Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mars Volcanoes May Still Erupt

Posted by samzenpus on from the send-joe dept.

Q3vi1 writes "Space. com reports, Images from a European space probe reveal recent glacial deposits and lava flows on Mars that suggest the red planet is more active than many scientists had thought."

21 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. Recent activity.... by grahamsz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Volcanic eruptions have happened in the last 4 million years....

    That's only about 15 iterations "emerge kde" on my gentoo laptop :)

    1. Re:Recent activity.... by lachlan76 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Still not as long as an "emerge openoffice" though ;)

  2. Molten core by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If it's as recent as 4 million years that would put to bed the dead Mars theory. The idea that Mars lacks a molten core. If there was magma that recently there would still be a molten core. It would take hundreds of millions if not billions of years to go from volcanic to a cold core. There would almost have to be liquid underground water. Good news for life and also water for explorers.

    1. Re:Molten core by Eric(b0mb)Dennis · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mars does have a molten core.

      Take a Look

      --
      Excuse me, I don't mean to impose, but I am the ocean
    2. Re:Molten core by helioquake · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Mars probably has a molten core (see Science article from 2003). But then it begs me another question: where has its magnetic field go?

      If the dynamo theory is accurate, there could be a sign of the magnetic field. Has Mars Global Surveyer mapped it out yet (I'll google after this post...)?

    3. Re:Molten core by cluckshot · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I really appreciate a poster who does what the parent of this post does. He is trying to get to the facts.

      Now as to one curious set of facts... planet formation. Mars and Earth being slightly different in size illustrate a curious reality. Bodies significantly smaller than earth in our solar system are actually evaporating into space. That is they are by the gas laws (which also apply to liquids and solids) are losing mass into space. Bodies the sized of earth or larger are acquiring mass from space.

      If we are to logically follow the accreation of a planetoid into a planet it never makes it because the planetoid evaporates. This also applies to stars and more profoundly so. If a star acquires gas from the region around it to the point where the nuclear fire erupts, it blows itself out as fast as it lights.

      These paradoxes have not been answered to by modern science types. Obviously there are processes at work which are not explained. The planet question says that in many cases the planets were formed as whole bodies at one time and ejected from stellar explosion as shrapnel. This also conforms to the warm core issues as well because a small planetoid forming by accreation would not generate a hot core or it would evaporate.

      I just point out the paradoxes. Anyone with reasonable suggestions is invited to chime right in.

      --
      Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
    4. Re:Molten core by Rob+Carr · · Score: 4, Interesting
      These paradoxes have not been answered to by modern science types.

      Actually, they have.

      The first is a simple application of the continuity equation. Mass in minus mass out equals the mass retained. During planet formation, the amount lost by "evaporation" (material outgassing into space - mass out) would be a function of temperature. If there's more material available to accrete to the planet (i.e. mass in), the net change in mass can be positive for any size planet (mass accumulated). The trick is to have enough material available in the first place. There's some fascinating astronomical pictures available of the debris fields surrounding some new stars. (Of course, I can't find them in a prefunctory search on Google - anyone help me on this? I'm too busy to scan something in from a back issue of SciAm, post it to the web, and then finish this post.)

      Given the temperatures involved in stellar processes, planets cannot form. Even if you had some bizarre process where they could form, the planets would be destroyed during the stellar explosion. The results would be the same that are actually seen as the result of stellar explosions: dust.

      The question of the formation of a hot core in planetary bodies has been addressed elsewhere.

      Claiming that a planet might form inside a star and be ejected is simply not a viable theory, especially since there are far better theories already available.

      My reasonable suggestion would be to take some basic astronomy courses to learn more about some really interesting stuff!

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  3. But... by Eric(b0mb)Dennis · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, we have only been closely looking at mars for (in an astronomical sense) a fraction of a second. Just because there hasn't been any evidence of eruption yet doesn't really mean anything.

    Mars does have a molten core, according to JPL. Strikingly similar to both earth, and venus. Interesting stuff, none the less.

    --
    Excuse me, I don't mean to impose, but I am the ocean
  4. Real reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    1.The Great Machine has awakened and is starting the terraforming process.

    2.Didn't you folks play Doom3? Hello Hellgate.

  5. mars is not dead by Ambient_Developer · · Score: 3, Funny

    So where are the little green men?

  6. Re:Hmm interesting by rufferto · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Mars isn't as massive as Earth. Hence a weaker gravitational field. More of what the volcanoes spew out would escape into space under Martian as opposed to Terran gravity. You still might have a thick enough atmosphere to support something though.

  7. Flat top volcanos. by jericho4.0 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Those lava flows look quite different from ones on earth. They're flat topped, show no signs of caldera/explosion, and seem to sit largly isloated from any other feature.

    Anyone have a clue?

    --
    "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
    1. Re:Flat top volcanos. by zvesda · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'll hazard a guess; if the lava on the Big Island of Hawai'i was looked at from a great height then it too would look smooth. On the other hand, lava from Etna or Mt St Helen's wouldn't. The difference is between basic (Hawai'ia) and acidic (Etna) lava, or perhaps the ammount of water (of course, these two may be highly correlated). On Mars, the lack of plate tectonics means that little surface material (inc. water) is pushed back into the mantle (c.f. Etna) and only 'pure' mantle material errupts (c.f. Hawai'i). Into a thin atmosphere, which allows dissolved gasses to leave more rapidly, the erruption would tend to be quite gentle and lower (Martian) gravity means it can spread over larger areas than on Earth.

      Result is wide smooth basalt flows.

      (but I only ever did Geology in 1st year undergrad---1A NatSci---so this might be incorrect).

      --
      -- Thus conscience does make cowards of us all - Hamlet
    2. Re:Flat top volcanos. by toxic666 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, they look much like certain lava flows on earth. Here's the URL of a primer on vulcanism with some examples:

      http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/types.html

      Mars igneous rocks are mafic -- rich in iron and magnesium, low in silica and volatiles (e.g. water). Mafic magmas are low viscosity and have a better chance of reaching the surface in a liquid state. Since they are also low in water, they don't explode.

      On earth, we also have big sheets of mafic lava flows -- the Deccan Traps in India, Watchung Mountains in New Jersey, Grand Mesa in Colorado just to name a few.

  8. stoned spirit by flibberdi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The question is rather, is the spirit stoned?

    OR

    is the spirit just stuck?

    OR

    Has there been to much to drink?

  9. Oh shit... by DarkHelmet · · Score: 3, Funny

    There goes the planet...

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
  10. Re:Okay... by Olix · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I thought Venus was still active? http://www.nineplanets.org/venus.html " Data from Magellan's imaging radar shows that much of the surface of Venus is covered by lava flows. There are several large shield volcanoes (similar to Hawaii or Olympus Mons) such as Sif Mons (right). Recently announced findings indicate that Venus is still volcanically active, but only in a few hot spots; for the most part it has been geologically rather quiet for the past few hundred million years."

  11. Re:Okay... by krymsin01 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Also, geothermal energy is a great resource to have when colonizing planets. Io and Europa are not as exciting prospects for colonoization, for a number of reason, as Mars is.

    --
    stuff
  12. Re:Okay... by tloh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you know you are not interested, why do you desire an explanation?

    For those who *are* interested, this can have any of several significance. According to an installment of NOVA on PBS called "Origions", a popular theory of planatary evolution holds that a hot molten interior in an inner planet such as Earth is responsible for creating the planetary magnetic field that shields the planet from the abrasive effects of the solar wind. Without this magnetic shield, the sun's radiation strips away the planet's atmosphere and other volatile compounds such as water. It was thought that Mars, being smaller than Earth, had a core that cooled and solidified more quickly and lost it's magnetic field early in it's life. With not magnetic field to shield it's surface, the atmosphere thinned and water became scarce.

    If Mars happens to be more geologically active than we once thought, another theory will be needed to account for the signs of a wetter martian past. Quite possibly, we need to reevaulate the level of protection offered by the molten core of our own Earth against the erosive effects of the solar wind.

    --
    Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
  13. Re:Okay... by OverlordQ · · Score: 3, Funny

    Erm weren't we supposed to stay away from Europa? All the rest of them are our's and that whole bit?

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  14. doom3 ! by phreakv6 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Mars Volcanoes May Still Erupt

    so beware when u play doom3 !

    --
    fifteen jugglers, five believers