Slashdot Mirror
Martian Methane May Be Created By Lifeforms
Following our recent discussions about the growing evidence pointing to possible life on Mars, reader skywatcher2501 writes with news of a study that has ruled out one possible explanation for the levels of methane seen on that planet — that it might be replenished by disintegrating meteors entering the atmosphere. So two theories remain: either the gas is created as a by-product of reactions between volcanic rock and water, or it is a by-product of a lifeform's metabolism.
that Martians need some beano eh? Also, first post BTW...
Methane concentrations peak in an area on the planet opposite the famous face on mars.
Now the ecozealots will decry our spoiling of the natural martial environment, and will protest any attempt at colonization or terraformation as the destruction of a precious natural world.
That it is life. I've said it before so I won't reiterate with a long post, but if there's life on Mars, that proves life isn't just unique to Earth. This planet isn't a fluke. If there's life on Mars, then it can be *anywhere*
What an amazing thing that would be.
Almost as good as the BBC TV series...
So there I was, scribbling down some notes off the PC screen by hand, when I reached for the keyboard and Ctrl-S'd.
It seems possible that life existed in the distant past on Mars, leaving behind methane deposits much like oil and natural gas deposits here on Earth...
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
This spells disaster in the form of global climate change on mars! Who wants to be the first to martian up and buy some methane offsets?
The problem is that on mars all methane should vanish in months due to oxidizing soil. Therefore something must be replenishing it.
Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
"So two theories remain: either the gas is created as a by-product of reactions between volcanic rock and water, or it is a by-product of a lifeform's metabolism."
Or C: There is some, as of yet, unidentified method of methane production.
... get ready to hear this word a lot: "cross contamination" from the bombardment period.
I know - I know. I'm not advocating it - I'm just saying: Don't be surprised.
L'esperienza de questa dolce vita (The experience of this sweet life) - Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy
Yes and I think it is also theoretically possible that there was life on mars until about half an hour after the first probe landed.
And I believe it was the great Dr. Hansford Solo that said "What a incredible smell you've discovered!"
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
I saw recently that NASA was leaning towards judging structures on a few meteorites as organic in nature. Meaning, we could have been derived from, or seeded life on Mars. Multiple times.
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
The problem is that on mars all methane should vanish in months due to oxidizing soil. Therefore something must be replenishing it.
Its a more complicated problem than that. First of all, there is no viable explanation for a source, assuming no lifeforms on mars, no active volcanoes, not enough meteors... Secondly, methane is localized and produced at weird rates, almost like weather... errr growing seasons... Third, methane is photochemically unstable in UV, it should all disappear in a couple centuries, except it is measured as disappearing much more quickly, VERY coincidentally about the timeframe of one martian year, so grasping at straws, it must be "oxidizing soil" or something. Fourthly the ESA guys claim when they detect methane, it also coincidentally comes along with yummy water vapor (actually, probably fizzy carbonated water crossed with stinky swamp gas)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars#Methane
Now it is refreshing after the quack climatologists basically making stuff up to "prove" their hypothesis, to see that real scientists studying mars are very carefully and appropriately skeptical about declaring martian life. But eventually Occams Razor kicks in and the complicated non-life workarounds become more ridiculous than admitting it makes more sense to assume there's life on mars. I think that tipping point is extremely close.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
"Decay" implies the breakdown of biological tissue by... you guessed it, micro-organisms. In places where there is not much bacteria, like the antarctic, things that die do not decay noticeably over hundreds of years or more.
So, I doubt decay from dead things is producing the methane.
Cows ruined their own planet before they came to earth millenia ago.
Its this migration that the child's nursery rhyme is referencing in the line "the cow jumped over the moon".
They're now doing the same to the earth.
And ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the argumentum ad hominem.
Let us take a moment to ponder this posters ability to take a tone of superiority, all the while unawares of the stupendous amount of ignorance being displayed by his own statement.
Truly a remarkable creature.
Mars has about 1/2 the radius of the Earth and about 1/10th the mass, which means a significantly smaller gravitational field, even at the surface (about 1/3 the gravity at the surface, and remember that it falls off proportionately to the square of the distance from the center of mass).
While Mars doesn't have a magnetic field any more, I suspect that the reason that Mars's atmosphere is so much thinner than our own has more to do with the lack of mass and corresponding gravity well to hold the gases in than it does the solar wind blowing it away. Recall that Mercury has a magnetic field, and it doesn't really help the planet hold its atmosphere. And lest you think that's because it's so close to the Sun, and thus the subject of stronger solar winds, I'll point out that Ganymede also has a permanent magnetic field and a very thin atmosphere, but its surface pressure is so low that if it were created in a bell jar here on Earth, it would be considered a vacuum.
Pull my tentacle.
Have gnu, will travel.
Titan, which is quite a bit smaller than Mars, has an atmosphere 1.5 times as dense as Earths.
Titan is also extremely cold, and has less agitation of its atmosphere; it has protection from Saturn's magnetic field (which it may be holding onto as it does pass through) and is at a much greater distance from the Sun than Ganymede is; the gases compositing the atmospheres of each are also different, which in consideration of their properties may definitely matter: my point is, that neither singly mass, nor density, nor solar distance, nor composition, nor magnetic properties, i.e. any single variable, is responsible for atmospheric density. Mars, however, is both so close to the Sun to be affected by solar winds, and so mass deficient relative to those other factors, that the planet isn't adequate for holding onto a dense atmosphere (of almost any composition): if it were around a dead star, or floating through space away from agitations, etc., then sure, you'd expect it could hold a dense--perhaps frozen (as much of Mars's atmosphere may, in fact, be, and thus on its surface and in its soil)--[r] atmosphere; but considering the variables for holding the kind of gases we'd even be interested in, it's not much worth our time, except perhaps to mine, or for other conditions for experimentation.
The same, unfortunately, applies to Venus--is inadequate to hold onto the kind of atmosphere we'd be interested in, and would even if its role were reversed with Mars (which would also mean it would be too cold). We on Earth have the sweet spot positionally, in mass, gravitationally, in density, and all the other variables you could think of. I'm happy for it too! : )
Intelligent idiots are we. | Evil men do not understand justice.