Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Euro Probe Finds Giant Frozen Sea on Mars

LONDON (Reuters) - A European space probe scanning the surface of Mars has discovered what scientists say appears to be a giant frozen sea near the planet's equator.

The discovery was the first of a body of what may be water that has been found away from the polar ice caps and was revealed by the Mars Express spacecraft that has been orbiting and photographing the planet for a year
They show a flat plain that is covered with irregular block-like shapes.

"They look just like the rafts of fragmented sea ice that lie off the coast of Antarctica on Earth," the ESA Web Site said
ESA said that as the water froze it broke into blocks which then became covered by an insulating layer of volcanic ash.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArti...ACE-MARS-DC.XML

***Thoughts
Sounds too good to be true.
But the link below should give additional proof?

http://www.esa.int/export/esaCP/SEM42PXEM4E_index_0.html

There are studies going on about what types of habitats to build for the first Martian colonies. One thought is to find natural caves and seal them. Another plans on carving caves out of frozen slurry-ice formations (gaining water and fuel in the process). Maybe in 200-250 yrs time, if we don't kill ourselves off first...

We need to start thinking about Mars as a one way transfer. The first explorers will require a round trip, but after the first rush of exploration, the economics of the situation will demand a better return for the investment of projecting that much weight/wealth in sending humans there.

And there will be a willing set of folks who would volunteer to take that one way ticket. Think about the benefits to the 50+ agers, 1/3 grav, lack of exposure to evolving earth pathogens and a slightly higher radiation level might actually extend life spans.

There would be no "retirement" there. Every human would be needed and useful for some job.

Yeah, I'm a dreamer. It will be maddeningly slow to watch the next round of Mars probes after the successes of the twin rovers. The next rover-like vehicle isn't due until 2010, I think - more than two Martian cycles away. (every 22? months there is a favorable Earth/Mars launch alignment)
That would be the 3rd next cycle for launch.

How much do we spend a month in Iraq? How much do we spend in an entire year on all NASA space exploration projects (excluding military apps please)?

If we could reverse this insane ratio, we would see cities on Mars in our lifetimes.

sorry for the rant...

No need to apologise for the rant DM, I'm sure lots of people would agree!

I understood that interplanetary travel was quite dangerous from a radiation perspective. Things like the shuttle and ISS benefit from the protection of the Earth's magnetic(?) field which soaks up/deflects much of the radiation but once you get away from that zone you are exposed to the full gamut of cosmic rays etc. It becomes quite a threat given the length of a trip to Mars one would suppose. Perhaps someone can set me straight on this?

The radiation exposure can be countered in a number of ways:
Shielding - which increases the "throw weight" and with current engine tech is a serious limitation. Payload/fuel calculations directly impact the length of time in the interplanetary environment - exposure time to CMEs, cosmic rays, other radiation.
Medicial - extraction of bone marrow stem cells to be highly shielded and re-injected into travellers if caught in a potentially deadly radiation event.
The Age Factor - taking 20-somethings and exposing them to a high radiation environment insures longer lifespans to allow negative radiation effects to manifest themselves (genetic damage/loss of reproductive abilities/cancers/etc) while older travellers have already passed through those life cycles and have correspondingly fewer years to manifest negative radiation effects.

The best plan for a Mars trip (exploration or colonization) is to heft robotic worker stations to land and establish minimal life support stations long before (22 month Mars/Earth launch windows) sending the human members of the team. Those robo-post can be collecting CO2 from the atmosphere, use some starter Hydrogen fuel taken along and chemically create a reserve of O2, and methane. This process can also continue while the robo-post records a Martian year worth of climate/radiation and other data.

Once we have a suitable station waiting, then launch the human component in the quickest path/least weight configuration possible - the trip between Earth and Mars can be made in 6 or 7 months.

Once on Mars, the accumulated Methane will fuel the exploration/building of the colony or give fuel for the return trip.

Again, you do not send the human component until you have secured some form of life support on the surface and establish a method of harvesting materials on site to replace the incredible cost/power necessary to launch a fully loaded vehicle with all the supplies and fuel needed for a round trip. Why carry (and break/restart) all that weight at Mars when you only have to launch what you need once in each direction?

***
When sailors approached the Edge of the World, they faced many dangers both real (hurricanes, unrelaiable navigation tools, no accurate maps, lack of medical knowledge - scurvey,etc) and imaginary (sea monsters, curses, ignorance). Many explorers lost their lives and fortunes in efforts to find (fill in the blank). Many more will be lost in this new phase. To not risk, is to insure there will be no gain.

Hmmm, I'm not sure I'm convinced on the radiation front but I'll keep my eyes open for any info, which I'll post if I find.

I think one of the things that's implicit in many of these exploration ideas is that NASA needs to reposition space travel as something that is DANGEROUS. The idea that shuttle missions can be safe jaunts for civilians needs to be dropped. I think NASA needs to get back to the old days when The Right Stuff was what drove space exploration. Test pilots and astronauts (always men) were well aware of the dangers but did it anyway. Things got done, FAST. Nowadays, NASA seem to be locked into this idea that space travel needs to be as safe as an airplane trip. This tunnel vision on safety crushes innovation and soaks up budgets.

Don't get me wrong, I have no wish to discount the civilians that have died in the shuttle tragedies. But what we need to do is accept it as dangerous and get on with it, rather than prevaricating about O rings and seals and holding lengthy inquiries into systems and procedures. Innovation and risk is where it's at.

I don't think there'd be any shortage of young people wanting a shot at glory. God knows, I'd rather see my child die doing something to extend our knowledge rather than blown up in some faraway war-torn country.

As Kate stated, radiation when traveling in space
is quite dangerous, and much dependant upon the length of time spend out there.
However we ought to look at only the most dangerous sources of radiation. Dangerous UV radiation is no problem within the confines of a Space capsule. On Mars one would require the protection provided from a simple metalized plastic foil.
Cosmic rays pass thru us at all times, are not a problem due to their relative low energy.
Its high energy particles from the Sun and space, that pose a serious threat to our DNA based life.
Our Earth's natural magnetic field deflects 99.9% of the high energy Electrons and Protons that would otherwise kill us slowly.
Thick lead shielding out in Space is obviously impractable. The Moon has no magnetic field.
Mars has recently been found to have a slight magnetic field, but not strong enough to deflect high energy particles.
My thoughts are- a lightweight Neodymium magnetic helmet would give one sufficient short term brain protection up there. Male/Female sperm/egg protection would not be a requirement.
Prehaps better would be the development of a Copper field coil, to provide a strong magnetic field. In which one would need to sleep within its center, or live within, were it large enough. Its power requirement would be a problem, necessitating the use of an atomic power supply?
Atomic power would certainly be a requirement, in any case, upon Mars, in my view.
Nothing is immpossible, the development of a Cryogenic Helium bathed magnetic coil, could be used short term, enabling travel in complete safety in the coldness of space until Mars was reached.
Even better might be the development of very high electrostatic plus and minus charges, in the form of annular rings on the outside of the spacecraft
The high voltages required might be produced by towing a long wire tether when in Space.
Should the high voltages needed, be produced using a conventional Atomic Powersupply.....Then the occupants could continue to live within their Space Capsule in complete safety while living on Mars.

It may not happen quite within my lifetime or yours, but I am sure our children will see the exploration of Mars.
Which reminds me...now where did I put my DVD copy of "Total Recall" that super Schwarzenegger
SciFi film of how they produced an atmosphere upon Mars? Its well worth watching.

Haha, yes, good old Arnie, he should be president of Mars!

I wonder how powerful a magnetic field would be needed? Would it be feasible?

I have read that some research about creation of mag fields for protection - tech awaiting development of massive super conductor coils. How large are the current models of super conductors? The time scale for development itself could be daunting.

Another theory was creation of a large expansion bubble filled with dense fluids or water. A transfer enveolpe that could would be parked in Martian orbit for the return trip. Experiments have been going on for some time on expanding forms (sails, foils, tether lines, and ballon-like devices).

But think throw weight of the Earth/Mars transfer. Regardless if Lifted from Earth/Built on Luna/Construct in Space, you still face a serious breaking problem when you get to Mars. The more weight you carry, the longer it takes to stop/more energy you have to dissapate to slow down. The Martian atmosphere is not very dense. How many months of airbraking orbits would be needed to stablizes some ISS or larger sized Earth/Mars/Lander/Earth vehicle.

Spread out the risk, minimize the chance that one failure would destroy the mission, reduce exposure during the most dangerous part of the mission. Whoever gets the nod to lead the Martian Exploration team should chant this mantra.

Speed with minimal protection would be safer than a long time exposed with moderate protection. Is it not the CMEs that are most to fear?

Well Mars does seem to be the flavour of the decade, at the moment, rather than the Moon.
Just as long as all Countrys and Continents remain
friendly. The Moon might remain relativly unimportant e3xcept as a 'jumping off point'
But allow an 'unfriendly' nation up on the Moon, and everyone will follow.
Since he who controls the Moon, could control the world.
Theoretically, the Earth can be held to ransome, with nothing more than a machine-gun up there.

So back to Mars
"European Scientists Believe In Life On Mars"

European Space Agency scientists think that there was and could even still be life on Mars and want a new European mission to the red planet to take samples.
So goes the blurb below.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArti...ACE-MARS-DC.XML

Sorry for being a bit dim, but how could the "Earth be held to ransom by nothing more than a machine gun" on the moon?

It is kind of like "England is an unsinkable aircraft carrier" for invasion of continental Europe. Most earth surface (a part of the Arctic/Antarctica) rotates under the gaze of the moon once every twenty-four hours. Anywhere the moon shines - optics have advanced enough that individuals could be recognized and potentially tracked/targeted.

Half of the face of Luna never is turned toward the Earth - who knows what is going on/being built there.

Another effect is the grav-well of the Earth compared to the grav-well of Luna - it is much cheaper/easier to launch big payloads from Luna to Earth than the other direction.

Finally the atmospheric distributive effect - take a 2,000 ton piece of rock and smack the Earth. You have a fire-storm, blast radius, environmental effects, world temperature fluxuations, what else... Take a 2,000 ton piece of rock and smack the moon and you have a hole where it hits and a very much diminished area of damage. There is no atmosphere to carry the blast/heat effects.

Whoever controls the Moon, controls the Earth. No doubt about that.

will the military industrial complex go to the Moon while the Colonist and the future of humanity go to Mars?

All good points we shoudl think about if you go to mars. but first, i think we should see if life ever exsisted on mars, and try to resusitate it on similar conditions. if we can do that, we can know How life exsisted and emulate and harness it. Agriculture created civilzation on earth. Agriculture was man living of nature but in the case of mars, we will have to be nature's caretakers. so far it doesnt seem liek were doing very good.

fetile soil is filled with bacteria, and the new findins on martian mircobiology can be a vital microbe that can turn the martian soil (likely the soil below the rust, but not nessarily)into something that certain hybrid varietis of Terran plantlife, which could mean food and therefore survival for man, therefore the spread of man and his inventiosn for life and convienence. Martian cities fileld with geneticall altered trees that suck the co2 from the air and make oxigen for our eltromagnetically sheilded cities. And after many, many years, we coudl start seeing a new life on mars being to rise up, mostly, if not entirely dependent on human influence, any where from parasite species to symbiotic speices connected to the human colonies and their foriegn creatures. perhaps only the cute, invisible and useful will survive.

wow, this would make great sci-fi

'cause the muzzel velocity of all handguns exceed the escape velocity requirement from the Moon.

I think you are absolutely right.
Difficultys often bring out the best in man. Once we get to Mars many problems should get solved.
Its nice to find someone so optimistic.
Sci-fi today, often becomes tomorrow fact.