New Mars Forums

Hi GregM and welcome to New Mars!   
    That was a marvellous recapping of the history of the Phoenix lander, which I enjoyed reading.
                                              :up:

[I'm probably dreaming but was Goldin's idea ever described as 'smaller, faster, cheaper'?
    I seem to remember reading it as that somewhere many years ago(?). It's probably a better description of the concept and precludes the standard criticism of 'better, faster, cheaper', which was "Pick any two!".      ]

Yes thanks, Cindy! Much clearer.   
    I realise now that, when Spirit got to West Spur, it made a left up the ridge toward Larry's Lookout, instead of a right, as originally planned, toward Lookout Point. Among other considerations, I assume the angle of the incident sunlight was a factor in that decision.

    In the event Tennessee Valley presents nothing promising, as seen from Larry's Lookout, I suppose it's asking too much to expect Spirit to make its way down Cumberland Ridge, via Lookout Point, and into the Columbia Hills inner basin?   ???
    At least it's downhill all the way, with the southward-bound midday Sun at an advantageous angle, and it would give us a look at that 'cave' and the layered outcrops.   

    [Not that I've got anything against Tennessee Valley, of course!  ]

Hmm.
    I wonder where 'Larry's Lookout' is, relative to 'Lookout Point'?

    Right now, I'm just praying Spirit hangs together long enough to maybe take a peek into that "cave" and check out the areas labelled 'possible layered outcrops' and 'Home Plate'.
    I suppose it's likely NASA wouldn't even consider steering Spirit toward that big shadowy-looking area until at least late in the southern spring, when the Sun's angle should be more favourable for viewing - not to mention for solar power purposes, of course.
                                                                      ???   

Cindy, Quote: "P.S.:  I'm currently going over the old 3D images of Mars from both Rovers with a pair of 3D glasses a friend sent me the other day.  Fan-tastic."
    Yep, those 3D pics are certainly worth "oohing-and-aahing" about. 

Thanks, Cindy, for that "Rover Trash Kicks Up Dust" photo.
    As you well know, I disputed how much dust had accumulated on Spirit's deck. Well this photo again appears to show a relatively dust-free surface, until you look at the area where the 'bread-bag tie' has been sliding around in that recess.
    This is just the kind of evidence I've been looking for to satisfy myself as to the amount of dust Spirit has gathered. I'm now quite satisfied that Doug was right and I was wrong.
    I stand corrected.

    Doug! Are you listening? I wish to concede final defeat in our debate.
    I admitted, towards the end of it, that my position had become precarious for several reasons I listed at the time. However, I still hadn't been able to convince myself entirely that your (and NASA's) argument was correct .. until now! You win, fair and square.
                                               

Cassioli:-

    Thanks for reminding us about that intriguing cave (if it is actually a cave).   :up:   
    I'd forgotten all about it.
    Just to refresh my own memory, I went back through the old posts about the Columbia Hills and retrieved this picture:-

[Oops! It's come out a bit bigger than I anticipated .. sorry!]
    Where's Spirit now? I've lost track.
    Couldn't we still get a look into that 'black hole'?   ???

Graeme, I think that picture of the Norwegian Aurora is among the most beautiful photos I've ever seen. Magnificent!  :up:

    And, as for that "raging blizzard of solar protons", Cindy, the SOHO picture makes it easier to imagine how such radiation can carve up the cell structure inside living tissue! {Gulp! }
    I think our human missions to Mars are really going to need some kind of magnetic shield, based on superconducting systems. Earth's magnetic field is relatively weak .. but it's BIG (! ), and has enormous distances over which to influence the paths of even high speed ions:-

    I guess, with a smaller field around a spacecraft, it'll have to be a stronger one in order to deflect particles, especially these almost light-speed protons, forcefully enough to prevent them reaching the people on board.
                                          ???

[Hope this isn't too far off-topic.     ]

Hi CM.
    The melting point of methane is -182.5 deg.C and its boiling point, at 1.013 bar, is -161.6 deg.C. (I assume the boiling point at the roughly 1.5 bar surface pressure on Titan would be somewhat higher than that figure.)
    The last I heard, the temperature on Titan's surface was measured at -180 deg.C, which would indicate that liquid methane is stable there - but not by much! 2.5 deg.C colder, and maybe a tad cooler again to mop up the latent heat of fusion, and the methane would solidify.

    The fact that the partial pressure of methane seems to increase from higher altitudes down to the surface, is another indicator that there's a source of methane on that surface - presumably reservoirs of liquid methane.

    Your comments make me think you're harbouring a pet theory of your own about all this (?).   ???   :;):
    Or am I mistaken?

That's easily the best picture of a water spout I've ever seen.  :up:   
    It looks almost eerie.

I think that's 'misspell', Clark.   

Interesting.
    I'm looking forward to the analysis.
    It looks less weathered than the iron meteorites Stu kindly linked for us, which I assume is due to the dearth of oxygen and moisture in the Martian air. Nevertheless, there must be at least some weathering going on, so perhaps that will give NASA a clue as to the rock's age.
    Or maybe it's nearly pure nickel.   ???

Cindy:-

    This puts me in mind of a discussion we had long ago about the localised effects on terrestrial weather during an eclipse. Apparently it can become quite windy as the Moon's shadow causes sudden small drops in the temperature on a regional scale.
   I suppose Saturn's rings would cause an analogous temperature differential and maybe explain some of those circular storms and high winds (?).

That's a very nice site you've linked for us, DonPanic.  :up:
    In the mosaic of black and white pictures, which shows the 'river delta' so clearly from a considerable altitude, I can't be sure whether there are some small craters in the broad dark area on the right (?).
    If they are craters, then the dark areas can't be liquid, can they? They can't even be tarry ooze either, I suppose.
                                                 ???

Cindy:-

    I don't believe I've encountered that particular picture of Titan's atmosphere in my travels or, if I have, the Alzheimer-effect is beginning to tell!   
    It certainly is fascinating to speculate that perhaps some kind of localised cryo-volcanic event resulted in an outpouring of gas from the surface. It's possible to imagine such a quantity of relatively warm gas, though still cold by Earthly standards, belched out from Titan's equivalent of a terrestrial volcano and rising as an enormous bubble in the freezing Titanian air.
    Gathering together all our data about Titan, even this archival stuff, is what it's all about as we struggle to understand this amazing moon. There could be all sorts of vital clues hidden in the old Voyager files.
    Nice detective work, Cindy.   :up:

No need to be defensive, Clark. I was merely pointing out how very thoroughly you've educated us all in the school of moral relativism over the years. Whether you actually subscribe to those views yourself, in your heart of hearts, I wouldn't presume to imply.

Clark:-

Me:-

    Again, no need for a defensive stance, Clark, because you evidently echo my own sentiments. 

Clark:-

     :laugh:  I'd have been executed many years ago!  Ah, Clark .. always a touch of good-natured humour!

Clark:-

    Once again, nothing to disagree about here. Maliciously breaking a 5-week-old baby's legs comes under the 'Wrong' category - plain and simple. (Thanks, Cindy, for bringing that case to our attention.)

    Without prejudice, toward Clark or anyone else, I would point out that moral relativism, if taken too far, is a stultifying creed at best and downright wrong at worst.
    If the far end of the sliding scale holds absolute sway and nothing is really 'right' and nothing is 'wrong', it's simultaneously a reason to do anything you want, no matter how bad, or to do nothing in the name of good, since there is no 'good'!
    The result is either inertia or chaos, and probably both.

    As I've admitted, and it appears Clark and I are in complete agreement on this (though he seemed unaware of our accord at first), absolutism is a very dangerous thing. But organised society cannot exist without rules. It looks to me, and to a growing number of the people I've spoken to, that the law in Australia is moving along the 'sliding scale' we've mentioned, away from absolutism and toward relativism; the law has gone 'soft' on crime and weak on punishment, I've heard repeatedly.
    One of our friends is a lawyer and I've had occasion to raise this popular viewpoint with up to 3 or 4 lawyers at a time, over dinner. The result is always the same .. the ranks close!  The attitude of the lawyers is that the situation is much more complex than the layman has any hope of grasping and that ordinary people really shouldn't have any input. At such gatherings, I've been made to feel very much the 'child among adults', whose opinion is quaintly amusing but hardly relevant to an informed legal discussion. The indulgent sniffs and smiles of condescension are unmistakable.
    Now, while I'm no lawyer, I don't feel I'm totally incapable of understanding basic societal concepts and making an intelligent comment here and there. But the arrogance of the legal profession is breathtaking to behold; their judgment of what is good or bad for society is evidently held to be innately superior to that of the rest of us.
    I note also that such people are not at all coy about displaying their liberal political ideologies, being openly and vehemently critical, for example, of the incumbent conservative Coalition here.

    These experiences, together with quite studious reading of the political sections of newspapers, lead me to the conclusion that the legal profession in Australia is heavily populated with individuals of a left-leaning persuasion. Many of our politicians and law-makers are also lawyers.
    Given that liberal lawyers are certainly more likely to lean away from moral absolutism and toward moral relativism (who was it that said the law has nothing to do with justice?), it's hard to escape the notion that a close-knit and exclusive 'lawyers club' is gradually changing the face of crime and punishment in Australia in accordance with their own agenda.

    Years ago, it was possible to leave your house unlocked when you went out; as a child, I walked right through my neighbours' open house looking for my playmates on numerous occasions, only to realise the whole family had gone out in their car for the morning.
    People, even lone females, used to be able to walk down the street after dark, with more than a fifty-fifty chance of not being assaulted.
    I managed to attend cubs (cub scouts) for 2 years without once being sexually penetrated while away on camp, or being offered illegal substances around the campfire!
    Criminals, convicted of violent crimes, were very unlikely to be released onto the streets on a good-behaviour bond or after a laughably short detention.
    Virtually all the kids I knew shared a household with two creatures we now call 'their biological parents', then known simply and affectionately as Mom and Dad. If a woman had three children in those days, the chances were they all had the same father!

    I suppose now, if anyone responds to this, we'll hear all the reasons that the swing toward liberalism and moral relativism has nothing whatever to do with today's deterioration in social order and cohesion. I'll be surprised if somebody doesn't try to tell me that there hasn't been any deterioration at all - that it's just an illusion!
    I fully expect Clark, ever the stickler for rigid fairness, to point out all the behind-the-scenes horrors of suburban life in the 50s and 60s, the claustrophobic existence of people trapped in loveless marriages for example.

    I think we all know the often heart-wrenching disadvantages of a highly ordered social hierarchy - I know I do. But I happen to think society, as a whole, is not served well by a perhaps well-meaning but overzealous erosion of its foundations.
    We have to preserve at least some absolute standards and hold them sacrosanct because people need a solid framework within which to function. While it may be aesthetically pleasing, from an intellectual point of view, to put every tenet up for grabs, it's not necessarily good for the average person in the street and for society in general.

    Again, just a few opinions.