Slashdot Mirror


Probable Water Ice Sighted On Mars

CraftyJack writes "Bright white chunks in the trenches dug by the Phoenix Lander have disappeared, leading Peter Smith & co. to believe that the chunks were ice that has since sublimated."

100 of 393 comments (clear)

  1. The real question is... by Zosden · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is there oil?

    1. Re:The real question is... by sjf · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well now we understand why he announced the pre-emptive strike:

      http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4551-bush-to-announce-manned-mission-to-mars.html

    2. Re:The real question is... by Ortega-Starfire · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, you fail it. Heinlein figured out how to move things from luna to terra cheaply a long time ago, if Platinum was just lying about on the moon, we would catapult it to earth with little cost. Moving oil on the other hand might be a more dangerous endeavor.

      --
      ---- Liquid was a patriot ----
    3. Re:The real question is... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      btw, I feel the need to mention that H2O ice doesn't sublimate, CO2 ice does. *Whoosh*! (That was the sound of all the world's freeze dryers stopping working simultaneously...)
      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:The real question is... by JebusIsLord · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes it does and can, at low atmospheric pressures (such as there is on Mars).

      --
      Jeremy
    5. Re:The real question is... by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 4, Funny

      There's no such word as democratyatize. It's democratalyze. Sheesh.

      --
      This ain't rocket surgery.
    6. Re:The real question is... by GeffDE · · Score: 5, Informative

      H2O ice does sublimate. Here's an easy way to prove it. All you need is a freezer and an ice cube tray.

      1. Fill ice cube tray with water (liquid, H2O water) and put it in freezer.
      2. Go back in a day and mark the level of the ice in the tray.
      3. Return later (preferably at least a week) and marvel at how the ice is below the level marked.
      4. ???
      5. Profit.

      The ice was in the freezer the whole time, so it didn't melt (assuming the freezer was set correctly and continuously powered). Therefore, the solid water lost must have changed to water vapor.

      --
      It has been a nervous year, with people beginning to feel like Christian Scientists with appendicitis.
    7. Re:The real question is... by 4D6963 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. If there was, Brave President Shrubbery would have already launched a preemptive strike to libertyifacate and democratyatize the natives.

      If everytime we talk about Mars or Titan we must make jokes about oil and America we might as well pick the one jokes which were proven to be funny.

      "If that was oil the US would plan a manned mission for next year. They'd send the marines claiming that the Martians were hiding weapons of mass destruction."

      "Well clearly we now need to spread Freedom and Democracy to the poor oppressed [Martians], who will welcome us with roses and be able to finance their own reconstruction."

      "By an amazing coincidence, [Mars] doesn't actually have democracy over there... Yet."

      You're welcome.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    8. Re:The real question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I thought that was from asshole roommates.

    9. Re:The real question is... by morari · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sailors
      Fighting in the dance hall.
      Oh man!
      Look at those cavemen go.
      It's the freakiest show.
      Take a look at the lawman
      Beating up the wrong guy.
      Oh man!
      Wonder if he'll ever know
      He's in the best selling show.
      Is there ice on Mars?

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    10. Re:The real question is... by Ortega-Starfire · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Platinum. A fuckup won't kill the environment as much with Platinum.

      Well, we could just build a bigger catapult on Mars, if only it had some sort of giant fucking mountain, we could build the mass driver along the side of it.

      --
      ---- Liquid was a patriot ----
    11. Re:The real question is... by hardburn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know the above is meant as a (seriously overused) joke, but it did get me thinking. If there was previously liquid water on Mars, and carbon-based life developed roughly along the same lines as on Earth, and internal geothermal processes are similar, than it's conceivable that there is oil, too. Although that's an awful lot of "if's". Also, if we were capable of getting oil off Mars economically, we also wouldn't need oil for energy.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    12. Re:The real question is... by linzeal · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oil can be used to make fertilizer, plastics and the like. Who said anything about burning it?

    13. Re:The real question is... by hcmtnbiker · · Score: 3, Informative

      btw, I feel the need to mention that H2O ice doesn't sublimate, CO2 ice does.

      And I feel the need to mention that Mars is not Standard Temperature and Pressure. The atmospheric pressure on Mars is about 1/100 that of Earth, I honestly don't know if that's reason enough for why H2O may experience sublimation like that, but I'm too tired right now to look it up and/or crunch some numbers and see if it does or not.

      --
      If i had one dollar for every brain you dont have, i would have $1.
    14. Re:The real question is... by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Informative
      The triple point pressure of water is 0.006 atmospheres, and that is based on the partial pressure of water on the gas side. The total pressure on Mars is about 0.008 atm, so the partial pressure of water in it would be much less than 0.006. Yes, water ice will indeed sublime (which is the preferred form of the verb in a physics context; "sublimate" is used in a sociological context).

      rj

    15. Re:The real question is... by settantta · · Score: 2

      btw, I feel the need to mention that H2O ice doesn't sublimate, CO2 ice does. As mentioned in another reply, water ice does sublimate at low pressure. Not only that, but water vapour sublimates at normal pressures too. That's how snow forms....
    16. Re:The real question is... by gnick · · Score: 4, Funny

      Everything here eventually (or immediately) degrades to politics, religion, or inane pedantics. If that's the way things go, that's because that's the way the gods want them to be. Besides, your decision to apply the 'serial' or 'Harvard' comma before the phrase "or inane pedantics" clearly shows a lack of proper use of style guides or general sophistication. The 'serial comma' is appropriate in major publications or papers, but not in newspapers, columns or short elucidations (such as slashdot comments.)

      But, I'm probably wasting my time arguing logical, on-topic points with an obvious liberal.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    17. Re:The real question is... by flyingfsck · · Score: 2, Informative

      There could be, if there are bacteria living in the crust that can hydrolyze methane. Methane, which is not normally considered to be oil, is a hydrocarbon and is the source of our oil and it seems to be everywhere in our solar system. So, yes, there could be oil on the moon too.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    18. Re:The real question is... by pushing-robot · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, we could just build a bigger catapult on Mars, if only it had some sort of giant fucking mountain, we could build the mass driver along the side of it.

      Like this one?

      You probably want something steeper, though.

      I'll refrain from making a reference to the relative spatial positions of you and the joke. ;)

      But escape velocity isn't really a velocity, as your trajectory is irrelevant. (Assuming it's, you know, above the horizon...) As long as you're traveling above a given speed, you'll escape the gravity well whether you're pointed straight up or towards the horizon.

      The reason we launch rockets vertically is to minimize the time spent in dense atmosphere. You get a lot of drag at low altitudes here on Earth, so it's better to climb quickly and get to where the air is thin as soon as possible.

      Mars is another story: Air pressure at the top of Olympus Mons is only ~0.003 that of Earth sea level. Launching a payload at a shallow angle through that would be no huge waste of energy.

      On the moon (or anywhere that lacks an atmosphere), you could lay the mass driver right down on the surface and it wouldn't make any difference.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    19. Re:The real question is... by Ihlosi · · Score: 5, Informative

      H2O ice does sublimate. Here's an easy way to prove it.

      There is absolutely no need to prove that.

      Just pull up a phase diagram of water (google is your friend), look at the lower-left
      corner (i.e. low pressure and low temperature), and what do you see ?

      A line where the solid phase borders on the vapor phase.

      And what's a phase transition from solid phase to vapor phase called ?

      Bingo. Sublimation.

    20. Re:The real question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, that's the scientific way. Don't prove it for yourself, take someone else's word for it.

    21. Re:The real question is... by cowscows · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you'd like, I could draw you a diagram that says that at certain pressures ice instantly turns to chocolate milk. Do you want me to do that? It'll change everything you thought you knew about the universe.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    22. Re:The real question is... by Mattsson · · Score: 2, Funny

      But in order to know if that phase diagram is correct, it must first be proved by someone.
      And then there's always that certain kind of people who can believe what someone else has proved.
      You know, the kind that says "It hasn't been 100% proved that smoking causes cancer, I've never seen smoking cause cancer. Look. I just smoked a cigarette. No cancer."
      And the "That proves nothing, it might have been god who did it" crowd. :P

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
    23. Re:The real question is... by Ihlosi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But in order to know if that phase diagram is correct, it must first be proved by someone.

      Yes. Better yet, under stringent laboratory conditions. Which means a much more controlled environment than the inside of your freezer (e.g. in an environment that contains _only_ water. Water vapor behaves somewhat different from an ideal gas, which means that your results may deviate as soon as you have other gases in the environment). If you do the freezer/ice cube tray experiment, how do you make sure that there isn't any liquid water involved when you're not looking ? (Oh, I know: You _know_ that water cannot be liquid below 0.01 Celsius ... which means that you're relying on the phase diagram to be correct. Congratulations, you've just proven the correctness of the phase diagram by relying on the phase diagram to be correct.).

      If the current phase diagram had fundamental errors in it, a lot of the processes that rely on water behaving exactly this way simply wouldn't work. Also, there'd probably be something on the order of a Nobel prize in for anyone who can prove the error ... and experimenting with water really isn't rocket science.

    24. Re:The real question is... by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 3, Funny

      *CRASH* (That was the sound of all the world's high altitude aircraft falling from the sky from the accumulation of ice the ceased to sublimate from the wings).

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    25. Re:The real question is... by nodrogluap · · Score: 2, Funny

      Our culture of freedom is superior to the bacterial culture, therefore we must liberate them.

  2. Was there ever doubt? by Gewalt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Haven't we known for a good many years that there was water ice at the cap?

    --
    Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    1. Re:Was there ever doubt? by WaltBusterkeys · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, we've even mapped the ice at the poles. But this is still important for a couple of reasons.

      First, it's confirmation that the white stuff at the poles really is ice (and not some unknown martian substance that just looks like ice).

      Second it means that the lander is digging in the right places to find all of the interesting stuff that goes along with water. It's tremendously interesting to discover whether there's carbon-based fragments in the water (suggesting life did or could exist) and to figure out what else is in the water.

    2. Re:Was there ever doubt? by NMerriam · · Score: 4, Funny

      Indeed, we've known this for several presidential administrations:

      If there is water, that means there is oxygen.

      If oxygen, that means we can breathe.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    3. Re:Was there ever doubt? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's tremendously interesting to discover whether there's carbon-based fragments in the water (suggesting life did or could exist) and to figure out what else is in the water. This is too shallow to be fossil ice. It has to be brand new precipitated water. It should be pretty pure, unless something is living in the ice right now.
    4. Re:Was there ever doubt? by pokerdad · · Score: 4, Informative

      Only if you separate the oxygen from the hydrogen first. That takes energy. Since the atmosphere is mostly carbon dioxide you might as well plan to split it into carbon and oxygen.

      I'm pretty sure the poster (and anyone else who would be browsing slashdot) knew that; the quote is from Dan Quayle, he's the one who needs help.

    5. Re:Was there ever doubt? by joocemann · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know, but I do know that 'knowing' that water is on mars is a big objective. I'm curious why they are observing and interpreting strange data instead of applying some (probably easily produced) technical gadget to detect the presence of water.

      It can't be that hard to make the device. You'd think that if they put so much importance on whether or not water is on mars, that the rover would be equipped with something to test that. Guess not.

    6. Re:Was there ever doubt? by NotZed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "First, it's confirmation that the white stuff at the poles really is ice (and not some unknown martian substance that just looks like ice)."

      Or perhaps it is just weird martian substance that still looks like ice, even close up?

      --
      _ // `Thinking is an exercise to which all too few brains
      \\/ are accustomed' - First Lensman
    7. Re:Was there ever doubt? by MarkusQ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry if it sounds like I'm trolling, but I just can't understand our push into space. Maybe it's the engineer in me, but if we can't exploit it (or learn something exploitable from it), why pursue it? It's not that it's not interesting (even fascinating), but not particularly useful as far as I can see.

      You're right, it does sound like you are trolling. But I'll bite.

      First off, you are aware that one of the best ways to improve your national engineering cadre (and thus, your economy, standard of living, etc.) is to attempt things that are at the border of your capabilities, or even just a tad beyond, aren't you? Even if the only thing out there was a big brass ring that was way far away, it would pay to push your limits by constantly trying to grab it faster, or cheaper, or whatever.

      Second, you realize I hope that NASA's budget is minuscule in the big scheme of things; we spend much more on things like professional sports and junk food that are even less useful. Our entire space program from 1958 to today cost less than our current misadventures in the middle east.

      Third, did you ever stop to think about where the vast majority of the available resources are? From energy to precious metals to useful chemical to just plain space the overwhelming majority of the resources we know about are out in space.

      Given all that, it hardly seems sensible to deride the space program as useless.

      --MarkusQ

    8. Re:Was there ever doubt? by zehaeva · · Score: 2, Insightful

      well if you can not understand our push to space then you have not read into anything about Asteroid Mining. see, there is a lot of material out there, far more than is on our little rock here. given that Jupiter is composed of almost entirely of hydrogen scooping off its atmosphere would be a wonderful source of the stuff that we would not have to refine at all. also i can not imagine that we would not find any nuclear fuels in space as well. given the abundance of resources within our solar system i can not see us living our constantly accelerating lives without at least puttering around our own solar system, if not going to the stars.

      ~z

    9. Re:Was there ever doubt? by mysticgoat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whether parent is a troll or not, the question raised deserves some kind of answer.

      Getting into space is not the long term goal.

      The long term goal is to get back into The Garden. The way to do that is to move all the factories (and most of the engineers) into space. This is all spelled out in the Ecological Manifesto. Which you can find written in the reflection of the clouds on any stillwater lake where you've got solitude surrounded by a few acres of wilderness.

    10. Re:Was there ever doubt? by jaminJay · · Score: 2, Funny

      ...and not some unknown martian substance that just looks like ice.

      Martianmallow?

      --
      Leela: "Is all the work done by children?" Alien: "No, not the whipping."
    11. Re:Was there ever doubt? by THE+anonymus+coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just my two cents to add...

      Exploration of the next horizon is part of being human. To stop exploring would be to deny something that is fundamental to who we are. The principle of utility is a horrible metric when the objective is poorly understood....

      For a long time, art made no sense to me, seemed like a waste of time, but it is an expression of human creativity and a reaching for beauty. Unless you care about seeking beauty, art doesn't make sense. Unless you care about seeking the truth of the universe, space exploration doesn't make sense.

      So, the question I would pose to the grandparent is what happened to make you lose interest in exploration? Have you never been curious about what is over the next hill that you haven't seen? Because really, that is what this is all about.

      --
      I guess thats all I have to say.
  3. Rubbish. by jd · · Score: 5, Funny

    The white things were Martian beach loungers. And as they were there first, I strongly suspect they were German-speaking Martians.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  4. Couple more things... by Bandman · · Score: 5, Funny

    Excellent. Some coke and rum and we've got ourselves a party!

  5. pictures don't lie? by notgm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    but super scientific ovens do? i suppose the ice melted before they could cook it?

  6. Dry ice? by zygotic+mitosis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In such a carbon dioxide rich atmosphere, how do we know it is water ice and not frozen CO2? What do we know of the Martian surface and subsurface temperatures?

    1. Re:Dry ice? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 5, Informative

      In such a carbon dioxide rich atmosphere, how do we know it is water ice and not frozen CO2? What do we know of the Martian surface and subsurface temperatures? Its too warm for solid CO2. Even at night the temperature is barely cold enough for carbon dioxide to solidify.
  7. Yeah, we know. by oskard · · Score: 5, Funny
    --
    Sigs are for Terrorists.
  8. This is why robots aren't great for science by putaro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We often see the scientific community putting manned spaceflight down, saying that it is not useful for scientific research. Had we sent people, with even a minimal laboratory, we'd have known within about 15 minutes whether what they were digging up was ice or not. Since the lander doesn't have an "ice" experiment/module on board, we're reduced to guess work.

    The reality is that manned spaceflight is not *economical* for scientific research at this point. We should be working on getting our launch costs down so that we could actually send people to do things, build factories in space, and start getting some real benefit out of space.

    1. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Come on please. It is easier to get stuff there than to get stuff there and return it. Maybe a robot isn't perfect in its science capabilities, but it is well armed with equipment. Robots are great to go dangerous people. Which do you think is better for science: A: Robot lander crashes, retry again in a few months B: Philip Fry crashes on moon and dies a death, are we ever going to try that again?

      And there is always C & D. C: Robot lander lands on Mars and completes mission. D: Philip Fry completes mission, but the return module will not leave Mars. Will we ever try that again?

      I'm a big fan of robots to do stuff like this.

    2. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by Loadmaster · · Score: 5, Funny

      B: Philip Fry crashes on moon and dies a death Oh! Had they only built the ship with 6000 and 1 hulls this would have been avoided. When will they ever learn?

      I agree though; this robot isn't as good as a human, but the folks at NASA are pretty bright. It's speculation now but after a few more tests they'll have the data they need for a solid conclusion. It's still very early in the lander's mission on Mars. We need to have a little patience.

    3. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by CraftyJack · · Score: 4, Informative

      the lander doesn't have an "ice" experiment/module on board TEGA has that capability. Verifying the presence of water ice is an explicit science objective of this mission.
    4. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by Narpak · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Not to mention discover better ways of maintaining the integrity of the human body. Apparently Zero Gravity isn't exactly reckomended for your health.

      The most significant adverse effects of long-term weightlessness are muscle atrophy and deterioration of the skeleton, or spaceflight osteopenia. These effects can be minimized through a regimen of exercise. Other significant effects include fluid redistribution, a slowing of the cardiovascular system, decreased production of red blood cells, balance disorders, and a weakening of the immune system. Lesser symptoms include loss of body mass, nasal congestion, sleep disturbance, excess flatulence, and puffiness of the face. These effects begin to reverse quickly upon return to the Earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_gravity#Health_effects_of_weightlessness

      I imagine that traveling to Mars and staying there to do serious research would, without significant advances, mean a shorter lifespan and for some; a martian burial.
    5. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by Bartab · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Come on please. It is easier to get stuff there than to get stuff there and return it.

      Find a couple astronaut capable people who have recently been diagnosed with cancer. Couple years to live, don't bring them back.

      A little cold hearted to design, but I'd guarantee you would have no lack of volunteers.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
    6. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by Ironlenny · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you refering to the Philip J. Fry from universe A or universe 1?

      --
      There is a system for subverting the system and you should use that system!
    7. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by trawg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And there is always C & D. C: Robot lander lands on Mars and completes mission. D: Philip Fry completes mission, but the return module will not leave Mars. Will we ever try that again? While I agree with the main sentiment of your post - that robots are better to send in the short term than people - I'd like to think that even if the first manned Mars mission met with disaster, there'd still be brave people queuing up to try again a second time.

      See: Apollo 1.

    8. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by Bartab · · Score: 2, Interesting

      At some point the public, law, and morality has to accept that adult humans can and should be able to make choices that are irrevocable.

      Besides, considering the trip length to Mars, anybody with 2 years to live wouldn't make it back. Even if there was a way back.

      BTW: Don't delude yourself that this won't happen. NASA won't do it, sure. The Chinese will.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
    9. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by Zadaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Manned space flight is afraid of a few deaths? What evidence do you have?

      Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee die during a ground test and we still landed on the moon 2 years later.

      Dick Scobee, Michael Smith, Judith Resnik, Ellison Onizuka, Ronald McNair, Gregory Jarvis and Christa McAuliff died in the Challenger explosion and we were back riding the same design to orbit 2 years later.

      We lost Rick Husband, William McCool, David Brown, Kalpana Chawla, Michael Anderson, Laurel Clark and Ilan Ramon in the Colombia reentry. And again, 2 years later we're back in space on the same vehicle.

      Just because you're too much of a wimp to risk your life doing something amazing and unique, don't condemn the rest of us to mediocrity.

    10. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by zwei2stein · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are plenty of people who would volunteer for such suicide mission even if they were NOT terminally ill.

      Really, if you can have people whose JOB is to murder other people and public is totally confortable with it (hint: its Soldier), volunteers for suicide missions should not concern public at all.

      Cultural taboo to overcome is "suicide", not "kill".

      --
      -- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
    11. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by MLS100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention they'd get a spot in the history books as the first person(s) on Mars.

    12. Re:This is why robots aren't great for science by DanOrc451 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Human psychology, particularly when dealing with nations of people, doesn't always work logically.

      Each one of those three cases you mention, while tragic and horrible, don't really fall into the nightmare scenario of human space exploration.

      It's not just the deaths we fear, it's the helplessness and impotence of an impending death we can do nothing about in the void of space, or the horror of unretreived bodies. A fiery death is something we as humans understand. There is tragedy, there is heroism and glory, we honor their sacrifice, and we can move forward.

      There is a huge difference, emotionally speaking, between a shuttle reentering Earth's atmosphere and incinerating, and what could possibly happen on a manned mission to the Moon or Mars.

      Imagine a scenario where, say, Apollo 17's boosters fail to fire after landing on the moon, dooming the landing crew to run out of oxygen and die on the moon. No amount of Apollo 13-style duct tape heroics can save them. They slowly die as a horrified public watches, and there is nothing that anyone can do to save them. Their bodies remain on the Moon, and every time someone looks up at the night sky, they see dead Americans in adddition to or in place of a crowning human achievement, until a future mission possibly retrieves their bodies.

      Or imagine a manned Mars mission where a critical rocket malfuntions and the crew is doomed to hurtle out into the void of space, and there is NEVER realistically a possibility of retrieving the bodies once they finally die.

      Now, I don't know if this would usher in a new dark age of space exploration, because it has never happened. I'm not advocating against human space exploration either. Clearly, for all of our costly fleshly limitations, humans are by far still the greatest possible conductors of science and exploration.

      However, it is also important to acknowledge that we don't truly know how humanity as a whole would react to the worst that could possibly happen in human space exploration because, thanks to the brilliance of engineers and a good deal of luck, it hasn't happened yet.
      --
      Ceci n'est pas une signature.
  9. Re:Great by maxume · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah, but how do you shake an entire planet?

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  10. what they should do by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    is send a dozen or two probes to Mars full of bacteria/fungus and whatever other DNA based lifeform that shown ability to live in extreme conditions and populate the planet of Mars. A few of the probes should carry heavy drilling equipment.. bore into crust of mars and dump a few loads of bacteria..

    its pretty obvious we'll fuck this planet up sooner rather than later so its probably a good idea to spread the seeds of life somewhere else. Maybe in 100 million years new life forms will thrive on Mars.

    1. Re:what they should do by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Funny

      I bet you could write about three thick books on that theme. You could pit a bunch of conservative geology types against power mad engineers with a small group of middle ground heroes in the middle

      But what would you call it. Something Mars. I know Red Mars, then the next book gets a slightly different name.

      The only problem is that the third book would probably run out of ideas about 10% of the way through.

      Maybe its not such a good idea to after all...

    2. Re:what they should do by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why is seeding a dead planet with life considered unethical? Since when? You say that we decided as a species that doing so was against our moral conduct but I've gotta ask.. when did that debate take place? By who? The supreme court of the world?

      Maybe you have a problem with it but the Chinese and Indians wont. So much for your supreme court ruling.

    3. Re:what they should do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We don't know the planet is dead yet, doofus. There is still a very real possibility of extremophile microorganisms existing on mars.

    4. Re:what they should do by mazarin5 · · Score: 2, Funny

      When did we vote? Was I asleep?

      --
      Fnord.
  11. Re:Good News by Yvan256 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Prof: Good news everyone!
    Bender: Uh oh. I don't like the sound of that.
    Prof: Today you'll be making a delivery to the planet Mars!
    Bender: Bo-ring. Let's go get drunk!

  12. Re:co2 ice ? by sjf · · Score: 3, Funny

    Since CO2 sublimates, and water does not. (It shouldn't even melt at these temperatures,) I assume that they mean CO2.

  13. We Blew It by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Funny

    After all this time and effort, we finally found water on Mars, and we let it get away!

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  14. Re:co2 ice ? by Teilo · · Score: 2, Informative

    Since CO2 sublimates, and water does not. Sorry to have to break it to you, but water ice sublimates also.
    --
    Mir tut es leid, Menschen daß Einfältigfehlersuchenbaumfolgendenaffen sind.
  15. Re:Great Scott !! by sjf · · Score: 5, Funny

    You see, you had a splendid joke there, and then you went and spoiled it.
    Any truly civilized individual knows that a Martini is made with gin, not vodka.

    Sheesh, when will these damn colonials ever learn ?

  16. Another article... by yorugua · · Score: 4, Informative

    Another article about the same news: http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/06/mars-phoenix-tw.html

    There is water ice on Mars within reach of the Mars Phoenix Lander, NASA scientists announced Thursday.

    Photographic evidence settles the debate over the nature of the white material seen in photographs sent back by the craft. As seen in lower left of this image, chunks of the ice sublimed (changed directly from solid to gas) over the course of four days, after the lander's digging exposed them.

    "It must be ice," said the Phoenix Lander's lead investigator, Peter Smith. "These little clumps completely disappearing over the course of a few days, that is perfect evidence that it's ice."

    The confirmation that water ice exists in the area directly surrounding the lander is big and good news for the Martian mission. NASA's stated goal for the Mars Phoenix was to find exactly this -- water ice -- and then analyze it. With the latest news, the first step is accomplished. All that's left now is to get the water into the Phoenix's instruments, a task which has occasionally proven more difficult than anticipated.

    Still, this is the best opportunity that humanity has ever had to analyze extraterrestrial water in any form. That had the Phoenix Lander's persona fired up.

    "Are you ready to celebrate? Well, get ready: We have ICE!!!!! Yes, ICE, *WATER ICE* on Mars! w00t!!! Best day ever!!" the Mars Phoenix Lander tweeted at about 5:15 pm.

    Their suspicions about water ice beneath the surface of Mars confirmed, scientists and the world will have renewed interest in the outcome of the soil analyses currently being conducted by the lander.

    The samples are being examined for traces of organic molecules, among other substances, but the lander does not have instruments that could directly detect life.

    See the full announcement from NASA.

  17. Re:co2 ice ? by sjf · · Score: 3, Informative

    You are correct. I had not realized just how low the air pressure was on Mars: it can be around 0.006 atm which is exactly the point where ice will sublimate.
    Cool. Thanks !

    Why the f*ck was I moderated troll ? I was wrong, but trolling ? Sheesh, get a life.

  18. From global surveyer to today by heroine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Still remember when global surveyer first released the picture of massive amounts of water below the surface. It was too good to be true, no-one believed it, and it got put away.

    Now we've found massive amounts of water just below the surface, enough water to make huge amounts of rocket fuel, and it didn't even make a buried link on CNN. Where in Calif* can you find water just 2" below the surface?

  19. Re:Great Scott !! by flewp · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sure, Martinis may be made with gin, but martiantinis are made with vodka. Duh.

    --
    WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
  20. Re:Ice Alright! by H0D_G · · Score: 3, Funny

    like Jynnan Tonnyx?

    --
    Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home!
  21. Water Ice? by mcgeeb · · Score: 3, Funny

    Awesome, what flavor?

  22. I think the point that everyone keeps missing by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think the most important thing, and it is something that everyone keeps missing, is that NASA has found a way to turn even rocket scientists into ditch diggers!
    Imagine a bright young engineer studying hard on saturday nights, while all his friends are getting drunk and laid, and thinking how he'll have a successful career with NASA. And when thinking about his lucky friends he says to himself "the world needs ditchdiggers too."
    And some day he gets into NASA, and his boss's first words are:
    "Johnson, this ain't rocket science, Phoenix has landed and I need you do dig me a ditch..."

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  23. Re:Super colonization plan by Smoke2Joints · · Score: 2, Informative

    the ultimate aim of these mars exploration missions is to check for signs of life BEFORE we start terraforming the shit out of it. science doesnt want unnessicary genocide on its hands, regardless of the sophistication of the species.

  24. Ice sublimes. by Dr.+Mu · · Score: 3, Informative
    Geeks sublimate.

    (Okay, okay, I just looked it up: "sublimate" can also be used with ice, but "sublime" is preferred.)

  25. Re:Great by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 2, Funny

    That would turn the whole planet into a Disaster Area!

    --
    Not a sentence!
  26. When on Mars... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You use vodka out of respect for the fallen Russian probes. When the Dutch lose more probes on Mars to the Russians, we can start switching to gin.

  27. Re:Oil, Water, Life on Mars? So what?! by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I still can't say that I agree on your point of view.

    Space exploration has no benefit for society in general. So there is no point in understanding why we have tides? What about how sunspots generate random levels of radiation that plays havoc with the radio broadcasts and communications that we use? What about looking into the area of space around our humble planet to see if there is an asteroid or comet heading right for us? Don't you think that these three points off the top of my head have some sort of benefit for society in general?

    As for the swearing, my point is that if it is used as commonly as in your original thread, it really does water down. I got absolutely nothing against colorful language. My point is if you put in too much color, the whole thing becomes a gaudy mess rather than a well accentuated splash here and there.
    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
  28. They Really Really Really Found Water (Almost) by KidSock · · Score: 4, Funny

    This time they really really really really really really found water. Just like the last time they really really really found water. But that one time they found water they really didn't. But this time they really almost definitely did.

    1. Re:They Really Really Really Found Water (Almost) by dotancohen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      yeah!

      just like Duke Nukem Forever will really really really really really really really come out this year!

      Duke Nukem is already done, but it only runs on Herd.
      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  29. Re:Oil, Water, Life on Mars? So what?! by TapeCutter · · Score: 2, Informative

    The reason you get modded to hell is obvious to this 50yo geek and was politely explained by the GP.

    The fact you think space exploration is a waste of time is your opinion, the way you state that opinion is 95% pure troll/flamebait. The unwashed masses of slashdotter do not have a personal grudge against you, you seem incapable of communicating contrary ideas without spewing bile at the same time.

    Also your original post is flat out wrong...

    "All the bad things about climate change, economic collapse, and overpopulation are happening here and now. The ability to use space exploration technology to address these problems won't be realistic for hundreds of years, if ever."

    Space exploration may not fix these problems but how did we find out about them? The effects of AGW and overpopulation have been measured for the last 30-40yrs using space programs such as landsat. As the GP suggested you cannot seperate science into little piles of factoids and then only fund the piles you want to grow, science is both a body of knowledge AND a way of thinking.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  30. Don't be ridiculous. by StarKruzr · · Score: 3, Funny

    Democratyatize is a perfectly cromulent word.

    --

    +++ATH0
    1. Re:Don't be ridiculous. by bluie- · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, and it embiggens us all.

      --
      life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think
  31. In later news by RationalRoot · · Score: 3, Funny

    Large groups of Martians are now protesting at the landing site.

    Holding placards saying "Go home - Keep Mars for the Martians" - "You messed up Earth, Leave Mars Alone" - "There's no Oil Here - Go Home"

    It appears we may not be welcome after all.

    --
    http://davesboat.blogspot.com/
  32. what't the big deal? by speedtux · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Viking lander already observed frost:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_2

    Furthermore, experiments with simulated soil and athmosphere suggest that that frost actually turns liquid when it melts.

  33. At last! by Evildonald · · Score: 2, Funny

    Astronauts will be able to make Long Island Ice Tea on Mars without having to ship expensive ice all the way from earth!

  34. Re:Not exactly scholarly by nicklott · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You, sir, are a pedant. When I get up every morning I don't know that my dog is really my dog and hasn't been stolen overnight and replaced with a very clever mechanical copy. I can't really check without dissecting him and that tends to upset both of us, so I assume that it being highly improbable that burglars would have replaced my crappy dog with a very expensive robot he is still my dog. It makes life much simpler.

    Likewise we know there is ice on mars, and one of the very few ways that a solid lump can disappear without trace is for it to sublimate. Other ways are for something with long limbs to have reached over and picked it up or perhaps they were iron rocks attracted by passing magnetic clouds, or perhaps a tiny blackhole opened for just long enough to remove those pebbles. However we've pretty much proved conclusively that there is no long-limbed life on Mars and every other way is vanishingly improbable so Occam's razor tells us that it is likely enough that this is ice that we can, on website designed for popular consumption, dispense with the endless qualifiers.

  35. Hmmm by Rog69 · · Score: 3, Funny

    When the roads get iced up round my way, they come out and chuck a load of reddish coloured sand on it and it melts, so how can all that ice exist under all that reddish coloured sand on Mars? They really didn't think this through.

  36. Re:Great! by Iamthecheese · · Score: 2, Funny

    That actually may not be a bad idea. Can anyone tell me whether a load of catalyst and a reactor would weigh less than a load of hydrogen?

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  37. WTF by Phaid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jesus, I thought I signed onto slashdot, but after reading the comments I realize I must have clicked on Fark by mistake.

  38. excess flatulence? by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Funny

    where you see a problem i see opportunity

    send 10 fat guys to mars in a small capsule loaded with beans, rice, corn dogs, garlic knots, etc

    when the capsule reaches mars, BOOM, a little percussion decompression, and voila: instant martian atmosphere

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  39. Hey Mr! I got five kids to feed. by SystematicPsycho · · Score: 2, Funny

    Blue sky on Mars.

    --
    Analytic & algebraic topology of locally Euclidean meterization of infinitely differentiable Riemmanian manifold
  40. preach that sophist love, brother! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    There is absolutely no need to prove that the Earth is the center of the universe, orbited by the other celestial bodies.

    Just pull up a Ptolemaic diagram (google is your friend), look at the center (i.e. within the orbits of the planets), and what do you see?

    A circle which is, in fact, the Earth.

    And what does the fact that the Sun and all other celestial bodies have concentric orbits around the Earth prove?

    Bingo. Geocentrism.

  41. We're (almost) ready (marshydro.com)... by Wonderkid · · Score: 2, Funny
    --

    O'WONDERWe're working on it.

  42. They're both words. by Etherwalk · · Score: 3, Funny

    Both are listed in the dictionary.

  43. Re:fake picture? by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, I don't think it looks fake. But, you could easily point your radio telescope at Mars and verify that there is a signal coming from that direction.

    20 years from now, we're going to have junior high school students saying that Phoenix and Spirit/Opportunity were faked. I only say this because my spouse is a science teacher and still hears that the Moon landings were faked.

    --
    The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
  44. WOW! by celtic_hackr · · Score: 2, Funny

    We'd better throw out those phase change diagrams in the schools' books and remove the triple point of water, someone on /. has confirmed ...
    IT'S ALL A LIE! Water can't sublimate.

    Of course, since the triple point of water is 6.1 millibars @ 0.0098 C, and the average atmospheric pressure of Mars is 6 millibars, it can't possibly ever have favorable conditions for the sublimation of ... err ... uh, I mean, ummm ...
    err ...
    Uh ....
    All your vapor belong to US!