Visit to Phobos

I have been reviewing the comments on the referenced thread, and it
seems to me that most of the writers missed the sense of my original
suggestion. I did NOT suggest going there as a relay station, or a
place to take a rest before continuing further. I believe there is
much to be learned there. There must be a significant reason for all
of those layers. I think they are sedimentary rock. That would
indicate that Phobos was once part of a large planet - at least as
large as Earth, and likely larger. And that planet had water. Lots of
water. And what might have been in that water?

Of the Asteroids whose photos I have seen, some seem to have layers,
but not many good photos have been made. One might suggest a visit to
one of those, but I think that Phobos should come first becuse of what
we already know about it and the ease and speed of getting there.
George

(George Prehmus) writes:

I have been reviewing the comments on the referenced thread, and it
seems to me that most of the writers missed the sense of my original
suggestion. I did NOT suggest going there as a relay station, or a
place to take a rest before continuing further. I believe there is
much to be learned there. There must be a significant reason for all
of those layers. I think they are sedimentary rock.

Highly unlikely. Phobos has a chemical composition typical of a carbonaceous
chondrite, which is not in the tiniest little bit like sedimentary rock.
Moreover, the infrared data indicate that it is covered hip-deep in
very fine dust, http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/releases/98/mgsphobos.html.
Since the thick dust layer would likely obscure any underlying structure,
if anything, the parallel striations are likely evidence that outgassing
of residual volatiles through cracks in Phobos' structure are `blowing'
the dust aside.


That would indicate that Phobos was once part of a large planet - at
least as large as Earth, and likely larger. And that planet had
water. Lots of water. And what might have been in that water?

I'm sorry, but there is absolutely =NO= plausible physical mechanism for
completely disrupting an Earth-sized planet. The only people who still take
the "Exploding Planet" hypothesis for formation of the asteroids seriously
are certifiable nutballs like Tom van Flandern or the worshipers of Velikovsky.


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'

(George Prehmus) wrote in message om...
I have been reviewing the comments on the referenced thread, and it
seems to me that most of the writers missed the sense of my original
suggestion. I did NOT suggest going there as a relay station, or a
place to take a rest before continuing further. I believe there is
much to be learned there. There must be a significant reason for all
of those layers. I think they are sedimentary rock.


Why do you think they are sedimentary in origin? If you think that
sedimentation is the ONLY cause of layering, you don't know much about
even elementary geology. I do extensive work in volcanics and
encounter layering all the time, no sedimentation involved
thankyouverymuch. Layering is found in coal beds and peat deposits.
You can find layering in aeolian deposits in Chile and the Gobi, the
driest spots on Earth.


indicate that Phobos was once part of a large planet - at least as
large as Earth, and likely larger. And that planet had water. Lots of
water. And what might have been in that water?

Of the Asteroids whose photos I have seen, some seem to have layers,
but not many good photos have been made.

You're right. The only geological quality pics of an asteroid (other
than Phobos and Deimos) were made by NEAR at Eros.


One might suggest a visit to
one of those, but I think that Phobos should come first becuse of what
we already know about it and the ease and speed of getting there.
George

(C. F. Leon) wrote in message . com...
(George Prehmus) wrote in message om...
I have been reviewing the comments on the referenced thread, and it
seems to me that most of the writers missed the sense of my original
suggestion. I did NOT suggest going there as a relay station, or a
place to take a rest before continuing further. I believe there is
much to be learned there. There must be a significant reason for all
of those layers. I think they are sedimentary rock.


Why do you think they are sedimentary in origin? If you think that
sedimentation is the ONLY cause of layering, you don't know much about
even elementary geology.
I don't think I said I thought that. I did say that what I see there
looks like sedimentary layering
I do extensive work in volcanics and
encounter layering all the time, no sedimentation involved
thankyouverymuch. Layering is found in coal beds and peat deposits.
You can find layering in aeolian deposits in Chile and the Gobi, the
driest spots on Earth.
Those layers don't look to me like any volcanic layers I ever saw,
and if the layers are coal or peat, wow! let's go there quick. And
what about those depression craters which seem to be formed by
volatiles escaping? Does that happen in volcanic layers that are as
old as Phobos appears to be?
Just out of curiosity, what would YOU guess they are?
-----

indicate that Phobos was once part of a large planet - at least as
large as Earth, and likely larger. And that planet had water. Lots of
water. And what might have been in that water?

Of the Asteroids whose photos I have seen, some seem to have layers,
but not many good photos have been made.

You're right. The only geological quality pics of an asteroid (other
than Phobos and Deimos) were made by NEAR at Eros.

And some of those seemed to be layered and dusty.
One might suggest a visit to one of those, but I think that Phobos should come first becuse of what we already know about it and the ease and speed of getting there.