Riveting polar expeditions of the 1903 Maslow Window resulted in the discovery of the north pole by Adm. Robert Peary (U.S.) in 1909 and the south pole by Roald Amundsen (Norway) in 1911; this “pole mania” featured daring adventure, international competition, and tragic accidents. The Peary/Amundsen Maslow Window has intriguing parallels with the 1960s Apollo Moon program and many lessons for the future human exploration and settlement of the Moon and Mars.
The top 10 lessons of Peary and Amundsen include:

10. The early 20th Century Peary/Amundsen Maslow Window (1903 - 1913) featured the spectacular achievement of Admiral Robert Peary — first credited with reaching the north pole — and the “Heroic Age” of Antarctic exploration including Roald Amundsen, discoverer of the south pole, the tragic deaths of Robert Scott and his crew, and the aborted transantarctic expedition of Ernest Shackleton… For more, click HERE.
The presence of both widespread ebullience and spectacular exploration of new geographical sites forms the core of Maslow Windows of the last 200 Years, and will likely be the zeitgeist of the 2015 Maslow Window

Amundsen and crew reach the “last place on Earth” in December, 1911. Click .

9. Antarctic exploration in 1843 by Sir James Clark Ross — discoverer of the well-known Ross Ice Shelf — was the last mid-19th Century foray into the Antarctic by explorers for more than 50 years. Polar expeditions were replaced by the central African adventures of Dr. David Livingstone as the focus of the world’s attention during his Great Exploration. The postponement of polar exploration until the early 20th Century is consistent with the general rules of thumb for Great Explorations (GEs) during the last 200 years: a) GEs are separated by 55 to 60 years, b) their sequence is from closer geographical sites to those of greater inaccessibility (e.g., central Africa vs. poles), and c) new GE sites always stimulate great public interest. And thus our next Maslow Window should arrive near 2015 and involve humans to Mars, Moon bases, or possibly both.

8. Clarence King — a 19th Century version of both Carl Sagan and Howard Hughes –was one of the greatest explorers of the American West, but because of poor long wave timing he’s not associated with a Great Exploration. During his important exploits, Americans were devastated by the Civil War and Europeans were distraught by the financial Panic of 1873… For more, click HERE.
Scentist-Explorer Clarence King is a classic example of a great explorer not having the global impact you’d expect because his discoveries occurred in the decades between Maslow Windows; these often dark decades — over the last 200 years — are inhabited by major wars and financial contractions that quickly destroy societal ebullience and make Great Explorations temporarily impossible.

7. “This is the greatest factor — the way in which the expedition is equipped — the way in which every difficulty is foreseen, and precautions taken for meeting or avoiding it. Victory awaits him who has everything in order — luck, people call it. Defeat is certain for him who has neglected to take the necessary precautions in time; this is called bad luck,” according to the discoverer of the south pole, Roald Amundsen. In the 15 major antarctic expeditions from 8 countries during the Heroic Age, there were a total of 17 crew deaths, including Scott’s entire party of 5 while returning from the pole. Having been overcome by extreme weather and questionable strategic decisions, Scott’s ill-fated crew is reminiscent of the famous California-bound Donner party during the ebullient mid-19th Century Maslow Window, who was trapped by unusual, early snow storms in the California mountains after ill-advised voluntary delays.
Great Explorations always involve significant risks, especially in an atmosphere of international competition. Experience has shown (see Stuster, 1996) that the best way to ensure crew safety and mission success is by trying to anticipate every potentially threatening situation and taking appropriate precautions.

Monument near Donner Lake indicating the 20+ foot depth of the snow in 1846 (B. Cordell, 1999). Click donner.pdf.

6. The international conquest of Antarctica was launched in 1895 when a general resolution at the 6th International Geographical Society in London exhorted scientific societies world-wide to support antarctic exploration. This echoed a similar theme ventilated by London’s Royal Geographical Society in 1893. Between 1901 and 1917 — the “Heroic Age” — 15 expeditions to Antarctica were mounted by 8 countries including the United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden, Scotland, France, Japan, Norway, and Australia.
The Heroic Age of antarctic exploration proved that international cooperation can be a powerful tool for science and exploration, and suggests that it will be essential for human expansion into the cosmos.

5. The financial Panic of 1893 caused estimated unemployment over 10% for 5+ years. The crisis initially lasted only 18 months but was followed by another recession that continued into 1897. The combination of GDP declines of several % coupled with population growth meant that GDP per capita didn’t recover to 1892 levels until 1899… For more, click HERE.
The Panics of 1893 and 2008 have interesting parallels, including that they began 10 and 8 years before their Maslow Windows opened, respectively. The Panic of 1893 suggests that the 2015 Maslow Window might be delayed only briefly as the global economy recovers to its mid-2007 “greatest ever global boom” status.

The 2015 Maslow Window may still arrive on time and feature Great Explorations even greater than Peary & Amundsen and Apollo, and MEPs more amazing than even the Panama Canal. Click .

4. Unike the Lewis and Clark expedition, which opened the West to human settlers, the Heroic Age of Antarctic exploration did not trigger massive human migrations to the polar regions. And while important meteorological and geographical science was done, it was the sheer adventure of polar exploration that enthralled the world… For more, click HERE.
That’s why during the 1960s Maslow Window, President Kennedy did not propose sending a mission to exploit the polar areas or anywhere else on earth, he chose to go to the Moon. It was the next obvious target that would globally demonstrate America’s technological prowess (Apollo was also an MEP), as well as revitalize education and society by activating raw human exploration passions — that have been hard-wired into us for 200,000 years.

3. “To a visitor from Mars it must have seemed that the Western world in 1914 was on the brink of Utopia,” according to historians J. Harrison and R. Sullivan (1966). Unfortunately, this pinnacle of Polar Maslow Window ebullience crashed in 1914 with the onset of World War I, the “Great War.” For more, click HERE.
The Peary/Amundsen Maslow Window is consistent with the lesson of the last 200 years: public support for Great Explorations and Macro-Engineering Projects typically vaporizes shortly after the economic boom peaks due to financial, political, and/or military factors. Maslow Windows flourish for less than a decade, and — unless we make special plans for it — the 2015 Window is unlikely to be an exception.

2. Although antarctic exploration began with an international organization in the mid-1890s, the desire to be first to the pole — i.e., pole mania — was overwhelming to some explorers. When Amundsen realized that Peary had reached the north pole in 1909, he made secret plans to be first to the south pole. For more, click HERE.
The Amundsen-Scott pole mania episode is reminiscent of the 1950s Cold War, which featured the International Geophysical Year’s plans to launch satellites into Earth orbit and resulted in the surprise Soviet launch of Sputnik in 1957; Sputnik ignited the Race to Space as the Apollo Maslow Window opened. As we approach the 2015 Maslow Window, is an Amundsen/Sputnik-type surprise likely to trigger the Next Race to Space?

1. Will there be a Grand Alliance for Space? Although the Polar Maslow Window failed in that regard (See #2), it’s likely the technical and financial challenges of early 21st Century space colonization will require a globally coordinated approach. The last 200 years indicate that twice-per-century pulses of Great Explorations and Macro-Engineering Projects are likely to be the focus of global ebullience in the foreseeable future — especially in space. And AIAA’s Jerry Grey and others have even suggested a multi-decade plan for unified, global settlement of the solar system. The spectacular achievement of the $ 100 B International Space Station and current international plans for Moon exploration and bases suggest hopeful movement in the right direction.

Last week the National Intelligence Council (NIC) released its most recent unclassified global briefing, Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World that closely parallels forecasts of this weblog. 21stCenturyWaves.com forecasts are based on patterns in long-term trends in the economy, technology, exploration, and society over the last 200 years, that include spectacular pulses of Great Explorations and Macro-Engineering Projects (MEPs) known as Maslow Windows.

NIC provides long-term strategic thinking for the U.S. Intelligence Community and reports to the Director of National Intelligence. It has a Deputy National Intelligence Officer for each of 12 areas and subject matters, including East Asia, Europe, Russia and Eurasia, Economics and Global Issues, and Military Issues, etc., and consults with experts in academia and the private sector.

Global Trends 2025’s preliminary assessments for the next 15 years include:

1) We should expect “unprecedented economic growth.” This NIC assessment is completely consistent with this weblog’s economic forecasts that include rhythmic, twice-per-century major economic booms; the next one should culminate around 2025. This “unprecedented economic growth” is essential for the affluence and ebullience that’s driven the spectacular Great Explorations and MEPs of Maslow Windows over the last 200 years.

2) “The whole international system — as constructed following WW II — will be revolutionized.” There will be “new players — Brazil, Russia, India, China — …at the international high table…bringing new stakes and rules…” This NIC expectation is consistent with the history of exploration over the last 200 years and supports our forecast that NASA will become more globally oriented. More specifically it supports our 1992 concept for a truly global space organization (like Interspace) that could take shape in 4-6 years to optimally focus global assets on human exploration of the solar system.

3) “The potential for conflict will increase…and the unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East …will continue…” Sadly, the last 200 years show that every Maslow Window of the last 200 years is terminated by a major war; this NIC assessment is consistent with our forecast of another major war in the mid-2020s. If this war comes early (e.g., 2020), in addition to widespread death and destruction, we could lose many or most of the Great Explorations and MEPs anticipated for the next Maslow Window. The timing of the major 2020s war remains a total wildcard of crucial importance.

Like James Bond, who believed that “The World is Not Enough!”, The Planetary Society thinks the Moon is not enough…and frankly I agree with them!

The World is not enough… Click .

I’ve always liked Lou Friedman and The Planetary Society! Explore the planets, humans to Mars, an international team — what’s not to like? It’s practically the meaning of life! I also enjoyed their new roadmap to the solar system: Beyond the Moon: A New Roadmap for Human Space Exploration in the 21st Century. And the title of their plan says it all: the Moon is not enough. They have clear differences with NASA’s current Vision for Space Exploration.

The Moon is not enough… Click .

There are now three fundamental visions for space: 1) NASA’s current Moon-focused Vision for Space Exploration, (VSE) 2) The Planetary Society’s roadmap featuring Mars, and 3) a vision with interstellar travel to the nearby stars as its focus. Vision 3 has been championed by the British Interplanetary Society since its 1970s Project Daedalus study, as well as by Gene Roddenberry. More recently it has resurfaced as a way to promote a multidecade, global commitment to human space exploration; in essence they believe that Mars is not enough.

Is Mars enough? Click .

The model of this weblog (e.g., Cordell, 2006, and “Forecasting...”) has met with considerable success in explaining great explorations and technology development over the last 200 years in the context of long-term fluctuations in the economy. For example, a) this model explains why Apollo began when it did and why it ended abruptly (as well as all the other Great Explorations over the last 200 years), b) the model pointed to a financial panic near 2008 and Obama’s likely election (although I failed to explicitly forecast them!), and 3) the model projects what we currently observe — increasing global interest in space as we approach another ebullient 1960s-like decade: the 2015 Maslow Window.

So in the context of this long-term economic model, I want to offer a few comments on the Planetary Society’s roadmap:

1. The program focus — Moon, Mars, interstellar — really matters from a marketing perspective. The Moon suffers from the fact that humans went there 6 times almost 40 years ago. This might encourage a “been there, done that” attitude. Or will the global public see human exploration of the Moon like past generations viewed terrestrial Great Explorations; i.e., progressing from more accessible locations like northwest North America (Lewis & Clark) to more distant ones like central Africa (”Dr. Livingstone I presume”) and both polar regions (early 20th Century)? However, if the global public views the Moon as just one more stop on the road to Mars and beyond, the sequence of Great Explorations over the last 200 years — North America, central Africa, Polar regions, Moon — suggests that Mars makes a more alluring program focus — from a marketing perspective — than the Moon.

2. Global momentum is currently toward the Moon. The U.S., with its International Lunar Network, as well as many other countries (including China, Japan) have expressed strong interests in Moon bases circa 2020. Authoritative sources (e.g., National Intelligence Council) forecast a “revolutionized” international system toward 2025 (during the 2015 Maslow Window) including new players at the high table (e.g., Brazil, India) and new rules. This will enhance U.S. plans for expanding ISS-style coorperation to the Moon and beyond, and may even make a truly global approach to space (such as Interspace) possible. This trend, plus the closeness and easy access of the Moon, may make a Mars focus — even in the 2020s — less attractive to the global public.

3. Astronaut safety will drive any deep space program strategy.
Current NASA boss Mike Griffin contends that safety requires a Mars program to go through ISS and the Moon in logical steps, much like the Apollo program carefully approached the Moon. The Planetary Society report deemphasizes lunar surface infrastructure in favor of near-term human exploration of near-Earth asteroids. Although not mentioned in their report, developing human space ops experience at near-Earth asteroids will be extremely valuable at Mars when establishing human bases on Phobos and Deimos. The Planetary Society Mars-focus strategy elegantly integrates the first human missions beyond the Earth-Moon system with planetary defense (from near-Earth asteroid impacts), and with specific preparations for future human operations in the Mars system.

4. For a multidecade, global space vision to be viable, it must include a realistic geopolitical and economic framework provided by long-term trends over the last 200 years. The Planetary Society roadmap asserts that the NASA VSE goal of a human return to the Moon by 2020 may “lead to multi-decade delays in expansion of human activity beyond the Earth-Moon system.” They are absolutely right as I pointed out previously, although it’s not fundamentally because of programmatic and funding conflicts. They are more on target here: “The national economic situation exacerbates NASA’s budget difficulties and makes it likely that the stated lunar exploration timetable cannot be met.” In fact, the national (and global) economic situation is a predictable consequence of technological, exploration, and military trends that have persisted over at least the last 200 years. Ignorance of them results in disappointments like the abrupt end of the spectacular Apollo program. However, in reality, they provide a dependable framework within which multi-decade programs of any kind (including space) can be structured so they flourish and enable human expansion into the cosmos.

In a historic election, American voters have chosen Barack Obama as their President-Elect. So it’s of interest now to evaluate how our long wave forecast model held up and what this selection means for the human future in space, and especially the onset of the 2015 Maslow Window.

As stated previously, this weblog’s major interest was not to express personal preferences for any candidate, but to reasonably project the direction of the U.S. and global space programs and related activities.

Will President Obama lead the U.S. and the world into the next race to space, and open up the planetary worlds to all humankind? Click .

21stCenturyWaves.com has shown that ebullient Great Explorations and Macro-Engineering Projects are associated with rhythmic, twice-per-century major economic booms, such as in the 1960s. The continuing global financial turmoil motivates our interest in this election, because without the return of the long global boom interrupted in 2007, there will be no Maslow Window and no 1960s-style space spectaculars.

The following points illustrate our forecast model’s robust character.

“There was only one issue — the economy,” according to close McCain advisor Sen. Lindsey Graham (Wall Street Journal, 11/7/08). With the economy as the presidential campaign’s focus, long-term economic influences initially made it reasonable to favor McCain over Obama; see Kennedy and Eisenhower.

However, three “wildcards” intervened:

1) During the Summer Olympics, the Russians attacked Georgia. This seemed to favor McCain given his war hero experiences.
2) The Panic of 2008 occurred and the Republicans took the blame. The Wall Street Journal headline (11/5/08) said it all, “As Economic Crisis Peaked, Tide Turned Against McCain.”
3) McCain was not an effective campaigner. For example, Wildcard 2 forced Sen. McCain to support Bush tax cuts that he’d previously voted against. Plus, McCain couldn’t seem to decide if Sen. Obama had lied about his relationship with Weather Underground bomber Bill Ayers, or was “a decent person…that you do not have to be scared of,” (WSJ, 11/7/08).

As it turned out, Wildcards 2 and 3, trumped 1. But were these truly “wildcards”, or could they have been forecasted?

Although the exact timing of Wildcard 1 was not forecasted, this style of Russian aggression was not unexpected given the return of Cold War-like tensions in Europe — something that was likely in this timeframe based on long wave forecasts. Unfortunately, it can be expected to intensify.

Likewise for Wildcard 2 — although exact timings in market-related events are also difficult — a financial panic was also in the cards, based on the last 200 years of macroeconomic trends. Indeed, two of the last three Maslow Window openings featured major financial panics early in the decade just preceeding them: 1837 and 1893; only 1949 avoided one, see discussion HERE. With the Panic of 2008, the record is now 3 of the last 4 decades just prior to Maslow Windows were so afflicted.

Wildcard 3 was not predictable based on long wave trends, but Sen. McCain’s conflicted campaign style was obvious (New York Times Magazine, 10/26/08)

What of the future? The following points will be influential:

1. The Russians can be expected to continue to misbehave. Putin has already begun trying to intimidate Obama in the style of Biden’s campaign warning (10/19/08): “Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy… Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

2. The U.S. remains a “center - right” country politically, “and if Obama loses track of that, he’ll be a weak-ass Jimmy Carter in office, especially with all those Clinton-clones hanging around,” according to vehement Obama supporter and Democratic political strategist Thomas Barnett. Also, a revealing Rasmussen survey conducted October 2 found that 59% of all surveyed and 44% of Obama voters agreed with this: “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem,” (Wall Street Journal, 11/10/08).

3. The long-term trend of the economy is up, based on 200 years of macroeconomic data. This suggests that the current recession will be less like the Great Depression and more like the pre-Maslow Window panics in the 19th Century; both led to spectacular, on-time Maslow Windows.

4. Obama is flexible in his approach to problems and Obama’s key political asset is his Kennedy-like charisma. We’ve indicated before that Obama’s Kennedy-like persona suggests he could be the next Space President, but his long wave timing seemed a little premature. His main problem now is the duration of the current recession. The Los Angeles Times (11/9/08) reports that Obama backs public works projects in the style of Franklin Roosevelt as a way to combat a prolonged downturn.

If Obama can turn the recession around in his first term then he still has a chance to be The One to lead the world into the 2015 Maslow Window. Otherwise, he’ll be forced to leave it to his successor.

A key question is: Given the current financial panic, is it likely the United States will play a leadership role in space colonization and exploration between 2015 and 2025? The question can be split into two more fundamental ones: 1) will the U.S. remain a global superpower in the normal sense of the word, and 2) will the U.S. aggressively pursue large-scale, unprecedented space activities of the type expected during the next Maslow Window?

Is America’s global leadership declining? Click .

Doubters abound regarding the U.S.’s future superpower status. For example, Germany’s finance minister, Russia’s prime minister, and Iran’s president have predicted U.S. “hegemony” is ending. And the New York Times, Der Spiegel, and Guardian columnist John Gray, all foresee a diminished America.

In this blog, I’ve featured rational arguments that suggest the U.S.’ superpower status will be uninterrupted, because:
1) The U.S. is not only the weathliest and most powerful country now, but in all of history; see Professor Madden.
2) The U.S. has weathered major challenges for over 200 years and continued to flourish; see Lewis & Clark.
3) The analog between Britain’s decline and the U.S. is very weak; see Zakaria.
4) America’s bright future is enhanced by its world-class universities and robust demographics; see Zakaria.

Bret Stephens, in the Wall Street Journal (10/14/08) asserts that “America will remain the Superpower,” because — referring to America’s opponents and critics — “When the tide laps at Gulliver’s waistline, it usually means the Lilliputians are already 10 feet under.” This is seen in a variety of economic stressors where the U.S. is favored vs. other countries, including inflation, ability to finance a bailout, government debt to GDP ratio, amount of foreign direct investment, and others.

The New York Times (10/12/08, David Leonhardt) anonymously quotes a senior Chinese economist who says that people in his home country do not doubt America’s prospects, “They know its ability to turn around problems is really unmatched, historically.”

Stephens concludes that no matter who wins the upcoming presidential election, “the United States will eventually regain its economic footing and maintain its place” as the Superpower.

In space, will the U.S. be a Gulliver or a Lilliputian? Click ?

Assuming the U.S. remains the Superpower, will the financial panic reduce the U.S. — in the space arena — to a Lilliputian or will it remain a Gulliver? Several points are relevant:

1) George Friedman (Stratfor, 10/16/08) notes that the current panic is less like a systemic collapse (i.e., the Great Depression with 50% GDP decline over 3 years) and more like an “inflection point” related to business cycles. For example, in the Savings and Loan crisis of 1989 government bailout was 6.5% of GDP, while currently government intervention is about 5%. Friedman concludes that a recession is coming but it “would not break the framework of the postwar economy.”

2) The timing of the current panic relative to the anticipated opening of the next Maslow Window (2015) is a concern. For example, economists believe the credit crunch could last “well into 2009,” (San Diego Union-Tribune, Dean Calbreath, 10/19/08). Until credit problems are resolved, “the current recession could be much deeper and longer than otherwise.” A worst-case scenario would be the decade-long Great Depression. This suggests the next Maslow Window could start near 2018, about 3 years “late”. On the other hand, two major 19th Century panics began within a decade of their Maslow Windows and did not delay their openings or diminish in the least their spectacular Great Explorations and MEPs. I’ve noted before that two factors — renewed Cold War-like tensions, and strong international interest in Moon bases — suggest the Maslow Window might open earlier than 2015. These geopolitical effects might even counter an unusually long recession, similar to how the war economy of W.W. II ended the Great Depression.

3) There was no financial panic in 1949, one decade before the onset of the Apollo Maslow Window, which featured the Cold War’s race to space and footprints on the Moon in 1969. Does that imply that the current panic (7 years before the 2015 Window) will interfere with realistic prospects for international space spectaculars between 2015 and 2025? It appears that the 1949 NON-panic was due to the post-war boom (for which the Boomer generation is named!) and financial reforms passed during the Great Depression. I concluded earlier that a good analog for our current situation is the Panic of 1893 which lasted through that decade but ultimately gave birth to the most spectacular Maslow Window of the last 200 years (until Apollo).

However, there is still considerable uncertainty about how our current panic will end. Arthur Laffer (Wall Street Journal, 10/27/08) believes that “this administration and Congress will be remembered like Herbert Hoover,” and that “the age of prosperity is over” because even more government bailouts are in our future. And The Economist (10/16/08) concurs: “Even if it staves off disaster, the bail-out will cause huge problems. It creates moral hazard: such a visible safety net encourages risky behavior. it may also politicize lending.”

On the other hand, it’s possible that international events will play a stimulating role. We may unify globally and have a Grand Alliance for Space, or someone might decide that a Sputnik-style surprise conveys irresistible geopolitical advantages. Either way it will get our attention.

The current economic crisis that caused so much pain and anxiety as it intensified to a credit meltdown about a month ago, supports Maslow Window forecasts in this weblog and elsewhere. Specifically, the long wave timing and character of the crisis is supportive of the Long Wave/Maslow Window (LW/MW) forecast model first published in Cordell (1996), and more recently in Cordell (2006), and expanded in this weblog. The LW/MW model is summarized HERE.

“We are now in the midst of a major financial panic,” according to author John Steele Gordon in the Wall Street Journal (10/10/08). But there have been several over the last 200 years; Gordon counts 9, including this one.

21stCenturyWaves.com has highlighted a class of panics that follow Maslow Windows; they appear 16 to 18 years after their 56 year energy cycle peaks (peaks are in 1801, 1857, 1913, 1969, 2025). This includes the Panic of 1873, the Great Depression beginning in 1929, and the Crash of 1987 (Black Monday). Gordon asserts that the “ordinary recession” of 1929 degenerated into the disaster known as the Great Depression because the Federal Reserve was ineffective; he believes that it’s reorganization in 1934 kept the Crash of 1987 from having any “lasting effect on the economy.”

Gordon’s mention of the 1819 panic completes the pattern:
Each Maslow Window of the last 200 years is followed by a panic 16-18 years after its energy cycle peak. This supports the LW/MW model by demonstrating that major economic events — in this case, post-Maslow Window panics — of the last 200 years are closely associated in time with long-term fluctuations in the economy.

21stCenturyWaves.com has also characterized a class of panics that predate Maslow Windows by about a decade. For example, the Panic of 1837 preceeded the opening of the mid-19th Century Livingstone Maslow Window (of “Dr. Livingstone, I presume?” fame) by 10 years and was a time of very high unemployment when 40% of the country’s banks failed. Ironically, about a month ago I was in the process of writing a new post on the Panic of 1893 and its similarities to today — and trying to develop the courage to forecast a similar crisis today (!) — when the credit meltdown occurred. The Panic of 1893 caused estimated unemployment over 10% for 5+ years. It lasted 18 months but was followed by another recession that lasted until 1897. The combination of GDP declines of several % coupled with population growth meant that GDP per capita didn’t recover to 1892 levels until 1899.

Although the Panic of 1893 began about 10 years before the opening of the 1903 Adm. Peary Maslow Window, the 1903-1913 decade featured exceptional ebullience, including the daring, world-famous races to both N. and S. poles, and construction of the greatest MEP of the last 200 years (until Apollo): the Panama Canal.

The Panama Canal — the greatest macro-engineering project (until Apollo) of the last 200 years — was constructed during the Peary Maslow Window immediately following the Panic of 1893. Click .

One loose end is the Panic of 1949; according to the pattern, the mid-20th Century Apollo Maslow Window began in 1959 and 10 years earlier we should expect a panic. Of course, happily it didn’t occur. Gordon attributes this to the Fed reorganization of 1934 and the post-W.W. II boom. An important lesson is that long-wave timeframes suggest when certain types of events are likely to occur, not when they must occur. Through knowledge of these long-term patterns, we are capable of avoiding disasters.

But what of the future? Gordon links our current crisis to the birth of huge interstate banks in the 1990s, and “Congress’ attempt to force banks to make home loans to people who had limited creditworthiness…” This “created another crisis in the banking system that is now playing out.” Today the New York Times (page 1) profiles Henry Cisneros, who was President Clinton’s top housing official in the mid-1990s, and one of the inadvertant early architects of the current panic.

The Panic of 2008 began about 7 years before the opening of the next scheduled Maslow Window (near 2015). Although 2008 is roughly the expected timeframe for a panic, long-term trends over the last 200 years suggest it arrived a little late, and could have started in 2005 (about one decade before 2015). Or, this may signal the 2015 Maslow Window itself may open a little late.

It’s likely the Panic of 2008 — and the upcoming 2015 Maslow Window — will have more in common with the pre-Maslow Window panics of 1837 and 1893, than it will with the Great Depression of 1929 — a post-Maslow Window panic. Especially if our political leaders can bring themselves to enact a unified, well-capitalized, appropriately regulated banking system.

Consider the technological wonders of the mid-19th Century Maslow Window — Suez Canal, Great Eastern ship, etc. — and those of the early 20th Century Window — Panama Canal, the Titanic, etc. — and their riveting equatorial Africa and polar region Great Explorations, respectively. How scintillatingly unparalleled for their day, despite their pre-Window panics.

More on what the current panic suggests about our future in an upcoming post.

It’s easy to become a collector of negative headlines about the economy these days, and my collection includes: “Economists Expect 2008’s Second Half to be Worse Than First” (Wall Street Journal, 8/11/08), “World Economy Shows New Strain” (WSJ, 8/15/08), and for you Harrison Ford/Tom Clancy fans, “Inflation is a Clear and Present Danger” (WSJ, 8/19/08).

If this financial turmoil were to persist for an indefinite period it might threaten the major economic boom that’s expected to trigger the affluence, ebullience, and spectacular technology and space activities of the 2015 Maslow Window, based on trends over the last 200 years.

But most analysts think it’s going away soon.

For example, best-selling author and financial strategist John Mauldin considers himself a short-term bear, because we have to deal with the twin bursts of the housing and credit bubbles, and can expect slow growth “through at least 2009″.

But as Mauldin explains in his online column (7/18/08), long term he is a “wild-eyed optimist!” Indeed he asserts that, “The next 20 years are going to see the most powerful wave of technologically driven growth the world has ever seen.”

This supports our expectation that the 2015 Maslow Window is going to feature unprecented technology programs and great explorations that will be spectacular.

Mauldin attributes this magnificent wave to the internet and to adding 2 billion people to the global middle class. “We will simply be throwing more people at an ever wider array of problems, and they will be able to share their discoveries at the speed of light.”

As I’ve pointed out, the trend of long economic waves and Maslow Windows over the last 200 years was not deterred by the Civil War, the Great Depression, W.W. I and II, or a variety of lesser disasters, including, for example, the Panic of 1837 — see State of the Wave, 8/15/08 — which is second only to the 1930s Great Depression. Despite the Panic of 1837, the 1847 Maslow Window ebulliently exploded with the greatest macro-engineering projects of the 19th Century and the still-famous equatorial African great explorations of Dr. Livingstone.

Mauldin simply concludes, “Why should the trend stop now?”

Indeed, the lesson of the last 200 years is that the future of the next 20 years is so bright, you’ll probably need shades!

The seminal Lewis and Clark expedition (1804-06) explored the Lousiana Territory through to the Pacific and has more parallels with the 1960s Apollo Moon program and lessons for future human exploration and settlement of the Moon and Mars than most people realize. The top 10 lessons of Lewis & Clark include:

10. Despite political opposition, Thomas Jefferson was enthralled by the exciting science and monumental strategic implications of exploring an overland route to the Pacific. Analogous to President Kennedy’s 1961 speech to Congress announcing the manned Moon landing, Jefferson pursuaded Congress by explaining his visionary rationales and requesting funding in a letter. Like both of these Great Explorations,
Presidential leadership will be a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for any major space initiative like humans to Mars.

9. While Kennedy had the Soviet’s Cold War aggressions to deal with, Jefferson had to deflect Napoleon’s desires for a North American empire. In 1802 Jefferson wrote, “Every eye in the U.S. is now fixed on this affair of Louisiana. Perhaps nothing…has produced more uneasy sensations through the body of the nation.” Jefferson decided to send Lewis and Clark through Louisiana to the Pacific no matter who controlled it, and Kennedy boldly decided to go to the Moon in 8 years, although no one was sure it could be done. Like Lewis & Clark and Apollo, a compelling national strategic challenge (including international confrontations) will play a role in motivating Moon and/or Mars programs.

8. The 1960s Apollo Maslow Window featured the spectacular Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo space programs which — in 8 years — culminated in the first man on the Moon in 1969. While not as well-planned as Apollo, Jefferson’s 3 pre-Lewis & Clark attempts to explore the northwest go all the way back to 1783 and, although unsuccessful, were highly instructive. They included a plan to explore from the Pacific coast eastward to St. Louis after a water passage from Russia; unfortunately, the would-be explorers were arrested in Russia and deported. The bottomline is: the first manned Mars expeditions may experience difficulties and will require at least a decade (one Maslow Window) of intense operational and technological preparations.

7. On April 11, 1803, when Napoleon decided it was more important to fund his European war machine than keep Louisiana for France — “I renounce Louisiana…not only New Orleans…the whole colony…reserving none of it,” — it may have surprised Jefferson, but he was definitely ready for action. Indeed the Corps of Discovery departed St. Louis only one year later. Likewise, although initially caught offguard by the surprise Soviet launch of Sputnik in 1957, NASA was formed in 1958 and Neil Armstrong took “one small step for a man…” on the Moon less than 12 years later. Although the world is full of wildcards,
the antidote for a Sputnik-like surprise in the next 5-7 years is focused preparation, many international partners, and the ability to anticipate the unexpected.

6. As is typical for Maslow Windows, the decade just prior to Lewis & Clark was a major economic boom; per capita income increased by 25%, international credit was almost unlimited, and by 1800 the U.S. population’s doubling time was 22 years! The 1960s economic boom was unparalleled and, “For the first time in human history, a majority of people (in the U.S.)…could have all of their needs and most of their desires met on demand.”
The last 200 years — including Lewis & Cark and Apollo — show that Great Explorations (and Macro-Engineering Projects) are fundamentally triggered by major, rhythmic, twice-per-century economic booms that result in an unusual level of societal affluence and ebullience. This creates a mindset — as people ascend Maslow’s Heirarchy — where great explorations and large technology projects are not only favored, but seem almost irresistible.

5. Lewis & Clark were “shocked” to learn that the Rockies are not just a single wall of mountains immediately adjacent to the Columbia River headwaters; imagine the shocks awaiting future explorers on a complex, Earthlike world like Mars! On Mars there will be no friendly natives (such as at the Nez Perce Camp) willing to feed starving explorers, suggesting that a “split mission” strategy — where food, consumables, and return propellants are sent FIRST to Mars — makes a lot of sense. Lewis & Clark’s length of mission (2+ years), planned wintering in Oregon before return (like waiting for an orbital launch window to open), and other parallels suggest that aspiring Mars explorers need to be scientifically and psychologically prepared to handle anything, and might even benefit from the journals of Lewis & Clark and other long-term explorers (e.g., Magellan).

4. The Jay Treaty in 1794 opened new markets in Canada and the Great Lakes for the North American fur trade industry and by 1800 made some wealthy, including John Jacob Astor.
Inspired by Lewis & Clark, Astor used his wealth to open up the West by founding Fort Astoria and by sponsoring the Astor Expedition (1810-12), during which South Pass in Wyoming was discovered. For Oregon Trail emigrants and others, South Pass became the key to continental passage by land.
Entrepreneurs and adventurers (e.g., mountain men) played a major role in opening up the West. Today Richard Branson and others may be the new John Jacob Astors as they seek the low energy, safe, economical path — like Astor’s South Pass — to space.

3. The War of 1812 — a tragic example of post-Lewis & Clark ebullience gone wild as Americans unrealistically attempted to militarily conquer Canada — delayed post-Lewis & Cark attempts (like Fort Astoria) to open the West to commerce and people until about 1820. And by 1834 the fur market had declined. The famous Bank Panic of 1837 was a financial collapse second only to the Great Depression; the Panic delayed economic growth for several years until it accelerated again toward the next Maslow Window in 1847. Despite creating great financial hardship for many, the 1837 Panic also provided incentive for some to move west. Alhough economic recessions cause turmoil and hardship for many, the last 200 years show they are usually relatively brief (< 1 year) and inevitably give way to the major economic boom of the next Maslow Window. On the other hand, wars -- like 1812 or Vietnam -- always reduce or terminate Maslow-driven ebullience as well as the great explorations and MEPs (e.g., manned Mars) linked with them.

2. The journals of Lewis & Clark generated great interest in the West and made it possible for many to migrate there during the NEXT Maslow Window (opening in 1847). The migration westward did not follow Lewis & Clark immediately because of the War of 1812, economic stresses (including the Panic of 1837), and the time needed for both Lewis & Clark’s message to diffuse and emigrants to get organized. By 1846 the nation was really on the move with about 20,000 westward-heading emigrants.
The following are consistent with Lewis & Clark and the Great Migration West: 1) the colonization of space did NOT occur immediately after Apollo but is expected to begin during the 2015 Maslow Window, 2) Mid-19th Century westward migrations were limited by financial, operational, and safety factors, which will also influence early 21st Century space colonization, and 3) the first humans may start exploring Mars (during the 2015 Maslow Window) simultaneously with the first steps toward space colonization (orbital and lunar hotels) and space industrialization (solar power sats).

1. Ebullience!!! The California Gold Rush began in 1848 (until 1855) with 300,000 people being drawn to California. In the first 5 years about 370 t of gold was removed ($ 7 B at 2006 prices) with many times that being extracted over he next few decades. The Gold Rush coincided almost exactly with the mid-19th Century Maslow (Dr. Livingstone in Africa) Window, 1847-57, and displayed classic ebullience. One author sees the Gold Rush as a national fork in the road because it, “marked the moment when people stopped believing that hard work leads to a good life…(and) that anyone could strike it rich…a pursuit that continues to this day,” — a very ebullient mindset! The end of the Gold Rush and threat of the Civil War in 1860 moderated this attitude. One gold rush analog for space will be tourism. In the 1950s, New York’s Hayden Planetarium solicited reservations for Moon trips and collected 100,000; how’s that for pre-Apollo ebullience?! And in the late 1960s Apollo era, Pan Am’s commercials used to feature the tease line, “Who’s the only airline with a waiting list for the Moon?” after collecting tens of thousands of eager Moon trippers. So the market’s definitely there. Space tourism will start next year with brief suborbital jaunts but will soon graduate to weekend stays in Earth orbit hotels. Honeymoons at the Moon could materialize in the 2020s. Space resource “gold” could eventually include the Sun’s energy (collected in space for use on Earth), and oxygen (from the Moon) and/or water (from Mars) for habitation and rocket propellants.

With Moonbases becoming the international status symbol for aspiring space powers and entrepreneurs beginning to tap the $ multi-Billion space tourism market, the 2015 Maslow Window may eventually make us think of the California Gold Rush as a rather quaint, restrained period in U.S. history!

Until a few days ago the plan was to hitchhike a ride on a Russian Soyuz after the Shuttle is retired in 2010 and before its replacement is ready in 2015, when American astronauts need access to the International Space Station (ISS) .

Now we’re not so sure.

According to U.S. Senator Bill Nelson from Florida, who spent 6 days in 1986 orbiting the Earth in the Shuttle Columbia (STS- 61C), “There will be consequences not just for Russia but for the U.S. too. That’s a $ 100 billion investment up there that we won’t have access to.”

The problem is a 2000 law that prohibits U.S. purchases of Russian technology — including Soyuz spacecraft — as long as Russia is exporting nuclear technology to Iran. The planned Congressional waiver would have enabled NASA to use the Soyuz to transport astronauts to the space station after 2010.

Now, the word from Washington is the waiver is DOA and there’s no back-up plan for ISS. This turn of events is particularly interesting considering Buzz Aldrin’s and other’s recent comments about the lack of plans for a commercial vehicle to reach ISS and opinion polls that revealed a relative lack of public concern.

Unfortunately, an increase in tensions potentially with Russia and/or other nations is expected based on the last 200 years of international conflicts. Despite our desire to avoid it, some see a return already to a Cold War mentality; for example, Russia’s recent attack of Georgia has similarities to the 1956 Soviet invasion of Hungary. That was rapidly followed by the surprise launch of Sputnik which triggered the first race to space.

Hopefully this time we can avoid most of the violence and engage cooperatively in our global 21st Century thrust into space, as we approach the spectacular 2015 Maslow Window.

In July, 2007 Fortune magazine termed the current worldwide expansion “the greatest economic boom ever”. Continued rapid growth, assuming consistent government policies, was projected by the Congressional Budget Office to 2011. This is precisely the trend one would expect as we approach the economic boom presaging the 2015 Maslow Window. For example, based on economic data corresponding to the previous four Maslow Windows, the GDP for 2025 should reach between two and three times its current value (Cordell, 2006).

However, given the current state of the economy, how can we propose an approaching economic boom that will result in another Maslow decade for society? It’s important to recognize that a Maslow Window is a long-term concept independent of the short-term fluctuations in the economy. The US economy has periodic downturns followed unfailingly by upswings of longer periods, resulting in an overall long-term trend of growth, as demonstrated by US GDP values.

Expansions and contractions of the economy from 1854 through November 2001 have been cataloged by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). Between 1945 and 2001, the “average” recession duration is ten months followed by a recovery period of 57 months. Thus the average peak-to-peak/trough-to-trough duration is 67 months, for a total of ten cycles during the 56-year period. The NBER makes the point that “expansion is the normal state of the economy, (while) most recessions are brief,” and followed by longer periods of expansion.

What of this current period, then, and when can the upturn be expected? Economists identify December 2007 as the turning point for the current downturn in the economy. Based on NBER data for business cycles since 1945, the economy will experience another turning point and move into a recovery period in the fourth quarter of 2008, with an expansion period of nearly five years to follow. This normal sequence of economic fluctuation will carry the US economy into an expansion period through the year of 2013, as we move into the next Maslow window.

The opening of the next Maslow window, however, is becoming less dependent on the US
economy and the ebullience generated among its population, and more associated with the health of the global economy as a whole. Although the rate of growth in more developed countries may slow due to the aging of their population, this will be more than offset by the enormous growth in emerging markets; Fortune cites the 4.5% annual growth in developing countries since 1998. This, paired with emerging technologies, will pave the way for the next Maslow window.

We expect the coming Maslow Window to produce far more significant MEPs and Great Explorations that previous ones, because it will be fed by growth, prosperity, and ebullience on a global scale.