0
   

Mars: Emerging or Dying?

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Aug, 2018 02:40 pm
By the way, in regard to your remarks about the "dust" storm that EB reported in his rovers on mars thread: That isn't actually dust, but rather, it is fines--the particles are micron size or smaller. Most of the rovers on Mars are dead right now, and the belief (unconfirmed and likely unconfirmable for quite some time to come) is that their solar panels are covered in fines. The fines would have a static charge (in this hypothesis) and they would not get blown off. The Curiosity rover in Gales Crater has something which was JPL's attempt at a solution, and, as far as I know, it has worked so far.
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Aug, 2018 09:07 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Quote:
Solar wind and radiation are responsible for stripping the Martian atmosphere, transforming Mars from a planet that could have supported life billions of years ago into a frigid desert world, according to new results.


The brutally cold temperatures on Mars are confirmed in this article from Space-dot-com

The salinity of the Martian soil and regolith are described in this article from Space-dot-com.

How could life have been supported in the Martian past without more mass/gravity than the planet currently has? Gravity is needed for the upper atmosphere to bear down on the lower atmosphere and generate pressure. Without that gravitational bearing-down, the atmosphere expands with heat and molecules in the upper atmosphere would be heated/accelerated to escape velocity.

The gases lost by heating them to escape velocity would result in what amounts to evaporative cooling of the atmosphere, so how could greenhouse gases build up enough density to blanket heat and warm the Martian land? The moment they start building up density and warming, they would expand and blow away by their own heat energy as well as energy added by the impact of solar wind.

Salinity is a different story. Mars is full of what appear by our standards to be toxins. Chlorine and iron oxide are abundant on the Martian surface, but then again salt crystals are also abundant on the leaves of mangrove plants. Plants usually wilt and die from salinity but mangroves have evolved to filter the salt out of saline water, and surface toxins on Mars may also have been transported to the surface by organic mechanisms that harness solar energy to filter and transport/excrete them in concentrated form on the surface, the same way mangroves do with salt. And if they haven't yet evolved to do that, they may yet develop in that direction.

0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Aug, 2018 09:11 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

If you wish to join the legion of those who mistrust scientific findings because they are not consonant with what they would like to believe, you may help yourself. Everything I posted in the post to which you refer, and my most recent post has the point of just how very, very unlikely it is that life could arise now on Mars. If you don't want to believe that, that's no skin off my nose. However, don't expect me to have any respect for your thesis when you basically piss down my leg and tell me it's raining.

If you can't apply scientific knowledge to think creatively and critically about different ideas, I would prefer you not interject by asserting 'mistrust' of 'scientific findings.' There is nothing interesting about having every creative discussion about a science-relevant topic attacked and ridiculed because it isn't a recitation of established scientific publications. It is possible and good to have creative, critical discussions that apply scientific knowledge without filtering out anything and everything besides echoes of other publications. Everything doesn't have to be or have a literature review to make for an interesting discussion.
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Aug, 2018 09:13 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Do you care to provide evidence for "methane vents?" The Curiosity rover, working Gale Crater, just south of the Martian equator, reported a methane bloom--which is nothing like a methane "vent." However, the mission controllers at JPL were suspicious that it might have been a data artifact, and they recalibrated the detector. No methane has been detected since the equipment was recalibrated.

If there is no methane, then that would be a moot issue. I don't really want to debate whether there is really methane or not, though. Let's just assume tentatively for the sake of discussion that the publications that note it aren't total fiction, and then if they turn out to in fact be fiction, you can say "I told you so."
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Aug, 2018 09:25 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

No thanks for sending me to "Daily Beast." I tried to read their "About" link, which did not work, and the site is so poorly designed that it kept jumping around as I tried to read the article. I won't be going back there.

I have no attachment for "Daily Beast" as a publication. The article came up in a feed I was reading so I followed the link and read the article. That's all. It was just food for thought.

Quote:
There is no possibility of Mars developing a "stronger, hotter" magnetic field. It has no magnetic field, because the core of the planet has cooled off (apparently, completely). That is why, in my original post, I mentioned that volcanism ended there more than a million years ago. After the eruption of the four giant volcanoes of Tharsis, there was probably no longer sufficient heat in the core to sustain a magnetic field, if in fact there ever was one.

I also thought Mars has absolutely no magnetic field and that the interior was completely solidified, but I have read some sources that claim otherwise. I have no way to directly verify or reject either claim so I must consider the possibility that there is some molten material and some magnetic field as a result. Whether these are the result of weakening through time or whether they are gradually strengthening is something I am interested in contemplating. Certainly I can see how a hot ball of magma from a supernova could gradually cool down and solidify, but I can also imagine that a planetary disk/cloud could gradually condense into sun + planets and then the cooling planet would automatically be 'in dialogue' with the sun because of ion-connections (solar wind) as well as light-energy absorbing mechanisms that emerge and evolve due to photochemistry.

I.e. when materials on the surface of a sunlight-exposed body are ionized or otherwise photoelectrically stimulated, the potential for evolving energy-storage mechanisms like photosynthesis occurs. Once such mechanisms begin occurring, there is also a likelihood that the stored energy will persist along certain pathways, probably extending underground since energy that gets stored underground would be protected from solar energy effects, weathering by dust storms, etc. In this way, it is possible that solar energy has been stored and built up underground in some form of underground organisms and/or fossil-fuel, which may be consumed and concentrated by other processes, whether living or non-living, which ultimately compound the energy as heat and begin melting material that is sufficiently insulated by its depth beneath the surface, hence initiating the formation and growth of a molten core and corresponding magnetic field.
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Aug, 2018 09:40 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Here is a relief map of Mars:

http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/WebImg/Mars2-ArabiaTerra-USGS-of02-282.jpg

On the left there are four gargantuan volcanoes. The three that run south-southwest to north-northeast sit atop the Tharsis plateau. This is now generally considered to have been a gigantic magma dome. The volcano in the center of that line of three is Pavonis Mons (Peacock Mountain). The southern rim of its caldera sits on the equator. To the right, you will see a feature known as the Hellas Planitia. The name is misleading, it is not simply a plain, it is an impact crater. It is oblong from east to west because the object, a planetisimal about 125 miles in diameter, came in, probably very fast and low. Most of the ejecta was thrown to the west, suggesting the speed, and the oblong nature of the impact crater suggests that it came in low. Below is a more detailed map of the Hellas basin:

https://www.psi.edu/sites/default/files/images/epo/explorecraters/hellas/hellas_overall.jpg

Note the Hellespontus Montes to the west, while there are no similar mountains to the east. That provides more evidence that the object came in low and fast. Many, but by no means all planetologists studying think that the magma dome which created the Tharsis plateau was caused by that impact. Enough scientists consider Thatsis to have been caused by a magma dome that most of them refer to it as the Tharsis bulge. Whether or not it was caused by the planetisimal which created the Hellas basin is less certain.

The point is that whatever caused the eruption of the four mightiest volcanoes in this star system, that very likely explains why volcanism has ended on Mars. With no hot core, there will not be any "hotter" magnetic field around the planet because there is no longer a mechanism to cause such a magnetic field.

Have you watched any of the Electric Universe videos on youtube explaining how surface features of Mars could be the result of powerful electrical activity that carved the surface like a plasma torch? It sounds far-fetched, but if you think about the early solar system as a hot planetary cloud/disk, then a such a cloud would exhibit a lot of internal lightning, the way a thunder storm involves a lot of lighting strikes between clouds as they condense and shift turbulently. Eventually, as the clouds of the solar system would condense into planetary bodies, the space between them would clear of ions and dust so that the main communication of energy would take the form of light passing through clear skies, along with some light solar wind. However, the further back you go into the past, the thicker the solar wind and electrical transmissions/current running through it, and the more diffuse and scattered the light would be by the ionized cloud/material permeating the entire solar system.

If hot planetary (ionized) gas can condense into magma and gradually cool into violent volcanic activity venting energy out through the cooling crust, the core may have cooled relatively quickly, but through that process, veins of extremophiles could have emerged and evolved into organism chains that capture solar energy and pass it down through the ground to pockets of water that are insulated enough to foster aquatic life. These organics, in turn, could die and sink down to form more energy-dense sludge, which in turn could be compressed until it begins a sort of pyrolysis, which releases the energy as heat, which then builds up because it is insulated by all the material around it.

In short, I think it is possible for a solar-energy 'bridge' to form as a hot planet cools, and then for that bridge to continue transmitting solar energy underground where it can build up to form a nascent molten core and corresponding magnetic field. The more the core and magnetic field grow, the more protection there is for life on the surface to emerge and evolve. The thicker the atmosphere can grow without being stripped away by solar wind, the more solar wind can be captured and settle as dust, which over huge periods of geological time can increase the overall mass and thus gravity of the planet, which in turn causes the atmosphere to thicken and more heat to build up from greenhouse gases that are retained.
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Aug, 2018 09:48 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
I don't think early, primitive life forms on Mars could have survived anywhere on the planet, and certainly not have come back and developed into the extremophiles which they would have to be to survive in the current environments on Mars.

If the early Mars was formed from the hot material of a planetary cloud/disk, it would have plenty of energy to transport around in different ways, through different paths. Energy = change and more energy means more rapid changes. In a hot environment that's cooling, extremophiles are likely to form, imo. It's simply a question of natural selection over a huge number of similar energy events/environments. As the planet continues to cool, most of the nascent cells die off, but those that survive are well-adapted to the environments they adapted within, and they must link together into metabolic food/energy chains that transmit energy from sunlight into other forms, which are logically underground since the surface is exposed to harsh radiation and dust storms/weathering.
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Aug, 2018 09:50 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

By the way, in regard to your remarks about the "dust" storm that EB reported in his rovers on mars thread: That isn't actually dust, but rather, it is fines--the particles are micron size or smaller. Most of the rovers on Mars are dead right now, and the belief (unconfirmed and likely unconfirmable for quite some time to come) is that their solar panels are covered in fines. The fines would have a static charge (in this hypothesis) and they would not get blown off. The Curiosity rover in Gales Crater has something which was JPL's attempt at a solution, and, as far as I know, it has worked so far.

Interesting point. Wouldn't that also mean that the charged 'fines' would be primed to cluster in ways that absorb and store solar energy?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Sep, 2018 07:38 am
Electric universe . . . ah-hahahahahahahahahaha . . .

My remarks about any original lifeforms surviving on Mars were with regard to the "Big Hit" hypothesis. Obviously, they only apply if the big hit had actually taken place, and were not simply hypothetical.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Sep, 2018 07:45 am
Mars is an interesting topic--your "electric universe" speculations, not so much--have fun. Bye.
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Sep, 2018 09:56 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Mars is an interesting topic--your "electric universe" speculations, not so much--have fun. Bye.

You can't just categorize and reject things based on your limited view of a certain theoretical approach. I'm not worshipping the Electric Universe theory. It just so happens they have addressed issue related to electrical activity within ionized plasma/gas, which is what most of the universe consists of and which would have been much more prevalent and dense within the early solar system if the planets have emerged/condensed within a protoplanetary cloud/disk.
0 Replies
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 05/16/2024 at 12:33:22