I always hear about all my science updates on twitter and then you guys come update the youtube world like a day later and it's kind of a funny thing to see. I get to have nostalgia on NASA updates every Friday.
Frank Schneider Oh your one of them... If people like you had ran the world progress would come to a standstill. Are you paid to nay say every progressive argument?
Captain Raz WOOOOTT . I thought he had just about enough of that place the first time round . . . . . . . . . Oh w8 . . . . . Oh crap. . . . . . Are you saying “That was just a movie ? . . . . 😂🤣😤
Scishow Space/Math question: How many rover/explorer missions does it take before it was cheaper/faster/better to just send a manned mission (assuming, of course, we had the tech to get them there, ability to do the job for 6ish months and get them back relatively safely)?
Thank you for making that clear. As I heard the story on the news I was thinking 'no, organic is not equal to life!' You'd think they'd run it past a scientist *first*!
Actually we should be happy that the the headlines were not more like "Plan of alien invader from Mars to attack Earth discovered", but I could easily imagine Fox News turning out a statement like that.
Hi, I really need to know. Do all life needs water? Could another liquid do? Like lets say a planet is too hot and it's not possible for it to have water. Couldn't there be another heat resistant liquid that functions well enough to support life like water does?
It would also need a replacement for DNA, proteins, and RNA because those denture when it's really hot. Maybe it is possible, but the chance of them getting in a nice combination to form a living cell seems much more difficult when you consider the fact it will also have to have a liquid that can move in and out of the cell while not allowing bigger molecules that would be sugar and lipids, or their replacements for hot atmospheres, would not be able to enter as easily. So, it's a big not not not not not NOT likely
The rover will be like "bop beep boop.... I found a little bit of snot!". And all the scientists of the world will be like "OOoooo.... look.... a little bit of snot!"
WarmWeatherGuy Yep yr right, but perhaps they are more wary this time because of the ballsup they had on the Moon (a rock was lifted up and in the reflection of his helmet you saw the following . . . . “MADE IN CHINA” . . . 😫
Toluene alone means either ancient life-beds such as make petroleum deposits, or that abiotic oil production is active due to extremely high heat/pressure near the surface. It's very volatile and easily breaks down (used on earth as high grade jet/race fuel and solvent) and will not just hang around for billions of years in the open on its own. Toluene production close enough to the surface to show up in such a shallow drill site suggests ongoing life-byproducts, because otherwise it would have to be leaching up from mature petroleum deposits thousands of meters below ground level -- either way, a massive indicator of present or former life.
It would be surprising if scientist find a message saying we actually lived on Mars and ruined it and then moved to earth when we exhausted all of Mars resources.
Imagine what would change if we dig in Mars and find that some km below the surface, there are living creatures producing methane and going to sleep in the winter.
It might be a stupid question but wouldn't it be interesting to study the methane that was released to see if it has clues on what created it? Maybe some other compounds produced and released along with it or, for instance, if it was produced by some sort of micro organism it would be possible that part of it gets trapped and released together with the gas.
from 3:00 to 3:36 I was hoping at 3:36 he would have said "Which. Unfortunately. Was when they realized... they had scooped up a small group of living insects. This would have been great news, but ... Obviously... this procedure kill them. All of them. However this find was still exciting and they continued to search the entire surface of mars for more of these unidentified living insects, but soon realized that the place they were extracted from and killed... was the only habitable spot left on Mars for them to live. In the future, we will have to be more careful about the ways we use to process alien soils, so that we don't repeat this mistake. Thanks for watching this episode of SciShow Space. If you would like to keep following the latest... ... ... ..."
There still is a sandstorm and it is going to be worse than any that opportunity has been in so far. It is currently in an emergency power saving mode to try and wait it out.
I think there's plenty of life on Mars right now, or rather IN Mars, deep in its crust where it's warmer, wetter and well protected from the harsh surface environment. There's plenty of life or this type deep in Earth's crust, some estimates putting the biomass in the crust on par with the more familiar one growing on the surface. There's no reason that similar creatures could not be just as abundant deep under the martian surface.
Absolutely plausible. I wouldn't think it's 100% certain but I'd say that higher than 50% chance: water, organics, protected from radiation under the soil? That means life-as-we-know-it in my evolutionary textbook, just that probably unicellular but life anyhow.
I think so too. Life doesn't give up, and since there is methane which varies seasonally it seems like a good indicator. I don't buy the "unknown chemistry" excuse. But then I am an advocate of Fred Hoyle's panspermia theory, so that's maybe just my bubble.
Interesting idea. Problem is that this biomass lives in the first few meters of soil only, not deep. And they need the life above the ground to make up their ecosystems. On Mars they would suffer from the harsh environnement also.
Correction: Curiosity is showing the history of Gale Crater. Saying it's showing the history of Mars is like saying you can tell the entire history of the Earth by looking at a few rocks in a desert somewhere. It's local history, and just like here on Earth, geologic histories vary widely depending on where you are. We don't have the tech yet to determine Mar's global history. All we can say is there was water there once, it flowed in rivers and lakes and make alluvial fans, but that's about it. We know the global composition in Mar's atmosphere, and the changes therein over the year. In Gale Crater on the other hand, we know a lot about that local history.
But REPLENISHED too! The same seems to be the case in Titan, so, while life is not yet demonstrated it is at least insinuated, sugested, plausible. Methanogenesis can be non-biological but why wouldn't it be biological, as it seems to require less conditions than the abiological one?
Luis Aldamiz Because life is extremely rare. Even on a seemingly ideally suite planet like Earth life just arose exactly once, but not continuously, meaning an abiogenesis event is even in the presence of seemingly perfect conditions extremely rare, therefore the likelihood within less suited environments will be pretty much zero. Yes it will not be exactly zero, so there is indeed a chance, but so slim that you really shouldn't expect anything to be there. And because of that the likelihood of a geological explanation is in comparison practically 1. Of course not exactly one, but .. well you get it. There are only 2 reasons why people are so hyped upon life on Mars: a) they WANT life to be found and b) Mars is just the closest (and thus esásiest to explore) place. So peiople are all the time hyped about "life on Mars" Both are obviously not "strictly scientific approaches" on how to tackle an experiment. If you want something found, you will find something. The human mind is quite flexible, when it comes to this, so even the tinniest indication that is no contradiction of the hypothesis is interpreted as "much more likely", which is of course absurd. According to everything we currently believe to know about abiogenesis, you shouldn't expect more than maybe a handful of extraterrestrial lifeforms in the milky way and if we are very really unlucky we might even be alone in it.
@Frank Schneider: We do not know that. The very root of the "tree of life" is a bit fuzzy and fossils don't really help much here. Notably there's no agreement on the origin of viruses but how the other branches of the DNA-based "tree of life" connect at the very beginning is not clear either. It is indeed possible, but not definitely proven, that life arose only once in an evolutionarily successful way but that may well be because once one "life system" is established, any other attempt was quickly outcompeted by the already successful variants. What we do know however is that life arose very very early in the history of our planet and that it stuck even through extremely harsh periods like "iceball Earth" and "the great dying". So life evolves easily (or comes from out there in "panspermia") and is extremely difficult to eradicate once established (many species will become extinct but a few will always manage to survive in almost any conditions). We know that Mars almost certainly had the conditions for "life as we know it" long ago: that should suffice, using the Earth's empirical model, for life to have evolved (or fallen from the sky and taken hold). Since then Mars has been in a perpetual "planetary crisis" but life is sturdy enough and some types of organisms, at the very least unicellular, should have managed to survive, as there is still some amounts of the stuff needed for life, even if scarcely so. My educated hunch is that bacterial-like life exists underground, as it exists in Earth, and that such life is most likely to be anaerobic. And anaerobic life here on Earth often produces methane as byproduct. Methane might be produced some other way but you'd need energy anyhow and the astro-geological consensus leans in favor of a rather geologically inert mars nowadays (nearly no erosion, dead volcanoes, no magnetic field), so I rather lean in favor of biological remnants of ancient "green Mars". Life is surprisingly sturdy, really.
Luis Aldamez I perfectly agree with you that life seems to be incredibly adaptive and once it is there it seems to be pretty hard to eradicate. But Abiogenesis is about the event that leads to the formation of these little buggers. when they are not there in the first place, they can't adapt. It's like talking about how your current properties helped you, before you were born. It is indeed thinkable that life arouse multiple times and all other variants except ours became extinct, but we absolutely have no positive evidence in favor of this. You are aware what a speculation (a hypothesis without any sort of positive evidence) is scientifically worth ? Exactly, nothing, so it's being ignored and scientifically speaking non-existing. Thus as long as there is no positive evidence in favor of multiple abiogenesis events on Earth, we have to assume,that there was just one the one we know of. Making assumptions based upon pure speculations or postulates is not how science works. Especially not, if the absence of positive evidence in favor of the first speculation (multiple abiogenesis events) is explained by a second speculation (every time all of these other life forms were outcompeted to extinction, without being able to survive in a single ecological niche). That's more fairy tale than scientific paper. I have to agree that the relatively early advent of life on Earth might indeed be interpreted as a fact strengthening the idea of it being a likely event, but of course a sample size one doesn't really mean a lot, right ? could just be coincidence. This interpretation is contradicted by the fact that it appeared just once on Earth in the past 4 billion years and if it would have been a generally likely event, this should have happened far more often. Further, if it would be a comparatively likely event, we should have been able to recreate it somehow in the lab, which we obviously didn't manage to do. As we failed to recreate life artificially in the lab, this means that the process that leads to the formation of life must require highly specific circumstances for it to occur, so that we never managed to recreate exactly this situation in silico. But highly specific circumstances means that they will be very rarely naturally occur, thus are rare. This is also perfectly in-line with the observation of life not appearing spontaneously from inanimate matter in nature (e.g. right now in my backyard), obviously not being widely spread within the solar system and with the Fermi paradox. Coming from this it's only rational to assume that a changing CH4 level on Mars is just a geological effect and not a biological, at least until proven otherwise. Finally did Mars never have the same ideal properties for the development of life, as Earth. E.g. it is far smaller (increased surfae increases likelihood of fitting circumstances), it has no magnetic field and a weak atmosphere, so that the comparatively weaker solar radiation is able to shredder all complex molecules, But main factor is that it is mainly outside out the habitable zone, and was even far more so 4 bya years ago. Even Earth, getting far more radiation, was a total snowball for several hundred million years and just came out of it due to it's quite active core (-> volcanism), which the much smaller Mars is also lacking. If they find non-terrestrial life on Mars: great. I'd be extremely happy as this would massively increase our knowledge about life, but the likelihood of this is pretty much next to zero.
Drilling's cool but the tool will probably wear out quite a lot faster than most other rover tools. How is it gonna do unmanned maintenance, if at all?
This is a facinating place, Mars. Thank you for your reports. Question; Are places they're looking for past and present life areas where the weak magnetosphere's are present?
Got following question in Indian Civil Service Pre Exam 2018: Consider the following phenomena : (Pre18 Set-D) 1.Light is affected by gravity. 2.The Universe is constantly expanding. 3.Matter warps its surrounding space-time. Which of the above is/are the prediction/predictions of Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, often discussed in media ? a.1 and 2 only b.3 only c.1 and 3 only d.1, 2 and 3 I zeroed on Option C, but most of the people are saying it is D. Please let me know the correct answer.
Still waiting for a sample from Mars to be taken all the way back to Earth. The scientific value of a mission like that is much more than the sample. It'd be a proof of concept for a shuttle to Mars and back.
A kid's microscope only costs about $50. You'd think somebody at NASA would be smart enough to put an ordinary microscope on board one of these billion dollar probes and do an actual search for life on Mars.
I think they found one compound that can be used by some earth bacteria as an energy source which is cool! I might also be misremembering something i saw on scott manley's channel.
I would assume that the interior of Mars has radioactive elements or has a crust that is not quite as thick as scientists once suspected. I can't wait until they get a geological study going that isn't going 2 kmh and only scraping off surface samples.
Why can't these rovers combine forces? The one with the 5 meter drill handing its sample to Curiosity which has the necessary equipment to do the chemical analysis?
I had the same thought. I pondered for a moment and came up with this. Mars is big, and the terrain can be difficult for our rovers to navigate. They may not land anywhere near each other. And having two probes in Gale Crater would give us less data than having them farther apart, in two distinct locations. And the other probe that can drill *and* analyze should land on Mars shortly after. Looking in the big picture, a strong case can be made that its just best to wait.
The likelihood is extremely slim. Life is rare, Mars is outside of the habitable zone and 4 bya it was a lot further outside of the habitable zone, than it is now. If there is life in the solar system (which is extremely unlikely), it's rather on one of the moons of Jupiter or Saturn., but you shouldn't bet your wife on that either (maybe your mother-in-law)
Call it what you like, but Mars is one in quadrillion planets, maybe quintillion of habitable planets. We're just excited to have a neighbour that possibly HAD life once. And that's the amazing thing, even with so few evidence. If Mars has that possibility, with it's deep hostile environment....think about the other ones. They'd be thinking exactly what we are asking ourselves, in this moment....
Ya. NASA didn't do itself any favors by implying there was evidence of life. The story was just sad with all the possibly maybe perhaps could've but we don't know click bait
Veronica Darrell You are falling into a fallacy: "many planes" -> likelihood of life is extremely high" ... it seems obvious, but it is in reality mathematically and logically flawed thinking
I didn't said that of ''many planes'' statement or comment. Where did you picked that up? I implied clearly that Universe is so vast that it's impossible to us be the only ones in it. No matter if there are just ONE civilization, or trillions more. With just ONE more, it's enough. Maybe you could try to write in spanish so I can express myself accurately? My english is not so rich, and expressing complex ideas on another language is challenging. Spanish is difficult, try for yourself :) cuando quieras lo charlamos!
They probably could. That's why we have to sterilize every Mars rover, or rover for that matter, so Earth life doesn't spread to other planets and confuses the heck out of us. BREAKING NEWS: ALIEN LIFE FOUND ON... Oh wait, just some extremophiles from Earth again.
So what will they need to actually find on mars to know life once was there, besides digging down and finding some live critters hanging out? Like find fossils or something less spectacular?
Frank Nitti well water would be a start. Under the surface obviously though. The atmosphere doesn't have the necessary component to be an atmosphere:pressure. Plus, ya know, heat. But who knows really. It might not be carbon based, but that can be thrown out of the window if there was surface water on mars
In Antarctica we have to drill hundreds of feet beneath the surface to get to old signs of plant life and sea shells, how can curiosity find anything useful when it can only drill a few inches??
Is anyone else over the discovery of organic molecules? At this point we know they form pretty much anywhere there is a carbon and even small amounts of UV light. I'm not suprised by this discovery in the slightest.
Earth is not the primordial singularity of life in this universe. Life is a quantum aspect of matter and life is everywhere that it can exist in this universe. It is just the vast, incomprehensible distances that prevents us from discovering other technologically advanced societies. We may go to Mars, but we will never inhabit a planet outside of our solar system. It's just the way the universe works. If people would understand this then we, as a people, would be able to design a society that returns to a symbiotic relationship with this biosphere and to preserve this extraordinary planet that we call Earth.
Dewey I dont remember that being said. Plus, it's a lot easier to notice biologically processes and the reactions in the membranes than some puny carbon compound
Adam. Hey man! Thanks for the reply! I don't think they mentioned the Curiously mission parameters in this video at all. So yes, my comment was a little short and vague. I was referring to the mission itself. Curiosity was designed to detect the ingredients that could possibly be a result of life, but not life itself. My hope was that it had the capability to drill deep into the surface, and view living microbes.... or something that would be more definitive. We do have the capability!!
Those darn carbon compounds... *shakes fist*
*Points at Mars in the night sky:* We're coming for you!
Jetpack Rorschach prepare yourself you red rusty dusty rock!
Jetpack Rorschach
*SHAKES FISTS*
Noice
*Mars looks back dramatically on the shoulder* yeah right.
I always hear about all my science updates on twitter and then you guys come update the youtube world like a day later and it's kind of a funny thing to see. I get to have nostalgia on NASA updates every Friday.
Last time I was this early mars had flowing water!
Last time I was this early the universe was collapsing back into a singularity
I was this early world war 3 happened.......oh wait.
mm now let's send astronauts to mars
And that's how we'll really show there's life on Mars.
Yup: a farm of potatoes, and one Captain Blondebeard.
Frank Schneider Oh your one of them... If people like you had ran the world progress would come to a standstill. Are you paid to nay say every progressive argument?
RDSk ...
Frank Schneider well sending man to mars would be proof of concept for colonisation.
Send Matt Damon already!
Captain Raz
WOOOOTT . I thought he had just about enough of that place the first time round . . . . . . . . . Oh w8 . . . . . Oh crap. . . . . . Are you saying “That was just a movie ? . . . . 😂🤣😤
NO! don't you realize the cost to retrieve him compared to a no name green shirt (red shirts die)? he would bankrupt NASA TRYING TO GET BUTT HOME!
I thought Sci Show spaces theme is blue? Why is the thumbnails theme green? Hank explain!
EDIT: They changed it to blue again.
Daudi Wampamba lmao
Top 10 questions science still can't answer
Daudi Wampamba well they changed ir
Hank is Green
lol Dawn!
All this talk about drilling has got me excited....
For Science!
A**L
You monster
Drill me ;p
Scishow Space/Math question: How many rover/explorer missions does it take before it was cheaper/faster/better to just send a manned mission (assuming, of course, we had the tech to get them there, ability to do the job for 6ish months and get them back relatively safely)?
Is there snot on Mars?
Snot at the moment.
David Blowie?
ahahahhah nice
nope but the rocks fart
there will be someday
Thank you for making that clear. As I heard the story on the news I was thinking 'no, organic is not equal to life!' You'd think they'd run it past a scientist *first*!
Actually we should be happy that the the headlines were not more like "Plan of alien invader from Mars to attack Earth discovered", but I could easily imagine Fox News turning out a statement like that.
We're never going to find alien life because we have this whole preconceived idea that believing in alien life is crazy
"Very cool geology" is what created life in the first place.
>drilling in a crater
>Maybe the organics are from an asteroid
You don't say.
Yeah,but asteroids has water and aminoacids that can create life
The news from mars is interesting this week
Hi, I really need to know. Do all life needs water? Could another liquid do? Like lets say a planet is too hot and it's not possible for it to have water. Couldn't there be another heat resistant liquid that functions well enough to support life like water does?
It would also need a replacement for DNA, proteins, and RNA because those denture when it's really hot. Maybe it is possible, but the chance of them getting in a nice combination to form a living cell seems much more difficult when you consider the fact it will also have to have a liquid that can move in and out of the cell while not allowing bigger molecules that would be sugar and lipids, or their replacements for hot atmospheres, would not be able to enter as easily. So, it's a big not not not not not NOT likely
Ayo. Where Muscle Hank at
Denzel Morok Այո՞
It could be something something.. SNEEZING
When we ultimately find evidence of life on Mars, it will be in the form of...
a little bit of snot.
The rover will be like "bop beep boop.... I found a little bit of snot!".
And all the scientists of the world will be like "OOoooo.... look.... a little bit of snot!"
I am drunk.
Hank is the best
I hope that one day we will dig under the surface of Mars and find skeletons or maybe something resembling a civilization.
How so?
@@Shifty989 nice pfp from courage the cowardly dog
3:02 How do they know how old the rocks are? I thought you needed very heavy equipment to do radiometric dating.
WarmWeatherGuy
Yep yr right, but perhaps they are more wary this time because of the ballsup they had on the Moon (a rock was lifted up and in the reflection of his helmet you saw the following . . . . “MADE IN CHINA” . . . 😫
Aren't organic molecules common throughout the universe? It's basically any molecule with a carbon atom.
Justin Mielke I dont *think* they are that simple. I'm pretty there are specifics, like bonds, placement' etc.
Toluene alone means either ancient life-beds such as make petroleum deposits, or that abiotic oil production is active due to extremely high heat/pressure near the surface. It's very volatile and easily breaks down (used on earth as high grade jet/race fuel and solvent) and will not just hang around for billions of years in the open on its own.
Toluene production close enough to the surface to show up in such a shallow drill site suggests ongoing life-byproducts, because otherwise it would have to be leaching up from mature petroleum deposits thousands of meters below ground level -- either way, a massive indicator of present or former life.
That ending is like a threat from humans to the martians
It would be surprising if scientist find a message saying we actually lived on Mars and ruined it and then moved to earth when we exhausted all of Mars resources.
Someone please start writing a novel on this idea already!!
Already exists, in two forms, one is the "The Venus Prime Omnibus" by Arthur C Clarke, the other is an old anime called "E.Y.E.S of Mars".
Sweet.. I gotta check these out now - Thank you!!
shivam jaiswal
You'll find "E.Y.E.S. of Mars" online, check general e-books for "Venus Prime Omnibus"
R.S Laurent
Thank you again sir.. I'm actually very fond of space operas- so I'm very thankful for this to you!!!
Don't ya just hate it when you find something cool, but everyone starts freaking out about it.
You're talking about that knife I found in the park, right?
I love you hanks
thank you so much
Biggest achievement of my life so far! Thank you all :*
Imagine what would change if we dig in Mars and find that some km below the surface, there are living creatures producing methane and going to sleep in the winter.
I'm glad you're using metric. Thank you. I'm crying.
It might be a stupid question but wouldn't it be interesting to study the methane that was released to see if it has clues on what created it?
Maybe some other compounds produced and released along with it or, for instance, if it was produced by some sort of micro organism it would be possible that part of it gets trapped and released together with the gas.
from 3:00 to 3:36 I was hoping at 3:36 he would have said "Which. Unfortunately. Was when they realized... they had scooped up a small group of living insects. This would have been great news, but ... Obviously... this procedure kill them. All of them. However this find was still exciting and they continued to search the entire surface of mars for more of these unidentified living insects, but soon realized that the place they were extracted from and killed... was the only habitable spot left on Mars for them to live. In the future, we will have to be more careful about the ways we use to process alien soils, so that we don't repeat this mistake. Thanks for watching this episode of SciShow Space. If you would like to keep following the latest... ... ... ..."
Great Video as always but I have a Question.
Are you gonna do a Video about The Opportunity Mars Rover and about the Mars Sandstorm?
*+Jebediah Kerman* that would be so cool!
Jebediah Kerman there was a mars sandstorm?!
There still is a sandstorm and it is going to be worse than any that opportunity has been in so far. It is currently in an emergency power saving mode to try and wait it out.
Sam Edwardson oh snap. i hope it doesn't get destroyed or anything, it would be a waste of billions of dollars and probably many discoveries
Sam Edwardson
I sure Hope it Survives out the Sandstorm.
Opportunity has been running for about a Decade.
I think there's plenty of life on Mars right now, or rather IN Mars, deep in its crust where it's warmer, wetter and well protected from the harsh surface environment. There's plenty of life or this type deep in Earth's crust, some estimates putting the biomass in the crust on par with the more familiar one growing on the surface. There's no reason that similar creatures could not be just as abundant deep under the martian surface.
Absolutely plausible. I wouldn't think it's 100% certain but I'd say that higher than 50% chance: water, organics, protected from radiation under the soil? That means life-as-we-know-it in my evolutionary textbook, just that probably unicellular but life anyhow.
I think so too. Life doesn't give up, and since there is methane which varies seasonally it seems like a good indicator. I don't buy the "unknown chemistry" excuse. But then I am an advocate of Fred Hoyle's panspermia theory, so that's maybe just my bubble.
Interesting idea. Problem is that this biomass lives in the first few meters of soil only, not deep. And they need the life above the ground to make up their ecosystems. On Mars they would suffer from the harsh environnement also.
I think there's life on Mars. Some slowly dying Earth extremophiles on a not completely sterilized rover.
@@nolanwestrich2602 it refers to native life stupid
First favorite " Not as dead as we thought!"...
Awesome!
Dig deeper and there you will find dinosaur bones
In its invite, NASA just said that there will be a live discussion on new science results from Curiosity rover. The invite didn't have the word "big".
Could those organics be from the meteorite that made the crater?
Yeah,but meteorites contain aminoacids and other things that could create life in the crater
really cool
Thank you for the first minute of this video. I can send people here when the invariably claim we now know there is/was life on Mars.
If we ever do find life on Mars, I hope it tastes like chicken!
More likely tofu (i.e. bacteriae).
Gravijta, or will we taste like chicken?
I'm pretty sure people will try to deep-fry it either way.
Why? Chicken just tastes like turtle anyways.
So long as Martians dont think we taste like chicken, ...
Correction: Curiosity is showing the history of Gale Crater. Saying it's showing the history of Mars is like saying you can tell the entire history of the Earth by looking at a few rocks in a desert somewhere. It's local history, and just like here on Earth, geologic histories vary widely depending on where you are. We don't have the tech yet to determine Mar's global history. All we can say is there was water there once, it flowed in rivers and lakes and make alluvial fans, but that's about it. We know the global composition in Mar's atmosphere, and the changes therein over the year. In Gale Crater on the other hand, we know a lot about that local history.
Nars mews. Congratulations Hank.
(DH & J-reference ❤️😍😎😂)
Well, before watching the full video I must say it’s not surprising considering “organic” could be any compound with C-C and C-H bonds.
And that stuff is found all over the universe. I guess someone at NASA just thought they could need a little bit more funding.
But REPLENISHED too!
The same seems to be the case in Titan, so, while life is not yet demonstrated it is at least insinuated, sugested, plausible. Methanogenesis can be non-biological but why wouldn't it be biological, as it seems to require less conditions than the abiological one?
Luis Aldamiz
Because life is extremely rare. Even on a seemingly ideally suite planet like Earth life just arose exactly once, but not continuously, meaning an abiogenesis event is even in the presence of seemingly perfect conditions extremely rare, therefore the likelihood within less suited environments will be pretty much zero. Yes it will not be exactly zero, so there is indeed a chance, but so slim that you really shouldn't expect anything to be there. And because of that the likelihood of a geological explanation is in comparison practically 1. Of course not exactly one, but .. well you get it.
There are only 2 reasons why people are so hyped upon life on Mars: a) they WANT life to be found and b) Mars is just the closest (and thus esásiest to explore) place. So peiople are all the time hyped about "life on Mars" Both are obviously not "strictly scientific approaches" on how to tackle an experiment. If you want something found, you will find something. The human mind is quite flexible, when it comes to this, so even the tinniest indication that is no contradiction of the hypothesis is interpreted as "much more likely", which is of course absurd.
According to everything we currently believe to know about abiogenesis, you shouldn't expect more than maybe a handful of extraterrestrial lifeforms in the milky way and if we are very really unlucky we might even be alone in it.
@Frank Schneider: We do not know that. The very root of the "tree of life" is a bit fuzzy and fossils don't really help much here. Notably there's no agreement on the origin of viruses but how the other branches of the DNA-based "tree of life" connect at the very beginning is not clear either.
It is indeed possible, but not definitely proven, that life arose only once in an evolutionarily successful way but that may well be because once one "life system" is established, any other attempt was quickly outcompeted by the already successful variants.
What we do know however is that life arose very very early in the history of our planet and that it stuck even through extremely harsh periods like "iceball Earth" and "the great dying". So life evolves easily (or comes from out there in "panspermia") and is extremely difficult to eradicate once established (many species will become extinct but a few will always manage to survive in almost any conditions).
We know that Mars almost certainly had the conditions for "life as we know it" long ago: that should suffice, using the Earth's empirical model, for life to have evolved (or fallen from the sky and taken hold). Since then Mars has been in a perpetual "planetary crisis" but life is sturdy enough and some types of organisms, at the very least unicellular, should have managed to survive, as there is still some amounts of the stuff needed for life, even if scarcely so. My educated hunch is that bacterial-like life exists underground, as it exists in Earth, and that such life is most likely to be anaerobic. And anaerobic life here on Earth often produces methane as byproduct.
Methane might be produced some other way but you'd need energy anyhow and the astro-geological consensus leans in favor of a rather geologically inert mars nowadays (nearly no erosion, dead volcanoes, no magnetic field), so I rather lean in favor of biological remnants of ancient "green Mars".
Life is surprisingly sturdy, really.
Luis Aldamez
I perfectly agree with you that life seems to be incredibly adaptive and once it is there it seems to be pretty hard to eradicate. But Abiogenesis is about the event that leads to the formation of these little buggers. when they are not there in the first place, they can't adapt. It's like talking about how your current properties helped you, before you were born.
It is indeed thinkable that life arouse multiple times and all other variants except ours became extinct, but we absolutely have no positive evidence in favor of this. You are aware what a speculation (a hypothesis without any sort of positive evidence) is scientifically worth ? Exactly, nothing, so it's being ignored and scientifically speaking non-existing. Thus as long as there is no positive evidence in favor of multiple abiogenesis events on Earth, we have to assume,that there was just one the one we know of. Making assumptions based upon pure speculations or postulates is not how science works. Especially not, if the absence of positive evidence in favor of the first speculation (multiple abiogenesis events) is explained by a second speculation (every time all of these other life forms were outcompeted to extinction, without being able to survive in a single ecological niche). That's more fairy tale than scientific paper.
I have to agree that the relatively early advent of life on Earth might indeed be interpreted as a fact strengthening the idea of it being a likely event, but of course a sample size one doesn't really mean a lot, right ? could just be coincidence. This interpretation is contradicted by the fact that it appeared just once on Earth in the past 4 billion years and if it would have been a generally likely event, this should have happened far more often. Further, if it would be a comparatively likely event, we should have been able to recreate it somehow in the lab, which we obviously didn't manage to do. As we failed to recreate life artificially in the lab, this means that the process that leads to the formation of life must require highly specific circumstances for it to occur, so that we never managed to recreate exactly this situation in silico. But highly specific circumstances means that they will be very rarely naturally occur, thus are rare. This is also perfectly in-line with the observation of life not appearing spontaneously from inanimate matter in nature (e.g. right now in my backyard), obviously not being widely spread within the solar system and with the Fermi paradox.
Coming from this it's only rational to assume that a changing CH4 level on Mars is just a geological effect and not a biological, at least until proven otherwise.
Finally did Mars never have the same ideal properties for the development of life, as Earth. E.g. it is far smaller (increased surfae increases likelihood of fitting circumstances), it has no magnetic field and a weak atmosphere, so that the comparatively weaker solar radiation is able to shredder all complex molecules, But main factor is that it is mainly outside out the habitable zone, and was even far more so 4 bya years ago. Even Earth, getting far more radiation, was a total snowball for several hundred million years and just came out of it due to it's quite active core (-> volcanism), which the much smaller Mars is also lacking.
If they find non-terrestrial life on Mars: great. I'd be extremely happy as this would massively increase our knowledge about life, but the likelihood of this is pretty much next to zero.
I wish one day this rover will walk with human on mars...
jaikumar848 and wish curiosity personally happy birthday
Methane =farting Martians
Phantom Blade you are awesome 💜👽
Phantom Blade no
You've got it all wrong.
It's Space Cows.
Drilling's cool but the tool will probably wear out quite a lot faster than most other rover tools. How is it gonna do unmanned maintenance, if at all?
small carbon chains? like ethanol? lemme get my space suit, i'm ready for some Martian Martini's.
"We're coming for you" could come off as REALLY sinister... :)
Like, we're the aliens invading another planet.
I can't believe they found molecules on mars
"Hang on you tiny probably dead martians, if you ever existed were coming for you" Hahaha Awesome quote Hank
So this discovery also ties into that meteorite from mars that made big headlines many years ago with some scientists saying it poroved e.t. life
This is a facinating place, Mars. Thank you for your reports. Question; Are places they're looking for past and present life areas where the weak magnetosphere's are present?
Got following question in Indian Civil Service Pre Exam 2018:
Consider the following phenomena : (Pre18 Set-D)
1.Light is affected by gravity.
2.The Universe is constantly expanding.
3.Matter warps its surrounding space-time.
Which of the above is/are the prediction/predictions of Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, often discussed in media ?
a.1 and 2 only
b.3 only
c.1 and 3 only
d.1, 2 and 3
I zeroed on Option C, but most of the people are saying it is D. Please let me know the correct answer.
*POWDERIZED* .... Actually a valid word. I was surprised.
People of Earth! Stay away from my snot farm! End transmition...
3:24 'Pulverize' is a real word; JSYK
Still waiting for a sample from Mars to be taken all the way back to Earth. The scientific value of a mission like that is much more than the sample. It'd be a proof of concept for a shuttle to Mars and back.
When would we expect a video on opportunity
A kid's microscope only costs about $50. You'd think somebody at NASA would be smart enough to put an ordinary microscope on board one of these billion dollar probes and do an actual search for life on Mars.
The more you dig you will fine life
That was good
Mars is such a Tease.
ColdCutz how?
Is the new lander going to go to Gale Crater? How about the 2020?
Organic Molecules finds a way:P
To me this sounds like there was / is life on Mars, but the scientists are being ultra sceptical.
Well that was underwhelming, but still interesting. I like it.
Now let's colonize Mars.
prolet kult Menvile we'll all die from climate change
Curiosity found more proof of organic molecules in sol 1065. A green eyed biologic beauty.
Now what? Send me tf to mars
i cant wait till we get advanced enough to drill to the core on mars (if there arent any geologic processes)
Next, we need to taste it...
Isn't CO2 an organic molecule or doesn't it count as one? Because CO2 is the Mars athmosphere.
No,it isn’t
I think they found one compound that can be used by some earth bacteria as an energy source which is cool! I might also be misremembering something i saw on scott manley's channel.
Rather as waste than as food: methanogenic bacteria produce methane from a variety of sources in anaerobic digestion.
I wasn't referring to the methane they found- i'm gonna rewatch the scott manley video and report back
I would assume that the interior of Mars has radioactive elements or has a crust that is not quite as thick as scientists once suspected. I can't wait until they get a geological study going that isn't going 2 kmh and only scraping off surface samples.
Why can't these rovers combine forces? The one with the 5 meter drill handing its sample to Curiosity which has the necessary equipment to do the chemical analysis?
I had the same thought. I pondered for a moment and came up with this. Mars is big, and the terrain can be difficult for our rovers to navigate. They may not land anywhere near each other. And having two probes in Gale Crater would give us less data than having them farther apart, in two distinct locations. And the other probe that can drill *and* analyze should land on Mars shortly after. Looking in the big picture, a strong case can be made that its just best to wait.
That makes a lot of sense. Getting data on a wider variety of locations on Mars is more important than getting extremely high quality data on one.
Well, at least we know the aliens were health conscious because they made sure to eat only organic!
Sooo, there’s definitely, probably, possibly life on Mars, maybe. Or was. Or isn’t.
The likelihood is extremely slim. Life is rare, Mars is outside of the habitable zone and 4 bya it was a lot further outside of the habitable zone, than it is now.
If there is life in the solar system (which is extremely unlikely), it's rather on one of the moons of Jupiter or Saturn., but you shouldn't bet your wife on that either (maybe your mother-in-law)
Call it what you like, but Mars is one in quadrillion planets, maybe quintillion of habitable planets.
We're just excited to have a neighbour that possibly HAD life once. And that's the amazing thing, even with so few evidence. If Mars has that possibility, with it's deep hostile environment....think about the other ones. They'd be thinking exactly what we are asking ourselves, in this moment....
Ya. NASA didn't do itself any favors by implying there was evidence of life. The story was just sad with all the possibly maybe perhaps could've but we don't know click bait
Veronica Darrell
You are falling into a fallacy: "many planes" -> likelihood of life is extremely high" ... it seems obvious, but it is in reality mathematically and logically flawed thinking
I didn't said that of ''many planes'' statement or comment.
Where did you picked that up?
I implied clearly that Universe is so vast that it's impossible to us be the only ones in it. No matter if there are just ONE civilization, or trillions more.
With just ONE more, it's enough.
Maybe you could try to write in spanish so I can express myself accurately?
My english is not so rich, and expressing complex ideas on another language is challenging.
Spanish is difficult, try for yourself :)
cuando quieras lo charlamos!
Why couldn't lifeforms on Mars evolve to adapt to it's environment ?
They probably could. That's why we have to sterilize every Mars rover, or rover for that matter, so Earth life doesn't spread to other planets and confuses the heck out of us.
BREAKING NEWS: ALIEN LIFE FOUND ON... Oh wait, just some extremophiles from Earth again.
Nolan Westrich I see
R.I.P Curiosity.
We’re coming for you....... sounds like a threat.
So what will they need to actually find on mars to know life once was there, besides digging down and finding some live critters hanging out? Like find fossils or something less spectacular?
Frank Nitti well water would be a start. Under the surface obviously though. The atmosphere doesn't have the necessary component to be an atmosphere:pressure. Plus, ya know, heat. But who knows really. It might not be carbon based, but that can be thrown out of the window if there was surface water on mars
3:41 I didn’t know that Wheezy Waiter was also on mars. Sorry, I’ll let myself out now
In Antarctica we have to drill hundreds of feet beneath the surface to get to old signs of plant life and sea shells, how can curiosity find anything useful when it can only drill a few inches??
If I lived on Mars...I'm I a Martian?
Is anyone else over the discovery of organic molecules? At this point we know they form pretty much anywhere there is a carbon and even small amounts of UV light. I'm not suprised by this discovery in the slightest.
me when seeing this in my sub box. Yeah if there was life on Mars the title would be different.
Why don't the ESA's 2020 rover collaborate with the NASA 2020 rover to hand it the rock samples from 2m below the surface?
Space E3
I wanna know if they have redstone there on Mars
"If you ever existed, we are coming from you!" I know we are a warlike species but damn... let at least the dead ones rest in peace...
Earth is not the primordial singularity of life in this universe. Life is a quantum aspect of matter and life is everywhere that it can exist in this universe. It is just the vast, incomprehensible distances that prevents us from discovering other technologically advanced societies. We may go to Mars, but we will never inhabit a planet outside of our solar system. It's just the way the universe works.
If people would understand this then we, as a people, would be able to design a society that returns to a symbiotic relationship with this biosphere and to preserve this extraordinary planet that we call Earth.
I'm all for sending a fleet of robots to Mars
Ryan Blanchard, then the robots will rebel and declare Mars to be an independent sovereign robot dictatorship.
if we find aliens on mars i'm gonna cry
I know you guys probably signed NDAs with NASA but I can read between the lines. COWS ON MARS CONFIRMED!
I still don't understand why Curiosity wasn't designed to identify life.
Dewey I dont remember that being said. Plus, it's a lot easier to notice biologically processes and the reactions in the membranes than some puny carbon compound
Adam. Hey man! Thanks for the reply! I don't think they mentioned the Curiously mission parameters in this video at all. So yes, my comment was a little short and vague. I was referring to the mission itself. Curiosity was designed to detect the ingredients that could possibly be a result of life, but not life itself. My hope was that it had the capability to drill deep into the surface, and view living microbes.... or something that would be more definitive. We do have the capability!!
Dewey I dont know for sure why. I'm sure they have some reason
Get the SPACE FORCE on stand by!!
Cool
Can't wait for humans to go to Mars.