The most *amazing* picture of Mars that I've ever seen!

[Yossarian]

what size does that pic need to be to fit nicely on a desktop?

 

[iamme]

Originally posted by: PipBoy
what size does that pic need to be to fit nicely on a desktop?

my LCD is 1280x1024. i resized the pic to 1280x1280 and set it to "tile" for my desktop background. the bottom is a little cut off, but it still looks nice

btw, what's wrong with the bottom of the Mars pic? is that just a shadow?

 

[matt426malm]

Originally posted by: Atlantean

Originally posted by: warcrow
Actually, a base on Mars doesnt make as much sense as a base on the Moon. Mars is *way* too cold for us to inhabit (not to mention the bad radiation we would be bombarded with), but there is nothing scientist could do that a rover (robot) could not -and its cheaper.

I'm interested in the Moon because of the mining opportunities it presents. The Moon has minerals that scientist say are one million times for powerful than coal (the name eludes me now, but it was mentioned in an issue of Time 2 weeks ago), and would be less harmful to the atmosphere. This is a good thing. They are also saying that there is enough of these minerals to sustain the US for 1000 years. This is probably why Bush jumped on the recent aumentation of NASAs budget.

-21 Celsius is too cold for humans to inhabit (I read that is the average temperature on mars)? I know people that live in Alaska and deal with colder temperatures than that. Isn't the moon in the -100's? Also the moon does not have much of an atmosphere and would not offer much shielding from radiation.

Mars Temps

moon- day 250F night and shadows -240F that is more extreme than Mars (Lowell Obsevartory site) but that is the soil.

moon has no atmosphere at all, Mars has 1/100 the atmosphere of Earth almost entirely CO2.

 

[PowerMacG5]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
Whoa.jpg

???!!

Has no one noticed this before??!!

(Not the bottom right corner)

Nice photochop.

 

[JoeKing]

I photochoped the missing corner in

 

[cpals]

Originally posted by: Joeyman
I photochoped the missing corner in

Could you get the bottom left?

 

[JoeKing]

Originally posted by: cpals

Originally posted by: Joeyman
I photochoped the missing corner in

Could you get the bottom left?

Done

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: warcrow
Actually, a base on Mars doesnt make as much sense as a base on the Moon. Mars is *way* too cold for us to inhabit (not to mention the bad radiation we would be bombarded with), but there is nothing scientist could do that a rover (robot) could not -and its cheaper.

I'm interested in the Moon because of the mining opportunities it presents. The Moon has minerals that scientist say are one million times for powerful than coal (the name eludes me now, but it was mentioned in an issue of Time 2 weeks ago), and would be less harmful to the atmosphere. This is a good thing. They are also saying that there is enough of these minerals to sustain the US for 1000 years. This is probably why Bush jumped on the recent aumentation of NASAs budget.

Moon Max Surface Temp: 123°C
Moon Min Surface Temp: -233°C
Mars Max Surface Temp: 20°C
Mars Min Surface Temp: -140°C

i love people that talk out of their ass. thanks for contributing!

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: matt426malm



Good luck finding life on Mars with a rover it will be sterilizd by UV at the surface. A (several hundered day) manned mission would do more than a 1000 rovers.

Why would you assume Martian life would be sterilized by UV rays?

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Hammer

i love people that talk out of their ass. thanks for contributing!

But at least it is warm in there...

 

[matt426malm]

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: matt426malm



Good luck finding life on Mars with a rover it will be sterilizd by UV at the surface. A (several hundered day) manned mission would do more than a 1000 rovers.

Why would you assume Martian life would be sterilized by UV rays?

It is pracitly unfiltered from the sun. We used UV lamps of simmilar intensity in the "goggles storage box" in my chemistry class to sterilize the goggles. Earth life would be killed instantly on the surface of Mars without protection so it is reasonable to think mars life would too. Life may have evolved to reflect the rays somehow but it would need quite a defense. If there is life on Mars I would bet it's underground.

 

[Abhi]

Thanks..

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

Originally posted by: matt426malm

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: matt426malm



Good luck finding life on Mars with a rover it will be sterilizd by UV at the surface. A (several hundered day) manned mission would do more than a 1000 rovers.

Why would you assume Martian life would be sterilized by UV rays?

It is pracitly unfiltered from the sun. We used UV lamps of simmilar intensity in the "goggles storage box" in my chemistry class to sterilize the goggles. Earth life would be killed instantly on the surface of Mars without protection so it is reasonable to think mars life would too. Life may have evolved to reflect the rays somehow but it would need quite a defense. If there is life on Mars I would bet it's underground.

Evidence of life and finding life are two different things.

 

[Richdog]

Stunning! Im going to get that printed and enlarged at work!

 

[matt426malm]

Originally posted by: yamahaXS

Originally posted by: matt426malm

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: matt426malm



Good luck finding life on Mars with a rover it will be sterilizd by UV at the surface. A (several hundered day) manned mission would do more than a 1000 rovers.

Why would you assume Martian life would be sterilized by UV rays?

It is pracitly unfiltered from the sun. We used UV lamps of simmilar intensity in the "goggles storage box" in my chemistry class to sterilize the goggles. Earth life would be killed instantly on the surface of Mars without protection so it is reasonable to think mars life would too. Life may have evolved to reflect the rays somehow but it would need quite a defense. If there is life on Mars I would bet it's underground.

Evidence of life and finding life are two different things.

Yah, we may find some fossils (bacterial) or evidence of past life metabolized chemicals at the surface but nothing currently living will be at the surface I'm betting. For currently living things it would need to be under the ground or in the crevices of rocks. The soil is not as likely because wind would blow it around and expose the microbe to the UV. Possibly some under ground hot springs, geothermal areas in Tharsis area. Based on that the lava flows there have 0 craters in some areas they are esstimated to be only a couple of millions of years old.

Possibly simmilar to the sulfur-metabolizing life on earth. Evidence of past life would be pretty facinating but a still living microbe likely won't be found and returned with a rover. It could give us a real insite into the range of possible life, something that evolved independently of Earth.

 

[ATLien247]

Originally posted by: matt426malm

Originally posted by: yamahaXS

Originally posted by: matt426malm

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: matt426malm



Good luck finding life on Mars with a rover it will be sterilizd by UV at the surface. A (several hundered day) manned mission would do more than a 1000 rovers.

Why would you assume Martian life would be sterilized by UV rays?

It is pracitly unfiltered from the sun. We used UV lamps of simmilar intensity in the "goggles storage box" in my chemistry class to sterilize the goggles. Earth life would be killed instantly on the surface of Mars without protection so it is reasonable to think mars life would too. Life may have evolved to reflect the rays somehow but it would need quite a defense. If there is life on Mars I would bet it's underground.

Evidence of life and finding life are two different things.

Yah, we may find some fossils (bacterial) or evidence of past life metabolized chemicals at the surface but nothing currently living will be at the surface I'm betting. For currently living things it would need to be under the ground or in the crevices of rocks. The soil is not as likely because wind would blow it around and expose the microbe to the UV. Possibly some under ground hot springs, geothermal areas in Tharsis area. Based on that the lava flows there have 0 craters in some areas they are esstimated to be only a couple of millions of years old.

Possibly simmilar to the sulfur-metabolizing life on earth. Evidence of past life would be pretty facinating but a still living microbe likely won't be found and returned with a rover. It could give us a real insite into the range of possible life, something that evolved independently of Earth.

You're still making assumptions that life on Mars would be carbon-based and/or not immune to UV radiation...

 

[matt426malm]

Originally posted by: ATLien247

Originally posted by: matt426malm

Originally posted by: yamahaXS

Originally posted by: matt426malm

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: matt426malm



Good luck finding life on Mars with a rover it will be sterilizd by UV at the surface. A (several hundered day) manned mission would do more than a 1000 rovers.

Why would you assume Martian life would be sterilized by UV rays?

It is pracitly unfiltered from the sun. We used UV lamps of simmilar intensity in the "goggles storage box" in my chemistry class to sterilize the goggles. Earth life would be killed instantly on the surface of Mars without protection so it is reasonable to think mars life would too. Life may have evolved to reflect the rays somehow but it would need quite a defense. If there is life on Mars I would bet it's underground.

Evidence of life and finding life are two different things.

Yah, we may find some fossils (bacterial) or evidence of past life metabolized chemicals at the surface but nothing currently living will be at the surface I'm betting. For currently living things it would need to be under the ground or in the crevices of rocks. The soil is not as likely because wind would blow it around and expose the microbe to the UV. Possibly some under ground hot springs, geothermal areas in Tharsis area. Based on that the lava flows there have 0 craters in some areas they are esstimated to be only a couple of millions of years old.

Possibly simmilar to the sulfur-metabolizing life on earth. Evidence of past life would be pretty facinating but a still living microbe likely won't be found and returned with a rover. It could give us a real insite into the range of possible life, something that evolved independently of Earth.

You're still making assumptions that life on Mars would be carbon-based and/or not immune to UV radiation...

Martian soil is rich in sulfer so if there are areas underground where ice is melted there are places where earth life could live. That makes a strong possiblity for Mars life.Sulfer-metabolizing life on earth

Well it would make sense to concentrate our efforts in areas that would give the best chance for any type of life to develop and live based on what we know, no? It is not just the UV rays directly, they also convert oxygen-containing rocks to so-called superoxides, bleach-like oxidants which burn up any organic material they touch. Given these conditions life would have some pretty strong odds to fight against. I'm not saying it is impossible but Earth's biology is really the only guide we have to look for life on Mars and that strongly leans towards no life on the surface.

Of course the surface soil should be checked too anyway, but my best guess is it's not on the surface. I'd be thrilled if we found silicon based life say. I have no idea what silicon based life would metabolize so I can't conject where it may live or anything about it.

Nature.com article on UV and oxides

 

[TheBoyBlunder]

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: Grey
It's Arrakis!

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Yucky/334.jpg[/q