Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

dickbill · 2003-08-13 07:13:53

Also, is there a link where the MOC pictures have been parsed together? Or do you have to go through each individual picture?

Hi Seth, do you refer to my post ? If so I havn't included the link, just go to your favorite MOC gallery and enter the picture number, like E07-00958.

dickbill · 2003-10-14 10:33:56

can somebody explain how such pattern can form ?

http://www.spaceref.com/redirec....rl=http

that the latest MGS picture, featuring aligned pits. It looks like waves, but why the alignment ?

sethmckiness · 2003-10-20 06:09:48

An Educated guess would be Anticlinal deformities, ie rock bent down into a v shape.

Salt doming bunched together(very odd though)

The skin of Gigantic Alligator(just a guess)

That is very odd. I would like to see that with a very fine detail topographic map. At first they looked like dunes, but then it hit me.. Nope, they are like ARROYOS. But the scale.. Who knows until we get some real hi-res. who wants 6" resolution. I do I do!

dickbill · 2003-10-20 08:51:49

An Educated guess would be Anticlinal deformities, ie rock bent down into a v shape.
Salt doming bunched together(very odd though)

Actually I was refering to the picture of October 14:
MGS MOC Release No. MOC2-513, 14 October 2003

The Northern Plains Patterns,

very strange, looks like waves, could it be the fossilized bottom of an ocean ?

i try the link again but I am afraid it redirect to the latest MOC picture, not the October 14 picture that I am talking about.
http://www.spaceref.com/redirec....rl=http

Almir · 2003-10-21 05:08:11

Northern Plains Patterns
MGS MOC Release No. MOC2-513, 14 October 2003

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/200 … index.html

dickbill · 2003-10-21 05:54:38

Northern Plains Patterns
MGS MOC Release No. MOC2-513, 14 October 2003
http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/200 … index.html

thanks Almir, your link is better than mine. So, no ideas to explain the aligned pits ?

dicktice · 2003-10-21 09:41:15

I can't imagine how we'll ever be able to draw any conclusions concerning Mars's surface geography (not to mention sub-surface) with the remote-controlled "go-carts" so far in the works. The features being discussed above, as well as more controversial ones being analysed to death by eg. Hoagland & Company, simply cry-out for crewed Mars landing expeditions. How awfully frustrating for those who care, but have no other input than this!

dickbill · 2003-10-24 11:29:36

The Olivine again !

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mars-wat … e-03p.html

The olivine seen in bedrocks in exposed fractures in Nili Fossae might be ancient, but the olivine in ground surface ? If it resulted from relatively recent volcanic eruptions, in the dry climate that we know today, it doesn't prove that the climate wasn't more wet before these eruptions.

sethmckiness · 2003-11-07 23:00:28

dickbill Posted on Oct. 21 2003, 07:54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote (Almir @ Oct. 21 2003, 07:08)
Northern Plains Patterns
MGS MOC Release No. MOC2-513, 14 October 2003
http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/200 … index.html
thanks Almir, your link is better than mine. So, no ideas to explain the aligned pits ?

The only thing that I could speculate on is some sort of medial moraine deposits associated with glaciation.

dickbill · 2003-11-08 10:50:18

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/200 … index.html
The only thing that I could speculate on is some sort of medial moraine deposits associated with glaciation.

You reject a wave pattern formed by water, or wind, then exhumed trough erosion ?

sethmckiness · 2003-11-08 21:31:39

You reject a wave pattern formed by water, or wind, then exhumed trough erosion ?

Well, I think the Glaciation may be the most likely. I don't know the Lat/Long of the picture.

The Structural Geology of Mars is completely different then anything on Earth. The scale of these pictures is also not given.
Now, wave forms that are lithified into rock are usually fairly small with the crests being a few inches to a few feet across. That could not be represented by these photographs.
Also, so far it seems that most standard erosion takes so much longer on earth, and is completely different, without an active water cycle, and without vegetation. Just about every satellite photo I see of Mars mystifies me. I really want to see a super high res terrain photos and I think a thorough satellite mapping with 7.5' mapping quality should be undertaken.

sethmckiness · 2003-11-08 21:35:12

My bad, LAT and Long was given, and I would say it would be sufficiently north to also show for glaciation.

The dark dots and lines are low mounds and chains of mounds.

Medial Moraine

dickbill · 2003-11-09 09:35:42

My bad, LAT and Long was given, and I would say it would be sufficiently north to also show for glaciation.
The dark dots and lines are low mounds and chains of mounds.
Medial Moraine

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/200 … index.html

The hypothesis of recessing glaciers is fascinating, maybe an icy northern hemisphere is more likely than a northern ocean, in the lights of other infos (lack of carbonates, presence of olivines ). But If a galcier is the cause of that pattern and was in contact to the ground in that area, we can still hypothezise that in other areas, below the glacier, there was some place for melted water like in Lake Vostok in Antarctica.

I am impatient to know what kind of life will be found in this Antarctica lake, certainly something strange and unexpected.

sethmckiness · 2004-01-07 10:21:21

Is it just me or does the darker rock in that nice color photo look basaltic?

Shaun Barrett · 2004-01-08 07:38:43

I'm a little concerned that the MERs are going to abrade the surfaces of those rocks to get at the minerals inside, without having a good hard look at the surface material first.

Not everybody is totally convinced that Mars is sterile; some of you here may have gleaned from my ranting over the years that I'm one of them!

In Antarctica, it's been found that hardy bacteria can find refuge from the harsh environment by living in pores in the surface of rocks. They huddle just under the surface to avoid the dessicating and freezing winds but not so deep as to deprive themselves of the light they need to survive. So, if you cut a rock open in Antarctica, you might see the 'line of life' just below the surface.

It's been found also that the so-called varnish on rocks in desert environments can be produced by bacteria. I found THIS SITE, which includes the following:-

On Earth rock varnish may have a "microbial origin" (Dorn and Oberlander, 1981). Clays, originating from an external source, such as dust or aerosols (Fleischer, et al., 1999), are transported, via wind or some other mechanism, and deposited on the outside of rocks (Potter and Rossman, 1979a; Dorn, 1991). "Manganese-concentrating bacteria", which bloom during wet periods, oxidise the manganese in the rock (Palmer, et al., 1985; Dorn, 1991). These oxides cause the clay to adhere to the surface of the rock, producing varnish (Dorn, 1991). The bacteria thus alter the optical properties and mineralogy of the dust and aerosols (Guinness, et al., 1997). Raymond et al. (1992) found manganese-rich stromatolites in rock varnish, which reinforces the idea that manganese-oxidising bacteria are involved in varnish formation.

NASA scientists seem keen to rip through the surface layers of the rocks on Mars using the much-vaunted Rock Abrasion Tool (RAT), so that they can get to the 'fresh' rock crystals underneath.
This is no doubt a very sensible thing for a geologist to do but a biologist would surely be horrified at the loss of potentially precious samples of rock varnish, which may well contain direct evidence of life.

NASA has sent two highly sophisticated rovers to Mars to look for evidence of water in the distant past. Such evidence, they say, might help to tell us whether life may have had a chance to develop. They've sent no instruments able to detect the metabolism of actual living organisms today.
Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if NASA were grinding away colonies of living organisms in the process of looking for evidence of life-giving water!!

I've been looking at the rocks in the Spirit colour photograph and I note that many of them have different coloured sheens on them. What if the sheens are due to bacteria-induced rock varnish?!
???

Palomar · 2004-01-08 07:50:48

*...which reminds me: ABC Nightly News had an item about Mars last evening (it has consistently done this since shortly before Spirit landed and ever since; however, I notice that the news segments pertaining to Mars are now getting bumped further and further into the broadcast; last evening's was the final item of the evening) about life on Mars. A scientist (forgot his name) found a small pocket of water in rock, here in New Mexico (from a cave, I believe; very cold temperature, near freezing). He drilled into it, extracted the water, got it to room temperature...and these 250 million year old (estimate) bacteria came back to life and started reproducing. Of course, the implications for Mars was mentioned in connection with this.

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2004-01-17 22:13:56

Yes, Cindy.
That discovery of viable 250 million year old bacteria caused quite a stir. Of course, there were people who disputed the discovery, presumably because theory indicates background radiation should destroy the DNA of dormant bacteria well before 250 million years has elapsed. By the time conditions improve enough for the bacteria to revive, they're no longer capable of metabolism because the machinery has disintegrated!
But I think the large amount of sodium chloride kept the little bugs insulated from the heavier unstable isotopes which break down and give off damaging particles.
To me, it just shows that life can 'get lucky' and find favourable niches where long-term survival is possible. In fact, I've used the discovery of that ancient bacteria to bolster my case that, if life ever did develop on Mars, it'll still be there and still metabolising somewhere. Life is very hard to eliminate completely and comes back quickly and strongly as soon as it gets a chance.

To quote that phrase you like: "Life finds a way!"

Palomar · 2004-01-29 07:29:10

Yes, Cindy.
That discovery of viable 250 million year old bacteria caused quite a stir. Of course, there were people who disputed the discovery, presumably because theory indicates background radiation should destroy the DNA of dormant bacteria well before 250 million years has elapsed. By the time conditions improve enough for the bacteria to revive, they're no longer capable of metabolism because the machinery has disintegrated!
But I think the large amount of sodium chloride kept the little bugs insulated from the heavier unstable isotopes which break down and give off damaging particles.
To me, it just shows that life can 'get lucky' and find favourable niches where long-term survival is possible. In fact, I've used the discovery of that ancient bacteria to bolster my case that, if life ever did develop on Mars, it'll still be there and still metabolising somewhere. Life is very hard to eliminate completely and comes back quickly and strongly as soon as it gets a chance.
To quote that phrase you like: "Life finds a way!"

[http://www.spacedaily.com/2004/04012907 … 8abf6.html]The Nose Knows Best?

*Aussie pooch sniffs out Marsian bacteria?

"Australian scientists said Thursday that a dog with a nose for sewage had found evidence that life once, and may still, exist on Mars.

Biophysicist Tony Taylor said his mongrel had sniffed out bacteria in mud from Queensland state that matched fossils of primitive organisms in a Martian meteorite which plunged into Antarctica 13,000 years ago.

This backed a theory by NASA scientists who examined the potato-sized meteorite, called ALH84001, after it was retrieved in 1984 and concluded 12 years later that life existed on Mars...

'When we say life, we're talking about bacteria, single cell primitive life forms, like we have here on Earth...'"

*Article also states these bacteria are older than the known fossil record here on Earth.

--Cindy

dickbill · 2004-01-29 10:10:07

That discovery of viable 250 million year old bacteria caused quite a stir. Of course, there were people who disputed the discovery, presumably because theory indicates background radiation should destroy the DNA of dormant bacteria well before 250 million years has elapsed. By the time conditions improve enough for the bacteria to revive, they're no longer capable of metabolism because the machinery has disintegrated!
But I think the large amount of sodium chloride kept the little bugs insulated from the heavier unstable isotopes which break down and give off damaging particles.

I also remember a 50 million years old wasp, embedded in amber. Researchers drilled through the amber into the wasp gut, where they retrieve 'stuff'. They put that stuff in culture, in a very carefully strerilized flask and broth culture, let a couple of days and... bacteria pop up. These bacteria matched the wasp bacterial symbiont that still exist in today's wasp gut. But their DNA was different enough to claim that they were not 'modern' bacteria.
So the authors claimed that they revived the 50 millions years old bacteria.

How the DNA can sustain a so long time without being completely degraded ? it's an organic molecule very fragile, and 250 millions years ? difficult to believe that even the DNA's atoms can stay in place in the molecule for so long. Even in a purely inert atmosphere, like argon, and with protection from radiations (then argon wouldn't be an ideal gas), the DNA has a limited life span. But it's also true that it can be repaired. I have doubts however.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-01-29 17:55:13

Clever people, us Australians!
Even our dogs have proven to be capable research assistants in the realms of microbiology and planetary science!!
:laugh:

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2003-08-13 07:13:53

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#27 2003-10-14 10:33:56

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#28 2003-10-20 06:09:48

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#29 2003-10-20 08:51:49

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#30 2003-10-21 05:08:11

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#31 2003-10-21 05:54:38

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#32 2003-10-21 09:41:15

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#33 2003-10-24 11:29:36

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#34 2003-11-07 23:00:28

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#35 2003-11-08 10:50:18

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#36 2003-11-08 21:31:39

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#37 2003-11-08 21:35:12

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#38 2003-11-09 09:35:42

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#39 2004-01-07 10:21:21

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#40 2004-01-08 07:38:43

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#41 2004-01-08 07:50:48

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#42 2004-01-17 22:13:56

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#43 2004-01-29 07:29:10

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#44 2004-01-29 10:10:07

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

#45 2004-01-29 17:55:13

Re: Martian Geology - Olivines, andesites, faults etc

Board footer