neutron stars and black holes by detecting their very rapid X-ray variability

MarcoPolo-R, a proposed mission to return a sample from a near-Earth asteroid

Plato, a proposed mission to search for new exoplanets and measure stellar oscillations

STE-QUEST (Space-Time Explorer and Quantum Equivalence Principle Space Test), a proposed mission devoted to precise measurements of general relativity effects.

I think EChO is the best choice, because of the potential discovery of oxygen in the atmosphere of an exoplanet, but it is probably the most risky as well, in terms of scientific payoff.

[Scotius]

MarcoPolo-R and Plato. Those sound most exciting, and offer huge return in short time.

[DonLorenzo]

OOh.. they all sound great! Plato is first off the list for me, as we're already discovering loads of exoplanets with Kepler, and for me the ballpark estimate of their existence ('lots') is exciting enough. Next off is Echo, measuring the atmospheres of exoplanets is super challenging and it would be great to know more about them, but our utter inability to get there makes it completely academic. Also the prevalence of exoplanets ('lots') makes it likely that all kinds of compositions exist.

Then we have LOFT and STE, both picking away at the fabric of existence itself and furthering our understanding of it. Hugely exciting stuff, but it's going to off the list as well, but only because we have such an exciting candidate in MarcoPolo-R. Rendez-vous with an asteroid and sample return (as done by the japanese Hayabusa probe as well) and developing the technologies and procedures to make such routine is scientifically interesting, practically useful AND has nigh immediate, tangible real-world application. Asteroid mining, deflection and even moving and capturing them is one of the few amazing sci-fi space things that we are actually quite likely to be able to do.. now.

So MarcoPolo gets my vote. Unfortunately I don't really have one

[magnemoe]

studying the atmosphere on exoplanets is mostly interesting if you can do it on earth sized planets in the Goldilock zone.

If not it will have limited interest, I doubt we find much interesting about the atmosphere in gas giants.

An asteroid sample return would be interesting,

[Nibb31]

I don't see much point in Plato or Echo, since Kepler has already detected more exoplanets than we can reasonably study. We won't be visiting them any time soon and they aren't going anywhere, so there is no rush.

Gaia and JWST will be doing a lot of pure astronomy, so I'd rather any new missions concentrate on our solar system and pure physics, so I guess my vote goes to MarcoPolo-R and STE-QUEST.

[Albert VDS]

EChO, no doubt about it. It's a good way to find life, because certain things can only put into an atmosphere if theres life down there.

It can even tell use if it's intelligent life.

[DonLorenzo]

EChO, no doubt about it. It's a good way to find life, because certain things can only put into an atmosphere if theres life down there.

It can even tell use if it's intelligent life.

Ooh Albert that's a good point. I didn't consider that. Although I find the possible headline 'Methane found = LIFE' to already be premature. It'd be painful! Such a probably indication but with no (easy) way to back it up

[Nibb31]

You won't be able to detect life on exoplanets. Even if we did find exoplanets that could theoretically harbour life, there is no way we'll be able to get there in this century or the next, therefore no way to confirm the theory.

[NASAFanboy]

My vote goes to MarcoPolo.

The other missions are all astronomy related, and we already have Hubble, Kepler, and the new James Webb going up. There is no need or rush to discover exoplanets, and even if we do find a earth-like world, the information will be useless, as we have no means to get there until the next century-but that's only to our nearest stars.

MarcoPolo, however, would produce a massive PR stunt, huge science payoff, and hundreds of geologists squealing with joy. Also, it would provide useful insight for NASA and private companies (And so, it has huge potiental for partnerships to reduce cost). Any new mission should be focused on our solar system..we've got telescopes enough.

[nhnifong]

If a gas is present in a planet's atmosphere at levels considered to be unstable on a geological time scale, like oxygen because it is reactive, then that would be evidence for life, or at least an unknown catalyst. The more atmospheres we observe the better baseline we will have for which gases we can expect as well.

If an exoplanet was believed to have life, I think many countries and institutions would begin transmitting narrow beam signals at it with the highest amplitudes they can produce. If anyone is there, we can expect a reply in a few hundred years, not an an unreasonable amount of time to wait IMHO. If we find 10 to 20 such planets and continuously beam signals at all of them for many years, I think we stand a good chance of first contact in a few centuries.

I think it goes without saying that first contact would be one of the most important events in the lifetime of the Earth.

Edited November 27, 2013 by nhnifong

[tom1499]

MarcoPolo! Stop trying to learn if there is life far away from us and learn something about our own damn solar system! Or Ste-quest.

[Albert VDS]

Ooh Albert that's a good point. I didn't consider that. Although I find the possible headline 'Methane found = LIFE' to already be premature. It'd be painful! Such a probably indication but with no (easy) way to back it up

You won't be able to detect life on exoplanets. Even if we did find exoplanets that could theoretically harbour life, there is no way we'll be able to get there in this century or the next, therefore no way to confirm the theory.

Garik Israelian can explain it better than me: TED Talk Garik Israelian: How spectroscopy could reveal alien life

[magnemoe]

If a gas is present in a planet's atmosphere at levels considered to be unstable on a geological time scale, like oxygen because it is reactive, then that would be evidence for life, or at least an unknown catalyst. The more atmospheres we observe the better baseline we will have for which gases we can expect as well.

If an exoplanet was believed to have life, I think many countries and institutions would begin transmitting narrow beam signals at it with the highest amplitudes they can produce. If anyone is there, we can expect a reply in a few hundred years, not an an unreasonable amount of time to wait IMHO. If we find 10 to 20 such planets and continuously beam signals at all of them for many years, I think we stand a good chance of first contact in a few centuries.

I think it goes without saying that first contact would be one of the most important events in the lifetime of the Earth.

Yes oxygen is unstable so if you find significantly with oxygen you have life.

The problem I see is to measure this on planets who has an chance of life as I understand this is very borderland for the project.

Measuring the atmosphere on gas giants is less interesting and can also be done with an more capable telescope.

EChO, no doubt about it. It's a good way to find life, because certain things can only put into an atmosphere if theres life down there.

It can even tell use if it's intelligent life.

How can it tell intelligent life?

[Albert VDS]

If you find chlorofluorocarbons or hydrocarbons created by burnning gasoline/diesel in large quantities then you know there's an intelligent life form on that planet.

[Skyler4856]

I'm torn between STE-QUEST Marco-polo, and ECHO

[Kryten]

If you find chlorofluorocarbons or hydrocarbons created by burnning gasoline/diesel in large quantities then you know there's an intelligent life form on that planet.

You mean like on Titan?

[Albert VDS]

Of course in conjunction with the elements that makes life possible and before you go there; yes the planet should be in a habitable zone too.

[magnemoe]

If you find chlorofluorocarbons or hydrocarbons created by burnning gasoline/diesel in large quantities then you know there's an intelligent life form on that planet.

Does freon and other artificial stuff show up in large enough quantities to be measurable? If so it should prove an technical civilization. Weakness with this is that we tend to reduce pollution over time, also switch to other materials pretty often as new ones is more efficient or environmental friendly so we don't know alien pollution.

Not sure who half burned hydrocarbons are released, however modern engines reduces this and it might be generated by biochemistry, NOX might be more interesting as it require high temperature fusing between oxygen and nitrogen, only natural source is lightning.

Anyway, it would be something to check for but chances to finding somebody +-100 year of our technological level is extremely low.