NASA to Announce Mars Mystery Liquid water today

[mfb]

Also, what if Earth life is actually Martian in origin? Then I don't know if we would detect the difference from microbes on the craft vs Martian bacteria because they would both be based on DNA.

Life on Earth today had 4 billion years of evolution - it looks significantly different from life back then. Could be invisible to a microscope, but DNA sequencing (if they have DNA at all - could still be based on RNA or something new that evolved on Mars) would reveal the difference.

2032/2033 looks optimisic, it would mean serious project planning would have to start now.

 

[Bystander]

"In http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo2546.html, scientists identified waterlogged molecules — salts of a type known as perchlorates (my emphasis)— on the surface in readings from orbit.

“That’s a direct detection of water in the form of hydration of salts,” said Alfred S. McEwen, a professor of planetary geology at the University of Arizona, the principal investigator of images from a high-resolution camera on NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and one of the authors of the new paper. “There pretty much has to have been liquid water recently present to produce the hydrated salt.”

This is a "bit of a leap." Do not be surprised at refutation and retraction.

 

[TheAnt]

That's the title of the NASA press release (I added the date).
8 a.m. PDT = 3 p.m. UCT = 5 p.m. CEST (Central European Summer Time)

The panel includes an expert for the HiRISE experiment, a high-resolution telescope in Mars orbit. Whatever they have, apparently images of some area are highly relevant.

One of the panel members is Lujendra Ojha, a PhD candidate. If they include him, it is very likely the discovery is directly connected to his work. According to http://www.lujendraojha.net/band-horizon/:Those structures are visible to HiRISE. Variations from year to year are not new. Did they see something in action?

Mary Beth Wilhelm is an organic biogeochemist (research interests).

How to combine organic biogeochemistry with Recurring Slope Lineae?

I'll update this post when I know more.

We waited for this to happen for so long!
Every astrophysicist's dream has come true, we might actually find extraterrestrial life in our own solar system!

 

[rootone]

Steady on, this just tells us of good places to look.
There has been nothing detected which is a positive indicator of presently active biochemistry.
We are already fairly certain of there having been quite substantial amounts of surface water in the past, and some of that water would have been a more likely origin of any life (just my opinion of course), than in these chlorine rich slush flows that have been discovered .
I'm prepared for the unexpected though, given the conditions that some extremophiles live in on Earth.

 

[DiracPool]

Also, what if Earth life is actually Martian in origin?

This is another big reason for sending humans to Mars (soon) to sort this out. One of the principle "Earth" life mysteries is what happened to intermediate stages of the evolution of life from inanimate matter to the first prokaryotic cells, which are extremely complex in their function. One theory was that life originated on Mars and that a "panspermia" event there knocked out some already highly evolved prokaryotes that were seeded on Earth a few billion years ago. According to that theory, what we might find on Mars is evidence of those intermediate stages of cellular evolution. I don't personally think that this is what happened, but it is possible. And that's the point, there is so much to learn and rule out or rule in. The presence of liquid water on the surface is simply begging for a thorough analysis. The possibly of finding something unexpected and significant is tantalizingly high.

2032/2033 looks optimisic, it would mean serious project planning would have to start now.

Agreed!

 

[russ_watters]

Yes. It's NASA Policy Directive 8020 and the 1967 Outer Space Treaty.

There are factions, both within NASA and outside of NASA, who say that Mars is off-limits to humans if we find life on Mars. Some of the proponents of this POV are rather influential. This finding will give those factions an even larger voice. That voice will become very large if incontrovertible evidence of life on Mars is found, even if its only extremely primitive life.

Thanks for the info (and others as well). Not sure how I feel about that (generally negative, but need to put more thought into it), but don't really want to get into it now. Maybe a topic for another thread.

 

[clope023]

2032/2033 looks optimisic, it would mean serious project planning would have to start now.

If you mean the manned Mars mission; the general idea is manned flyby by 2033 and landing by 2037; after the completely unnecessary asteroid re-direct in 2025; there are factions trying to replace asteroid re-direct with a Mars and Venus flyby mission in 2025 which would push forward the Mars landing by a few years.

 

[Monsterboy]

If you mean the manned Mars mission; the general idea is manned flyby by 2033 and landing by 2037; after the completely unnecessary asteroid re-direct in 2025; there are factions trying to replace asteroid re-direct with a Mars and Venus flyby mission in 2025 which would push forward the Mars landing by a few years.

Do we need a manned mission to do this job ? Why can't we send a well sterilised rover better equipped than the current ones to go and do the job?

 

[clope023]

Do we need a manned mission to do this job ? Why can't we send a well sterilised rover better equipped than the current ones to go and do the job?

I wasn't referring to anyone specific job, just the general plan of the manned program; but humans are better equipped to find life on Mars than robots are. If fossils exist on Mars, Curiosity and the 2020 rover and such like are more than likely to gloss over them; though a sterilized rover would probably do just fine with something like flowing water, but even then careful human hands would be preferable.

 

[Jupiter5]

Steady on, this just tells us of good places to look.
There has been nothing detected which is a positive indicator of presently active biochemistry.
We are already fairly certain of there having been quite substantial amounts of surface water in the past, and some of that water would have been a more likely origin of any life (just my opinion of course), than in these chlorine rich slush flows that have been discovered .
I'm prepared for the unexpected though, given the conditions that some extremophiles live in on Earth.

Is water always an origin of any life ?

 

[mfb]

Is water always an origin of any life ?

We don't know, but on Earth they are closely linked.
It is really hard to find places on Earth with liquid water but without life. Don Juan pond was mentioned in the linked news article, but even that is a bit more complicated.

If you mean the manned Mars mission; the general idea is manned flyby by 2033 and landing by 2037; after the completely unnecessary asteroid re-direct in 2025; there are factions trying to replace asteroid re-direct with a Mars and Venus flyby mission in 2025 which would push forward the Mars landing by a few years.

That sounds very optimistic. This article estimates 2030 for the first flight of the fully upgraded space launch system - and you probably don't want to fly to another planet with the maiden flight of a rocket, 5 years of backwards time travel not included.
SpaceX could be faster, but it is questionable if NASA will use this and abandon the SLS.

 

[Baluncore]

Now Coke Cola can build a bottling plant there, and they don't even have to paint the background red.
Imagine the marketing possibilities for a carbonic acid rich, still mineral water.

Does the presence of acidic water preclude shellfish, exoskeletons and animal bones like we see on Earth?

 

[clope023]

We don't know, but on Earth they are closely linked.
It is really hard to find places on Earth with liquid water but without life. Don Juan pond was mentioned in the linked news article, but even that is a bit more complicated.

That sounds very optimistic. This article estimates 2030 for the first flight of the fully upgraded space launch system - and you probably don't want to fly to another planet with the maiden flight of a rocket, 5 years of backwards time travel not included.
SpaceX could be faster, but it is questionable if NASA will use this and abandon the SLS.

I knew it was delayed but that's the first I've heard of the launch system being pushed back that far; asteroid re-direct is tentatively scheduled for mid 2020's and they'll need SLS and Orion for that.

 

[Jupiter5]

We don't know, but on Earth they are closely linked.
It is really hard to find places on Earth with liquid water but without life. Don Juan pond was mentioned in the linked news article, but even that is a bit more complicated.

That sounds very optimistic. This article estimates 2030 for the first flight of the fully upgraded space launch system - and you probably don't want to fly to another planet with the maiden flight of a rocket, 5 years of backwards time travel not included.
SpaceX could be faster, but it is questionable if NASA will use this and abandon the SLS.

mfb , thank you for an article
I am certain that scientists were scientifically aware of differences of Earth's and Martian's atmosphere

 

[mfb]

I knew it was delayed but that's the first I've heard of the launch system being pushed back that far; asteroid re-direct is tentatively scheduled for mid 2020's and they'll need SLS and Orion for that.

There are different stages with increasing payload. A mission to Mars needs much more payload than a mission to L1 or L2.

mfb , thank you for an article
I am certain that scientists were scientifically aware of differences of Earth's and Martian's atmosphere

I don't doubt what the scientists are aware of, I questioned the quality of the news article as at least one statement there is way too strong given the quoted reference I found so quickly.

 

[Jupiter5]

I don't doubt what the scientists are aware of, I questioned the quality of the news article as at least one statement there is way too strong given the quoted reference I found so quickly.

Agree,but I doubt everything for many reasons,and one of them is constant lack of adequate short info about statistical tested data, relationship between two or more variables,results of previous researches, and opinions of scientists form the same and closely-related fields.

 

[Hugh Parker]

2] We finally know where to look for Martian Life.

My reply: When Mars had oceans, perhaps life could thrive in lava tunnels under giant volcanoes. Deeper sites mean warmer sites. At what range of depths under the Martian surface are salty waters (if any) currently liquid? At those depths, what are the current partial pressures of oxygen and carbon dioxide?

 

[Mark Harder]

Am I the only one who sees no evidence for LIQUID water NOW on Mars? Perchlorates, OK. Perchlorates are the anions of salts. What is the cationic species in these salts? Important because perchlorates of alkali metals are very soluble in water. So if there was liquid water in their surroundings, they would be in solution, not in crystalline form, complexed water or not. Water soluble minerals occur mostly in dry environments like the Kalihari and Atacama deserts, eg. copper sulfate in the oxidation zones of CuS deposits. The popular press has reported that other runnel-like feature on Mars' surface are evidence that water ONCE was found on Mars. The RSLs are interesting because of their seasonal nature, but is the presence of contemporary surface water the only explanation for them?

 

[DaveC426913]

The popular press has reported that other runnel-like feature on Mars' surface are evidence that water ONCE was found on Mars. The RSLs are interesting because of their seasonal nature, but is the presence of contemporary surface water the only explanation for them?

Seasonal nature means it's there now.
Spectroscopic analysis from the probe has directly detected and identified it as water.

 

[mfb]

Spectroscopic analysis from the probe has directly detected and identified it as water.

They didn't find spectral lines of water (unless I really missed the point) directly, just spectroscopic evidence of chemicals that are directly associated to water "today" (or yesterday or a week ago, but not a million years ago).

 

[DaveC426913]

They didn't find spectral lines of water (unless I really missed the point) directly,

It was my understanding that they had, but it is entirely possible that I am wrong. We should verify.

 

[mfb]

It was my understanding that they had, but it is entirely possible that I am wrong. We should verify.

"Spectral evidence for hydrated salts in recurring slope lineae on Mars"

Here we analyse spectral data from the Compact Reconnaissance Imaging Spectrometer for Mars instrument onboard the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter from four different locations where recurring slope lineae are present. We find evidence for hydrated salts at all four locations in the seasons when recurring slope lineae are most extensive, which suggests that the source of hydration is recurring slope lineae activity. The hydrated salts most consistent with the spectral absorption features we detect are magnesium perchlorate, magnesium chlorate and sodium perchlorate. Our findings strongly support the hypothesis that recurring slope lineae form as a result of contemporary water activity on Mars.

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo2546.html

 

[Mark Harder]

"Spectral evidence for hydrated salts in recurring slope lineae on Mars"http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo2546.html

That's how I interpreted the reports - evidence in support of a hypothesis - a carefully worded scientific conclusion. It admits of other unspecified interpretations of the spectral data. Many chemical salts contain so-called 'water of hydration', or water molecules coordinating about the cations of the salt (maybe the anions too, I'm not sure). My guess, and again I haven't read the entire report, is that at some time the magnesium and sodium salts were dissolved in water. When the water dried up, the salts crystallized or precipitated out, taking some proportional ( i.e. stoichiometric) number of water molecules with them. The seasonality of the observations is indeed consistent with that explanation. Furthermore, if one supposes that the salts were crystallized ages ago and remain to this day, then one is left with the need to explain why they appear to be temporary phenomena.

 

[mheslep]

"Spectral evidence for hydrated salts in recurring slope lineae on Mars"http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo2546.html

The title of this thread does not seem justified by the finding you quoted, not in this forum.

 

[mfb]

Just quoting NASA scientists.
"That’s a direct detection of water in the form of hydration of salts", "There pretty much has to have been liquid water recently present to produce the hydrated salt.", "It’s very definitive there is some sort of liquid water"

As always, their results can be interpreted differently by others. Feel free to add those interpretations to the thread.

 

[mheslep]

Just quoting ...scientists.
...

1992 University of Utah press release.

"We hope we'll be able to work with others to develop this into a useable technology for generating heat and power for the world," says Fleischmann. "The process is clean and indications are it will be economical compared to conventional nuclear systems."

 

[mfb]

Just quoting NASA scientists.

 

[mheslep]

Yes NASA has scientific prestige. So did Pons and Fleischmann. NASA also has a colossal potential conflict of interest by way of desire to promote more Mars missions by stirring public interest and thus enhancing budgets. We avoid possible bias by focus on the detailed findings and not employers.

 

[mfb]

So where is the point?
"X claims Y" is a valid statement, Y is discussed seriously in the scientific community, and it is the main topic of this thread.

 

[at94official]

I am adding a link to the upcoming live stream here, in case there are others who'd like to watch it on Sep 28, 8:30 a.m. PT :
Quote: "The event will also be carried live on: http://www.ustream.tv/NASAJPL"

Well, now you made it impossible for me to resist posting a link to this sketch.

Fantastic as it is! Thanks for this LINK!