IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Update on Mars' atmosphere, Media briefing on NASA Jan 15th
SirBruce
post Jan 15 2009, 06:05 PM
Post #31


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 20-April 05
Member No.: 326



QUOTE (djellison @ Jan 15 2009, 09:26 AM) *
The story here, is that Astrobiology is off topic for UMSF. Rule 1.2. This is the first, last and only warning. In the post press-conf rush, I will not hesitate in hitting the delete button or issue suspensions.


Wow, guess things have changed since I stopped reading UMSF months ago. I recall all sorts of discussion in the past. I guess there must have been some thread that got out of hand and you laid down some new rules. Too bad; I'm not much interested in a place that's going to completely ban astrobiology discussions just to keep a lid on UFOlogists and the like. Good luck to you, Doug.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Sunspot_*
post Jan 15 2009, 06:24 PM
Post #32





Guests






QUOTE (djellison @ Jan 15 2009, 05:26 PM) *
The story here, is that Astrobiology is off topic for UMSF. Rule 1.2. This is the first, last and only warning. In the post press-conf rush, I will not hesitate in hitting the delete button or issue suspensions.


That's a bit heavy handed...care to elaborate on the reasoning behind that?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Jan 15 2009, 06:29 PM
Post #33


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14431
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (SirBruce @ Jan 15 2009, 06:05 PM) *
I'm not much interested in a place that's going to completely ban astrobiology discussions just to keep a lid on UFOlogists and the like.



So be it. I am sure you, and anyone else who wants to discuss it can do so elsewhere. I will almost certainly join in the debate over at www.bautforum.com , for example.

I am not completely banning astrobiological discussions. I'm not saying that no one can discuss it. But the rules of UMSF dictate that you can't discuss it here. It's not what UMSF is for. Everyone is totally free to talk about them elsewhere - and I'll probably join you! Yes - this is a baby out with bathwater issue. Rather that, than descend into a bickering fringe-theory conspiracy infested argument about astrobiology and methane. The price to pay for keeping UMSF to the standards we do, is the exclusion of things that may risk damaging it.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Sunspot_*
post Jan 15 2009, 06:35 PM
Post #34





Guests






QUOTE (djellison @ Jan 15 2009, 06:29 PM) *
I am not completely banning astrobiological discussions. I'm not saying that no one can discuss it. But the rules of UMSF dictate that you can't discuss it here.


That's a somewhat contradictory statement.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hungry4info
post Jan 15 2009, 06:55 PM
Post #35


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1415
Joined: 26-July 08
Member No.: 4270



If you want, you can discuss it on the Extrasolar Visions' website.
http://solar-flux.forumandco.com/news-and-...e-t237.htm#1388


--------------------
-- Hungry4info (Sirius_Alpha)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
imipak
post Jan 15 2009, 06:59 PM
Post #36


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 646
Joined: 23-December 05
From: Forest of Dean
Member No.: 617



Edit - remove silly question. Apologies for the noise.


Seasonal variation is interesting, surely if the methane is being generated relatively far from the surface seasonal temperature and/or atmospheric pressure variations shouldn't affect the local conditions; unless the processes that are destroying it vary, instead (dust devils, as suggested by one slide?)


--------------------
--
Viva software libre!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Juramike
post Jan 15 2009, 07:17 PM
Post #37


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2785
Joined: 10-November 06
From: Pasadena, CA
Member No.: 1345



And the evidence is not clear either way....space.com article here.

The part I found even more fascinating that methane being created, is that methane is being destroyed faster than expected.

The soil chemistry of Mars seems to extend into the atmosphere....
(peroxide laden dust grains possibly doing the oxidizing)

-Mike

[EDIT: The article did state that volcanism as the source is not likely, since other gases associated with such event were not observed. But down-deep serpentization is still a possible source.]


--------------------
Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Stu
post Jan 15 2009, 07:21 PM
Post #38


The Poet Dude
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 5551
Joined: 15-March 04
From: Kendal, Cumbria, UK
Member No.: 60



Anyone know of an "audio only" link for this? My ******* broadband connection is ******* useless tonight and the NASA TV is re-buffering every twenty ******** seconds!!!! Any minute now... ANY minute now.... I'm putting my fist thru the screen...



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paolo
post Jan 15 2009, 07:32 PM
Post #39


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1729
Joined: 3-August 06
From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E
Member No.: 1004



On NASA's portal http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/news/marsmethane.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
imipak
post Jan 15 2009, 07:37 PM
Post #40


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 646
Joined: 23-December 05
From: Forest of Dean
Member No.: 617



BBC piece.


--------------------
--
Viva software libre!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tty
post Jan 15 2009, 07:41 PM
Post #41


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 688
Joined: 20-April 05
From: Sweden
Member No.: 273



The only way to pin the origin of the methane down would seem to be the carbon isotope ratio. Anybody know if the MSL laser spectrometer is sensitive enough?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PDP8E
post Jan 15 2009, 07:41 PM
Post #42


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 807
Joined: 10-October 06
From: Maynard Mass USA
Member No.: 1241



mars atmosphere is active
Methane plumes are seen in certain regions (Nills Fossea, Syrtis)
Methane then breaks down over months
It appears to be seasonal (lowest levels at equinoxes)
It could be geologic (simplest)
It could be biologic (ties into seasons?)
Nobody knows yet.

More study required




--------------------
CLA CLL
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Juramike
post Jan 15 2009, 07:44 PM
Post #43


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2785
Joined: 10-November 06
From: Pasadena, CA
Member No.: 1345



QUOTE (tty @ Jan 15 2009, 02:41 PM) *
The only way to pin the origin of the methane down would seem to be the carbon isotope ratio. Anybody know if the MSL laser spectrometer is sensitive enough?


Probably not even then. As just mentioned in the broadcast, other biomarker gases could be used to support a biogenic origin. But do really pin down the origin and the process you'd need to get to right to the source.

Drill, baby, drill!


--------------------
Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Jan 15 2009, 07:46 PM
Post #44


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14431
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Sunspot @ Jan 15 2009, 06:35 PM) *
That's a somewhat contradictory statement.


It was written in a hurry. The point I'm making is that people can talk about anything they want. But they can't talk about biology, here. People object as if I'm banning them from discussing the subject. I'm not. I'm saying you can't talk about it HERE, in this forum, with these rules. It's not as if people can't go and talk about it somewhere else. Sorry if that was not clear.

There are things I want to talk about that, if I posted them here, I, in my admin role, would delete them, and then ban myself resulting in a catastrophic rip in the forum-time continuum. I know the rules for UMSF, so I stick firmly within them. If I want to discuss things that are outside the scope of UMSF (and regularly, I do) I visit BAUT usually.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Juramike
post Jan 15 2009, 07:52 PM
Post #45


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2785
Joined: 10-November 06
From: Pasadena, CA
Member No.: 1345



The source could be clathrated methane (see avatar for structure) emplaced long ago, only now being liberated through seasonal vents.

So the carbon isotope ratio could have been locked in at the time of clathration long ago.


--------------------
Some higher resolution images available at my photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31678681@N07/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 2nd April 2024 - 12:54 PM
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.