IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

"Could the Meridiani Spherules be Surficial?"
Kye Goodwin
post Jul 10 2007, 04:37 PM
Post #1


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 2-July 07
Member No.: 2646



I have been reading the response to the reponse to impact-surge linked by Dr Burt in post 170. The MER team objects to the impact-spherule explanation because " The spherules are dispersed nearly uniformly across all strata." I agree that is a valid criticism. It is very much like Dr. Burt's criticism of the MER team's hypothesis, that spherule distributions are not consistent with any conceivable ground-water movement regime that should have controled the development of concretions. I agree strongly with this point of Dr. Burt's as well. Neither theory does a good job of explaining the distribution of the spherules. Also, neither theory does a good job of explaining why the spherules do not apparently disturb the bedding.

There may be a solution in a possibilty that I now raise with some trepidation. I think that there is a chance that the spherules are superficial, and not an integral part of the Meridiani strata at all. This probably sounds crazy to many readers, but before rejecting it outright remember that science is at kind of an impasse on this and could use a new idea. If the spherules are superficial this would explain a number of puzzling observations.

The layering at Homeplate and Meridiani is most simply explained by impact-surge. It is elegantly and inescapably explained by impact-surge. The impact-surge authors have also tried to explain the Meridiani spherules as part an impact event. If doubts are raised that the spherules are integral to the deposit, this would not in any way be inconsistent with the impact-surge origin of the layered structure. On the contrary, an objection to impact surge would be removed.

I intend to start another thread under Opportunity to discuss this question. The first posting should be mine and should be an organized outline of how it might be possible that the spherules have been mis-interpreted as part of the Meridiani layered deposit. I am working on it. If anyone wants to start in on me with the obvious objections, do it here for now. Maybe Dr. Burt would like to respond. No matter what the details of spherule formation in an impact or spherule deposition in the impact sediments, the very uniform distributions that we see are troublingly unlikely. Random distributions are possible from explosive dispersal but less likely than some kind of clustering because of the rapidly changing conditions in the surge cloud. The more-uniform-than-random distributions of spherules on rock characterised by MER-team analysis cannot be explained by impact surge.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Kye Goodwin
post Jul 17 2007, 02:31 PM
Post #2


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 2-July 07
Member No.: 2646



Doug, re your post 31, in the same order: I am not proposing that bulk liquid water is involved. The jarosite and nanophase iron-oxide crystals at Meridiani needed water to form, but ample water would have altered them further. Olivine sharing the surface with water-altered minerals might similarly be an indication of water activity that is limited in some unknown way. I don't buy the idea that there was water chemistry happening billions of years ago that stopped and has been preserved ever since by totally dry conditions.

The spherules are different in different places at kilometer scale, but that fact could be interpretted in many ways. (We saw few large spherules near Erebus, but they seemed to be replaced by many tiny spherules.)

The trouble with trying to compare the frequency of occurence of spherules in rock at Meridiani versus Earth is deciding how much rock to include in your calculation. What is the average frequency of Utah spherules if the entire sandstone formation is included as the denominator? I think that the spherule frequency that is suggested by what we see at the surface at Meridiani is more like that of a concentration of Utah spherules where groundwater conditions were favorable than it is like the average in an entire formation.

I think you are asking if mineral is accreting on rock surfaces at Meridiani, why isn't it accreting on soil surfaces. I don't know. The fate of deposited dust on Mars surface is highly variable. It interacts chemically with some surfaces and is relofted from others. Because of the large difference in thermal inertia the microclimate of soil is very different from rock at times in the daily cycle.

Of course I need the Alien Planet Pardon to discuss the topic of surface spherule growth at all. Part of being ultra-conservative in our interpretation of Mars is not ruling out anything prematuely. If a hypothesis can simplify the picture a lot by proposing a previously unknown process then we should consider it.


Here is another way to consider the surface spherule vs deep spherule question:

Let’s review the evidence that the spherules are integral to the layered deposit, that is that they are present throughout at frequencies like we see at the surface:

1. Many spherules are visible partially embedded in the rock, and the RAT has revealed that some are fully embedded.

That’s it. There is no other evidence that the spherules occur throughout the rock. If you think I missed a line of evidence, let me know.

Now how about the evidence that the spherules are not integral to the rock:

1. The spherules do not disturb the fine bedding in the rock.
2. The spherules are distributed in a way that shows no correlation with the bedding or contacts in the rock.

There may be more evidence on this side but these two lines are pretty persuasive. Considering that we are on an alien planet and do not know how to properly weight these indications, I think that it is premature to conclude that the spherules are present throughout the layered rock.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Kye Goodwin   "Could the Meridiani Spherules be Surficial?"   Jul 10 2007, 04:37 PM
- - djellison   I've seen you mention your theory that the sph...   Jul 10 2007, 04:53 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   Doug Ellison, Thanks for asking. It will be a lon...   Jul 10 2007, 07:12 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 10 2007, 08:12 P...   Jul 10 2007, 08:11 PM
- - MarsIsImportant   Kye, How would this be a test for either hypothesi...   Jul 10 2007, 07:30 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   MarsIsImportant, If the spherules are superficial,...   Jul 10 2007, 11:21 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 11 2007, 12:21 A...   Jul 11 2007, 07:36 AM
|- - climber   QUOTE (djellison @ Jul 11 2007, 09:36 AM)...   Jul 11 2007, 06:12 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   Centsworth_II, OK. I will start a topic under Ma...   Jul 11 2007, 12:40 AM
- - Pavel   I'm not a geologist, but I majored in solid st...   Jul 11 2007, 01:00 AM
- - Kye Goodwin   I have started writing on this topic on the thread...   Jul 11 2007, 01:01 AM
- - Kye Goodwin   I have a feeling that I have already lost eveybody...   Jul 11 2007, 05:09 AM
- - MarsIsImportant   I agree with Doug. The spherules are basically ma...   Jul 11 2007, 02:12 PM
- - Bill Harris   QUOTE I do not need to prove that accretion is tak...   Jul 11 2007, 02:46 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   Bill Harris, I can't prove anything by postin...   Jul 11 2007, 05:54 PM
- - djellison   This page - http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery...   Jul 11 2007, 06:33 PM
- - helvick   Kye, I'm all for thinking outside of the box ...   Jul 11 2007, 07:06 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   helvick re your post 17, Thanks. On superficial...   Jul 11 2007, 10:57 PM
|- - MarsIsImportant   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 11 2007, 05:57 P...   Jul 12 2007, 12:54 AM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 11 2007, 11:57 P...   Jul 12 2007, 07:11 AM
- - dvandorn   OK -- here are two points that might possibly lead...   Jul 13 2007, 04:29 AM
- - MarsIsImportant   Well, the distribution of the spherules was a prob...   Jul 13 2007, 04:56 AM
- - Bill Harris   Agreed, Mars. His argue-ments remind me of http:...   Jul 13 2007, 06:56 AM
- - Kye Goodwin   MarsIsImportant, re your reply 22, I agree, both ...   Jul 13 2007, 03:09 PM
|- - Gray   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 13 2007, 03:09 P...   Jul 13 2007, 04:19 PM
- - denis   Kye, When what looks closely at the spatial distr...   Jul 13 2007, 04:50 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   Gray, Thanks for considering this. What I wrote ...   Jul 13 2007, 05:13 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   denis, re your 26, Thanks. On your first point: ...   Jul 13 2007, 07:01 PM
- - MarsIsImportant   I think Mars is throwing us another 'monkey wr...   Jul 13 2007, 09:17 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   I just thought of another remarkable observation t...   Jul 15 2007, 03:18 PM
- - djellison   How do you make hematite rich spheres sat on top o...   Jul 15 2007, 03:41 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   Doug, re your post 31, in the same order: I am...   Jul 17 2007, 02:31 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 17 2007, 03:31 P...   Jul 17 2007, 03:47 PM
- - paxdan   An engineer, a physicist, and a mathematician were...   Jul 17 2007, 03:29 PM
|- - Stu   QUOTE (paxdan @ Jul 17 2007, 04:29 PM) An...   Jul 19 2007, 10:46 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   Doug, Thanks for removing that off-topic post. Re...   Jul 19 2007, 05:29 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 19 2007, 06:29 P...   Jul 19 2007, 05:47 PM
- - MarsIsImportant   To be fair, you are tackling the distribution prob...   Jul 19 2007, 05:55 PM
- - djellison   Interesting paper regarding erosion rates : http:...   Jul 19 2007, 10:35 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   Doug, Yes, "How?" is now the heart of th...   Jul 19 2007, 11:24 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 20 2007, 12:24 A...   Jul 20 2007, 06:59 AM
|- - tglotch   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 19 2007, 11:24 P...   Jul 21 2007, 07:15 PM
- - Aussie   Kye, Could you please provide a model for your the...   Jul 20 2007, 09:56 AM
- - Kye Goodwin   Doug, re your post 41, Yen is referring to the su...   Jul 20 2007, 03:28 PM
|- - djellison   You've had ten days to bring some sound scienc...   Jul 20 2007, 06:09 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   Paxdan, re your 33, That's funny, Thanks. ...   Jul 21 2007, 03:26 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (Kye Goodwin @ Jul 21 2007, 04:26 P...   Jul 21 2007, 04:13 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   tglotch, re your post 47, Thanks very much for yo...   Jul 22 2007, 01:33 AM
- - tglotch   Kye, The occurrences of hematite at Gusev were de...   Jul 23 2007, 07:56 PM
- - Kye Goodwin   tglotch, Thanks for that information about the he...   Jul 24 2007, 02:39 PM
- - djellison   ....in your opinion. It's time to bring this ...   Jul 24 2007, 04:21 PM


Closed TopicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 02:28 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.