Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Curiosity's Mars Crater Was Once a Vast Lake

Posted by samzenpus on from the how's-the-fishing? dept.

astroengine writes The mountain that NASA's Mars rover Curiosity is exploring appears to have once been a lake, scientists said Monday. Mount Sharp, a three-mile-high mound of layered debris rising from the floor of Gale Crater, is believed to have formed billions of years ago, images posted on NASA's website ahead of conference call with reporters show. Sediments to create the mountain likely originated from the crater rim highlands and were transported toward the center of the crater in alluvial fans, deltas, and wind-blown drifts, scientists said. "During wet periods, water pooled in lakes where sediments settled out in the center of crater," NASA said. "Even during dry periods in the crater center, groundwater would have existed beneath the surface. Then, during the next wet period it would resurface to form the next lake. This alternation of lakes, rivers and deserts could have represented a long-lasting habitable environment."

42 comments

  1. gotta find mars' g-spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    then its going to be wet again.

    1. Re:gotta find mars' g-spot by Tempest_2084 · · Score: 1

      Ok I'll admit it. That comment made me shoot coffee out my nose (which is as painful as it sounds). Damn you!

    2. Re:gotta find mars' g-spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Troll quality: -5

    3. Re:gotta find mars' g-spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As trolling goes, this is beyond pathetic. You think this is shocking because you're a complete spastic. It is not at all shocking though. I'd say try harder, but it won't help.

    4. Re:gotta find mars' g-spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And btw, accuracy is sometimes irrelevant when trying to get a point across, in fact the process of being proven wrong gets the point across even better. It's like a Socractic method, that you don't do on purpose, but you're simply lazy to get bogged down in the tedious details and walk the walk and do the work to iron out all the edges, so you throw a guess out there, instead of looking it up. Who's got all that time to write perfect posts? Slashdot is not a book you publish, meant as a reference for eternity, but a discussion site, depicting the status quo. What goes on a tombstone is different than the clay tablets egyptians used to send mail to each other bitching at one guy laying with another guy's gal, when he knew they were in some kind of bod, or agreement, together - I think they did not yet have formal marriage back then, where a woman, until married, is free to change her mind and dump somebody and go with somebody else instead, but after marriage, not so, especially in an era where few children are born out of wedlock.

  2. Great by RobinH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So why is it so hard to find fossilized evidence of previous life then?

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    1. Re:Great by rockout · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps because evidence of water does not guarantee life was ever present in that water.

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    2. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it's millions of miles away and we cannot bring any samples back to properly examine?

    3. Re:Great by edibobb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Fossils are not that common on earth. Pick a random place on earth, then do about as much looking around as a Rover can do. You'll be very lucky to find a fossil.

    4. Re:Great by Nyder · · Score: 3, Informative

      So why is it so hard to find fossilized evidence of previous life then?

      Big planet and we aren't by the exposed stuff. While we do find stuff laying out in the plain site on earth, that isn't usually how they find fossils. Some digging is required and a lot of time nature will do something to expose fossil. Mars doesn't have weather like ours, so chances of having a landslide or something is less.

      If we had a million peeps walking around on mars, then yes, maybe we'd find some fossils if they exist, but 1 rover on that planet? We'd be really lucky, IMO.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    5. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why is it so hard to find fossilized evidence of previous life then?

      Because Satan didn't put them their like he did here.

    6. Re:Great by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      So why is it so hard to find fossilized evidence of previous life then?

      You're joking, right?

      The original mission was:

      The mission's scientific objective was to search for and characterize a wide range of rocks and soils that hold clues to past water activity on Mars.

      Having been sent there to see if water could have been there and if we can find evidence of that, and after being a huge success, lasting longer than planned, and giving us evidence that, yes, at one point Mars had liquid water ... you're actually bitching that it hasn't found fossils? Seriously?

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    7. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what, you think THEY (live) are going to tell us the truth?

    8. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why hasn't it built a habitat capable of sustaining human life yet? Come on Curiosity, get it together! This is the big leagues!

    9. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because any previous life would be microbial and not visible and so you have to look for chemical fossils.

      Chemical fossils are hard to find for three/four reasons:

      1) Peroxide in the soil destroys organic compounds along with cosmic rays, solar wind, and UV light.
      2) Surviving organic chemicals could have come from metorites / comets.
      3) Surviving organic chemicals could have be been form in-situ from non-biological processes.
      4) The SAM instrument has a leak of an chlorinated hydrocarbon reagent that is complicating the SAM results.

    10. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fossils are very common on Earth ... in the Phanerozoic (the last ~500 million years). Before that (Precambrian) they are fairly rare, and most of that time you're dealing with microscopic fossils. About the only thing macroscopic for most of that time is stromatolites, and those still need the right sort of environment to occur. A lake is suitable, but they don't occur all the time.

      Putting it another way, for equivalent time periods on Earth to the ones they're investigating on Mars (probably >2 or 3 billion years) it would still be fairly lucky to come across recognizable macroscopic fossils. It happens, but you'd have to search pretty thoroughly and some areas would be entirely devoid of them.

    11. Re:Great by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      We need a road cut. Get an Interstate on Mars - then we'll find fossils.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    12. Re:Great by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      Native Martians would also appear out of the wood work protesting the road going through sacred burial grounds. Consider it a twofer.

    13. Re:Great by flyingsquid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not as if you're going to be able to crack open one of those rocks and find the Martian equivalent of a trilobite. For most of Earth's history, the dominant forms of life were microbes, and only in the last 600 million years or so when oxygen levels increase do large multicellular forms appear. Mars, assuming it ever had life, probably never got that far. So fossil evidence will consist of fossilized microbes- which will require cracking open rocks, thin-sectioning them, and inspecting them under a microscope. The other possibility is doing chemical analyses of the rocks and looking for geochemical evidence of life- isotopic ratios or organic compounds that could only be explained by the presence of life. Either way, it will require a fairly sophisticated laboratory. Either we have to conduct a sample-return mission, or we need to develop miniature laboratories that can be sent to Mars.

      Although it now seems as if there is a third option. Recently, a meteorite was discovered which appears to represent a sedimentary rock from Mars. It's spendy stuff- $10,000 a gram- but that's vastly cheaper than a sample-return mission. A multimillion-dollar program to prospect for Martian meteorites on Earth is another way to look for Martian sedimentary rocks.

    14. Re:Great by camperdave · · Score: 1

      The spot on Mars was not picked at random. It was picked because the overall geomorphology suggested that there may have been liquid water there in the past.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    15. Re:Great by camperdave · · Score: 2

      Wrong robot. It's Curiosity that's in the alleged lake bed, not one of the MERs (Spirit or Opportunity)

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    16. Re:Great by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 1

      None of the rovers are set up to look for microfossils, which can reasonably be expected to be the most common if any are present.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    17. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are better than/superior to precisely nobody. You in particular.

  3. all the evil will burn in the lake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    burn in the lake
    burn in the lake

    ahahahaahahhahahaahhahahahHAHHHHHAHAHAHAHH!!H!!H!H!HH!AHA

    fuck you Ancient Egyptians!

  4. Call it Formerly Lake Pahoe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, if NASA is open to suggestions.

    .

  5. Confirmation Bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jeeeze, what a case of confirmation bias?
    Now we're creating theories as to how geology happened so that we can fulfill our predetermined conclusion that Mars may have once been hospitable.
    Funny, I don't see sedimentary formations at the center of lakes on Earth. Guess it must be that crazy martian sediment.
    IT'S A DEAD PLANET FOLKS, MOVE ON.

    1. Re:Confirmation Bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi there.

      .

    2. Re:Confirmation Bias by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      Hi there Hi there, thanks for the incredibly large low-rez picture of a gorge cut by a river.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    3. Re:Confirmation Bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know fuck all. So do the right thing and say fuck all.

  6. Until they find .... by PPH · · Score: 2

    ... beer cans, tires, fishing tackle and a boat motor, I'm skeptical.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Until they find .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least then we will know there is no intelligent life.

    2. Re:Until they find .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does 20 years after the first colony appears count?

  7. beware of thirsty martians by ozduo · · Score: 0

    or worse ones with full bladders!

    --
    I got to the chocolate box before you, that's why the hard ones have teeth marks.
  8. Global warming by Anarchy24 · · Score: 1

    So basically, once global warming takes its course, Earth is going to look like Mars.

    1. Re:Global warming by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      So basically, once global warming takes its course, Earth is going to look like Mars.

      If you want a global-warming nightmare scenario, Venus is a better candidate.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    2. Re:Global warming by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Mars is a frosty desert. A runaway greenhouse effect on Earth would be much less pleasant. Hotter for a start. Sadly.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  9. Partly solves a mystery by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    The fact that basic life on Earth formed "surprisingly early" in Earth's history suggests it came from Mars. Earth was a mess early on at a time when Mars was an almost Earth-like place (by today's standards).

    Mars would probably have been much more suitable for life formation in the first billion or so years after the solar system formed. The volume of land suitable to life formation on Mars was probably much greater on Mars than Earth then. And meteor strikes were common such that life had a ready interplanetary tram.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  10. next goal is Venus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so apparently men are from Mars afterall, we must find where women are from now...

  11. Yeah right by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    It all drained away in those canals, I suppose.

    Pull the other one, it plays a tune.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."