Slashdot Mirror


NASA Announces Water Found On Mars

s.bots writes "Straight from the horse's mouth, NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander has identified water in a soil sample. Hopefully this exciting news will boost interest in the space program and further exploration of the Martian surface." Clearly, this has long been suspected, but now Martian water's been (in the words of William Boynton, lead scientist for the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer) "touched and tasted."

281 comments

  1. First ? by daveime · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Well that's such a relief, as I was convinced we were going to run out of water here soon.

    1. Re:First ? by Kugrian · · Score: 4, Funny

      Many, so very many.

      A bottling plant on Mars would make crazy money. "Don't drink earth water, drink E.T water!" (even more if they pluralize that and convince people alien urine will give them super health).

      And then the Mars company will give everyone hell for calling it Mars Water.

      Mod parent Insightful, and mod me drunk troll!

    2. Re:First ? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I swear I saw that as a SPAM subject

  2. Uh Oh by clang_jangle · · Score: 2

    Here comes the neighborhood!

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  3. Water? Big Deal! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Meh. Call me if they find crude oil on Mars.

    1. Re:Water? Big Deal! by Muad'Dave · · Score: 4, Informative

      They found crude oil components on Titan.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    2. Re:Water? Big Deal! by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Meh. Call me if they find crude oil on Mars.

      But we've already got that on Titan.

    3. Re:Water? Big Deal! by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True, but that's one gawdawful pipeline you gotta build to get at it, dontcha think?

      (...and I don't even want to know how what's gonna happen once the Sierra Club crowd finds out...)

      (yes, I'm being facetious).

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    4. Re:Water? Big Deal! by volcanopele · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, crude oil has not been confirmed as a major surface component. The confirmation of surface liquids on Titan (in lakes previously observed by the ISS and RADAR instruments) demonstrate the presence of liquid natural gas, not crude oil.

      --
      The Gish Bar Times - Blog covering Jupiter's moon Io
    5. Re:Water? Big Deal! by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 3, Funny

      Natural gas? Crude oil?

      Same shit, different phase.

    6. Re:Water? Big Deal! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not sure why you got modded as "troll".
      "Wrong" would be appropriate.

    7. Re:Water? Big Deal! by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1, Informative

      That's why I said crude oil COMPONENTS. Crude oil is a complex mixture of aliphatic hydrocarbons, mainly methane CH4 thru n-Tetracontane C40H82. Everything from methane to asphalt tars are in there.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    8. Re:Water? Big Deal! by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was going for funny, I thought Slashdoters were dedicated pun connoisseurs.

      And as far as corectness, that's a matter of perspective. Crude oil is just a mixture of hydrocarbons with a large enough formula to be liquid, and natural gas is hydrocarbons with a small enough formula to be gas. The fact that ethane, propane, butane, and pentane are in both just goes to show the distinction is arbitrarily based on phase. Unless you know some special reason why all the hydrocarbons are counted as crude oil, except the ones that are gasses?

    9. Re:Water? Big Deal! by rronda · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But it means that if you are planning a manned spaceflight, you only need to carry enough water to get there.

    10. Re:Water? Big Deal! by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 1

      But it means that if you are planning a manned spaceflight, you only need to carry enough water to get there.

      I just hope there isn't some sort of killer bug dormant in the frozen water that we miss with our initial lander explorations.

      --
      ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
    11. Re:Water? Big Deal! by Varun+Soundararajan · · Score: 1

      I thought Titan was a gas station for aliens to fill up gas before reaching earth?

    12. Re:Water? Big Deal! by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      I could see that happening, actually i think i did already in a movie , no?

    13. Re:Water? Big Deal! by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      Unless you know some special reason why all the hydrocarbons are counted as crude oil, except the ones that are gasses?

      The special reason is that some of them are gasses (around STP). Gasses and liquids require different handling and processing to one another. The distinction is anything but arbitrary.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    14. Re:Water? Big Deal! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh. Call me if they find beer on Mars.

      Fixed it for you.

    15. Re:Water? Big Deal! by spidercoz · · Score: 1

      Martian Microbrew, hell yeah. Tharsis Lager. Ales Marineris!

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
  4. Hurray! by inotocracy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Now what?

    1. Re:Hurray! by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...now we find a way to launch approximately 40bn gallons of fine single-malt whisky to Mars.

      Oh, okay, - it really means that now we don't have to drag as much stuff with us when we finally do get sufficient testicular fortitude to get people out to Mars for exploration, perhaps settlement, etc etc.

      Now to answer your question specifically? We need to know how much H2O are we talking here, and in what concentrations and distributions.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:Hurray! by Eudial · · Score: 5, Funny

      Now what?

      Now we move to mars. Naturally, we won't actually use or drink the readily available Martian water, but buy bottled water from earth instead.

      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    3. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dejah Thoris and a hot tub, what else?

      Projected quantities, availability and ease of procurement of said water, but first need need other resources necessary for sustained life there. Perhaps afterwards can discuss algae and people with a greenhouse. Lots to do, rest assured though somewhere along the line there will be a push for terraforming, if we don't destroy ourselves first.

    4. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the plan: get your ass to Mars

    5. Re:Hurray! by Jimbookis · · Score: 1

      > Now what?

      Thanks for the cue.

      1) Find water on Mars
      2) ?
      3) Profit!

      Just heard on ABC Australia radio:

      NASA Rep: (referring to water) We're sitting on it, we've touched it, we've tasted it, we've smelled it.
      ABC Journo: Who tasted it?
      NASA Rep: Uh, the oven.

    6. Re:Hurray! by videoBuff · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Now what?

      Absolutely nothing. NASA seems to move at a glacial pace. Their science experiments are all geology related. How many times have we seen the headline that water has been discovered on Mars? They discovered it with remote sensing, photography and now on a first hand (shovel) basis.

      From the article "One surprise is how the soil is behaving. The ice-rich layers stick to the scoop when poised in the sun above the deck, different from what we expected from all the Mars simulation testing we've done"

      Has these people ever used a shovel on earth in a wet and cold environment? Above statement implies that payload scientists really did not expect to encounter ice on Mars. As far as next steps go, they will design better shovels. No astrobiology experiments.

      Now on to more frustratingly slow search for water in still other ways.

    7. Re:Hurray! by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 2, Funny

      ...now we find a way to launch approximately 40bn gallons of fine single-malt whisky to Mars.

      no no, we just need to send barley, oak casks and some funny shaped copper tubes.

      If your willing to wait a bit longer, we only need to send barley and acorns, I'm sure there must be some copper on Mars.

    8. Re:Hurray! by odiroot · · Score: 1

      Now they have to teach Mars Lander to open the bottle!

    9. Re:Hurray! by Original+Replica · · Score: 1

      No astrobiology experiments.

      I was under the impression that Phoenix was equipped to detect organic compounds in the water vapor. Sure that's not about trying to grow terrestrial lichen or algae on Mars, but it's a good idea to see if there might be native microscopic life in the water/ice layer of Mars first. Just what sort of astrobiology experiments did you have in mind?

      --
      We are all just people.
    10. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now what?

      Now we build another probe to make extra sure there's water on mars.

    11. Re:Hurray! by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 1

      We move. Doh. :-)

      --
      Send your spendthrift head of state this
    12. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it really means that now we don't have to drag as much stuff with us when we finally do get sufficient testicular fortitude to get people out to Mars for exploration, perhaps settlement, etc etc.

      You = dumb. Testicular fortitude is one of the least important problems in getting to Mars. Something like keeping people alive in space for years rather than months is the REAL issue.

    13. Re:Hurray! by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 4, Funny

      We can't send them all of our tubes, I'm still in the middle of a download!

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    14. Re:Hurray! by NotmyNick · · Score: 0, Troll

      You = dumb. Testicular fortitude is one of the least important problems in getting to Mars. Something like keeping people alive in space for years rather than months is the REAL issue.

      You=teh FAIL. You have no balls, you mince about on what-ifs and never, ever have a hope of accomplishing anything.

      --
      Notmysig
    15. Re:Hurray! by Samah · · Score: 1

      Yet it's probably still cheaper to design, build, and transport expensive machinery to extract and purify the water than to buy your average bottled water.

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    16. Re:Hurray! by Penguinisto · · Score: 2, Informative

      Something like keeping people alive in space for years rather than months is the REAL issue.

      You mean like this, this, or perhaps this (to count just a few among literally thousands of projects dedicated to accomplishing exactly that)?

      Incidentally, the Russians have a HUGE volume of data on long-duration spaceflight, for periods that could conceivably cover an exploratory trip to Mars.

      ...and if you induce gravity for the majority of the trip (e.g. w/ centripetal motion), you actually discard the majority of the problems. The rest involves shielding from gamma/cosmic rays, taking along enough supplies (but water in sufficient quantities there would alleviate the majority of the burden - air, fuel, and water would take up the vast majority of the load anyway if you had to bring it all along).

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    17. Re:Hurray! by mjwx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Now we move to mars.

      Get your ass to Mars.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    18. Re:Hurray! by wylderide · · Score: 1

      First the ice -- Then Ice Pirates!

      --
      This is the best restaurant I ever eat in
    19. Re:Hurray! by j01123 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Now we move to mars. Naturally, we won't actually use or drink the readily available Martian water, but buy bottled water from earth instead.

      You've got it backwards. We bring the Mars water back here and sell it to gullible yuppies for 6 million dollars a bottle. Just tell them it's free of all of those earthly contaminants that cause cancer and wrinkles.

    20. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha.
      its so true

    21. Re:Hurray! by Godji · · Score: 1

      Get your arse to Mars.

      There, fixed it for you.

    22. Re:Hurray! by ghostmech · · Score: 0

      now we destroy mars just like we are destroying earth. join now!

    23. Re:Hurray! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      If your willing to wait a bit longer, we only need to send barley and acorns

      MIght be more difficult than that - some types of whiskey (Jack Daniel's, for instance) require NEW oaken barrels. Some (scotch) require USED oaken barrels.

      We wouldn't want to have to wait till JD opens a distillery on Mars to start distilling scotch whiskey there.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    24. Re:Hurray! by quax · · Score: 4, Informative

      Satellite surface penetrating radar measurements indicate a layer of almost pure ice with depth of up to 1.8 km in places. Lateral spherical distribution of what is most likely water ice with about 1000 km diameter has been observed in March 2007 around the south pole.

      Source (Sorry is German):

      http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-33791-9.html#backToArticle=569278

    25. Re:Hurray! by markov_chain · · Score: 3, Funny

      Awesome! Let's come up with a brand name. How about 'naive' backwards?

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    26. Re:Hurray! by wanted · · Score: 1

      1. Find water on Mars
      2. ???
      3. PROFIT!

    27. Re:Hurray! by mjwx · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just to be a pendant, I'm Australian and can speak english properly, I was attempting to show an Arnie accent witch doesn't place the "r" in arse as rightfully placed there in any version of the Queens English.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    28. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now what?

      SerchinNow beer!

    29. Re:Hurray! by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Now we have energy (sun) and water. We can make oxygen through electrolysis, food through hydroponics. Now Mars becomes definitely the best candidate for colonization in the solar system. Well, better than the moon anyway.

      Note that I say "now" but in fact it was already known that Mars had a lot of water ice from the European probe that scanned the Martian crust a few years ago.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    30. Re:Hurray! by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      That is something I have a hard time understanding. When NASA sends a robot rover that is representative of techs that exist since the Cold war, we tout it as a genius achievement even if all it does is dig a little hole that is not even 1 meter deep. When a German probe, however, scans the entire underground structure of Mars down to several kilometers deep, it looks less important and gets fewer coverage. Maybe it is time for the ESA to grow a PR department.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    31. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Advanced scouts have revealed an ancient structure in the Martian ice caverns. It appears there is an activation device that will enable blue skies on Mars.

      Source (Sorry is image):

      http://www.shortarmguy.com/total10.jpg

    32. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do we spend $420 million to directly "taste" water when it was fairly safe to say the water already existed? The marginal benefit of this proof is pretty much next to nothing given the cost, but hey--that's the way government works, right? What are we going to do with this water anytime soon? If we discover microscopic lifeforms on Mars I will be much happier, but the chances of that are incredibly small, and even from a philosophical perspective, it would not be very important.

    33. Re:Hurray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When a German probe, however, scans the entire underground structure of Mars down to several kilometers deep, it looks less important and gets fewer coverage.

      Nope. It sounds like you misread something, but I have no idea what, since there's no technology that could do that even theoretically and I'm entirely familiar with all the tech orbiting Mars at the moment (especially the SHARAD sounder).

    34. Re:Hurray! by quax · · Score: 1

      The purpose of the probe goes significantly beyond direct irrefutable proof of water on Mars. But you also need to understand that the other readings from orbit were with regards to hydrogen. All the large data collected on Mars indicate it was very wet in the past and that there still was water in form of ice - but science does not deal in conjecture. Proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is water and being versus certain that there is lots of it is a great achievement.

      Now if Phoenix can also carry out some more experiments to determine the soils chemistry that'll be all the better.

      In regards to the tax argument. Don't know if this makes you feel any better but given the federal debt burden most of the US expenditures are just baby steps closer to maxing out the national credit card so to speak. Also if my memory serves me right the Phoenix was at some point a scrapped mission although the orbiter was already build. NASA then - more by chance than design - could secure some additional payload on a rocket launched for another mission.

      So the Phoenix literally rose from the ashed and your monetary scorn is a bit misdirected at this particular mission.

      On a related note as a non-American with strong ties to your country I am happy about any positive news associated with the US. From a internationally political angle this is money well spend.

    35. Re:Hurray! by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1
      From http://www.sharad.org/index.php?page=instrument_description.php&UserSID=

      The primary scientific objective of the SHARAD investigation is to map, in selected locales, dielectric interfaces to depths of up to one kilometer in the martian subsurface and to interpret these interfaces in terms of the occurrence and distribution of selected materials, including rock, regololith, water and ice.

      Ok, not several kilometers, but up to one kilometer. On the entire surface of Mars. That's still better than a spoonful of "whatever rock we land on" of the Mars rover-like robots

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    36. Re:Hurray! by sharpmarble · · Score: 1

      now that's funny since the etymology of the English word "arse" is actually German from the word Arsch. This, of course came from the Hittite version "Arrash". Ah yes the good Queens German.... Hagelführer

    37. Re:Hurray! by mjwx · · Score: 1

      now that's funny since the etymology of the English word "arse" is actually German from the word Arsch. This, of course came from the Hittite version "Arrash". Ah yes the good Queens German.... Hagelführer

      Yes, English is the most evolved form of language.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    38. Re:Hurray! by sharpmarble · · Score: 1

      depends on who you ask...

    39. Re:Hurray! by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      now we find a way to launch approximately 40bn gallons of fine single-malt whisky to Mars.

      Why? You don't actually... put water *in* your whisky, do you? Sick bastard... you probably put ice in there, too. Admit it!

  5. Big deal... by Atreju · · Score: 5, Funny

    NASA found water on Mars over three years ago.

    1. Re:Big deal... by yincrash · · Score: 3, Funny

      Your modders obviously didn't click on your link.

    2. Re:Big deal... by akzeac · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I wonder how many times we'll keep seeing that picture every time water and Mars are mentioned. It was fun in 2005, and it hasn't aged well.

    3. Re:Big deal... by smolloy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I love that this has been moderated "+5 Interesting" :D

      Obviously lots of people moderating without clicking on the link.

    4. Re:Big deal... by Atreju · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's why i just LOVE this "serious" link pointing to nasa.gov. They really should put some more stuff like that to help people get modded up on slashdot.

    5. Re:Big deal... by Locke2005 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The modders DID click on the link, they just realized that modding it "funny" would spoil the surprise... I was going to post the same comment myself, but somebody else beat me to it. True, it is only funny the first time you see it, so it is an old joke to 90% of slashdotters.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    6. Re:Big deal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      it hasn't aged well.

      Neither does whine.

    7. Re:Big deal... by g0dsp33d · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I disagree, its like the in Solviet Russia, running linux or beowulf clusters jokes, you insensitive clod!

      --
      lol: You see no door there!
    8. Re:Big deal... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I had never seen it before.
      But yeah, it's lame.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Big deal... by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 1

      Interesting gives karma. Funny does not. Mods trying to be helpful, there.

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

    10. Re:Big deal... by RompeRatones · · Score: 0

      I always thought it was announced by the european space agency over four years ago

  6. Great! News by DallasMay · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well we know one place where the Housing bubble hasn't collapsed. The Deed I bought on MartianRealestate.com will finally go up in value. I purchased 3000 acres on the Martian polar regions. Now where to build my lake house...

    --
    I've given up on Slashdot's comment scores.
  7. Are we surprised? by g0bshiTe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seriously are we really that surprised we found water on Mars? Considering most of our galaxy is made up of the same compounds here on Earth, I wouldn't doubt if we found water on nearly all our planets, in one form or another.

    --
    I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    1. Re:Are we surprised? by 19Buck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously are we really that surprised we found water on Mars? Considering most of our galaxy is made up of the same compounds here on Earth, I wouldn't doubt if we found water on nearly all our planets, in one form or another.

      from our perspective here on earth we might seem to have an overabundance of water, but on a universal scale it's a fairly rare compound. After all, water can only exist in a limited number of states under a limited number of conditions.

    2. Re:Are we surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "After all, water can only exist in a limited number of states under a limited number of conditions."

      I am sure that water can be found in ALL 50 states to some extent, although it would be mostly salty in Utah, and Hawaii, and frozen (most of the time) in Alaska.

    3. Re:Are we surprised? by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Insightful
      from our perspective here on earth we might seem to have an overabundance of water, but on a universal scale it's a fairly rare compound.

      On the contrary: I'd guess that water is the most common compound in the Universe.

      The most abundant substance in the by far in the visible Universe is hydrogen. The second most abundant is helium. The third most abundant element in the Universe is oxygen, but in the presence of elemental hydrogen oxygen is unstable and reacts exothermically to produce water. Probably most of the oxygen not locked up inside stars is in water molecules.

      Liquid water is rare, I'll grant. But the Universe is absolutely riddled with water vapour and with ice.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    4. Re:Are we surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you say that water is a rare compound, do you mean to include ice?

      If, as certain theories would predict, it is asteriods and meteorites that have contributed all of earth's water (millions and millions of years of "rain" from the stars) then it would suggest that water should be common in early solar system formation.

      What would the earth look like without the moon and the impact that created the moon? Would we have the continents that we do today or would this planet be more like the one in "The Fifth Element" - covered in water?

      How much water is "out there", stored in great big "ice blocks" in the Oort cloud?

    5. Re:Are we surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "..from our perspective here on earth we might seem to have an overabundance of water, but on a universal scale it's a fairly rare compound. After all, water can only exist in a limited number of states under a limited number of conditions.."

      What are you talking about! H2O is everywhere in the Solar System. All the planets have it somewhere - bound to rock if nowhere else. Universally it's as common as muck.

      Your second point is even more confusing. Yes, LIQUID water can only exist under certain conditions. And yes, we would be surprised if we found lakes of it on Mars, knowing the conditions there. But they didn't find lakes - it was ICE they found. The OP was just using the word 'water' to mean H2O. So your point is.....???

    6. Re:Are we surprised? by 19Buck · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      elements that make up water != water. an ice crystal here or there != water water vapour in any nonsubstantive amount != water. Yes I was talking about liquid. Did I really need to specify that? course I did, this is karmawhoresincaaaahhh slashdot after all.

    7. Re:Are we surprised? by 19Buck · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      do I really need to explain this? Stop thinking like a scientist and think like a regular shlub. How many planets do we know of that have even a FRACTION of the water we have here on Earth? None? Exactly. Yes I know water is out there, yes I know there's tons of ice, ice vapor, blah blah blah. none of that means a THING to the purposes of life, if it's not liquid, relatively free of impurities and in a (or was in a) state similar to what we have here on earth.

    8. Re:Are we surprised? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      Floston Paradise!

      Obligatory useless fact: The song that Diva Plava Laguna sang was the "Mad Scene" from Donizetti's "Lucia di Lammermoor". When done well, it is a very intense opera (as was done in this performance by the up-and-coming soprano Manon Strauss Evrard).

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    9. Re:Are we surprised? by Mattsson · · Score: 1

      There's a very big difference between believing something and knowing something.

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
  8. It's not "real" by Sybert42 · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I'm a geek and all, but this is all inferred through instruments. I know the taste and feel of water. Humans and all other organisms have a built-in feel for H2O.

    1. Re:It's not "real" by carambola5 · · Score: 1

      Here's a jug of stuff that my instruments tell me is ricin. Why don't you go ahead and verify that for me?

      Of course it's real.

      --
      IWARS.
      People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
    2. Re:It's not "real" by nawcom · · Score: 0, Troll

      You remind me of the creationists who demand evidence they can feel in the palms of their hands because microscopic evidence under a microscope is never enough. I can see someone traveling to mars, getting some water for "you" to taste, and you not accepting the truth because it tastes different then the water that's been softened with sodium that you've grown up to know and love. I assume you are a member of the flat earth society too, no?

    3. Re:It's not "real" by treeves · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Humans and all other organisms have a built-in feel for H2O." So do FTIR spectrometers, TGAs, Karl Fischer titrators, and other instruments. You're obviously not a chemistry geek.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    4. Re:It's not "real" by Darby · · Score: 1

      Here's a jug of stuff that my instruments tell me is ricin. Why don't you go ahead and verify that for me?

      Is the jug painted hideously with a huge wing on the back?
      Does it have the -MOMFG-REALLY-FAST flag set?

      If you answered yes to either, than the stuff is ricin'. Otherwise, it's not.

  9. I, for one, welcome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    our aquatic martian overlords.

    -AC

  10. Mars... by Poromenos1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I still can't believe we sent a small robot and let it run around on *Mars*. It seems so unfathomably far away that I find it hard to even imagine...

    Next stop: Bacteria.

    --
    Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
    1. Re:Mars... by Kamokazi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There isn't any bacteria on Mars. Earth is the only planet that God chose to bless with life.

      I mean seriously, do you realize what kind of damage control the Roman Catholic Church would have to deal with after something like that? They have way to many altar boy molestation lawsuits to deal with.

      --
      As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
    2. Re:Mars... by sconeu · · Score: 1, Insightful

      We didn't. This is Phoenix. It's stationary.

      On the other hand, Spirit and Opportunity *are* running around on Mars.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re:Mars... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn right sir! The images from Phoenix are not real, NASA has faked the whole thing -- they made it in a movie studio, the same they used to shoot the Apollo landing. How did I discovered that? Look at the shadows, they make no sense at all!

    4. Re:Mars... by amliebsch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think he's talking about sending Earth bacteria to Mars to let them run around.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    5. Re:Mars... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Informative

      On the other hand, Spirit and Opportunity *are* running around on Mars.

      For very low values of "running".

      The rover has a top speed on flat hard ground of 5 centimeters (2 inches) per second.

      Which is approximately 0.1 miles per hour.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:Mars... by Poromenos1 · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, Spirit and Opportunity *are* running around on Mars.

      So, we did :)

      --
      Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
    7. Re:Mars... by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know you are trolling, but here is the truth: here is the truth about the Church and Extra Terrestrial Intelligent life forms.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    8. Re:Mars... by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 4, Funny

      For very low values of "running".
      The rover has a top speed on flat hard ground of 5 centimeters (2 inches) per second.
      Which is approximately 0.1 miles per hour.

      Are you kidding? That's sprinting for most slashdotters.

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    9. Re:Mars... by flewp · · Score: 1

      Ugh, I'm so sick of hearing this. It wasn't done in a movie studio or soundstage. Wake up. NASA's gone digital. It's all done in Maya and other FX packages these days.

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    10. Re:Mars... by Knuckles · · Score: 4, Informative

      You are confusing the roman catholic church with your run-off-the-mill protestant crackpot from the US. The roman catholic church has stated numerous times that they see no conflict between either extraterrestrial life or evolution and the church. E.g.,
      http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12628

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    11. Re:Mars... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your top speed on Mars is what?

    12. Re:Mars... by toQDuj · · Score: 1

      Well, the speed is ok, since the time it takes between you seeing a wall and the rover hearing your "STOP!!!" command is about an hour... Slow may be quite nice then

      --
      Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
    13. Re:Mars... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you are definitely confusing most U.S. churches with some other crack pot. There are very few here (close to 0%) that have problems with science or aliens or water on mars or whatever. Most things we are discovering still today are already in the Bible. Plenty of things (like DNA being a blueprint) are talked about in the Bible centuries before anyone had a microscope even close to capable of viewing it.

    14. Re:Mars... by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 1

      Well, the speed is ok, since the time it takes between you seeing a wall and the rover hearing your "STOP!!!" command is about an hour... Slow may be quite nice then

      Reminds me of the Austin Power's bit with the steamroller and the guard;-)

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    15. Re:Mars... by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      And you are definitely confusing most U.S. churches with some other crack pot. There are very few here (close to 0%) that have problems with science or aliens or water on mars or whatever. Most things we are discovering still today are already in the Bible. Plenty of things (like DNA being a blueprint) are talked about in the Bible centuries before anyone had a microscope even close to capable of viewing it.

      I see, so these 0% control the public discourse, curricula in schools, etc?

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
  11. "So what?" by damburger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...is what most people will think. Whilst this is of earth-shattering (well, mars-shattering) importance to a lot a scientists it isn't going to motivate Joe Public to commit any more tax money to the exploration of space, because they don't benefit from it themselves. This isn't a condition of human nature, this is a conscious choice by a significant portion of the population to never grow out of adolescent self obsession. People are told its good to be totally egotistical, and here is a product that will help you do that.

    So no, it won't boost interest in space exploration; everyone who will raise an eyebrow to this news is already interested in space. People who didn't care before now won't care now.

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    1. Re:"So what?" by Phairdon · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's unfortunate that Joe Public is such an idiot. Yes, he doesn't benefit directly from space exploration, but he has many indirect benefits.

      You have to be seriously ignorant to not see the benefit of the space program.

      Ever used a cordless power tool? A smoke detector? Modern water filtration? Infrared thermometer? Edible toothpaste (this one is now used for baby toothpaste and we probably all used it as babies)? Composite forceps in the delivery room? Global communications?

      Here is a kid friendly site that Joe Public might be able to comprehend
      http://techtran.msfc.nasa.gov/at_home.html

    2. Re:"So what?" by icegreentea · · Score: 1

      Well, still the question is, so what? What does the presence of water on Mars tell us. Not asking for what it can do, or what it will let us do, but what does it tell us? What can we learn from what, what new questions does it raise.

      Also, I want to meet this legendary Joe Public. Wanting to invest in things that probably will have more immediate or more significant payoffs seems to be incredibly human. You're turning the 'non sciency' people into a large monolithic blocks. Since they believe that there are better investments that don't involve Space Exploration, they are totally egotistic? Since they believe that given the state of the World right now, this news isn't THAT important to them, they suffer from 'adolescent self obsession'?

      I personally support Space Exploration. I know how small the NASA budget is, and the unlikelihood of anything else significant coming out of reassigning all of it to other areas, especially when you look at your ballooning military budget. I know that a good segment of the public appears to be apathetic to space exploration, or even basic science. But the misconceptions the public has of NASA budget isn't because their stupid or 'anti science'. It means their ignorant and should be informed. They don't believe that some random discovery about quantum effects is 'amazing'? That's ok. The whole friggin world probably went 'heh' when the laser was first created. Didn't stop it from being used in next to everything.

      Sorry, rant over. I just grinds on my nerves whenever a science article comes out, and people start talking about us, those who appreciate science, and the dirty stupid majority who is too dumb to understand the beauty/importance.

    3. Re:"So what?" by Turiacus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sick of these constant attacks on "Joe Sixpack". When was the last time you were consulted on NASA's budget ? Ordinary folks have no control over this.

      And what did you personally do to encourage congress to spend more of space exploration ? Probably nothing. (whining on slashdot doesn't count).

      I also disagree with the idea that nobody cares. I care, and I bet a lot of people here care too. I remember the record number of visitors pathfinder's website had at the time. You are certainly not alone in finding a robot driving around Mars more exciting than a bunch of guys bicycling in orbit. But I guess having a superiority complex is fun.

    4. Re:"So what?" by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's unfortunate that Joe Public is such an idiot. Yes, he doesn't benefit directly from space exploration, but he has many indirect benefits

      ...

      Ever used [...] Composite forceps in the delivery room?

      FWIW, I think if Joe Public has used composite forceps in the delivery room, we have larger problems than NASA funding. For one, we need to fix the healthcare system so that when my wife delivers her next child, it's an obstetrician, not Joe Public, prying the little rugrat out of her dilated vagoogoo.

      (My apologies to my as-yet-unconceived (I hope) second child).

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    5. Re:"So what?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and if they find some Oil?

    6. Re:"So what?" by damburger · · Score: 1

      I know that a good segment of the public appears to be apathetic to space exploration, or even basic science. But the misconceptions the public has of NASA budget isn't because their stupid or 'anti science'. It means their ignorant and should be informed. ... Sorry, rant over. I just grinds on my nerves whenever a science article comes out, and people start talking about us, those who appreciate science, and the dirty stupid majority who is too dumb to understand the beauty/importance.

      Information isn't hard to get. These days you would be hard pressed to find someone who couldn't figure out to type 'NASA' or 'Mars' into google. So if someone is uninformed, it is purely by choice.

      To me, 'willfully ignorant' is not significantly different from 'stupid'

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    7. Re:"So what?" by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Funny

      prying the little rugrat out of her dilated vagoogoo.

      (My apologies to my as-yet-unconceived (I hope) second child).

      As long as you are calling it a 'vagoogoo' you are to young to have a first child, never mind a second.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    8. Re:"So what?" by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      I wish I were that young again. I'm just exhausted and not able to functionally create humorous posts today.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    9. Re:"So what?" by Jaxoreth · · Score: 1

      You have to be seriously ignorant to not see the benefit of the space program.

      Ever used a cordless power tool? A smoke detector? Modern water filtration? Infrared thermometer? Edible toothpaste (this one is now used for baby toothpaste and we probably all used it as babies)? Composite forceps in the delivery room? Global communications?

      Dude! You forgot Velcro!

      --
      In general, it is safe and legal to kill your children. -- POSIX Programmer's Guide
    10. Re:"So what?" by rhombic · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      prying the little rugrat out of her dilated vagoogoo.

      (My apologies to my as-yet-unconceived (I hope) second child).

      As long as you are calling it a 'vagoogoo' you are to young to have a first child, never mind a second.

      As long as you are mistaking "to" for "too", you ought not be complaining about the spelling in other posts.

      --
      1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
    11. Re:"So what?" by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As long as you are mistaking "to" for "too", you ought not be complaining about the spelling in other posts.

      As long as you think vagoogoo is a simple mispelling you ought not to be posting in the first place.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    12. Re:"So what?" by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Wait, water on mars? Like out of a toilet?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    13. Re:"So what?" by bob.appleyard · · Score: 1

      NASA may have popularised Velcro, but did not invent it. Check this out.

      --
      How dare you be so modest!! You conceited bastard!!
    14. Re:"So what?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it have electrolytes?

    15. Re:"So what?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What we really need is for Joe Public's key source of information and inspiration to really "sell" the excitement in this. Rather than caring what BritParLinsey has done recently. It was mentioned in passing on the evening news tonight as "That robot thing that those space guys sent to the planet found water just like Evian!"

      It would of been better if they said something along the lines of "Scientists have found evidence that water exists on Mars. Shouldn't we be asking our politicians when we will be sending people to Mars now?"

      It is a perfect time to bring up this question considering its a Presidential election year. Of course the candididates will blow it off but at least it will be brought to the mind of Joe Public.

      I know, I know this probably will not work but people did get mildly excited when dubya mentioned it even though it was just hot air.

    16. Re:"So what?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe Joe Public has more immediate concerns than contributing to a space race ,and a limited budget ?

      But you want to tax him even more just because you get off thinking about visiting a schorched rock,in the name of science.

      Instead of making his life here on earth better you want him to invest in something that might never pay off.

      Advances in science may be achieved by flying to mars, but that's definitely NOT required. Think of all the things that were invented just here on earth.

    17. Re:"So what?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why don't you pay with your own money ?
      Or are substantial sacrifices on your part not "interesting" enough ?

      Calling everyone an adolescent selfish prick who does not want to contribute is immature, even....shall we say CHILDISH ???.

      I have the right to invest MY money in whatever I want,(at least I should have that right)and if I conclude that Mars is not worth my money , you have no right to take that away for the supposedly Greater Good.

    18. Re:"So what?" by damburger · · Score: 1

      The capitalisation of the word 'my' in response speaks volumes about your personality. The idea of a social contract, that perhaps your success might have been helped along the way by society, is deliberately excluded from your mind in order to justify your total egotism.

      You would likely not have the money (printed by the state, btw) in your bank (which doesn't get robbed every day because of the police) if it weren't for society providing clean water, universal education, and security.

      And then, you turn around, and arrogantly state that you owe society nothing. Yes, you are exactly like an adolescent and your post just proved it Mr. Coward.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    19. Re:"So what?" by msormune · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking ordering my next double scotch with some Martian rocks, baby!

    20. Re:"So what?" by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      There are wikipedia pages on various issues. Do you know all the nuances of the issues on Wikipedia? It's not hard to search wikipedia for it. If you don't know the nuances of the issues on wikipedia, you're "willfully ignorant" and not significantly different from "stupid".

      There are many issues to inform yourself on, and while space is high enough on your list, it is not high on theirs. You're arrogant enough to disparage those who prioritize their lives differently.

    21. Re:"So what?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm sick of these constant attacks on "Joe Sixpack". When was the last time you were consulted on NASA's budget ? Ordinary folks have no control over this.

      I don't know about you, but I'm consulted on the first Tuesday of every other November, like clockwork. Beyond that, I also can call up Joe Congressman whenever I want, and even if he wants to ignore me, he can't entirely escape my opinion if enough people share it.

  12. Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MTV ? by TheLazySci-FiAuthor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This will be remembered in the textbooks as one of the biggest discoveries in human history - and yet it will of course be presently overlooked by uninterested masses.

    Will humanity ever get past our predilections with ourselves?

    I can't fathom the significance of this event fully, and yet the public applause so well deserved is again, starkly absent.

    oh well - I think it's great at least, maybe I shouldn't care so much what the masses think or care about.

  13. Let me know..... by Beat+The+Odds · · Score: 0

    ...when they find beer there!!

  14. Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ant is there life in that water soil?

    And what a body of thy subject you say about?

  15. What about social life in bee hives? by Sybert42 · · Score: 0

    Well, if bees don't interest you, than why should "the masses"?

  16. Who knew? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...but this is the first time Martian water has been touched and tasted."

    I wasn't aware that Phoenix had a tongue. What will those NASA scientists come up with next??

  17. Only one thing to say by The-Pheon · · Score: 1

    Bring a Brita!! :)

    1. Re:Only one thing to say by hotdiggitydawg · · Score: 1

      Wait until they start bottling it. You think the stuff imported from Fiji is horrendously overpriced?

    2. Re:Only one thing to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But think of the "mouth feel" of Martian water!

  18. Quantum Fingerprints by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if we'll someday be able to look at the quantum state of the molecules, atoms and subatomic particles making up even pure water, to learn about its history. The way that we look at the chemical composition now, with more familiar instruments.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Quantum Fingerprints by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      I find it both hilarious and pathetic that this pseudoscience BS was modded interesting...

    2. Re:Quantum Fingerprints by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I find your idiotic post, that doesn't even bother to explain how quantum states cannot indicate the particle's history, completely unscientific. And not even funny. More like "empty bullshit".

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  19. water ICE by TheSync · · Score: 1

    It isn't water, it is water ICE. This is no big surprise, it has long been suspected that there is plenty of water ice on the Martian poles.

    What would be a surprise would be liquid water, even if it only exists deep below the surface (given the current atmospheric pressure).

    Life of any kind would be a real find, even if it is frozen bacteria, even if it is 8 million years old.

  20. Re:Measurements on a human level by SlashDev · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wasted tax dollars? I'm sure tax dollars are wasted on many idiotic programs than the geological survey of Mars. Space exploration is so important to understanding how the universe was formed, which in turn makes us understand how the earth was formed, which in turn makes us predict many events.

    --

    TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
  21. the oven was the clinching experiment by peter303 · · Score: 1

    They previously found something shiny, white, and hard. Small scrapings disappear after a few days by sublimination (solid evaportation). When a chunk of icy soil was put into an oven, then slowy heated, the thermometer got stuck at 0 degrees Celius for a while. This a science experiment done in junior high: heat a block of ice with a thermometer in it. The temperature rises until 0 degrees and stalls there until the ice is completely melted before rising again. Solid water has this phase change at this temperature.

  22. suspected? are you kidding? by speedtux · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Viking landers observed frost in the 70's. Mars obiters found huge amounts of water underground. Ice is clearly exposed in many photographs. Knowledge of ice and water on Mars goes way, way beyond "suspected". If detecting ice is all this mission yields, it's a big waste of money. This mission was intended to give detailed information about what's in the ice and soil, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

    The question for the last decade or two has been whether there is liquid water on Mars. Despite the low air pressure, even pure liquid water can exist in some places and times: aquifers, briny puddles and lakes, lakes enclosed in ice, etc.

    1. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That's Carbon dioxide ice, you insensitive clod.

    2. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by speedtux · · Score: 3, Interesting
    3. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by dedazo · · Score: 0

      Pure liquid water was never sampled by the Viking missions. The frost you refer to I assume are the pictures from the Utopia taken by the #2 lander. That wasn't pure water. Water vapor has been known to be in the Martian atmosphere for a long time. But that's true also for the higher levels of the Venus cloud cover, so it doesn't mean much in this context.

      Despite the low air pressure

      The average air pressure in Mars is about 7mb, which is comparable to the top of Everest.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    4. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by AJWM · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, no, the air pressure at the top of Everest is about 300mb. I suppose that's "comparable" to 7mb if by that you mean "one and a half orders of magnitude bigger than". The Martian air pressure does vary quite a bit (maybe +/- 2mb) seasonally as CO2 at the polar caps sublimates or freezes. It's higher also at the bottom of Mariner Valley, but I couldn't find a reliable number for it.

      --
      -- Alastair
    5. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by dedazo · · Score: 1

      Doh, I was thinking in mmHg, sorry.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    6. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by speedtux · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Pure liquid water was never sampled by the Viking missions.

      So? Who said it was? The new mission hasn't found "pure liquid water" either.

      The frost you refer to I assume are the pictures from the Utopia taken by the #2 lander. That wasn't pure water.

      Of course that was "pure water". What do you think it was?

      The average air pressure in Mars is about 7mb, which is comparable to the top of Everest.

      No, it's not. The pressure on top of Mt Everest is about 260mb. The boiling point of water on to of Mt Everest is 69C. On Mars, it's about 10C (meaning water doesn't just sublimate, it melts first).

    7. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If detecting ice is all this mission yields, it's a big waste of money.

      If only we had called you first! Fortunately, the members of the review board at JPL are much better judges of this than you are.

    8. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      The Viking landers observed frost in the 70's.

      The Vikings landed on Mars IN THE 70s?!? Damnit, they beat us to America by almost 500 years, and they beat us again to Mars by at least 50 years! Oh well fortunately in both cases most people don't know these guys were first..

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    9. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by speedtux · · Score: 1

      If only we had called you first! Fortunately, the members of the review board at JPL are much better judges of this than you are.

      The "review board" at JPL approved a mission to analyze Martian soil and soil chemistry, based on the known fact that there is water ice.

      But because the lander can't even dump a scoop of dirt into the bucket, they can't do any of their experiments and are trying to spin this as a big breakthrough.

      Phoenix is a big failure compared to its mission objectives.

    10. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phoenix is a big failure compared to its mission objectives.

      Phoenix's mission objectives are to: (1) study the history of water in the Martian arctic and (2) search for evidence of a habitable zone and assess the biological potential of the ice-soil boundary. They've pretty much nailed them.

    11. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phoenix's mission objectives are to: (1) study the history of water in the Martian arctic and (2) search for evidence of a habitable zone and assess the biological potential of the ice-soil boundary. They've pretty much nailed them.

      Phoenix's mission objectives are to carry out the experiments it was designed to carry out. Many of those experiments have serious technical failures: TEGA and MECA can't be used for most of the experiments because they can't get fresh soil in and because of shorts and MARDI failed completely.

      People have been able to get some useful results: soil pH, microsocopic examination of soil particles, and a few others, but on the whole, the mission is in trouble.

    12. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, MECA has already achieved almost all it's goals for success. It analyzed one sample in the wet cell lab without trouble, which provided a lot of information about the mineral composition of the soil, exactly as it was supposed to. They don't expect any trouble delivering three more samples to the wet cells. It's imaged several samples through the optical microscope, and I believe yesterday was the planned first observation of a sample with the atomic force microscope. The soil thermal and conductivity probe is operating fine and has taken several readings. The weather station and LIDAR are working perfectly. The cameras are working perfectly.

      The MARDI issue came up before launch, and a decision was made and approved to eliminate its observations, which aren't a huge deal since they were able to use the radar to perform it's primary function and MRO to do 90% of its secondary function. Remaining MARDI funds were actually transferred to the MSL, which needs all the resources it can get.

      TEGA is the only instrument having trouble, but even that isn't insurmountable. The cause of the short was identified and should be mitigated. They've had no more trouble with it. The doors are a pain in the neck, but not insurmountable. The ovens themselves are working fine. Yes, they'll have to be sure to take lessons away from these problems, but every attempt looks better.

    13. Re:suspected? are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They haven't been able to get any fresh soil and ice into the lander at all. That means none of the experiments have been working on what they were supposed to be working on.

      It's nice that they have still been able to get some science out of it, but this is not a success.

      NASA really needs to figure out how to design better, more robust systems.

  23. A bit far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now if they could only find water in Tucson, where the press release was issued.

  24. Gold on Mars by halsver · · Score: 1

    Now that would spark some interest.

    Or maybe: "NASA discovers naturally occurring beer on Mars!"

    --
    Roughly half my comments are never submitted. You may be reading the better half...
    1. Re:Gold on Mars by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      That's not beer, it's Martian Jabra water.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
  25. Anybody check the concentration of deuterium? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet it's high. Clear evidence that the al-Qaeda is developing WMDs on Mars! I bet they're well stockpiled there by now, what with all the bombs they moved there from Iraq.

  26. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by Dynedain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This will be remembered in the textbooks as one of the biggest discoveries in human history

    No it won't, because water is a fairly common molecular arrangement. Electricty, atomic power, Earth being round, these are things that qualify as the biggest discoveries. In 10 years this particular incident of the rover will be forgotten, and in 100 years, the rover itself will be a historical footnote. How much do textbooks cover the Apollo program other than #11 and #13?

    Less than 100 years ago, people believed that Mars had canals full of water. Then with better optics people realized that no, those trenches, causing an extreme belief swing the other way - that Mars must be bone dry, any water having long since evaporated. Of course that ignores the polar ice caps which spectrography can easily identify.

    We've finally come into direct contact with H20 on Mars' surface rather than simply remote identification. While a milestone, it's a pretty damn tiny one. It will not be remembered in textbooks. Look how results of the Venus expeditions of the 70s are now glossed over.

    --
    I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  27. Marketing by copponex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People are curious by default. But you can't make money on reveling in scientific breakthroughs. Since money is the only measure of success in our culture, R&D that doesn't directly translate into more capital is ignored and often ridiculed, though almost all real breakthroughs are performed through the state sector (through funding to universities or even directly by DARPA).

    Billions upon billions are spent convincing people to buy products they don't need with money they don't have. It's all fun and games until the currency crashes and the environment is left in ruins.

    1. Re:Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since money is the only measure of success in our culture

      That's only true if you make it true

  28. Who's really being self obsessed? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
    I think the scientists are really being self obsessed here.

    Why the hell should anyone care if there is water on Mars or not? A few scientists get their thrills about this, but why should they think that the rest of the people should get excited and spend money on this when there are far more meaningful and useful things to be spending money on and getting excited about. NASA has been spending huge amounts of money for 50 years now and we really have nothing useful to show for space research. Sure we have satellite technology but that's hardly the result of sending people to the moon or sending probes to Mars.

    Even if Mars is shown to have bacteria and dinosaur fossils... so what. You can prove that life existed on Mars and that still does not change what is important on earth.

    For example, we don't know much about our own oceans and those are far more important to us as a source of food, minerals etc.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Who's really being self obsessed? by the_weasel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For example, we don't know much about our own oceans and those are far more important to us as a source of food, minerals etc.

      [sarcasm]Absolutely. We should immediately stop space research entirely and focus ALL of our efforts on the oceans. I can't believe no one is looking into this subject already.[/sarcasm]

      I care if there is water on Mars. With the advent of nuclear and biological weapons, we now have the power to significantly fuck up our living space. Hell - one of these days there will be another asteroid strike.

      It would be nice to know if humans can be self sufficient in places other than earth. That won't happen tomorrow, but it won't happen at all if we don't research it.

      I don't know if you have looked up lately, but it turns out the universe is an awfully big place. We should probably look around a bit.

      --
      - sarcasm is just one more service we offer -
    2. Re:Who's really being self obsessed? by Turiacus · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't be republican by any chance ? The whole "Why should we subsidize intellectual curiosity?" thing ?

      I you admit the principle of public funding for science, then I think every areas should deserve equal support. There is no reason why we should support paleontology, particle physics, genetics, etc... but not space science.

      As for your argument on low return, I think it is misguided. You can't put everything in the same basket. Most of the money has been spent on human spaceflight which IMHO has teached us nothing and hasn't gotten us any closer to the goal of affordable space travel.

      I don't known what the total budget for unmanned scientific missions is, but it is not that big and the return has been enormous.

      Take solar system exploration. Practically all our knowledge about the solar system comes from space probes. Just look at the wikipedia pages on the planets and major moons. Most of the information there comes from space probes.

      Or take astronomy. Chandra, Compton and Spitzer revolutionized our understanding of the universe.

      As for the practical usefulness, I find your comment funny because I don't think paleontology (on earth), which you don't seem to object too, has much practical applications.

      Of course, I don't think we should only fund research that has a potential for practical applications, but that's another debate.

      Anyway, I do think solar system research has a lot of practical uses. Mostly because a better understanding of the solar system leads to a better understanding of the earth. The problem with understanding the Earth is that there is only one. You can learn a lot if you have the opportunity to compare it with similar yet different bodies. Studying the climate of Venus for example will help us better understand Earth's climate. Just like studying the hydrocarbon cycle of Titan, the volcanism of Io, or the interaction of Mars's atmosphere with the solar wind will yield new insights.

      Oh, about the ocean thing. I don't know where this myth comes from but oceanography is far from underfunded. Look at what NOAA or Scripps is doing. They have pretty solid research programs.

    3. Re:Who's really being self obsessed? by Turiacus · · Score: 1

      I agree with the importance on space exploration, if for no other reason than the fact that:
      - we can do it
      - it is interesting

      But I must disagree with the whole "OMG we must settle outside Earth NOW or we will die" argument, which seems very popular around here.

      First, it would be simpler not to destroy Earth. Anf if we are stupid enough to destroy Earth, it won't be long before we destroy Mars as well. So resettling only pushes the problem further.

      Second, every rock in the solar system besides Earth is inhospitable. Even a big asteroid strike or a major nuclear war will not kill everyone; and it will still be easier to leave in a hole on earth that in a hole on mars.

      Third, the whole asteroid scare is great movie material but has no basis in reality. It would be trivial for a moderate annual budget to track asteroids and to develop ways to deflect them. When a big one will be in view, we will have several decades to push it out of the way. Note also that large impacts are rare, and no more likely on Earth than anywhere else we might choose to live.

      Finally, I think nuclear disarmament is not an impossible goal. Altough it will take a while.

    4. Re:Who's really being self obsessed? by the_weasel · · Score: 1

      Ah. I never said we must settle outside earth NOW. Only that it was a goal which made sense to pursue. I personally doubt we will see a significant human presence outside our own atmosphere for at least 100 years.

      Nevertheless, I think as a species it makes a pretty compelling long term goal - the same way I feel having the data for my company backed up and stored offsite is a pretty smart move.

      I agree with your first two points, but the purpose of my post was to respond to the "what practical good is exploring mars" tone from the original post, so I focused on practical reasons.

      --
      - sarcasm is just one more service we offer -
  29. Science education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In the meantime, Chinese kids and other kids from developing countries are looking with awe and go on to study math and science.

    A generation from now, when they are the leaders of the World, our children will wonder why they're sweeping up after the assembly robots - Chinese will move their manufacturing over here because of our cheap labor. After all, they'll be busy inventing things and exploring space while we're watching the latest reality shit on TV.

    I blame the educators for making such a fascinating subject dull and harder than it has to be. Why, I really didn't understand derivative and integral calculus until I took Physics. A derivative is velocity?! Cool! And its derivative is acceleration?!? Awesome! And the integral of velocity is distance?!?! I have a hard-on!

    Why does it have to be taught on its own? Calculus was invented for science and teaching it as a separate subject just makes it completely abstract and a mechanical wrote type of process.

    That's just one example of how science education is this society needs to be updated, revamped, or whatever you want to call it. And I'm really glad that girls are being encouraged more to enter those fields.

    1. Re:Science education by jgarra23 · · Score: 1

      I blame the educators for making such a fascinating subject dull and harder than it has to be.

      Are you talking about Linux zealots here?

    2. Re:Science education by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      They'll be the leaders of the world regarding industry, technology (maybe not innovation/R&D), businessish stuff like commerce and all that, but it takes so much more than being an economic super-power to achieve cultural supremacy. 40 years from now China may be the top dog, but everybody will still watch American movies. Their culture will have a very tough time imposing itself, and I don't think China's reign will last long enough for it to happen even remotely. Besides, you don't want to hear China's eventual Britney Spears, there's just too much hostility towards a culture as different as theirs.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    3. Re:Science education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What American movies? Don't you mean Canadian movies? The US outsourced most of its entertainment business over a decade ago.

    4. Re:Science education by Magada · · Score: 1

      Bwahahaha. A rag-tag mix of all the world's outcast creeds and populations, with a "history" of barely four centuries is going to dominate Earth's most ancient civilization - on cultural grounds, no less. Do tell.

      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
    5. Re:Science education by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      Popular culture. Sounds like a no-brainer to me that a young, melting-pot culture would be far better placed to churn out popular culture for the world than an ancient, more insular culture.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    6. Re:Science education by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Bwahahaha. A rag-tag mix of all the world's outcast creeds and populations, with a "history" of barely four centuries is going to dominate Earth's most ancient civilization - on cultural grounds, no less. Do tell.

      1895 just called, they want their scepticism back.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    7. Re:Science education by Magada · · Score: 1

      Of course! That's exactly why anglo culture didn't go anywhere!

      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
  30. Human condition by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This isn't a condition of human nature, this is a conscious choice by a significant portion of the population to never grow out of adolescent self obsession.

    Actually, I'd rather spend the majority of my resources on my children, which is probably a trait shaped by evolution to become part of the human condition. If you can send a mission to Mars without impacting my kids' education, future debt, or well-being, I'd completely support it.

    1. Re:Human condition by damburger · · Score: 1

      Compare the cost of the Vision for Space Exploration, the Iraq war, and how much people with children care about those two things, and you'll realise that isn't a sensible position to take.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    2. Re:Human condition by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      And through evolution we have developed societies, whose job it has become to look further ahead than the next meal.
      So support it.

    3. Re:Human condition by quax · · Score: 1

      No insult meant but you either don't have very much disposable income or you seem to plan to spoil your children. I intend to offer a 1st class education to my children if they are so inclined but after that they will need to be able to support themselves. Don't see how anything material beyond education will be of much benefit.

    4. Re:Human condition by shinier · · Score: 1

      Funding a mission to Mars *is* spending resources on your children. And their children, and their children...

  31. Not so much by Locke2005 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is momentous only because it finally proves that sustainable human life is possible on Mars. However, since Mars is sadly lacking a Magnetosphere, the fact that water and oxygen are available there isn't as useful as we would like it to be. Hmm... how hard is it to build a dome that blocks out all harmful cosmic radiation, yet still lets in the sunlight necessary for photosynthesis? Since any Terran originated life on Mars would require a pressurized dome anyway, how big a win is a Martian colony over a lunar or asteroid belt colony? Seems the only advantage of Mars is earth-like gravity, which is also a disadvantage if you ever want to leave the colony...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Not so much by H0p313ss · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is momentous only because it finally proves that sustainable human life is possible on Mars.

      It proves no such thing. It only hints at the possibility.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    2. Re:Not so much by rbanffy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "How hard is it to build a dome that blocks out all harmful cosmic radiation"

      You don't build a dome. You dig a cave. You use nuclear or solar power to light lamps and let plants use that light instead of sunlight. You could also use mirrors, but you would need a lot of them because Mars is farther from the Sun than we are and Earth plants evolved for earthly amounts of light.

      Alternatively, if you really want a dome, you could build two and fill them with water. Then, if you are really clever, you can build the two domes in a way that concentrates the sunlight in a smaller area giving the plants both light and radiation protection. Sounds like an interesting architectural project.

    3. Re:Not so much by TheLazySci-FiAuthor · · Score: 1

      I had an idea once. It was a "jump to conclusions" mat.

      But also I had an idea about the Martian magnetosphere - or lack thereof: http://thelazysci-fiauthor.blogspot.com/2007/04/ding.html

      what do you all think? :)

    4. Re:Not so much by rbanffy · · Score: 1

      Loved it. Really good.

  32. Re:Big deal... (Corrected Link) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Corrected Link: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap050720.html

    ----

    I have mod points and I know how to use 'em

  33. Significance by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is there any particular scientific significance to the discovery of water on Mars that isn't related to the possibility of discovering extraterrestrial life? I firmly believe that extraterrestrial life does not exist (and never has), so everybody else's excitement about it gets a little old after awhile. Is there another reason I should be excited about this?

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    1. Re:Significance by Vukovar · · Score: 1

      I don't understand how you can say that - if the universe is in a constant (albeit slow) state of change, and buying the theory that the universe is endless, I don't see how there couldn't be life in some form (not necessarily as we know it) in existence elsewhere. Scientific theroy isn't icon-clad - it stays a valid theory until something comes along that invalidates it. While probably unlikely that you're going to find the remnants of some ancient form of life on Mars, water is an essential building block for the existence of life (again, as we currently know it). What if the orbit of Mars was similar to that of earth at one time, and Mars was exposed to a similar set of circumstances that brought the process of life to earth (going from the scientific approach, not the opposing biblical version)? Would not the discovery mean something then? Better yet, what if the discovery of water there invalidates some long-standing scientific theory? Could it not then force some new way of thinking?

    2. Re:Significance by nawcom · · Score: 0, Troll

      I firmly believe that extraterrestrial life does not exist

      I don't care if you believe that the tooth fairy lives in everyone's rectum. The remaining skeptics will take evidence as evidence (in this case, that the water on mars we saw from space is in fact real water), for belief only requires the delusional confidence of one's self.

      Optimism is something completely different however. I can say I'm a skeptic who is optimistic about extraterrestrial life, yet accepts the fact that there is evidence lacking.

    3. Re:Significance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well maybe not for you, but hey why don't just skip over this article and find something you would rather be interested in? Just saying...

    4. Re:Significance by rhennigan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I firmly believe that extraterrestrial life does not exist (and never has)

      Around here we tend to rely on evidence and not beliefs.

    5. Re:Significance by dedazo · · Score: 1

      Like Carl Sagan once said, we humans are carbon chauvinists. We want life in other planets/places to be similar to the stuff we have here on Earth, and water is an agreeable medium for most carbon-based organisms (and compounds) to thrive on.

      So if you find liquid water, it follows that you might also find something that approaches life in or near it.

      I firmly believe that extraterrestrial life

      Look up at the night sky some time and try to wonder if all that is there just to look pretty to us elite chosen ones.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    6. Re:Significance by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      The main significance of this discovery is that we now have something to add to Martian single-malt whiskey (known locally as "Martch").

    7. Re:Significance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I firmly believe that extraterrestrial life does not exist (and never has)

      Around here we tend to rely on evidence and not beliefs.

      I guess you're not American then, eh?

    8. Re:Significance by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

      Life is just a random arrangement of amino acids, which naturally form when enough lightning hits basic chemicals. You should look into the experiments Carl Sagan did in the 1970s.

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    9. Re:Significance by AceofSpades19 · · Score: 1

      So you believe out of the entire universe there is not even bacteria on a planet besides earth and in the whole time the universe has been around either? as unlikely as extraterrestrial life is, IMHO, thats more unlikely

    10. Re:Significance by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "I firmly believe that extraterrestrial life does not exist (and never has)"

      well, that's the smallest minded thing I have ever read on /.

      Wow, such hubris.

      I mean, you are ignoring the fact that there is water on another planet, nutrients in the soil of another planet, but refuse to consider that somewhere else there might be life of some kind?
      Everything needed for there to be something out there have been found on other bodies.

      But you refuse to consider that in the billions of years this universe has existed life could have been somewhere else.

      such a small mind.

      This could mean we could build a sustaining building on mars. Of course we can't have that becasue that would mean there will be extraterrestrial life on mars... former earthling and there descendants.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    11. Re:Significance by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

      Around here we tend to rely on evidence and not beliefs.

      The only evidence we have right now is that intelligent life has never existed in this galaxy prior to us. See: The Fermi Paradox.

      It's not ironclad proof, obviously, but it's far more evidence than we have for the existence of other intelligent life, which is absolutely none.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    12. Re:Significance by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      I don't understand how you can say that - if the universe is in a constant (albeit slow) state of change, and buying the theory that the universe is endless...

      It's simple: I reject your assumptions. :-)

      What if the orbit of Mars was similar to that of earth at one time, and Mars was exposed to a similar set of circumstances that brought the process of life to earth (going from the scientific approach, not the opposing biblical version)? Would not the discovery mean something then?

      Nope. I mean, sure, finding water is cool and all, but that's not life.

      Better yet, what if the discovery of water there invalidates some long-standing scientific theory? Could it not then force some new way of thinking?

      Well, this was the whole point of my original question. Was there some long-standing theory that the discovery of water on Mars invalidates? How does this change our understanding of the universe? So far I haven't seen any indication that it does.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    13. Re:Significance by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      Well maybe not for you, but hey why don't just skip over this article and find something you would rather be interested in? Just saying...

      Because maybe there is something interesting here, other than the possibility of extraterrestrial life. That's what I was asking about. If not, then I'll skip over it (and any similarly uninteresting articles in the future).

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    14. Re:Significance by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      So you believe out of the entire universe there is not even bacteria on a planet besides earth and in the whole time the universe has been around either?

      That's correct.

      as unlikely as extraterrestrial life is, IMHO, thats more unlikely

      You're welcome to keep looking, of course, but I respectfully disagree with your opinion. Let me know if you find anything.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    15. Re:Significance by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      But you refuse to consider that in the billions of years this universe has existed life could have been somewhere else.

      No, I've considered it, and reached a conclusion that differs from yours. Show me some evidence - ANY evidence - to support your belief, and I'll be happy to reconsider.

      This could mean we could build a sustaining building on mars. Of course we can't have that becasue that would mean there will be extraterrestrial life on mars... former earthling and there descendants.

      Of course I didn't mean that life that originated on Earth couldn't live on other planets. I wouldn't even rule out that there's something alive out there right now - some microscopic organism that hitched a ride on a spacecraft or probe or something, that somehow managed to survive. That would definitely be interesting.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    16. Re:Significance by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      You know, it occurs to me that there's potentially a very simple solution to a large chunk 'dark matter' problem and to the Fermi Paradox; that Dyson Spheres are incredibly common and that around 70% of the stars have been wrapped in them already. The rest might have been left by the first-wave civilisations to evolve new life, or might simply not have been reached yet, or be unsuitable or uninteresting for use in one way or another.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    17. Re:Significance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is this evidence of ET that you speak of?

    18. Re:Significance by rk · · Score: 1

      It's an interesting idea, but we'd probably detect the resulting IR emissions from them as the energy collected, used and transformed would have to radiate out sooner or later. Unless you want to hypothesize some sort of perfect energy storage mechanism for them too. But now your solution isn't so simple.

  34. How many billions were spent? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Just to prove common sense?

    Sure space is cool.. and so are the expeditions.. But we could have done something even more cool on the mission if we went out there looking for what everyone knew was there.

    Hell, by now we could have people running around on Mars instead of wasting it on finding water.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:How many billions were spent? by geekoid · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nobody 'knew' is was there. Now we do.

      Yes, we could ahve people on mars by now, but there isn't a real budget for it, so we send the specific mission robots.

      When we are ready to build something their, we will send people.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:How many billions were spent? by damburger · · Score: 1

      "Common sense" is a form of highly parallel reasoning based in comparing current situations to previous ones. It is therefore useless for determining what is on planets never visited by man. For that, we need science. It works, bitches.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    3. Re:How many billions were spent? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      I disagree, in this case common sense is not useless.

      Comparing 2 things of rather similar history, proximity and makeup and making a common sense conclusion based on that is good enough.

      Sort of like you don't need to see a female bleed to determine they are similar to a male in biological function.

      Or that the surface of mercury is hot due to its closeness to the same sun.

      Its all common sense logic.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:How many billions were spent? by damburger · · Score: 1

      The surface temperature of Mercury being higher because its closer to the Sun isn't 'common sense' its fucking maths. Trying to apply common sense to scientific problems is anti-intellectual.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    5. Re:How many billions were spent? by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Or that the surface of mercury is hot due to its closeness to the same sun.

      Venus just called, they beg to differ on what you call 'hot'.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
  35. Re:Nb4 by twotailakitsune · · Score: 1, Funny
    no need. Bush already wants us to go to mars.

    It is the stupid democrats that don't want to upset the Martians: where ever they are now. They are afraid that the Martians will be unhappy if we take their land.

    The Martians have not used their land in years: A lot of years.

    I am tired of the democrats doing their stupid appeasement. 10 years-ago it was Saddam Hussein, next it was North Korea, Iran, and now it is the Martians!

    The universe is a harsh thing to live in. If they are not willing to fight for their land then it should be taking from them.

    (funny)

  36. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by kaiser423 · · Score: 1

    uh, it's not a rover. It doesn't rove.

    it landed there and sits there.

  37. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Its not a great event. It only proved what everyone already knew, both by theory and common sense.

    We are all made from the same building blocks, so on a rather similar planet, not so far away from us, finding water there is not really that amazing of a event. ( cool yes, amazing, no )

    To me, when we find primitive life there it will be the same sort of "well, no kidding there is some sort of life there"..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  38. only water? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    any Oil? dang it

  39. water ice not previously "suspected" by katakomb · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just to reiterate a point that a few others have made: the presence of water ice at the surface of Mars has been understood since at least the 1970's for high latitudes. This goes for parts of the polar caps (also made up of CO2 ice), and the seasonal frosts that are known to coat the very study area visited by the Phoenix lander.

    Here's a snippet from an abstract of an article from 1982 (Journal of Geophysical Research, 87:367-370): "A new reflectance spectrum of the Martian north polar cap is analyzed, and it shows water ice absorption features. This evidence confirms the result of the Viking IRTM and MAWD experiments, which indicate that the north residual polar cap of Mars is composed of water ice during the season observed." The Viking 2 lander directly saw seasonal frost in the late 70's, as the Phoenix lander will in the coming months: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/jplhistory/captions/vikinglander-t.php

    The Phoenix results are new in that ice has been directly confirmed for shallow regolith ("soil") materials at the Phoenix site (as opposed to spectroscopically identified from orbit or from the Earth). This is a nice and important result, but is not a huge surprise (the site is known to be seasonally coated with water-ice frosts, and its sediments are distributed in a polygonal pattern that is analogous to what we see at high latitudes on Earth where freeze-thaw action dominates).

    Phoenix is a great mission, but let's also give due credit to earlier workers.

    1. Re:water ice not previously "suspected" by geekoid · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, there where ice absorption features, and indications.

      Phoenix also found out that there are nutrients in the soil.
      Yes, the soil could grow plants.

      This is huge, plant supporting material found on another planet.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  40. Department by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    from the so-val-kilmer-can-breathe-easy dept.

    Val Kilmer? Don't you mean Dan Quayle?

    "Mars is essentially in the same orbit ... Mars is somewhat the same distance from the Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals, we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If oxygen, that means we can breathe."
    -- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1989-08-11 (reported in Esquire, 1992-08)

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  41. Re:life on mars by daveime · · Score: 1

    I suppose they could go and join all the looneys holed up in bomb shelters who believed the world was going to end at the turn of the millenium.

    But really, in a potentially infinite universe (and of course no one can yet say it ISN'T infinite seeing as the universe is not only expanding, but that expansion is accelerating also), anything is possible.

    I can't see how anyone can DENY the fact the we cannot be alone in the universe, and that the whole thing is just so Adam and Eve had something pretty to look at at night.

  42. Re:Measurements on a human level by rbanffy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Must... resist... Iraq... comparison...

  43. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by rbanffy · · Score: 1

    "No it won't"

    The Martians of the future may disagree with you.

    Obviously, they will have to exist, before they disagree. But water makes it a lot more likely.

  44. Total Recall by WebmasterNeal · · Score: 0

    Now we just need Governor Arnold to place his hand on that weird control panel to melt all of that martian ice and give the planet an atmosphere.

    --
    "During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
  45. So what! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares about water? We have plenty of that here! Phoenix should be looking for Martian babes with green skin, a third breast on their back (for slow dancing), and whose only concept of clothes is some kind of thong bikini...

  46. Sort of, but not really by iamlucky13 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Overall, we're not surprised. Scientists have been pretty sure there was subsurface ice there for several years based on ground-penetrating radar on one of the orbiters. Confirming this was a major goal of Phoenix. There weren't a lot of other good explanations for all that hydrogen detected by radar, but that still wasn't considered proof. Nor even were the images of the bright, ice-like material uncovered earlier in the Phoenix mission. Also, we already knew for quite a while about water vapor on Mars, but the next question was about large quantities of surface water.

    The Phoenix team was a little surprised by exactly how it occurred, however. Because ice sublimates on Mars once exposed, they had to get the sample into the TEGA oven relatively quickly. It ended up being even stickier than previous samples (possibly due to melting of the ice by friction from the rasp) and didn't fall properly from the scoop into the oven. By the time the results were received, analyzed, and a conclusion reached, they considered the sample already spoiled, but because some likely made it into the oven, the oven was also "contaminated," which affects the accuracy of measuring relative abundance. So they managed to dump the "ruined" sample into the oven to compare it to the last "ruined" sample, but found there was water in it anyways. Unfortunately, because of the sublimation, this still doesn't give them the relative abundance. It also, as far as I know, was only inferred so far by calorimetry. In the next day or two, they should get spectroscopy results back, which will be even better verification.

    Because of all this, they're going to spend some more time practicing and polishing their delivery method so they can get a truly fresh sample into the ovens. They've got 6 empty ovens left, although there might be a problem with the doors on some or all of them.

    1. Re:Sort of, but not really by geekoid · · Score: 1

      They also watched it sublimate. Since only water can go from solid to gas, it's a pretty good test.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Sort of, but not really by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      They also watched it sublimate. Since only water can go from solid to gas, it's a pretty good test.

      Err... no, water isn't the only thing.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    3. Re:Sort of, but not really by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Since only water can go from solid to gas

      Apparently *someone* has never played with dry ice...

  47. Not only that by geekoid · · Score: 1

    but the determined the soil has the nutrients need to support plants.

    Of course the atmosphere is sucky.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  48. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by geekoid · · Score: 2, Funny

    Could we send a Rove?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  49. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by amohat · · Score: 1

    Pay my rent for awhile and maybe I'll have the time to care about something other than coming up with next month's rent.

    Oops, I meant the next bag of groceries. Or tank of gas.

    Joe Public is plenty smart and curious and altruistic. Too bad 'he' spends all day stressed out over losing the rat race, and all night poisoning 'himself' to counter the stress.

    Luckily, some of us still can give a damn about shit that has zero effect on our lives. Most don't care how many angels are on your fancy pin.

    Personally, I'm amazed that we can go to mars but Apple can't get my iPhone to stop crashing, after dedicating obscene amounts of time and money to the effort.

  50. Re:Measurements on a human level by urcreepyneighbor · · Score: 1

    Space exploration is so important to understanding how the universe was formed

    Devil's Advocate: Then pay for it your damn self.

    --
    "The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
  51. old news... by philo_enyce · · Score: 1

    Coke-Sponsored Rover Finds Evidence Of Dasani On Mars

    March 24, 2004 | Issue 40â12

    PASADENA, CAâ"The Coca-Cola-sponsored Real Rover has discovered evidence that the surface of Mars was once partially covered by free-flowing Dasani, scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory announced Monday.

    http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30505

    --philo

  52. Wonderful... by mpthompson · · Score: 1

    now we have something to water the asparagus with.

  53. Re:life on mars by neko+the+frog · · Score: 1

    Well from my take on the posting it's not the fact that we found water on Mars, it's the fact that we found a horse.

    --
    -- the opinions stated above aren't those of my employer. in fact, they're probably not even my own. you know what, ju
  54. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will humanity ever get past our predilections with ourselves?

    Probably not, since there are bigger problems here on Earth than whether water exists on Mars. Seriously, does anyone in the know really regard this as news? There have been strong suspicions that Mars harbours water since Percival Lowell first pointed his telescope at the red planet. Wake me when they find bacteria.

  55. Now can they finally answer my question? by T3Tech · · Score: 1

    Clearly, this has long been suspected, but now Martian water's been (in the words of William Boynton, lead scientist for the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer) "touched and tasted."

    What flavor is it?!?

    The potential investors for my Martian Water Ice chain are really going on about this and just have to know before they will release the VC funds.

    --
    Of course I didn't RTFA... why would I do that? You really are new here aren't you? Don't let my UID fool you.
  56. Coca Cola lander found water on Mars years ago... by jberg_13 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Coke-Sponsored Rover Finds Evidence Of Dasani On Mars http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30505 Is it scary, that, upon reading this article, all I could think of was this Onion article, published in 2004?

  57. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are 100% correct, esp about the Venus missions.

    I watched a doco in which the Russian scientists were talking about the Venus missions and how they knew that many forms of instrumentation would simply not survive the atmospheric conditions, so they decided to stick as many cameras as they could get away with on the Venera vehicles. The guy they interviewed described what they had to do to get away with this, such as refering to certain cameras as "photon detectors","EM radiation monitors" etc...was good to know that even Russian scientists had a sense of humour.

  58. Re:Amazing! Unprecidented!...I wonder what's on MT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...you can spell "predilections" but not "unprecedented"? Weird.

  59. Liquid water? by christurkel · · Score: 1

    Was it liquid water they found or water ice?

    --

    CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
  60. I bet the French get there first by NCG_Mike · · Score: 2, Funny

    It'll be Evian or Volvic who leverage the new market! Probably Volvic, if Olympus Mons yields a source :-)

  61. Re:Measurements on a human level by CraftyJack · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Devil's Advocate: Then pay for it your damn self.

    In that case, I for one would like my Iraq money back so that I can transfer it to NASA.

  62. no, not the first! by ben2umbc · · Score: 1

    Until the martians blow up earth for stealing all its water for the purpose of bottling and selling to hippies.

  63. Bah..... by localhost00 · · Score: 1

    This is all the proof I need: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap050401.html

    APOD said it, I believe it, and that settles it!

    --

    Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

  64. Re:Measurements on a human level by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    whoosh

  65. WHATEVER! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good luck trying to get money from the Gov!

  66. Bring samples to Earth! by kusmin · · Score: 1

    I think they should bring soil samples from Mars to Earth A.S.A.P. The analysis on Earth will be much more thorough, and it will be done by the top experts. I'd say bring 50 kilogram at least :).

    1. Re:Bring samples to Earth! by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 1

      *Looks through a microscope*

      Hey guys, there's this little green thing waving back at me from here. Ahhh! It's got me! It's got me.... ugle gurgle... ack!

      *WHUMP!*

      --
      ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
  67. observer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well duh, last time i checked there are trees and lakes of something on mars, guess they are trying to break it to us slowly, landing robot surveyors in areas the equivalent of terrestrial deserts slow down the discovery process to, check these nasa pics
    http://mmmgroup.altervista.org/e-trees.html

  68. Re:Measurements on a human level by dtml-try+MyNick · · Score: 1

    If only I could give you a years worth of mod points for that comment.

    --
    Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
  69. Waiting by Evildonald · · Score: 1

    I'm waiting for them to find scotch on Mars before I get excited about all this news.

  70. Enjoy your icecubes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might have to rethink that purchase. The polar regions are bitterly cold at sometimes minus 140 Celsius (-220F).

    At the equator the temperature in summer can reach a perfectly fine 20 Celsius (68F). Mind, you still freeze during the night as the atmosphere is too thin to act as a thermal buffer.

    Could this be the beginning of the collapse of the Mars housing bubble?

    1. Re:Enjoy your icecubes by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      No, you just put a web server there and post a link to it on Slashdot, and you'll have all the heat you need.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  71. shiny thing in the picture? by Sken-Pitilkin · · Score: 1

    What I want to know is what is that shiny thing in the panorama image vertically in line with the beginning of the solar panel on the left.

    1. Re:shiny thing in the picture? by pedestrian+crossing · · Score: 1

      Looks like it's the back shell and parachute that the lander ejected before the powered landing.

      --
      A house divided against itself cannot stand.
  72. Mars == Gay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares if thar be trace amounts of water in them thar hills?!? Mars is RED, the color of goatse, therefore it is gay and you can all go to the goatse planet I don't care, I'm staying HERE!

  73. my moma says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mars is the devil

  74. Fiji Dethroned by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Now what?

    Now Fiji has competition for the most obnoxiously resource intensive bottled water.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Fiji Dethroned by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Now Fiji has competition for the most obnoxiously resource intensive bottled water.

      Hrm, that might actually not be a bad way to fund the advancement of space exploration. No matter the cost one could probably re-coup it from the fabulously wealthy by offering water from another planet for sale. I'd recommend buying an Island (Cuba, perhaps) and building a gold temple there for the consumption of the allotted ounce.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  75. Re:Measurements on a human level by Katalyst23 · · Score: 1

    This is pretty off topic, but I've always thought it would be really cool if you got to choose where your taxes went directly, say through a form or something. Check the boxes next to the things you want your taxes to go towards, leave the boxes unchecked for things you're not interested in funding. The only problem is I could see people possibly neglecting areas like welfare.

    --
    It's turtles all the way down!
  76. Scopping problems "unexpected"?! WTF?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Peter Smith said:

    One surprise is how the soil is behaving. The ice-rich layers stick to the scoop when poised in the sun above the deck, different from what we expected from all the Mars simulation testing we've done.

    I find it hard to believe. Ever tried handling ice cream? WTF did they expect? That it won't stick?

    Cheers, Kuba

  77. And in related news... by BobMcD · · Score: 1

    ...water was also recently discovered in Antarctica.

  78. ET, we need your 10% by gosand · · Score: 1

    You are confusing the roman catholic church with your run-off-the-mill protestant crackpot from the US. The roman catholic church has stated numerous times that they see no conflict between either extraterrestrial life or evolution and the church. E.g.,
    http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12628

    Wow, that boosts the Roman Catholic Church's credibility by 1 point. So now they're about a 3 on the 100 point scale.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  79. Out of curiosity by allaunjsilverfox2 · · Score: 1

    What are the plans for the mission after funding is removed? I mean, is there a contingency that allows for a different department to take over? Forgive me for my ignorance, I haven't been keeping track of things lately. The other idea I had then immediately shot down due to the military applications is profit sharing in a sense. I was going to say if they didn't have the funding, maybe the EU or some other country with the proper funds could take over funding and continue the mission. But I remember reading the review on the hardware/software being a National security issue. I know this has been done before for launching satellites, but has it ever been done in the sense of transferring the cost burden? I.E I launch the hardware, get my science on and then sell it to you to use?

    --
    Restore the madness of youth's lechery
  80. Re:Measurements on a human level by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fine. You pay for it. Lets raise your taxes and keep mine the same. I'm sure there are plenty of stupid, wasteful programs too, but they aren't half as EXPENSIVE.

  81. Re:Measurements on a human level by urcreepyneighbor · · Score: 1

    The only problem is I could see people possibly neglecting areas like welfare.

    I disagree. Most people would love to support assistance programs that actually produced results.

    Anyone that's actually been poor - truly poor, not "my daddy didn't buy me a Benz for my Sweet 16!" - knows all too well that a guiding, helping hand can turn a life around.

    --
    "The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
  82. Mars ain't where we need it! by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

    Great, they found water on Mars.

    Now we just need to find some in Lake Mead!

    (for those not in the US desert southwest, the lake is very low and is predicted to be likely to be empty in 13 years)

    --
    Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  83. Re:Nb4 by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    Indeed, I'm amazed by how so many Slashdotters' sense of humour consists in repeating the same fucking joke they heard before over and over again. "Tell Bush there's oil on Mars/Titan", "Bush is gonna want to "spread democracy" there har har har", "But, the Earth is only 6,000 years old!" and so on..

    Memes are only funny when you use them in a way that makes your meme-based joke somewhat novel. Brainlessly repeating the same fucking thing without bringing any new twist to it is about as funny as an Adam Sandler movie.

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  84. Re:Measurements on a human level by sharpmarble · · Score: 1

    unfortunately... that's the minority of folks on the program blood attracts leeches.....

  85. Re:life on mars by sharpmarble · · Score: 1

    Even if we're not alone, the probability of two or more civilizations coming "of age" at the same time and actually crossing paths is highly minuscule. I think it was Carl Sagan's eggshell theory or something like that