Theory on Martian Spheres photographed by Opportunity rover, page 1

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

Topic started on 9-2-2004 @ 02:03 AM by worshipthemoon

I've found an uncanny resemblance of the Martian spheres to fossils found here on Earth. Please check out the explanation and comparison pictures on my website.

www.worshipthemoon.com...

reply posted on 9-2-2004 @ 02:59 AM by jdean

Worshipthemoon,

Thanks for posting that information. I too, am a
fossil collector/rockhound, this has been bugging me
since I saw the first sphere pic, a couple of days ago.
I've been trying to come up with both, a biological reason, and a geological reason to explain these formations. The matrix that seems to be "dumping" these spheres onto the sand as it erodes.
It reminded me of stromatolite fossils I had seen before.
As you probably know stromatolite formations are ALSO among the oldest fossils, and they are still being formed to this day by mats of bacteria on some shorelines.

Stromatolites and sponges, living together? hmmm..It happened once before!

On the geological side, I'm thinking volcanic tuff, with with glasslike tektites raining down as the ash also collected.

This is my first post, as I just found this website. Very interesting reading.

Jdean

reply posted on 9-2-2004 @ 03:40 AM by worshipthemoon

Originally posted by jdean

It reminded me of stromatolite fossils I had seen before.
As you probably know stromatolite formations are ALSO among the oldest fossils, and they are still being formed to this day by mats of bacteria on some shorelines.

Actually, I believe that stromatolites are mats of algae, but yes they may also be fossilized in the "Snout" rock. If there was algae or bacteria coexisting with sponges, that also could have been a food source for them.

I've only seen a few pictures of stromatolite fossils. The fossils I collect near my house are from a later period (Mississippian period). They're mostly sponges, crinoids, and corals.

reply posted on 9-2-2004 @ 05:33 AM by jdean

There's a good definition here:

www.fossilmuseum.net...

There's an interesting sentence there:
"Stromatolites secreted a thick gel as protection from unattenuated solar radiation."

I think cyanobacteria, and blue-green algae, have both been used as terms to describe the oraganisms that built up these layered mounds.

I still think it could be a nice place for a sponge to take up residence..

reply posted on 9-2-2004 @ 05:49 AM by ScienceGuyQ

I'm not a geologist or marine biologist, but I don't think those kind of rock formations are very common. The majority of sphere bodies empedded in rock like that tend to be fossils on earth.

On the other hand maybe on mars those kinds of mineral formations could be common.

Unfortunatly the twin rovers really aren't equiped to study them that well. All we really get are images and spectrometer readings.

reply posted on 11-2-2004 @ 02:33 AM by worshipthemoon

Originally posted by jdean

There's a good definition here:

www.fossilmuseum.net...

There's an interesting sentence there:
"Stromatolites secreted a thick gel as protection from unattenuated solar radiation."

I think cyanobacteria, and blue-green algae, have both been used as terms to describe the oraganisms that built up these layered mounds.

I still think it could be a nice place for a sponge to take up residence..

Thanks for that info on stromatolites.

I've added 2 new pictures to my webpage which show closer views of spheres embedded in the main rock. The closer views do have sort of globular areas that resemble stromatolite mounds.

There's also an article at space.com about their possible methods of formation. They don't even suggest that they MAY be fossils of ancient life, but they do offer a few interesting possibilities. Here's a link:

www.space.com...

reply posted on 12-3-2004 @ 11:32 AM by quaternary

These spheres could be concretions, which are formed in an aqueous environment by the precipitation of a mineral. I have seen large nodules of siderite (FeCO3) grow around almost anything (though they are usually onlong not spherical).

Another possibility is that these are large ooids (oolites), which are primarily calcite that has grown around a grain of some sort (sand or shell fragment). They usually form on beaches.

reply posted on 12-3-2004 @ 12:15 PM by Kano

The consensus from the Geologists working on this at NASA is that they are concretions, due to the way they are embedded in the rock, and the randomness of their positions throughout the rock.

reply posted on 12-3-2004 @ 02:45 PM by dangermouse

Kano, are you on NASA's payroll?

reply posted on 12-3-2004 @ 03:11 PM by Faisca

I'm reading a book right now that kind of deals with something like this. Could this be any indication of Panspermia? Hopefully I don't butcher the definition too much, but I'll try to get across the general idea.

Basically panspermia is the idea that life on earth was seeded from an extraterrestrial origins. Not that little green men came to earth and formed an experiment or something; but that a meteor containing the basic building blocks of life crashed into the primordial waters and thus started the evolution of life on our planet.

In the book I'm reading (Deception Point) it talks about a meteorite that contains fossils of an insect that is very similar to insects found on earth, in fact it can be classified down to the genus and species (they're just much larger). This sounds similar to the idea that the spheres on Mars are like fossils found on Earth.

I'm kinda just throwing this out there for discussion. Maybe I should have started a new thread for it, but basically what do people think about this idea?

reply posted on 12-3-2004 @ 09:27 PM by dangermouse

Well that's certainly POSSIBLE.

reply posted on 13-3-2004 @ 12:40 PM by Kano

Originally posted by dangermouse
Kano, are you on NASA's payroll?

No, those points were covered in the press conference last week.

reply posted on 13-3-2004 @ 05:50 PM by SpittinCobra

Originally posted by Faisca

very similar to insects found on earth, in fact it can be classified down to the genus and species (they're just much larger).

Well this is what I know with live here on earth, If everything is the same everywhere (space, other planets, anywhere) then it should apply.

Animals wont out grow there cage, as long as it a cage can support its mature size. Meaning that if an animal has a cage that will fit its size when it matures it wont out grow it. Planets are cages, cages that you can get out of, just not able to. Ok having said that let me give some everyday examples.

1. Fish, If you get a Hammer head shark Put it in Lets say a 500 gallon tank, it will never out grow it. It matures at about 6 feet. So that 500 galllon tank will support that. But you say they grow to 14 feet, Ah but it wont, Why? because it would die. The basic instinct is live. Does the shark think to do this? No, its simply to survive.

www.fishsanibel.com...
talking about bottom shark.

2. Reptiles, I know this one so well, I am a big reptile guy, I have lizards and snakes, I am going to us the snake for the example its easier. I have a 7 Foot red tail boa in a cage its abot 75 gallons in size, Perfect size for her now and for every, she might gain another foot in length. Thats it, She can get to 16 feet, but she three and mature. she will get thicker mut not much longer.

3. Dinos. It is proven that dinos with more room grew bigger. Raptors on one a big Island might be 8 foot tall, Ones one smaller Island might have been 3 to 4.

I hope I have helped in a little.

[Edited on 13-3-2004 by SpittinCobra]

reply posted on 13-3-2004 @ 11:54 PM by Aeon10101110

Concretions are the probable nature of the spherules. Especially given that that it is ascertained that the area was submerged for an appreciable period, such nodules are consistent. Originally forming due to infiltrating groundwater containing dissolved solids, some have since eroded out of the formation. But many remain in situ and were ground in half by Rover tools. In cross-section, no concetionary "rings" were noted, though a single line in one was an artifact of the grinder.

Their presence, in context with the surrounding geology, is evidence of an interesting history. Any word yet on their composition?

reply posted on 13-3-2004 @ 11:58 PM by Kano

The "triple berry" seen in the center of the microscopic image is intriguing to scientists because it reveals a clue about how the blueberries formed. Spheres formed from impacts or volcanoes do not tend to mold together like the spheres seen in the microscopic image. Spheres from impacts or craters are usually round or teardrop-shaped from flying in the air and freezing before hitting the ground. Any droplets of magma that combine with other droplets usually grow into a single mass in a spherical, dumbbell, or teardrop shape. In contrast, concretions could form this triple berry shape. Concretions are spherical mineral structures formed by groundwater percolating through porous rocks. On Earth, as concretions grow in close proximity to each other, their outer edges often intersect each other, giving an appearance like a triple soap bubble.

marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...

Pages: ^^TOP^^