Jump to content

Mars Rover Perseverance Discussion Thread


cubinator
 Share

Recommended Posts

Some of those spacecraft "bits" have landed near places of geologic interest that might be near the rover's path...I wonder if they'd be able to pay a visit to the parachute and descent stage, or the heat shield. (Skycrane seems to be somewhat in the middle of some dunes, so probably not worth the risk.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want the real science!! Gosh waiting is so hard. I want that sweet sweet geological info. I want that data download...

 

I wish they would livestream the scientists all talking about the pictures as they come in. That would be awesome.

 

Gaahh i want it!!

 

Ok.. i can suppress my emotion now. For a bit at least..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moving this discussion over here from me getting jiggy with the wrong thread:  Question is, effectively, why they chose this location rather than the canyons to the west of where Viking 1 landed.

 

13 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Do we know where Percy is?

 

13 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

landing-site-mars-mission.jpg?__blob=nor

 

10 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

So - I spent some time looking at the Isidis Basin - and there's a lot to be excited about by that site.  I'm wondering, however (having scanned around a bit) why something in the Chryse Planitia wasn't chosen.    The Kasei channels look like they had much greater (and probably earlier) hydro features.

Kasei Valles topolabled - Chryse Planitia - Wikipedia

 

Anyone know if there are any planned missions going here?

Those channels to the west of Viking 1 look like a long-term water feature, and one that would have originated from precipitation at the nearby high elevations... seems to me that if we are looking for evidence of wet Mars / life... a long established watershed feature might be better than what looks like an impact-driven melt/flow that occurred after Mars lost most of its atmosphere (Jezero Crater flow features).

Edited by JoeSchmuckatelli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They think Jezero used to be filled with a lake.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jezero_(crater)

' (/ˈjɛzər/)[1] is a crater on Mars located at 18.38°N 77.58°E[2] in the Syrtis Major quadrangle. The diameter of the crater is about 49.0 km (30.4 mi). Thought to have once been flooded with water, the crater contains a fan-delta deposit rich in clays.[3] The lake in the crater was present when valley networks were forming on Mars. Besides having a delta, the crater shows point bars and inverted channels. From a study of the delta and channels, it was concluded that the lake inside the crater probably formed during a period in which there was continual surface runoff.[4]'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SuperFastJellyfish said:

They think Jezero used to be filled with a lake.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jezero_(crater)

' (/ˈjɛzər/)[1] is a crater on Mars located at 18.38°N 77.58°E[2] in the Syrtis Major quadrangle. The diameter of the crater is about 49.0 km (30.4 mi). Thought to have once been flooded with water, the crater contains a fan-delta deposit rich in clays.[3] The lake in the crater was present when valley networks were forming on Mars. Besides having a delta, the crater shows point bars and inverted channels. From a study of the delta and channels, it was concluded that the lake inside the crater probably formed during a period in which there was continual surface runoff.[4]'

Oh I get that.

Let me invite you to look at this:  The topography of Jezero crater – landing site of NASA's Mars 2020 mission - DLR Portal  - the 'false color' image of Jezero.

Specifically, focus on the Neretva Vallis.  The Neretva Vallis, in this picture, is the riverbed like structure to the far left of the image.  The delta sediments in the crater which everyone is interested in flowed into the lake from here.  If you look to the terrain on any side of the smooth bottom of the creek / river / glacier bed, you will see significant cratering.  Cratering that does not exist on the bed of the feature.  This tells me that the area was subject to significant cratering before the liquid (whether liquid water, water ice/glacier, or carbon dioxide ice -- or some mix thereof) flowed and cut the bed into the surrounding rock.  For that cratering to happen, Mars already had to have shed the significant portion of its atmosphere that would have protected the surface from impacts.  So when the impact event that created Jezero Crater occurred, Mars was already dry and subject to intense cratering.  

Thus, what it looks like to me, is that Jezero is an event that liquidated / liberated subterranean (water, ice, or CO2 ice) from the surrounding terrain that then flowed, cut through the rock, creating the Neretva Vallis and filling the 'lake' --- but that kind of event would not result in 'a vibrant ecosystem' where we might find signs of life (beyond, maybe, bacteria).  I suggest the liquid was subterranean not only because of the cratering - but also because there's not a significant nearby mountain range or high plateau that would force atmospheric vapor to precipitate (resulting in surface runoff).

 

On the other hand - the Kasei Channels look like they come from an area where atmospheric vapor might well have precipitated, and look like surface water flows could have created them... I presume the structure to be significantly older than Jezero's Neretva Vallis.  And given the elevation map above... they look like a more likely location to search for ancient 'wet Mars' evidence.

Edited by JoeSchmuckatelli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brikoleur said:

Very interesting, in-depth article about how Perseverance got to where it is. NASA are clearly better than I am at pinpoint atmospheric landings... and they do it with n-body physics enabled!

https://jalopnik.com/how-nasas-perseverance-landed-on-mars-an-aerospace-eng-1846332411

That was an incredible read.  Thank you! 

 

Also answered my question above 

'spacecraft orbiting mars have detected carbonate molecules in the area. Carbonate molecules are made when carbon dioxide reacts with water and rocks. This is exciting because, on Earth, carbonate molecules that precipitate out of the water in lakes and oceans are known to trap evidence of microbial life. '

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I caught a glimpse of this during the tribute montage at the end of the briefing that I linked to above. I'm surprised it didn't make bigger headlines (it impresses me, anyway):

The cliff face on the left (The Eiger's North Face in Switzerland) that the red Perseverance logo is projected onto is over 5000 vertical feet high.  All three peaks that have images projected onto them (The Eiger, Jungfrau and Mönch) exceed 13,000 feet (~4000m) in height. This would have been quite the sight to see!

94368.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PakledHostage said:

I caught a glimpse of this during the tribute montage at the end of the briefing that I linked to above. I'm surprised it didn't make bigger headlines (it impresses me, anyway):

The cliff face on the left (The Eiger's North Face in Switzerland) that the red Perseverance logo is projected onto is over 5000 vertical feet high.  All three peaks that have images projected onto them (The Eiger, Jungfrau and Mönch) exceed 13,000 feet (~4000m) in height. This would have been quite the sight to see!

94368.jpg

This reminds me of my visit to Switzerland. I spent two nights in a hotel in Mürren. Nice little mountain town. Very cool to have a view of the Eiger (not this side of it) from my hotel room window.

Edited by mikegarrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2021 at 4:12 AM, Lewie said:

Hearing the wind blowing on Mars...

Sounds just like on Earth, but still managed to send shivers down my spine....

It's great that we have made such progress in technology. But why is the sound of the wind the same as on Earth? The atmosphere is thinner. Shouldn't this somehow affect the sounds? Shouldn't sound travel faster?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Ethan13 said:

It's great that we have made such progress in technology. But why is the sound of the wind the same as on Earth? The atmosphere is thinner. Shouldn't this somehow affect the sounds? Shouldn't sound travel faster?

I couldn't really tell a difference, to me it sounded a lot like wind on earth (when heard on a mic) 

But yeah, the leaps and bounds man kind has made....it gives you hope for our future, y'know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe I already mentioned this, but you are not hearing "the sound of the wind", really. You are almost certainly hearing the turbulence being self-generated by the microphone as the wind blows across it.

Since the length scale is the same (determined by the microphone geometry), the noise sounds pretty much the same.

At least, that's how I interpreted what I was hearing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...