Europa May "Nurture" Life 23
Bullschmidt writes: "This article suggests that Europa may not only have the water to support life, but also heat, generated from the intense tides of the Jovian moon, to not only support, but possibly nurture, life. The article also suggests that the same forces that heat the water may be also responsible for melting the icy crust of Europa, causing its characteristic cracked surface."
Re:so europa has heat and ice... (Score:1)
No photosynthesis required (Score:2)
Why did CNN post that? (Score:5, Insightful)
Worse, the research was really poor. It isn't hard to get the basic facts straight. I mean, Galileo went into orbit in 1995, not 1997 (hence the 1996 reference they gave which mentioned Galileo already in orbit by then). The book was 2010 (also made into a movie), not the dreadful 3001.
As for melting at the surface... not likely. Most researchers seem to think that the melting is occuring farther down, and some of it may rise up to the surface occasionally. (Others think its just warm ice convecting, for the most part.) Admittedly, I'm probably biased by my officemate's research on this topic, but still. They could at least give the alternate view.
They also don't note that Europa might or might not have two of the three ingredients thought necessary for life: readily availible biogenic elements and a source or energy suitable for life (tidal heat doesn't really serve that end directly). All it has is water. Water is an important start, but it isn't all and that bears keeping in mind.
I'm really confused and miffed by this article. It really shouldn't have been published, especially not as news. (This is not meant as an attack on the
hey hey hey! (Score:1)
It makes better news that way.
Re:Why did CNN post that? (Score:2)
Saying that the core will melt belies a serious misunderstanding of tidal heating. The core is too small to feel tides nearly as strongly as the outer icey shell or, to a lesser degree, the mantle. The mantle *might* get heated. But most models I've seen in the past few years point to the heat being dissapated in the icey shell. Thus, leaving the rocky bits untouched and usless for an energy source.
As for biogenic elements: just because they are generally abundant does not meant that they are accessible. If they're locked into the rocks or frozen as ices, they're useless for life. Particularly for the genesis of life.
Oh, the wonders of SF... (Score:1)
Re:Oh, the wonders of SF... (Score:2)
Old theory whose time has come (Score:4, Interesting)
Recently American Scientist" [sigmaxi.org] had an article on possible niches for organisms on Europa. The magazine article is worth reading. Very interesting. It is pretty easy to do the calculation that shows how deep the oceans are on Europa. You can even get an idea of the ice thickness from the heat diffusion for snow, though maybe I fluked that one. Anyway, Europa is the next moon out from Io which is pretty tormented by tidal stress. The surface of Europa is amazingly flat ... like the ice isn't very thick blah blah .. you get the picture.
People have been theorising about this for about 20 years, Clarke didn't invent the "life on Europa" thing he was just astute enough to see a winning theory. I remember at the time I was surprised so few supported it ... it seemed a very likely possibility. Then when hydrothermal vents were discovered it didn't take long for people to put the two ideas together.
Actually, the likely pressure at the bottom of the ocean on Europa is likely to be similar to that at the deepest parts of the Earth's oceans. But no-one knows. Can't wait for a probe to do some searching ... even just the ice on the surface near the cracks should have heaps of biological stuff if there is life there. Also, its probably the easiest place we could colonise. I mean the temp is over 0 C and the upper layers should be ok for scuba ... and a few subs ... hmmmmmmmmm
Pete
Re:Old theory whose time has come (Score:3, Insightful)
Holy hell! Colonisation is something that shouldn't even be considered, let alone attempted! It should be left as pure as possible for study, not contaminated by an excessive human presence.
Bush wants to cancel Europa mission (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Bush wants to cancel Europa mission (Score:1)
Re:Bush wants to cancel Europa mission (Score:1)
In the episode, Fry, Amy, & Zoidberg go to Europa for a picnic -- as they approach it, we see a monolith floating in space, with an "Out of Order" sign taped to it...
Odds are there won't be life... (Score:2)
Anyway, I would prefer to see the space dollars be spent on extra-solar system exploration or better yet, colonization or at least space tourism. Not that finding microbes somewhere else in the solar system would be nice, but the odds are against it. And is anyone forgetting Jupiter freaking radiatioon belt? Sure the ice is thick, but who knows maybe that radiation was orders of magnitude stronger a million or more years ago and all of Jupiters moons are just giant sterilized balls of .
Re:Odds are there won't be life... (Score:1, Offtopic)
What about the Klingons on Uranus?
sorry... had to revert back to the 4th grade for a second.
Re:Odds are there won't be life... (Score:3, Insightful)
First, Europa vs. Venus or Jupiter: Jupiter lacks liquid water (thought necessary for life) and a reasonable chance for biotic elements to come together (there is a lot of space, there, and not much carbon, nitrogen and oxygen). Venus is much too hot. Neither planet has any serious proponents for (present day?) life. Neither does the Moon, Mercury, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus or Pluto. Titan and Mars are the two other possibilities, as generally held by the planetary community. Oh, add to that Callisto and Ganymede, which also have liquid water. (Note that Juptier has icey moons, plural, not just Europa.)
We know that there is more than ice on Europa. We know that there are surface contaminents (either salts or hydrogen sulfide from the magnetosphere). We also are pretty sure, based on mangetometer readings, that there is liquid water under the ice. And under the icey shell, there has to be rock, based on the density and the moment of intertia results.
Jupiter's radiation belts are irrelevent. No one is forgetting them, they don't matter a whit to Europa's ocean. Radiation only pentrates about 10 cm of ice. It is not going to penetrate 1-10 km of ice. And you can't make the radiation strong, it's charged particles. Their energy is set by the pickup speed at Io (57 km/sec). You'd have to spin Jupiter up to increase the energy. That gives you the insane problem of how to strip off that angular momentum and how to keep a ball of gas from breaking up at that rotation speed (Jovian planets are already visibly oblate from their rotations.)
My last thought is a matter of personal opinion, but I wanted to voice it: I find your preferences for colonization and extra-solar exploration over astrobiology naive. Getting outside the solar system or sending people to other planets is orders of magnitude more expensive and difficult than sending a simple probe to Europa (which is already $1 billion). I mean, I'd love for NASA to develop faster than light drives, but it isn't realistic to expect them to focus on that over exploration of our system.
Important Question (Score:1)
Nothing new (Score:1)