Curiousity Rover, update thread

[PB666]

Another update thread. This one is generally significant because it begins a more risky mission for curiousity.

Nasa link: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/nasa-mars-rover-curiosity-reaches-sand-dunes

So from 2012 to present,  curiousity has sampled interesting sites close to the lander, then moved in the direction of mount sharp moving through some of the basin formations and up the outcrops that form the visible base of mt Sharp, scaling these formations. The wheels have sufferred considerable damage and the surface rsistance that these wheels give bouyancy is looser substrates. These substrates have now come as the rover attempts to scale the sandy slopes of mount sharp beyond its base layers, i hope it brought a flag with it, if it makes the top the only thing it would leave as a marker is its hulk. 

[PB666]

http://www.nature.com/news/mars-contamination-fear-could-divert-curiosity-rover-1.20544?WT.ec_id=NEWS-20160908&spMailingID=52252265&spUserID=Njk3NjE5NzEwNjES1&spJobID=1001480448&spReportId=MTAwMTQ4MDQ0OAS2

Nutshell, rover is to avoid areas that might have water in an effort to prevent contamination.

I think it is incredibly unlikely, the salt concentration is probably way to salty and toxic minerals to allow earthen life to grow, but . . . . .

 

 

[Scotius]

I don't know...on Earth life pops out in some really ridiculous places (brine pools, acidic springs...insides of a nuclear reactor :P). And martian life, if there is any, certainly would have to be a tough nut.

[Camacha]

Somehow it feels rather counter productive to send a rover to a far away place, only to steer it away from something that could yield the discovery of the millenium. I have always felt that these calculations how stringently a space craft needs to be decontaminated are ridiculous. You should always prepare for the worst, since you are, by definition, heading into the unknown. This incident proves that wonderfully. Some sort of surprise shows up and suddenly we cannot investigate it further and risk contaminating a planet a such way that any evidence will be wiped away.

Yes, it will be very expensive and prohibitive in various fashions, but anything else is just an act to please our personal feelings.

[Vanamonde]

I respect their commitment to avoiding contamination, but it seems like an excess of caution to me. Life on earth has indeed adapted to extreme conditions, but evolution takes time to adjust, whereas any potential rover hitchhikers in this instance would be dumped straight into horribly inhospitable conditions, and the first generation would need to survive to propagate before evolution could begin its work. Besides which, anything that may have been on the rover when it left earth is almost certainly already dead after having been exposed to the conditions of the interplanetary transit and subsequent prolonged stay on Mars. Eh, but good on 'em for being ethical and responsible. 

[_Augustus_]

3 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

I respect their commitment to avoiding contamination, but it seems like an excess of caution to me. Life on earth has indeed adapted to extreme conditions, but evolution takes time to adjust, whereas any potential rover hitchhikers in this instance would be dumped straight into horribly inhospitable conditions, and the first generation would need to survive to propagate before evolution could begin its work. Besides which, anything that may have been on the rover when it left earth is almost certainly already dead after having been exposed to the conditions of the interplanetary transit and subsequent prolonged stay on Mars. Eh, but good on 'em for being ethical and responsible. 

Agreed. I really wish that they could investigate...

[katateochi]

26 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

I respect their commitment to avoiding contamination, but it seems like an excess of caution to me

and I'm sure they sprayed it with TardigRAID to make sure none of those cute little survivalists weren't on board before launch. I guess a tardigrade could possibly survive the trip, but I agree, it does seem like over the top caution. 

[Camacha]

52 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

I respect their commitment to avoiding contamination [...] Eh, but good on 'em for being ethical and responsible. 

They are not committed, ethical and responsible. If you apply some sort of calculation to it, which is mostly based on assumptions about stuff we just do not quite know, it becomes a lot of hocus pocus and handwaving. If you were serious about preventing contamination, you would decontaminate everything at a severe level, if not the most severe level. Anything else is careless and playing roulette. Drifting probes can end up in strange places when you are talking about cosmic time scales and circumstances on your goal body will be different than expected.

 

[PB666]

2 hours ago, Vanamonde said:

I respect their commitment to avoiding contamination, but it seems like an excess of caution to me. Life on earth has indeed adapted to extreme conditions, but evolution takes time to adjust, whereas any potential rover hitchhikers in this instance would be dumped straight into horribly inhospitable conditions, and the first generation would need to survive to propagate before evolution could begin its work. Besides which, anything that may have been on the rover when it left earth is almost certainly already dead after having been exposed to the conditions of the interplanetary transit and subsequent prolonged stay on Mars. Eh, but good on 'em for being ethical and responsible. 

Justifies a new super sterile mission.

Sterility however is defined by the lack of observable contamination.

[tater]

Cast in this light, The Martian is not a useful NASA recruiting tool, but a story of a planetary vandal who inoculates Mars with human fecal fauna.  

[Wjolcz]

All I need is more panoramas.

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, PB666 said:

Justifies a new super sterile mission.

Sterility however is defined by the lack of observable contamination.

Think the stuff they send to Mars is as sterile as they can get it. However you can not be 100% sure. rovers also have lots of moving parts making them extra hard to sterilize. 
As I understand the main issue is not that you spread earth life to Mars in it self but that you could conterminate future searches for life. 
However this would require an earth bacteria who would reproduce on mars as the few on the rover would be impossible to detect. 

[Camacha]

17 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Think the stuff they send to Mars is as sterile as they can get it.

They are not. The degree to which they are sterilized is depended on a complex calculation and quite a few assumptions. As my previous post indicated, this can only lead to trouble. It really is not a serious effort al all.

Also see planetary protection and the categories they employ.

[Mitchz95]

Would Curiosity even be capable of studying liquid water? I can't imagine it was designed with that possibility in mind.