balls

reading on the new scientist website about some of the mars rock analysis,
there are 2 formation possibilities left for the rock with 'balls'
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994658

"The first of the remaining two explanations is that the rocks are layers of
volcanic ash, interspersed with droplets of molten rock spewed out by
volcanoes or meteorite impacts and then frozen into glassy beads.

The second scenario involves layers of ash or fine windblown dust that later
were penetrated by mineral-rich water, which deposited successive layers of
material onto the grains, building them up into spheres"

it appears that by using the mass spectrometer the correct explanation will
be known.

it strikes me that the outcome of this test, and others, will have a huge
influence on the short term (100yrs or so) timetable for solar system
exploration, finding good evidence of water on mars should speed up the
space program but a lack of water evidence could curb public and financial
interest, the results of these tests could decide if a man walks on mars is
our lifetime

Spudge wrote:

reading on the new scientist website about some of the mars rock analysis,
there are 2 formation possibilities left for the rock with 'balls'
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994658

"The first of the remaining two explanations is that the rocks are layers of
volcanic ash, interspersed with droplets of molten rock spewed out by
volcanoes or meteorite impacts and then frozen into glassy beads.

The second scenario involves layers of ash or fine windblown dust that later
were penetrated by mineral-rich water, which deposited successive layers of
material onto the grains, building them up into spheres"

it appears that by using the mass spectrometer the correct explanation will
be known.

it strikes me that the outcome of this test, and others, will have a huge
influence on the short term (100yrs or so) timetable for solar system
exploration, finding good evidence of water on mars should speed up the
space program but a lack of water evidence could curb public and financial
interest, the results of these tests could decide if a man walks on mars is
our lifetime

The money would be better spent sending probes to Europa - plenty of
water there with the potential for life.

--

Peter

Peter Hayes wrote:
The money would be better spent sending probes to Europa - plenty of
water there with the potential for life.

There currently is more compelling evidence for water on mars than on
Eruopa. It *may* have lots of water. We need to go look, that's for sure.

--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools Software for the Observer:
http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html

Skyhound Observing Pages:
http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html

To reply remove spleen

"Greg Crinklaw" wrote in message
...
Peter Hayes wrote:
The money would be better spent sending probes to Europa - plenty of
water there with the potential for life.

There currently is more compelling evidence for water on mars than on
Eruopa. It *may* have lots of water. We need to go look, that's for
sure.

--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools Software for the Observer:
http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html

Skyhound Observing Pages:
http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html

To reply remove spleen

I was not questioning the scientific specifics of where water could be
found, my point was more to do with the public and political enthusiasm
(money) that would be generated for the space race by the discovery of water
evidence on mars, and vice versa what damage to the future time line of
solar exploration a dry mars could cause?



Clear skies (soon I trust)

DS

52N 0E 10M

Spudge wrote:
I was not questioning the scientific specifics of where water could be
found, my point was more to do with the public and political enthusiasm
(money) that would be generated for the space race by the discovery of water
evidence on mars, and vice versa what damage to the future time line of
solar exploration a dry mars could cause?

Which I thought was an astute observation... Look at how long it took
NASA to go back to mars after Viking for instance.

No, I was just responding to the other guy who made the extreme claim
that there was "plenty of water" on Europa. That hasn't been
established yet.

Clear skies,
Greg


--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools Software for the Observer:
http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html

Skyhound Observing Pages:
http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html

To reply remove spleen

Greg Crinklaw wrote:

Spudge wrote:
I was not questioning the scientific specifics of where water could be
found, my point was more to do with the public and political enthusiasm
(money) that would be generated for the space race by the discovery of water
evidence on mars, and vice versa what damage to the future time line of
solar exploration a dry mars could cause?

Which I thought was an astute observation... Look at how long it took
NASA to go back to mars after Viking for instance.

No, I was just responding to the other guy who made the extreme claim
that there was "plenty of water" on Europa. That hasn't been
established yet.

I thought we knew the surface of Europa was covered in ice, and that
there is a high probability of liquid water below this ice crust. Along
with this water comes the possibility of life.

Sending people to Mars is politically motivated, whereas sending robots
to Europa would be science motivated. I can indeed see why the Mars
adventure would appeal to Bush, but is it money wisely spent?

I guess Europa doesn't strike a chord with the public, unlike Mars.

--

"The Other Guy."

"Peter Hayes" wrote in message
o.uk...
Greg Crinklaw wrote:

Spudge wrote:
I was not questioning the scientific specifics of where water could be
found, my point was more to do with the public and political
enthusiasm
(money) that would be generated for the space race by the discovery of
water
evidence on mars, and vice versa what damage to the future time line
of
solar exploration a dry mars could cause?

Which I thought was an astute observation... Look at how long it took
NASA to go back to mars after Viking for instance.

No, I was just responding to the other guy who made the extreme claim
that there was "plenty of water" on Europa. That hasn't been
established yet.

I thought we knew the surface of Europa was covered in ice, and that
there is a high probability of liquid water below this ice crust. Along
with this water comes the possibility of life.

Sending people to Mars is politically motivated, whereas sending robots
to Europa would be science motivated. I can indeed see why the Mars
adventure would appeal to Bush, but is it money wisely spent?

I guess Europa doesn't strike a chord with the public, unlike Mars.

--

"The Other Guy."

"I guess Europa doesn't strike a chord with the public, unlike Mars."



Exactly Peter, and although most of ng readers here are probably as
interested in the Huygens probe as they are the Mars flotilla, joe public is
quite rightly fascinated with Mars, can you imagine the revenue and
political mileage that would be generated by the discovery of water based
formations on Mars, I can see the 'artists impressions' of how Mars looked X
million years ago on mainstream evening news, the politicians would queue
right round Westminster to be photographed with the likes of C Pillinger and
his Beagle 3.



Do you think this would have a beneficial knock on for the space race as a
whole, or would it divert finances and interest from other space
exploration? as evidence to the former I would suggest that George B's
recent NASA budget increases are wholly motivated by nothing more than the
desire to associate himself with the current Mars interest, maybe I'm wrong
and George has a 10" Dob round the back of the Whitehouse.



The flip side of this is the damage that the discovery of a 'dry' Mars could
do, I have no doubt that we will 'get there one day' and I know this is the
golden age of cosmology but as a child I was fascinated by the moon landings
and I am quite (selfishly) impatient to see a continued commitment to solar
system exploration in all its forms.



I know this is oversimplification but I wonder if there is a NASA mission
planner with two long term budget proposals for congress one based on the
discovery of wet mars and a cheaper plan based on a dry Mars.



Btw Greg. I am quite new to astronomy and internet newsgroups so I apologise
if my reply appeared curt, no offence was intended.



Bright days and dark nights to you all

DS



52N 0E 10M

Wasn't it Greg Crinklaw who wrote:

There currently is more compelling evidence for water on mars than on
Eruopa. It *may* have lots of water. We need to go look, that's for sure.

I think that you're confusing the fact that there may be ice on Mars and
there may be lots of liquid water on Europa. There's certainly lots of
ice on Europa and there's certainly no liquid water at present on Mars.

--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure

Spudge wrote:

"Greg Crinklaw" wrote in message
...
Peter Hayes wrote:
The money would be better spent sending probes to Europa - plenty of
water there with the potential for life.

There currently is more compelling evidence for water on mars than on
Eruopa. It *may* have lots of water. We need to go look, that's for
sure.
I was not questioning the scientific specifics of where water could be
found, my point was more to do with the public and political enthusiasm
(money) that would be generated for the space race by the discovery of water
evidence on mars, and vice versa what damage to the future time line of
solar exploration a dry mars could cause?

In the same way Al Bean (?) pointing the camera at the Sun
on Apollo 12 (?) killed the moon missions?

--

Peter

Mike Williams wrote:

Wasn't it Greg Crinklaw who wrote:


There currently is more compelling evidence for water on mars than on
Eruopa. It *may* have lots of water. We need to go look, that's for sure.


I think that you're confusing the fact that there may be ice on Mars and
there may be lots of liquid water on Europa. There's certainly lots of
ice on Europa and there's certainly no liquid water at present on Mars.

I can assure you sir, I'm not some confused newbie. You took my comment
out of its context (where it should have been clear that when I said
"water on mars" I meant at some point in history, not today. And "it"
meant Eruopa. The evidence for water ice on Europa is not as compelling
as some might like to state, and there is little more than speculation
that liquid water resides under the surface. On the other hand the
evidence for historical flowing water on mars is ubiquitous, although it
too needs confirmation from the ground.

--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools Software for the Observer:
http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html

Skyhound Observing Pages:
http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html

To reply remove spleen