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.
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.
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.
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.
meh, it's just the same image over and over. Zoom all the way out.
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
Re Ocean ridge volcanics: The basalt and associated rock from spreading centres tend to be Low-K, Low Th and high Fe. Potassium and Thorium in igneous rocks tend to be associated with granites or the types of volcanoes that go "BOOM!" rather than produce extensive flows.
Watashi wa chikyubutsurigakusha desu.
The reason the people are researching this is intellectual curiosity, and for the grant money that pays the scientists bills. This information may or may not have any use to anyone alive today, but it is a part of the puzzle of how the universe works. Perhaps in the distant future, this information and countless other data points will help humanity solve some problem. Or it may be just a useless piece of trivia. The point is, we do not, nor can can we know what things we learn about our universe will be useful down the road. Better to collect all the observations we can in hopes that it will be of use.
Math is like sex. People who get it are popular in class, people who don't are not.
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)
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.
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.