[X] My Assistant

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

Scientists Solve the Mystery of Methane in Titan's Atmosphere
By Lori Stiles, UANews.org
March 1, 2006

Scientists Solve the Mystery of Methane in Titan's Atmosphere
By Lori Stiles, UANews.org
March 1, 2006

This refers to the Tobie et al. paper in the March 2, 2006, issue of Nature.

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

Judging from the LPSC abstracts, Tobie's is actually only one of several rival theories. The most interesting thing about his theory, if it's true, is that it's a violation of the usual Principle of Historical Mediocrity as applied to solar system history. He explicitly states that Titan started outgassing major amounts of methane only about 300 million years ago -- and that for all of its history before then, it was radically different.

What might be called the Great Ammonia Mystery -- why Titan seems to show evidence of it, but Enceladus and the other smaller moons don't -- seems to be one of the biggest new mysteries uncovered by Cassini, and I'll be putting a summary of the whole swarm of new LPSC and EGU abstracts on the subject in this section soon. It may be connected on some ways with the origin of Titanian methane.

[The Messenger]

Judging from the LPSC abstracts, Tobie's is actually only one of several rival theories. The most interesting thing about his theory, if it's true, is that it's a violation of the usual Principle of Historical Mediocrity as applied to solar system history. He explicitly states that Titan started outgassing major amounts of methane only about 300 million years ago -- and that for all of its history before then, it was radically different.

What might be called the Great Ammonia Mystery -- why Titan seems to show evidence of it, but Enceladus and the other smaller moons don't -- seems to be one of the biggest new mysteries uncovered by Cassini, and I'll be putting a summary of the whole swarm of new LPSC and EGU abstracts on the subject in this section soon. It may be connected on some ways with the origin of Titanian methane.

Evidence of ammonia acting in the past, or current evidence of ammonia? The paper is a little ballsy, since the gravity runs could either support or debunk it.

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

Evidence of ammonia acting in the past, or current evidence of ammonia? The paper is a little ballsy, since the gravity runs could either support or debunk it.

Most scientists appreciate a testable hypothesis: indeed, I wish more papers were just as "bal[l]sy" and not wishy-washy with "maybe this, maybe that."

[The Messenger]

Most scientists appreciate a testable hypothesis: indeed, I wish more papers were just as "bal[l]sy" and not wishy-washy with "maybe this, maybe that."

Agreed. Ballsy was meant as a compliment