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.

 

[New] How Mars lost its atmosphere, searches for known precursor of life.

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Breaking Curiosity News!


Initial SAM results show an increase of five percent in heavier isotopes of carbon in the atmospheric carbon dioxide compared to estimates of the isotopic ratios present when Mars formed. These enriched ratios of heavier isotopes to lighter ones suggest the top of the atmosphere may have been lost to interplanetary space. Losses at the top of the atmosphere would deplete lighter isotopes. Isotopes of argon also show enrichment of the heavy isotope, matching previous estimates of atmosphere composition derived from studies of Martian meteorites on Earth. ..........

........Scientists theorize that in Mars' distant past its environment may have been quite different, with persistent water and a thicker atmosphere. NASA's Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution, or MAVEN, mission will investigate possible losses from the upper atmosphere when it arrives at Mars in 2014.





and.... Drum Roll......... .Was there any Methane??????...........


With these initial sniffs of Martian atmosphere, SAM also made the most sensitive measurements ever to search for methane gas on Mars. Preliminary results reveal little to no methane.



Methane is of interest as a simple precursor chemical for life. On Earth, it can be produced by either biological or non-biological processes.


Read more at: phys.org...




posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
How Mars lost its atmosphere?

may be here is one possible answer





posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ubeenhad
 


A few years back I read a book, something like "The Mars Mystery" or such. In it they proposed a theory that Mars was impacted by a large, fast moving asteroid. It may have created the massive tear we call Valles Marineris.

Opposite this huge scar, where shock waves would meet up, is the tallest planetary Volcano called Olympus Mons. It is suggested in the theory that up to 2 or 3 miles of top surface may have been blown off the planet by the shock waves.

In which case any atmosphere, water, living organisms would have been blown out into space also.

While this is not an accepted theory as yet on how Mars reached it's current format, I do think it can explain a lot about what we now see.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Tayesin
 

There is an impact theory which is a bit more palatable than that which also accounts for the loss of Mars' atmosphere. The idea is that the impact shut down the internal dynamo which produced Mars's magnetic field. The resultant loss of magnetosphere, combined with the low gravity of Mars would allow the solar wind to drag the atmosphere away over time.

The new findings from Curiosity would tend to support this model for the loss of atmosphere but the reason for the magnetic shutdown is still pretty wide open.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


You know lack of a magnetic field and lower gravity, with the solar wind causing the atmospheric loss, always brings me back to Venus.

It's magnetic field is extremely week compared to earths, and is not a product of a core dynamo, but interactions with the atmosphere. And while Venus has a much higher gravity field, I do have to wonder about somethings like:

Has Venus always had such a weak field?
If so, then even with the larger gravitational field, why is it's atmosphere so thick today?

I know this thread is about Mars,so apologies from me. I just find Venus much more mysterious than Mars at times.



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Well that's odd, The temperature on Mars may reach a high of around 70° Fahrenheit during certain times of the year, where Venus has a high of around 867° Fahrenheit.

So, with that being said, I think it's clear which planet is more interesting and that is Mars. Know why? Because there is much more of a chance of life existing, or to once have existed, on Mars. ~$heopleNation



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SheopleNation
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Well that's odd, The temperature on Mars may reach a high of around 70° Fahrenheit during certain times of the year, where Venus has a high of around 867° Fahrenheit.

So, with that being said, I think it's clear which planet is more interesting and that is Mars. Know why? Because there is much more of a chance of life existing, or to once have existed, on Mars. ~$heopleNation



Your opinion is noted: you find Mars much more interesting than Venus.

I on the other hand find Venus much more mysterious than Mars (which is what I said in my post).

By the way, speaking of finding life on other planets, get this:


Although the surface conditions on the planet are no longer hospitable to any Earthlike life that may have formed prior to this event, the possibility that a habitable niche still exists in the lower and middle cloud layers of Venus can not yet be excluded.[47]


Venus Atmosphere and Climate

And:


Owing to its extremely hostile conditions, a surface colony on Venus is out of the question with current technology. However, the atmospheric pressure and temperature approximately fifty kilometres above the surface are similar to those at the Earth's surface and Earth air (nitrogen and oxygen) would be a lifting gas in the Venusian atmosphere of mostly carbon dioxide. This has led to proposals for extensive "floating cities" in the Venusian atmosphere.[156] Aerostats (lighter-than-air balloons) could be used for initial exploration and ultimately for permanent settlements.[156] Among the many engineering challenges are the dangerous amounts of sulfuric acid at these heights.[156]


Venus Colonization

But of course this thread is about Mars. I was commenting to Phage about the almost non-existent magnetic field of Venus as compared to Mars, and the loss of atmosphere.
edit on 3-11-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Interesting. Yeah I believe that there possibly could have been life on Venus at one time, but not now. So I just lean more towards Mars exploration. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
~$heopleNation



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks for the info Phage, much appreciated.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ZakOlongapo
 


Although theory with a lot of speculative and without ground ideas, it was at least fascinating to watch.Though I agree about the influential people in the end.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ZakOlongapo
 


Cute cartoon.

Even if the material it presents is the height of insanity.


I think Mars and Venus should both be studied equally as extensive as possible. Currently Mars is easier of course since we can get landers running around on the surface. Both can give clues for looking for life outside of our planet as well as possible warning signs for Earth itself.




top topics



 
4

log in

join