Mars Rock Found In Antarctica 51
lousyd writes "Scientists with with ANSMET, the Antarctic Search for Meteorites, have found a meteorite in the Antarctic that apparently has come from Mars. Weighing in at 715.2 grams, the find has been confirmed by the National Museum of Natural History. The rock is a member of the 'nakhlite' set, and has been named MIL 03346. By having the real thing before them, this offers Mars researchers a reality check on the data coming back from the various probes currently on Mars."
I'm curious... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I'm curious... (Score:2)
Re:I'm curious... (Score:2, Insightful)
Bzzzzt! Wrong! You cannot compare A with B and use B to verify A if you are unable to independently verify B first. In other words, since we've yet to bring back any samples from Mars, we cannot know for certain that the Arctic rock is indeed Martian, and therefore cannot use it to sanity-check the data coming from Mars.
It's a great case of a cyclic log
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1, Insightful)
It's funny how people on Slashdot are so sure the
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1)
But, is the label genuine? (Score:2)
To know that the label is genuine, look for the small print at the bottom that says, "Printed in China."
Re:I'm curious... (Score:5, Informative)
Read More [spacetoday.org]
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1)
http://www.solarviews.com/cap/meteor/ves
This describes some other meteorites that we know with good certainty come from the asteroid Vesta. The process is the same for knowing a meteorite came from Mars.
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1)
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1, Insightful)
Antarctica really is the best place to look for meteorites. There are huge areas where the only rocks are metoeorites (the rest is snow and ice). I'm sure it's on ANSMET's site some place, but I can't find it. Part of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet flows into the Transantarctic Mountaains. As the ice flows up the mountainside it sublimated by strong winds (nasty place). Any rocks in the ice are left just sitting on the surface. The dark rocks sta
Good information above (Score:1)
It's so easy, researchers have actually done it by robot. [spaceref.com]
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1)
Re:I'm curious... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I'm curious... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1)
Even on earth there is isotope partitioning. Lighter isotopes of water will evaporate preferentially (cause they're lighter). If we're in a glacial stage, these superlights will get deposited in glaciers, and leave the oceans with heavier isotopes of oxygen. Hence oxygen isotope dating... Look it up, the worls around us is very interesting.
Re:I'm curious... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www-curator.jsc.nasa.gov/curator/antmet/mar smets/Text.htm [nasa.gov]
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1)
Re:I'm curious... (Score:1)
Re:I'm curious... (Score:2)
More importantly, I can find the answers myself!
Yeah! (Score:1)
Sorry... bad pun... no karma bonus... overuse of periods... running away now...
Extraterrestrial Rocks (Score:2, Interesting)
I've heard that you are most likely to find them near the bases of mountain ranges where the swirling winds scours away the ice and snow better, revealing alien rocks and pebbles that have been covered for millenia.
I'd guess there are tons of Martian rocks under the ice, perhaps some from Venus, lots of moon rocks
Venus rocks not likely (Score:4, Interesting)
The reason Mars rocks get here is because they are intercepted on their way to the sun.
Re:Venus rocks not likely (Score:1)
Re:Venus rocks not likely (Score:3, Informative)
Not to be mean, but pigs could fly too. Really, the chances of this are really quite slim. I don't have the data set to prove it, but I'd expect the probability of Venus originated meteorites in the once-in-a-billion-year range or so.
Martian meteors on the other hand happen quite regularly. [space.com]
In fact, there is a large list [meteorite.fr] of Martian matter found on ear
But not for that reason (Score:1)
Re:But not for that reason (Score:1)
Both Earth and Venus were repeatedly hit by very large planetesimals, and would have ejected much material into space.
Any venusian rocks that hit Earth would have been destroyed by erosion or tectonic activity long ago, but in theory there might be rocks from both the young Venus and the young Earth bur
Re:Venus rocks not likely (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason Mars rocks get here is because they are intercepted on their way to the sun.
Bzz. Wrong. Launching stuff to a much lower orbit also requires lots of energy. Basically the energy requirement is the same between two orbits, no matter wether you go from a lower to a higher orbit or the other way around. Quite obivious when you think about it, otherwise you could make perpetual motion machine, tapping the energy
Re:Stop saying "Bzz. Wrong.". (Score:1)
But ... (Score:2)
But how are we supposed to spin the Enterprise around the sun and travel through time then Mr Smarty Pants?
Re:Venus rocks not likely (Score:1)
No you don't. Quite simply you are always are in a stable orbit, and you will return to about the same spot in space after one complete orbit around the center of gravity (assuming no orbit-changing close encounters or collisions with another object, and not using a rocket motor, etc).
I recommend basic Newtonian physics.
Your mistake is understandable
Re:Venus rocks not likely (Score:2)
Well, actually, they are intercepted on their way to an orbit closer to the sun. To actually get to the sun from a planetary orbit requires quite a bit of delta-v.
Interestingly, it actually takes more delta-v to get to the Sun from Earth (31.8 km/sec) that it does just to break away from the Earth (11.2 km/sec).
Re:Venus rocks not likely (Score:2)
Re:Venus rocks not likely (Score:1)
This is science?! (Score:1)
posting #9762667 [slashdot.org]: Q: "How can they be sure that it comes from Mars?" A: "The Viking landers of the 70s identified the unique chemical compostion of Mars rocks."
Let me see . . . We know this meteorite is from Mars, because of evidence from space missions. And we know that we can trust the space-mission data, because it agrees with this mete
Re:This is science?! (Score:2)
So, assuming that Mars probe results match the rocks, either
a) both meteor and probe measurements are faulty, but by co-incidence or systematic error they match each others
b1) rocks are not from mars, probe results are faulty but by incredible co-incidence look just like the Antarctica meteors from somewhere else
b2) like b1, except probe results are not faulty
Highly speculative; science hypocrisy (Score:1)
Nonetheless, it's STILL circular to say, "The meteorite is Martian, and so it confirms the telemetry from the probes" and "The telemetry from Mars missions confirms that the meteorite is Martian."
There are many alternative (although unlikely) explanations.
The point is this:
the scientific community TYPICALLY demands a maddeningly-strict standard for "common-sense" hypotheses -- especially when there's an axe to grind, e.g. professiona
Re:This is science?! (Score:1)
Yep, sure does. And as I said:
"And the scientists are probably right. Nonetheless, it's STILL circular."