More News From Mars? Afraid Nasa Funding Could Dry Up?

[cronus]

http://www.npr.org/2012/11/20/165513016 ... um-for-now

Big News From Mars? Rover Scientists Mum For Now

Scientists working on NASA's six-wheeled rover on Mars have a problem. But it's a good problem.

They have some exciting new results from one of the rover's instruments. On the one hand, they'd like to tell everybody what they found, but on the other, they have to wait because they want to make sure their results are not just some fluke or error in their instrument.

It's a bind scientists frequently find themselves in, because by their nature, scientists like to share their results. At the same time, they're cautious because no one likes to make a big announcement and then have to say "never mind."

The exciting results are coming from an instrument in the rover called SAM. "We're getting data from SAM as we sit here and speak, and the data looks really interesting," John Grotzinger, the principal investigator for the rover mission, says during my visit last week to his office at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. That's where data from SAM first arrive on Earth. "The science team is busily chewing away on it as it comes down," says Grotzinger.

(continued)

[FBM]

[Gawdzilla Sama]

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/index.html

[mistermack]

This is tantalising.
SAM analyses samples, and the hints are that they are finding organics that are compatible with life.

As they are trying to eliminate the possibility of contamination by Earth air, that's the only possible conclusion.
There's nothing else in Earth air that would cause much excitement if found on Mars.

If there has been life on Mars, that will be stunning. But of course, we get bits of Mars hitting the Earth. I don't know if it's possible that bits of the Earth have hit Mars SINCE life evolved? I would suspect not, as the Earth's gravity would make it much harder for that to happen.

So maybe life began on Mars, got transferred on a meteorite to Earth, and flourished in a better environment.
Or maybe life evolved separately on both. That would be a hard one to prove either way.

[Jesus_of_Nazareth]

Is it the new homeland for the Jews?

[cronus]

Is it the new homeland for the Jews?

It's got sand hasn't it?

[Horwood Beer-Master]

I'm going to be lazy and just quote my posts from RatSkep on this topic,

[quote="Horwood Beer-Master";p="1542626"]They've probably found "organic molecules".

Physicists just love getting themselves all in a tizzy over "organic molecules"; biologists meanwhile react to such discoveries in a more measured fashion.

I am preparing to be underwhelmed
[/quote]


[quote="Horwood Beer-Master";p="1542813"][quote="mattwilson";p="1542754"]As I understand it, the module that is responsible for the data being examined right now is designed to detect organic compounds, if this is correct it may just be that something indicative of "life"...[/quote]
There are a great many organic compounds that exist that are in no way specifically indicative of life.

I hope there turns out to be life on Mars, and I can certainly think of no solid reason why there shouldn't be; but I can't help but notice that on the whole "extraterrestrial life" issue astrophysicists have a history of overreaching themselves, and overreacting to fairly minor (or even non) discoveries.


If they do believe they've discovered life on Mars, I hope they actually bother to run the evidence for it past a good number of actual biologists, and bother to examine in detail at any criticisms/concerns the biologists may raise, before they go ahead and organise the press conference.[/quote]

[Jason]

It may be that it detected some monkey shit some tech stepped in and smudged on the rovers wheels.

'We might have news, but we don't want to say, but here's a press release anyway?' Fuck off. Afraid their funding will be cut indeed.

[cronus]

How does a idiot keep the worlds geeks & science buffs in suspense? Join Nasa and issue a press release...about...?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We're talking about it, so it worked.

[Blind groper]

If there has been life on Mars, that will be stunning. But of course, we get bits of Mars hitting the Earth. I don't know if it's possible that bits of the Earth have hit Mars SINCE life evolved? I would suspect not, as the Earth's gravity would make it much harder for that to happen.

It has been calculated that the 'dinosaur killer' asteroid that hit the Earth 65 million years ago, would have thrown quite a lot of debris into space, and some would escape the Earth's gravity. There is research that shows that bacterial spores inside rocks could survive the G forces, the cold, radiation, and vacuum of space, and stay in a torpid state for long enough to reach Mars.

That is not, in itself, proof that Earth bacteria could or have traveled to Mars, but it is an interesting possibility.

[klr]

If there has been life on Mars, that will be stunning. But of course, we get bits of Mars hitting the Earth. I don't know if it's possible that bits of the Earth have hit Mars SINCE life evolved? I would suspect not, as the Earth's gravity would make it much harder for that to happen.

It has been calculated that the 'dinosaur killer' asteroid that hit the Earth 65 million years ago, would have thrown quite a lot of debris into space, and some would escape the Earth's gravity. There is research that shows that bacterial spores inside rocks could survive the G forces, the cold, radiation, and vacuum of space, and stay in a torpid state for long enough to reach Mars.

That is not, in itself, proof that Earth bacteria could or have traveled to Mars, but it is an interesting possibility.

There was a line in Red Mars about that. About 2% was the figure mentioned IIRC.

[mistermack]

If there has been life on Mars, that will be stunning. But of course, we get bits of Mars hitting the Earth. I don't know if it's possible that bits of the Earth have hit Mars SINCE life evolved? I would suspect not, as the Earth's gravity would make it much harder for that to happen.

It has been calculated that the 'dinosaur killer' asteroid that hit the Earth 65 million years ago, would have thrown quite a lot of debris into space, and some would escape the Earth's gravity. There is research that shows that bacterial spores inside rocks could survive the G forces, the cold, radiation, and vacuum of space, and stay in a torpid state for long enough to reach Mars.

That is not, in itself, proof that Earth bacteria could or have traveled to Mars, but it is an interesting possibility.

I would discount the dinosaur collision being responsible for any bacterial evidence, because 65 million years ago, Mars would have been just as cold and unwelcoming as it is now, so any bacteria that got transferred in this way would be unlikely to flourish, enough to be detectable by the current mission.

I don't know what the estimates are for Mars losing it's atmosphere, and hence it's liquid water, but I think it's billions of years ago, not in the tens of millions. So if bits of the Earth successfully seeded Mars with bacteria, it would probably have to have been about three billion years ago, before the Mars climate changed.
Of course, there were a lot more collisions back then, so it's entirely possible, I would think, if they calculate that debris could escape the Earths gravity.

[Blind groper]

To mistermack

I would not totally discount the possibility that the bacteria 65 million years ago could not survive and reproduce, and consequently evolve into some better adapted to Mars. All that seems needed for bacterial life is liquid water. While Mars is less than 0 C, we know that water may remain liquid under those conditions in very thin films around dust particles. That is all that many bacteria need.

The truth is that we do not know if any life exists on Mars, and if so, where it might have come from. But the dinosaur killer impact sending Earth bacteria to Mars, and those bacteria surviving, is not impossible in theory, even if it is not probable.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

How about 650 millions ago? The calamity before the Cambrian Era.