Slashdot Mirror


Venusian Climate May Have Been Habitable

tqft writes "Venus - life signs maybe - 'The hellish climate of Venus may have arisen far more recently than previously supposed, suggests new research. If so, pleasant Earth-like conditions probably persisted for two billion years after the planet's birth - plenty of time for life to have developed.' Mars is for wimps afraid of a real hot acid drenched challenge."

60 comments

  1. We already knew there was life on Venus by psyconaut · · Score: 2, Funny

    After all, isn't that where women originated from?

    -psy

    1. Re:We already knew there was life on Venus by pmz · · Score: 3, Funny

      After all, isn't that where women originated from?

      But, then, the men arrived with beer, brauts, and football. The atmosphere turned in a matter of weeks.

    2. Re:We already knew there was life on Venus by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 1
      "After all, isn't that where women originated from?"

      Real hot, acid-drenched challange? Sounds like a woman to me.
  2. Republicans are responsible for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Of COURSE Venus was inhabitable, until the Republicans and their Big Business Allies destroyed the environment. They're doing to the same to Earth: beware!

  3. Mmmmm... Mars by InsaneCreator · · Score: 2, Funny

    Mars is for wimps

    It's still better than having peanuts stuck between you teeth after eating a Snickers bar!

    1. Re:Mmmmm... Mars by dosius · · Score: 1

      Snickers kinda-sorta is Mars (well, it's made by Mars)... ;)

      -uso.

      --
      What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
  4. the greenhouse effect by falsification · · Score: 4, Funny
    The hellish climate of Venus may have arisen far more recently than previously supposed

    It was fine until an oil magnate became their President.

    1. Re:the greenhouse effect by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 2

      Calling GW an anything magnate may be overstating things a bit.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    2. Re:the greenhouse effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, then again, it may also be understating.

  5. From the article by passthecrackpipe · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the article:

    Venus is virtually the same size as Earth and, on average, is our nearest neighbour. Today, its atmospheric temperatures are hot enough to melt lead and concentrated sulfuric acid continuously drizzles down from thick sulphurous clouds that completely block out the Sun.

    Sounds like human life originated on Venus, we totally fucked it up, and sent a "try again" genetic seeding material package to Earth. Seems we didn't learn much.....

    --
    People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.
    1. Re:From the article by sab39 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "thick sulphurous clouds that completely block out the Sun" - the article

      "We don't know who struck first. But we do know that it was humans who darkened the sky." - Morpheus

      Venus is the real world, Earth is the Matrix?

      (yeah, I probably screwed up the Matrix quote. I'll surrender my geek credentials on my way out...)

    2. Re:From the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      But of course *we* know who struck first, because we've all seen Second Genesis.

    3. Re:From the article by GreenHell · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There's actually a Philip K. Dick story like that.
      Earth has been overmined, etc, and the environment is in a state of ruin. Humans send astronauts to Mars in the hopes of finding it habitable so that they can move their entire civilisation there.

      Once there it's discovered that an ancient race destroyed Mars and moved their entire civilisation to a new planet they had found, a veritable Eden, where the technology failed and they reverted back to a Stone Age civilisation.
      Unfortunately the astronauts can't find where this planet is, as all the equipment seems to have malfunctioned and is locked on Earth. (Well, all except one, who realises the significance of this fact, thereby giving the story its point.)

      Can't remember the name of it or which collection it's in. Anyone?

      --
      "I won't mod you down - I feel the need to call you a twit explicitly, rather than by implication."
    4. Re:From the article by Webere · · Score: 1

      we do? I thought it was deliberately vague on that point...

      after all, the Second Genesis was from Zion's archives, so if it recorded who struck first, it would follow that the "we" Morpheus refers to would also know.

    5. Re:From the article by NotInTheBox · · Score: 1

      Was it not called "The Second Renaissance"? Also. Morphius said in part one that they, Zion, did not know exactly what happend, only some bits and pieces.

      "Renaissance" was a projection of events as understood by the people of Zion. Take the scene where the robots slave like the ancient egyptians? Clearly this is an error; but it's very likely that the survivers are not the people in the developed world, are not the people who dwel in megacities. Maybe no survivor knew about cranes, catapilars, etc. Maybe they took (bruned, damaged, partial) books and movies as depictions of reality.

      --
      What I cannot create, I do not understand
    6. Re:From the article by Sarcastic+nerd · · Score: 1

      ""Renaissance" was a projection of events as understood by the people of Zion. Take the scene where the robots slave like the ancient egyptians? Clearly this is an error; but it's very likely that the survivers are not the people in the developed world, are not the people who dwel in megacities. Maybe no survivor knew about cranes, catapilars, etc."

      What about people who were unplugged from the matrix? They would know about cranes and other such things.

      The Second Rennaissance is very symbolic, maybe too symbolic, but I just took that scene to be another symbol about how evil humans are or whatever.

    7. Re:From the article by NotInTheBox · · Score: 1
      What about people who were unplugged from the matrix? They would know about cranes and other such things.

      Fair. However; they would most likely be very few in number. Also, most of them will be very young when they are unpluged.

      Also: would you trust the matrix simulation to depict reality as it really was? Would you trust the enemy's version of the past?

      However. Your right of cause, it could all be symbolic and I think we, as the human race, are indeed this evil and intollerant -- we care too much about the here and now and almost never look beyond a few years in the future.
      --
      What I cannot create, I do not understand
  6. No, it is the Democrats who are responsible by bluGill · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Venus would still be inhabitable except the feel good Democrats and their big labor allies destroyed the enviorment. They are doing the same to Earth: beware!

    I know it is all the rage the pick on republicans for destroying the environment, but the democrats only say they are better. Look at their actions, and you will find (just like the rebpulicans) that they don't match their words. Often the desire to fight with the repblicans (who in turn desire to fight back) means that if the other wants to do something the other promised to do, they vote it down just because the other party started it.

    Which is why I prefer to vote for a third party.

    1. Re:No, it is the Democrats who are responsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And sometimes a joke is just a joke, and a cigar is just a cigar.... Sweet Jesus people, lighten up. The first guy was just making a funny, not some heavy hearted political statement.

    2. Re:No, it is the Democrats who are responsible by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Um, I think that was a *JOKE*. It seems to me equally likely that the poster is right-wing as left-wing. The joke can easily be read as an insult of doomsaying by environmentalists.

    3. Re:No, it is the Democrats who are responsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my opinion democrats and republicans are the same thing. They just want you to think you have a choice.

      -1 Offtopic

    4. Re:No, it is the Democrats who are responsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why I prefer to vote for a third party.

      Interestingly enough, most of Nader's funding came from Republican and far-right sources. How's that for providing a viable third party alternative?

      Third parties are wonderful, but not when they're essentially used only to siphon off 2% of your opponent's vote.

  7. Moving to Venus 2150 by Yanray · · Score: 1

    I was recently reading Ben Bova's "Venus" and was thinking about the ability of humanity to live in the upper reaches of Venus's atmosphere. Anyone seen anything on this?

    I think a health spa would do very well their.

    --
    --"Sorry for the inconvience." Gods Last Words to his Creation
    DNA, So Long and Thanks for all the Fish
    1. Re:Moving to Venus 2150 by Cletus+the+yokel · · Score: 1

      There's a Ray Bradbury story (I think it's Bradbury's, don't know the name either) in which Venus is terraformed using bacteria. The clouds in Venus' upper atmosphere is seeded with bacteria that thrive on Carbon Dioxide and Sulphuric Acid. As they spread through the upper atmosphere, they generate Oxygen and water in huge quatities and also greatly reduce atmospheric pressure. This allows liquid water to form in the lower atmosphere and fall as rain.

      Over a period of months (or years?), the planet's surface cools enough to allow a team of astronauts to be sent to the planet's surface. On their initial survey, they find large, dead worm-like creatures. These creature had lived just under the surface.

      --
      Wanted: One witty yet thought provoking .sig - Apply here.
  8. Focusing on Earth-like... by feidaykin · · Score: 5, Interesting
    We've found that microbes can survive inside devices that have been sitting on the freaking moon for an extended period of time, organisms can survive in the depths of Earths oceans at temperatures of 250F, yet we still believe that all life needs an Earth-like environment?

    We have no real evidence of this... I don't think it is fair to rule out any chance of finding life in extreme places.

    Venus may be our hell, but isn't it possible that somewhere in the universe, organisims exist that would thrive there?

    --

    "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking

    1. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by GeoGreg · · Score: 1

      I think that "Earth-like" principally means that water can exist in a liquid form and probably that oxygen (or maybe something else?) is available for something like respiration. Water is practically unique in its properties, so it's difficult to think of any other substance that might take its place. Note that those microbes on the moon would be in a dormant form (spores?), not actively exchanging energy with their environment.

    2. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by yasth · · Score: 5, Informative

      Oxygen is a dangerous poison. Most early life (and lots still extant) not only do not need oxygen but are harmed by oxygen. Early life was probably based on hot methane plumes in the Earth's oceans, which is not dependent upon the sun, nor on oxygen.

      --
      I'd do something interesting, but my server can't handle a slashdotting.
    3. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by GeoGreg · · Score: 1

      Good point re: oxygen. Where would hot methane plumes have come from, though?

    4. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by zonx+lebaam · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes ... we know that at the time of early life development on earth the environment was dramatically different in terms of chemical composition, and probably temperature distribution (although water is a terrific temperature buffer). This changed gradually over 2.5 billion years in tandem with evolving life forms. So the rate at which environmental shifts occurred is at least as important as what the shifts actually were. If the change in environment was recent (i.e. "dramatic") that is worse news for existing venusian life than if Venus has been the way it is for a long time (on geologic/evolutionary scales).

    5. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me, after a burrito from Santana's. With extra hot sauce.

    6. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the anarobic microbs that don't use oyxgen for respiration?

    7. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by ramk13 · · Score: 1

      I think that if there is already life, it will adapt to many of these harsh conditions, but I just don't think the RNA soup theory we currently have took place in extremely harsh conditions.

    8. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by doricee · · Score: 1

      You're way off. Oxygen is dangerous at high concentrations, but it is essential to nearly all life on Earth. Besides a lot of things are dangerous at high concentrations... All Eukaryotes, cells with mitochondria, require it for the Citric Acid Cycle (aerobic metabolism). That would include all animals, plants, algae, fungi and protist. Most bacteria, eubacteria and archaebacteria, also prefer to use aerobic metabolism though they're capable of various other, very interesting, forms of metabolism. The only life forms that I'm aware of that are completely intolerant of Oxygen are some archaebactium. Now there's some evidence that these were once the dominant form of life. But that's not the current situation. Oxygen is so prevalent and it's use in metabolism so efficient that most life has evolved to take advantage of it. Trivia: Some Eukaryotes, notably our skeletal muscles and yeast will engage in anaerobic metabolism if deprived of Oxygen. Lifeforms that engage in photosynthesis produce a good amount of Oxygen as a byproduct of sugar manufacture. But they require some Oxygen to metabolize that same sugar.

    9. Re:Focusing on Earth-like... by doricee · · Score: 1

      You're way off.

      Oxygen is dangerous at high concentrations, but it is essential to nearly all life on Earth. Besides a lot of things are dangerous at high concentrations...

      All Eukaryotes, cells with mitochondria, require it for the Citric Acid Cycle (aerobic metabolism). That would include all animals, plants, algae, fungi and protist.

      Most bacteria, eubacteria and archaebacteria, also prefer to use aerobic metabolism though they're capable of various other, very interesting, forms of metabolism.

      The only life forms that I'm aware of that are completely intolerant of Oxygen are some archaebactium. Now there's some evidence that these were once the dominant form of life. But that's not the current situation.

      Oxygen is so prevalent and it's use in metabolism so efficient that most life has evolved to take advantage of it.

      Trivia:

      Some Eukaryotes, notably our skeletal muscles and yeast will engage in anaerobic metabolism if deprived of Oxygen.

      Lifeforms that engage in photosynthesis produce a good amount of Oxygen as a byproduct of sugar manufacture. But they require some Oxygen to metabolize that same sugar. And no they do not save the Oxygen for later use, the concentration of Oxygen gets high enough to interfere with other pathways.

      Html formatting is evil!!!

  9. Question about plate tectonics by clintp · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Once the water was lost, Grinspoon says, plate tectonics would have stopped completely,
    Why is water a prerequisite for plate tectonics?
    --
    Get off my lawn.
    1. Re:Question about plate tectonics by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      Lubricant. Anyway, that's my understanding. IANA Planetary Astronomer.

    2. Re:Question about plate tectonics by Baikala · · Score: 5, Informative

      The rapid heat exchange between magma and water allows the slow but stedy rock 'generation' process that pushes the tectotic placs apart from each other

      --
      16,777,216 comments ought to be enough for any forum!
    3. Re:Question about plate tectonics by dynoman7 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Why is water a prerequisite for plate tectonics?

      DUH! Because things (e.g. HUGE rocks) float in water!!

      --
      Blarf.
    4. Re:Question about plate tectonics by WTFmonkey · · Score: 2, Funny
      And what else also floats in water?

      Apples! Very small stones! Churches! CHURCHES!

    5. Re:Question about plate tectonics by zonx+lebaam · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps not just water, but any kind of ocean or atmosphere that can boil away to provide a nice temperature gradient. There is an interesting article at: This dynamic earth, USGS

    6. Re:Question about plate tectonics by barakn · · Score: 1

      The previous posters to this parent don't know what they're talking about. The addition of water to a mineral usually lowers its melting point.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    7. Re:Question about plate tectonics by barakn · · Score: 1

      Did you even read your own link? There you'll find that geologists consider ridge push to be less important then slab pull, which often occurs near continental margins, not open oceans. And an atmosphere or ocean is going to act like a thermal blanket, actually reducing temperature extremes. After all, space is a 3 K cold sink and the sun is a 5800 K heat lamp.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    8. Re:Question about plate tectonics by barakn · · Score: 1

      Nope. Ridge push is far less important then slab pull for moving tectonic plates. See this link.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
  10. Life might still be there by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If life ever arose on Venus, it is still going to be there. Simply raising the temperature 100K until it is hot enough to melt lead and bathing the entire planet in acid isn't enough to wipe out all life. There are going to be extremophiles all over. And the best thing is that we probably don't have to worry much about about contamination when we're studying it.

    1. Re:Life might still be there by kalidasa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah, but the *surface* temperature may have risen a hell of a lot more than 100K. Remember what it says in the article, that the surface melted and reformed. Maybe you're right - airborne extremophiles might have survived, and maybe sulfur breathers - but we can't be sure about it.

    2. Re:Life might still be there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, there are probably cockroaches on Venus that can survive the extreme temperature.

  11. Habstar Database, anyone? by kalidasa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More generally, if this analysis is right, it means that the "habitable zone" for planets around other stars may be much wider than has been assumed, since Venus had been thought to be far outside it.

    Damn, if this is right, I guess they'll have to expand the HABSTAR database some. Isn't that terrible? :-)

  12. Good thing that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I planted that hot dog tree on Mars.
    A universe without hot dogs is something I cannot imagine.

  13. Even extremophiles are only so extreme by Tau+Zero · · Score: 1

    The temperature limit for life on earth was only recently extended... to a whole 113 C, if memory serves. This is a long way from Venusian levels, and hardly offers hope for anything living on the surface. (How life could get minerals and other essentials high in the atmosphere, where temperatures are quite habitable, is a question that advocates of airborne life need to answer.)

    --
    Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
  14. We're Next by Detritus · · Score: 1

    No, this doesn't have anything to do with "global warming". The Sun's output is slowly increasing as it ages. Eventually this will tip the Earth into thermal runaway. The good news is that homo sapiens will be long gone by the time it happens.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    1. Re: We're Next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The good news is that homo sapiens will be long gone by the time it happens."

      Pleasantly optimistic eh old chap?

    2. Re: We're Next by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1
      Stephen J Gould argues that mammalian species generally only last about 10 million years -- we are a young species (perhaps a couple hundred thousand years old). After that the evolve or get replaced with something that evolved from another species.

      I think the idea is that long before the 500 million years we have until the Sun warms up too much (I think we have another 5 billion of main-sequence time left, but there is the Sun creeping up and left along the Main Sequence that is the problem), we or our evolved progeny will have travelled to another planet, perhaps even out of the solar system.

  15. Prepare for round 3!! by Lispy · · Score: 1

    We can still send our DNA to Mars. But after the third try we might run out of Class-M Planets in our Solarsystem. Jupiter as next shot might be waaay too heavy for us.

    But, hey, we could still build underwater cities (Man! Afaik we were promised them anyway by 2000) on Europas Oceans and try again (the Jupiter moon, folks, the continental jokes are exhausted!).

    There MUST be a climate cold enough to stand greenhousegases.

    cu,
    Lispy

    1. Re:Prepare for round 3!! by weileong · · Score: 1

      could still build underwater cities (Man! Afaik we were promised them anyway by 2000) on Europas Oceans

      I dunno - the black obelisks told us that all the planets except Europa was ours. I wouldn't want to piss off the obelisks.

    2. Re:Prepare for round 3!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STOP...WATCHING...STAR TREK!

      Class M planets do not, technically exist. It's only a star trek term.

    3. Re:Prepare for round 3!! by Lispy · · Score: 1

      I know that, of course. Funny thing is it's really a good synonym for "decent orbit planets with athmosphere".
      I think everyone knows what I mean. And if I can't use that term on /. wherelse? ;-)

  16. ahem monoliths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ahem monoliths. Calling them obelisks REALLY
    pisses them off.

  17. filling in the blanks by barakn · · Score: 1

    ...and so Venus may have a lithosphere (outer layer of solid rock) twice as thick as Earth's. It's a tougher skin so it's less likely to crack.

    --
    "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
  18. Mission to Mars by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1
    Isn't that the plot to that lamo movie Mission to Mars? But didn't Philip Dick have a lot to contribute to Hollywood -- didn't he have a connection to Blade Runner?

    This idea that Earth is "seeded" from afar is a neat science fiction concept, but there are a lot of ham-fisted realizations such as the insufferable Battlestar Galactica among others.

    1. Re:Mission to Mars by GreenHell · · Score: 1

      I've never seen Mission to Mars, so I can't comment. (I'm also happy to say that I've only ever seen one Battlestar Galactica episode, and that was enough.)

      Philip K. Dick was a popular choice for Hollywood films though, Total Recall was very loosely based around a short story called "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale" and he also provided the inspiration for Blade Runner (among others).

      Although the only major connection between the movie and the book (called "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?") is that the characters have the same names.

      --
      "I won't mod you down - I feel the need to call you a twit explicitly, rather than by implication."