Slashdot Mirror


Enceladus "Sea" Mystery Deepens

Smivs writes "The BBC reports that an ocean may not be the source of the jets emanating from Saturn's moon Enceladus. Controversial research questions the moon's promise as a target in the search for life beyond Earth. A chemical analysis of Enceladus, led by University of Colorado planetary scientist Nick Schneider, failed to detect sodium, an element scientists say should be present in any body of water that has been in contact with rock for billions of years. Spectral analysis with the Keck Telescope found no sodium in the plumes or in the vapor in orbit around the moon. At stake is whether Saturn's moon could support alien life and is thus a worthy target for a NASA exploratory mission to detect it. Such a mission to Enceladus is one of four currently under review for further development."

4 of 166 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Assumption check, please by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't Lake Michigan, along with all the other lakes, refilled every so often (on a geological time scale)? Seems to me that any salt that eroded from the rocks would eventually flow downstream and end up in the oceans. And it would get filled up again by rain water, which doesn't contain salt. That is my completely made up reason as to why lakes don't have salt, while oceans and seas do. Anybody know whether or not it makes any sense.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  2. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sodium existing as a requirement for life is not the issue here. I know this is slashdot and everything, but even TFS clearly states that the question is whether or not an ocean is the source of the water plumes that have been observed. It is the ocean we are looking for and it is the ocean that we believe is an indication of possible life.
    You may still take offense to the assumption that water is required, but when millions, nay, billions of dollars are on the line at NASA, you can be sure that greater and brighter minds than you or I have taken all the considerations and the great majority of scientists continue to believe that large bodies of liquid water are sufficient if not necessary conditions for life.
    Furthermore, if there is life, but not as we know it, then it is nigh unto impossible for us to begin looking for it. The most resources must necessarily be used in a manner which has the highest chance for success, and the small odds of finding life as we know it still compare favorably to the negligible odds that we find life as we do not.

  3. Re:Waste of Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's really not a total waste of government money, because once alien life is found it will be a great tool for controling the masses through fear. Just think - instead of fearing another country we could now fear life from other planets. That should keep us busy for a couple of generations...

  4. Re:Waste of Money by rve · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It costs very little. The entire NASA funding is less than half of a percent of the government budget, it really is a pittance. Only a very small percentage of the NASA budget is used for space exploration.

    One Iraq war for example costs (so far) about a thousand times as much as putting robots on mars.

    Spending a very small amount of money on building a legacy isn't useless.