On Christmas Eve, an autonomous spacecraft flew past the Sun, closer than any human-made object before it. Swooping through the atmosphere, Nasa’s Parker Solar Probe was on a mission to discover more about the Sun, including how it affects space weather on Earth.
This was a landmark moment for humanity – but one without any human directly involved, as the spacecraft carried out its pre-programmed tasks by itself as it flew past the sun, with no communication with Earth at all.
Robotic probes have been sent across the solar system for the last six decades, reaching destinations impossible for humans. During its 10-day flyby, the Parker Solar Probe experienced temperatures of 1000C.
But the success of these autonomous spacecraft – coupled with the rise of new advanced artificial intelligence – raises the question of what role humans might play in future space exploration.
NASA
Artist’s concept of the Parker Solar Probe spacecraft approaching the sun
Some scientists question whether human astronauts are going to be needed at all.
“Robots are developing fast, and the case for sending humans is getting weaker all the time,” says Lord Martin Rees, the UK’s Astronomer Royal. “I don’t think any taxpayer’s money should be used to send humans into space.”
He also points to the risk to humans.
“The only case for sending humans [there] is as an adventure, an experience for wealthy people, and that should be funded privately,” he argues.
Andrew Coates, a physicist from University College London, agrees. “For serious space exploration, I much prefer robotics,” he says. “[They] go much further and do more things.”
NASA
US astronaut Buzz Aldrin walking on the surface of the Moon in 1969
They are also cheaper than humans, he argues. “And as AI progresses, the robots can be cleverer and cleverer.”
But what does that mean for future generations of budding astronauts – and surely there are certain functions that humans can do in space but which robots, however advanced, never could?
Rovers versus mankind
Robotic spacecraft have visited every planet in the solar system, as well as many asteroids and comets, but humans have only gone to two destinations: Earth’s orbit and the Moon.
In all, about 700 people have been to space, since the earliest in 1961, when Yuri Gagarin from the then-Soviet Union became the first cosmic explorer. Most of those have been into orbit (circling the Earth) or suborbit (short vertical hops into space lasting minutes, on vehicles like the US company Blue Origin’s New Shepard rocket).
“Prestige will always be a reason that we have humans in space,” says Dr Kelly Weinersmith, a biologist at Rice University, Texas and co-author of A City on Mars. “It seems to have been agreed upon as a great way to show that your political system is effective and your people are brilliant.”
But aside from an innate desire to explore, or a sense of prestige, humans also carry out research and experiments in Earth’s orbit, such as on the International Space Station, and use these to advance science.
NASA
The Earthrise photo was taken by US astronaut William Anders in December 1968 during the Apollo 8 mission
Robots can contribute to that scientific research, with the ability to travel to locations inhospitable to humans, where they can use instruments to study and probe the atmospheres and surfaces.
“Humans are more versatile and we get stuff done faster than a robot, but we’re really hard and expensive to keep alive in space,” says Dr Weinersmith.
In her 2024 Booker Prize-winning novel Orbital, author Samantha Harvey puts it more lyrically: “A robot has no need for hydration, nutrients, excretion, sleep… It wants and asks for nothing.”
But there are downsides. Many robots are slow and methodical – for example on Mars, the rovers (remote-controlled motor vehicles) trundle along at barely 0.1mph.
“AI can beat human beings at chess, but does that mean they’ll be able to beat human beings in exploring environments?” asks Dr Ian Crawford, a planetary scientist at the University of London. “I just don’t think we know.”
He does, however, believe that AI algorithms might enable rovers to be “more efficient”.
AI assistants and humanoid robots
Technology can play a part in complementing human space travel by freeing up astronauts from certain tasks to allow them to focus on more important research.
“[AI could be used to] automate tedious tasks,” explains Dr Kiri Wagstaff, a computer and planetary scientist in the US who previously worked at Nasa’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California. “On the surface of a planet, humans get tired and lose focus, but machines won’t.”
The challenge is that vast amounts of power are needed to operate systems like large language models (LLM), which can understand and generate human language by processing vast amounts of text data. “We are not at the point of being able to run an LLM on a Mars rover,” says Dr Wagstaff.
“The rovers’ processors run at about a tenth [of the speed] that your smartphone has” – meaning they are unable to cope with the intense demands of running an LLM.
Complex humanoid machines with robotic arms and limbs are another form of technology that could take on basic tasks and functions in space, particularly as they more closely mimic the physical capabilities of humans.
NASA
Nasa’s Valkyrie humanoid robot
Nasa’s Valkyrie robot was built by the Johnson Space Center to compete in a 2013 robotics challenge trial. Weighing 300lb and standing at 6ft2in, it looks not unlike a Star Wars Stormtrooper, but it is one of an increasing number of human-like machines with superhuman abilities.
Long before the Valkyrie was created, Nasa’s Robonaut was the first humanoid robot designed for use in space, taking on tasks that were otherwise performed by humans.
Its specially designed hands meant it could use the same tools as astronauts and carry out complex, delicate tasks like grasping objects or flicking switches, that were too challenging for other robotic systems.
A later model of the Robonaut was flown to the International Space Station on the space shuttle Discovery in 2011, where it helped with maintenance and assembly.
Reuters
Valkyrie demonstrates how it is able to open a bag
“If we need to change a component or clean a solar panel, we could do that robotically,” says Dr Shaun Azimi, lead of the dexterous robotics team at Nasa’s Johnson Space Center in Texas. “We see robots as a way to secure these habitats when humans aren’t around.”
He argues that robots could be useful, not to replace human explorers but to work alongside them.
Some robots are already working on other planets without humans, sometimes even making decisions on their own. Nasa’s Curiosity rover, for example, is exploring a region called Gale Crater on Mars and autonomously performs some of its science without human input.
“You can direct the rover to take pictures of a scene, look for rocks that might fit science priorities for the mission, and then autonomously fire its laser at that target,” says Dr Wagstaff.
“It can get a reading of a particular rock and send it back to Earth while the humans are still asleep.”
NASA
Nasa’s Perseverance Mars rover takes a “selfie”
But the capabilities of rovers like Curiosity are limited by their slow pace. And there is something else they cannot compete with too. That is, humans have the added bonus of inspiring people back on Earth in a way that machines cannot.
“Inspiration is something that is intangible,” argues Prof Coates.
Leroy Chiao, a retired Nasa astronaut who went on three flights to space in the 1990s and 2000s on Nasa’s Space Shuttle and to the International Space Station, agrees. “Humans relate when humans are doing something.
“The general public is excited about robotic missions. But I would expect the first human on Mars to be even bigger than the first Moon landing.”
Life on Mars?
Humans have not travelled further than Earth’s orbit since December 1972, when the last Apollo mission visited the Moon. Nasa is hoping to return humans there this decade with its Artemis programme.
The next crewed mission will see four astronauts fly around the Moon in 2026. A further mission, scheduled for 2027, will see Nasa astronauts land on the Moon’s surface.
Reuters
Astronauts for NASA’s Artemis II mission
The Chinese space agency, meanwhile, also wants to send astronauts to the Moon.
Elsewhere Elon Musk, CEO of the US company SpaceX, has his own plans related to space. He has said that his long-term plan is to create a colony on Mars, where humans could land.
His idea is to use Starship, a vast new vehicle that his company is developing, to transport up to 100 people there at a time, with the aim for there to be a million people on Mars in 20 years.
“Musk is arguing we need to move to Mars because that could be a backup for humanity if something catastrophic happens on Earth,” explains Dr Weinersmith. “If you buy that argument, then sending humans into space is necessary.”
However, there are large unknowns about living on Mars, including myriad technical challenges that she says remain unsolved.
“Maybe babies can’t develop in that environment,” she says. “There [are] ethical questions [like this] that we don’t have the answers to.
“I think we should be slowing down.”
Lord Rees has a vision of his own, though, in which human and robotic exploration might merge to the point that humans themselves are part-machine to cope with extreme environments. “I can imagine they will use all of the techniques of genetic modification, cyborg add-ons, and so on, to cope with very hostile environments,” he says.
“We may have a new species that will be happy to live on Mars.”
Until then, however, humans are likely to continue their small steps into the cosmos, on a path long trodden by robotic explorers before them.
Top image credit: NASA
BBC InDepth is the new home on the website and app for the best analysis and expertise from our top journalists. Under a distinctive new brand, we’ll bring you fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions, and deep reporting on the biggest issues to help you make sense of a complex world. And we’ll be showcasing thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. We’re starting small but thinking big, and we want to know what you think – you can send us your feedback by clicking on the button below.
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Holding a virtual monopoly in a product on which the artificial intelligence boom relies should be a golden ticket. For chipmaker Nvidia, it has been. But ASML, which makes extraordinarily complex machines that etch silicon and is no less integral to the rise of AI, has found that ruling the roost can still be an up-and-down affair.
The €270bn Dutch manufacturer, which reports its earnings next week, is a sine qua non of technology; chips powering AI and even fridges are invariably etched by ASML’s kit. The flipside is its exposure to customers’ fortunes and politics.
Revenue is inherently lumpy, and a single paused purchase makes a big dent — a key difference from fellow AI monopolist Nvidia, which is at present struggling to meet demand for its top-end chips. ASML’s newest high numerical aperture (NA) systems go for €380mn; as an example of how volatile revenue can be for such big-ticket items, one delayed order would be akin to drivers holding off on buying 8,000-odd Teslas.
Initial hopes were high for robust spending on wafer fab equipment this year and next. Semi, an industry body, in December reckoned on an increase of 7 per cent this year and twice that in 2026. Jefferies, for example, now expects sales to flatline next year.
Mood music bears that out. Top chipmaker TSMC has sounded more cautious over the timing of the adoption of new high NA machines. Other big customers are reining in spending. Intel in April shaved its capital expenditure plans by $2bn to $18bn, while consensus numbers for Samsung Electronics suggest the South Korean chipmaker will underspend last year’s $39bn capex budget.
Politics is also getting thornier. Washington, seeking to hobble China’s tech prowess, has banned sales of ASML’s more advanced machines. Going further would hurt. China, which buys the less advanced but more profitable deep ultraviolet machines, typically accounts for about a quarter of sales. Last year, catch-up on orders lifted that to half.
Meanwhile, Chinese homegrown competition, given an extra nudge by US trade barriers, is evolving. Shenzhen government-backed SiCarrier, for example, claims to have encroached on ASML territory with lithography capable of producing less advanced chips.
The good news is that catch-up in this industry, with a 5,000-strong supplier base and armies of engineers, requires years if not decades. Customers, too, will probably be deferring rather than nixing purchases. The zippier machines help customers juice yields; Intel reckons it cuts processes on a given layer from 40 steps to just 10.
Over time, ASML’s enviable market position looks solid — and perhaps more so than that of Nvidia, whose customers are increasingly trying to create their own chips. Yet the kit-maker’s shares have been the rockier investment. In the past year, ASML has shrunk by a third while Nvidia has risen by a quarter; its market capitalisation is within a whisker of $4tn. That makes ASML the braver bet, but by no means a worse one.
Astrolight is developing a laser-based communications system
I’m led through a series of concrete corridors at Vilnius University, Lithuania; the murals give a Soviet-era vibe, and it seems an unlikely location for a high-tech lab working on a laser communication system.
But that’s where you’ll find the headquarters of Astrolight, a six-year-old Lithuanian space-tech start-up that has just raised €2.8m ($2.3m; £2.4m) to build what it calls an “optical data highway”.
You could think of the tech as invisible internet cables, designed to link up satellites with Earth.
The company hopes to be part of a shift from traditional radio frequency-based communication, to faster, more secure and higher-bandwidth laser technology.
Astrolight’s space laser technology could have defence applications as well, which is timely given Russia’s current aggressive attitude towards its neighbours.
Astrolight is already part of Nato’s Diana project (Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic), an incubator, set up in 2023 to apply civilian technology to defence challenges.
In Astrolight’s case, Nato is keen to leverage its fast, hack-proof laser communications to transmit crucial intelligence in defence operations – something the Lithuanian Navy is already doing.
It approached Astrolight three years ago looking for a laser that would allow ships to communicate during radio silence.
“So we said, ‘all right – we know how to do it for space. It looks like we can do it also for terrestrial applications’,” recalls Astrolight co-founder and CEO Laurynas Maciulis, who’s based in Lithuania’s capital, Vilnius.
For the military his company’s tech is attractive, as the laser system is difficult to intercept or jam.
It’s also about “low detectability”, Mr Maciulis adds:
“If you turn on your radio transmitter in Ukraine, you’re immediately becoming a target, because it’s easy to track. So with this technology, because the information travels in a very narrow laser beam, it’s very difficult to detect.”
Astrolight
Astrolight’s system is difficult to detect or jam
Worth about £2.5bn, Lithuania’s defence budget is small when you compare it to larger countries like the UK, which spends around £54bn a year.
But if you look at defence spending as a percentage of GDP, then Lithuania is spending more than many bigger countries.
Around 3% of its GDP is spent on defence, and that’s set to rise to 5.5%. By comparison, UK defence spending is worth 2.5% of GDP.
Recognised for its strength in niche technologies like Astrolight’s lasers, 30% of Lithuania’s space projects have received EU funding, compared with the EU national average of 17%.
“Space technology is rapidly becoming an increasingly integrated element of Lithuania’s broader defence and resilience strategy,” says Invest Lithuania’s Šarūnas Genys, who is the body’s head of manufacturing sector, and defence sector expert.
Space tech can often have civilian and military uses.
Mr Genys gives the example of Lithuanian life sciences firm Delta Biosciences, which is preparing a mission to the International Space Station to test radiation-resistant medical compounds.
“While developed for spaceflight, these innovations could also support special operations forces operating in high-radiation environments,” he says.
He adds that Vilnius-based Kongsberg NanoAvionics has secured a major contract to manufacture hundreds of satellites.
“While primarily commercial, such infrastructure has inherent dual-use potential supporting encrypted communications and real-time intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance across NATO’s eastern flank,” says Mr Genys.
BlackSwan Space
Lithuania should invest in its domestic space tech says Tomas Malinauskas
Going hand in hand with Astrolight’s laser technology is the autonomous satellite navigation system fellow Lithuanian space-tech start-up Blackswan Space has developed.
Blackswan Space’s “vision based navigation system” allows satellites to be programmed and repositioned independently of a human based at a ground control centre who, its founders say, won’t be able to keep up with the sheer volume of satellites launching in the coming years.
In a defence environment, the same technology can be used to remotely destroy an enemy satellite, as well as to train soldiers by creating battle simulations.
But the sales pitch to the Lithuanian military hasn’t necessarily been straightforward, acknowledges Tomas Malinauskas, Blackswan Space’s chief commercial officer.
He’s also concerned that government funding for the sector isn’t matching the level of innovation coming out of it.
He points out that instead of spending $300m on a US-made drone, the government could invest in a constellation of small satellites.
“Build your own capability for communication and intelligence gathering of enemy countries, rather than a drone that is going to be shot down in the first two hours of a conflict,” argues Mr Malinauskas, also based in Vilnius.
“It would be a big boost for our small space community, but as well, it would be a long-term, sustainable value-add for the future of the Lithuanian military.”
Space Hub LT
Eglė Elena Šataitė leads a government agency supporting space tech
Eglė Elena Šataitė is the head of Space Hub LT, a Vilnius-based agency supporting space companies as part of Lithuania’s government-funded Innovation Agency.
“Our government is, of course, aware of the reality of where we live, and that we have to invest more in security and defence – and we have to admit that space technologies are the ones that are enabling defence technologies,” says Ms Šataitė.
The country’s Minister for Economy and Innovation, Lukas Savickas, says he understands Mr Malinauskas’ concern and is looking at government spending on developing space tech.
“Space technology is one of the highest added-value creating sectors, as it is known for its horizontality; many space-based solutions go in line with biotech, AI, new materials, optics, ICT and other fields of innovation,” says Mr Savickas.
Whatever happens with government funding, the Lithuanian appetite for innovation remains strong.
“We always have to prove to others that we belong on the global stage,” says Dominykas Milasius, co-founder of Delta Biosciences.
“And everything we do is also geopolitical… we have to build up critical value offerings, sciences and other critical technologies, to make our allies understand that it’s probably good to protect Lithuania.”