Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Brine on Mars?

Posted by michael on Fri Feb 20, 2004 08:57 AM
from the still-need-gin-vermouth-and-olives dept.
Bagels writes "A new article on MSNBC (coming originally from Space.com) reports that the both Rovers may have struck water in the form of brine. The Opportunity rover found hints of salty water in the trench that it dug, and scientists note that the Spirit rover is currently digging a trench of its own to investigate the soil that clings to its treads, suggesting the possibility of moisture. The brine would only be small amounts of water mixed with salt, which can exist in liquid form at very low temperatures. More images are available over at NASA's rover site." Reader frovingslosh would like to add: "I'm just hoping that when you get around to posting one of the many stories that the rover has found mud on Mars that you might include a link to the slashdot article where I predicted this but got moderated as 'funny'." Done!
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by SYFer (617415) <syfer.syfer@net> on Friday February 20 2004, @08:59AM (#8338797) Homepage
    Scientists now believe that advanced colonies of Sea Monkeys [sea-monkeys.com] once inhabited Mars.
  • by turnstyle (588788) on Friday February 20 2004, @08:59AM (#8338800) Homepage
    ...there's shrimp!
  • by clifgriffin (676199) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:00AM (#8338810) Homepage
    I believe this is obvious proof that Mars used to have oceans. Yes, oceans. And because they had oceans, they had life. And because they had life, they had Elephants. Only they weren't called Elephants. They were called Marlaphants.

    Yeah, Marlaphants.

    Anyone taking bets?
  • Let's not forget (Score:4, Insightful)

    by W32.Klez.A (656478) * on Friday February 20 2004, @09:04AM (#8338837) Homepage
    Jokes, aside, let's not forget that this could house some microbial life, at the very least. Just look at our ocean's seabed around the vents.
  • by SparafucileMan (544171) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:05AM (#8338844)
    And so begins the great Martian Salt Trade.
  • by Ubi_NL (313657) <joris AT ideeel DOT nl> on Friday February 20 2004, @09:05AM (#8338847) Journal
    ..why did it not evaporate?

    The atmospheric pressure on mars is pretty low [washington.edu], which means that any liquid water (which this apparently is) will be vacuum dried [wustl.edu] to gas and move into outer space.
    • by Tango42 (662363) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:11AM (#8338894)
      That's why they're not looking for water on the surface. Water mixed with rock, sand, or salt, or even just underground, would not evaporate.
    • by kinnell (607819) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:14AM (#8338922)
      ..why did it not evaporate?

      The same reason they are speculating that it can exist in liquid form at such low temperatures: the phase diagram of a solution can be radically different from the pure substance. In hand-waving terms, the attracion between the salt molecules and the water molecules increases the energy required to evaporate the liquid. This is why they are theorising that it is highly concentrated brine - because if it were not highly concentrated, it could not exist under the temperatures and pressures on Mars. I'm probably not being unrealistic in suggesting that the scientists have thought this all through before publishing the press release.

    • by Speare (84249) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:37AM (#8339088) Homepage
      Even if the water DID evaporate, it would not, "move into outer space." There's this thing called gravity, which works on the molecules of gas-phase matter just as much as it works on liquids. The air doesn't "move into outer space," does it? The vapor would rise until it found equilibrium with other atmospheric gases. If there was a lot of water, you'd see it in the form of clouds.
      • by Detritus (11846) on Friday February 20 2004, @10:18AM (#8339440) Homepage
        Gases do move into outer space. Gravity slows down the process, but it doesn't stop it. When you get to the outer atmosphere, the velocity of gas atoms and molecules follow a predictable statistical distribution, dependent on their atomic mass and average temperature. Many atoms and molecules will reach escape velocity, and diffuse away from the planet. What do you think happened to the atmospheric helium on Earth?
        • by Christopher Thomas (11717) on Friday February 20 2004, @12:49PM (#8340869)
          Gases do move into outer space. Gravity slows down the process, but it doesn't stop it. When you get to the outer atmosphere, the velocity of gas atoms and molecules follow a predictable statistical distribution, dependent on their atomic mass and average temperature. Many atoms and molecules will reach escape velocity, and diffuse away from the planet. What do you think happened to the atmospheric helium on Earth?

          Molecular weight of helium: 4
          Molecular weight of water: 18

          Gases escape over geologic time if the mean particle velocity is more than about a tenth escape velocity (if I recall correctly). Light particles at a given temperature (defined by average particle kinetic energy) move faster and so are lost more readily. Heavier particles are moving more slowly, and so are lost at a _much_ slower rate (the tail of the Boltzman distribution is exponential).

          The real reason Mars has relatively little water is that water is broken up in the upper atmosphere by interaction with solar UV. While water may not be light enough to escape, hydrogen definitely is (molecular weight 2, and weight of an atomic hydrogen radical formed by a UV event is 1). This mechanism works on all of the planets (especially the inner ones) to strip their atmospheres of hydrogen.

          Mars has a less active geology than Earth. We get hydrogen compounds (including water) replenished from volcanic sources. Earth also has a much higher escape velocity, which means that hydrogen is lost less quickly when formed (and has longer to recombine to form chemicals with higher molecular weight).

          Both of these help explain why Earth is wet and Mars isn't. On the short term, however, water stays bound in Mars's atmosphere just fine. Those ice caps that migrate seasonally via atmospheric gas transport aren't all CO2, you know.

          You can find a number of documents online discussing why Venus did get stripped of most of its water, despite being heavy and having a fairly active geology.
    • by mikerich (120257) on Friday February 20 2004, @10:24AM (#8339483)
      ..why did it not evaporate?

      Most of it probably has. One process could be groundwater carrying dissolved mineral salts being drawn to the surface by capillary action. The water evaporates into the very low pressure Martian atmosphere, leaving the salt as a deposit.

      Similar processes take place on Earth where they deposit salt and iron oxides in deserts.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

  • by SpinyManiac (542071) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:06AM (#8338851) Homepage
    Here's [newscientist.com] a New Scientist article from January which argues for the presence of brine.
  • Great! (Score:5, Funny)

    by HarveyBirdman (627248) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:07AM (#8338863) Journal
    Now there will be salt mines for the riff-raff when I take over Mars.
  • Salt? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Pirogoeth (662083) * <pirogoeth@@@ikrug...com> on Friday February 20 2004, @09:07AM (#8338865) Homepage Journal
    Maybe it's leftover salt from Martian civilizations de-icing their driveways...
  • by SparafucileMan (544171) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:07AM (#8338867)
    Rover is picking up hints of Martian Cities made entirely of Gold off in the distance. Spanish mercenaries, get ready!
  • by dnaboy (569188) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:09AM (#8338875)
    My guess, one of these days one of the Mars rovers will stumble on upon Bikini Bottom, and be treated to the whimsical antics of SpongeBob, Patrick, Plankton, and Squidward. Come on, there's no space helmet wearing sassy squirrels like Sandy on earth. If there were, would I be sitting here typing?
  • by Cesaro (78578) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:11AM (#8338889) Journal
    This would be much much more exciting if they found spice.

    Other rover was actually taken by a sand worm.

    In other news, new rovers will roll without rhythm. :)
  • Be careful (Score:4, Interesting)

    by amightywind (691887) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:16AM (#8338933) Journal
    The Opportunity rover found hints of salty water in the trench that it dug, and scientists note that the Spirit rover is currently digging a trench of its own to investigate the soil that clings to its treads, suggesting the possibility of moisture.

    The very small particle size of Martian dust makes it likely that it sticks due to static charge. If the soil were moisture laden you would expect it to rapidly dry out and crust over (change appearance) on the wheels of the rover.

    • Re:Be careful (Score:5, Informative)

      by mbrod (19122) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:35AM (#8339066) Homepage Journal
      "The very small particle size of Martian dust makes it likely that it sticks due to static charge. If the soil were moisture laden you would expect it to rapidly dry out and crust over (change appearance) on the wheels of the rover."

      No. The amount they are talking about causing this is much much smaller than the amount it would require to saturate it to the point of an observable change in appearance after exposure.

      It may even be the result of no water in it now but the result of residual salts left behind by existance of water at some point. Theoretically this could display these properties as well.
    • Re:Be careful (Score:5, Informative)

      by hcg50a (690062) on Friday February 20 2004, @10:16AM (#8339427) Journal
      Right.

      The brine speculation is coming from people not involved on the project, which space.com is reporting uncritically. The news conference where the project scientists are presenting their information mention nothing about brine.

      See the entry for Thursday, February 19, 2004 at http://www.spaceflightnow.com/mars/mera/status.htm l [spaceflightnow.com].
  • Fe2O3 (Score:5, Funny)

    by martinX (672498) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:18AM (#8338948)
    I hope they rust-proofed the Rovers.
  • Normally (Score:5, Funny)

    by maroberts (15852) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:20AM (#8338964) Homepage Journal
    If you dig a trench in the sand and find salty water, you should start running because the tide is gonna come in any minute!
    • Ah, but... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by abb3w (696381) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:49AM (#8339184) Journal
      Deimos and Phobos, while closer (23459 and 9378 km) to Mars than Luna is to Earth (about 384400 km), also have much smaller masses (1.8e15 and1.08e16 kg) than Luna (7.35e22 kg). [source [arizona.edu]]

      Tidal forces (being a function of gravitational differential) are an inverse-cube function on distance, and linear with mass, so that would be a tidal force about 1/99th that of which we're used to. (Disclaimer: I am not a Physicist, but I share a house with one.)

      While this is Mars, the concern isn't completely insane. If the rover's in position to get a 1% response from the Martian equivalent of the Bay of Fundy [highest-tides.com], we'll be needing yet another Mars probe, and someone at NASA should be needing a new job for putting it there.
  • by G4from128k (686170) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:21AM (#8338974)
    This raises the possiblities of halophiles [www.uib.no] living on Mars. On Earth, halophiles can live in up to 35% salt solutions. Pure water would kill these creatures --causing them to aborb water until they burst.

    Its no wonder that Viking [utk.edu] found no clear evidence of life on Mars, the low-salt water in Viking's nutirent broth probably killed any halophiles.
  • Gee... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Syberghost (10557) <syberghost@syb e r g h ost.com> on Friday February 20 2004, @09:24AM (#8339001) Homepage
    You mean there might actually be water on Mars, meaning that there's oxygen, that we could extract and breathe?

    If only someone [netjeff.com] had mentioned this possibility before.
  • by bob670 (645306) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:28AM (#8339025)
    Brine? Brine means pickles? Pickles means Mars was (or still is) inhabited by a highly evolved race of cucumbers? Earthlings eat huge quantities of pickles on burgers? Meaning McDonald's could be considered a weapon of mass destruction? So now Mars will declare war, great, this is just what the economy needs...
  • by Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:35AM (#8339071) Homepage
    So now we know where all those pickled odities you find in redneck bars come from. I knew those things floating in brine must have come from another planet.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 20 2004, @09:38AM (#8339091)
    I think they should take a picture at night so we can see what Mars' moons look like.
  • Better way to dig (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dellis78741 (745139) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:39AM (#8339099)
    Rather than having the rovers scratch the surface or look at billion year old craters what they should do is send a large lump of heavy metal (say, 500 lbs) to Mars and, with it protected by a heat shield, slam it into the surface like an meteorite. Not having to account for parachute wind drift they could be pretty accurate with such a targeted blow and the result would be a small -fresh- crater. The crater could be observed by sensors in orbit and a rover landed in the vicinity shortly thereafter. Both the man-made meteorite and the rover could be sent together and initially orbited so as to allow time for a precise hit and accurate rover reentry.
  • Resolving Power? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mattr (78516) <mattr@tel e b o d y . c om> on Friday February 20 2004, @09:52AM (#8339226) Homepage Journal
    I keep seeing references in the rover news about the microscopic imager, but is this really a microscope, or is it just magnifying as much as say a desktop macroscope for opaque objects (they let you see things around the size of a hair okay..? If there were things the size of microorganisms in the briny reaches, could we see them? It is impossible for the layman to look at the closeups we've been seeing and understand how big the field is.
    • Re:Resolving Power? (Score:5, Informative)

      by mikerich (120257) on Friday February 20 2004, @10:48AM (#8339729)
      I keep seeing references in the rover news about the microscopic imager, but is this really a microscope, or is it just magnifying as much as say a desktop macroscope for opaque objects (they let you see things around the size of a hair okay..?

      It is definitely a microscope - going down to 30 microns per pixel. A hair is around about 100 microns in diameter.

      Sorry I don't have a precise magnification.

      If there were things the size of microorganisms in the briny reaches, could we see them?

      The objects seen in the ALH84001 meteorite were only between 20 and 100 nanometres (0.02 to 0.1 micrometres) and needed a scanning electron microscope to be seen. So MER can't hope to see them. Terrestrial bacteria are 2 to 10 microns (generally) in size - so the majority of them would also be invisible. There are some much larger bacteria; the largest known Epulopiscium fishelsoni is a whopping 250 microns in diameter.

      But it should be remembered that this is not a biological microscope - it was designed for petrological work which rarely requires such extreme magnification.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

  • by Dan East (318230) on Friday February 20 2004, @09:58AM (#8339271) Homepage
    Hasn't anyone else noticed this [nasa.gov]?

    The mars face has returned!

    Dan East
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 20 2004, @09:59AM (#8339286)
    Maybe... just maybe, Mars was similar to Earth some-umpteen-billion years ago. And Earth will be like Mars in some-umpteen-billion years.

    I'm willing to take an entreprenurial risk and say we're overlooking the real moneymaker here... and that's Venus... once Earth moves out of this cushy orbit, Venus is going to move in. A couple billions years after that... Hot Venutian Chicks on my beaches.

    awwwYEAH.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 20 2004, @10:20AM (#8339454)
    You stick a couple of 100 million dollars worth of water detecting apparatus aboard a rover, and how do you eventually find the wet stuff? Right, it sticks to the tires...

    Doh!
  • by praedor (218403) on Friday February 20 2004, @10:54AM (#8339798) Homepage

    That means that NASA can start putting cool mudflaps on future rovers. You know, those flaps with the naked ladies on 'em? R-r-r-r-r baby!

  • water? (Score:5, Funny)

    by chunkwhite86 (593696) on Friday February 20 2004, @11:11AM (#8339958)
    What happens if the rover DOES find water? Would it sink or would it float? Logic dictates that if it floats, it is therfore a witch and must be burned.