It might not be remembered as one of the major news events of 1999, but the failure to deploy a space mirror from Russia's MIR space station in early February had implications beyond its ignominious result.

Space experts hoped the mirror would serve as a prototype for larger models that could illuminate sun-starved areas of the globe, spotlighting disaster areas and possibly even creating a perpetual day.

Had the experiment gone smoothly, the Russian space mirror was expected to shine a concentrated beam of light five miles in diameter into a number of regions in the former Soviet Union and points beyond.

But hopes were dashed when the mirror was damaged by the cargo ship's antenna. Instead, it became just the latest in a long line of failed attempts to place a reflective mirror in the sky.

The dream of the space mirror dates back to Hermann Oberth, the great mathematician and physicist, who in the early 1920s published Ways and Means to Space Navigation.

In his book Oberth described various uses for space mirrors, including its destructive forces as a military weapon, capable of destroying cities and incinerating armies in the battlefield from space.

Although many believed an offensive military weapon of this kind was simply science fiction, others took it more seriously. In the 1960s, both NASA and the Department of Defense contracted aerospace firms to study the feasibility of space mirrors and whether they were capable of providing extra light to nighttime military operations.

Known alternately as Project Moonshine and Project Able, the studies set off a storm of controversy. The Cambodian government, upon hearing word of the project, lodged a protest to the UN Security Counsel in 1968, arguing a space mirror could have "unfortunate repercussions on crops and on human life."

Although NASA dropped its plans to develop a space mirror, Russia's space program continued research into the technology. 

Their mirror (aka, Znamya or "banner) has been portrayed in a more peaceful light: providing assistance in global crop management, illuminating areas where natural disasters have occurred, as well supplying solar "sails" to space missions.

Although the heat generated by space mirrors is negligible compared to direct sunlight (it's more akin to moonlight) theoretically, a coordinated effort to erect a series of reflective satellites could lead to a form of weather control.

Hugo Gernsback, the father of "science fiction," once described the "eternal spring" that would result if a set of  8 to 10 mirrors 100-miles in diameter were deployed at the same time. The "perpetual day, wrote Gernsback, would mean "no destructive frosts, no hurricanes, no tornadoes, no heavy winter-long snows." In their place: "blooming deserts, more abundant crops, more food for more people."

Despite the potential benefits, recent Russian experiments have caused a good deal of controversy. Environmentalist Bill McKibben was so incensed about a test-run of the Russian program in 1993 that he wrote an editorial called "Light Up the Sky? Are We Crazy?" to The New York Times in protest.

A similar debate erupted in 1999. Various voices in the scientific community argued that  Znamya was too risky to pursue, that its potential benefits were outweighed by concerns the project would disturb the natural cycle of day and night.

A proposal to persuade the United Nations to protect the night sky from satellites has been introduced. It is not the only obstacle the mirror faces if it ever hopes to illuminate the Earth. Funding for the Znamya program is in constantly short supply and, without outside help, it seems unlikely the space mirror will shine anytime soon.

Photographs (top to bottom):  © Sky & Telescope; Courtesy of NASA; Courtesy of NASA; Courtesy of NASA.