[meteorite-list] WG: NASA Phoenix Lander Bakes Sample, Arm Digs Deeper

From: Martin Altmann <altmann_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:35:03 +0200
Message-ID: <012801c8d18b$2b7c60d0$177f2a59_at_name86d88d87e2>

Hmm,

not so updated....
http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/

No you missed the point... the SNC are in the same way "the beef" as the
results of the orbiters and rovers.
They add important information.
No one expects to find the philosopher's stone in an SNC, as noone in turn
would the Mars rovers expect to meet the king of Mars...

A geologist in general can access the objects of his studies in most cases.
On other planets it's different.
Remote exploration from the orbit can't replace the examination of the stuff
in the labs.
The rovers have a radius of a few miles, Phoenix is stationary - both can't
dig deeply..

Look, why are the lunaites so important? Because some of them represent
rocks, which weren't sampled by the astronauts, nor by the Luna-probes. They
are from different sources, different depths ect.
They help to complete the mosaic.

(I guess that's also the motivation for people skidding around for decades
in cold Antarctica...).

(How many of the hits are indeed by Nasa, and how many are results of the
Life in Mars meteorite ALH-debate?)

Best!
Martin

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von
mexicodoug at aim.com
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2008 22:24
An: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] WG: NASA Phoenix Lander Bakes Sample,Arm Digs
Deeper

"to me the space agencies seem to be like, like...
let's say marine biologists, who tell yaaah let's built one fancy diving
robot after the other, we like marine organisms, fishes and stuff!
But water? Why should be water interesting for us, what has water to do
with
our subcject???"

Hi Martin,

I would modify that example for the Marine Biologist parody, I would
say you are asking much of a few distorted 1.3 billion year old catfish
fossils from the same brood, and a single 4 billion year old distorted
fossil shark's tooth. And then from that, hoping to extrapolate how
the entire oceanic and riparian ecosystems evolved to be what they are
today on Earth.

A geologist (or Areologist) is usually interested in studying the
context of his find. Like you, I am a strong supporter of the study of
SNC's and of space missions. Happily, a Google of the terms: Mars
meteorite NASA gave aboout 144,000 hits and the three terms Mars
Meteorite ESA gave about 31,000 hits.

For comparison a Google of the two terms: Mars meteorite gave only
193,000 hits.

It would seem to me that the space agencies are not so mute on Mars
meteorites as you would say! Unless of course, those are all Martinoid
complaints ...

Like a fish in a fishbowl, you are, not able to perceive it is floating
in water, water everywhere ... Science has thankfully analyzed the
heck out of the Mars meteorites we have and there are many experts in
our midst who have done that who owe a portion of their livelyhood to
NASA grants.

If any commercial hatcheries can propose how to prepare some delicious
catfish in a way not already tried, please propose it to researchers
(many of whom have financial ties to NASA or the ESA) and I am certain
someone will buy up all the catfish needed to learn anything new.
Meanwhile, you gotta be pretty amazed at the wonderful science going on
as the geological context of Mars is unwrapped piece by piece, in situ
and in real time. That doesn't mean we all can't stand to enjoy a bit
more catfish from time to time, hopefully to be washed down with a
healthy portion of what is discovered by the thirst for more knowledge.

And between me and you and the wall, if given the opportunity to
control a spacecraft from another planet to explore its geological
structure, vs. buy the same delicious catfish and shark's tooth from
reputable local meteorite battered fish & chips joint, and hope to
discover a modern Martian cephalopod complete in its whole life cycle
and environment falling out of the Mass Spec machine as a result, well,
I'd have my activity preference ... :)

Best wishes,
Doug




-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Altmann <altmann at meteorite-martin.de>
To: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 1:47 pm
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] WG: NASA Phoenix Lander Bakes Sample, Arm
Digs Deeper



Hi Larry,

without any doubt! I didn't tell, that we shouldn't fly to Mars or that
we
shouldn't send space probes there, there was no "instead of".
In fact I'm a great fan of planetary missions, and not least the Viking
missions had a certain contribution, that I have now my own Mars :-)

I'm only always baffled, that the space agencies aren't interested in
SNCs
at all! I mean, you see, the methods and devices to analyze rocks in
situ on
a different planet are limited. It is expensive to send robots there
and the
risk of failure is high.
If I'm interested in exploring Mars, why should I then do the research
without the samples from Mars I have already here on Earth, where I
have no
risks to take, which are thousands and thousands times cheaper, then the
sniff a rover can take of a rock on the surface of Mars, and - which is
most
important -, whereon I can apply my whole arsenal of techniques and
methods
in my lab?

Remember back, why NASA built up before Apollo a reference collection of
Moon-like rocks, why Shoemaker trained the astronauts in th Ries Crater
to
pick up the right stuff?
See.
And there they had the problem, that NO lunar rock was known on Earth at
that time.

Now to have all those Mars missions, but to ignore the SNC meteorites,
Well Larry, to me the space agencies seem to be like, like...
let's say marine biologists, who tell yaaah let's built one fancy diving
robot after the other, we like marine organisms, fishes and stuff!
But water? Why should be water interesting for us, what has water to do
with
our subcject???

Well, and if I read, that ESA spends funds in collecting Earth-rocks,
which
are similar to Mars rocks, and is studying them in their labs...
Larry, what would be the outcome, if there would be a poll:
Hey German taxpayer: ESA wants to learn about Mars rocks, shall they
spend
the 3$, each of you is paying to ESA each year, for sending people
around
the globe, to collect earthly stones to analyse them,
or shall they rather buy for your money real Mars rocks, which would
cost
the same?

Hmmmmmmmmm.......

Martin Doe

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von
lebofsky at lpl.arizona.edu
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2008 20:04
An: Martin Altmann
Cc: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] WG: NASA Phoenix Lander Bakes Sample, Arm
Digs
Deeper

Hello Martin:

But there are several reasons for going there:

1. You actually know where the sample came from (not true for the
meteorite).

2. To get a meteorite takes a little energy, so "stuff happens" to a
Mars
rock that does not happen to a pristine soil sample on Mars.

3. If you are looking for water (or water ice or carbon dioxide ice) as
part of an initial search for life on Mars, again, you need to know
where
your sample has come from and that it has not been bashed by an impact,
been in space for a few million years, gone through Earth's atmosphere,
and then sat on Earth for some unknown length of time.

Ideally, you want to get samples from a number of places and bring them
back to Earth, but that gets a little more expensive. And you are up
against ICAMSR (International Committee against Mars Sample Return)
(those
Mars bugs are going to get you).

For your information, the Mars rovers cost just over $800 million
(build a
second for about half the cost of one). The "next generation" Mars
lander,
Mars Science Laboratory, is running $1.2 billion (20% over budget) and
behind schedule. This is problem since nothing can be done to get Mars
to
wait for the Lab to get launched. If it cannot be launched on time,
there
is a delay of something like 18 months for the next opportunity.


In this respect, Phoenix is cheap.

Larry

On Wed, June 18, 2008 8:57 am, Martin Altmann wrote:
>

> Hmm Sterling,
>
>
> assumed that I'm not so intelligent, I have a question, which is
> bothering me: aside from the achievements and recoveries such a
mission
> like the Phoenix lander means,
> I wonder - well how shall I say - but given the $386,000,000 and not
to
> mention, what for means a successful sample-return-mission would
consume
> -
> I wonder why NASA is not interested in baking Martian soils and rocks
from
> many different places on Mars in terrestrial ovens for let's say
$30,000
> or something around that sum, (Hey NASA has an a n n u a l budget
of
> $17,000,000,000
> All SNCs found so far would cost, let's say
> $40,000,000
> to make all happy) and I wonder whether the American taxpayer would
agree
> more to such an expense.
>
> Strange in my blear eyes is too, that ESA is sending out employees to
far
> corners of the World, to collect terrestrial analogs to Martian
rocks to
> analyse and research them, but on the other hand they have no
reference
> collection of Martian meteorites to work on, although such a
collection
> currently would cost them less, then the plane tickets for the guys
sent
> to collect Martian look-a-likes.
>
> In my na?ve point of view, I was thinking, that it could be a
fundamental
> and elemental building block of scientific exploration of Planet
Mars to
> investigate that matter, those rocks from there, we already have
here on
> Earth?
> (as told, maybe I'm to stupid.. but on the other hand, perhaps the
quality
> of the training and schooling of those guys at NASA, IAXA, ESA had a
few
> gaps, so that they simply don't know, that we already do have some
> Martian
> rocks here on Earth? At least I think it is problematical to
propagate the
> scientific mandate of these organizations to explore Planet Mars and
the
> necessity of those hefty expenses, but to neglect that simple and
> cost-efficient, but nevertheless very important domain of researching
the
> Martian meteorites - it isn't plausible to public in no way, happily
> most of the taxpayers don't know, that there exist meteorites from
Mars,
> hehe).
>
> See you all in Ensiheim!
> Martin
>
>
>
>
> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von
> Sterling
> K. Webb
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2008 08:52
> An: Pete Shugar; Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com;
mexicodoug at aim.com
> Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] NASA Phoenix Lander Bakes Sample,Arm
Digs
> Deeper
>
>
> Hi, Pete, List,
>
>
> This mission was named Phoenix in recognition
> of the fact that like the mythical Phoenix, it rose from the ashes of
the
> dead! Once upon a time, there were two Mars missions that died: the
2001
> Mars Surveyor
> lander was cancelled in 2000, and the Mars Polar Lander was lost on
Mars
in
> 1999.
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>


______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Wed 18 Jun 2008 05:35:03 PM PDT