Mr Worf, I've heard that plans to that effect are on the boards. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Mr. Worf <hellomahog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > That must be interesting work. That would probably take a long time though. > I think that they should send a couple of explores like they did for Mars to > crawl around on the bottom and hope that it doesn't get eaten. > > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Martin Baxter <martinbaxt...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> >> Mr Worf, I know that the pressure angle is being worked on, through the >> liquid oxygen breathing apparatus being tested extensively right now (the >> fluid can be adapted for the extreme depths). >> >> >> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Mr. Worf <hellomahog...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> I think that there are still some hurdles that need to be solved first. >>> One is being able to see in the deep and another is the pressure. >>> >>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Martin Baxter <martinbaxt...@gmail.com >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Okay... now that we know how big it is, let's get to exploring it. >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Mr. Worf <hellomahog...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Ocean's Depth and Volume Revealed* >>>>> >>>>> [image: A Swedish warship, left, escorts a merchant ship, on Tuesday, >>>>> May 11 ,2010, in the Indian Ocean. (AP Photo/Tim >>>>> Freccia)]<http://www.yahoo.com/_ylt=AkvlRGz6TuDWyr_.eX05YNGbvZx4;_ylu=X3oDMTNoMjNobTM1BGEDMTAwNTE5IG5ld3Mgb2NlYW4gbWVhc3VyZW1lbnRzIHQEY3BvcwMxBGcDaWQtMjc1MjQEaW50bAN1cwRwa2d2AzExBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN0ZC1mZWF0BHNsawNpbWFnZQRzbHBvcwNGBHRlc3QDNzAx/SIG=12tmu20hb/**http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100519/sc_livescience/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed> >>>>> LiveScience >>>>> Staff<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/byline/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed/36218767/SIG=121vpfog1/*http://www.livescience.com/php/contactus/author.php?r=editorial> >>>>> >>>>> LiveScience.com<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/byline/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed/36218767/SIG=10sog4vj6/*http://www.livescience.com> >>>>> livescience >>>>> Staff<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/byline/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed/36218767/sig=121vpfog1/*http://www.livescience.com/php/contactus/author.php?r=editorial> >>>>> >>>>> livescience.com<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/byline/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed/36218767/sig=10sog4vj6/*http://www.livescience.com> >>>>> – >>>>> Wed May 19, 10:40 am ET >>>>> >>>>> The Earth's >>>>> oceans<http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100519/sc_livescience/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed#>are >>>>> among the most mysterious places on the planet, but scientists now have >>>>> at least figured out how deep the oceans are and just how much water they >>>>> hold. >>>>> >>>>> A group of scientists used satellite measurements to get new estimates >>>>> of these values, which turned out to be 0.3 billion cubic >>>>> miles<http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100519/sc_livescience/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed#>(1..332 >>>>> billion cubic kilometers) for the volume of the >>>>> oceans<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/storytext/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed/36218767/SIG=1188p8bmt/*http://www.livescience.com/topic/ocean>and >>>>> 12,080.7 feet (3,682.2 meters) for the average >>>>> ocean depth. >>>>> >>>>> Both of these numbers are less than many previous estimates of the >>>>> ocean's volume and depth. >>>>> >>>>> "A lot of water values are taken for granted," said Matthew Charette, >>>>> an associate scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic >>>>> Institution<http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100519/sc_livescience/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed#>( >>>>> WHOI) in Woods Hole, Mass., who led the new audit of the oceans. "If >>>>> you want to know the water volume on the planet, you Google it and you >>>>> get five different numbers, most of them 30- or 40-year-old values." >>>>> >>>>> Crude measurements of volume >>>>> >>>>> The depth estimate of 2.3 miles is about 69 to 167 feet (21 to 51 >>>>> meters) less than previous estimates. (Some areas of the ocean, such as >>>>> the Mariana >>>>> Trench<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/storytext/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed/36218767/SIG=12ma3o35k/*http://www.livescience.com/common/media/video/player.php?videoRef=LS_090603_marianas>(at >>>>> nearly 7 miles or 11 km deep) are of course much deeper than the >>>>> average, while other areas, such as the Mid-Atlantic >>>>> Ridge<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/storytext/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed/36218767/SIG=123pbuug3/*http://www.livescience.com/animals/091122-deep-sea-creatures.html>are >>>>> shallower.) >>>>> >>>>> The researchers report that the world's total ocean volume is less than >>>>> the most recent estimates by a volume equivalent to about five times the >>>>> Gulf >>>>> of Mexico, or 500 times the Great Lakes.. While that might seem a lot >>>>> at first glance, it is only about 0.3 percent lower than the estimates of >>>>> 30 >>>>> years ago. >>>>> >>>>> That small difference shows how accurate even crude measurement >>>>> techniques were at estimating the ocean's volume. As long ago as 1888, for >>>>> example, John Murray dangled lead weights from a rope off a ship to >>>>> calculate an ocean volume - the product of ocean area and mean ocean >>>>> depth - >>>>> just 1.2 percent greater than the figure reported by Charette and his >>>>> colleague Walter H.F. Smith, a geophysicist at the National Environmental >>>>> Satellite, Data and Information >>>>> Service<http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100519/sc_livescience/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed#>of >>>>> the National >>>>> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). >>>>> >>>>> Starting in the 1920s, researchers using echosounders improved depth >>>>> estimates significantly, according to the researchers. Most recently, >>>>> Smith >>>>> and >>>>> others<http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100519/sc_livescience/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed#>have >>>>> pioneered the use of satellites to calculate ocean volume. >>>>> >>>>> Oceans not losing water >>>>> >>>>> The trend toward a progressive lowering of volume estimates is not >>>>> because the world's >>>>> oceans<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/storytext/oceansdepthandvolumerevealed/36218767/SIG=1188p8bmt/*http://www.livescience.com/topic/ocean>are >>>>> losing water. Rather, it reflects a greater ability to locate undersea >>>>> mountain ranges and other formations, which take up space that would >>>>> otherwise be occupied by water. >>>>> >>>>> Satellite measurements reveal that ocean bottoms "are bumpier and more >>>>> mountainous than had been imagined," Smith said. >>>>> >>>>> Satellites cannot actually "see" the ocean bottom. Instead, they >>>>> measure the ocean surface, which reflects what lies beneath. For instance, >>>>> if a mountain range lurks under a certain part of the ocean, the surface >>>>> above it will bulge outward. >>>>> The satellite project has covered virtually all the world's oceans, >>>>> except for some areas of the Arctic that are covered with ice, Smith said. >>>>> The result is a "new world map" of the oceans, he said. "Matt [Charette] >>>>> and >>>>> I are seeing a better picture of the shape and volume of oceans." >>>>> >>>>> Fine-tuning the numbers >>>>> >>>>> Satellite measurements do have their shortcomings though: "There is a >>>>> problem of spatial resolution, like an out-of-focus camera," Smith >>>>> explained. "We're measuring the sea surface that is affected by mountains, >>>>> but we're seeing only really big mountains, and in a blurry way. The >>>>> resolution is 15 times worse than our maps of Mars and the moon." >>>>> >>>>> Consequently, the researchers say, more ship-based measurements are >>>>> needed to augment and "fine tune" the satellite data. And so far, >>>>> ship-based >>>>> sonar and other instrumentation have mapped only 10 percent of the Earth's >>>>> seafloor. >>>>> >>>>> "We have gaps in echosounding measurements as wide as New Jersey," >>>>> Smith said. >>>>> >>>>> It would take a single ship 200 years (or 10 ships 20 years) to measure >>>>> all the ocean-floor depths with an echsounder, according to published >>>>> U.S.. >>>>> Navy estimates. >>>>> >>>>> The new study, funded in part by the EarthWater Institute, is detailed >>>>> in the June issue of the journal Oceanography. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! >>>>> Mahogany at: >>>>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> "If all the world's a stage and we are merely players, who the bloody >>>> hell wrote the script?" -- Charles E Grant >>>> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! >>> Mahogany at: >>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> "If all the world's a stage and we are merely players, who the bloody hell >> wrote the script?" -- Charles E Grant >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik >> >> >> > > > -- > Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! > Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ > > -- "If all the world's a stage and we are merely players, who the bloody hell wrote the script?" -- Charles E Grant http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik
