Starship Asterisk*

An Unusual Vein of Deposited Rock on Mars

Explanation: What could create this unusual vein of rock on Mars? A leading hypothesis is that this thin rock layer dubbed "Homestake" was deposited by a running liquid -- like most mineral veins are here on Earth. And the running liquid of choice is water. Therefore, this mineral streak -- rich in calcium and sulfur -- is the latest in the growing body of evidence that part of Mars had a watery past. This, in turn, increases the speculation that Mars was once hospitable to life. Pictured above is a vista taken near the western rim of Endeavour Crater by the Opportunity rover currently exploring Mars. The inset image shows a close up of the recently discovered mineral vein.

<< Previous APOD

Discuss Any APOD

Next APOD >>

[/b]

Hmm, I might be wrong about this, but...

Some time ago I posted this image on the Asterisk forum. To me this seems very much like a river on Mars. I found it on the THEMIS Day IR 100m Global Mosaic at coordinates LAT -28.081 LNG 319.395 E.

Some other forum members agreed that it was probably an ancient dried out river. Isn't it clear from this picture that there was once water on Mars?

Again, I might be completely wrong, as I am not an expert on these matters, but I'm very curious what others think.

Ok, sure finding veins of what might be ancient rivers on Mars is very interesting. However, the question that I have is what is the significance in these findings? I mean, not to sound full of ingratitude or to downplay the exquisite interest in these findings, but so what? What if Mars had water long ago, why does that make any big deal? Even if it were to mean that it could support life, and even if we could find some sign of this life within the long amount of time it would be to uncover, what impact would that have on our lives here on Earth? This is not a criticism post, merely an inquisitive one. I am intrigued to find out opinions and answers from learned folk on this matter. Thanks, and keep up the great work! I love APOD!

Insufferable wrote:However, the question that I have is what is the significance in these findings?

To see if there is life on Mars, of course, or if it is habitable in any way.

Insufferable wrote:I mean, not to sound full of ingratitude or to downplay the exquisite interest in these findings, but so what?

To see if there is life on Mars and if we are alone in the universe or not.

Insufferable wrote:What if Mars had water long ago, why does that make any big deal?

To our understanding, water us the basis of life. Without it, nothing would live or survive.

Insufferable wrote:Even if it were to mean that it could support life, and even if we could find some sign of this life within the long amount of time it would be to uncover, what impact would that have on our lives here on Earth?

We would find out if there is life in the universe and discover it.

Insufferable wrote:This is not a criticism post, merely an inquisitive one. I am intrigued to find out opinions and answers from learned folk on this matter. Thanks, and keep up the great work! I love APOD!

I hope that this may have helped you understand a bit more, and you're welcome!

Considering the "blackness" of the vein(s) extend into the sky in the background, it's most likely an imaging error.

To me this (again) raises the thoughts:

If Mars WAS habitable (even if it was not inhabited) then it BECAME uninhabitable, that could mean something to our successors here on Earth.

Say, for example, that Mars lost its atmosphere because its core hardened into a solid and thus lost its magnetic field (resulting in the solar wind stripping the atmosphere). What would that mean to us? Will Earth harden before the end of the sun's life? Are we just too big to fail?

Are Jupiter's rings and the Kuiper belt full of ice from Mars' water, blown out there by the sun so long ago?

Suppose our own surface temperature is made to rise, and more water going into our atmosphere as gas increases the volume and causes more of it to be lost to space... Could we be steering our wonderful planetary oasis toward a worldwide barren dryness from which there could be no recovery?

"The spice extends life. The spice expands consciousness. The spice is vital to space travel."

-Noel

I think it is almost certain that there was water on Mars! It doesn't look like there is any evidence that once there was plant life!

However, the question that I have is what is the significance in these findings? I mean, not to sound full of ingratitude or to downplay the exquisite interest in these findings, but so what? What if Mars had water long ago, why does that make any big deal? Even if it were to mean that it could support life, and even if we could find some sign of this life within the long amount of time it would be to uncover, what impact would that have on our lives here on Earth? This is not a criticism post, merely an inquisitive one. I am intrigued to find out opinions and answers from learned folk on this matter. Thanks, and keep up the great work!

Many basic assumptions about life on earth remain to be tested.For example, we assume that it is a universal principle that life forms change over time and that DNA is the universal packaging material for heritable traits. What if these are not universal? What if other "data storage" exists for traits and what if there is some mechanism other than evolution that gives rise to new species? By investigating whether the basic tenants of evolution and genetics hold true on another planet, on which these processes may have arisen independently of life on earth, we can learn a lot about ourselves. What we learn may have important benefits for medicine and for other fields that seek to improve the lives of humans and non human animals.

Plant.Biologist wrote: Many basic assumptions about life on earth remain to be tested.For example, we assume that it is a universal principle that life forms change over time and that DNA is the universal packaging material for heritable traits. What if these are not universal? What if other "data storage" exists for traits and what if there is some mechanism other than evolution that gives rise to new species? By investigating whether the basic tenants of evolution and genetics hold true on another planet, on which these processes may have arisen independently of life on earth, we can learn a lot about ourselves. What we learn may have important benefits for medicine and for other fields that seek to improve the lives of humans and non human animals.

I wouldn't be focused on DNA and encoding - but on proteins and function. There are many ways information could be encoded - but the molecules actually doing most of the work of life function are proteins - and much of their properties come from the ways polypeptides can take on incredible structures in water - while being neither too rigid nor too flexible.

Amino acids can form all over the place, including interstellar space and Miller's Nobel experiment. So if you have a liquid water environment where they can form chains, then you already have an environment where polypeptides could form and take on dynamic shapes. There is a lot of evidence for liquid water on mars, but although there is strong evidence of liquid flowing in the past, I don't think there has been confirmation any of the liquid is really water - until this more conclusive evidence.

If you don't see evidence of liquid water, then the only chance for something life-like would require a completely unknown combination of elements in solid and liquid form at some range of temperatures and pressures. But if you *do* see evidence of water being present for a long time - you can then hope for hydrocarbon life forms based on amino acid chemistry - which is known to allow amazingly dynamic and complex shapes and function from a long chain of simple molecules - and the amino acid building blocks can form spontaneously.

But at the same time - I thought there was already evidence of water *currently* flowing on Mars - in the slopes that show changing "stains" due to moisture through the seasons. But I think this current image refers to water flowing in quantity a long time ago - meaning there might be fossilized evidence of simple hydrocarbon-based life if you look in the right place. I don't know if mars is currently the most likely place to find evidence of life in the solar system - but I'd say that with good evidence of flowing water - it's still in the running.

zloq

Rivers of lava can form these when the lava source runs out.

Daan Kogelmans wrote:Hmm, I might be wrong about this, but...

Some time ago I posted this image on the Asterisk forum.

Click to view full size image

To me this seems very much like a river on Mars. I found it on the THEMIS Day IR 100m Global Mosaic at coordinates LAT -28.081 LNG 319.395 E.

Some other forum members agreed that it was probably an ancient dried out river. Isn't it clear from this picture that there was once water on Mars?

Again, I might be completely wrong, as I am not an expert on these matters, but I'm very curious what others think.

Rivers of lava tend to start at vents and peter out with increasing distance from them as the magma cools and solidifies. They also tend to have raised edges, or "banks", due to solidified material on the surface of the flow fragmenting and being deposited to the sides, looking at the shadows, this does not appear to be the case.

Anon wrote:Considering the "blackness" of the vein(s) extend into the sky in the background, it's most likely an imaging error.

The "vein" in not the dark patches in the photograph that go up. The vein is a horizontal line in the picture by the words "Homestake Vein". The darkness that extends up is evidently a photographic artifact. The insert at the bottom left of the photo is an insert of that area and shows the vein...

hope that helps...

:---[===] *

Got to go to the assay office and stake my claim!


:---[====] *

cmflyer wrote:Rivers of lava can form these when the lava source runs out.

Daan Kogelmans wrote:Hmm, I might be wrong about this, but...

Some time ago I posted this image on the Asterisk forum.

Click to view full size image

To me this seems very much like a river on Mars. I found it on the THEMIS Day IR 100m Global Mosaic at coordinates LAT -28.081 LNG 319.395 E.

Some other forum members agreed that it was probably an ancient dried out river. Isn't it clear from this picture that there was once water on Mars?

Again, I might be completely wrong, as I am not an expert on these matters, but I'm very curious what others think.

I was looking at the image and started thinking -look at that, the river has managed to dodge all the meteor strikes, when all of a sudden..... i was seeing the river channel and the craters -above the surface, instead of below it. Maybe my feeble brain didn't notice the little shadows before. That's a neat experience to have the image switch like that, when you're looking at it.

I think this is a dinosaur bone sticking out of the soil.

its a hunk of drywall left over from an earlier time

APOD Robot wrote: A leading hypothesis is that this thin rock layer dubbed "Homestake" was deposited by a running liquid -- like most mineral veins are here on Earth. And the running liquid of choice is water. Therefore, this mineral streak -- rich in calcium and sulfur -- is the latest in the growing body of evidence that part of Mars had a watery past.

Err, am I the only one who fears for the future of real science when I see that one of the more influential (to the public) science institutes calls a leading hypothesis of one thing evidence for another? This is rather sickeningly unscientific, the mere existence of a hypothesis certainly can not be considered evidence for water on another planet. Evidence that it could possibly have been, perhaps, but certainly not that it actually did. Don't get me wrong, I'm as interested as the next guy in the idea of water on Mars, but I would hate to see the scientific community do something as anti-science as get swept up in the hype of an idea and make faulty assumptions.

I personally do not see anything wrong with the statements made in this APOD. It's certainly not anti-science or fake science as you have implied, lswan.

LswaN wrote:Err, am I the only one who fears for the future of real science when I see that one of the more influential (to the public) science institutes calls a leading hypothesis of one thing evidence for another? This is rather sickeningly unscientific, the mere existence of a hypothesis certainly can not be considered evidence for water on another planet. Evidence that it could possibly have been, perhaps, but certainly not that it actually did. Don't get me wrong, I'm as interested as the next guy in the idea of water on Mars, but I would hate to see the scientific community do something as anti-science as get swept up in the hype of an idea and make faulty assumptions.

This is about hypotheses and evidence- what is unscientific about that? Indeed, this is about as solid as science can be. Nobody is being definitive, nobody is throwing around words like "prove". There's just a logical process at work: we observe a mineral vein, which appears structurally and chemically similar to veins found on Earth that are known to have been formed in water. So logically, it is reasonable to treat such a vein on Mars as evidence for an aqueous past.