IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Water oceans on mars?, Images of different water oceans on mars based on MGS MOLA instrument.
Guest_Magnus Lundstedt_*
post Mar 14 2006, 11:20 PM
Post #1





Guests






I have just completed a fun little afternoon project. I have long been looking for what an ocean on mars would look like for different amounts of water - preferably with a movie for many different ocean heights. So after not finding it ever, I did it myself today:

http://magnus.infidyne.com/mars/water/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ElkGroveDan
post Mar 15 2006, 01:36 AM
Post #2


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4763
Joined: 15-March 05
From: Glendale, AZ
Member No.: 197



QUOTE (Magnus Lundstedt @ Mar 14 2006, 11:20 PM) *
I have just completed a fun little afternoon project. I have long been looking for what an ocean on mars would look like for different amounts of water - preferably with a movie for many different ocean heights. So after not finding it ever, I did it myself today:

http://magnus.infidyne.com/mars/water/



Nice. Now if you really want to impress us, project it on a rotating globe


--------------------
If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RNeuhaus
post Mar 15 2006, 01:56 AM
Post #3


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1636
Joined: 9-May 05
From: Lima, Peru
Member No.: 385



Very interesting pictures and these give us the idea where is low and high. Very good Mars altitud view.

Rodolfo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Magnus Lundstedt_*
post Mar 15 2006, 08:09 AM
Post #4





Guests






QUOTE (ElkGroveDan @ Mar 15 2006, 02:36 AM) *
Nice. Now if you really want to impress us, project it on a rotating globe


Nah, that is not so intresting.. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
helvick
post Mar 15 2006, 08:20 AM
Post #5


Dublin Correspondent
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 1799
Joined: 28-March 05
From: Celbridge, Ireland
Member No.: 220



QUOTE (Magnus Lundstedt @ Mar 15 2006, 08:09 AM) *
Nah, that is not so intresting.. smile.gif

Well - if you take your idea and create a specular map and a texture map with a less saturated blue you would have quite a convincing effect on something like Celestia. It would be quite a challenge (I think) to animate but you could have a selection of alternate textures.
like Don Edwards is doing in this Celestia discussion
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Richard Trigaux_*
post Mar 15 2006, 08:27 AM
Post #6





Guests






Interesting work!

But to be noted that, Mars having several well separated basins, the water level would not necessarily be the same everywhere, at least with few water. Fot instance it is likely that the northern bassin had water, at least temporarily, at a time where Helas basin (the deepest) had not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Magnus Lundstedt_*
post Mar 15 2006, 09:49 AM
Post #7





Guests






QUOTE (Richard Trigaux @ Mar 15 2006, 09:27 AM) *
Interesting work!

But to be noted that, Mars having several well separated basins, the water level would not necessarily be the same everywhere, at least with few water. Fot instance it is likely that the northern bassin had water, at least temporarily, at a time where Helas basin (the deepest) had not.


Ah intresting. Do we know for sure that helas basin did not have any water in it, and that the northern basin had, or was that just an example? But that is certainly possible, since it did necessarily not rain over helas basin (like deserts on earth). I guess it is also possible it did not rain anywhere on mars in any significant amounts, etc..

While the best explanation for mars is probably that of an forever dry-planet, I wonder if this scenario would be reasonable;

Mars starts out with significant amounts of water ice, maybe in melted form due to much vulcanism in "embryonic-mars", or that it quickly turns to ice form - "a snowball mars". Then this water-ice boils away due to the low airpressure on mars (water sublimation). After some time the huge amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere increases airpressure significantly; thus allowing for oceans to stay liquid more stable for a longer time. Water vapor is also a powerful greenhouse gas afaik, so the weak sunshine from the young sun is enough to keep temperatures above 0 C. At this time some kind of equilibrium forms between the pressure in the air from water vapor and evaporation of the oceans. The water vapor in the atmosphere is also constantly outgassed in space because of mars low gravity + no magnetic field + solar winds, etc. ?

To compare the order of magnitudes between oceans and atmosphere on earth:

Mass of ocean: 1.4 × 10^21 kg
Mass of atmosphere: 5.1480 x 10^18 kg

(numbers from wikipedia)

So it would probably not be unthinkable that massive amounts of water (maybe in ice-form) on mars could generate a massive H20-rich atmosphere to allow for liquid oceans?

EDIT: I attatch an image of the phase diagram of water, with range now and a example range for what I talked about above:

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Richard Trigaux_*
post Mar 15 2006, 11:56 AM
Post #8





Guests






There are still many things strange and unknown about water on Mars.

For instance, if you look at Google mars you notice that huge surges of water (or at least liquid) created hyper large flow channels leading from Tharsis dome to the northern plains. The springs of these water flow are graben-like hollows which are Vales marineris itself, of parallel to it. It is really ununderstandable, it is as if there was a huge eruption of water from underground, associated with major geological features. Could magma chambers differentiate to such an extent that they contain only water? All along the southern plateau, flow marks gather water which apparently rained over this plateau, for instance Maadim Vallis, which filled the Gusev crater (Spirit landed on this filling). Other flow marks lead to Helas basin, but were apparently unable to fill it with sediments.


So whatever how this happened, it is clear that Mars, usually very dry, experienced brief episodes of flooding, and thus free liquid water on its surface, and thus a temporary atmosphere of steam. Could such an atmosphere lock Mars in a state of greenhouse heated planet? Perhaps yes, but obviously this did not happened. So in a matter of weeks, or even days, the free water was covered with ice, and likely froze to the heart in some years. Maybe this frozen ocean is still there, in the northern plains, covered with a layer of dust which prevents it from sublimating.

And steam in the atmosphere? Likely most of its molecules are broken by UV light, and hydrogen escapes. The reminder forms oxygen and hydrogen peroxyde, which are still present in Mars atmosphere today. Such an oxydizing atmosphere is the responsible of the reddish colour of Mars (by oxydizing iron).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Magnus Lundstedt_*
post Mar 15 2006, 01:49 PM
Post #9





Guests






Yeah I have seen those. But what I dont understand is why it has to be "huge surges"; why not a smaller continious flow during a million years or so? (if we assume mars could have hold significant amounts of water for that long)

If mars was always very dry, one explanation can be no/little water, but could not another explanation be that while there was huge oceans for a short time and a few rivers leading out to it; verry little rain fell on the landmass resulting in a very dry (desert-like) landmass, most of the steam in the atmosphere never condesated back to rain - it just ended up beeing blown away from the planet high above the surface? Maybe the larger water-outflows from the olympus-mons area is due to increased rainfall / direct condensation on mountain walls, due to more cooling of that area during night (because of extreme altitude).

Well, what I wonder is; do we really KNOW that: (and if so how, what proofs are there?)

1) There was verry little/no water on mars surface
2) The big river-like features was formed in great surges of water (and not wind, or water during X million years?)
3) That Vales marineris was formed after water under it erupted. Cant there be other explanations for that formation, for example deformation of the planet after the evaporation of a hypothetical ocean?
4) It is not possible that entire water molecules or H + O2 molecules separateley gets blown away high above mars surface. If we would have a ground atmospheric pressure of around that of earth, on mars, I assume the highest layers of the atmosphere would be quite far away from the surface; thus the force of gravity acting on those molecules would be far lower than that force on the molecules high up in earths atmosphere. Thus solar winds might be able to blow away larger and heavier atoms/molecules?

It would be intresting if there are any papers on this matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
David
post Mar 15 2006, 01:58 PM
Post #10


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 809
Joined: 11-March 04
Member No.: 56



You can play a similar game over at Viktor Toth's Seas of Mars website. He has the same sort of game for Venus, which is in its way even more interesting (if only for demonstrating how bizarre and unearthlike Venus' topography is).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Magnus Lundstedt_*
post Mar 15 2006, 02:25 PM
Post #11





Guests






QUOTE (David @ Mar 15 2006, 02:58 PM) *
You can play a similar game over at Viktor Toth's Seas of Mars website. He has the same sort of game for Venus, which is in its way even more interesting (if only for demonstrating how bizarre and unearthlike Venus' topography is).


Nice! Albeit too low resolution to be really intresting smile.gif

Would be nice with highresolution topography data on venus to do the same. Howevera afaiu the surface of venus has "recently" been resurfaced; thus any tracks of ancient lakes, oceans, rivers, etc is probably long gone. sad.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Richard Trigaux_*
post Mar 15 2006, 03:29 PM
Post #12





Guests






QUOTE (Magnus Lundstedt @ Mar 15 2006, 02:49 PM) *
Yeah I have seen those. But what I dont understand is why it has to be "huge surges"; why not a smaller continious flow during a million years or so? (if we assume mars could have hold significant amounts of water for that long)



Why "giant surges"? because these water beds are huge, 100kms large or more, while showing erosion-sedimentation marks of a mountain torrent. So the flow was much larger than Earth's Amazon, and much faster, implying a flow rate several orders of magnitude greater than anything known on Earth. Such a flow rate would have quickly filled an ocean, so it cannot have lasted millions of years. The mystery is where this water came from, and how such a quantity made to the surface, apparently from underground. The most commonly accepted explanation is that Mars had a watertable, of a mixture of water and carbon dioxid. At the occasion of a tectonic process, the pressure released, inducing a massive boiling of the carbon dioxid and the release of a torrent of mud. Personally I add that some volcanic eruptions may have released huge clouds of steam, carbon dioxyd and dust. But until now nobody can be sure of what happened.


QUOTE (Magnus Lundstedt @ Mar 15 2006, 02:49 PM) *
... I assume the highest layers of the atmosphere would be quite far away from the surface; thus the force of gravity acting on those molecules would be far lower than that force on the molecules high up in earths atmosphere.




The gravity at high altitude (100 to 300kms) is not much smaller than on the ground. The ability of a planet to retain its atmosphere depends mainly on its gravitation, but also on its temperature and composition, and in a less extent on processes like UV or solar wind (if the later is not shielded by a magnetic field).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Magnus Lundstedt_*
post Mar 15 2006, 04:23 PM
Post #13





Guests






QUOTE (Richard Trigaux @ Mar 15 2006, 04:29 PM) *
Why "giant surges"? because these water beds are huge, 100kms large or more, while showing erosion-sedimentation marks of a mountain torrent. So the flow was much larger than Earth's Amazon, and much faster, implying a flow rate several orders of magnitude greater than anything known on Earth. ...
The gravity at high altitude (100 to 300kms) is not much smaller than on the ground. The ability of a planet to retain its atmosphere depends mainly on its gravitation, but also on its temperature and composition, and in a less extent on processes like UV or solar wind (if the later is not shielded by a magnetic field).


Ah didnt realize that it was so huge, quite intresting smile.gif Would be intresting with some papers that discusses this in more detail.

Ah ok on the altitude. Maybe an earth-like (pressure wise) would not extend larger than 100-300 km above surface, which maybe makes it unrealistic that huge amounts of water can have evaporated into space?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RNeuhaus
post Mar 17 2006, 12:55 AM
Post #14


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1636
Joined: 9-May 05
From: Lima, Peru
Member No.: 385



QUOTE (Richard Trigaux @ Mar 15 2006, 10:29 AM) *
Why "giant surges"? because these water beds are huge, 100kms large or more, while showing erosion-sedimentation marks of a mountain torrent. So the flow was much larger than Earth's Amazon, and much faster, implying a flow rate several orders of magnitude greater than anything known on Earth. Such a flow rate would have quickly filled an ocean, so it cannot have lasted millions of years. The mystery is where this water came from, and how such a quantity made to the surface, apparently from underground. The most commonly accepted explanation is that Mars had a watertable, of a mixture of water and carbon dioxid. At the occasion of a tectonic process, the pressure released, inducing a massive boiling of the carbon dioxid and the release of a torrent of mud. Personally I add that some volcanic eruptions may have released huge clouds of steam, carbon dioxyd and dust. But until now nobody can be sure of what happened.
The gravity at high altitude (100 to 300kms) is not much smaller than on the ground. The ability of a planet to retain its atmosphere depends mainly on its gravitation, but also on its temperature and composition, and in a less extent on processes like UV or solar wind (if the later is not shielded by a magnetic field).

About the geological marks originated by a "giant surge". I am not sure about your interpretation since the width of channel is not related to the magnitud of flow surge but also it is related to the time of flow. The other factor might play is the mass density. The denser is the water such as a mud along with stones, erodes the land faster than only water. The case is the very often in the andean zone in the rain time which makes big downpour which drags the land very fast and makes channels to be wider. Are you referring width of the channels from Kaiser or Marines Vallies or other where else.

The other factor about the width erosion land is of its composition. Some loose land such as sand, the water can erode it very easy and fast against on a rock and compact surface. The northern land looks less rocky and mostly of silica sand lands.

Back here about to prove about the "big surge" might be resolved after an laboratory empirical observation on different types of land and measure with liquid force (water or other liquid state such as hydrogen, methane or other which becomes liquid at lower temperature that has happened at billions years when the sun was young with less heat radiation).

Rodolfo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Richard Trigaux_*
post Mar 17 2006, 07:57 AM
Post #15





Guests






QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Mar 17 2006, 01:55 AM) *
About the geological marks originated by a "giant surge". I am not sure about your interpretation since the width of channel is not related to the magnitud of flow surge but also it is related to the time of flow. The other factor might play is the mass density. The denser is the water such as a mud along with stones, erodes the land faster than only water. The case is the very often in the andean zone in the rain time which makes big downpour which drags the land very fast and makes channels to be wider. Are you referring width of the channels from Kaiser or Marines Vallies or other where else.

The other factor about the width erosion land is of its composition. Some loose land such as sand, the water can erode it very easy and fast against on a rock and compact surface. The northern land looks less rocky and mostly of silica sand lands.

Back here about to prove about the "big surge" might be resolved after an laboratory empirical observation on different types of land and measure with liquid force (water or other liquid state such as hydrogen, methane or other which becomes liquid at lower temperature that has happened at billions years when the sun was young with less heat radiation).

Rodolfo


Thanks for your contribution. Yes, certain factors like mud, or sandy terrain, could make appear flow marks wider. but I still maintain that such water surges (linking the Nort east part of Tharsis dome, and Vales Marineris, to the northern low lands), were formed by something much more powerfull than our usual rivers. If you look at the Google Mars, these traces are very visible, while M'aadim Vallis (the one which flows into Gusev) is barely visible. However M'aadim vallis is already huge to our standards. At the same scale even our largest rivers would not be visible.

Also the images clearly show a one-time short event. A smaller flow working for a long time can form a large valley, but this valley shows meanders and a narrow bed (Like in France the lower Seine valley), not sand banks the width of the valley. Try to go on a beach, and manage to make some water flow in the sand: if forms water beds which look exactly like the martian formations, but at a much lesser scale. And you notice that these formations are the width of the actual water flow, and that they appear in some seconds, compared to hours with a lesser flow to obtain the same width.


So I still maintain that these formations were created by huge water surges, maybe muddy, or boiling with carbon dioxyd, but not by a continuous small river. This is the mystery.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 08:22 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member.