It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cassini Finds Titan Lake Is Like a Namibia Mudfla - Picture worth a 1000 words!

page: 1
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Although the findings are awesome in their own right... I made this thread to bring attention to the photograph that accompanied it..

Just look, and imagine the 'maybe's'




What the....?

You could show that picture to 1000 people, and ask them where they think that picture was taken. The underlying notion for nearly all answers would undoubtedly be 'Earth' somewhere. Then you would get the jack wagon who would at random say... 'the moon', well my friends.... this jack wagon would somehow have been right! Just who's moon this person was referencing is the question.

Article...



cienceDaily (Apr. 20, 2012) — A new study analyzing data from NASA's Cassini spacecraft suggests that the lake, known as Ontario Lacus, behaves most similarly to what we call a salt pan on Earth.


and goes on to say....




A group led by Thomas Cornet of the Université de Nantes, France, a Cassini associate, found evidence for long-standing channels etched into the lake bed within the southern boundary of the depression. This suggests that Ontario Lacus, previously thought to be completely filled with liquid hydrocarbons, could actually be a depression that drains and refills from below, exposing liquid areas ringed by materials like saturated sand or mudflats. "We conclude that the solid floor of Ontario Lacus is most probably exposed in those areas," said Cornet, whose paper appears in a recent issue of the journal Icarus.
These characteristics make Ontario Lacus very similar to the Etosha salt pan on Earth, which is a lake bed that fills with a shallow layer of water from groundwater levels that rise during the rainy season. This layer then evaporates and leaves sediments like tide marks showing the previous extent of the water. "Some of the things we see happening in our own backyard are right there on Titan to study and learn from," said Bonnie Buratti, a co-author and Cassini team member based at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. "On Earth, salt pans tend to form in deserts where liquids can suddenly accumulate, so it appears the same thing is happening on Titan."
While the liquid on Titan is methane, ethane and propane rather than water, the cycle appears to work in a very similar fashion to the water cycle on Earth. Beyond Earth, Titan is the only other world known to bear stable liquids on its surface. There, the full hydrocarbon cycle is based on hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen, and takes place between the atmosphere, the surface and the subsurface. Titan's lakes are an integral part of this process. This latest paper is part of an ongoing study of Ontario Lacus, the largest lake in Titan's south polar region. Cassini has been observing the lake with multiple instruments and employing multiple methods of analysis to see if Titan, like Earth, changes with the seasons.
During the time Cassini has been exploring the Saturn system, Titan's southern hemisphere has transitioned from summer to fall. "These results emphasize the importance of comparative planetology in modern planetary sciences: finding familiar geological features on alien worlds like Titan allows us to test the theories explaining their formation," said Nicolas Altobelli, ESA's Cassini-Huygens project scientist.
The Cassini-Huygens mission is a cooperative project of NASA, the European Space Agency and ASI, the Italian Space Agency. NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, manages the mission for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Washington. The Cassini orbiter was designed, developed and assembled at JPL. The RADAR instrument was built by JPL and the Italian Space Agency, working with team members from the US and several European countries. JPL is a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena.


This only goes to strengthen the notion that it's entirely possible that life exists elsewhere. That is, if it is possible for these life forms, instead of being Carbon and hydrocarbon based..., but being nitrogen based, or any number of other elements.

What a picture...


Ooops, almost forgot...

Link or it didn't happen!
www.sciencedaily.com...




posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Excellent find about 1 of the most interesting places in the solar system. There's a genuine chance - being looked into by genuine scientists - of finding life with an alternative chemical basis in places like Titan and Io.

If that happens, chances of life elsewhere in our galaxy go through the roof.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Carbon could not really be replaced by nitrogen, carbon has a valence of 4 (makes 4 bonds) which is extremely important for life as we know it. Silicon would theoretically be similar, but does have issues associated with it.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   
I have always thought the idea of " There must be water for life." was a bit narrow minded. I would have thought by now with the discovery of things such as the black smoker vents where life needs no light that we would have learned.

May be some day if we manage not to exterminate ourselves we can be truly introduced to the wonders of the universe.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Carbon could not really be replaced by nitrogen, carbon has a valence of 4 (makes 4 bonds) which is extremely important for life as we know it. Silicon would theoretically be similar, but does have issues associated with it.


Ok... so what about, germanium, tin, lead, and ununquadium? Which issues do you suggest arise?

What about the possibility of replacing phosphorus with arsenic? Is it not possible?

The way I see it, carbon based is by far the easiest means for nature/cosmos to allow for the construct of life to inhabit. But, isn't that all based on conditions, and the whole 'Goldilocks' zone? Is it not possible that other 'zones' are more conducive to other constructs, such as Nitrogen?

Why is it that a valence of 4, is more conducive to life than 5 or 8? Isn't everything dependent on frame of reference, and this bias towards carbon is due to your perspective? 4 may be better than 3 in regards to bonds, but saying better is subjective to our paradigm and our frame of reference in respect to being in the so called 'goldilocks' zone.

I'm truly just wondering... any answers will suffice
edit on 20-4-2012 by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS because: additional statement

edit on 21-4-2012 by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS because: clarification



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
What if...
there is a whole galactic family that we are unaware of, and we are regarded as the bad apples that no one intentionally invites to family gatherings?

I wouldn't even find them faulty in their reasoning, we've got a ways to go. We can destroy one another, with ease. Just imagine what we would do on a galactic scale, we would probably end up collapsing all life in the universe, even before it starts up again.


Yeah, maybe Earth is like Australia, a prison planet, that humans was sent to eons and eons ago for being nasty and just outright criminals.
Well maybe not a prison planet (who would want to waste such a beutiful planet like earth to scumbags?) Or, we are like the european imigrants who "fled" to N.America so that they could start their own little new land with their own laws and be the bullys of the earth...Ahh, its 7am here, sry for my babbling



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by netlas

Originally posted by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
What if...
there is a whole galactic family that we are unaware of, and we are regarded as the bad apples that no one intentionally invites to family gatherings?

I wouldn't even find them faulty in their reasoning, we've got a ways to go. We can destroy one another, with ease. Just imagine what we would do on a galactic scale, we would probably end up collapsing all life in the universe, even before it starts up again.


Yeah, maybe Earth is like Australia, a prison planet, that humans was sent to eons and eons ago for being nasty and just outright criminals.
Well maybe not a prison planet (who would want to waste such a beutiful planet like earth to scumbags?) Or, we are like the european imigrants who "fled" to N.America so that they could start their own little new land with their own laws and be the bullys of the earth...Ahh, its 7am here, sry for my babbling


No offense to be taken... but,

Are you a Scientologist? Maybe they're, or you are... on to something. maybe.... lol.(again no offense
)



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
 


Cool thread... S and F.

The picture you posted for comparison looks like a foot also...



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
 


As far as I know carbon is completely unique in forming complex bonds, there is no known replacement element. Silicon is similar in having 4 unpaired electrons, but does not have the complex tendencies of carbon. If you find another answer PM it to me, but as far as I know there is no replacement, the chemistry of carbon is unique.

Edit: Here's a link.

imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov...
edit on 21-4-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   


No offense to be taken... but,

Are you a Scientologist? Maybe they're, or you are... on to something. maybe.... lol.(again no offense
)

Haha, no, I´m not
funny thing, I didn´t even realize it was kinda scientolog-ica to say such a thing like a prisonplanet until now that I read your answer. Oh, stupid me.



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
It's because carbon is so chemically reactive compared to all the other elements. Water because the majority of life as we know it is based upon carbon and water (remember your body is made up mostly of water).

Does that mean life can't happen without water or carbon? No. It just means that both those elements are what we are used to looking for is all. We might indeed find something in the future that is based on other elements (but that begs the question of if we'd know what we were looking at or not,
).

Interesting thread, thanks for posting!



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
 


Wait a minute !!!




This only goes to strengthen the notion that it's entirely possible that life exists elsewhere. That is, if it is possible for these life forms, instead of being Carbon and hydrocarbon based..., but being nitrogen based, or any number of other elements.


Just ask any oil man and he will tell you the hydrocarbons in oil comes from dead dinosaurs.

Are they now trying to tell us that this place was once "crawling" with dinosaurs ?

This could be a good reason to restart the space program. We just need to build some reeeeaaallllyyy big supertankers !!!

See !! Energy crisis -- solved .



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
It's because carbon is so chemically reactive compared to all the other elements. Water because the majority of life as we know it is based upon carbon and water (remember your body is made up mostly of water).

Does that mean life can't happen without water or carbon? No. It just means that both those elements are what we are used to looking for is all. We might indeed find something in the future that is based on other elements (but that begs the question of if we'd know what we were looking at or not,
).

Interesting thread, thanks for posting!


I have always tried to explain your statement to people.Human arrogance tries to purport that life can only exist where 'we' do:

planets can't be hotter or colder than Earth
they must contain the elements that Earth does
they must be of a similar distance from their star as Earth is
they must be carbon-based as we are

This arrogance will prevent us from advancing as a species.



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
The link states that i was generally believed that the lake was filled with Liquid Hydrocarbons. So, scientist already accept the presence of Organic compounds off Earth....????

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
 


All I can say is that is ONE BIG FOOT.

Wow.




posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Carbon could not really be replaced by nitrogen, carbon has a valence of 4 (makes 4 bonds) which is extremely important for life as we know it. Silicon would theoretically be similar, but does have issues associated with it.


Ok... so what about, germanium, tin, lead, and ununquadium? Which issues do you suggest arise?

What about the possibility of replacing phosphorus with arsenic? Is it not possible?

The way I see it, carbon based is by far the easiest means for nature/cosmos to allow for the construct of life to inhabit. But, isn't that all based on conditions, and the whole 'Goldilocks' zone? Is it not possible that other 'zones' are more conducive to other constructs, such as Nitrogen?

Why is it that a valence of 4, is more conducive to life than 5 or 8? Isn't everything dependent on frame of reference, and this bias towards carbon is due to your perspective? 4 may be better than 3 in regards to bonds, but saying better is subjective to our paradigm and our frame of reference in respect to being in the so called 'goldilocks' zone.

I'm truly just wondering... any answers will suffice
edit on 20-4-2012 by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS because: additional statement

edit on 21-4-2012 by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS because: clarification


Basically, carbon bonds can form in a virtually infinite number of combinations. The next most versatile element is silicon. It's bonds can form 9 different combinations. Other elements are not so versatile. Does that explain why carbon-based life is most likely?

From a chemical standpoint, life is a molecule that can make copies of itself. It has a structure that can be zipped apart (often by another molcule, called an enzyme) into two halves, and each half naturally attracts replacement atoms to the empy niches until the missing half has been completely replaced. Then you have two identical copies - probably. If a different atom or combination of atoms finds a way to fit into the molecular lattice, then this imperfect copy is called a mutation. Keep in mind that the easier the atoms & molecules can move around, the easier it is to find partners with which they can combine.

Take a pile of atoms. Add heat to get them excited, and the electrons in the outer shells will start forming bonds. Sitting there in a dry pile, only atoms that are next to each other can combine So let's add a fluid medium to make a soup where the atoms can really move around and mix (We could try a gasious medium, such as the atmosphere of Jupiter, but in that environment the atoms & molecules are much farther apart, and thus have a much more difficult time finding each other to combine).

Now then, the warmer the fluid, the more the atoms will mix - up to a point. If the fluid is too hot, the atoms become too excited and many promissing chemical bonds can break down. This is why water is a more favorable medium than liquid nitrogen or molten lead.

Also, it helps if the medium isn't prone to breaking down chemical bonds, the way sulphuric acid (which rains from the clouds on Venus) or peroxides (such as those found in the soil on Mars) does. Again, liquid water is a favorable alternative.

(Note that I am not ruling anything out. Carbon-base is certainly not the only option, but it is a very favorable one. Water is not the only possible fluid medium, but it is a very common and conducive one.)

OK, so we've got raw materials, water and heat. The last ingredient is time. We have found through laboratory experiments that given these ingredients amino acids that form the basis of carbon-based life form pretty quickly (and we have found these same compounds - called tholins - forming naturally on Titan). However, no one knows how long it takes for the molecules to find a combination that reproduces itself - i.e. become biological life. From a strictly probabilistic standpoint, the more time that passes the more likely that random chance or the freshman God of Molecular Biology (a hypothesis I favor) has of putting together something that works.

As I mentioned above, the warmer the fluid medium is, the faster the raw materials will mix and try combinations. On Titan, we've found methane lakes on the surface that may be swarming with tholins, but they are very cold (hundreds of degrees below 0), It may take several billion years for them to form life (note that as our sun ages and heats-up, this will inevitably speed-up the chemical reactions on Titan.) However, we have also found strong evidence that tidal warming has created a large warm liquid water layer beneath the frozen surface. Assuming that enough tholins have been subducted to this layer by active geology, I have every reason to expect that carbon-based life may already be thriving beneath the surface of Titan.



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Looks like a giant footprint to me. Particularly Bozo the Clown's footprint.
edit on 21-4-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS

What the....?

You could show that picture to 1000 people, and ask them where they think that picture was taken. The underlying notion for nearly all answers would undoubtedly be 'Earth' somewhere. Then you would get the jack wagon who would at random say... 'the moon', well my friends.... this jack wagon would somehow have been right! Just who's moon this person was referencing is the question.



Which photo? You posted 2 in that one image. The one on the left is Saturn's moon Titan and the one on the right is the Etosha Pan here on Earth.



Saturn's moon Titan (left) and a salt pan on Earth known as the Etosha Pan (right)


www.nasa.gov...





posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist

Originally posted by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS

What the....?

You could show that picture to 1000 people, and ask them where they think that picture was taken. The underlying notion for nearly all answers would undoubtedly be 'Earth' somewhere. Then you would get the jack wagon who would at random say... 'the moon', well my friends.... this jack wagon would somehow have been right! Just who's moon this person was referencing is the question.



Which photo? You posted 2 in that one image. The one on the left is Saturn's moon Titan and the one on the right is the Etosha Pan here on Earth.



Saturn's moon Titan (left) and a salt pan on Earth known as the Etosha Pan (right)


www.nasa.gov...




Essentially both, but to be specific... the one on the left, obviously, for it is not a photo of earth. I can't wait until colored photos are taken of Titan, that would be awesome!

Here's another image that was made a little while back:







Global mosaic of VIMS infrared images acquired during the nominal and equinox Cassini mission. Differences in composition translate into subtle differences of colors in this mosaic, revealing the diversity of terrains on Titan, such as the brownish equatorial dune fields or the bright elevated terrains. (Color coding : Red=5 μm, Green=2.0 μm, Blue=1.27 μm) (Credit: JPL/NASA/Univ. of Arizona/CNRS/LPGNantes)

Titanic Jigsaw Challenge: Piecing Together a Global Color Map of Saturn's Largest Moon
www.sciencedaily.com...


edit on 21-4-2012 by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS because: additional statement




top topics



 
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join