Slashdot Mirror
A Third of Mars Could Have Been Underwater
Matt_dk writes "An international team of scientists who analyzed data from the Gamma Ray Spectrometer onboard NASA's Mars Odyssey reports new evidence for the controversial idea that oceans once covered about a third of ancient Mars.
'We compared Gamma Ray Spectrometer data on potassium, thorium and iron above and below a shoreline believed to mark an ancient ocean that covered a third of Mars' surface, and an inner shoreline believed to mark a younger, smaller ocean.'"
It's gonna be a pain in the ass to get one of those rovers up to 88 miles per hour.
So it's a long shot, but what we know is that water definitely existed on Mars, so it's not that much of a long shot. We may have in our possession, evidence that a global calamity destroyed Mars in the way that the Earth will be destroyed in the galacticly near future. Perhaps the planets are getting closer to the Sun with each passing year? Whatever caused the devastation on Mars, could be avoided on Earth with the correct approach to discovering the truth.
As long as we don't get a mix of Water World and Red Planet in theatres anytime soon, I will be able to sleep at night.
Yes, but what percentage of Mars was covered with buggalo?
Your thinking and opinions are positively antediluvian.
For what it's worth, I don't think scientists deny the possibility of a global flood. They just don't see much evidence for it.
Fascinating! The planets could be operating in stages. I wonder if there is something at the end of our solar system creating planets? That can't be true because of Pluto's declassification.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Makes some sense to see potassium anomalies in the old basins if there was water there which has since been evaporated, with the concentration increasing toward the centres, as potassium salts are somewhat more soluble than their sodium equivalents, theyd be the last left to precipitate out. Thorium on the other hand is usually residual, at least here on Earth, and tends to concentrate along shorelines and riverbeds due its high density and low solubility.
Watashi wa chikyubutsurigakusha desu.
Mars is part of a Beowulf cluster of planets
We are living on dross, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dross the impurities on the surface of a molten ball of nickel/iron
that takes billions of years to cool, geologically speaking.
Global cooling is the long range prognosis for us, just as Mars. Mars gets less solar power, being more distant from the sun.
Mars HAD an earth-similar composition 2 billion years ago. It is what the Earth will look like in the future. Deal with it.
.Did they serve Pina Coladas at the beaches?
Power corrupts the few, while weakness corrupts the many.
Now I know where God got all that water from!
I find it strange how many scientists insist on a water body to have carved the different features of Mars. The new theory of a really big impact as a source of the lowlands makes far more sense, explains the big "cracks" in the Mars surface far better, especially their alignment, and so on.
The "river beds" and "river deltas" can easily be explained with lava flow, especially after the planet heated up a lot due to the impact. The sediment layers may or may not be the remnants of vulcanism, asteroid impacts, storms, and so on.
As the planet seems to be pretty sandy, I suppose most water, if it was ever pushed to the surface by vulcanism or the likes, would probably faster sink down again then the lava needs to cool down.
Not to mention that I didn't find the connection with Thorium, Potassium, and Iron - do our volcanic-ridge-free oceans have similarily high concentrations of those? Or is it only the oceans with high volcanic activity? Are there other possible sources for those elements?
There are so many interesting planets - I find it unusual that so much money is used for this one, which is probably among the least likely to ever have had life. A rover (or similar) on all the planets and moons which are not too hostile for our level of technology would be much cooler, I think. Not to mention manned missions - I suppose establishing a permanent and fairly self-sufficient outpost on the moon or even Mars would be a million times more valuable to humanity then all the probes together...
This financial crisis is even worse than we thought!
Check out Google Mars!
http://www.google.com/mars/
How cool is Google?
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
But the 'plate tectonics' that are the impurities that form during the cooling process make for a bumpy
ride, and unless massive 'terraforming' does occur, there will not be any flat, smooth land to accelerate upon to reach
that speed. Sadly.
Tom Swift had the answer, but he did not know the question.
The argument that understanding the way Mars once was helps us understand ours own planet a lot better seems to me to be little more than a coverup for saying it just satisfies our intellectual curiosity, and it seems peculiar to me that something that is doing little else should be such a huge deal. And even if it were true, how we got to where we are today isn't nearly as important as what we are going to choose to do, today, with whatever circumstances we find ourselves in. I'm not advocating ignorance to history here... I think it's very important to learn history so that we can avoid repeating it where the circumstances would be undesirable, but Mars having water so long ago is outside the domain of our experience entirely, so what practical benefit does it serve to spend who knows much money on exploring the notion? If somebody can explain to me how knowledge about Mars once having water in the distant past would change the way that we perform some possible future Mars expedition, for example, I'd like to hear it.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
SO WHAT!
Haven't we gotten past the point where the idea of Mars once having lots of water is controversial? I mean, it seems as if every new piece of evidence points in that direction, so what exactly still makes it controversial?
I believe that the Earth used to be an asteroid hurtling through space. It then collided with Mars(which used to be in the orbit close to where Earth is today) and killed all life on Mars knocking it far off into orbit where it is today. Earth was then left with the tiny bacteria or rna or something frozen in it. It was later warmed and thawed by the Sun and that's how life was started on Earth. Too far fetched?
"I don't have to think. I only have to do it. The results are always perfect, but that's old news." - Meat Puppets
So, just to recap what we've learned about mars in the last few years...
Discovery #1: Rust is formed by metal coming in contact with water. Or oxidizing. Which is usually done by water.
Discovery #2: The surface of mars is covered in rust.
Today's Discovery: OMGBBQPONIES!!!111!! Mars may have had water!
My question is this: after billions upon billions (upon umpteen trillions) of dollars poured into both the US educational system and NASA, do you really mean to tell me that there is a single "high school graduate or better" who didn't see this coming? Seriously?
First, as others have noted, there is a massive level of sheer scientific curiosity. Prior to this, we didn't know of any planet other than Earth that ever had liquid water on it. We had no idea if such planets were rare or common, or even how to identify them if the water wasn't extremely visible and obvious. This allows us to know so much more about planets and their evolution in early solar systems than we ever knew before.
Then, there is another side. Water, particularly if it is mildly acidic, leaves open the possibility of cave systems. Cave systems make manned exploration a more realistic possibility, as you're better shielded from cosmic radiation, much better shielded from dust devils, and have a (comparatively) easy environment to seal and pressurize.
Finally, the combination of a lower gravity and a lower air pressure (whilst a significant atmosphere lasted) may make for crystals that are very different from those that form naturally on Earth. They should be slightly higher purity, for a start. This would not pay for exploration of Mars, or even significantly offset the costs, but it might well intrigue enough of the uber-rich (who tend to like unique trinkets) to either coerce Governments to fund exploration or provide some of the money themselves, purely for the bragging rights of having superior-grade, all-natural, extraterrestrial gemstones.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
All other planets are inferior potassium.
how long until
Seems that scientists are now certain of the existence of ancient oceans on Mars after one of the rovers found fossilized windsurfs and kiteboards, as well as oil rigs.
I'm not sure that Hotter is correct... Perhaps a deathly cold ocean is more to the point... For I shall never take a dip in an ocean at -80 Celcius (according to latest now doomed Phoenix operation).
This is the craziest thing I ever read. Everyone knows the scientific consensus is that global warming is caused entirely by human activity. The rest of it seems plausible though.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
We are living on dross
I didn't know six and a half billion of people live in a small Austrian municipality. It must be really all too crammed up there, probably worse than HK. But at least all enjoy living in the birthplace of a music composer.
But now that it's in outer space it's managed to stay dry.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The question is why Mars would have oceans then and not now. Put water on the surface today and that which doesn't freeze will evaporate due to the low atmospheric pressure. The atmospheric pressure is low because Mars doesn't have that strong a gravitational field to sustain an atmosphere. So the question becomes, how did Mars ever manage to have an ocean in the first place? It's not likely that it was more massive earlier on so it's not likely to have ever had an earth-like atmosphere that recycles the water back to the oceans. Sans gravity, you don't get a steady-state atmosphere. Sans atmosphere, you don't get to keep your water. Bottom line - it's a problem full of paradoxes. Weird.
Only a third of the planet underwater doesn't seem so bad compared to Earth right now. Did they have to do a bailout?
Squirrel!
I've been saying that all along! Nobody ever believes me!
It has to do with partial pressure of a gas in relation to the escape velocity of the planet. All planets loose their atmosphere given a sufficient amount of time. Having higher gravity slows this process because a smaller portion of the molecules making up the atmosphere have a vector of motion with a magnitude greater than EV that does not intercept another molecule.
Earth still has its atmosphere not only due to its higher gravity, but also because it is still volcanically active. The release of gas from inside the earth is sufficient to replenish much or all of the gas lost at the moment.
It took mars millions, possibly billions of years to loose its initial atmosphere and the atmosphere released from its early volcanism. And the same fate will eventually befall the earth when our mantle cools and hardens.
If Titan is massive enough to have a dense atmosphere, Mars certainly is. I don't think the mystery is how did Mars ever have an ocean in the first place. The mystery is what made the conditions change so that it couldn't have one now. There's a lot of evidence of a catastrophe on Mars in the distant past and I suspect that most of the atmosphere was violently blown off the planet and that the oceans then evaporated away.
Maybe it's simply that the planetary "habitable zone" shifts over the life time of a star. Early on when the star is larger and crazier the safe zone is further out. Once the star settles down in a long term stable state the safe zone shifts in to a more permanent position and the planet(s) in that zone then get the chance to properly develop life as we know it. While the planet(s) that have now moved out of the safe zone become colder and any water that formed on the planet moves to say, the poles, and any or all life that developed that can't adapt or shift planets is basically fucked. Oh and once the star runs out of fuel and loses it's shit, then the "safe zone" basically moves to the next Solar System over.
Making it up as I go along appears to be working so far. The time frame involved would also explain why there isn't signs of life on Mars, given any signs of civilisation would have ample time to disolve away into virtually nothing (except maybe for Twinkies and cockroaches, those two things survive anything) and would also explain why all the documentaries I've seen about Mars show that all the women have three boobs. Well it really doesn't, but Total Recall was a great movie.
Find the reactor (its in the old terbinium mine). The aliens built it. When the reactor starts up, it hits the ice and that creates oxygen, enough for the whole planet. Tell Howser to get his ass to Mars. Don't lobotomize him when you give him the brain implant, and try to find that mutant Quatro. Remember, the last thing you want Howser to have is 'Total Recall(1990)'.
Not necessarily. Titan is much colder than Mars, so the molecules of the Titanian atmosphere are much less likely to acquire the kinetic energy to escape into space.