This is the latest 3D picture of the polar cap on Mars
Taken by the HiRISE (Hi-Resolution) Camera.
NASA first implied that the polar glacier/mountains were 2 miles
high.
But the Hi-Res photo seems to show just a good covering of sublimated ice and CO2. Still better than nothing!

http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=mola_pole_021203_02.jpg

Man! That is some picture! How big across is that structure in the picture? Do we have anything to compare it to on Earth?

My sentiments exactly, it is some picture, especially as we have always been taught that Mars is hot, red, dry and dusty.

This is the Martian South Pole, the area shown is about the size of Texas. With some of the mountains being 2 miles high.
Apparently there is a smaller amount of sublimed ice present at the North Pole. (No HiRES picture as yet).

I posted some earlier information here in this Forum, last March 6th.
Here
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showthreaded&Number=19001

Thanks for the pics, and the info. It's interesting to think that Mars has water on it, albeit in ice form. Maybe we can someday use it when we visit there.

I think you're being a bit picky! It's an amazing photo and I thought it looked very high and imposing, also very 3D. However what do you mean by 'sublimated' ice? Is it actually not real?

Sublimated ice simply means it goes from being vapor to ice and completely skips the liquid water part. If the ice wasn't sublimated, it would lead to the assumption that somewhere between the parts of the planet where water exists as vapor and where water exists as ice it exists as a liquid. So far, I dont think any proof of liquid water has been found..

Does anyone believe the latest claim made that the sky of Mars is blue? NASA has been acused of using filters to give false colors of the red planet. Some photos I saw that were suppose to be the true colors certainly look authentic. If the sky is blue that means some oxygen is in the atmosphere. Meaning water. What say you?
odin1

The colour of images taken on Mars depends, apparently, on the local atmospheric conditions at the time the image is obtained.

ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/pressrel/1997/97-148.txt

"If dust diffuses to the landing site, the sky could turn out to be pink like that seen by Viking," says Philip James of the University of Toledo. "Otherwise, Pathfinder will likely show blue sky with bright clouds."

About 0.03% of Mars' atmosphere is water vapour, compared to about 1% for Earth.

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/M/Marsatmos.html

NASA sometimes does add artificial colour to images, particularly those deep space shots, but there's nothing sinister about it. Perhaps the colour of some Mars images has been altered, I wouldn't know. As for the accusations, presumably of deliberate deception, maybe they come from the same kind of people who accuse NASA of faking the Apollo landings.

I have looked at some of the anomalies in the Mars photos and I can say that some people have a vivid imagination. There are some however I have scratched my head over. The photos of the ice are really something. You almost expect to see an igloo!
Best Regards,
odin1

You know Mike, one of the proposals for a trip to Mars was create the fuel (hydrogen) from water trapped under the surface.
Who knows our grandchildren may be trout fishing there in the not so distant future.

Best Regards,
odin1

I remember reading an article in some science magazine in either the very late 1980s or very early 1990s and in it they said it was believed that Mars' lack of mass allowed its atmosphere to bleed off into space and then it went into an elaborate description of how NASA planned on warm Mars up and bring back its atmosphere. One thing which puzzled me then and still does with this plan is how will they prevent the Atmosphere from bleeding off again? Oh and another thing how will they get a magnetic field to cover Mars so the people on the planet won't die every time the sun has a solar storm?

Personally I think the answer lies with Venus where we can lob passing comets at the planet which should blast most of that planet's toxic atmosphere into space, replace it with a water based atmosphere, and introduce a proper spin to the planet so that the iron core inside of Venus can make a magnetic field to protect our first colonists.

Currently it is said Mars is warming up. If this is true and water is below the surface in the form of ice, and more water vapor is released into the atmosphere, it may have a change in atmosphere. I saw some clouds in photographs last week in the atmosphere of Mars. I know it is a lot more complicated than that, but if Mars is warming up something must be going on there is a reason for it and no telling what it will lead to.

Interesting though about what you said about Venus. I have never heard that before. It is a pity Hale - Bob (hope I spelled that right) the comet that hit Jupiter didn't hit Venus.
We might be seeing a different Venus now.

Best Regards,
odin1

I don't think the Hale Bopp Comet would have had much effect on the atmosphere of Venus since it was an old comet which had orbited close to our sun too many times and I think the only thing left of that comet was the rocks because all of the gas had been depleted by the sun. If the Hale Bopp comet had hit venus though it might have a significant effect in other ways though if it were able to add a spin to the planet, but for that answer I think a qualified scientist would need to speak up since I am just a common man with a curiosity towards science.

I knew I was spelling Hale Bopp wrong! I just wanted to see if you knew how to spell it.

Best Regards
odin1

I'm sure you're right on all counts, Rallem. I suspect that the mass of an impacting object would need to be much greater than that of any known comet in order to significantly alter a planet's rotation period. And I can't imagine how many cometary impacts it would take to provide venus with a more agreeable atmosphere. But again, your right about our views being non-expert. The ideas are very interesting, and I would like to see some expert opinions on just what it might take to achieve the desired changes.

I don't even know if I spelled it right Odin, but I know which comet you were referring to.

Just kidding, I watched a documentary about two or three weeks ago I've seen it several times, I think it was on the Discovery Channel and they were talking about Hale Bopp-and I still couldn't spell it right.

Best regards,
odin1

I've had an idea about a science fiction story about what I described above where astronauts from around the world would select a comet a little smaller than the size of Mars to alter its course and guide it into a collision course with Venus to Terra Form that planet, but I have been thinking that if Scientists could think of an operation like this would they risk it with one large comet or would they maybe try to bombard Venus with several smaller comets so no one mistake can drastically foul things up.

Good material for a sci-fi story, but it may not always be so far-fetched.

You may know that our moon and the Earth's rotation period are believed to have resulted from just such an impact:

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/17802

The energy required to achieve such an objective would be enormous, right? (are we talking Type I again?) Maybe it would be equally possible to move Venus to Earth orbit but on the opposite side of the sun (is that called superior conjunction?). That might ensure that whatever processes lead to the current state of Venus would be less likely to recur.

I am aware of the theory of an asteroid a little smaller than Mars striking Earth and adding water and a spin on this planet and that is sort of what I am basing the idea of my story on, but I had no intention of trying to move Venus' orbit because I think I read somewhere that if Earth were in Venus' orbit the planet would only be in average 20 degrees Fahrenheit warmer and if we were in Mars’ path of orbit we would be 20 degrees Fahrenheit cooler. The little piece of information I read which got me thinking was that on a web site it said that Venus was a dead planet meaning it had no magnetic field and it said that the theory was that the only reason Venus lacked a magnetic field was because of its very slow reverse orbit. The web site said that it is possible that if a spin were added to Venus, the iron core which is already there could begin to make a magnetic field. From that I am planning on taking literary license. Thank you for the link.