Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
I've been thinking about this one for a while, especially after I saw the white silica soil images. It would be reasonable to assume the presence of profitable fields of precious opal. Regards, Kevin. _ Get a preview of Live Earth, the hottest event this summer - only on MSN http://liveearth.msn.com?source=msntaglineliveearthhm __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
When Viking got to Mars, it found what looked like clear evidence of the shoreline of a vast ancient sea. Exciting. Later, closer looks show that the shoreline was not level; it waved up and down. Shorelines don't do that -- goodbye to the Seas of Barsoom. Geophysicists at UC Berkeley have created a simple model that explains the wavy wrinkled shoreline, and now it looks like the Ancient Seas of Mars are possible, even likely. This Ocean would have covered a goodly fraction of the planet and been 4000 to 6000 feet deep! Needless to say this is way too much water to have been lost to space by leaking out of the atmosphere, so the question is, Excuse me, but where are you hiding the ocean? Mars Probably Once Had A Huge Ocean: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070613131912.htm The full paper will appear in the journal Nature tomorrow, if anyone who wants it has access. Meanwhile, we can put a sedimentary Martian Meteorite on the list of things we want the universe to give us for Christmas. Sterling K. Webb __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
Fascinating article from both yourself and Ron. It left me thinking I could have thought of that if only I were a little bit smarter as I knew all the mechanisms involved. To see what is right in front of your face is a constant challenge Meanwhile, we can put a sedimentary Martian Meteorite on the list of things we want the universe to give us for Christmas. Wouldn't that be something extraordinary? Problem is, would anyone recognise it as a meteorite if it had lost it's crust from lying around for a bit? I wouln't be surprised if one had already been found with crusts on but got discarded as clearly terrestrial. Rob McC Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
--- samc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I get more convinced as time passes, that we *will* find either active or fossil life forms on Mars in my lifetime. Don't kid yourself Mark, I think you'd get better money if you put it on Mars being proven to be a lifeless lump of rock and always having been so. Did you ever do that calculation in physics where you work out the probability of all the air molecules in a shoe box randomly moving into one half of the box leaving the other half momentarily in a vacuum making the box half collapse? If not, it works out that the chances are that you have to leave the box for something like 10^20 times longer than the universe has been around for to have a chance of it happening or something ridiculous like that. My point is that random chemical production of complex amino acids is one thing but DNA is quite the other and how it manages to develop from a molecule to sentience is off any scale. A group of British scientists predicted finding life on extrasolar planets in the next 10 years in the last week. How presumptious is this??? You really have to believe that life will form wherever it can which is not the same as life finding a way to hang on (as it does on earth in nasty places, like rocks in antarctica, sulphur lakes in Yellowstone, mid-oceanic vents, the Gobi desert, New York, etc) I have started my stopclock. In 9 years, 11 months and 22 days I'm going to be sending Leicester University a big blown raspberry if my scepticism proves to be right and I REALLY think it will be. If I am as wrong as I could possibly be on this, send me a mail and I will send you a real, bonafide picture of me actually eating a massive slice of humble pie. (ohhh, geez, I hope proof isn't found next week) Rob McC 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
And, like a fool, I forgot to ask for a sedimentary Martian meteorite with FOSSILS! I mean, as long as you're asking, what harm could it have done? Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: samc [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Rob McCafferty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:47 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS I get more convinced as time passes, that we *will* find either active or fossil life forms on Mars in my lifetime. Great spot Sterling, thanks. Mark Rob McCafferty wrote: Fascinating article from both yourself and Ron. It left me thinking I could have thought of that if only I were a little bit smarter as I knew all the mechanisms involved. To see what is right in front of your face is a constant challenge Meanwhile, we can put a sedimentary Martian Meteorite on the list of things we want the universe to give us for Christmas. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
I get more convinced as time passes, that we *will* find either active or fossil life forms on Mars in my lifetime. Don't kid yourself Mark, Did you ever do that calculation in physics where you If not, it works out that the chances are that you have to leave the box for something like 10^20 times longer than the universe has been around for to have a chance of it happening or something ridiculous like that. My point is that random chemical production of complex amino acids is one thing but DNA is quite the other and how it manages to develop from a molecule to sentience is off any scale. Completely agree - but we're here to argue about it, right? So, given the universe has a greater than zero chance of life emerging (which I hope we can all agree on, even on metlist), it either happens in a tiny fraction of potential cases, or we're unique. Since I specifically mentioned Mars, I'd argue that the chances are somewhat higher than (arbitrarily) 10^20, because we share a common environment. I'm not positing panspermia (nor ruling it out); just noting the fact that we have a stable single star, a habitable zone which extended further out in geological time, and demonstrably a place where the right stuff emerged to do it at least once. I think Mars is a hot bet, and getting hotter by the year :) A group of British scientists predicted finding life on extrasolar planets in the next 10 years in the last week. How presumptious is this??? Probably pretty presumptious, I agree; but this species does tend to get a little excitable on this topic. I offer myself as a type specimen in evidence ;) You really have to believe that life will form wherever it can which is not the same as life finding a way to hang on Personally, I do believe that life will form, a lot of the time, in an environment where the conditions are right. You're completely right in about 'forming' vs 'hanging on' in a place where it's close to extant life, like sulphur vents vs rainforests - but as I say above, narrow the field of view. Maybe in our solar system, Mars is the sulphur vent to our rainforest? I REALLY think it will be. (ohhh, geez, I hope proof isn't found next week) I'll happily join you in humble pie and a decent pint if we ever get proof either way :) Hell, I'll buy you a pint anyway and we can argue till the cows come home 8) Best Mark __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
Hi Rob, Mark, and All, While I doubt that someone will be able to find/prove life on extrasolar planets during the next ten years I'm personally convinced that life itself is not that rare in the vastness that we tend to call our universe. Just imagine the billions of galaxies, each bearing billions and billions of stars, planets, moons, asteroids, comets with water and amino acids, sugar, and all the stuff necessary to plant the seed of life on more than one remote world that we tend to call our planet Earth. If the formation of life is THAT improbable, how does it come that WE are here? If you want a good read on this issue, try Christian de Duve's Vital Dust: Life as a Cosmic Imperative. No, de Duve's not one of those confused dreamers, he's a renowned scientist and a Nobel prize winner... and his book is a real blast. Maybe you will change your mind on what it takes to form life in the first place, from a biochemical point of view. Life rulez! Norbert -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- I get more convinced as time passes, that we *will* find either active or fossil life forms on Mars in my lifetime. Don't kid yourself Mark, Did you ever do that calculation in physics where you If not, it works out that the chances are that you have to leave the box for something like 10^20 times longer than the universe has been around for to have a chance of it happening or something ridiculous like that. My point is that random chemical production of complex amino acids is one thing but DNA is quite the other and how it manages to develop from a molecule to sentience is off any scale. Completely agree - but we're here to argue about it, right? So, given the universe has a greater than zero chance of life emerging (which I hope we can all agree on, even on metlist), it either happens in a tiny fraction of potential cases, or we're unique. Since I specifically mentioned Mars, I'd argue that the chances are somewhat higher than (arbitrarily) 10^20, because we share a common environment. I'm not positing panspermia (nor ruling it out); just noting the fact that we have a stable single star, a habitable zone which extended further out in geological time, and demonstrably a place where the right stuff emerged to do it at least once. I think Mars is a hot bet, and getting hotter by the year :) A group of British scientists predicted finding life on extrasolar planets in the next 10 years in the last week. How presumptious is this??? Probably pretty presumptious, I agree; but this species does tend to get a little excitable on this topic. I offer myself as a type specimen in evidence ;) You really have to believe that life will form wherever it can which is not the same as life finding a way to hang on Personally, I do believe that life will form, a lot of the time, in an environment where the conditions are right. You're completely right in about 'forming' vs 'hanging on' in a place where it's close to extant life, like sulphur vents vs rainforests - but as I say above, narrow the field of view. Maybe in our solar system, Mars is the sulphur vent to our rainforest? I REALLY think it will be. (ohhh, geez, I hope proof isn't found next week) I'll happily join you in humble pie and a decent pint if we ever get proof either way :) Hell, I'll buy you a pint anyway and we can argue till the cows come home 8) Best Mark __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] [Meteorite List] OCEANS ON MARS
In a message dated 6/13/2007 7:56:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If the formation of life is THAT improbable, how does it come that WE are here? Good evening Folks, H. Perhaps, it might too, be fairly argued that, blind is he/she that are so closed minded as to dismiss the possibility of the existence of God. Certainly, that possibility falls within that same probability that ...with billions and billions of stars, planets, moons, asteroids, comets with water and amino acids, sugar, and all the stuff necessary to plant the seed of life... life elsewhere is possible, Yes? Good evening to all, Paul Martyn Savannah, Georgia ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
Norbert Classen wrote: If the formation of life is THAT improbable, how does it come that WE are here? I agree with your point of view. We shouldn't be surprised that we find ourselves in a universe which satisfies the conditions necessary for our existence. (quoting a version of the anthropic principle) David __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
AUTOBIOGRAPHY: random chemical production of complex amino acids is one thing but DNA is quite the other and how it manages to develop from a molecule to sentience is off any scale I don't see the problem. Structures are inherent in all matter, not just any structure: specific structures. In the case of carbon, they are complicated but just as determined by binding energies and electron orbits. From the beginning of the universe, they're BUILT IN, even DNA. The universe is just made that way. DNA is a polymer. Molecules polymerize all by themselves when exposed to energy, light, heat, dessication, a host of circumstances. Sugars and phosphates gum up, dry out, solidify, polymerize -- now they're chains. Aminos like to shelter in the lee of five-sided sugars, so chains of polymerized pentose phosphate collect aminos. All the chains are glopped up together -- if the aminos on one chain FOR A SHORT STRETCH match up with their opposite numbers, a section of two chains is joined as a 2-chain. The loose ends get broken off; short 2-chains bump into each other, join end-to-end; 2-chains get longer. Some long 2-chains don't have a good match between aminos; they don't last long; others do. Some, a few of the long 2-chains, have good enough matches that if they're torn apart, they re-create the missing half from around them. They have replicated. Some 2-chains, a few, can DO things, little meaningless things, that make them persist longer than other 2-chains. Those 2-chains persist and replicate while other patterns disappear. Some of these 2-chains collect highly polar molecules that are attracted to water at one end and repulsed by water at the other end. Soon, the 2-chains are surrounded by a rough sphere of polar molecules which crudely protects the 2-chains from the general environment while allowing some other smaller molecules to pass both ways. Some rough spheres allow more than one kind of 2-chain, even other active molecules, to occupy the protected volume, each doing some little meaningless chemical operation just happens to make them persist longer together than apart and longer than those that don't do as much, sometimes for hours, and then sometimes for DAYS by doing more meaningless little things all the time, and this just keeps going on and on and on, getting more complicated all the time, for the next, say, 10^17 seconds, and HERE I AM. Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: Mark Crawford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Rob McCafferty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; samc [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 6:06 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS I get more convinced as time passes, that we *will* find either active or fossil life forms on Mars in my lifetime. Don't kid yourself Mark, Did you ever do that calculation in physics where you If not, it works out that the chances are that you have to leave the box for something like 10^20 times longer than the universe has been around for to have a chance of it happening or something ridiculous like that. My point is that random chemical production of complex amino acids is one thing but DNA is quite the other and how it manages to develop from a molecule to sentience is off any scale. Completely agree - but we're here to argue about it, right? So, given the universe has a greater than zero chance of life emerging (which I hope we can all agree on, even on metlist), it either happens in a tiny fraction of potential cases, or we're unique. Since I specifically mentioned Mars, I'd argue that the chances are somewhat higher than (arbitrarily) 10^20, because we share a common environment. I'm not positing panspermia (nor ruling it out); just noting the fact that we have a stable single star, a habitable zone which extended further out in geological time, and demonstrably a place where the right stuff emerged to do it at least once. I think Mars is a hot bet, and getting hotter by the year :) A group of British scientists predicted finding life on extrasolar planets in the next 10 years in the last week. How presumptious is this??? Probably pretty presumptious, I agree; but this species does tend to get a little excitable on this topic. I offer myself as a type specimen in evidence ;) You really have to believe that life will form wherever it can which is not the same as life finding a way to hang on Personally, I do believe that life will form, a lot of the time, in an environment where the conditions are right. You're completely right in about 'forming' vs 'hanging on' in a place where it's close to extant life, like sulphur vents vs rainforests - but as I say above, narrow the field of view. Maybe in our solar system, Mars is the sulphur vent to our rainforest? I REALLY think it will be. (ohhh, geez, I hope proof isn't found next week) I'll happily join you in humble pie and a decent pint if we ever
