NASA Picks Up Rainstorms On Titan

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Picks Up Rainstorms On Titan

Posted by timothy on Sunday March 20, 2011 @06:39PM from the you-can-still-grill-outdoors-though dept.

RedEaredSlider writes "Rainy seasons aren't just a regular occurrence on Earth — they also happen on Titan, the largest moon of Saturn. The rain isn't water, it's methane. And the seasons are years long, as Titan takes two weeks to go around Saturn and Saturn takes 29 years to complete one circuit of the Sun. Recent images from the Cassini probe, which is currently orbiting Saturn, show clouds forming in Titan's atmosphere and evidence that liquid methane is soaking the surface."

110 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 18:44 · Score: 0

Alien space beings who communicate through song!
1. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 20:48 · Score: 0
  
  And I'm pretty sure their father uses KDE.
2. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by clang_jangle · 2011-03-20 21:55 · Score: 2
  
  It strikes me as odd that a celestial body can be drenched in hydrocarbons like that yet no fire. Here on earth all it takes is dry conditions for a few weeks and fires pop up all over. How can Titan be a ball of flammable substances which remains unlit?
  
  --
  Caveat Utilitor
3. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by Hognoxious · 2011-03-20 22:13 · Score: 2
  
  You don't know, and I don't know too
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
4. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-20 22:32 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It strikes me as odd that a celestial body can be drenched in hydrocarbons like that yet no fire. Here on earth all it takes is dry conditions for a few weeks and fires pop up all over. How can Titan be a ball of flammable substances which remains unlit?
  To burn you need fuel and oxidiser. The atmosphere on Titan is like the inside of a Nitrogen fire extinguisher. Any oxygen on Titan long ago combined with hydrogen to make water. There is a lot of water on Titan. The planet is actually made of the stuff. Having said that I wonder if oxygen or another oxidiser could have survived under ground where the Methane can't get at it. Such fossil fuels could lead to the return of the internal combustion engine, but this time in the outer solar system.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
5. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by Progman3K · 2011-03-21 01:20 · Score: 1
  
  Probably because Titan is less oxygen-rich than the Earth and fire requires oxygen?
  
  --
  I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
6. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by CanadianRealist · 2011-03-21 01:33 · Score: 2
  
  I'm not sure if this was the idea you were going for, but suppose that there is a sufficient concentration of methane in the atmosphere. You would fill your vehicle's tank with oxygen and use that to be burn the surrounding atmosphere in the engine. Instead of carrying fuel and getting the oxidiser from the atmosphere you would be doing the reverse, carrying the oxidiser with you.
7. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by corbettw · 2011-03-21 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  You also need one other critical component: heat. Considering the temperature on Titan is somewhere around -179C, fires aren't going to break out any time soon.
  
  --
  God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
8. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by icannotthinkofaname · 2011-03-21 02:44 · Score: 0
  
  There is a lot of water on Titan. The planet is actually made of the stuff.
  Did you really just call Titan a planet? Either you did, or your post is written in an especially confusing way. Now, which of us needs our morning coffee before posting on Slashdot again?
  
  --
  Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
9. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by kyuubiunl · 2011-03-21 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  It's called the FIRE TRIANGLE. Fuel, Oxygen, Heat. In addition to all three parts, the mixture has to be perfect for combustion to occur. If the temperature/pressure is not sufficient to reach the flash point of the hydrocarbon, it will not ignite. Ever. Also the flash point is different at different pressures.
10. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by Chris+Burke · 2011-03-21 04:00 · Score: 1
  
  Coffee for everyone!
  
  --
  
  The enemies of Democracy are
11. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-21 19:13 · Score: 1
  
  You also need one other critical component: heat. Considering the temperature on Titan is somewhere around -179C, fires aren't going to break out any time soon.
  No but they would have when Titan was forming.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
12. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-21 21:50 · Score: 1
  
  As I discovered trying to light a camp fire at 5000 feet..
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
13. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by kyuubiunl · 2011-03-22 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  Sort of. There is not appropriate oxygen OR temperature for there to be fires, but assuming there WAS. Titan's atmosphere is:
  1.5x Atm -OR - 14.7psia * 1.5 = 22.05psia. Methane at this pressure is mostly liquid.
  1. Its melting point is then -279 deg(F).
  2. It would flash at -204.26 deg(F) with an ignition source.
  3. It would auto ignite (again, sufficient oxygen) at -271.02 deg(F).
  However this is all very academic as the temperature on the surface averages -355.1 deg(F).
14. Re:I'm pretty sure Titan is the home of... by uninformedLuddite · 2011-03-22 12:49 · Score: 1
  
  those sneaky dinosaurs they didn't die they migrated to Titan
  
  --
  The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 18:46 · Score: 0

When my ex has burritos.
1. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 19:55 · Score: 0
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc63VnrJH7Y
Years long... by Kokuyo · 2011-03-20 18:52 · Score: 4, Interesting

Can someone explain to me how long these years are? I find the TFA confusing.
Our years are calculated by the circuit of our own planet around the sun. So does this rainy weather last for literal earth years or are they talking about relative years? And then: Saturn yars or Titan years? And what would a Titan year be since it doesn't revolve around the sun directly.
Yeah, I don't have a clue about astronomy ;).
1. Re:Years long... by RoFLKOPTr · 2011-03-20 18:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Can someone explain to me how long these years are? I find the TFA confusing.
  Our years are calculated by the circuit of our own planet around the sun. So does this rainy weather last for literal earth years or are they talking about relative years? And then: Saturn yars or Titan years? And what would a Titan year be since it doesn't revolve around the sun directly.
  Yeah, I don't have a clue about astronomy ;).
  
  And the seasons are years long, as Titan takes two weeks to go around Saturn and Saturn takes 29 years to complete one circuit of the Sun.
  Obviously we're talking about Earth years, because Saturn revolving once around the sun cannot possibly take 29 Saturn years as that would completely contradict the definition of the word "year".
2. Re:Years long... by The+Great+Pretender · 2011-03-20 19:05 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Caveat - I am not an astronomer. Actually, I agree with the original poster the article is confusing. I believe that they swap the point of reference without announcing they did. While the initial units are in Earth years: "as Titan takes two weeks to go around Saturn and Saturn takes 29 years to complete one circuit of the Sun." They then move to either the Saturn or Titan point of reference, as it would make no sense comparing Earths 'time of year' to a warming period for Titan "McEwan says the atmospheric models predicted that there would be clouds in the equatorial regions at this time of year, as the sun on Titan got warmer. "We saw these clouds suddenly, and then we saw the equatorial area darken," he said." As the warming period for Titan must be associated to Saturns position relative to the Sun I can only assume that this second seasonal reference is based on Staurns orbital year. Which would then also explain why the article claims the seasons are 'years long' as it is talking about Saturn seasons in Earth years.
  
  --
  A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
3. Re:Years long... by tsadi · 2011-03-20 19:13 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Just a random thought; a day in Titan lasts almost 16 Earth days. If humans evolved in Titan instead, would that mean that we'd spend the equivalent of 16 Earth days awake also, and maybe almost the same amount sleeping?
4. Re:Years long... by euyis · 2011-03-20 19:30 · Score: 2
  
  The latter part is quite fascinating...
5. Re:Years long... by pspahn · 2011-03-20 19:33 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  As far as I'm aware, the evolutionary effects on circadian rhythms on other planetary bodies is a study that has not yet been conducted.
  I guess that means the answer to your question is.... maybe.
  
  --
  Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
6. Re:Years long... by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-20 21:02 · Score: 2
  
  Years on Titan are the same as years on Saturn. A day on Titan is the same period as an orbit around Saturn. Years are important on Earth, Saturn and Titan because the axial tilt makes the sun move from North to South and back. Additionally the eccentricity in the orbit makes the planet move towards and away from the sun. The rainy season on Titan may actually last for Earth years. But particular period of rain may go for hours, days or weeks.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
7. Re:Years long... by jpapon · 2011-03-20 22:08 · Score: 1
  
  One would think that would be the case. Another interesting thought is whether or not they would naturally process everything slower. Their "day" is 16 of our days, but would their consciousness experience it lasting about the same as we experience an earth day? So if we ever met such beings, would they seem to act abnormally slowly?
  
  --
  -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
8. Re:Years long... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 23:08 · Score: 0
  
  ""McEwan says the atmospheric models predicted that there would be clouds in the equatorial regions at this time of [Saturn] year..."
  Yes. Basically, "summer" is coming to Titan -- a long, multi-Earth-year duration summer because Saturn's year is 29 Earth-years long. Titan has apparently just passed the Saturnian equinox, which coincidentally we on Earth just experienced today in our annual seasonal cycle. Titan's summer may be its [methane] rainy season.
9. Re:Years long... by GNUALMAFUERTE · 2011-03-20 23:36 · Score: 1
  
  You mean Los verdes?
  (Reference to Pluton B.R.B Nero, a series you probably don't know, since AFAIK it never got English subs. It's Alex de la Iglesia's shot at space comedy. A sort of Spanish Red Dwarf, except Lorna is so much hotter than Kochanski ;) . It was absolutely brilliant, if you can find subs or understand some Spanish, you should definitely take a look at it. Specially if you enjoy Alex's movies, It's as clever as the Oxford Murders, as funny as El dia de la Bestia, and as bizarre as Mutant Action).
  
  --
  WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
10. Re:Years long... by GNUALMAFUERTE · 2011-03-20 23:39 · Score: 1
  
  Well, forgot to explain the actual reference.
  In an Episode, they reach a planet that is 100 times the size of the earth, and it's inhabited by a humanoid species whose individuals seem to be motionless, but they are actually just incredibly slow.
  
  --
  WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
11. Re:Years long... by TapeCutter · 2011-03-21 01:40 · Score: 1
  
  I doubt it. People living in the Arctic circle don't sleep for 6 months.
  
  --
  And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
12. Re:Years long... by Progman3K · 2011-03-21 01:42 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  There was a study where they put a subject in an underground mine (they built him and underground house in there, or lair if you prefer) and only let him have contact through a video link to an operator's booth above.
  The operators would be relieved and assigned shifts in a random way so that the subject could not infer how long each operator was present nor how long their shifts were.
  After a few weeks/months of this, the subject began having 33-hour days and 11-hour nights.
  So the sun really DOES influence human wake/sleep periods. What the 33/11 ratio means is anyone's guess though...
  
  --
  I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
13. Re:Years long... by argStyopa · 2011-03-21 02:17 · Score: 2
  
  First to answer your question:
  The terms used ARE confusing because the terms "day", "month" and "year" are all relative to what planet you're talking about.
  Saturn's year (1 circuit around the sun) is 29 Earth-years, approximately.
  Saturn is, like earth, tilted about 26 degrees on its axis, so it would have 'seasons' approximately in the same way that earth does - as it goes around in its orbit, the sun would be shining directly on the northern hemisphere and southern hemispheres, alternately, with the solstices being about 14.5 years apart (ie summer to winter in one hemisphere, analogous to June/December on Earth).
  Titan (as far as I can tell) orbits almost exactly around Saturn's equator, so it too is inclined 26 degrees to the Sun.
  Its orbital period (the amount of time it takes to go around Saturn) is 16 earth-days. So a "month" according to Titan, is 16 earth days.
  Since it's geosynchronous (like our Moon) one face always points at Saturn, so a Titan-day (from sunrise to sunrise) is the same as a Titan-month - about 16 earth days.
  Titan goes around Saturn 672 times over the course of Saturn's complete circuit of the Sun. So this means that Titan's seasons (assuming they're each 1/4 of the year like earth), are each 168 "Titan days", which are each about 16 Earth days long.
  Does that help?
  Second, I RTFA'd and I didn't understand how they got to some of their conclusions. For example they saw Cassini's early imagery of Titan, interpreted that they were seeing "dunes" and concluded that weather was scarce. Perhaps it's my MN origins, but "dunes" are not a great deal different from "snowdrifts", are they? And if the "dunes" were drifts, this would suggest the exact opposite, climatologically - an aeolian surface with regular precipitation.
  
  --
  -Styopa
14. Re:Years long... by mister_playboy · 2011-03-21 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  Titan (as far as I can tell) orbits almost exactly around Saturn's equator, so it too is inclined 26 degrees to the Sun.
  The only major satellite that does not orbit very near its planet's equatorial plane is Earth's Moon.
  https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:Earth-Moon.PNG
  
  --
  Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
15. Re:Years long... by Wyatt+Earp · 2011-03-21 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  Polar night varies from 20 hours at the Arctic Circle to 179 days at the pole, places like Barrow Alaska do polar night for 65 days, but that doesn't mean it's night outside every where, it gets a strange twilight for most of the area.
  Past 84 33' theres no twilight, but there are no permanent human settlements that far north/south, just science stations.
16. Re:Years long... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 04:15 · Score: 0
  
  I am actually looking to do a study of this, would you look to give me grant money???
17. Re:Years long... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 04:24 · Score: 0
  
  Since it's tidally locked (like our Moon
  FTFY.
18. Re:Years long... by arisvega · 2011-03-21 05:15 · Score: 1
  
  from TFA:
  "In tropical regions moisture rises as the sun heats the surface, and it precipitates out as rain, which is why rain forests tend to occur in those latitudes."
  "Tend to occur" my ass. First, a rainforest is not always in the tropics. Second, a tropic rainforest, like the ones that 'tend to occur at those latitudes' occurs all around earth in the tropics where there is land because sunlight is maximum all year long- NOT because they get rain all year long. A high fraction of the water that is in the atmosphere above a tropical rainforest area comes from the plants themselves, via their respiration.
  I think TFA better get its facts straight.
  
  --
  The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
19. Re:Years long... by HaZardman27 · 2011-03-21 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  Who really knows what we would be doing for sleep considering we'd bath in methane.
  
  --
  Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
20. Re:Years long... by argStyopa · 2011-03-21 07:29 · Score: 1
  
  Whups thanks.
  Was mentally thinking that its rotation was synchronus...definitely a goof saying 'geosynchronus'. Wow. Monday.
  
  --
  -Styopa
21. Re:Years long... by TapeCutter · 2011-03-21 18:30 · Score: 1
  
  It was an offhand comment, I also missed the part about "if humans evolved on Tiatan", so my comparison was kinda irrelevant since humans did not evolve in the polar regions, rather they just moved there when technology allowed them to.
  
  --
  And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
22. Re:Years long... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:55 · Score: 0
  
  This really could use a link....a fascinating notion, but some actual citations would go a long way to making this more than anecdotal hearsay and something to be taken seriously.
23. Re:Years long... by RockDoctor · 2011-03-23 15:27 · Score: 1
  
  There was a study where they put a subject in an underground mine (they built him and underground house in there, or lair if you prefer)
  
  I know, personally, several participants in such experiments.
  
  and only let him have contact through a video link to an operator's booth above.
  They were carried out in the 1960s (when I was concentrating on potty training!) in various natural caverns in Northern England. Gaping Ghyll for one ; stump cross caverns for another. The "incarcerated person" was generally (always?) Geoff Workman. And he'd do it in his holidays.
  
  The operators would be relieved and assigned shifts in a random way so that the subject could not infer how long each operator was present nor how long their shifts were.
  There was (generally - equipment and techniques evolved over several experiments) no direct contact from surface to underground. Geoff would call to surface, and later be called back by a tape recorded answer ; the surface would call Geoff and later a reply tape would be played back down the phone line. Supplies would be left at point X at times that Geoff had indicated that he would be doing work in area Y. (I assume there was a similar effort to deal with shit too. I'll ask Geoff next time I see him.)
  
  After a few weeks/months of this, the subject began having 33-hour days and 11-hour nights.
  There was certainly a drift to longer days, but a drift to longer nights is more arguable. This may be a reaction to the stress of the situation.
  I wouldn't draw much from these experiments. More sophisticated experiments have been done. But less sophisticated experiments (I work 24x7 on-site cover) show that individual people are variable, and differently variable, and quite adaptable. Week-by-week sleep limits are probably more important than day-by-day limits. That's not to suggest that people can work 24*7=168 hours at a stretch, but that in 100 hours, you probably need to get at least 20 and 36 hours of sleep in reasonable-sized (4 hours at least) chunks.
  The Navy (various navies) got to that conclusion centuries ago.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
24. Re:Years long... by RockDoctor · 2011-03-23 15:33 · Score: 1
  
  The Russian term is "white nights". Which raises a pun on "white knights" which at least one oil company has made use of before they got brought out.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
25. Re:Years long... by RockDoctor · 2011-03-23 15:48 · Score: 1
  
  A day on Titan is the same period as an orbit around Saturn.
  Err, Titan and Saturn are in rotational/ orbital resonance?
  When Saturn-Titan-Sun are co-linear then Titan will get eclipses. Which are likely to be meteorologically important. For Titan. The corresponding solar eclipses on Saturn by Titan are unlikely to be significant to Saturn.
  Titan is essentially co-planar with Saturn's rings (gravity assures me of that). Saturn's rings are around 20 degrees inclined to the ecliptic.
  Without having (to hand) the eccentricity of Titan's orbit around Saturn, or Saturn's orbit around the Sun ... how much effect Titan's distance from the sun at different parts of it's orbit around Saturn would have on illumination ... I don't know, but I doubt that it is important.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
26. Re:Years long... by Progman3K · 2011-03-23 16:10 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for fascinating insight, RD.
  I know I saw a documentary about it some years ago, it might have been on The Nature of Things with David Suzuki, I'm not sure...
  Anyhow, interesting study. Thanks for the info!
  
  --
  I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
27. Re:Years long... by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-23 22:41 · Score: 1
  
  A day on Titan is the same period as an orbit around Saturn.
  Err, Titan and Saturn are in rotational/ orbital resonance?
  I think its pretty clear. Ignoring issues of sidereal motion, the sun goes around the sky on Titan in the same time as Titan orbits Saturn.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
28. Re:Years long... by RockDoctor · 2011-03-27 10:23 · Score: 1
  
  You're right. I'm surprised that I'd never heard that before.
  It's a bit surprising too, because most of the cases of orbital synchronisation that I've heard of are when the orbit is very tight. Or, in the case of Earth-Moon, the synchronisation is thought to have developed very early in the evolution of the system when the Moon was very close to it's Roche limit.
  Interesting.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
All together now... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 19:38 · Score: 1

Raindrops keep falling on my head....AAAAAaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
1. Re:All together now... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 20:17 · Score: 1
  
  A little methane never hurt anyone.
2. Re:All together now... by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-20 20:51 · Score: 1
  
  ....AAAAAaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
  I like your version better.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
3. Re:All together now... by burisch_research · 2011-03-20 21:06 · Score: 2
  
  Methane on Titan would flash-freeze you, since Titan's temperature is around 93.7 K (179.5 C), so AAAAAaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh is quite apt. Let's not forget that you'd have nothing to breathe, either.
  
  --
  char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
4. Re:All together now... by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-20 21:10 · Score: 1
  
  Methane on Titan would flash-freeze you, since Titan's temperature is around 93.7 K (179.5 C).
  I think you mean -179.5 C but think of it this way. Titan is about twice as cold as the coldest place on Earth. I once had a job collecting data from remote weather stations in Antarctica. One day a station reported -75C.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
5. Re:All together now... by camperdave · 2011-03-20 21:23 · Score: 1
  
  A little methane never hurt anyone.
  True... But we're talking a lot of methane, liquid methane at -180 degrees C; enough to carve channels in the landscape and form lakes. It's not just a little methane.
  
  --
  When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
6. Re:All together now... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 22:21 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't really make any sense to describe something as "twice as cold", especially when you're using a scale based on an arbitrary zero point.
  It does make sense to say that the coldest place on Earth is twice as warm as Titan, though.
7. Re:All together now... by MadKeithV · 2011-03-20 23:25 · Score: 2
  
  Let's not forget that you'd have nothing to breathe, either.
  Maybe he was dictating?
8. Re:All together now... by atrain728 · 2011-03-21 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  Also accepting "half as warm."
  
  Although GP did not state it, the -75C temperature cited is 198K, which is a little more than twice as warm as Titan. Kelvin has a non-arbitrary zero point. (I am not insinuating that you dispute any of this, just making the GP's point perhaps a little more clear in light of the semantics lesson.)
9. Re:All together now... by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-21 21:44 · Score: 1
  
  Wikipedia gives 184 K (-89.2 C) as the coldest temperature on Earth and I suppose people would walk around with just very warm clothing on at that temperature. For a while, anyway. So my point (if I have one) is that while 93K sounds cold its actually not beyond possibility that a person could walk around on Titan with a bottle of oxygen and some well insulated clothing. Heated boots would be a good idea. Wear mittens, not gloves.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
God farts? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 19:50 · Score: 0

So, who made the methane on Titan?
Are these liquified god farts?
1. Re:God farts? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 19:57 · Score: 0
  
  queue the stupid Uranus jokes...
2. Re:God farts? by EdIII · 2011-03-20 20:08 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Methane is not exclusively produced by biological organisms anymore than oxygen is exclusively produced by plants and trees. The process by which methane is thought to be produced on other planets, moons, etc. is abiotic.
  Furthermore, only 1-10% of a fart is methane. Interestingly enough, that is not the part that smells bad. It is the trace gases that give it the smell.
3. Re:God farts? by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-20 20:42 · Score: 1
  
  Makes me wonder if there could be "Fossil Oxidisers" on Titan, analogous to the fossil fuels on Earth. Maybe oxidisers could be found under ground and dug up so colonists could run their SUVs on Methane.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
4. Re:God farts? by pspahn · 2011-03-20 20:52 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  It is the trace gases that give it the smell.
  And here I thought it was because it was air that came out of your ass that made it smell bad.
  
  --
  Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
NASA Picks Up Rainstorms On Titan by pop+up+gazebo · 2011-03-20 20:14 · Score: 1

To some extent, i just wanna say that this post "NASA Picks Up Rainstorms On Titan" brings us much more pleasure for our daily life.
are we there yet by diaflux · 2011-03-20 20:20 · Score: 1

Unclaimed hydrocarbon rain on Titan?! Europa is a giant ball of water? Jupiter and Saturn have magnetospheric energy strong enough to power as many crafts as we would like (positioned accordingly of course) Not to mention the added bonus of a radiation shield from solar wind and CMEs. Somebody build a station in orbit for local planetary exploration already. Oh, and the ISS is being used as a lab for experimentation, another station is needed for this as the ISS is busy enough as it is. It's not like we have to build something on the ground and launch the entire payload anymore... seriously lets go, private industries are not dependent on international government organizations for delivery of payloads into orbit. This is nothing new. I'm sure many people would be willing to take their chances in orbit around Titan, or even explore Jupiter's moons with current knowledge of the radiation belt locations of each planet.
1. Re:are we there yet by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 21:39 · Score: 1
  
  We haven't got the technology to do it. Nobody does.
  The gas giants are a long way away, and even with magical future-tech nuclear-electric engines several orders of magnitude more powerful than the ones we can build today, it'd still take over a year to get to them. If you're using something more realistic for a near future launch, like a combination of chemical rockets and solar-electric, you'd be talking about travel times close to a full decade.
  Long travel times like that are a death sentence for astronauts, until we invent better radiation shielding.
2. Re:are we there yet by elrous0 · 2011-03-21 01:22 · Score: 1
  
  WAY too far away, my friend. Titan could be made of petroleum and gold and it still wouldn't be worth the effort.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
3. Re:are we there yet by mister_playboy · 2011-03-21 03:03 · Score: 1
  
  Jupiter and Saturn have magnetospheric energy strong enough to power as many crafts as we would like (positioned accordingly of course)
  Nope, Saturn's magnetic field is actually less powerful than Earth's, although it is much larger. From Wiki:
  Saturn has an intrinsic magnetic field that has a simple, symmetric shape—a magnetic dipole. Its strength at the equator—0.2 gauss (20 T)—is approximately one twentieth than that of the field around Jupiter and slightly weaker than Earth's magnetic field. As a result Saturn's magnetosphere is much smaller than Jupiter's and extends slightly beyond the orbit of Titan. Most probably, the magnetic field is generated similarly to that of Jupiter—by currents in the metallic-hydrogen layer, which is called a metallic-hydrogen dynamo. Similarly to those of other planets, this magnetosphere is efficient at deflecting the solar wind particles from the Sun. The moon Titan orbits within the outer part of Saturn's magnetosphere and contributes plasma from the ionized particles in Titan's outer atmosphere.
  
  --
  Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
4. Re:are we there yet by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 06:08 · Score: 0
  
  Not to mention the added bonus of a radiation shield from solar wind and CMEs
  Being that close to either, your bigger concern would be the intense radiation produced by the planets' own magnetospheres.
5. Re:are we there yet by diaflux · 2011-03-22 11:27 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I was certainly talking out my ass about Saturn's magnetic field being used as a source of power =D However, thermionic nuclear power sources have been used for decades. If you could prevent yourself from being buried in sulfur, Io would have tremendous geothermal energy. To be more accurate, the systems of Jupiter and Saturn do indeed have a fair amount of power in different forms that can be tapped into. For example, the gravitational forces induce a lot of heat, especially in the moons close to the planets in orbit.
6. Re:are we there yet by diaflux · 2011-03-22 15:53 · Score: 1
  
  The gravitational forces create geothermal energy. Io has been said to be "turning itself inside out" every few hundred years, although I'm not sure how accurate a depiction this is of the activity observed on Io. There certainly have been large volcanic plumes observed by previous probes.
no practical reason? by pablo_max · 2011-03-20 20:52 · Score: 3, Insightful

Why do people always say that there is no practical reason for space exploration? I just don't get it.
Titan is a wonderful example. A planet with literally 100's of times more hydrocarbons than Earth. That seems like a reasonable excuse to go there and develop mining and extraction techniques.
You can get never get to the point where space exploitation makes sense unless you start.
1. Re:no practical reason? by j_sp_r · 2011-03-20 20:59 · Score: 1
  
  Shipping tons of hydrocarbons to earth doesn't sound like the best plan to me. It would decrease oxygen levels and increase CO2 if done in big enough numbers.
2. Re:no practical reason? by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-20 21:06 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  GP didn't say they had to go to Earth. Those gasses would go a long way on Mars or Luna.
  (See Imperial Earth by Arthur C Clarke for a good book on the subject)
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
3. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 21:25 · Score: 0
  
  That seems like a reasonable excuse to go there and develop mining and extraction techniques.
  You seem to be underestimating the cost of escaping a gravity well.
  Even if Titan were made of Gold it still wouldn't be worth it.
  At least until (if ever) we get Project Orion going again.
4. Re:no practical reason? by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-20 21:27 · Score: 1
  
  You could scoop gases from the atmosphere. In effect, aerobraking and mining at the same time. Judge it right and you could return to the inner solar system without using much fuel. If your spacecraft uses nuclear engines the gas you collect could be used immediately as a reaction mass.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
5. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 21:49 · Score: 1
  
  Do you really want to pay fuel prices above 200 million USD per litre?
6. Re:no practical reason? by Hognoxious · 2011-03-20 22:25 · Score: 1
  
  GP didn't say they had to go to Earth. Those gasses would go a long way on Mars or Luna.
  Where there's already no free oxygen to burn them with, so they'd be pretty much useless as fuel.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
7. Re:no practical reason? by MichaelSmith · 2011-03-20 22:39 · Score: 2
  
  GP didn't say they had to go to Earth. Those gasses would go a long way on Mars or Luna.
  Where there's already no free oxygen to burn them with, so they'd be pretty much useless as fuel.
  Handy as an atmosphere though. Methane is a great greenhouse gas.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
8. Re:no practical reason? by KeensMustard · 2011-03-20 22:57 · Score: 1
  
  Why do people always say that there is no practical reason for space exploration? I just don't get it.
  Hard to say without finding someone who is actually saying that. Mostly I just hear people saying that there is no practical reason for sending humans to do a robots job.
  
  Titan is a wonderful example. A planet with literally 100's of times more hydrocarbons than Earth. That seems like a reasonable excuse to go there and develop mining and extraction techniques.
  Well, Titan isn't a planet. Also it isn't possible to carry enough methane (by mass) to make it worthwhile to transport from Titan. It would take more energy to transport to the inner planets then we could gain from the cargo, meaning it's cheaper to manufacture on-site.
9. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 23:15 · Score: 0
  
  Lol... ERORI = [big negative number]
  Run the calculations on how much it would cost to ship fuel off a planet to, well, anywhere. Nobody would be able to afford space gas, even if you could get ERORI above zero.
10. Re:no practical reason? by icebraining · 2011-03-20 23:26 · Score: 1
  
  Imperial Earth by Arthur C Clark
  Oh, I've read that book, but I didn't know it was written by him. Although this story did remind me of it immediately.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
11. Re:no practical reason? by SoftGLOW · 2011-03-20 23:43 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe we should just bomb Titan for the "oil". I mean, there's no crackpot dictator (that we know of) but a proactive preemptive strike probably wouldn't hurt would it?
12. Re:no practical reason? by circletimessquare · 2011-03-21 00:12 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  2 things:
  1. pure science for the sake of pure science always eventually winds up making incredible discoveries that alter history and result in trillions of dollars of economic activity. that's why worrying about "no practical reason" is silly: it just means the person raising the issue doesn't understand science or history
  2. mining hydrocarbons on titan, and taking them somewhere else: anywhere, even just another moon of saturn, is completely ridiculous. its like flying from LA to Hong Kong to get your lunch time sandwich. you need an oxidizer too
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
13. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 00:32 · Score: 0
  
  Your political bias is showing. We have no practical way of mining Titan and bringing significant quantities of natural gas back to Earth. And do you see a tiny little incongruity here? The sci-fi dream of mining other planets... to get chemicals to burn in combustion engines? Not exactly Star Trek, is it?
14. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 00:33 · Score: 0
  
  Titan is a wonderful example. A planet with literally 100's of times more hydrocarbons than Earth. That seems like a reasonable excuse to go there and develop mining and extraction techniques.
  Well, Titan isn't a planet. Also it isn't possible to carry enough methane (by mass) to make it worthwhile to transport from Titan. It would take more energy to transport to the inner planets then we could gain from the cargo, meaning it's cheaper to manufacture on-site.
  To be fair on the original poster, he never said anything about transporting it back to Earth. But using the stuff locally to produce the next generation of iPads and then shipping those back to Earth might make economical sense. Well, something like that.
15. Re:no practical reason? by khallow · 2011-03-21 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  The Moon has a lot of oxygen. Any mining process which extracts metals from lunar crust will create oxygen as a byproduct.
16. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 02:51 · Score: 0
  
  Manufacture goods there. Ship them via solar sail.
17. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 05:06 · Score: 0
  2. mining hydrocarbons on titan, and taking them somewhere else: anywhere, even just another moon of saturn, is completely ridiculous. its like flying from LA to Hong Kong to get your lunch time sandwich. you need an oxidizer too
  Mr. McGuire: I want to say one word to you. Just one word.
  Benjamin: Yes, sir.
  Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?
  Benjamin: Yes, I am.
  Mr. McGuire: Plastics.
  Benjamin: Just how do you mean that, sir?
  -- The Graduate
  So I guess the questions are
  
  what's a cheap source of oxidizer? Say, perhaps, numerous icy bodies in perhaps a large collection of small particles in a ring like orbit of a nearby planet?
  what kinds of plastics can be made without consuming said oxidizer?
  how expensive would it be to make giant ballons out of various plastic, filled with hydrogen from the cracking of ice water for the oxygen, to collect by an orbital transfer craft towing a skyhook for lifting to an orbital processing factory?
  And finally, what's the deltaV cost needed to move products from there? It only has to be less than shooting stuff up from Earth to make economic sense.
18. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 05:14 · Score: 0
  
  2. mining hydrocarbons on titan, and taking them somewhere else: anywhere, even just another moon of saturn, is completely ridiculous. its like flying from LA to Hong Kong to get your lunch time sandwich. you need an oxidizer too
  It seems ridiculous because the cost of space travel is ridiculous. But, I don't think it's any more ridiculous than shipping the materials for a Prius around the world. It makes sense if the cost is covered. Eventually, space travel will get cheaper.
19. Re:no practical reason? by circletimessquare · 2011-03-21 06:56 · Score: 1
  
  it's like medieval mankind inventing guns, rockets, and laser cannons...
  all in order to go to endor to get more wood to make bows and arrows
  what the hell is wrong with you? seriously. you think its valid to get all this technology together, to go to titan, to get hydrocarbons!?
  are you gw bush? i know the usa has a petroleum addiction, but this is hilarious
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
20. Re:no practical reason? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 06:59 · Score: 0
  
  You don't ship the fuel, you setup an automated processing plant on Titan and beam the energy back via microwaves or lasers.
21. Re:no practical reason? by circletimessquare · 2011-03-21 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  yes. and the time space travel is cheap enough to go to titan, the idea of going there to export hydrocarbons will make as much sense as inventing guns, rockets and laser cannons to go to endor to get more wood to make bows and arrows
  you're imagining that it will be useful to use advanced technology to solve the problems of a dying technological era. the petroleum age is ending dude. by the time we're going to titan cheaply, we'll all have fusion power generators in our pockets
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
22. Re:no practical reason? by diaflux · 2011-03-22 09:46 · Score: 1
  
  Shipping tons of hydrocarbons to earth would certainly be a waste of time, in the context of using it as a combustible fuel in our atmosphere. Look at it as a resource in other ways. How about a valuable local resource for generating new materials. This is just one compound of many, sitting there, with plenty of energy on hand to use.
23. Re:no practical reason? by diaflux · 2011-03-22 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  For one thing, it would be useful as a source of propellant in moving materials in the first place. Locally and back to Earth.
It's rain, Jim, but not as we know it. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 21:20 · Score: 0

Not as we know it
excess could wreck another planet in 400 years? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 21:31 · Score: 0

black hole builders? ungrateful? misinformed. what?
this planet was relatively pristine (other than spiritually) in the 1600's. many think we're not supposed to need a 'new one' yet. the unwarranted taking of life (motive) throws the whole cosmos in a spin. there's stuff we need out there, it's being delivered now.
like if anybody lived 400 years we'd give a poop? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-20 23:41 · Score: 0

right
Whew, just in time by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 00:06 · Score: 0

When our oil runs out and it's time to colonize the Galaxy, we can extract Titan's natural gas to power our rockets.
It's raining methane by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 00:17 · Score: 0

Hallelujah!!!
Would have imagined it's wet! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 01:59 · Score: 0

Hence, sirens!
As Always when I pick a place by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 02:04 · Score: 0

Great! There goes my vacations plans this summer.
(rolls up piece of paper into a ball and throws it at the wall)
To boldly go - by Darth+Snowshoe · 2011-03-21 02:26 · Score: 1

My employer (disclosure) has a proposal out for a NASA discovery-class mission to put a boat (yes, a boat) on the surface methane seas of Titan;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8409052.stm
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010LPI....41.1236S
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/01/carnival-of-space-135-proposed-titan.html
It's called the Titan Mare Explorer (TiME) and let me just say, it's the coolest thing that I've ever come anywhere near close to working on. Not much of a Catholic anymore but I say a littler prayer each night that NASA selects this proposal to go forward. (They are due to announce next month. Write your congressperson!)
So it's not impossible, it's actually do-able, and it's not very logical to carp about whether it's convenient or fun for astronauts to go, as we've got a tremendous amount left to learn from automated missions before we contemplate sending people there. Besides, when TiME sends back the first live footage of the ravenous methane kraken, I'm sure everyone will be glad that astronauts were not part of the first payload.
1. Re:To boldly go - by geckipede · 2011-03-21 03:01 · Score: 1
  
  The ggp was talking about putting a manned space station around jupiter or saturn without government assistance. We really don't have the tech to do that. We could make an attempt at it with current tech, and it might work if we were lucky, but it would be very slow, the chances wouldn't be good, and it would be loltastically expensive.
  
  Shunting robots about the solar system is three or four orders of magnitude easier, plus one more order of magnitude if you are getting some form of government backing.
Weather by kellyb9 · 2011-03-21 04:06 · Score: 2

So what you're really telling me is - they can tell me its raining on Titan, but I can't seem to get reliable weather forcasts here.
1. Re:Weather by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 05:45 · Score: 0
  
  We know when it's raining on earth too.
2. Re:Weather by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 05:54 · Score: 0
  
  They can tell you that it's raining here too. For that matter, so can my pet rock. (Whenever it's wet)
3. Re:Weather by volcanopele · 2011-03-21 10:39 · Score: 1
  
  We can't make reliable weather forecasts for Titan either... But at least we have an excuse, we've only observed Titan's weather patterns from the Titan equivalent of mid-December (when Earth-based observations of sufficient resolution began in 2002) to the equivalent of early- to mid-April (where we are now). And even then the data set (even from Cassini) is pretty sporadic. But I do have one reliable way of knowing when there won't be clouds on Titan. Acquire images of it with an observation with the word "CLOUD" in it, like ISS_147TI_CLOUD002_PRIME
  
  --
  The Gish Bar Times - Blog covering Jupiter's moon Io
If the price of gas keeps raising by GarryFre · 2011-03-21 07:34 · Score: 1

It won't be long before it might be worth it to go to Titan to fill up.

--
www.Migrainesoft.com - Computer giving you a headache? We can fix that!
Where are all the cows? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 08:14 · Score: 0

I've been told for years that methane in the atmosphere on Earth is primarily caused by cows and is a major source of "global warming". So where are all the cows on Titan? And where is all the cry about global Titan warming?