Notices
Results 1 to 76 of 76

Thread: Life on Mars?

  1. #1 Life on Mars? 
    Forum Masters Degree thyristor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    542
    I'm rather confused about the way scientists search for life on other planets. They search for water and for coal in organic material.
    But why couldn't the coal be replaced with silicon in our organic chemistry and why would E.T. life have to be based on water? There are many other di-polar materials.
    Anybody else who feels the same way?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Water is by far and away the most suitable solvent on which to base life, at least on any terrestrial planet - keep in mind the only planet where we have looked for life so far is Mars.
    1. The characteristic of water that it expands upon freezing is all but unique among materials, certainly unique amongst common ones.
    2. The very high latent heat of water (higher than any other within its liquid range) helps maintain even temperatures and the very existence of lakes and rivers.
    3. The high specific heat of water also helps maintain equable temperatures.
    4. The extremely high surface tension is very useful in many aspects of cellular behaviour.
    5. It is an amzingly effective solvent.
    6. I could go on and on, but you get the idea.

    I am not sure what you mean by saying 'they search for coal in carbon'. Even if I reverese the words it still does nto make sense. Coudl you elaborate.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Can't resist... 
    Forum Professor serpicojr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    JRZ
    Posts
    1,069
    Take a look at the lawman beating up the wrong guy. Oh man, wonder if he'll ever know he's in the best selling show. Is there life on Mars?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Senior miomaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    302
    I fully agree with Ophiolite, the list of water as the medium for life goes on and on. The reason why we search for water on planets is because the likelihood of the exisitance of life increases immensely if water is found.

    Something that we should be doing is looking for elements that fit together that could be a nother medium for life.
    I haven't come to fight my word, but to find the truth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    as far as silicon is concerned, it is far less versatile in creating a variety of bonds compared with carbon
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman teeniewitabeenie1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    making lemons into lemonade
    Posts
    81
    people are are so igrant to be so smart...its pissing me off...do you honestly really to mean to tell me that because life as we know it here on earth requires water so EVERY life must require water...what if the other life forms dont need it, they drink silicons or something.........
    Brief is this existence, as a fleeting visit in a strange house. - Alberto Einstein
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor sunshinewarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by teeniewitabeenie1
    people are are so igrant to be so smart...its pissing me off...do you honestly really to mean to tell me that because life as we know it here on earth requires water so EVERY life must require water...what if the other life forms dont need it, they drink silicons or something.........
    Oh all right then - take wossname (chappie who devised the Gaia idea) and his notion. Living things will have to be dissipative systems (in terms of the laws of thermodynamics). They will, therefore, demonstrate on their planets, whatever they might be, the results of the by-products of such systems. On our planet, for instance, we have an atmosphere that is nearly a quarter oxygen. Oxygen is one of the most reactive elements and does not stay 'free' or 'pure' in a natural state but can only be maintained that way through living entities constantly pumping it into the atmosphere/biosphere. Look for free oxygen, or any other reactive element (like hydrogen) occuring elementally (not in a compound) on a planet, and you can be pretty certain that there is some form of living activity over there. Spectroscopy can tell us the difference between the two.

    Ah yes - James Lovelock, that's his name.

    Happy?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    There could be more advanced ecosystems and ways of dealing with certain elements out there, but we haven't found them yet. So for now when we only have a robot millions of miles away being remote controlled on limited resources, we have to limit our methods of searching to the most well known types. If we didn't, none of the instruments would be precise enough, and it would have to be considerably larger to make...which means just that many more parts that can go wrong. Its currently very impractical to try to use methods to search for types of life that seem very unlikely to exist at this moment.
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by teeniewitabeenie1
    people are are so igrant to be so smart...its pissing me off...do you honestly really to mean to tell me that because life as we know it here on earth requires water so EVERY life must require water...what if the other life forms dont need it, they drink silicons or something.........
    Excellent. As one of the people who is not ignorant perhasp you would like to share with us the chemistry and biochemistry, in outline form will do, of an alternative system that does not use carbon and water.
    Perhaps you can, while you are about it, demolish the arguments of Henderson whose 1913 work on the Fitness of the Environment has stood the test of almost a century.
    Looking forward to being educated.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor Obviously's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    1,416
    I remember Jeremy posted this link once: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/298795_mars08.html

    Quote Originally Posted by From the link
    We may have already encountered Martian life about 30 years ago and accidentally killed it, according to a new analysis of NASA's Viking mission to Mars presented Sunday at a major astronomy conference in Seattle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman Lightingbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Saint Louis, Missouri
    Posts
    63
    Agreed.

    Right now our information is limited. We really don't know if water is the main requirement. Although based on our limited knowledge. We can only base it on what we know.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2
    Excellent link posted. That says to me that som scientists are beginning to open their minds to the endless possibilitess that our universe presents.
    What it appears a vast majority of scientifically-minded people fail to realize is that all of that which we call science may be obsolete by tomorrow. I mean to say, as things stand now, humanity in general is predisposed to assume life will always develop in chemically, if not environmentally, similar conditions to our own. The most important thing, IMO, to take into consideration when trying to discover the unknown is specifically that, that it is unknown. We have no way of knowing how life might have developed, be developing, or will develop in an ecosystem halfway across even our own galaxy, because we have no way of knowing where to begin concerning experimentation in trying to duplicate those chain of events. I'd have to say that just because "WE" have observed no scientific evidence that other lifeforms in the universe may have radically different chemical compositions than our own does not mean that those biologies are not capable of existing. As some old smart guy said in some long-ago time, the impossible is only impossible until it happens. Then it just becomes improbable.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Posts
    101
    Curious to know is it plausible to think life forms were unknowingly deposited on the moon during the Apollo landings and/or on Mars by the various landings by our probes and by our probes to other planets, astroids and comets as well.

    If this occured, will we be able to distinguish these reminents from life that originated from non-earth sources?
    .................................................. ...............
    The truth is difficult to obtain.
    They conceal it in books.
    *************************************
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Getting back to Mars.

    There is plenty of water on Mars, mostly frozen. Surface features suggest liquid from time to time. Atmospheric data shows pressures above the triple point of 6.5 millibars and ambient air temps of 95F.

    Methane has been found and oxygen. These elements tend to bond fairly easily and would not last long without replenishment.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Lookingbeyondthesky
    Excellent link posted. That says to me that som scientists are beginning to open their minds to the endless possibilitess that our universe presents.
    What it appears a vast majority of scientifically-minded people fail to realize is that all of that which we call science may be obsolete by tomorrow. I mean to say, as things stand now, humanity in general is predisposed to assume life will always develop in chemically, if not environmentally, similar conditions to our own. The most important thing, IMO, to take into consideration when trying to discover the unknown is specifically that, that it is unknown. We have no way of knowing how life might have developed, be developing, or will develop in an ecosystem halfway across even our own galaxy, because we have no way of knowing where to begin concerning experimentation in trying to duplicate those chain of events. I'd have to say that just because "WE" have observed no scientific evidence that other lifeforms in the universe may have radically different chemical compositions than our own does not mean that those biologies are not capable of existing. As some old smart guy said in some long-ago time, the impossible is only impossible until it happens. Then it just becomes improbable.
    I think it's mostly about probability, and our own limited resources. This kind of investigation is not a double edged sword.

    I mean, if we find water and carbon, and a few other things similar to life as we know it, that would prove a "yes". "yes" is a good thing to know.

    If we don't find those things, that does not prove a "no". I hope nobody in the scientific community thinks they're proving a "no" if we don't find what we're looking for.

    It's sort of like when you try a person for a crime in court. Just because he/she is acquitted doesn't mean he/she is innocent, but we like to hope they wouldn't be convicted unless there was a lot of evidence.

    Nasa is not in any possible sense, trying to argue that life can't exist in other ways than how we know it. The problem is that there's about a bazillion of those ways, and only a madman would try and test for them all and expect to come in under budget.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Test.

    Water run off channell

    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by ajg624
    Curious to know is it plausible to think life forms were unknowingly deposited on the moon during the Apollo landings and/or on Mars by the various landings by our probes and by our probes to other planets, astroids and comets as well.

    If this occured, will we be able to distinguish these reminents from life that originated from non-earth sources?
    The surface of Mars and the Moon are much too harsh for any known extremophiles to survive, and the bacteria that would have been on and insde the craft before launch would be aerobes or commensal anaerobes living on the human crew, so these are not bacteria that would survive the trip outside the craft or survive on the surface.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    I think a good question is if we saw life on another world would we be able to tell. All we have is this Earth as a springboard.

    You can bring all the instrumentation you want to mars and you are still left with interpretation of the data. Look at the Viking data. Was positive for life, even showed a circadian rhythm. It was shot down because no organic material was found.

    Can we believe our eyes. No. We have no way to judge even the visible data. The images coming from Mars are artwork as far as color. In grayscale can we truly say what we see?

    This is from an area in Endurance Crater on Mars in stereo 3D. Do we really know what we are looking at. If we can not interpret the visible data then good luck with all the rest.


    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Come on boys.

    A concretion on fracture file. That should not be. Come on boys.
    Image courtesy of Hortonherdawho.


    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    The people read and hope someone knows. Yep I am different but I have been doing this a while.

    Let’s do it boys. A song for my name sake.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dipFMJckZOM

    Now all you got to do is talk to this mental retard.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    The reality is we watch the data come down. We have images we like. If you want to talk Life on Mars bring it.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Now we can talk in what ever spectrum. Some folks have problems with interpretation.

    Let’s try this. Bring it on. I been doing this a while. There is a chance guys on this forum aren’t up to it. If not then don’t go to Mars.

    Damn

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Now we can talk in what ever spectrum. Some folks have problems with interpretation.

    Let’s try this. Bring it on. I been doing this a while. There is a chance guys on this forum aren’t up to it. If not then don’t go to Mars.

    Damn

    Vincent
    Once again, nice topic yet ruined by trolls. I am all for peace but you really are bringing the place down. Please cease.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Once again, nice topic yet ruined by trolls. I am all for peace but you really are bringing the place down. Please cease.
    Otherwise you aint got nothing to bring to the table, What say you?

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    Well thank you for allowing me the chance.

    There is ice on Mars and they have found evidence that there used to be oceans but scientists believe that if there was ever any life on Mars it would be destroyed now as the place is inhabitable. That is assuming the lifeforms are carbon based.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    You do not have a very scientific mindset. You sound like you are a 5 year-old trying to sound "cool". You brought nothing viable to the "table". I expressed my knowledge and it is common manners not to rebuke it unless you have evidence to disprove my theory.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    414
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiyk
    Well thank you for allowing me the chance.

    There is ice on Mars and they have found evidence that there used to be oceans but scientists believe that if there was ever any life on Mars it would be destroyed now as the place is inhabitable. That is assuming the lifeforms are carbon based.
    Several different types of life (ie bacteria) has the capability to survive in the harshest of environments. A magazine I just picked up yesterday states that there have been experiments done that show that several types of bacteria can live for extended periods of time in the emptiness of space. Some bacteria can also withstand the incredible heat generated while being attached to a bullet. I found it in a section dealing with the question if life did orginate from space. It is thought that basic bacterial life may have originated on Mars while it had water only to be transported here due to a large collision with the planet which then shot off several meteors which then came oru way and within a few hundred years impacted Earth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    I have heard that too. I just assumed this was about intelligent life. I belive they have found bacteria on Mars or at least the remains of it.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Panspermia is a bit of a stretch, I have met and talked to a former NASA scientist Dr. Vali who is a proponent of this theory and I've always felt he was a bit of a nut job, but a great lecturer . I find it very unlikely that bacteria will be found on Mars, besides the earliest life found on Earth is likely Archaea who are unable to form spores and survive the harsh conditions of space. It is relatively easy to find a bacteria that can survie X condition, or Y condition. It is rare to find one that can survive X, Y, and Z. Not to mention the energy released when a meteorite strikes a planet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    Panspermia is a bit of a stretch,
    What makes you think it is a bit of a stretch?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    Yes, why?
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    I thought that they have found remains already!
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by BumFluff
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiyk
    Well thank you for allowing me the chance.

    There is ice on Mars and they have found evidence that there used to be oceans but scientists believe that if there was ever any life on Mars it would be destroyed now as the place is inhabitable. That is assuming the lifeforms are carbon based.
    Several different types of life (ie bacteria) has the capability to survive in the harshest of environments. A magazine I just picked up yesterday states that there have been experiments done that show that several types of bacteria can live for extended periods of time in the emptiness of space. Some bacteria can also withstand the incredible heat generated while being attached to a bullet. I found it in a section dealing with the question if life did orginate from space. It is thought that basic bacterial life may have originated on Mars while it had water only to be transported here due to a large collision with the planet which then shot off several meteors which then came oru way and within a few hundred years impacted Earth.
    This is an interesting possibility. I think it's funny, though, that some people would have an easier time believing life could evolve on Mars than on Earth, and actually prefer the explanation that it arrived here from there over the explanation that it simply evolved here.

    If it evolved in deep space, though, then I guess that gives it a lot more time and chance to happen then our limited size/age world would allow. It's also hopeful, because it would indicate that life may be common in the universe.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    That is slightly surreal but then again some think that we were brought here from space.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    Panspermia is a bit of a stretch,
    What makes you think it is a bit of a stretch?
    Well I don't think the "organic compounds from space" is unviable, just the idea of intact organisms surviving through space. Phylogenetics suggests the common ancestor of life was a hyperthermophile, an organism that would not have been adapted to living on a meteorite.

    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast20dec_1.htm

    Here is the research that made Dr. Vali such a supporter of the theory, but I'm not convinced the magnetite crystals have to have an organic source.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    Well I don't think the "organic compounds from space" is unviable, just the idea of intact organisms surviving through space.
    There is good research to show that organisms can survive in space. The interior of grains, meteorites, comets and asteroids can all provide stable environments for organisms to survive in suspension, or in some instances to flourish. They can also survive entry into planetary atmospheres and resultant impact forces. (Again backed up by research - if you insist I shall spend a couple of hours locating the references for you.)
    So the possibility is there. So far there is no proof either way.
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    Phylogenetics suggests the common ancestor of life was a hyperthermophile, an organism that would not have been adapted to living on a meteorite.
    Two points. First, portions of the interior of an asteroid would be ideal for hyperthermophiles. Secondly, as I understand it the cladistics on primitive life is still a dynamic field with significant changes occuring on a regular basis. I agree the apparent relationships are suggestive, but again, not conclusive.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    Panspermia is a bit of a stretch,
    What makes you think it is a bit of a stretch?
    Well I don't think the "organic compounds from space" is unviable, just the idea of intact organisms surviving through space. Phylogenetics suggests the common ancestor of life was a hyperthermophile, an organism that would not have been adapted to living on a meteorite.

    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast20dec_1.htm

    Here is the research that made Dr. Vali such a supporter of the theory, but I'm not convinced the magnetite crystals have to have an organic source.
    I'm never convinced that anyone's guess about the first life form can be accurate.

    What I mean is that single celled life forms evolve and adapt so quickly that the first strain would have changed dramatically before there were even enough of them to fill a city block.

    We can maybe figure out what kind of bacteria became common within the first million years, but that won't tell us anything about what we started with, only what kind of structure was most adapted to the environment of the time. It would arrive there so rapidly that we wouldn't expect to find any remains of the ancestors of strain that came to dominate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    It would arrive there so rapidly that we wouldn't expect to find any remains of the ancestors of strain that came to dominate.
    But they have left their footprints in our DNA, in our cellular structure and in our metabolism.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Professor sunshinewarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    It would arrive there so rapidly that we wouldn't expect to find any remains of the ancestors of strain that came to dominate.
    But they have left their footprints in our DNA, in our cellular structure and in our metabolism.
    True - but they might be of just the strain, as he says, that came to dominate. The original abiogenetic forms may well have been outpopulated by the eventually dominant one (after a great deal of initial radiation) and hence may have erased traces of the ur-forms existence (as a uniquely idenitfiable entitiy).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Guys.

    Either way is correct. If life can form with no help from space then if the same conditions are right for what ever type of life then it begins. If it can begin one place it can begin in another.

    If impacts can deposit life forms into space and they can travel to a world and take hold and adapt or if the basics of life can form in space and take hold on a world via impacts then that is correct as well.

    I have spent many years studying Mars in particular as it is the most Earth like of the planets. I have watched the data that is available and can not reconcile the visible data with the current model.

    The previous images showed complex process that is hard to believe is the result of wind erosion and dust deposition.

    In the equatorial regions of Mars it can get quit toasty during the afternoon. I believe the visible data shows periodic water eruptions. This is my best image of liquid water at the rover site, or transparent dust for the diehards. In Stereo 3D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Now we can make this a Vincent flood. The truth is I stand on the shoulders of giants.

    Sir Charles from

    http://www.xenotechresearch.com/cgi/wp/index.php

    Hortonheardawho and LWS from

    http://www.marsroverblog.com/


    They post the images. I give my interpretation. The last post shows water on the surface of Mars. Several images will show the footprint. You must ask, If it is on the surface then an eruption vent must be present.

    Yep. Endurance crater.

    Vincent


    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Boys you have heard of a six shooter. I got a 25 shooter.

    Water eruption on the edge of Victoria crater.

    Vincent


    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    I didn't know sandworms had spouts.


    It's a dust devil, might explain certain erosion and dispersal patterns we've been seeing.



    "Life on Mars" we can rule out, I think. Radiation on the surface. "Life under Mars" though... who knows? Maybe microscopic animals even. I wonder if we'll think to pack a shovel next time? Employing jammed rover wheel to try and gouge ruts in soil was so embarrassing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Pong,

    The dust devil image is impressive to watch but could not create all of the fluvial patterns on the surface.

    In regards to radiation I agree it would kill many life forms that we are aware of but not the ones that have somehow adapted and formed a protective coating like the Martian Blueberries.

    We know liquid eruptions and ponding occur on mega scales on Mars. Micro-scale eruptions seem evident, so water we have. All we would need it’s a radiation resistant life form.

    This image:
    Area I is eruption site
    Area II is visible shore lines from ponding
    Areas III is ponding area absent of craters. Very young.



    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    The dust devil image is impressive to watch but could not create all of the fluvial patterns on the surface.
    Can you cite an example.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    We know liquid eruptions and ponding occur on mega scales on Mars. Micro-scale eruptions seem evident, so water we have.
    And can you demonstrate that these eruptions are the result of water and not of carbon dioxide?

    I am unconcerned by the radiation. A few centimetres of regolith and 3 billion years to develop resistance should solve the problem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Ophiolite,

    I posted several images of micro and mega-scale eruptions, reference page three of this thread. Sorry I did not see were the post are numbered

    The liquid eruptions could not be liquid CO2 because it would require 10 bars or 10,000 milibars of pressure. Liquid CO2 could exist below the surface but even there the temperature would likely never reach the condensation point

    CO2 gas would likely act as a propellant for liquid water in a brine state to reach the surface. Any deep sub-surface heating could allow periodic movement to a point of rapid pressure change and gas and brine release. Like opening a can of soda pop.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    @Vincent. I didn't mean dust devils or wind explain everything. But these certainly will create dunes and silting just like you see at a water-sloshed beach. Surface liquid clearly occurs, however it may not be so common as erosion and patterning from wind.

    My main point in this thread is that asking for life on Mars is like asking for life on a nuclear test site. I think life under is far more likely! Will somebody pack a damn shovel already?! :x

    IMO, an immobile lander that only takes a 1m core and inserts that into Earthbound rocket, would teach us more than all these cars driving around.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Pong,

    I agree wind is the dominate force on Mars and life as we know it is more likely underground.

    The Blue Berries are still unknown and in my opinion could be a life form.

    My main point in this thread is that asking for life on Mars is like asking for life on a nuclear test site.
    Now Pong, there are more forces at work at a nuclear test site than radiation.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    The Blue Berries are still unknown and in my opinion could be a life form.
    They look like poops to me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    They look like poops to me.
    Please define.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Um, they have precisely the same size variation, shape, and texture, of scattered deer poops.

    The regularity of those "blueberries" is odd allright.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Thought I would post some images of the, “Blueberries.” Now the official line is that they are concretions and they do show a resemblance as do Dear Poops.

    The first image is a Berry on a stem in the middle of nowhere. In stereo 3D.



    The second image is a Berry on a stem on a rock.



    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Pong,

    I agree wind is the dominate force on Mars and life as we know it is more likely underground.

    The Blue Berries are still unknown and in my opinion could be a life form.

    My main point in this thread is that asking for life on Mars is like asking for life on a nuclear test site.
    Now Pong, there are more forces at work at a nuclear test site than radiation.

    Vincent
    Blue berries form on Earth also and are a geological formation usually formed by running water. There isn't a legitimate scientist around who would say they are alive. They are usually cited as evidence of running water once having existed on Mars, along with the ocean ridges.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Masters Degree thyristor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    542
    I know that I'm not following the thread but here's a philosophical point.
    Suppose that there is E.T. life aware of our existance that prevent us from discovering them by for example making our sonds send the wrong data to the earth or sending false information to our telescopes.
    373 13231-mbm-13231 373
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Oh, Brother Baby

    I love it when someone has the nads to come forth.

    To say Blue Berries form on Earth is a leap unlike Hawkins. If he was not a quadriplegic everyone would kick his ass.

    Bottom line they aint no blue Berries on Earth.
    Concretions on Earth form with microbial assist.
    Water, but not running watter.

    Damn I want to post a song. Why I do not know. Moderator please forgive. Remember my name is Vincent and he killed himself.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZqoSHi3aP4


    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    The first song is all that matters

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    "The abundant concretions found in the Navajo Sandstone consist of sandstone cemented together by hematite (Fe2O3), and goethite (FeOOH). The iron forming these concretions came from the break down of iron-bearing silicate minerals by weathering to form iron oxide coatings on other grains. During later diagenesis of the Navajo Sandstone while deeply buried, reducing fluids, likely hydrocarbons, dissolved these coatings. When the reducing fluids containing dissolved iron mixed with oxidizing groundwater, they and the dissolved iron were oxidized. This caused the iron to precipitate out as hematite and goethite to form the innumerable concretions found in the Navajo Sandstone. These concretions are regarded as terrestrial analogues of the hematite spherules, called alternately Martian "blueberries" or more technically Martian spherules, which the Opportunity rover found at Meridiani Planum on Mars [12] [13]."

    No where does it mention that they involve microbial assistance.

    Maybe you are thinking of stromatolites.

    Although I was wrong about it being running water, though for some reason in the back of my mind the word running appeared.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Yep on earth Bacteria is involved in concretions. Now where is the babes. Females are such an illusion

    http://www.universetoday.com/2004/06...ueberries-too/

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    From your link, all I found:

    "The concretions may bear on the search for evidence of past life on Mars because bacteria on Earth can make concretions form more quickly."

    Suppose heat can too. Does this capture the imagination?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61 Re: Life on Mars? 
    Forum Freshman antimatter54's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by thyristor
    I'm rather confused about the way scientists search for life on other planets. They search for water and for coal in organic material.
    But why couldn't the coal be replaced with silicon in our organic chemistry and why would E.T. life have to be based on water? There are many other di-polar materials.
    Anybody else who feels the same way?
    well not all organisms need water to survive extremofiles can live almost anywere im shure if we look hard we could find life on mars
    trash can man :-D

    need to revenge my pride list:
    Sum1bor3d
    Sonny
    Cuntinuum
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62 Re: Life on Mars? 
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by antimatter54
    Quote Originally Posted by thyristor
    I'm rather confused about the way scientists search for life on other planets. They search for water and for coal in organic material.
    But why couldn't the coal be replaced with silicon in our organic chemistry and why would E.T. life have to be based on water? There are many other di-polar materials.
    Anybody else who feels the same way?
    well not all organisms need water to survive extremofiles can live almost anywere im shure if we look hard we could find life on mars
    Extremophiles need water... Hyperthermophiles live in hot springs and near hydrothermal vents where water can exist at temperatures above 100 C. Psychrophiles live in pockets of water, or survive freezing and only grow when the ice melts. Halophiles live in salt water. It is impossible for life as we know it to exist without a polar fluid medium, water is the most appropriate because of the wide range of temperature it can be liquid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Pong,

    Bacteria make concretions grow more easily

    Otherwise I got to say, They are life forms you [ad hominem insult deleted]. Look at the visible data.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Pong,

    Bacteria make concretions grow more easily

    Otherwise I got to say, They are life forms you [ad hominem insult deleted]. Look at the visible data.

    Vincent
    Well a mod deleted whatever insult you were flinging around, but Pong is right. That authors of that articles position on blueberries is:

    "The geologists determined the processes responsible for these large-scale features in Utah involved the flow of briny groundwater saturated with natural gas that bleaches sandstone, and that such groundwater flow, the precipitation of hard hematite-cemented rock and the later erosion of surrounding softer rock also would explain the formation of the erosion-resistant pipes, buttes, knobs and concretions. They concluded a similar process could have formed concretions and larger landforms on Mars."

    The fact that bacteria can make them form faster on Earth is completely irrelevant. Moreover, similar spherecules appear on the Moon, and could have been formed on Mars in a number of ways different from the formations on Earth.

    Edit: Also, unless you're talking about the little blue fruit rich in antioxidants, blueberries are in no way life.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    OK

    Gather around children,

    Once pond a time there was a ball. In it was every thing they was or will be. For no reason this ball overheated and exploded and formed everything

    How is that. You like it? You believe it? Then you do not need me.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    OK

    Gather around children,

    Once pond a time there was a ball. In it was every thing they was or will be. For no reason this ball overheated and exploded and formed everything

    How is that. You like it? You believe it? Then you do not need me.

    Vincent
    What the fuck does the Big Bang have to do with blueberry rock formations on Mars. Way to change the subject.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Nothing,

    Mars is wind and dust. Do not pay any attention to the man behind the curtain.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Looks like a Mars flood stand by

    Can you see the movement from the base. Geo types got to say hell yea.

    Vincent

    http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2045/...2ac2cfb2_o.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Now this is a gif of clouds that has to do with the hydro cycle. An old weatherman can talk about that.



    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Sorry on that last post. Love to talk to the geo ***********.

    Hows that for an edit




    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Lets see Viking , ol’ damn lets don’t go there

    !970,s

    Lots of ******* ice , must have Benn a solar coincidence. NAW.

    Was it cold on Earth in the 70’s? Nah



    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    This is the best CO2 generated Geyser. This is all I am going to do today.

    I tried to PM the brain trust but they don’t want to go 1 on 1. Damn, I love this crap.



    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Thought I appreciate, Vincent, your strenuous attempts to find life... I truly honestly do... one might ask why you want so badly to believe there is life on another planet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Pong,

    I feel I can be honest with you. Humanity is a link in a chain. Our eyes are indeed the universe looking out.

    The next step in evolution is robotics. That will carry man out into the cosmos. The bond into cyber space is evolution. Most people could not see.The computer is our way out.

    Evolution will continue.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Mans eyes look out over Mars and for a moment over Titan. His eyes will get better.

    Now call me a liar.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    The liquid eruptions could not be liquid CO2 because it would require 10 bars or 10,000 milibars of pressure. Liquid CO2 could exist below the surface but even there the temperature would likely never reach the condensation point
    I was thinking in terms of density flows, analagous to turbidity currents or pyroclastic flows, in the manner proposed by Nick Hoffman. (e.g.http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/sao/guest/hoffman/)

    My point is that while the evidence for water is substantial it is not yet conclusive. Personally I believe there is one hell of a lot more water than the consensus view holds to be the case. However my beliefs are wholly irrelevant in this matter. What matters is the evidence - and that is not conclusive.

    Vincent, Official Warning: Stop the swearing; stop the ad hominems; stop the multiple posts. Thank you.

    And on a personal note - non-moderator mode - stop with your 'I know a secret and and am so damn smart' style. It is tiresome, counterproductive and wholly uninformative. Of course, that is advice and not a requirement. You are perfectly free to make yourself look like a dickhead if you wish. I just think it would be a shame since you do have something interesting to say beneath the braggadocio.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •