Slashdot Mirror
Mars Had Surface Water for Eons
LukePieStalker writes "Far from being a one-time event, it now appears that surface water
flowed on Mars for eons. Nasa has announced that, after descending
down further into the Endurance crater, the Opportunity rover has found a 'razorback'. It is believed that this was formed by 'fracture fill' from the minerals in percolating water. Since this feature extends through several geologic layers, it argues for a long period of wetness near the surface. This would seem to substantially increase the chance that life once existed on the red planet."
Is there an official length of time for an eon? I know it just means "An indefinitely long period of time" but when it comes to life developing the amount of time available is quite important.
... Eon is a very long period of time. Geologists refer to a Phanerozoic Eon which is about 550 million years long
The Archaeon Eon lasted over 2.1 billion years.
or is it:
An eon is the period of time it takes for a universe to come into being and then disintegrate again.
Casual Games/Downloads
If Mars had water, why would it not have it for a long time?
of course, science fiction never fortells the future now, does it...
$ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
@(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
and see the same jazz..
"It is believed that..."
"...substantially increase the chance.."
"This would seem..."
To me, that's the only concrete proof of life on Mars. Life is complex--there's more to it than water.
I are winner
simply because there are giant chunks of ice that have been visible on its surface for as long as I have been alive. Where there's smoke...
Finding evidence of life on Mars would be extremely helpful/interesting in begining to answer this question. I'd say that is the main reason people are so "obsessed" with finding life on Mars.
This would seem to substantially increase the chance that life once existed on the red planet.
No. Life did or did not exist on Mars, but either way, its chances are over.
What these results might increase, if true, is the chance of our discovering evidence that life has existed on Mars.
"Skill shows through where genius wears thin." -Wittgenstein || Religion: uniting aviation and architecture.
I know scientists that believe such a discovery would discredit religious beliefs... but many religious folks I know have absolutely no problem with life on other planets (or some a source other than that described in the Creation story).
One friend of mine, a pastor at a non-denomination church, argues that the Creation story is not a literal history; science can never remove God completely, no matter the discoveries.
Really, the obsession with life on Mars (or other places) has a lot of sources. As we learn more about the Universe, human beings don't want to be alone in it. We want to try and answer questions that may not have answers here on Earth, including the origins of life and the nature of evolution. Wouldn't you like to be there to witness the natural beginning or end of life on an entire planet?
Probably yes. Hydrogen and oxygen are among the most abundant elements in the universe.
The unusual thing about Earth is that the environment is at the triple point of water. Water is able to exist as a gas, liquid, and solid all together in the same environment. This is only possible in a narrow range of temperatures and pressures. So water is probably very common. Liquid water, OTOH, is not.
As for why water is important for life, see one of my older comments.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
First, since when does the presence of life on other planets contradict the existence of a god? The earth isn't flat and the sun doesn't orbit us either, yet somehow world religions go on. Second, how is it so hard to see the innate value and magnitude if we were to discover life on mars? Finally, why is the discovery of life only interesting if it involves little green men. Microbial life on mars would be a watershed event in it's own right. I can't even begin to list all the medical, philisophical, biological, etc implications that would immediately result.
And right there is the major problem with religion...
Go ahead... mod me OT....
The darkness... controls the music. The music... controls the soul.
"I don't quite see the obession with finding life on Mars."
I do. But then I'm a scientist. I want to know stuff. I want to know as much as possible, and have other people in other fields find out as much as possible, because you never know what good things that can improve the quality of life can come of it. And actually, that last part is justification so that society will continue funding my research. Mostly, I just want to know stuff. It's why I became a scientist.
Also: because that's what humans do. They explore. They want to know their environment. I could probably come up with a decent hypothesis regarding cognitive dissonance driving humans' desire to decrease the number of unknowns in their environment in order to maximize their comfort level and probability of survival. But then that's the other thing I do as a scientist. Come up with hypotheses. Fact is, for whatever reason, or maybe no reason other than evolutionarily determined hard wiring in the brain, it's what people do.
Anyone not interested is free to focus their attention elsewhere. And dollars to donuts they themselves will have something like this that drives them that other people may not understand.
I'm sure you're right, that some people would use such a discovery as proof for and/or against some religious viewpoint. Hell, they did it with rock and roll music, and pretty much anything you can think of that they can use as leverage against each other in their power games. Good for them. Everyone needs a hobby, it gives them purpose in life, and it keeps them out of my hair.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
A sense of sarcasm? There is nothing in the image. He is saying "this isn't a big deal, and they haven't found anything", but in a sarcastic manner. Which is pointless to do in slashdot, because we believe anything.
Part of the fascination is that we don't know if it's possible. We think that it might be, and the odds seem to be in favor of it, but we won't know for sure until we find some evidence of it. That's how science works.
It seems to me the only reason people are obessed with finding life on Mars, or anywhere else for that matter, is to fill some urge that if they do, to less scientific minded (read: religious) people will be proven wrong.
First, I think this is a false dichotomy, as if a God who created the Heavens and the Earth isn't capable of creating life in multiple places. See Out of the Silent Planet by C.S. Lewis.
Second, I've met a lot of scientists, and very few of them seem to be motivated by the desire to prove religious people wrong. Most of them (and all of the good ones) seem motivated by curiosity and a desire to understand the world and universe around us. That, coincidentally, is the same impulse behind most of the religious people I know, as well.
"Part of the fascination is that we don't know if it's possible. We think that it might be, and the odds seem to be in favor of it, but we won't know for sure until we find some evidence of it. That's how science works."
We do know it's possible, evidence is right in front of you. Earth. Earth isn't some magical existence according to science, it's just a planet. If it can occur then it will occur, and given enough time it must occur.
Aren't there enough articles about Mars to warrant its own category within Slashdot?
Anti-religious Slashdotters, get this through your heads: the wide majority of mainstream Christian denominations have no opinion of extraterrestrial life, any more than they do of quantum physics, black holes, or gravity waves. I don't know where you got the idea that we sit around in church in an absolute panic that the latest scientific discovery will mean the end of our belief system, but we don't. I read the Bible when I want to learn about religion, and Scientific American when I want to learn about science. They are not incompatible, except to people like yourself.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
What? It's a problem with religion that science can't disprove the unprovable?
Physical science operates from the paradigm that there is no God (or that he is completely immaterial to the formation and operation of creation - a distinction without a difference). How then can it ever expect to explain God one way or the other, and how can religion be criticized for the failure of science in this regard?
Sheesh. People act like science is the ultimate finder of all truth. Science is simply a tool that tries to explain the observable world. Things which cannot be observed and measured can never be explained by science. That is not the problem with the thing that cannot be measured or explained, it is simply a limitation of the tool being used.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Where do people get this stupid (more importantly: wrong!) idea that religion is incompatible with science?
Science has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, a number of things that directly conflict with Biblical teachings. For instance, we know that the Earth is much older than the chronology in the Bible allows for. We know that man evolved from apelike ancestors. We know that Noah's flood did not occur.
And yet I know a number of people who will swear, based on no evidence whatsoever, that all of the world's scientists are wrong and the Bible tells the true story. In other words, they believe that nomadic herders who lived thousands of years ago knew the truth and that millions of modern scientists, the guys who invented computers and lasers and put men on the moon, have no idea what they are talking about.
It's possible, I must admit. Of course, it's also possible that there is an invisible unicorn standing right next to me. But I think that believing an old book over this incredible body of scientific knowledge, and worse yet trying to keep said scientific knowledge out of our classrooms in favor of religion, is both delusional and dangerous. Religion and science are very much enemies, unfortunately.
You may not personally have a problem with the idea of evolution or whatnot, but sadly there are a tremendous number of ignorant Christians who do, and they continue to oppose scientific advancement at every turn.
ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck