Strange Globs Could Signal Water On Mars 186
Joshua.Niland writes "Strange globs seen on the landing strut of the Phoenix Mars lander could be the first proof that modern Mars hosts liquid water. Images from the robotic craft show what appear to be liquid droplets growing, merging, and dripping on the lander's leg over the course of a Martian month. Just when is NASA going to fix that leaking roof on the backlot?"
Duh... (Score:5, Interesting)
Why is this news so important? (Score:0, Interesting)
"Therefore there must have been life on mars, therefore we must have descended from alien bacteria, therefore the Bible must be wrong, therefore there must be no God, therefore religious people shouldn't lecture me about sleeping around."
Strange globs found on Mars? - OH C'MON! No wonder such news turns on so many people.
Re:Science has a high burden of proof. (Score:1, Interesting)
Finish your train of thought so you can actually make a point.
So... you disagree with him? People should starve?
Phoenix was above the triple point (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't see that this is that surprising. The Phoenix landing site was low enough to have the surface pressure above the "triple point" of water, so liquid water is just a matter of having it being warm enough (or having enough salts to depress the freezing point enough).
Re:Science has a high burden of proof. (Score:4, Interesting)
Damn right it's my tax dollars at work, and millions of us approve of it.
I agree except with the "at work" part. Scientific exploration on Mars is just an expensive hobby right now. For example, if there had been 5 Phoenix landers instead of one (five landers incidentally would have cost less than five times the cost of one Phoenix lander), we'd be able to compare the legs of the working vehicles. By launching one, they eliminated an important part of scientific observation, namely being able to repeat an observation. As it is, I don't see how this discovery will be "confirmed" over any reasonable length of time. It may well be decades before anything concrete can be said.
As I see it, there are three ways they could make those tax dollars work for Mars exploration: 1) faster probe development and larger batch sizes when a probe is developed and built, 2) sample return, 2018 is the scheduled date for the first sample return mission, and 3) a long term manned presence on Mars. Some of these options will drive up costs a bit. But if you're interested in your tax dollars "working"...
Re:No, it proves there is water vapor (Score:3, Interesting)
As frigid as Mars is, it would have sublimated onto the rover, not condensed.
God, I'm an idiot... it would have accumulated by DEPOSITION, not sublimation.
Still, the point is still there. It would have changed from vapor to solid without a liquid phase. The perchlorates that would keep it liquid wouldn't be in the vapor, and thus it would depose, not condense.
Re:Silly (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No, it proves there is water vapor (Score:5, Interesting)
That condensed on the metal parts of the rover
Not to denigrate the achievements of the Phoenix lander, but this is exactly why the people who advocate robotic planetary missions over manned ones are wrong.
We didn't detect this water using Phoenix's million-dollar spectrometer designed to detect hydroxy compounds, or whatever. We detected it by adding a $20 digital camera that happened to be capable of pointing at some metal struts.
If you want to discover new stuff, you want to leave room for serendipity. Unfortunately, because Phoenix is a purpose-designed robotic platform, we can't ask any more questions about what the condensing substance is, or what else is in it. No matter how advanced they become, we can only tease ourselves with robots. To really check the place out, we have to go in person.