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.
Whatever history-making news there is to report, Curiosity scientists are expected to cough up the goods at this year's American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting in San Francisco, to be held from Dec. 3 to Dec. 7.
On the AGU agenda is a discussion of Curiosity's search for organic molecules on Mars with its Gas Chromatograph-Mass Spectrometer — a key instrument to help explore the surface and subsurface of Mars, seeking traces of prebiotic or biological activity.
As expected, readers in the blogosphere have already chimed in with what they believe Curiosity has found; their guesses so far have included a fossil, a black monolith, Tang and Jimmy Hoffa.
Most scientists contacted by SPACE.com believe that Curiosity's SAM has detected organic chemical compounds. Still, some experts caution that the rover's finding may be overhyped.
"This is going to be a disappointment," said Chris McKay, a NASA space scientist at Ames Research Center at Moffett Field, Calif. "The press description of the SAM results as 'earthshaking' is, in my view, an unfortunate exaggeration. We have not (yet) found anything in SAM that was not already known from previous missions: Phoenix and Viking."
But James Garvin, chief scientistat NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., and a member of Curiosity's Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) science team, had a different take.
"What John Grotzinger was saying as our very capable project scientist on MSL is exactly the case," Garvin said. "The analytical payload on MSL —in particular, SAM as a suite —has been making unprecedented measurements of solid material samples with incredible implications about Mars, but which require, as in all science, demonstration of reproducibility and adequacy of calibration/validation."
Garvin said the SAM team, plus the wider MSL science team (including Grotzinger), "are working industriously to have consistent results for the world to revel in as soon as possible."
"It is more akin to waiting for test results from one's doctor … we want to be sure they are valid and properly interpreted and explained," Garvin added.
Unlike imaging and related experiments, highly sensitive results from SAM's instruments, which include mass spectrometers, tunable diode laser spectrometers and gas chromatographs —require very great care in calibration, validation and interpretation, Garvin emphasized.
"MSL with its Curiosity rover really is analogous to the Hubble Space Telescope in the impact it can and will have —we just have to be patient," Garvin said.
Similar to the Hubble Space Telescope, Garvin added, "We have to be patient to use our tools to look at the 'right stuff.' Stay tuned … Mars will not disappoint and nor will MSL."
Also awaiting the word from the Curiosity science team is Michael Mumma, a planetary scientist also at NASA Goddard, where he is founding director of the Goddard Center for Astrobiology.
"It clearly relates to the first soil sample analyzed by SAM. I suspect the delay means that a second sample is being analyzed to confirm findings from the first," Mumma said.
In Mumma's view, "blockbuster findings" could include the discovery of a major release of methane from pyrolyzed soil, with measurements of certain intriguing chemical variations called isotopologues. A finding of complex hydrocarbons (molecules containing hydrogen and carbon) or of a type of chemical compound called polymers, would also be a major discovery.
"I think the minimum finding that could get Grotzinger to describe it as 'historic' is complex organic compounds," said Gilbert Levin, an adjunct professor at Arizona State University in Tempe.
Levin was a life-detection experimenter on NASA's Viking mission to Mars in 1976. Levin and co-experimenter Patricia Ann Straat led the Viking Labeled Release (LR) investigation, which returned data from Mars indicating the presence of microbial life, the team asserts.
"I have already pointed out that the Viking PR [The Viking biology package also consisted of the Pyrolytic Release experiment (PR)] showed that simple organics are continually being formed on Mars, so they would be no big deal for Curiosity," Levin told SPACE.com. "I doubt SAM could have detected proof of living microorganisms. But, slowly, ineluctably, NASA is being dragged into the mire of life on Mars, and will ultimately, maybe soon, have to reverse its opinion on the results of the Viking LR."
Well they're scientists, they're not supposed to get hyped until they've seen conclusive data.
his I like very much and brings up an important question. If (huge if) there does happen to be microbial life on Mars, does the Viking crew get credited with the discovery or does the Curiosity crew get it... shared?
To conclude, i certainly hope the announcement is of substantial nature and we are not left holding our breaths.
WASHINGTON—Stick a shovel in the ground and scoop. That's about how deep scientists need to go in order to find evidence for ancient life on Mars, if there is any to be found, a new study suggests. That's within reach of Curiosity, the Mars Science Laboratory rover expected to land on the Red Planet next month.
The new findings, which suggest optimal depths and locations to probe for organic molecules like those that compose living organisms as we know them, could help the newest Mars rover scout for evidence of life beneath the surface and within rocks. The results suggest that, should Mars harbor simple organic molecules, NASA’s prospects for discovering them during Curiosity’s explorations are better than previously thought, said Alexander Pavlov of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, lead author of the study.
However, within 5 to 10 centimeters (2 to 4 inches) beneath the surface, the amount of radiation reduces tenfold, to 50 million grays. Although that’s still extreme, the team reports that simple organic molecules, such as a single formaldehyde molecule, could exist at this depth – and in some places, specifically young craters, the complex building blocks of life could remain as well.
read full article
“Right now the challenge is that past Martian landers haven’t seen any organic material whatsoever,” Pavlov said. “We know that organic molecules have to be there but we can’t find any of them in the soil.”
Prof. Sun Kwok and Dr. Yong Zhang of the University of Hong Kong show that an organic substance commonly found throughout the Universe contains a mixture of aromatic (ring-like) and aliphatic (chain-like) components. The compounds are so complex that their chemical structures resemble those of coal and petroleum. Since coal and oil are remnants of ancient life, this type of organic matter was thought to arise only from living organisms. The team's discovery suggests that complex organic compounds can be synthesized in space even when no life forms are present.
Not only are stars producing this complex organic matter, they are also ejecting it into the general interstellar space, the region between stars. The work supports an earlier idea proposed by Kwok that old stars are molecular factories capable of manufacturing organic compounds. "Our work has shown that stars have no problem making complex organic compounds under near-vacuum conditions," says Kwok. "Theoretically, this is impossible, but observationally we can see it happening."
Read more at: phys.org...
Originally posted by talklikeapirat
reply to post by Kali74
This sounds like they 'knew' what they would gonna find, before the mission even started....
Originally posted by talklikeapirat
“Right now the challenge is that past Martian landers haven’t seen any organic material whatsoever,” Pavlov said. “We know that organic molecules have to be there but we can’t find any of them in the soil.”
Interesting how the narrative has changed over time. Now organic molecules have to be there.
Originally posted by severdsoul
" some experts caution that the rover's finding may be overhyped. "
this is my guess,
every time they announce some great finding, it has turned out to be a dud...sure great discovery but not as ground shaking and over advertised as they build them up to be.
Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by boymonkey74
It's hard to imagine getting emotional about microbial life but I totally am. Even if it's not existing currently, if they have some strong evidence, enough to say these tiny things lived on Mars millions of years ago, I will be so emotional that I will cry. It's huge, if that's what this is. If it's only 'scientifically exciting' then meh, back to waiting... lol.