NASA Press Conference At 1:PM EST Regarding Mars

[Axenos]

NASA will hold a press conference at 1:PM EST today to disclose new scientific findings. NASA's web site calls them significant.

Initial heads-up stolen directly from Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy page @ www.badastronomy.com.

Thank's Phil!

So what's it gonna be? Nifty new rocks? Big black monolith? Alien ice machine? You decide... :)

[The_Fire]

Free flowing water?

[richardm]

Trouble is, NASA are always promising Significant New Findings but quite often fail to deliver. Everyone hopes for evidence of life or free-flowing water or whatever, but "Significant" things can include an unusually fine patch of sand or that the Mars Polar Lander team have finally solved the clue for 32-down that they've been trying to get in their spare time.

I would so love it to be something truly exciting, but I fear the worst.

[Loss Leader]

I assume the significant finding will be: "NASA Still Relevant. Tell Your Democratic Congressman We Were Rooting For Them The Whole Time."

[bob_kark]

I'll bet Quaid finally managed to activate that martian terraforming gizmo.

[Axenos]

I'll bet Quaid finally managed to activate that martian terraforming gizmo.

Thanks for that laugh. :D :D :D

[Cello Man]

This better not be some viral marketing ploy for the new Transformers movie.

Come on NASA. You guys landed on the moon, for crying out loud. Please let this actually be something important. I really want to trust that the space program can live up to its astronomical potential.

(crosses fingers)

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

This ought to be like the opening credits of a film like Independence Day, but I suspect they will only have discovered that Mars is reddish in colour and quite cold.

Let's see...

[R.Mackey]

Trouble is, NASA are always promising Significant New Findings but quite often fail to deliver. Everyone hopes for evidence of life or free-flowing water or whatever, but "Significant" things can include an unusually fine patch of sand or that the Mars Polar Lander team have finally solved the clue for 32-down that they've been trying to get in their spare time.

I would so love it to be something truly exciting, but I fear the worst.
The smart money says that it'll be findings of surface water by Mars Odyssey (or the now silent Mars Global Surveyor and/or the new Mars Reconaissance Orbiter).

http://www.nasawatch.com/ is a good site for rumour and internal leaks, in general, though be advised the site owner has a pronounced bias. Nothing wrong with that, of course.


Disclaimer, I work for NASA, but I have no unusual insight into any Mars mission. All opinions here mine alone. Carry on.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

As long as it doesn't involve an impending ELE, it's cool.

[Spindrift]

I think this is may be the discovery:

http://www.fffast.com/mars/mars_woman.jpg

(I think I finally found my avatar!)

[bob_kark]

Wow, martian chicks are... Sooooo hot!!

[Axenos]

Spindrift, I just ate and it doesn't digest well when I laugh. That pic is hysterical! :D :D

[Cello Man]

Well, it's a few minutes until noon here in Central Time, which means that 1:00 PM Eastern is soon approaching. Let's keep our eyes peeled.

[Dragon]

Free flowing water?Yes, according to the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=420833&in_page_id=1770).

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Yes, according to the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=420833&in_page_id=1770).
Confirmed: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/main/index.html

ETA: Full story here : http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/news/mgs-20061206.html

[bob_kark]

This may be it:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/news/mgs-20061206.html

Seems water may still be flowing on Mars. I suppose The_Fire wins.

ETA: Oh come on!

[Cello Man]

Here it is on NASA's site:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/news/mgs-20061206.html

A very interesting quote from the above story:

"These fresh deposits suggest that at some places and times on present-day Mars, liquid water is emerging from beneath the ground and briefly flowing down the slopes. This possibility raises questions about how the water would stay melted below ground, how widespread it might be, and whether there's a below-ground wet habitat conducive to life. Future missions may provide the answers."

[Cello Man]

Boy, I'm just dragging today.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

:monkey: :mdance: :monkey2: :monkeyr: :mrocks :monkey4:

[Pipirr]

Sweet, alien ice machine.

[Boo]

Perhaps, one day, I shall look at my grandchildren and tell them that I remember the day we found out about the water on Mars that made the colony they are moving to, possible.


My fear is that this will be used by some as justification to continue enviromental irresponsibility, afterall, we can just move to Mars.



Boo

[Steve]

Speculation:
The Martian cities are all underground and they periodically flush their wastes to the surface? Kind of like an inverted septic field. :eek:

[Loss Leader]

Seems water may still be flowing on Mars. I suppose The_Fire wins.

ETA: Oh come on!

This is just like that whole Martian bacteria thing. It's not going to pan out.

[Overman]

Goodbye cruel world I'm going to Mars!!!!

[CurtC]

Actually, I think the differences in those photos are more likely where all our spacecraft have been crashing.

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Goodbye cruel world I'm going to Mars!!!!

Er, I think that should be "Hello, cruel world. I'm coming to Mars"

[Enlightenment]

What is most interesting to me is the process of how this water is being heated below the crust. One of the scientists at the press conference exclaimed that these water flows were not happening around any volcanic areas. Sooooo, what's going on? Something is heating the water...

[Loss Leader]

What is most interesting to me is the process of how this water is being heated below the crust. One of the scientists at the press conference exclaimed that these water flows were not happening around any volcanic areas. Sooooo, what's going on? Something is heating the water...

More likely, nothing is heating the water because there is no water to be heated.

[pgwenthold]

How close is the working Mars rover?

[Marc L]

Perhaps, one day, I shall look at my grandchildren and tell them that I remember the day we found out about the water on Mars that made the colony they are moving to, possible.


My fear is that this will be used by some as justification to continue enviromental irresponsibility, afterall, we can just move to Mars.



Boo


It'd be awhile before we can really use that justification. Even if Mars has flowing water, it would still need to be terraformed.

Marc

[The_Fire]

Yes, according to the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=420833&in_page_id=1770).

Confirmed: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/main/index.html

ETA: Full story here : http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/news/mgs-20061206.html

This may be it:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/news/mgs-20061206.html

Seems water may still be flowing on Mars. I suppose The_Fire wins.

ETA: Oh come on!

I would like my million in small bills, please :D.

[R.Mackey]

More likely, nothing is heating the water because there is no water to be heated.

So, out of curiosity, what is your basis for this statement?

We have pretty strong evidence that there was water at or near the surface for long periods of time. Now we have photographs that seem to indicate recent fluid phenomena at the surface. If it isn't water, then how would you explain the photographs?

No, this isn't proof, but I think it's a pretty decent hypothesis.

[Loss Leader]

So, out of curiosity, what is your basis for this statement?

We have pretty strong evidence that there was water at or near the surface for long periods of time. Now we have photographs that seem to indicate recent fluid phenomena at the surface. If it isn't water, then how would you explain the photographs?

No, this isn't proof, but I think it's a pretty decent hypothesis.

The basis for my statement is my knowledge of politics, history, unblinded emotion and geology.

Politically, NASA is an institution looking for a budget. It must convince lawmakers to give it money in order to survive. Recently, I don't know if you heard, there was a turnover of the congress to a group that has promised fiscal discipline and realistic budgets. "Prestige" agencies like NASA don't tend to fare well in economically tough times. Looking to demonstrate its relevence to the new lawmakers, NASA is pressed to come up with some sort of interesting discovery - any sort of interesting discovery, really.

Historically, the relationship between humans and Mars has roughly been the same as the relationship between southerners and the Atlanta Braves. Mars has always been looked at with hopefull eyes. Possibly because it is tantalizingly close, people have projected their desires for alien contact onto that planet. From the canals of Mars (widely believed by respectable scientists of the day) to the bacteria fossils, the study of Mars has been one of great initial excitement that never quite pans out. Just like the Braves, you will never go broke betting against Mars.

Emotionally, the scientists involved in this study had great reason to want their conclusions to be true. I do not doubt their training, skill or sincerity. But there is a reason experiments are double-blinded - one's expectations will bias one's judgment. These scientists wanted their discovery to be cool for their own careers, for their own egos and just because it makes the job more enjoyable.

Geologically, there appears to be no mechanism for keeping water warm under the surface of the planet near the observed phenomena. There is no volcanic activity in the area. Mars is geologically moribund. There is also very little opportunity for liquid water to exist in the arid Martian atmosphere. It would evaporate instantly. Maybe you could get some ice from the south pole but that is the extent to which water still exists on that planet.

Please do not take anything I've written as an indictment of NASA or of these particular scientists. Dollar for dollar, it is by far my favorite government agency of all time.

[R.Mackey]

The basis for my statement is my knowledge of politics, history, unblinded emotion and geology.

Politically, NASA is an institution looking for a budget. It must convince lawmakers to give it money in order to survive. Recently, I don't know if you heard, there was a turnover of the congress to a group that has promised fiscal discipline and realistic budgets.
Yeah. I work for NASA, so I'm agonizingly familiar with the budget cycles, politics, and the alleged "turnover" and house-cleaning.

The current Mars announcement does not, to me, stink of political motivation. The announcement concerns data from Mars Global Surveyor, which is ten years old and now probably dead. If it's hype, why not hype the brand-new Mars Reconaissance Orbiter? If it's a ploy for budget money, why is it not coordinated with any big-ticket NASA items already proposed?

Quite the opposite, the fact that it comes from an old warhorse suggests that they've probably been sitting on the data for a little while and have had time for a few checks.

Mars has always been looked at with hopefull eyes. Possibly because it is tantalizingly close, people have projected their desires for alien contact onto that planet. From the canals of Mars (widely believed by respectable scientists of the day) to the bacteria fossils, the study of Mars has been one of great initial excitement that never quite pans out.
Hmm. I don't know about it "never panning out."

Mars is a favorite target for NASA-JPL (my center) to the point of distraction, something that has cost JPL dearly in the last few years, but it's because of some good reasons. First, Mars is close, and has enough atmosphere that landing robotic missions there is relatively inexpensive, in some cases cheaper even than a Moon mission. Second, it's arguably more interesting that any other place we've ever flown to -- certainly more fun than Venus or the Moon. Third, while we can rule out intelligent life anywhere in our Solar system other than Earth, we can't rule out microbiotic life in several places. I won't argue whether the odds of life on Mars is 1 in 10 or 1 in 1010 because I don't have a clue, but if you only gave me one choice of where to look, Mars is where I'd look.

Emotionally, the scientists involved in this study had great reason to want their conclusions to be true. I do not doubt their training, skill or sincerity. But there is a reason experiments are double-blinded - one's expectations will bias one's judgment. These scientists wanted their discovery to be cool for their own careers, for their own egos and just because it makes the job more enjoyable.
Independent review is a good thing. I'll certainly agree the pictures are not proof of liquid water, and I'd still agree even if I was a planetary scientist instead of an AI researcher. Still, your claim that "It's not going to pan out" is premature. It might, and it might not. We have no evidence that these scientists are prone to poor or premature judgments, so give them the benefit of the doubt.

And even if it isn't water, the results are still very interesting.

Geologically, there appears to be no mechanism for keeping water warm under the surface of the planet near the observed phenomena. There is no volcanic activity in the area. Mars is geologically moribund. There is also very little opportunity for liquid water to exist in the arid Martian atmosphere. It would evaporate instantly. Maybe you could get some ice from the south pole but that is the extent to which water still exists on that planet.
One way in which Mars has panned out is that we now have strong evidence that surface water was present, for long periods of time, over wide areas of the surface. The Big Question has changed from "Is there water on Mars?" to "Where did it go??"

That's pretty huge.

We know the water didn't escape into space, and it's unlikely that it all changed chemically. The water seen in the ice caps doesn't appear sufficient. It's vaguely like the hunt for Dark Matter -- it's around somewhere, but we can't see it.

So, again, maybe this is a clue to where it went. Maybe not. Still, there is definitely some activity in that region. So the claim that it is "geologically moribund" is directly contradicted by these photographs. Don't you want to understand what's going on? I do.

Please do not take anything I've written as an indictment of NASA or of these particular scientists. Dollar for dollar, it is by far my favorite government agency of all time.
No insult taken, not at all. I have to be careful given my position, so please refer to my disclaimer below before reading further. Anyway, I will be the last person to say that NASA's activities are not largely politically driven, and there is always potential for early interpretations to be wrong. NASA is a troubled agency, as you can read in an editorial (http://www.slate.com/id/2155164/) published today, or almost daily on NASA Watch (http://www.nasawatch.com/). Indeed, the latter site demonstrates just how uncoordinated this announcement was ("How To Spread Great News at NASA: Send The Media Somewhere Else"), so it should relieve you of any concern that NASA is trying to pull a fast one on the public.

In short, the jury is definitely still out on this, but we have indisputably discovered another mystery on Mars. I also agree with the researchers that this could be a sign of long-lost Martian water. This is good work, plain and simple. Nothing wrong with caution, but there's no reason to be unduly pessimistic.

DISCLAIMER: All opinions are mine alone. I do not represent NASA, JPL, or any space Mission. This post contains no technical data, analysis, or opinions that do not exist in the public domain. If you haven't called your mother lately, perhaps you should.

[Dazed]

If you haven't seen this picture you really must get a look.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/164007main_PIA09028_c.jpg

The geology of the region makes me doubt that thing has anything to do with liquid water, but I'm no NASA scientist.

[Loss Leader]

Nothing wrong with caution, but there's no reason to be unduly pessimistic.

Clearly you know nothing about the Atlanta Braves.

[R.Mackey]

I'm reasonably certain that none of the Atlanta Braves are employed by NASA. :)