Nasa: 'Liquid water has been found on Mars'

[Notebook]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34384101

Scientists think they can now tie dark streaks seen on the surface of Mars to periodic flows of liquid water.


Data from a Nasa satellite shows the features, which appear on slopes, to be associated with salt deposits.

Crucially, such salts could alter the freezing and vaporisation points of water in Mars's sparse air, keeping it in a fluid state long enough to move.

Michael Meyer, the lead scientist on Nasa's Mars exploration programme, and Dr Jim Green, Nasa's planetary science director, made the announcement.

 

[boogabooga]

Why are we getting so excited about tiny amounts of transient liquid water on Mars when there are oceans of the stuff on Europa, Enceladus, etc.?

 

[Ripley]

Maybe because Mars is the next step where humans are going to?

 

[boogabooga]

Why do we assume that Mars is where we are going next?

Do you not see the circular logic?

 

[fred18]

I think that the point here is that mars is the only somehow "liveable" place around here. No way of building a colony on Venus, Moon is close but nothing to live on, mars somehow is similar to earth, and there is the strong doubt that it was like earth in a remote past. Therefore each similarity to our planet is a good news, and brings the transformation of planet mars in a human colony a bit closer.

Moreover, I also think that when human will be able to dig around mars we could fine fossils and other rests of past life there, it could be huge.

Europa is to me the most interesting place in the solar system, but so far away and so full of radiation that for a while will be a difficult target for humans. And it's very different from Earth, so it's difficult to imagine us in that kind of underwater world.

At last I think that NASA people is also looking for good reasons to gather government investments for the mars exploration program, so the more sensational the better.

 

[Urwumpe]

Why do we assume that Mars is where we are going next?

Do you not see the circular logic?

Well, what is the alternative? Jupiter? Saturn? Venus? Wisconsin?

 

[fort]

Well, what is the alternative? Jupiter? Saturn? Venus?

Wisconsin?

Becon les Bruyeres :lol:

 

[Frilock]

Well, what is the alternative? Jupiter? Saturn? Venus? Wisconsin?

Whats wrong with Wisconsin?

 

[boogabooga]

Packers fans

But seriously, I am talking more about planning unmanned missions.

I would like to see Europa get the same kind of attention in the next 15 years that Mars has in the past 15.

 

[dbeachy1]

I would like to see Europa get the same kind of attention in the next 15 years that Mars has in the past 15.

But beyond that, Mars is a lot closer.

 

[C3PO]

Or to put it another way: Shorter travel time.

 

[RGClark]

Why are we getting so excited about tiny amounts of transient liquid water on Mars when there are oceans of the stuff on Europa, Enceladus, etc.?

Let's visit all of them.

Bob Clark

---------- Post added at 06:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:57 PM ----------

How does this compare to the discovery of the gullies on Mars by Mars Global Surveyor.

Bob Clark

 

[Capt_hensley]

Let me know when it pools up and stays that way longer than a year...

 

[Andy44]

Packers fans

But seriously, I am talking more about planning unmanned missions.

I would like to see Europa get the same kind of attention in the next 15 years that Mars has in the past 15.

This is, all by itself, an incredible scientific discovery. It has nothing to do with manned missions or colonization or any of that stuff. The pure science alone is stunning.

THAT's why we get "all excited".

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Have we concluded that Mars is actually lifeless? It seems like there is the potential for microbial life existing on Mars right now.

• Perchlorates do not seem to be a show-stopper, as tests have shown that Earth-based archaea can cope with Martian levels of perchlorates. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24150694)).
  
• UV doesn't seem to be a problem for anything living a few inches into the soil
  
• Cosmic radiation does not seem to be a problem for some critters like Deinococcus Radiodurans
  
• Pressure doesn't seem to be a problem either - especially if surface tension in fluids is accounted for.
  
• Temperatures seem within a comfortable range on Mars (relatively speaking).
  
• There isn't a lot of nitrogen on Mars, but there is some. Getting some proteins together doesn't seem impossible.

Anything I'm missing? We really need to analyze the hell out of a shovel-full of Mars soil. Might have to dig down quite a ways, but my bet is that there are critters on Mars, and that they are probably similar to critters that live in similar environments on earth. It would be interesting to sequence them and see of the panspermia hypothesis is valid or not.

 

[Unstung]

I thought the streaks on Mars have been linked to seasonal water flows a few years ago.

Anything I'm missing? We really need to analyze the hell out of a shovel-full of Mars soil. Might have to dig down quite a ways, but my bet is that there are critters on Mars, and that they are probably similar to critters that live in similar environments on earth. It would be interesting to sequence them and see of the panspermia hypothesis is valid or not.

The ExoMars rover is able to dig relatively deep and analyze samples, even with perchlorates, with its mass spectrometer just fine. But sending a spacecraft to Enceladus to fly through plumes of abundant ocean samples is much simpler and more promising, especially if life is found.

At current funding levels, flagship missions to places like Mars and Europa cannot be constructed simultaneously. Mars 2020 will likely make it off the pad years before the Europa mission. Neither mission is designed to find life, unless one gets really lucky. A lack of plutonium is reducing opportunities for exploration beyond Jupiter.

 

[Lisias]

Why do we assume that Mars is where we are going next?

Do you not see the circular logic?

Because Venus is terribly inhospitable and there's no hope of getting anything from the planet in order to keep humans alive. Mercury much less.

Jupiter is far, far away - the closest Jupiter can be of Earth is 588 millions of Kilometers. Mars, on the other hand, is "just" 54.6 millions of Kilometers at the closest point - a trip to Jupiter would last 10 times a trip to Mars.

And a trip to Mars is barely possible nowadays, what to say about Jupiter?

So, yes. Besides the Moon, Mars is the only viable place to send a Human in the near future.

 

[Urwumpe]

Jupiter is far, far away - the closest Jupiter can be of Earth is 588 millions of Kilometers. Mars, on the other hand, is "just" 54.6 millions of Kilometers at the closest point - a trip to Jupiter would last 10 times a trip to Mars.

More accurate: about 5 years to Jupiter. And you sure don't want to try an accelerated transfer to Jupiter, because a Orbit insertion into a Europa orbit is already costly enough.

And then there is still the problem that Europa is inside the Jupiter-scale version of the Van Allen belts. You really don't want to be there, unless you are a robot. And if a robot had a choice there, he would likely also decide to stay away.

 

[Unstung]

So, yes. Besides the Moon, Mars is the only viable place to send a Human in the near future.

That was in regard to unmanned missions.

More accurate: about 5 years to Jupiter. And you sure don't want to try an accelerated transfer to Jupiter, because a Orbit insertion into a Europa orbit is already costly enough.

And then there is still the problem that Europa is inside the Jupiter-scale version of the Van Allen belts. You really don't want to be there, unless you are a robot. And if a robot had a choice there, he would likely also decide to stay away.

It is possible to achieve two years to Jupiter; all that's required is a sufficiently powerful rocket. The SLS capable of launching orbiters directly to the outer planets, and maybe even the Falcon Heavy.

While the Jupiter environment still presents its own problems, the issue is more budgetary than technological. The Mars committee has more clout than Outer Plants. Mars gets a disproportionate amount of the attention and funds, to the point where it feels like the NASA administration forgot about six other planets. The cost for contemporary missions to Jupiter and Mars are comparable (Juno and Europa Clipper vs. MAVEN and Curiosity).

 

[Urwumpe]

It is possible to achieve two years to Jupiter; all that's required is a sufficiently powerful rocket. The SLS capable of launching orbiters directly to the outer planets, and maybe even the Falcon Heavy.

As I said: Europa Orbit insertion with a minimum energy transfer to Europa is already expensive enough.

The faster you want to go there, the more fuel you need for slowing down at your target. Using a larger launcher is only the beginning of your problems. If you track the consequences of changing the requirement of a minimum energy orbit insertion into a high energy orbit insertion to all other requirements on your spacecraft, you can quickly see, what a can of worms you have just opened.

Edit: See here for a very good example of the problems:

http://ccar.colorado.edu/asen5050/projects/projects_2003/simmons/