Firsts in Space

Originally published in the Informanté newspaper on Thursday, 7 June, 2018.

During the early 1970’s, the Space Race was in full swing. The Americans had landed a man on the moon during 1969, and the Soviets were reeling from the loss of their lead in the race to conquer space. Having heard of the American Skylab space station programme, and having lost the race to the moon, their focus shifted towards manned orbital space stations. 

So in early 1970, construction began on Salyut 1 (Russian for ‘Salute’ (naturally) or ‘fireworks’). Its purpose was merely to test the elements of a space station, and its basic design would be built upon for decades to come. As an initial test station, it was not large – 20m in length, 4m in diameter with about 99 cubic metres of interior space. It had only three pressurized compartments, of which two could be entered by the crew.

The first of these compartments was the transfer compartment – a docking port, essentially, allowing one Soyuz spacecraft to dock. Its docking system is still in use today on the International Space Station. The second and main compartment was the main compartment, with enough space for eight chairs, several control panels, and about 20 portholes. The third pressurized compartment contained its control and communication equipment, power and life support systems. An unpressurized four compartment contained engines, batteries and reserve supplies of oxygen and water. Also attached to the Salyut 1 was the astrophysical Orion 1 Space Observatory. This ultraviolet telescope took spectrograms of the stars Vega and Beta Centauri during its operation. 

Its launch was initially planned for 12 April 1971 to coincide with the 10 year anniversary of Yuri Gagarin’s flight on Vostok 1, but launch was delayed until the 19th. Its first crew would launch with the Soyuz 10 mission, but they experienced problems with docking, and could not enter the station. The Soyuz 10 mission was aborted and a replacement crew was launched in Soyuz 11.

On 7 June 1971, 47 years ago today, the crew of the Soyuz 11 successfully docked, and became the first men to man a space station. Commander Georgy Dobrovsky, Flight Engineer Vladislav Volkov, and Test Engineer Viktor Patsayev remained on board for 23 days, setting space endurance records that would hold until the American Skylab mission.

When they first entered the station, they encountered a smoky and burnt atmosphere, and had to replace a part of the ventilation system and retreat to the Soyuz until the air cleared. The crew continued with their mission, checking the design and systems of the orbital station, testing the procedures for orientation and navigation as well as the associated control systems. 

In orbit, they also studied the Earth’s surface in terms of geology, geography, meteorology and snow and ice cover, while studying phenomena in the atmosphere and conducting medico-biological studies on the effects and influence on long-term spaceflight on humans. Interestingly, they found that using the exercise treadmill as they were required to do twice a day caused the whole station to vibrate! During the course of the mission, Victor Patsayev also became the first man to operate a telescope outside of Eareth’s atmosphere, when he operated the Orion 1 Space Observatory. 

On 18 June, an electrical fire broke out on the station, and mission planners considered abandoning the station. Finally, on 29 June, after flying 362 orbits around the Earth, the crew was ordered to return to Earth. They re-entered Soyuz 11, and started re-entry. Their capsule parachuted to a soft landing in Kazakhstan, and all seemed well for their mission. 


When the recovery team found the capsule, however, they realized something went wrong. Kerim Kerimov recalled, “Outwardly, there was no damage whatsoever. They knocked on the side, but there was no response from within. On opening the hatch, they found all three men in their couches, motionless, with dark-blue patches on their faces and trails of blood from their noses and ears. They removed them from the descent module. Dobrovolsky was still warm. The doctors gave artificial respiration. Based on their reports, the cause of death was suffocation.”

The fault was traced to a ventilation valve located between the orbital and descent module, which had incorrectly opened about 12 minutes after the start of their descent. Opened at an altitude of 168km, the loss of pressure was fatal within seconds. Biomedical sensors show cardiac arrest had occurred within 40 seconds of pressure loss. The Soyuz 11 crew had become the first, and to date only, humans to die in space. 

As a result, the Soyuz capsules were redesigned to allow crew to wear pressure suits, and due to the time it took to redesign, Salyut 1 was deorbited on October 11 without ever receiving another crew. The world’s first space station burned up over the Pacific Ocean after 175 days in space. The Salyut programme continued, however, with Salyut-7 being more commonly known as the Mir Space Station, and it’s final module, Salyut-8 known as Zvezda, the core of the Russian segment of the International Space Station.

For the crew of the Soyuz 11, the world of Richard Nixon put it best: “The American people join in expressing to you and the Soviet people our deepest sympathy on the tragic deaths of the three Soviet cosmonauts. The whole world followed the exploits of these courageous explorers of the unknown and shares the anguish of their tragedy. But the achievements of cosmonauts Dobrovolsky, Volkov and Patsayev remain. It will, I am sure, prove to have contributed greatly to the further achievements of the Soviet program for the exploration of space and thus to the widening of man's horizons.” On August 1, 1971, their names joined 8 Americans and three other Soviets who lost their lives in furtherance of space exploration on the Fallen Astronaut Memorial placed on the moon by David Scott.

Testing Relativity

Originally published in the Informanté newspaper on Thursday, 31 May, 2018.

This week, 99 years ago, Sir Arthur Eddington arrived at his destination to test a theory of Albert Einstein. Einstein had just four years earlier published his groundbreaking papers that introduced the theory of general relativity, and it had not gone down well with the scientific community, as it had contradicted the great Sir Isaac Newton’s model of classical mechanics as formulated in his 1687 book Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica.

It was a natural extension of Einstein’s earlier work, the 1905 publish theory of special relativity, where he showed that the laws of physics were the same for all non-accelerating observers. See, in the late 19th century, physicists were searching for the ether – the medium that light travelled through. But between April and July 1887, Albert Michelson and Edward Morley conducted an experiment to detect the speed of light as it travelled through the ether in perpendicular directions in order to detect the movement of the ether. 

Their experiment did not produce the results they expected. Michelson and Morley found no difference in the speed of light no matter what direction they used – the speed of light was the same with or against the earth’s rotation, and with or against the earth’s orbit. This experiment would in the years following become known as the most famous failed experiment. 

Other experiments after this continued to provide the same results, with most physicists assuming the experiment was wrong. A young physicist named Einstein tackled the problem from a different direction. He assumed that the laws of physics do not change, and that the experiments were correct – the speed of light is the same for all observers no matter the speed they were moving. 

Einstein’s special theory of relativity removed ether from the equation, and fundamentally changed how we perceive the world around us. Instead of an inert ‘ether’, the only frame of reference would be the relative difference in velocity. It also introduced the concept of space-time. Physicists had always assumed that physical space was simply the normal three dimensions, but Einstein had shown that, due to the speed of light being constant, time was also a part of space, and was manipulated by movement through it. 

As an example, suppose you were in a spacecraft moving at half the speed of light. Since you’re not accelerating, you don’t appear to be moving from your frame of reference. If you took a laser, and shone it against a mirror on the roof to reflect to a detector, it would appear to you as if the light travelled in a straight line up and down to the reflector. But from an observer stationary outside the ship, and looking into the window at the exact right time, it would look very different – the light would appear to move at an angle up to the mirror and at an angle down to the reflector! Since the speed of light is constant, what could account for this difference?

The answer, according to Einstein, was obvious. Time is slower in a fast moving object! This effect of special relativity is known as time dilation. This is not obvious – in fact, in our tough experiment above, moving at just half the speed of light would slow time inside by only 13.4%. By 90% of the speed of light, time would slow by more than half – 56.4%. By 99% of the speed of light, time would pass at 14.1% of normal speed.

Einstein’s theory seemed to solve the problem of the missing ether, but Einstein noticed a paradox it created. Newton’s first law of motion stated that an object remains in uniform motion unless acted on by a force. So you should feel a force if you’re accelerating, correct? So then why, when you fall, and gravity acts on you, do you not feel a force acting on you, but instead feel weightless as you accelerate?

Einstein realized that the space-time concept in his special theory of relativity could explain this, and explain the origin of gravity. He theorized that mass warped space-time! Earth’s mass would warp space-time in such a way that a moving object without a force acting on it would actually move in a straight line from its own frame of reference. In fact, time dilation occurs in gravity – the time difference between earth surface and its centre would be about 3.4 microseconds over 1000 years.

 This was what Einstein proposed in 1915 with his publication of the general theory of relativity, and was met with great scepticism. How could this 34-year-old try and upstage the tested works of the great Isaac Newton? It was also in the middle of World War I, and Einstein’s work was isolated to the German scientific community. Dutch physicist Willem De Sitter, however, heard of it, and told British astronomer Sir Arthur Eddington. 

Since Einstein’s theory could only be tested by observing the light from stars bending around the sun (the only massive object close enough that such distortions in space-time would be visible), and the sun’s glare making that impossible, Einstein’s theory could not be tested. Sir Arthur Eddington, however, was an astronomer, and he knew of a way. In 1917, he discussed it with Sir Frank Watson Dyson, Astronomer Royal, and in 1919 he was sent to the remote island of Príncipe, off the west coast of Africa.

During January and February 1919, he had measured the true positions of the stars in the Hyades star cluster, and on 29 May 1919, he was ready on Príncipe. The sky was clear, and then it happened. A total solar eclipse. The Hyades were visible during the day, and right next to the sun. The astronomer and his team took several pictures during the eclipse, and returned to England. There they studied the pictures, and checked and rechecked their calculations. On November 6, 1919, he published his results – Einstein had dethroned Newton, and the stars had moved just like his theory predicted. When the London Times published his results a day later, with the headline “Revolution in Science: New Theory of the Universe: Newtonian Ideas Overthrown,“ Einstein was no longer an obscure German physicist, but a worldwide celebrity. 



A Look At The Nation

Originally published in the Informanté newspaper on Thursday, 24 May, 2018.

Every 5 years, Statistician-General Alex Shimuafeni and his team at the Namibia Statistics Agency compile a Namibia Household Income and Expenditure survey to allow government to align its National Development Plans so as to match the demographics of the Namibian nation. Luckily, this study is published, so we too can have a look at this nation of ours. 

From the report, we can see this data was compiled via surveys given to 10 090 households. With the total households in Namibia at 544 655, we can see that statistically, this survey should give us an accurate representation of the entire population with a very low margin of error, even at 99% confidence level (Theory of Interest: The Study Scientific). From this, the NSA has estimated the population at 2 280 716 people. 

As such, they can tell you that 66% of our population is under 30 years of age, with only about 11.9% of the population over 50 years of age. 51.4% of them are female, and 48.6% are male, with 54.1% of the population now living in urban areas and only 45.9% living in rural areas. Also interesting is that 62.8% of the country has never been married, with the married (certificate or traditional) making up only 21% of the population. 

In terms of languages, 50.8% of the country speaks Oshiwambo at home, with Nama/Damara at 12%, Rukavango at 11.8%, Otjiherero at 8.9% and Afrikaans at 6.3%. We also have the unfortunate statistic that 13.3% of children under 17 years of age, are orphans. When we look at housing, we find out that 32.9% of the population lives in traditional dwellings, with 30.6% in houses and 20.2 in improvised housing units. Interestingly, this also results in 59.1% living on a plot they own without a mortgage, with only 22.2% renting. 12.7% occupy the space for free, with only 5.8% of households having a mortgage. 

When we dig down to energy usage, we find that 48.6% of the country use firewood for cooking, with only 37.3% using electricity and 10.3% gas. When it comes to lighting, 47.8% use electricity, but 31.7% use batteries, and 11.2% still using candles. When it comes to water, the situation at least looks better – 84.4% uses piped water, with 7.5% dependent on boreholes or wells. Looking at education next, it is revealed that 87.4% of the country older than 15 years is literate, but 83.4% of schoolchildren still walk to school. And while the cost of education per year is on average N$ 1136.40 (with Khomas region the outlier at N$ 3 333 per year), only 8.3% of pupils learn on a scholarship. 

Now that we’ve got a good idea of what an average household looks like, let’s delve into their economic situation. 53.6% of the country earns a salary for income, with 11% on pension, 10.6% practising subsistence farming, 9.6% subsisting on grants and 9.1% receiving business incomes. 23% of households have debt, with 28.7% of that debt from cash loans, 12.5% from car loans and 6.9% from furniture and appliance debt. 

In terms of assets, the most prevalent asset is the cellphone, which 93.3% own. A radio is owned by 45.6% of the population, followed by a television (42.5%), refrigerator (37.8%), freezer (17.8%) and car (15.9%). Of interest here is the drop in certain assets compared to the 2009/2010 NHIES, with the landline telephones dropping from 56% of the population to 4.9%, and the radio dropping from 72% to 46%. 

So what do we spend our incomes on? Well, on average 36.3% goes to food and beverages, with 31.8% on housing, 7.5% on transport and communication, 5.3% on furnishings and equipment and 4.2% on clothes and footwear. And now the times has comes to examine the distribution of income, and see how the average Namibian fares. The average Namibian household now earns N$ 119 065 per year, or N$ 9922 per month.

How is this distributed? Well, the bottom 25% of the population earns N$ 27 301 per year, or N$ 2275 per month. Those from 26% to 50% earns N$ 48 160 per year, or about N$ 4 013 per month. Those from 51% to 75% earns N$ 75 540 per year, or about N$ 6 295 per month. From 76% to 90%, earnings are N$ 123 911 per year on average, or N$ 10 326 per month. In the 91% to 95% bracket, earnings are N$ 202 523 per year or N$ 16 877 per month, and in the 96% to 98% bracket, it’s N$ 335 875 per year or N$ 27 990 per month. Finally, the top 1% earn N$ 733 245 per year or N$ 61 104 per month. 



Quite skew, yes, but it’s slowly becoming better. While we’re nowhere near the best in the world, our current GINI coefficient (the measure of income inequality) is down to 0.56, from 0.58 in 2010 and down from 0.63 back in 1990. But perhaps more important is our fight against poverty. And it’s clear from this data that we’ve made a resounding dent in that area. Those living in food poverty has about halved during the last 10 years, down from 11% to 6.1%, and when taking the upper poverty line, it’s reduced from 37.5% of the population to about 17.4%. By any measure, that’s good progress. Let’s use this data to see how we can help our fellow citizens, now that we know a bit more about them, and try to improve this picture so that the next NHIES report can have even more good news.