Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space

Is There Life on This Saturn Moon? Scientists Plan a Mission to Find Out (theguardian.com) 52

Posted by EditorDavid from the more-than-just-rings dept.
It's one of Saturn's 146 moons — just 310 miles in diameter (or 498 kilometers). Yet the European Space Agency plans to send a robot on a one-billion mile trip to visit it. Why?

Because astronomers have discovered Enceladus "possesses geysers that regularly erupt from its surface and spray water into space," reports the Guardian: Even more astonishing, these plumes contain complex organic compounds, including propane and ethane. "Enceladus has three key ingredients that are considered to be essential for the appearance of life," said astronomer Professor Michele Dougherty of Imperial College London. "It has got liquid water, organic material and a source of heat. That combination makes it my favourite moon in the whole solar system."
A panel of expert scientists have now recommended the Saturn moon for an ESA mission by 2040, according to the article, "with the aim of either landing on the moon or flying through the geysers spraying water and carbon chemicals from its surface into space. Preferably, both goals would be attempted, the panel added."

It will be tricky. Dougherty warns that Enceladus "is small with weak gravity, which means you will need a lot of fuel to slow it down so that it does not whiz past its target into deep space. That is going to be a tricky issue for those designing the mission." But Dougherty has a special interest, as the principal investigator for the magnetometer flown on the Cassini mission that studied Saturn and its moons between 2004 and 2017. "At one point, Cassini passed close to Enceladus and our instrument indicated Saturn's magnetic field was being dragged round the moon in a way that suggested the little moon had an atmosphere," said Dougherty. Cassini's managers agreed to direct the probe to take a closer look and, in July 2005, the spaceship swept over the moon's surface at a height of 173km — and detected significant amounts of water vapour. "It was wonderful," recalls Dougherty.

Subsequent sweeps produced even greater wonders. Huge geysers of water were pictured erupting from geological fault lines at the south pole. The only other body in the solar system, apart from Earth, possessing liquid water on its surface had been revealed. Finally came the discovery of organics in those plumes and Enceladus went from being rated a minor, unimportant moon to a world that is now set to trigger the expenditure of billions of euros and decades of effort by European astronomers and space engineers.
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader thephydes for sharing the article.

Is There Life on This Saturn Moon? Scientists Plan a Mission to Find Out More | Reply

Is There Life on This Saturn Moon? Scientists Plan a Mission to Find Out

Comments Filter:

  • Vacuum of space (Score:3)

    by CaptQuark ( 2706165 ) on Sunday June 16, 2024 @01:31AM (#64552549)

    Capturing water vapor in the vacuum of space will be tricky. It has been done in the laboratory using a "cold trap", but that far out from the sun it's already so cold it's a unknown whether the water vapor will boil or freeze first. Capturing the water vapor while in orbit will require some carefully thought out science.

    Landing might not be any easier as we still don't know how thick the surface ice is that the plumes geyser through. Imagine viewing Earth and trying to land in a random location to drill for magma.

    I wish the project planners good luck with this one.

    • I wonder if you are planning this type of mission today, with a date in the 2040's do you consider designing with Starship as a launch platform in mind?

      I suppose they have another couple years of other work to do before they have to make that choice but the volume, launch capacity and delta-v push it could provide with in orbit refueling would really open up concepts for this type of thing.

      • It says "ESA" in the summary, so the first consideration will be for whatever Ariane rocket is available, obviously.

        • ESA is already using SpaceX to launch stuff into space.

          The ESA's Sentinel-6 [wikipedia.org] was put in orbit by a SpaceX Falcon-9.

          The Ariane is an expensive dinosaur. It should be retired, and the money saved should go into the payloads, not launch services.

          • Sentinel-6 isn't an ESA mission, it is a joint mission by the EU, represented by the Commission, NASA, EUMETSAT and NOAA. So, ESA is a subcontractor and the final decisions what to launch and how aren't made by them.

            This one is announced as "ESA" mission. Until the funding and the structure is clearer, it is quite safe to assume that given European rocket availability in 2040, it will be a prime candidate.

            • ESA and EU purchased some Falcon 9 launches from SpaceX due to the long delay of Ariane 6.

              ESA mentions Ariane 6 and Enceladus in an article on their own site, so the use of Ariane 6 for this is highly likely.
          • Ariane 5 was retired in 2023. But the long delayed Ariane 6 will be launched in early July.

    • we still don't know how thick the surface ice is

      We have some good guesses based on the surface temperature.

      Enceladus is extremely cold because it reflects almost all incident sunlight. It is completely white and has the highest albedo of any object in the Solar System. The surface temperature can be used to calculate the ice thickness needed to insulate liquid water at 0 C.

      The ice is calculated to be between 20 and 25 kilometers thick.

      That is way too far to drill, so one proposal is to melt through the ice with a tethered RTG.

      • >one proposal is to melt through the ice with a tethered RTG.

        I have faith that if the engineers say it'll work, and other engineers say they can land the thing, there are good odds that it'll work.

        However, the idea of a 25km long tether unreeling from a hot probe as it melts and sinks through the ice... just that part just seems amazing. How massive and how bulky would a suitable tether be? It seems to me it would have to be carried by the probe because the ice will be re-freezing behind it and holding

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by cusco ( 717999 )

          I proposed something like this for Europa in the '90s, and I've seen people considerably more knowledgeable than myself say the same since. A 25 km spool of optical fiber isn't that large, and would be a bit of ballast to help keep the RTG in contact with the ice as it descends. The spool would have to be on the descender, since it's impossible to drag more than a few centimeters of cable through ice as it refreezes behind it.

        • Yes, the tether would unwind from the descending RTG, not from the lander sitting on the surface.

          It would have to be thick enough for both data and power.

          It could be thinner if it was only data, but then we'd need a 2nd RTG to remain on the surface, and RTGs aren't cheap.

          RTGs use Pu-238, which is in very short supply.

          Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator [wikipedia.org]

    • The water is liquid because it was heated by the tidal forces acting on the moon. Once it's sprayed into space, it sublimates into vapor. After it cools, the water will deposit as a solid on any surface it touches, going directly from a gas to a solid. Saturn is far past the Solar System's frost line. In fact, it's also past the frost line for methane. Meaning that methane actually wants to freeze that far out.

      That's all a moot point, though. The probe won't need to directly took the plumes. It can use las

  • for being so naive. We launch all of these probes from our gravity well, spending huge amounts of resources betting on which mission will be most "useful".

    Why don't we focus on mining off planet resources and we could send 10x or even 100x the number of probes and make discoveries that would otherwise have been missed due to this "group think" approach. Of course its no surprise that we a mired in short term thinking, our society is based on it - likely another one of the great filters for life in the unive

    • You post this drivel in every thread on space, letter for letter. How do you mine "off-planet resources" without studying the planets they're on? And how do you study them without "probes"?

    • That's so cool! Who is your favorite author? I like classics like Asimov and Heinlein. Why don't we just paved the entire planet in metal like Trantor? We can have our fully self aware 3 rules robots do the work and don't worry about how long because we'll all be functionally immortal!

      Sooo coooool!

      Oh and yeah we can use the asteroid belt for the metal we'll need. Easy!

      • Oh and yeah we can use the asteroid belt for the metal we'll need. Easy!

        1. Complain about lack of off-world mining technlolgy that does not exist.
        2. ????
        3. Profit !!!

    • Why don't we focus on mining off planet resources and we could send 10x or even 100x the number of probes and make discoveries that would otherwise have been missed due to this "group think" approach.

      Other than the technology does not exist to mine resources off planet. Other than despite the lack of technology, the cost of mining would be more than the value of the materials mined? For example, Psyche [space.com] might have $100 quadrillion dollars in nickel and copper but it would be far cheaper to mine it on Earth :"Even if we could mine Psyche and bring the materials back to Earth, the asteroid is so far away that the cost of doing so would negate their value, Philip Metzger, a planetary physicist at the Univer

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by cusco ( 717999 )

        Tech to mine asteroids doesn't exist today. Fifty years ago the tech to pull lithium out of sea water didn't exist. And the actual value of raw materials depends in large part where they're going to be used. If you're going to mine silicon or iron on the Moon and use it on Earth it would be prohibitively expensive, but if you're going to use it in space it makes perfect sense.

        • If you're going to mine silicon or iron on the Moon and use it on Earth it would be prohibitively expensive, but if you're going to use it in space it makes perfect sense.

          I do not see any immediate future where mining for nickel and copper to fulfill orders for space parts. Mining for water has value though.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by cusco ( 717999 )

            I do not see any immediate future

            That's short-term thinking talking. If you're going to build a permanent human habitat or solar power satellite on orbit you don't want to have to drag all of that mass out of Earth's gravity well, it would be far more efficient to launch it off the Moon or asteroids. No, we don't need to do it immediately, but if we as our species want to avoid the fate of the Neanderthals we will need to learn to do it before too long.

            • That's short-term thinking talking. If you're going to build a permanent human habitat or solar power satellite on orbit you don't want to have to drag all of that mass out of Earth's gravity well, it would be far more efficient to launch it off the Moon or asteroids.

              I did not state there was no need for any mining. I said specifically there is no future need for large amounts of nickel and copper for satellites or habitats. If there was huge amounts of aluminum or titanium or water that would be different.

              No, we don't need to do it immediately, but if we as our species want to avoid the fate of the Neanderthals we will need to learn to do it before too long.

              Again I am specifically saying that mining nickel and copper is not likely to be used in huge amounts to build anything in space. Water would the very first thing to mine.

      • If we hadn't slowed down after the moon, we might have the tech by now.

        The goal is not to bring the materials back to earth, it's to use them in space.

        • If we hadn't slowed down after the moon, we might have the tech by now.

          The goal is not to bring the materials back to earth, it's to use them in space.

          This. All the negative responses are the exact reason we can't do this, lack of imagination and long term commitment.

          Why would we want to send it back to earth? Use it to build in space so we only have to launch people and high tech equipment. Eventually you can send it to earth, but that is likely going to be too expensive until you are generating massive amounts of fuel in space.

          • Why would we want to send it back to earth? Use it to build in space so we only have to launch people and high tech equipment. Eventually you can send it to earth, but that is likely going to be too expensive until you are generating massive amounts of fuel in space.

            1) And where do we build in space, again? There are no colonies in space. You seem to be ignoring that we as humans have to first establish those colonies and stations. Considering we do not know precise where those colonies exist yet, it would rather stupid to dumb to create the mine for a colony that does not exist yet. 2) The materials that can be mined may not be what is needed for space vehicles. Does the ISS use nickel and copper that Psyche has? Yes but for small amounts compared to aluminum, titaniu

            • 1) Where do we build? Anywhere we freaking want, space is rather large and rather empty last I checked.
              2)
              https://www.nasa.gov/overview-... [nasa.gov]
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

              Yes, it is possible to build spacecraft using materials from lunar regolith or asteroids. This concept, known as in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), aims to reduce the cost and complexity of space missions by using local materials instead of transporting everything from Earth. Here are some potential uses:

              1. Construction Materials: Lunar re

              • 1) Where do we build? Anywhere we freaking want, space is rather large and rather empty last I checked.

                That is the dumbest thing you've said. We don't build something anywhere here on Earth. That's why people do not build retail locations far away from people. Things should be built where they are needed.

                Yes, it is possible to build spacecraft using materials from lunar regolith or asteroids. This concept, known as in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), aims to reduce the cost and complexity of space missions by using local materials instead of transporting everything from Earth. Here are some potential uses:

                I cited specifically an asteroid made of metal composed of nickel and copper. Please try to keep up. That is what people talk about when they talk about mining. There is not a lot of need for nickel and copper for space vehicles. You seem to ignore the whole part where mining does not occur anywhere you want

        • The goal is not to bring the materials back to earth, it's to use them in space.

          For what do we use in space, again? There are no colonies in space. In the far future, there might be however, we have to establish the any colonies first This poster wants to ignore the first long process of setting up the colonies before mining begins..

  • Enceladus is just the most convenient target for such an investigation, but damn are there a lot of options. If life is found, it'll be one of the biggest "duh doi" moments in history. We would wonder why we ever doubted it, given the ingredients present.

    • There's no doubt life is out there somewhere. A lot of somewheres. It is just a lot more likely to be some slime than ask us to take it to our leader.

      • Yeah, I would bet quite highly that there's plenty of simple biology in our solar system, especially in the Saturn system. Probably Jupiter system too. Folks get too melodramatic about these searches.

  • ... "I don't know, let's find out" is frequently the right answer.

  • are they going to define the term "life?"

  • The best SMBC (Score:5, Funny)

    by 0xG ( 712423 ) on Sunday June 16, 2024 @11:56AM (#64553309)

    The XKCD guy follows this.
    This one killed me and is relevant:
    https://www.smbc-comics.com/co... [smbc-comics.com]

  • David Bowie asked 'Is there life on Mars' decades ago and still got no answer.

  • when we find those tardigrades, i hope we can name them and create a super breed of useless bacteria.

  • Enceledas [thecookingjar.com]...

Slashdot Top Deals

"There is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress." -- Mark Twain

Close