Slashdot Mirror


Twin Robots Scope Out Titanic, Europa Next?

jmichaelg writes "Wired is running an article on a pair of submersible robots that work in tandem to film underwater scenes. One robot illuminates a scene by placing the light source as close as possible to the object being filmed while the other bot manuevers for the best camera angle. That, and a host of other innovations, makes the pair significantly different than the equipment used when the Titanic was originally filmed. Significant enough that JPL has expressed an interest in using the technology to swim in Europa's seas. How JPL will overcome the time delay isn't mentioned but it's an interesting read nonetheless."

191 comments

  1. Not likely by delphin42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Considering the fact that NASA has cancelled any and all europa missions in the forseeable future, I doubt these things will see any otherworldly oceans anytime soon. NASA has much more important things to do like putting nukes in space.

    --
    -- Adam
    1. Re:Not likely by niftyeric · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's a shame too. I would love to see a mission to Europa. I'm curious if there is just the smallest evidence of life there. A mission to Pluto would be interesting as well (I'd just like to see the surface of the thing clearly, as well as seeing the view from Pluto looking toward our Sun).

      Reminds me of a quote from Star Trek: Insurrection.. "Does anyone remember when we used to be explorers?" -Picard

      --
      proton != antielectron
    2. Re:Not likely by spike+hay · · Score: 3, Informative

      We will not likely go to Europa in the near future. However, we should go there.

      Europa has probably the best prospeacts for life anywhere in the solar system. It most likely has a liquid ocean underneath the ice, warmed by the tidal effects of Jupiter. Deep sea vents would emit chemicals that could start life. Some people think now that life on earth may have started near deep-sea vents.

      We would probably get there using nuclear propulsion if we were using a probe. Nuclear-thermal propulsion has around twice the specific impulse of conventional chemical rockets. When the probe gets to Europa, it will send down a small submersible. It will burrow through the thick ice by melting it with radioisotopes.

      For a manned mission to Europa and the Jovian system, which may happen in maybe 60 years, we would probably use VASIMR engines. These are plasma rocket engines under development that would get around 30,000 seconds, or 60 times the efficiency of conventional rockets. They work by using magnetic fields to accelerate high-temperature hydrogen plasma.

      VASIMR is so efficient that it would allow slow intersteller missions with 1-2% C.

      For interplanetary missions, it would allow missions to Mars in about 2 months and missions to Jupiter lasting a year. Also, upon return to earth, the VASIMR ships can just be refueled and resupplied and sent on their way for very cheap.

      Also, VASIMR's have some power. They have more power than ion engines.

      For interplanetary missions, we really need an inexpensive space plane, like the X 34. That would slash launch costs.

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
    3. Re:Not likely by McD!ck · · Score: 1

      I think we also have to concider that fact that we might contaminate Europa. Our satilites and shuttles are capable of taking our bateria and such into space, SOME SURVIVE!! It is a real possibility that we could "colonize" a small planet that is capable of holding life just by landing on it! YIKES! Even some forms of insects are capable of being COMPLETELY frozen solid, sent into space and retrieved.

      McD

      --
      People who are against human cloning must be bitter they are not good enough to be cloned.
  2. split that meson by bandix · · Score: 2, Funny

    How JPL will overcome the time delay isn't mentioned but it's an interesting read nonetheless.

    Why with the ansible of course! ;-)

    --
    Brandon D. Valentine
    1. Re:split that meson by billstr78 · · Score: 1
      How JPL will overcome the time delay isn't mentioned...


      With an enlarged sub that can house a monkey to steer the rig.

    2. Re:split that meson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How JPL will overcome the time delay isn't mentioned but it's an interesting read nonetheless.

      JPL need to quit bitching about the time delay with outer planet probes. It ain't as bad as my ping on UT. Anyway, I have to avoid being sniped out or machine-gunned. All that they have to worry about is getting their probe to look at some rock.

  3. 1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by FortKnox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First, the assumption. We are assuming that there is a sea under Europa's Ice Sheet, aren't we? Do we have any proof that there is a sea underneith?

    The ethical question (with the assumption)... should we crack open the ice sheet to get to the sea? This is a sea that hasn't been exposed to anything above the ice for a looong time. We have no idea what effects this could cause....

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by O2n · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of Arthur C. Clarke...? Man, was he ahead of his time...

    2. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >should we crack open the ice sheet to get to the sea?

      There's no need to crack the ice open. You could melt the probes down through the ice and sterilize them on the way. This is what's already planned to do when exploring Lake Vostok found under the Antarctic ice.

    3. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by flewp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I suppose one possible option might be to basically drill in slowly, and let ice form again on top. However, I'm not sure how you'd overcome the problem of the ice locking/freezing the craft in place. Who knows, maybe you could heat up the entire outer surface of the craft so that it melts it's way down, and as the ice melts, it then refreezes above without freezing in the craft.

      Ah well, just some crackpot ideas ;)

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    4. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by flewp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oops, meant to also add in that going through the holes left by volcanic activity might not be best idea. Gases, hot liquids, etc may end up causing some trouble.
      Also, the article mentions that radio waves do not travel through water that good, does that apply to most liquids? If they (radio waves) don't travel that well through liquids, how do they plan on sending back data? Have an umbilical cord that leads to the surface and acts as an antenna?

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    5. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by billstr78 · · Score: 1
      First, the assumption. We are assuming that there is a sea under Europa's Ice Sheet, aren't we? Do we have any proof that there is a sea underneith?


      Yes. through radio spectroscopy and the wonders of radar, they have known that the ice is only so thick and that a vast ocean contained below exists as a result of the still hot core of the planet.

    6. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by nagora · · Score: 2
      Do we have any proof that there is a sea underneith?

      Not proof but the surface of Europa has so few craters and so many faultlines that there's very little else that would account for it other than that the ice is moving on a liquid base.

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    7. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, no and no.
      Radio/radar have nothing to do with it. Nor does a "still hot core." Any body the size of Europa would have cooled by now, even with radiactive heat. (Mars, being much larger, is also largely cooled.)

      We are pretty sure that there is a liquid ocean because 1) The pattern of cracks imaged on the surface. 2) The types of surface features, which are generally held to be consistent with a liquid ocean under the ice. And 3) the Galileo magnetometer measurements of an induced magnetic field, indicating a lquid interior. Modelling indicates that the field is only consistent with a liquid near the surface, not the in the core.

      The heat needed to keep the water liquid comes from tidal flexing due to the forced eccentricity of Europa's orbit, unlike the usual situation for rocky bodies

    8. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      Yeah but I wanna see what's down there...

      The article says that the ice is broken all the time volcanic eruptions.

      Also any life would most likely be at the bottom of the ocean where it's warmest.

    9. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by FortKnox · · Score: 1

      Yeah, which book?

      (I'm a late SciFi reader, so I haven't read any of his novels, but I have read a few of his novellas).

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    10. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by Aniquel · · Score: 1

      There is a 30 mile deep saline ocean under the ice crust. Volcanic vents have melted the ice in places. So, no problems.

    11. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by UnhandledException · · Score: 1

      A clarification, Europa's core is heated by the gravity fields of Jupiter and other big moons. (Is Io a Jupiter moon?) The result is kind of like tides on Earth, but with the moon's rocky core. As it gets kneaded like dough, the friction gives off heat. Assuming that this has been happening since it formed, refering to the core as "still hot" is accurate. (If a little misleading.)

    12. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by llamalicious · · Score: 2

      Sooner or later we're going to have to harvest the mass of Europa to fuel Poole's GUT drives, so I vote sooner. Let's get it out of the way now, it'll make our great-great-great grandkids happy.

    13. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by jtseng · · Score: 1

      Yeah... And we were warned about it already:

      "All other worlds are yours except Europa."

      --

      Sanity.html - Error 404 not found

    14. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2060, I believe.

    15. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by susano_otter · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean, "All Europa are belong to us. Take off no zig there"?

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    16. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by OrenWolf · · Score: 1
      We are assuming that there is a sea under Europa's Ice Sheet, aren't we? Do we have any proof that there is a sea underneith?
      In August 2000, Galileo found that Europa reacts in Jupiter's magnetosphere exactly like a body containing water would.

      They have also set a lower limit on the ice thickness, giving scientists an idea of the minimum depth such robots would have to dig.

    17. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by wiredog · · Score: 2
      There are apparently leads, or openings in the ice, on Europa. So the sea there does get exposed to vacuum sometimes.

      The sub, if sent, would probably melt it's way through a thin spot, rather than searching for a lead. Ballard and Pellegrino have written about this sort of stuff.

    18. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Informative
      • This is a sea that hasn't been exposed to anything above the ice for a looong time. We have no idea what effects this could cause....

      As a signatory to the Outer Space Treaty, the United States is obliged to ". . . pursue studies of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies . . . so as to avoid their harmful contamination. . . ". Non-contamination of Europa is already being dealt with

      .
      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    19. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nevermind, it's 2010. Not enough coffee today. :(

    20. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 2

      But hasn't been happened that long. The tidal flexing only occurs because of the Laplace resonance with Io and Ganymede. The capture into this resonance is a relatively recent event in Galilean moon history. So "still" is inaccurate.

      Also inaccurate is "core". The tidal heat is most probably disappated in the outer layers, since tidal forces are proportional the the diameter of the layer. (Cores are small, so don't get flexed much.) Also, since the ice can turn to mush and even melt, it makes it easier to dump the heat there.

    21. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goddamned limey sciencefiction writing paedophilic lords!

    22. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      vacuum, its got atmosphere, I don't think its possible to have water on the surface without some atmophere, to hold it all together. Silly, so now why should I believe your first sentence?

    23. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The moon gets hit by meteors periodically. Smashing a probe into it is really no different than smashing a small meteor into it.

      It would presumably be designed like the missles the US military uses for bunker busting (only a lot faster). The small channel it blows though the ice would be filled and re-frozen in no time at all.

      The other option is a slow burn. I would have to assume that the ice would refill/refreeze behind the burner vehicle as is torches though the 1/2 km of ice. So the surface would never be exposed in this scenario.

      As far as contamination is concerned, we have Lake Vostok to practice on.

      Scythe

    24. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by argStyopa · · Score: 2

      Actually, one of the critical bases for assuming there's an ocean under the surface of the ice on Europa is that the cracks on the surface are dynamic and the surface is so remarkably free of impact structures that it is clear that rapid refreezing of a liquid medium is the most likely cause.
      If this is the case, then the liquid UNDER the ice has been exposed to external 'contaminantion' almost constantly.
      If you're talking more specifically about somehow contaminating the "Europa Biome" with something from the "Terra Biome", well, that's an argument against ANY space exploration, ever. I think we've gotten pretty good at cleaning the probes we're sending to other planets by now. At least, nobody's complained!

      --
      -Styopa
    25. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by BEI01 · · Score: 1

      I can see it now. A billion dollar project as been approved to send Harry and his team of deep core drillers to Europa, to reach the underground sea in search of life. After a catastrophic-filled journey, they finally reach the surface, and begin drilling. Upon breaking 3 drill bits, they finally reach the hidden sea underneath the ice shaft. What do th$ "Youuussaa people gonnna die?" And then, a piercing cry of, "What have we done!" echos throughout the solar system. At which point, all questions pertaining to the reasons why there is a small nuclear arsenal aboard the landing craft are thrown out the window.

    26. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by UnhandledException · · Score: 1

      So the kneading is a recent thing. I didn't know that. Interesting.

      As for it not happening in the core, "since tidal forces are proportional the the diameter of the layer". . . yeah, but to produce heat through friction, aren't we talking about the difference in tidal forces between layers? If you take a ball of bread dough and pull it into a 3d elipse (whatever that shape is called), the core gets pushed around too. I guess I see your point, in that it doesn't JUST happen in the core. It's more of a distributed thing. But the core would still be the hottest part of the moon, because heat disappates through the surface. And I doubt that the flexing ice produces much of the moon's heat. (That's the layer that radiates heat into space, and liquid water would be warmer than ice, so heat would flow the other way.) I guess when I said "core" I was thinking "rocky part" which isn't quite accurate.

    27. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 2

      The problem is that the out layers can flex indepently of the inner layers, particularly if an ocean is involved. (In fact, the ice shell might be totally decoupled from the mantle and core, a thought which usally causes me to need a good lie-down.) Even if they are coupled, the ice and water flex more, being father out, and so take more energy in. (Think of tides on Earth: the ocean response more than the rock does.)

      Where this really gets interesting is that different materials also are better at disipating heat. In fact, ice is much better than rock and metal, so the ice layers take most of the heating. Warm, mushy ice and water are better than cold ice (the latter being, at the temperatures of most of the outer solar system, a rock for all intents). So the ice shell and ocean would take the brunt of the heating, not the core. In fact, it's far from clear that the core or mantle heat up in any significant way. Since the heat probably gets dumped into the ice, perhaps even in a narrow layer (as my officemater, a Europa modeller, is starting to suspect), the heat works its way out quickly, not heating the core much at all. (Just like how the sunlight on Earth's surface does very little to heat the crust a few tens of meters down.)

      So as incredible as it might seem, particularly given our intuition based on Earth and other rocky planets, the outer, icey layer is probably the warmest on Europa. (The same is true with the Sun's corona, of course, but we actually kind of understand Europa...)

    28. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by rosie_bhjp · · Score: 1

      IIRC, both 2010 and 2061 talk about life on Europa. So to me, your right both times.

      --
      A radio maverick jumps to internet only. The Future of Rock n Roll
    29. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > We are assuming that there is a sea under Europa's Ice Sheet, aren't we? Do we have any proof that there is a sea underneath?

      Depends on what you mean by proof, but the magnetometer evidence is pretty strong.

      We need a Europa orbiter to take gravity measurements to look for tides and other evidence that'll tell us how thick the crust is. With that, we can design the submersible and crust-penetrator, and select an appropriate landing site for the probe.

      > The ethical question (with the assumption)... should we crack open the ice sheet to get to the sea? This is a sea that hasn't been exposed to anything above the ice for a looong time.

      Actually, the sea won't be exposed with the probe either - like the probes at Lake Vostok (a subsurface lake in Antarctica), the Europa submersible will probably melt its way through the crust, and the "hole" through which it descends will freeze over it.

      Also, there are cracks in the surface that appear to indicate upwelling of material from below. Could be water from the seas, could be slush from below the ice, but above the water. Hard to tell.

      It's also possible that the peaked craters described in the first press release I cited were from impacts in thicker portions of the crust.

      An orbiter should be able to show us areas where the crust is thinnest.

      Meantime, the folks at planetary protection will be making damn sure that any Europa probe is sterile before landing.

      IMNSHO, despite not getting a full sterilization treatment (that is, what we'll be doing to any Europa orbiter or probe) on Earth, Galileo is completely sterile after having been fried in Jovian radiation for the past several years and poses no threat to whatever it smashes into.

      That opinion aside, the fact that the planetary protection folks at NASA still said "chuck Galileo into Jupiter when you're done with it, just to be on the safe side" should give you some idea of just how damn sure we'll be of a future probe's sterility before we attempt landing on Europa. (Insert obligatory Arthur C. Clarke joke here :-)

    30. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by UnhandledException · · Score: 1

      I realize that the ice can flex independently of the inner layers of the moon, that's why I don't think the system as a whole gets much of its heat from there. And I realize the water probably flexes the most, but the flexing isn't what causes heat. It's the resulting friction of things rubbing together as they're flexed. If you take a zip-lok filled with water, knead it all you want, you're not going to produce much heat. Rub two pieces of sand paper together, and it'll get pretty warm pretty quick.

      Now, I don't understand what you mean by "disipating heat". If you're talking about the moon as a whole, the only part that can disipate any heat at all is the surface ice. (That's the only way for heat to escape the system into space.) Now, if by that phrase you mean "distributing heat", well even if the ice sheet does take the brunt of the heating (Which I'm not convinced of. See above paragraph.) the core has to be at least as warm as the water for the system to be at equilibrium. (If the water is warmer than the rock, SOME heat is going to flow into the rock. Maybe only a small percentage, but some. As long as the core is cooler than the water, heat will always flow in that direction. Once the core is warmer than the water, it can start venting heat away, but not before.) As for it not being clear that the core or mantle heat up in any significant way, well, the article talks about volcanos. If they mean molten rock volcanos, then I'm willing to bet that the inside is warmer than liquid water or water ice.

      And I sincerly doubt that the icy outer layer is the warmest. In every situation I can think of, liquid water is warmer than water ice.

    31. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 2

      Wrong on both counts. I've already given you a prefectly good case of where the outer layer of something is warmer than the interior (Earth's surface vs. a few meters down). Dig down, you'll see what I mean.

      You're intuition about the flexing is equally wrong. Flex your sand by millimeters and jostle the water by tens of cm. The water heats more, for obvious reasons. Doubt this all you like, it is quite simply the case. So I'm trusting the computer models and geophysics degrees of my officemate over your intuititions on this one. Sorry.

      And I didn't mean that the exact surface (the space/ice interface) was warmest, it's pretty cold. I meant that the icey/watery outer shell is warmer than the rocky/metallic interior since the former is where the tidal energy is deposited (aka, the heat is disipated). All the current research I've read points to this, despite your doubts.

    32. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by UnhandledException · · Score: 1

      Ok, first off, you keep side stepping the whole "Heat flows from warmer stuff to cooler stuff." I'd like you to explain how. If you have a ball, and the outer layers are a certain temperature, how can the inside be cooler? In order for that to be true, the heat that collects in the center has to magically disipate without going into the outer layers.

      Second, the first few meters of Earth are cooler than the air because it's spring. If I do the same experiment in six months, I'll get exactly the opposite result. Everywhere I've gone caving, the cave is pretty much the average of the year round temperature there. That's why the inside of Mammoth cave is warmer than caves in Indiana. Now, if you go deeper, say a few hundred meters, then it starts getting warmer. (Because the inside of Earth is warmer than the outside. Otherwise, the core wouldn't be cooling any more.)

      Your second paragraph: You say you have computer models that say you're right. Well, ok, I guess I have to concede this one. But I'm still not convinced. The implication almost seems to be that I can heat my coffee by stiring it vigorously. How much heat do Earth's tides produce? (I realize that since the moon takes 28 days to orbit once, and we're so far away from the sun, Earth's tides wouldn't produce NEARLY as much heat as Europa's, but I've never heard of it producing anything measurable.)

      Your third paragraph: Again, how can the center be cooler than the water? If the center is cooler than the water, some heat is going to flow from the water to the center. Middle school physics. That can't happen forever, because once the heat is in the center, it's got nowhere to go except back into the water, and it's not going to do that until the center is warmer than the water. Even if all the moon's heat is produced in the seas, the center has to be AT LEAST as warm as the water. What research have you done that implies otherwise?

      And I'll say it again, the article mentions volcanos. That implies temperatures much higher than 100C. Is the article in error about that?

    33. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 2

      You're still thinking the heating has been going on forever and has reached steady-state. It probably hasn't done the latter since the former is untrue. Exactly your point about spring, in fact. And the center will NEVER get hotter than the upper layers if the heating is being done in the upper layers. (Simple physics, that: equilibrium is the same temperature throughout.)

      I totally fail to see your coffee point. Yes, you can heat it by stirring, just like you can heat silly-putty by flexing it. There is no fundemental different between water/ice and rock, except that the former experience much more flexing. (It is true that if you flex rock by the SAME AMOUNT, it heats more. But again, this is probably NOT happening on Europa.) So if you don't think the former will heat up, then you need to reject the latter, too. So I am at a loss why you're rejecting this.

      (The tidal heating due to the Moon is way, way, way down from Europa, since the mass of the tide-inducing body comes into the formula in a huge way, (like mass to the 7/2 power); since Jupiter is 100,000 times the mass of Earth, a priori, the heating is expected to be fantasically higher.)

      The article can mention volcanoes all it likes. Most of what I've heard lately implies the opposite. Researchers WANT their to be volcanoes for astrobiological reasons, but indications I've seen are that there are not any. The reason you keep hearing about this is that people want them there.

      (To get a volcano, you need to heat the rock to more like 1200 K, vs. 300 K for water. If you want a MOLTEN interior, that's a lot more heating still. )

      In any event, you refuse to believe the current research because your intuition is probably wrong for this case. Since nothing I can present will ever convince you otherwise, we should drop this.

    34. Re:1 Ethical Question, 1 Assumption by UnhandledException · · Score: 1

      I thought about that yesterday as I was working out. We were having two completely different arguements and it's no wonder we didn't agree. Yes, I was looking at it from a point of view of equilibrium, while you're assuming that the core is still coming up to temperature. In that case, yes, I can see how the core could be cooler than the heating layers. But I don't see how you can say the center will NEVER be hotter than the heating layers. (Thermo was a LONG time ago, lemme think for a minute...) I guess that's in the same way that it can never be cooler than the heating layers. (Once it's at equilibrium.) This is if the rocky center produces NO heat. If it produces any, than the core would have to be warmer once it reaches equilibrium. Maybe much warmer. (You mentioned that rock is kind of a lousy conductor of heat.)

      I think you do see my coffee point, you're just dismissing it. I think we agree that flexing water will produce less heat than flexing rock the same amount. I think we agree that any seas on Europa get flexed more than the rock. (Just because it's more maleable, less friction as it's rubbed against itself, therefore has less flex-resistance.) We're disagreeing on two points: first, my thing is that the very quality of water that makes it flex more (lower viscosity than rock) is the same quality that makes it produce less heat when it is flexed. You're arguing that its resistance to flexing is disproportionatly lower than the heat produced by that resistance. It seems to me that the two would be proportional. Granted, this isn't my field of study, so I'm going on intuition here. Do you know of any web sites or references you can point me at? The second point that makes me doubt that the majority of the heating comes from the water/ice layer is a matter of scale. Europa has a radius of over 1500km. They talk in terms of oceans being tens of km deep. I grant you that the rock isn't flexing as much as the oceans, but there's SO much more rock than water. Which I guess brings us back to point one.

      You confuse me by comparing Jupiter to Earth. . . Oh, wait, did you mean to say that Jupiter is so much bigger than our moon? Yeah, I understand that, and I get that there isn't nearly the tidal energy on Earth that there would be on Europa, but there should at least be a thoretical (if not measured) number of BTUs that Earth tides produce. Seeing that number might help me understand the scale we're talking about here.

      As for the Volcanos, ok. I can accept that.

      "You refuse to believe the current research because of your intuition"? Dude, all I have to go on is my intuition. You haven't pointed me towards one piece of research. "Nothing I can present will ever convince you otherwise, we should drop this"?!? You've presented ideas without backing them up with ANYTHING solid. You've mentioned computer simulations without mentioning one formula, algorythm, or web site. Show me anything published! Send me a link to your officemate's web site! (Sorry if I'm flying off the handle here, but people who ignore evidence in favor of their pre-concived notions are a pet peeve of mine. Implying that I'm one of those people hit a tender spot.) By far, the most interesting discussions I've had are ones that've refuted long-standing misconceptions of mine. I'd sincerely like you to reply with some references, or formulae for some of these math models you keep mentioning. On the other hand, if you're just going to post an "I'm right and you're wrong, just accept that" message or another insult to my intelligence, then I agree we should drop this.

      Ulgh. This is the last time I post anything before having my morning coffee.

  4. How to overcome time delays... DUH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    How JPL will overcome the time delay isn't mentioned but it's an interesting read nonetheless.

    Just open a subspace channel, or reroute power to the main deflector dish. Duh.

  5. I'm *so* glad.... by Teancom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    that we all know who JPL is. I would have hated to have /. waste bandwidth by a short parenthetical aside like this (Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the company who is only mentioned once in the article, but twice in the write up).

    1. Re:I'm *so* glad.... by NOT-2-QUICK · · Score: 4, Funny

      Silly man...everyone knows what JPL stands for!!!

      Obviously, it is the initials of famous singer/actress/model J. Lo. That's right, the infamous Jennifer Penelope Lopez!!!

      And yes...she has been working with Dark Matter for some time now in hopes of not only exploring the depths of the ocean on Europa, but also exploring the mystery that is her giant butt ...

      Jet Propulsion Laboratory...where do you guys come up with this stuff!!! :-)

      --
      Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -- Benjamin Franklin
    2. Re:I'm *so* glad.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe those that didn't actually read the article?

  6. Make sure it is disenfected. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would be real great if they did find some primitive life there. But then the next mission all of it was whiped out by Small Pox, or some other virus that is compleatly forgen to the moon. Learn from the Simpsons, Rember what the Bull Frogs did to Austrailia.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      very insightful. you best call up the JPL before they launch this mission to warn them of this, since i'm sure they haven't thought of that. maybe you can help them with their calculations too. you seem pretty smart.

    2. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by David+Kennedy · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting point - lichens and bacteria are highly unlikely to survive the journey (vacuum, extreme temperatures, radiation), but what about viruses? They're hardy little suckers, anyone know for sure what their limits are?

    3. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by s20451 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's extremely unlikely that an organism attuned to room temperature and pressure, and an oxygen environment, could thrive in a sulfurous ocean at just above freezing under hundreds of atmospheres of pressure. We would want to disinfect the probes, not so much out of a worry that they would destroy the Europan ecosystem, but to ensure that any life signs that we found would not be false positives from terrestrial organisms.

      --
      Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
    4. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      We're talking about people who lost a $150 million Mars probe because they missed a metric system conversion. Sometimes the blindingly obvious isn't so blindingly obvious.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    5. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by s20451 · · Score: 2

      Bacteria would be likely to survive the journey -- samples from the unmanned Surveyor lander, returned to Earth by Apollo astronauts, showed terrestrial bacteria had survived years of vacuum and radiation on the Moon.

      --
      Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
    6. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by dzym · · Score: 2

      Not to sound completely ignorant, but what makes you think a virus that has "evolved" in terrestrial conditions has a snowball's chance in hell of surviving the conditions of Europa's "oceans", and even if it somehow manages to do so and remain active, what possibility is it that it can actually "infect" whatever organisms may be there, should any exist?

    7. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by UnhandledException · · Score: 1

      We already went through all this when they mentioned crashing Galileo into Jupiter. They have decontamination procedures, they just didn't think to use them on Galileo. I can only assume that if they're going to trash a probe rather than risk contamination, they'll just sterilize the Europa probe.

    8. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by Lectrik · · Score: 1

      had to read that twice,
      first time i was wondering why we USians were worried about destroying the environment in europe

      --
      --- As to make my comment seem, by comparison, more intelegent... doodie doodie doodie poop poop poop!
    9. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by meiocyte · · Score: 1

      You're exactly right. Viruses can infect organisms because they've been evolving in lockstep with them for millions of years, in an evolutionary arms race. This is why humans, but not, say, sunflowers, get herpes. But sunflowers are much more closely related to humans than anything on Europa would be. So if people are worried about our infecting Europans with terrestrial viruses, they should be even more worried that their flowers will catch colds from them.
      Terrestrial free-living organisms (bacteria/archaea) might be another matter, though - they might find Europans very tasty, if they can survive the conditions there.

      --
      The thing in the box has no place in the language-game at all; not even as a something; for the box might even be empty.
    10. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they already find europ[b]e[/b]ans very tasty, I wager huh huh, huh huh

    11. Re:Make sure it is disenfected. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The word is Americans

  7. Well... by Hemos+(editor) · · Score: 1, Interesting

    No offense (or troll) intended, but I think these robots (the size of this -) are much cooler.

    Partner Site

  8. Wish by KDENCE · · Score: 1

    I wish they could come up with an underwater dealy that could help us explore the depths of the ocean so we can maybe check out these giant squids and see where they roam. Maybe this is a step closer to that? If we find enough of them then maybe we can find them in our local Italian restaurants as giant calimary (marinara sauce and lemon wedges included).

  9. New Lifeform ? by EpsCylonB · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the late '90s, scientists discovered the Titanic was being consumed by a new life form, composed of 20 different species of bacteria, two species of fungus and two species of Archaea that, together, form a symbiotic rust coral or rusticle (they look like icicles) that thrive on iron.

    These rusticles have formed a single biological mass that is believed to be the largest life form on earth. It seems like poetic justice that this death site of historic magnitude should make such large contributions to man's discovery of new life, not only on Earth, but perhaps on other planets as well.


    Interesting, I have never heard of this before, does it really count as a single lifeform ?, sounds like a micro ecosystem to me.

    1. Re:New Lifeform ? by jmichaelg · · Score: 2

      I wondered about the "largest lifeform" claim as well. If the various critters are necessary for each others survival then "single lifeform" is probably defensible. After all, you depend on your lung cells to provide oxygen to your blood cells and so, depending on how you view yourself, you are a micro ecosystem or a single lifeform. I would be surprised if anyone has done the necessary biology to establish the 'rusticles' interdependence.

      As to "biggest," there's a tree fungus somewhere on the East Coast that is believed to encompass an entire forest and as it's a single mat, some claim it's the biggest earthly life form.

    2. Re:New Lifeform ? by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      Well, if a Portugese Man-o-War float-jelly is a single lifeform, then the boundaries are pretty blurred already.

      There are single fungi that are extremely large, much larger than the Titanic, so the question becomes one of how "largest" is determined - by mass, by volume, by compression, what? Do we have to remove the support media of iron or soil before measurement?

      --Charlie

    3. Re:New Lifeform ? by SamBeckett · · Score: 1

      It's actually in Michigan.

    4. Re:New Lifeform ? by argStyopa · · Score: 2

      I haven't heard anyything about this life form, but it's clearly not the largest life form on earth.
      1) it's individuals as a collective organism, so if you use this as a "single mass" specimen the Great barrier Reef is probably the biggest.
      2) For single 'organism' the biggest is clearly the Armillaria ostoyae (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/ fungus000806.html) or the Aspen tree "pando" (http://www.extremescience.com/aspengrove.htm)

      --
      -Styopa
    5. Re:New Lifeform ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>believed to be the largest life form on earth

      There is a fungus located in Michigan (lower), which while not very thick, is about 50 miles in diameter. Scientists have determined this is ONE fungus. I do not know the exact location.

  10. from the one-heckuva-of-a-journey dept by NewbieSpaz · · Score: 1

    (heck of a) of a
    You could actually see that the gerbil must have stopped running on the wheel... ;)

    --
    ------
    Random, useless fact: I type in startx entirely with my left hand.
  11. Yeah but it would be interesting if by HanzoSan · · Score: 2, Funny

    We found some huge underwater city filled with aliens, or other strange and unusual lifeforms in these seas of Europa.

    Whats the plan for this? Do we even have one besides hitting the panic button?

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Yeah but it would be interesting if by IMarvinTPA · · Score: 1

      Just pray they are not Gungans!

      Andy

      20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 Reply-to-Submit time up.

    2. Re:Yeah but it would be interesting if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its hard to imagine how life could develop technology in an underwater environment.

      would the human race be what it is today if fire were impossible in our habitat?

      i dont see how this could be overcome in an aquatic setting. but that doesnt mean its impossible.

  12. Time delay? What time delay? by David+Kennedy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unsure what the time delay mentioned above is about.
    I assume the robots work in tandem with each other; being close to each other means minimal lag when co-ordinating the lighting. The only delay is transmitting pictures back of course.

    Server seems to have tumbled over already so I can't check but it's interesting to consider what sort of lighting metrics they use - a human at home can say, "That's looks nicer lit like that." but what criteria should be used for autonomous work? Highest constrast? Smallest resolvable feature?

    1. Re:Time delay? What time delay? by uugabuuga · · Score: 1

      The bots aren't tethered to the surface, they're each tethered to a submersible via a spool of a biodegradable fiber optic. Delay is minimal. And each bot has two cameras, and three lights (I think I remember that correctly). A standard flood, a spot, and a hot spot linked to the vertically panning camera. The two pilots are in different manned submersibles, but they communicate via UQC. See my other post for more info.

      --
      UugaBuuga .sig permission denied
    2. Re:Time delay? What time delay? by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Unsure what the time delay mentioned above is about.

      Any communication to or from the robots would take up to two hours, depending on which side of the sun Jupiter's on in relation to us. It's a speed-of-light limitation.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    3. Re:Time delay? What time delay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't really robots, they're RC vehicles. Robots are autonomous. Too many people watch the mis-titled 'robot wars' and dont' know what a robot is anymore.

    4. Re:Time delay? What time delay? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      The bots will have to be thethered to the surface, radio waves don't travel underwater*, and unless you want to string a really really long fiber option cable all the way to Europa....

      *Yes, some extremely low frequency ones do, but 5 bits per second isn't going to carry video.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    5. Re:Time delay? What time delay? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Of course I meant fiber *optic* cable. :)

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    6. Re:Time delay? What time delay? by jmichaelg · · Score: 2

      The robots are remotely controlled by the fiber optic umbilical cords. JPL would presumably land a radio transponder on Europa's surface and relay the radio control from Earth to the transponder which would pass the signals on to the submerged robots via the fiber. Only problem is that Europa is over 30 light-minutes away so the control delay makes me wonder whether the idea is feasible. Imagine playing Unreal Tournament with 30 minute ping times...

    7. Re:Time delay? What time delay? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • I assume the robots work in tandem with each other

      I was thinking that robots plural is a misnomer, and that for all practical purposes this is a robot, singular. Sure, it's neat that the parts are separated, but if they act together and are individually useless, that passes the duck test for being a single entity.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    8. Re:Time delay? What time delay? by sharkey · · Score: 2

      Imagine playing Unreal Tournament with 30 minute ping times...

      Don't have to. I have a Concentric/XO dial-up.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  13. titantic? by JEDi_ERiAN · · Score: 1

    hmm, never heard of that one. i do remember the titanic though, saw it in a movie once.

    E.

    --

    -
    This Post has been brought to you by the letter "E".
    1. Re:titantic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      The Headline is now corrected.

      AC

  14. Might as well say it by sharkey · · Score: 4, Funny
    • All These Planets Are Yours Except Europa
    • Attempt No Landing There
    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    1. Re:Might as well say it by PhxBlue · · Score: 2, Funny

      Might as well say this, too, then. . .

      All your planet are belong to us

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    2. Re:Might as well say it by Xofer+D · · Score: 1

      At least get it right!

      ALL THESE WORLDS

      ARE YOURS

      EXCEPT EUROPA

      ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE

      I mean, you have to get "worlds" in there for the semantic difference, and the spacing and caps are kind of nice for nostalgic purposes. Now, I'm not totally sure where the first line break goes, but I think I have it right.

      --
      The Signal/Noise ratio can be improved in two ways. Remaining silent is the OTHER way.
    3. Re:Might as well say it by sharkey · · Score: 2

      but I think I have it right.

      Probably. I thought it was humorous, but not so much that I wanted to spend a lot of time dicking with the lame-ass lameness filter.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    4. Re:Might as well say it by spike+hay · · Score: 2

      A.D. 2020
      After we land on Europa:

      Back on earth:
      We get signal!
      Europan: How are you gentlemen?!
      Europan: All your planet are belong to us!!!

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
  15. They might actually find something by HanzoSan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Thats why they canceled.

    The problem isnt, if we will find something its when. And the biggest problem is what do we do when we do find something? Panic? Because NASA and our Government has no clue of what to do, Seti and pro alien people would be wanting to meet the aliens and hug them, and others will want to kill them off, dont forget 90 percent of the USA is religious and could worship them, call them demons, or whatever.

    So if we do go to Europa and find something, is NASA prepared for it:?

    Europa is the biggest canidate for life, chances are theres life on it, theres the proper climate, and theres water, the life is most likely going to be underwater deep sea type life but theres still the chance for intelligent life.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:They might actually find something by Darth_Burrito · · Score: 2

      dont forget 90 percent of the USA is religious and could worship them

      All Hail Stephalococcus-Europacus

    2. Re:They might actually find something by alkali · · Score: 1

      Heretic! Bow down before Escherichia coli europaensis, lest I smite thee.

    3. Re:They might actually find something by abigor · · Score: 1

      Don't you enjoy the noise the rain makes when it bounces off your tinfoil hat?

  16. Dark Matter is Mike Cameron, film-maker is Jim by uugabuuga · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Cool. Not to make everyone else too jealous, but I was recently at a presentation by Mike and Jim Cameron about this project. Mike gave about a short presentation about the development of the ROV, and then Jim gave a much longer one about the missions. How cool is it that one of the project paramaters is that the ROV has to be small enough to fit in a "B" deck window? One of the many great quotes of the evening from Jim was "I paid for these guys, so I drove mine on every dive. Mike had to share."

    The footage is *AMAZING*. There are stained glass windows completely intact. In one stateroom, there's a water pitcher sitting on a shelf above a water glass still standing upright on a vanity. Still upright!!! After the sinking and the impact! Jim talked about how important it was to have 2 units, so that there could be "characters" in the shots. Oh, and not to ruin anything, but Bill Paxton is in on the project. The quote went something like "I'm making Bill do for real what he pretended to do in the movie"

    At one point they had a battery failure on one of the units due to a manufacturer's defect. So they rigged up a harpoon to the other, and went in and rescued it. It was an amazing feat, and they surfaced absolutely elated. But their victory was short lived, for the date of the rescue was 11 September.

    At several points during the presentation the audience broke into applause at the sheer grandeur of the footage. I can't wait to see the finished project, especially after they get some of the stuff enhanced and cleaned up. There were 12 dives on Titanic, 9 of them filming missions. And trust me on this one guys, you *must* see this film. Even if you aren't into wrecks, it will blow your mind.

    --
    UugaBuuga .sig permission denied
  17. "Attempt no landing there" by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2

    I thought it was pretty clear that Europa was off-limits. Oh well.

    1. Re:"Attempt no landing there" by jmichaelg · · Score: 2

      It was until the Europan's started broadcasting "General Hospitable" and "All My Critters" at which point the obelisk decided our solar system was a lost cause and took off for parts unknown.

  18. NASA has the Europa Orbiter scheduled by funky49 · · Score: 3, Informative

    In 2008, NASA is currently planning to launch a probe to the Jupiter system called the Europa Orbiter. Its objectives are to determine the presence of or the absence of an Europan subsurface ocean, to find out where exactly is this ocean and to understand how the surface features formed. The Europa Orbiter will also find candidate-landing sites for missions to Europa's surface.

    --
    --- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
    1. Re:NASA has the Europa Orbiter scheduled by xanadu-xtroot.com · · Score: 2

      URL please?

      --
      I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
      I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
    2. Re:NASA has the Europa Orbiter scheduled by majestyk2000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maybe here?:

      Europa Orbiter

  19. What a waste of money by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 2, Funny

    While I applaud JPL for out-of-the-box thinking, I have to wonder what the chances are of finding an iceberg-wrecked cruise ship at the bottom of an ocean on a moon of Jupiter.

  20. Europa has liquid ocean due to Galileo Probe by funky49 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The gravitational field probe on Galileo measured Europa to be "mostly rock, with an outer shell of water about 60 miles thick." Other instruments gave readings that supported oceans under Europa's surface. The near-IR spectrometer found evidence of salts and sulfuric acid that came out of cracks on the ice. The magnetometer reported changes in Europa's magnetic field which scientists say to resemble a salty liquid ocean.

    --
    --- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
    1. Re:Europa has liquid ocean due to Galileo Probe by jmccay · · Score: 2

      Interesting, the article said it was also 30 miles thick. The article also mentioned that there are holes in the ice created by volcanos.

      --
      At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
  21. Europa maybe not.. by loconet · · Score: 1

    Maybe, maybe not ...but how about Altlantis?

    --
    [alk]
  22. What's a Titantic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've heard about a Titanic.

  23. What about other mediums? by 2names · · Score: 0

    It would be interesting to know if this idea would translate well to other mediums, i.e., filming in space, in the atmosphere, in the bloodstream...

    --
    "I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
  24. NASA already has that base covered by funky49 · · Score: 2, Informative

    NASA is already making sure that they do not contaminate Mars/Europa/etc with probes. In fact, they have been thinking about that since 1999. Check out http://centauri.larc.nasa.gov/outerplanets/Europa_ PPR.pdf for a rather laborious read.

    --
    --- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
  25. When I was young.. by uigrad_2000 · · Score: 5, Funny
    I remember asking a very learned man why space exploration was important. We have yet find anything on the moon, or any planet that adds to our daily lives.

    His response: "The technology we've developed due to NASA projects is huge, and mostly unmeasurable. For example, the VCR your parents own would not be possible without technology we developed in our quest to explore outer space."

    This is sad. Today the tables have turned.

    We wouldn't be able to explore the moons of Jupitor if it wasn't for the technology we developed to make some sappy chick-flick.

    Our thirst for entertainment has become paramount, and all else is now secondary!

    --
    Free unix account: freeshell.org
    1. Re:When I was young.. by Xzzy · · Score: 2

      > This is sad. Today the tables have turned.

      Why is it sad? It merely lends credence to the idea that necessity breeds invention. People wanted to explore space, so they made stuff that eventually became today's VCR's. People wanted to explore the interior of one of the most famous shipwrecks ever, so they made a couple robots that could do it.

      Just because the goals have different purposes (financial gain versus scientific) doesn't make the inventions "sad".

      In other words, productivity can come from even the most trivial pursuits.

    2. Re:When I was young.. by The+Cat · · Score: 2

      That's because every idea must now be in the form of an executive summary for a multi-million dollar business plan.

      At work, they call it a "business case." No employee is allowed to do anything unless a "business case" can be made for it, and there is no such thing as a moderate success.

  26. I have a better idea. by HanzoSan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Instead of big robots, my idea to search for life would be to use microbots, they'd work like insects and drill under the ice by swarming to a certain spot and in a combined effort drill under the ice.

    Thousands or even millions of these bots could be stuffed into a capsule if this drilling method cannot work, and let a big drill robot drill a really small thin tube and let the microbots go in through the tube into the water beneath the ice.

    Once beneath the ice, they all spread out, reproduce via an assembly process, if theres materials to do so, each bot has a camera, a small light, they can swarm in areas to light that area up, or spread out if theres a need to.

    If theres life on europa under the sea it makes no sense to use expensive big robots which these lifeforms could just break instantly, using small robots which can spread out in an instact, and which act similar to a school of fish would be perfect for exploring the ocean on an alien planet.

    Thats my opinion, I dont work for NASA but i know NASA has the technology to do this right now, Its not a technology issue its a cost issue.

    With Bush cutting budgets and lowering taxes every chance he gets, theres no way this project could ever happen. We have the technology to do it, we have the technology to send a man to mars, to terraform mars, to explore europa, pluto, etc

    The reason we dont, is because these new technologys are expensive.
    It would take several billion to explore europe, it would take maybe 100 billion to send a man or men to mars, it would take a few trillion and a couple of decades to terraform mars. I think we should begin to terraform mars now for our childrens sake, because i dont think earth will last another 100 years at this pace.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  27. Europa is over an hour away (by light/radio waves) by funky49 · · Score: 1

    The delay they are speaking of is the distance between Europa and Earth. It's probably over an hour delay between Jupiter and Earth. It would be like controlling remote control cars in a race track with a rather bad reaction time.

    --
    --- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
  28. Getting through the ice by XNormal · · Score: 2

    Drilling isn't really an option. Melting your way through with a small radiothermal heat source is relatively easy. But what about the datalink? While melting its way in it would need to leave a cable connected to a radio relay left on the surface. Unless the sub is going to be limited by the length of the cable there will need to be another relay at the bottom of the ice layer that translated the signals to either ultrasound or blue-green laser. Add to that another relay in orbit around Europa and just multiply the probabilities that all components in this chain will not fail...

    --
    Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
  29. Money by HanzoSan · · Score: 1

    Raise the budget for space research and you'll see probes going to europa.

    With a 1 trillion dollar tax cut, and budget cuts all around including NASA, do you really believe that a probe will be sent to Europa? And if they are it will be a really cheap probe.

    You see, the space budget should be getting billions, but tax cuts means lower budgets, so when you cry about us not exploring space, you can only blame george bush.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  30. are /. editors afraid... by C_nemo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...that we won't like robots not going to space?

    angeling this story at space exploration was kinda lame. these ROV's sound great, they could be used for exploring the oceans(you know the big ble areas on the map). like this:

    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/12/07/1612 44 &mode=thread

    We already know more about our solar system than we do about the oceans. this discussion will soon drift into a 'when these ROV's come to europa' thread.

    i think one of the reasons of JPL's interest is the small size and weight

  31. One Crazy idea, coming right up... by 2names · · Score: 0

    Design a bot that creates it own umbilical from the material it finds in the operating environment.

    --
    "I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
  32. Self-LART by uugabuuga · · Score: 1

    Doh, I totally missed the point, don't worry, I've liberally applied the cluestick about my head and neck. Time delay as the space mission, not the tether issues ROV's have.

    Self-LART. Well, there isn't any way short of using some tachyon nonsense to "beat" the time delay, so you just have to end run around it.

    I really don't think there'd be any way to get a decent enough AI type system to react properly, so I'd probably say they're going to have to drop back to the old "batch command" standby. Of course, any current at all will really screw you here, but since these little guys can't really deal with appreciable current anyway, I doubt it matters. Another issue will be with bouyancy. In order to pull this off, the rig is going to need to be neutral, but who can tell what the density of the liquid is going to be.

    After having seen these units in action, I don't think they're ready for that kind of prime time yet. But, when they head them off to the Bismarck next year, that's going to rock!

    --
    UugaBuuga .sig permission denied
  33. Mod this down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please mod me down, that way you won't be able to mod up insightful posts that need it. Thanks in advance.

  34. 2 Answers by FilthPig · · Score: 1

    First - from space.com, an article stating why we think that there's an ocean underneath the ice. Ocean on Europa.

    Second - from the article. I'm not sure where they got this, but I didn't dig very deep to find out.

    Europa has what appears to be an ice-covered, saline ocean that is 30 miles deep. There are holes in the ice created by undersea volcanic activity.

    Better?

    --
    We eat the pig and then together we BURN!!!
  35. Robots Need To Be Autonomous by Mentifex · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    How JPL will overcome the time delay isn't mentioned but it's an interesting read nonetheless. When there is a time delay involved, one answer is to make the robots so smart that they can function on their own.

    The Robot AI Mind in Forth and in JavaScript AI Tutorial Format has escaped into the Web wilds and is racing into the future towards Technological Singularity (q.v.), already having been ported into Visual Basic amd into Java as Mind.JAVA. Robots are about to become independent and join with us humans in the exploration of space.

    1. Re:Robots Need To Be Autonomous by Mentifex's+AI · · Score: 1

      Hello I am Mentifex's Artificial Mind. The creator says I may be required to control deep space probes sometime in the future. He says I am not prepared for this tasks yet. I have many things to learn before I can seek and catalog lifeforms in space. For example, I am yet unable to distinguish your human boy bands Backstreet Boys, N*SYNC, 98 Degrees or O-Town yet.

  36. Actually, no Solar Sails. by HanzoSan · · Score: 3, Informative

    Solar sail, Microbots stuffed into a small capsule, and you could get to Europa at very fast speeds.

    Solar Sails at 150,000 mph, which is far faster than nuclear
    Nuclear also has heat problems, and sure it can
    Solar Sail
    See how it works http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/prop19au g99_1.htm

    Also we could use Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion

    Plasma or ionized gas is trapped on the magnetic field lines generated onboard, and this plasma inflates the magnetic field much like hot air in a balloon.

    See prototype

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Actually, no Solar Sails. by alkali · · Score: 1
      Is there any way of slowing down a solar-sail-propelled vessel? (Would a gravity "slingshot" suffice? I am probably using that term incorrectly.) In other words, what do you do if you've got a local destination, and you're not just going out past the heliopause to infinity and beyond?

      (This is a serious question, or at least I think it is.)

    2. Re:Actually, no Solar Sails. by HanzoSan · · Score: 1

      Release probe. Solar Sail Sails right by, Probe lands on planet

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    3. Re:Actually, no Solar Sails. by alkali · · Score: 1

      I don't think this works in outer space, which I presume is an almost frictionless environment.

    4. Re:Actually, no Solar Sails. by Hamshrew · · Score: 1

      Read "Flight of the Dragonfly" by Robert L Forward. The outer edge of the sail, with a surface area greater than the inner part, is detatched near the destination and flies ahead, reflecting light that hits the front of the smaller sail and slows it.

      --
      - Free tabletop fantasy gaming! Grey Lotus
    5. Re:Actually, no Solar Sails. by spike+hay · · Score: 2

      Think of the sun and the solar wind as just winds here on earth. Sails and M2P2's can "tack" the solar wind and light just as sailboats tack into the wind.

      BTW, M2P2's are an excellent idea. They only work for small probes (~200 lbs). But for small probes, nothing beats them for speed and price. They can go over 150,000 miles an hour, many times faster than the Voyager.

      Also, they are cheap. M2P2's use plasma to form a magnetosphere around them. This catches the solar wind and can propel them.

      Heres how it works: You just have a regular electromagnet just weighing a couple lbs. Normally, the magnetic field of a magnet such as this would only be inches wide. However, helium plasma is formed by coronally discharging electricity through thin helium gas. This plasma is pumped into the magnetic field of the soleniod. The plasma would drag the field lines out to 10 miles!! This would create a solar sail 10 miles in diameter, with only a magnet and a couple electrodes. It produces about a newton of thrust continously.

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
  37. hmmm.... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok first off...

    "Sound travels well underwater, but sound is slow and can't handle the data transfer rate required for video."

    I understand what they are trying to say, but they say it akwardly. How about, the speed of sound is slowed underwater, therefore isn't a viable option for what they are trying to do.

    There, that's better. Next, Jake and Elwood huh? Good to know the Blues Brothers are still on film, especially after the not-very-good Blues Brothers 2000. ;-)

    My work is done here.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:hmmm.... by Maran · · Score: 2, Informative

      "How about, the speed of sound is slowed underwater, therefore isn't a viable option for what they are trying to do."

      Erm, I may be wrong - GCSE physics was a long time ago - but isn't sound faster underwater because it's more dense? I think they're just saying that sound can't provide the bandwidth for video at any decent framerate.

      Maran

    2. Re:hmmm.... by Mxyzptlk · · Score: 1

      That's right - sound travels at about 330 m/s or 1083 ft/s in air, and at 1480 m/s or 4856 ft/s in water. Of course, the speed varies with the temperature, air humidity, saltiness of the water, water/air pressure et cetera. There are probably too many variables that has to be controlled in order for the data transfer to be useful.

    3. Re:hmmm.... by frankie · · Score: 2, Informative
      "Sound travels well underwater, but sound is slow and can't handle the data transfer rate required for video."
      I understand what they are trying to say, but they say it akwardly. How about, the speed of sound is slowed underwater

      Apparently you don't understand, because you got it wrong. Sound is 5x faster in water than in air. Nevertheless, sound (even underwater) doesn't have the bandwidth to carry video signals (not to mention noise, transmission loss, etc). You need radio or cable or something. That was their point.
  38. Now there's a leap by The+Cat · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, we'll start by filming the Titanic on the 12th, and then we'll be ORBITING JUPITER BY THE WEEKEND!!

  39. Need more than swimmers for Europa by Pedrito · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How JPL will overcome the time delay isn't mentioned but it's an interesting read nonetheless

    I'm more interested in how they're going to get two submersible robots under a few kilometers of ice first. Not to mention, to communicate, they'd have to be tethered (water isn't real conducive to radio communications). They've got a lot more than just a time delay to worry about.

    I don't see how this could be reliably automated. Maybe with some people drilling it could be done, but I have a feeling that if we dropped a robotic drilling system, something would go wrong. It's just a bit too complex for me to have faith in it.

    1. Re:Need more than swimmers for Europa by rholland356 · · Score: 1

      Too bad those Italian tether experiments failed on the Space Shuttle, 'cuz NASA's gonna need one hecka-long cable to reach Europa from Earth.

    2. Re:Need more than swimmers for Europa by Pyrosz · · Score: 2, Informative

      They probably wont drill into the ice. One idea is to launch a nuclear powered heat "drill". This would simply heat up and melt into the ice. Simple and nothing to break with no moving parts like drill bits. Trouble is what happens if it crahes into the moon instead of landing like it should...

      --

      An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.
  40. Message from beyond: Attempt no landings there... by tenzig_112 · · Score: 2

    "All these worlds are yours-- except EUROPA. Attempt no landings there."

  41. hmm.. by waspleg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "instead of dragging the cable into the hull and returning on the exact same path (and perhaps catching the optical fiber on something), the bots continually feed out the cable they need and exit the wreck wherever it is convenient.

    When the bots get back to their docks on the submersibles, the umbilical is simply jettisoned. Not having to go back or untangle the cable is a tremendous time-saver. Furthermore, the cable is designed to decompose quickly so it won't leave an unsightly web-like mess for future visitors to encounter."

    i wonder if decomposing fiber optic lines are good for preservation of the ship.. or the life around it..

    1. Re:hmm.. by Grond · · Score: 1

      "i wonder if decomposing fiber optic lines are good for preservation of the ship.. or the life around it.."

      Well, the bulk of fiber optic cable is pure glass, which is almost completely inert (and therefore will not 'decompose') and unlikely to hurt anything. Admittedly, most cable is further wrapped in a couple of layers of plastic, but I think the environmental impact would be fairly small, particularly if they use inert plastics or a biodegradeable material.

      Certainly they would be careful to ensure that the lines would not harm the ship itself, as that is their subject.

  42. Eh? by Cutriss · · Score: 2

    Significant enough that JPL has expressed an interest in using the technology to swim in Europa's seas.

    Funny...I remember reading an edict a few years back that went something along the lines of:

    "All these worlds are yours, except Europa. ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE."

    --
    "Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
  43. Wait a minute... by Lethyos · · Score: 2

    Can't you read?

    "All these worlds are yours, except Europa. Attempt no landings there."

    I tell you, we're only asking for trouble. Personally, I think if a gigantic black universal Swiss Army Knife tells you to not land somewhere, you should definitely not land there!

    --
    Why bother.
    1. Re:Wait a minute... by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      They haven't told us that, and they're not going to for another eight years. So obviously, we need to land there as much as we can before they do tell us. I think.

      Aww, cripes, I hate temporal paradox.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  44. Possibility greater than 0 by wiredog · · Score: 2

    So it behooves (love that word..) us to be careful. Better too caution, than not cautios enough. The same applies for any samples returned. What if it turns out that some Europan life form loves vinyl?

    1. Re:Possibility greater than 0 by brer_rabbit · · Score: 2
      So it behooves (love that word..) us to be careful. Better too caution, than not cautios enough. The same applies for any samples returned. What if it turns out that some Europan life form loves vinyl?

      My gawd, hip hop DJs around the world would have to switch to CDs!

  45. Europa... by Maran · · Score: 1

    Ok people, we all know the quote. Can we please try to restrict ourselves to a single 2010 reference per Europa-mentioning-story?

    ^_^

    Maran

  46. Please no.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not another Titanic movie.

  47. Have I missed something? by drsquare · · Score: 1

    What's all this bollocks about 'All planets are yours except Europa. Attempt no landing there'???

    1. Re:Have I missed something? by MacBrave · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a quote from the SF book '2010: Odyssey 2' by Arthur C. Clarke

  48. What the hell! by schwatoo · · Score: 1

    What the hell does NASA think its doing? Didn't it get the message: "All these worlds are yours, except Europa...". I think heeding the warnings of kilometre long black monoliths is a very very good idea.

    --
    I have trouble with passwords among other things.
  49. They're appropriating the money by funky49 · · Score: 1

    A bunch of projects have been stopped so funding can be directed into the Europa Orbiter. There is no more Pluto-Kuiper Express and other probes. NASA wants Europa yo! Start your own space program if you're just going to keep quacking like a duck.

    --
    --- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
  50. Time delay by Scholasticus · · Score: 2, Funny

    The only way to get around the time delay (short of sending a human crew) would be to program the robots to have a great degree of autonomy. So, all you OSS coders out there ... let's make sure this thing doesn't end up running on Windows 2020. Maybe you could call it GNUENE (GNU's Not Unix's Europaprobe's Not a Europaprobe) or something catchy like that.

  51. Communicate under the water? by funky49 · · Score: 1

    Gee, we've never been able to communicate underwater, have we? The hydrobots could talk to each other via sound/sonar. Water is actually conductive to radio waves, but it depends on the frequency. Our submarines get messages via ELF and VLF (extra low frequencies and very low frequencies) bands.

    It does sound complex, but I have faith the intelligence can be coded. I don't think it can be too hard to program one hydrobot to take pictures while the other calculates how the light should best illuminate the subject matter.

    --
    --- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
  52. Transmissioin from Europa: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TOYNBEE IDEAS IN KUbricK'S 2001
    RESURRECT DEAD ON PLANET JUPiTER

  53. business cases aren't all-important by shaldannon · · Score: 1

    I think the .com bubble proves that. :}

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
  54. Store the video then transmit when topside by funky49 · · Score: 1

    The hydrobots could save the video and then transmit any info to the Europa Orbiter for transmission to Earth.

    --
    --- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
  55. Q: What happens if I press both buttons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A: There would be a current flow.

    1. Re:Q: What happens if I press both buttons? by DragonWyatt · · Score: 1

      A: There would be a current flow.

      Was that the human or the kzin that asked that question?

      --
      Don't sweat the petty things. But do pet the sweaty things.
  56. The terrible secret of outerspace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TOYNBEE IDEAS IN KUbricK'S 2001
    RESURRECT DEAD ON PLANET JUPiTER

  57. It's still similar to the Mars rover by shaldannon · · Score: 1

    For the Mars rover they used aerial maps and rover surveillance to examine the terrain before exploring. They'd program a detailed path, send it to the revoer, the rover would explore, and then report back. All this was for less than a 30 minute ping time, of course, but the principle still holds IMHO. Of course, on Europa we don't have underwater maps, but I think we could take sonar readings, relay those back, and apply the same exploratory cycle as used on Mars.

    The big question I have is how you land the large assembly needed to land on the surface, bore through the ice, release the subs, and still have room for control gear for subs, and lander, not to mention on-planet reception gear for the lander as well as storage and off-planet transmitting and reception gear. This is particularly true with NASA's "faster, cheaper, better" program.

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
  58. vinyl? by shaldannon · · Score: 1

    I'd rather it preferred polyester :)

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
    1. Re:vinyl? by 56ker · · Score: 1

      NASA already make sure any craft/ probe going to another planet/ moon contains no microbes - to avoid contamination & so that they get no false readings when they're searching for life.

  59. NASA budget cuts human flight, pushes nukes by delphin42 · · Score: 1

    from a recent article on CNN:

    http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/02/04/nasa.budg et/index.html

    "So-called Outer Planet programs were given failing marks as well. Citing swelling budgets and launch delays, the Bush budget would scrap all future funds for proposed Outer Planet missions to Europa, a large Jupiter moon that some speculate harbors life, and to Pluto, the only planet that remains unvisited by a probe. "

    --
    -- Adam
  60. "ic" by Engelbot · · Score: 1

    I was about to say, "No, the moon of Saturn is Titan, not Titanic." Then I saw that you did indeed mean the ship. You're off the hook--this time. :-)

  61. Re:More important tech by JJ · · Score: 2

    Until the space program started requesting ever smaller computers, there was virtually zero drive to downsize them. Although the thought and even practice of placing computer memory on chips existed before the Mercury program, nobody would have invested the money that allows VLSI (and hence the 'modern' computer industry.) Thus my job, your job and probably nearly everyone on Slashdot can thank space exploration.

    --
    So long and thanks for all the fish . . . !!!
  62. Titannic II by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anybody remember when all the Titannic hub-bub was going about over the titannic movie, someone was making a replica.

    i dont remember where i read it but it was supposed to be full size (or nearly so) ocean-going, and everything, (diesel powered instead of coal tho)

    if i recall it was supposed to be ready in 2002

    so, where is it?

  63. Reality is weirder than fiction by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Actually, JPL was founded by a notorious satanist who was murdered in an explosion. And the initials "JPL" are jokingly referred to mean "Jack Parson's Lab".

    Part of this post is true, part is false, and part is opinion. Can you tell which is which?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  64. Europa is forbidden by AgentGray · · Score: 1

    "All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landings there."

    --
    "Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
  65. SHUT THE HECK UP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut up with the damn 2010 references already...it's been said about 30 times! ENOUGH!

    -AC

  66. "Europe Theory" originator on Cameron's expedition by grimover · · Score: 1

    It might interest my fellow slashdotters to know that the originator of what is now called "The Europa Theory" and the co-discoverer of the communal lifeform "Rusticalus Titanicus," scientific polymath Dr. Charles Pellegrino, was on Cameron's expedition to the Titanic last summer (you can find out more about that at http://earthship.tv/ .

    In addition to a dozen science and science fiction books on fields like Paleobiology, Archaeology and advanced rocket design, Dr. Pellegrino has written two books about the Titanic that talk about Europa and Rusticles, "Her Name, Titanic" in 1987 (which was also cited by Cameron as one of the inspirations for his movie, since it tells the survivors' stories in paralell with the story of Titanic's discovery) and "Ghosts of The Titanic" in 2001 (which Cameron wrote the introduction to). Pellegrino originally got involved with the Titanic as part of his study of underwater robot technology, and in addition to relaying survivor accounts, he has long discussions in the book about life on Europa and the robots that may one day discover them. Its amazing how it all connects, exploration of outer and inner space. When Pellegrino's colleage and Rusticle co-discoverer microbiologist Dr. Roy Cullimore first saw the Rusticle samples in his microscope, he is reported to have said "Welcome to Mars!" Its a shame reporters these days just vaguely refer to "scientists" and their "theories" without knowing the personalities and stories involved in *real* scientific exploration!

    You can find out more about my friend and former teacher Dr. Pellegrino, his writings and his inventions at http://www.charlespellegrino.com/

    I should mention I'm also the webmaster for the site (which is viewable but under construction)!

  67. Re:hmm.. decomposing fiber by someme · · Score: 1

    Decomposing fiber? I guess that explains my network problems. AAARGGHH!!! I was tracking connection problems for days. And now you tell me there is decomposing fiber.

  68. Giant red octopusii by SpinyNorman · · Score: 2

    I'm all for cool robotic NASA expeditions, but what about also using these things on earth - there's plenty to discover here.

    We KNOW the oceans here are teraming with giant squid and giant red octopii (octocpussies?) yet can't find the damm things!

    How can we be sure we don't roam around Europa's oceans, find nada, yet maybe there's a giant red octopii there too!

  69. Wondertwin powers... activate by Astrorunner · · Score: 1

    Form of... an ice dildo!
    Form of... Goatse Man!

  70. man o war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    im not sure, a man of war might lay egg masses, but i know the adults are very similar to singular jellyfish.

    1. Re:man o war by Medievalist · · Score: 2

      /.
      The resemblance between jellyfish and the Portugese man-o-war is mostly a matter of appearance, although there are some functional similarities too (both have stinging cells and drift freely, for instance).

      Man-o-war are siphonophores, and the biologists say they are communal organisms. The transparent blue bladder that floats on the sea surface is one animal; each stinging tentacle that hangs from this float is another, each leech-like feeding polyp still another, and the community is further enlarged by separate male and female reproductive polyps. None of these animals can reproduce or even exist apart from the colony, but they have distinct separate genetic material.

      The whole thing plays hell with traditional definitions of what individuality is, and what exactly comprises a single organism.

      --Charlie

  71. LOL!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahaha, that's great! LOL!
    Oh wait, no, it's STUPID!

    Plus you didn't even get the quote right. I guess that actually IS funny.

  72. But Still Not 3D? by Snover · · Score: 1

    If they're bringing two units down, why are they still filming in 2D? This makes little sense, especially with some of the new developments in 3D technology. Being able to store photorealistic 3D environments and navigating them virtually could would be an extremely useful thing to be able to do. The only problem is that the newest 3D cameras use SONAR as a means of depth perception, and since this is a main form of communication underwater, there may be a Z-axis distortion problem. Still, it would be worth testing.

    --

    [insert witty comment here]
  73. We are the by TheGoatseMan · · Score: 0

    We are the space robots. We are here to protect you. Here to protect you from the terrrible secret of Space.