Rock on Mars possibly indicating Life

[BillTre]

NASA people are excited about a new (old actually) rock that their rover Perseverance found a few days ago.

Space.com article here.

Short NASA video:

 

[mfb]

No, NASA hasn’t found life on Mars yet, but the latest discovery is intriguing

The Perseverance rover has found a rock that has an interesting pattern. On Earth, that pattern is associated with life below the surface. Perseverance can't study the rock much more, but labs on Earth would have much better tools. This rock would be a great choice for a sample return mission.

 

[berkeman]

This rock would be a great choice for a sample return mission.

Are there provisions for such a return mission? It would be great if NASA has thought that far ahead. (docking mechanisms and procedures, return missions, etc.)

 

[BillTre]

Here is a short Science magazine news article on the rock find.
They are more skeptical about it as an indicator of past life and quote someone who suggests its a PR play for more money for a return the rocks mission.

Are there provisions for such a return mission? It would be great if NASA has thought that far ahead. (docking mechanisms and procedures, return missions, etc.)

Here is an older (last year) Science magazine news article about how the previously planned return the rocks mission (AKA Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission) estimated costs went from 4 billion to 11 billion dollars. That's a lot of money, even for NASA. This has caused the return mission to be put on hold or in a bureaucratic Siberia of some kind.

One of the previous rovers (now dead I believe) has an on board lab that would have been better able to analyze the rock's organic chemistry, but it was not needed since it was planned for the samples to be returned to earth labs where things would be better analyzed.

 

[Ken G]

Sounds like they need to send a lab to that rock instead of bringing it back, then we'll see if it needs to come back.

 

[enorbet]

I see this discovery as far more than merely interesting. I see this as compelling considering that so far no attempts, albeit limited by onboard labs, have been able to come up with any natural abiotic explanation to this occurrence at least by Earth environment standards. This means whether it is a result of "mere" Chemistry or due to microbiotic life the answer is extremely important.. how extremely depends on which is the most likely.

I agree with Ken G that the best odds to make any progress is to send a probe with at least a very high priority of analyzing this finding. I don't see the current US administration spending the billions required to bring samples back to Earth labs, though that should never leave the table altogether.

The bottom line as I see it is this could be the most important scientific discovery to date if it is indeed likely it is evidence of life and even more important than undersea smoker life discovery if it is simply mineral.

 

[Baluncore]

I see this discovery as far more than merely interesting.

There is no reason, that I can see, that requires an urgent answer to the question of life-or-just-mineral on Mars.

Sounds like they need to send a lab to that rock instead of bringing it back, then we'll see if it needs to come back.

True. Once there are people on Mars, there will be a minimum laboratory, with the ability to send microscope images and isotope analysis back to Earth.

 

[enorbet]

While I can't shy away from the simple fact that I don't have many years left (I'm a 79 year old diabetic that has survived 3 strokes) but apart from my own selfish interests the simple fact is that if it is simply mineral based chemistry, since it is nothing we have any frame of reference for on Earth, that is not only fascinating but likely important going forward if we are to grasp what we find with both spectroscopy and physical visits to planets and moons of planets.

If it is Life, and that means either Life sprung up on 2 planets in 1 system or on 1 but migrated to another, either of which is quite profound to my way of thinking. I happen to agree that "Are we alone?" is among the top 3 questions facing mankind, and has for a vast slice of time. That seems rather compelling to me.

So, Baluncore, care to mention what you consider more compelling?

 

[Baluncore]

So, Baluncore, care to mention what you consider more compelling?

With the MSR mission estimated costs of 11 billion dollars, I would prefer to see an investment in health and education, every cent of which goes back through the economy several times. The public should not suffer, just to resolve a question that does not improve their lives.

There are private entrepreneurs willing to arrange a one-way bus service to Mars, I say, offer to place a $1M laboratory on one of those future flights.

We can never prove that there is not, and never has been, life on Mars. Statistically, we can expect life on Mars, and that has been an acceptable situation for some time now. Mars tourists will see many samples that represent chemical activity, until one may show a certainty of life. We simply do not need to resolve the question immediately, it will resolve itself without investment, in the fullness of time.

 

[enorbet]

With all due respect, @Baluncore, that is the age old disproved argument against pure science spending. Have you ever web searched the multitude of wide variety of spinoffs hugely important to the world's populace from just the Apollo Program? It is spectacular and in a massive variety of fields not to mention the corporate cooperation required that became a positive lesson to industry.

It is even possible we wouldn't be having this conversation absent the advances just in micro electronics, but advances in materials, medicine, nutrition, health monitoring, are just scratching the surface of what the Cold War space programs led to..

Beyond that the 2025 US Defense Budget is 384 Billion dollars. Why not divert just 10% and do MSR AND Health and Education? Incidentally the stimulus to children in school to increase interest in Math and Science has historically always spiked with exciting discoveries. It's difficult to place a monetary value on that.

 

[Baluncore]

With all due respect, @Baluncore, that is the age old disproved argument against pure science spending. Have you ever web searched the multitude of wide variety of spinoffs hugely important to the world's populace from just the Apollo Program? It is spectacular and in a massive variety of fields not to mention the corporate cooperation required that became a positive lesson to industry.

It is even possible we wouldn't be having this conversation absent the advances just in micro electronics, but advances in materials, medicine, nutrition, health monitoring, are just scratching the surface of what the Cold War space programs led to..

Beyond that the 2025 US Defense Budget is 384 Billion dollars. Why not divert just 10% and do MSR AND Health and Education? Incidentally the stimulus to children in school to increase interest in Math and Science has historically always spiked with exciting discoveries. It's difficult to place a monetary value on that.

Investing $11G in medicine would do a lot more for the human race than bringing a few rocks from Mars, back to Earth, only top find it was probably chemical mineralogy, and not life, yet again.

 

[willyengland]

Once there are people on Mars, ...

Then there will be the problem that Mars will be contaminated with biological material.

 

[Baluncore]

Then there will be the problem that Mars will be contaminated with biological material.

Earlier Martian life will be fossilised. We can differentiate between modern Martian and Earthling life by our DNA.

 

[berkeman]

Thread is closed temporarily for Moderation.

 

[berkeman]

Thread is reopened provisionally.

So, Baluncore, care to mention what you consider more compelling?

Arguments about the politics and economics of a return mission versus other uses of the money are off-topic for this thread. Please start a different thread if you folks want to discuss that aspect. Thank you.