• Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Previous

Next

Mars Rover Finds Finger of Rock That Points Toward Water

December 9, 2011, 10:25 am

Mars Opportunity rover

The Mars Opportunity rover

San Francisco—Their aging robot has an arthritic arm and some myopic sensors, minor infirmities that only heightened the boyish enthusiasm of two veteran scientists as they announced  on Wednesday that the Mars Opportunity rover was still going strong—and had discovered a rock on the Martian surface apparently created by liquid, moving water.

“I think this is the single most bulletproof observation we’ve made with this rover about liquid water,” said Steven W. Squyres, a professor of astronomy at Cornell University and lead investigator of the mission, at the American Geophysical Union meeting here. “Both the chemistry and the mineralogy both scream water.”

The word they are hollering is “gypsum,” which appears to be what the rock is made from, added his colleague Raymond E. Arvidson. “As groundwater comes up, the first thing to come out of would be gypsum,” said Arvidson, Opportunity’s deputy chief scientist and a professor of planetary science at Washington University in St. Louis.

Water on Mars, or evidence there was once water on Mars, is an ongoing quest for researchers because water means life, at least as far as we understand life. An article on a NASA Mars exploration web site begins “After Earth, Mars is the planet with the most hospitable climate in the solar system. So hospitable that it may once have harbored primitive, bacteria-like life.” But that theory depends on a warm, wet past with lakes and rivers. There’s nothing like that on cold Mars today. There’s some evidence of frozen ice. And the Mars Phoenix Lander kicked up a fuss in 2008 when it appeared to kick up water droplets on its landing struts, though that interpretation is still strongly disputed. So this thin finger of gypsum, a mineral on Earth that’s used for drywall and caps the blinding dunes of White Sands National Monument in New Mexico, beckons aluringly in a watery, life-sustaining  direction.

Homestake vein of rock

The "Homestake" vein of rock found by Mars Opportunity

Opportunity, the robot that landed on Mars in 2004, has been inching along a crater called Endeavor. It found this unusual vein, 16 to 20 inches long and a fingers-width wide, and set about figuring out what it was made of. Spectrometers and multi-filter cameras, instruments that analyze light and x-rays reflecting off an object, were deployed. Different minerals have different reflection patterns. This one indicated calcium and sulfur, in a ratio typically seen in gypsum, a form that’s heavily saturated with water molecules.

How did it get there? “Long ago,” speculated Squyres, “an impact hit this basalt crater. The energy from that impact may have produced hydrothermal activity” deep in the planet. “Later—a long time later—groundwater percolated up through the surface, and calcium and sulfur precipitated out.” Carried by the water up through these surface cracks, those minerals came together to form gypsum.

Gypsum signatures have been seen elsewhere on the planet, but never this pure and always at sites that lent themselves to non-watery explanations for its creation, such as particles blown together and compacted by wind. This vein, which the scientists have named Homestake, seems to be a narrow fracture where water once bubbled up.

The scientists plan to move Opportunity to the northern end of the crater to angle its solar panels towards the sun and maintain power as the rover prepares to weather the Martian winter. In the Martian spring, more vein prospecting is in order, but exactly what the robot will do depends on what it sees. “We’re going to do discovery-based science,” Squyres said, with a rover that has crawled 20 miles since it landed and is still prepared to be what the scientist called “a field geologist on Mars.”

(Images courtesy NASA – JPL)

This entry was posted in physical sciences. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • jbarman

    I’m considering suing my high school (from which I graduated in 1968). Unlike today’s enlightened schools, mine had a GPA upper-limit of 4.0. Accordingly, I was not able to overachieve and earn, say, a 4.66 or even a rather pedestrian 4.5. That short-sightedness caused me to barely earn a 3.0, thus precluding any chance I had of getting into the Ivy League school of my choice.

  • fairtest

    Very funny . . .until someone takes you up on the litigation theories (or sues the Chronicle because their lawsuit failed)

    FairTest feels left out because parents should be suing us for regularly demonstrating that their kids can get into many of the nation’s finest colleges and universities without wasting their time on the test coaching arms race. More than 200,000 unique visitors now access our free test-optional lists each year (http://fairtest.org/university/optional)

    Bob Schaeffer, Public Education Director
    FairTest: National Center for Fair & Open Testing

  • vatican

    This is too good to pass. These parents should also sue God for not allowing their kids to get into their school of choice!

  • sand6432

    What about suing their OB-GYN for not administering a pre-natal IQ test and beginning a regimen of nutritional supplements to stimulate the brain before birth? Or suing their own parents for not attending the chosen institution and creating the chance for a legacy admission? Or suing their child’s high school teachers for not teaching to the test so that their child can score high on AP tests? Or suing their child’s music teacher for not producing the prodigy that any institution would have to admit? There are endless possibilities here….—Sandy Thatcher

  • 11147066

    Mr. Hoover is our sanest, funniest and most thorough journalist of higher education. He should have Jacques Steinberg’s position at the New York Times.
    Emily

  • scunitz

    A colleague of mine who just had a child joked that he will be putting the baby’s high Apgar scores on his application to Harvard :)

  • cwinton

    Theater of the absurd … pity the poor child to have to live in a household with this kind of mother.

  • panacea

    Her suit against the OB GYN is unlikely to succeed if she didn’t breast feed, though. ;)

  • missoularedhead

    Can I go back and retroactively sue my schools because I didn’t get into an Ivy? Oh, wait…I didn’t apply to any.

  • http://okstate.academia.edu/JohnFoubert John D. Foubert, Ph.D.

    Well, shoot, my daughter’s Apgar was low when she was first born. I guess she is headed for the University of Phoenix. I’ll just throw in the towel now.

  • alexis_v

    Desperate social climbers we have with us always.

    Whenever a social consensus develops on what constitutes a high status credential, the vast majority of social climbers focus upon the same prize. Once an item becomes a token of power, status, and legitimacy, social climbers will desperately want it because they think that obtaining that token will give them power, status, and legitimacy.

    The big problem here is the U.S. News and World Report. I think its ranking system has done more to damage public education and promote a bias toward Ivy standards than any other factor. Its rankings are rigged and self-perpetuating, and may actually harm the Ivy League in the long run.

    The social power of rankings by the U.S. News and World Report ensures that colleges get sucked into a prestige-based rat race, a race they can never win because the race is biased to favor the “Big Three”. They also ensure that Ivy League colleges get swamped with applications from ruthless self-promoting snobs with ruthless social climbing mothers who live vicariously through their children. And this leads to another game, where colleges compete against one another on how many applications they reject.

    In theory, the most prestigious university ought to have a 100% rejection rate. As the theory goes, if it is impossible to get admitted to a university, it must be really good!

  • jffoster

    “The big problem here is the U.S. News and World Report. I think its ranking system has done more to damage public education and promote a bias toward Ivy standards than any other factor”

    That’s one of the things it’s meant to do.