Methane on Mars? 327
mbone writes "Two independent groups are claiming the detection of methane in the Martian atmosphere, one using the
Mars Express orbiter,
and the other using ground based telescopes. This detection, if confirmed, would be of great significance for the search of life on Mars, as Methane will not last long in the Martian atmosphere and thus must be renewed, presumably either by biological processes or by volcanic vents, which would be a good place for life to develop. The leader of the ground based astronomy team, Michael Mumma of the Goddard Space Flight Center, when asked if the methane was biological in origin, said 'I think it is, myself personally.'"
And if they find sulfur... (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, a couple [heptune.com] of sources [thefart.com] indicate that humans emit little or no methane when they pass gas.
Re:And if they find sulfur... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:And if they find sulfur... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:And if they find sulfur... (Score:5, Funny)
well I say 6 Bean burritos and a Zippo lighter will prove your sources wrong
Re:And if they find sulfur... (Score:3, Funny)
More likely that Canada got to Mars first.
"Say Terrance, pull my finger!"
"OK Philip..."
FART!
"Bahahaha, you farted on Mars!"
"I sure did Philip!"
Re:And if they find sulfur... (Score:5, Funny)
What are you talking about? Michael Mumma already admitted he did it. Reference: "The leader of the ground based astronomy team, Michael Mumma of the Goddard Space Flight Center, when asked if the methane was biological in origin, said 'I think it is myself, personally.'"
Re:And if they find sulfur... (Score:2)
Re:And if they find sulfur... (Score:3, Funny)
when asked if the methane was biological in orign (Score:2, Redundant)
It's GOLD Jerry, GOLD!
for want of a comma (Score:5, Funny)
He who smelt it, dealt it.
Re:when asked if the methane was biological in ori (Score:2)
Re:when asked if the methane was biological in ori (Score:5, Insightful)
Asked whether the continual production of methane is strong evidence of a biological origin of the gas, Dr Mumma said: "I think it is, myself personally."
He added: "It's difficult to imagine that primordial methane [from geological activity] would continue outgassing for four billion years [the age of Mars]. This looks very intriguing."
Doesn't sound reckless to me. Sounds more like informed speculation.
Uh-oh! (Score:5, Interesting)
Bad astronomer = Apple project? (Score:5, Funny)
Is this another future Mac OS project, much like their famous Butt-Head Astronomer [typepad.com] project.
Come to think of it, Bevis is a constellation [bisque.com].
Possibility? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Possibility? (Score:2)
When has he been to Mars? (Score:5, Funny)
Well, atleast he's not denying it. How did Michael get to Mars? Gee, he must have a heck of an intestinal disorder for it to be detectable with a telescope!
Re:When has he been to Mars? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:When has he been to Mars? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:When has he been to Mars? (Score:3, Funny)
My bad, it was pointed at Uranus.
Woo Hoo (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Woo Hoo (Score:4, Funny)
Bitch (Score:3, Funny)
Hi. I'm Troy McClure (Score:5, Funny)
FIRE!!!!!!! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:FIRE!!!!!!! (Score:2)
Ahhh, methane. (Score:5, Funny)
Well, what about... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well, what about... (Score:5, Interesting)
Two Words (Score:2, Informative)
-Colin [colingregorypalmer.net]
Re:Two Words (Score:5, Informative)
It isn't the same, but studies of bacteria living far underground offer a good example. They are starved, tiny. Often less than a thousandth the size of a normal bacteria. Their metabolism is so slow that according to Sci Am they may have an average frequency of cell division of once a *century* or even less.
Mars is even less hospitable. Far colder, far less water, and hardly more nutrients.
It seems to me that if you're going to believe we managed that with the probes it also seems just as likely one could argue for earth bacteria having made it there long ago on meteors.
exponential growth (Score:4, Insightful)
Whether they divide once every century or once ever 20 minutes, their growth is still exponential. Biological systems only stop growing exponentially once there is serious competition for resources or space.
Re:Well, what about... (Score:2)
I don't think that's in the realms of possibility.
Anyone got a light? (Score:2)
Existence (Score:5, Insightful)
It is life.
Re:Existence (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Existence (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Existence (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think that ultimately mattered. People have been obsessed with life on Mars since it was first discovered and the possibility of canals that were built by other beings.
The thought that water once flowed on the planet wasn't really that much of a profound/thought provoking concept in the scheme of things. There is some fairly obvious evidence [esa.int] that has hinted at the possibility of water. (I know, that image is from Mars Express, but we've known about major valleys and canyons since at least the time of the Viking Landers).
Regarding whether we are being eased into the possibility of life being on other planets. There is a greater chance of that than trying to prepare of for the possibility of water existing on another body.
However, I think the confirmation of life would be such huge and amazing news, I doubt word of it could be covered up for very long before it got out.
More like public relations (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Existence (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Life originated only on Earth and travelled to Mars in an ejected rock. This would be just *boring*.
2) Life originated on Mars and travelled to Earth in an ejected rock like the famous Mars meteorite. We are all Martians? Well, there's an interesting thought.
3) Life originated somewhere else and travelled to both Mars and Earth by one of these mechanisms. Panspermia. Life would be very likely to exist throughout the galaxy in every niche you could imagine.
4) Life originated quite differently and separately on Earth and Mars. Woahh! Now *that* is a deep thought.
It seems likely to me that Scientists (being careful people) will start off with assumption (1). It would be hard to tell the difference between (1)/(2) and (3) without going off to mine some comets that have never been close enough to Earth or Mars to pick up a stray life-bearing meteorite. It would be hard to imagine any test that would distinguish between (1) and (2).
So it'll come down to (1)/(2)/(3) versus (4). If it's (4), I'd expect us to be able to see that pretty easily - eg: Totally different fundamental mechanisms for just about everything.
Re:Existence (Score:4, Interesting)
Even if the mechanisms are the same, there could be a difference. Many chemical structures involving carbon can exist in two different variants, that are each others mirror image. In life on earth a lot of those apear only in one variant. In some cases the mirror image of something existing in our bodies would actually be toxic. And AFAIK the torsion of DNA in every living cell here on earth is the same direction. Now even if life did evolve in the same way independendly on Earth and Mars, what are the chances that all of those structures would be the same direction in Earth life and Martian life? If we found life on Mars with DNA that was mirrored compared to our DNA, what would that tell us?
Re:Existence (Score:4, Interesting)
That's really big news (Score:5, Insightful)
There were some experiments [space.com] onboard the Viking landers that showed some odd results but weren't invested any further.
The fact that the fine rovers are unable to detect life is a shame I think. They were designed to search for water only, I know. But they should at least have been equipped with minimal biological experiments too, just in case. I can't wait for a samplereturn mission...
Re:That's really big news (Score:2, Insightful)
"Minimal" might not be good enough. They found out the hard way from Viking that it is often difficult to rule out natur
Re:That's really big news (Score:3, Insightful)
Safety of sample return missions? (Score:3, Interesting)
Vindication of James Lovelock ? (Score:4, Informative)
James Lovelock was the guy who invented the current notion of 'Gaia'. Whether you agree or disagree with that idea I think you'll find the origin of it interesting. He was hired by JPL to devise ways of finding life on Mars. So he asked the question: How could we tell there is life on Earth ? And being a chemist he concluded the atmosphere is a dead giveaway. The oxygen in the air indicates life, so with a powerful telescope (he actually wanted to build a 1,000 inch scope to find life on the planets via atmosphere chemistry) you could find if life existed. His argument was not to look just for oxygen but to find if the atmosphere was far from chemical equilibrium ... that would be the telltale sign. Needless to say NASA was not impressed with the idea that they didn't really need to go to Mars to tell if life was there.
Here [erg.ucd.ie] is one link. Doubtless there are others.
the obligatory remark....a bit late (Score:2)
o well, the good thing about passing gas on Mars, no one there to smell and complain about it.... (the ol' "If you pass gas and no one is around to smell it, does it smell?")
but this is good news. Now they don't have to rely on just solar power when they eventually make an outpost on Mars; they can collect the methane and use fuel cells to power the station (especially at night)
Re:the obligatory remark....a bit late (Score:2)
Re:the obligatory remark....a bit late (Score:2)
Doesn't have to be life (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Doesn't have to be life (Score:5, Informative)
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_med
"Methane is destroyed by the intense ultraviolet radiation on Mars because the gas has a relatively short photochemical lifetime of about 300 years, so if it is present there must be something producing it continually, Professor Formisano said. "[Its presence] is significant and very important. If it is present you need a source," he added."
Re:Doesn't have to be life (Score:2)
Re:Doesn't have to be life (Score:4, Informative)
Life or some sort of residualt volcanic activity are still the more likely explanations.
Re:Doesn't have to be life (Score:2, Funny)
Suuuure.. mr probability.
Martian Methanogens (Score:5, Informative)
Methane is the second-most abundant greenhouse gas. The world's agricultural livestock produce about 17 percent of the methane in the atmosphere. A byproduct of digestion, cattle and other ruminant animals produce methane when organisms in their stomachs called methanogens break down fiber in grasses and grains they eat.
Here are some pictures of the little critters [sidwell.edu], and here [msu.edu]
Viking Mission (Score:2)
Re:Viking Mission (Score:5, Interesting)
Before the mission, they published the criteria for a postitive result from each biological experiment (along the lines of, add water to Martian soil and CO2 is given off; sterilize another soil sample and add water, and CO2 is not given off). The biology tests passes _every one_ of the pre-published tests, albeit with some variations.
However, the mass spectrometer saw no significant organic molecules (and there were no obvious large critters visible through the camera). This, more than anything, made them discount the biology results. If they had detected large organiic molecules in the soil, they would have claimed life, in my opinion. Instead, they came up with non-biological explanations.
However, this was all before we knew about the ability of life to exist deep underground and buried in rocks, etc., While the Viking results are not generaly regarded as requiring life, they are certainly not against a biological explanation of the Methane findings.
The Hidden Secret Of Life On Mars (Score:5, Funny)
Since we now know that once Mars had liquid water in significant amounts, and now we've found evidence of methane gas, there can only be one conclusion:
There were cows on Mars.
But what happened to the cows on Mars, you say?
Well, that's simple. As any reputably zoology dragon will tell you [rathergood.com] cows have infinite density. As Dr. Joel and Alex Veitch discovered in the Jaunuary 2004 issue of The Annals of Completely Fraudulent Research:
Obviously this means that all of Mars' water was not evaporated by a thinning atmosphere, but carried off by a massive cow-based singularity.
In order to prevent such a catastrophe from occuring on this planet it is clear that we must begin a systematic effort to minimize the cow population. Preferably using barbeque sauce...
What happens when life IS found (Score:4, Interesting)
Or they may just dismiss it as ' well, we don't consider that blob of bacteria life ' and move on believing man is the center of the universe, and continue to pummel their un-believing neighbors in a neighboring state.
Of course, depending on which book you use at the time...
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should there be religious ramifications to finding bacterial life on Mars?
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand extraterrestial intelligence would be a much thornier problem (as far as Christianity is concerned, in any case) - did the aliens have the original sin and redenmption, etc.
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:3, Insightful)
I think most religions do not insist on literal interpretations of their texts.
Worse, they tend to insist on interpretations by an approved "authority" within the religion. In short, they then make up shit like "the Earth is the center of the Universe" or "homosexuality is an abomination before God" or "aliens are Godless animals". Then someone comes along who isn't talking shit ("Earth Orbits Sun, says Galileo; "Your Own Priests Fucked Me" boys say) an instead of admitting a mistake of Godly propor
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:4, Informative)
Not in so many words, but there's a Quran verse which translates as something like "Glory to God, who has created the heavens and the earth and scattered life among them". The first Muslims probably read that as a reference to birds or angels, but it's easy enough to see that verse as compatible with the existence of extraterrestrial life.
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:3, Informative)
John 10:16 [blueletterbible.org]
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:5, Insightful)
Religion will still survive, perhaps unfortunately.
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:3, Insightful)
Basiclly he hypothesis that god is the thing that is beyond that which we can comprehend around us.
Therefore (My extrapolation of Decartes reasoning) until we can understand and control the creation of the universe there will always be room for "God".
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:5, Insightful)
atheist? (Score:2)
However, as many point out, they will just 'adapt' their view of the universe so that their 'faith' isn't effected.
Sad really, if you have to adapt to keep things in check...
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:2)
Just because evolution is widely accepted today did not mean that the religions that preached otherwise went away, right?
Also, some religions might argue that God did not create intelligent life out there, merely microbial life which is not of consequence and all that.
Unless we have little green men with death rays landing up, religions will find a way to cover things up and move on. And even then, they will probably be branded agent
Re:What happens when life IS found (Score:4, Insightful)
If the discovery of a universe that is about a dozen billion light years large and a dozen billion years old, of 60ft cold-blooded monsters with banana-sized teeth, of nuclear fusion, of evolution, and of all that didn't change religion, the discovery of bacterial life on Mars won't either. In fact, most people will probably neither know or care about it.
Terraforming Mars? (Score:5, Interesting)
According to this article [guardian.co.uk] at The Guardian, NASA is actually thinking of creating earth-like conditions on Mars. Will I get to visit Mars in my lifetime? My expiration date is sometime in the years around 2070.
BTW, has anyone seen Red Planet [imdb.com]?
Re:Terraforming Mars? (Score:2)
'Fraid so.
Bad science.
Bad writing.
Bad movie.
Re:Terraforming Mars? (Score:3, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Myself, personally.. (Score:5, Informative)
Outgassing stopped 4B years ago? (Score:5, Interesting)
We should searching for . . . (Score:4, Funny)
So Many Strong Inicators... (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, I applaud the efforts of the rovers and the orbiters. They're doing a lot of good science, and we should be proud of what they've shown us. But at the same time, human explorers could do so much more, for not a heck of a lot more money (this $1 Trillion price tag that's been floating around is bad journalism at its finest [thespacereview.com]). I say that all of this good news should serve as impetuous to get people on the surface of the Red Planet as soon as possible!
To all those people who worry about cross-contamination, come on...the two environments are so different, the chances that a microbe from one could survive in the other are basically nonexistent. Besides, it's been proven that unsterilized meteorites have been moving from one planet to another for several billion years now, so if cross-contamination was ever going to happen, it already would have.
More like proof of FAT life.... (Score:4, Funny)
Methane on Mars? (Score:3, Funny)
Can somebody explain something? (Score:5, Interesting)
OK - I can buy that - but I've been reading a bit about this subject - and I happened on this article:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_m
"On Earth, organisms do thrive deep underground -- hundreds of feet below -- without a single ray of sunshine. They live off chemical energy instead, like methane or hydrogen produced in chemical interactions between water and rock."
Wooaaahhh. Hold ON a minute. "methane
If methane can be produced between rock and water (eg: of the salty kind presumed to be found underground on Mars) then isn't the signature of 10 parts per billion of Methane in the atmosphere of Mars merely a further indication of underground water?
That's not what the 'experts' are saying though. Clearly I'm missing something - but I don't understand what.
Help?
Re:Can somebody explain something? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm no geochemist, but it really seems to me like they're jumping the gun on this one. We *know* Mars had volcanic activity which can produce methane, and we don't know that there isn't any currently. We know **nothing** about life on Mars. Parsimony dictates that we presume geo(areo?)chemistry or volcanism until it can be clearly shown to be of another origin.
Re:Can somebody explain something? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Can somebody explain something? (Score:3, Informative)
And just because the organisms are living off methane, which is chemical energy, doesn't mean that the methane isn't created by other organisims.
What's the big deal about finding life? (Score:2, Interesting)
But what's the big deal with finding single-celled organisms on other planets? Are we in that dire a need of validation of theories about the origin of life on this planet that we're grasping blindly at the hope of "Is it here?" ... "What about here?"... "Let's try over here!"?
Quite frankly, what difference does it really make how we
Has to be a hoax (Score:2)
We all know there is no Martian atmosphere, or they wouldn't have built that nuclear atmosphere machine [darylscience.com] underground.
Article description misleading (Score:5, Informative)
With that said, this certainly is exciting news.
Proving Native Life. (Score:4, Informative)
All one would have to do is study the DNA structure of the Martian life. There would be stark differences between Martian life DNA and Earth life DNA. The best analogy of this I can put forward would be one dealing with snowflakes. On the base level snowflakes are exactly the same thing. They form the same way, and are made of the exact same stuff (ice), but the key difference here is that while there are many similarities, no two snowflakes are exactly the same.
While the base similarities would be the same, there would be sufficient differences in Martian microbe DNA to say with absolute resolve that "These are not Earth bacteria!"
NASA's plan for if they DID find life (Score:3, Interesting)
What would be so unusual about life on Mars? (Score:3, Insightful)
James Lovelock found differently. (Score:4, Interesting)
So what's changed? Is the methane a trace that Lovelock's instruments couldn't pick up? Did he discount it as too small to be significant? Or did he discount it because there was no free oxygen?
Or did the bacteria arrive since then on one of our probes?
Re:Finding what one looks for. (Score:2)
Uh, yeah, pretty much. Thing is, if they wanted to lie, they could do it a lot more cheaply. The great thing about fake evidence is that you don't actually have to go all the way to Mars to get it.
They have a lot of other motives, actually. They learn a lot about how things might work on Earth, from geology to biology to meteorology, for which we have few contro
Re:Finding what one looks for. (Score:2)
Fair enough. What does irk me is that all this hype on life on Mars sounds too partisan to me, like trying to quelch doubts about received wisdom. Since I feel we're heading towards a new Dark Age, it does unsettle me.
Re:Finding what one looks for. (Score:2)
Re:Finding what one looks for. (Score:2)
That's the connection I found not wise, and sound like proposed by the the poster's quotes on Wise People...
Re:Finding what one looks for. (Score:2)
Perhaps it just betrays a whim or some German influence... whatever, it is an ad hominem attack.
(Lack of) Age and (lotsa) popularity are no indications of sanity of anything, much less scientific theories.
Re:Life on Mars, yeah right! (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally, I'm hoping that life is found on every hunk of rock we come across. It will destroy those notions that w
Re:Life on Mars, yeah right! (Score:2, Interesting)
Life tends to cluster, as the program of the same name graphically depicts. Mars is in many ways similar to earth and by virtue of this and it's proximity I would give it a significantly higher likelyhood of hosting life than planet "x"
There is a notion that life on earth was seeded from an extra solar source, like a comet. Material from Mars has been found on ear
null (Score:2, Insightful)