A Land Far Away

NASA's $420 million Phoenix mission is aimed at an icy, flat region of northern Mars known as Vastitas Borealis. There, the lander is expected to use its eight-foot (2.4-meter) robotic arm like a backhoe to carve out samples of the surrounding martian soil and ice. The samples will be analyzed by onboard ovens, cameras, microscopes and a wet chemistry laboratory to determine their chemical makeup.


Researchers are hoping to learn whether the icy terrain has preserved any organic molecules or compounds within the martian soil, which may prove useful in determining whether the area may have once been habitable for microbial life. Phoenix also carries a laser ranging and detection tool and other instruments mounted to a meteorology mast to study the arctic weather on Mars. link

And for some insight on its importance.

Bob Park, PhD wrote:How can it be that 30 years after the Viking landings on Mars we still don’t know if there is life on our nearest neighbor? What have we been doing? Life to which we are not related may be the most important quest in science. It would put in perspective the foolish philosophical musings about “purpose” that over the ages led to spilling the blood of countless millions - and still takes lives. Perhaps then we could get on with making the most of the wonderful cosmic accident of life on Earth. Phoenix is not meant to search for life, but to see if conditions on Mars justify a search. If all goes well, Phoenix will touch down in the Martian arctic in May, 2008. link

See, it isn't just me....

Space exploration is worth every penny. We cant be the only lifeforms in all the universe. Even if their more advanced or not as advanced as us there has to be other life in the universe. I personally just cant believe Earth is the only planet that could hold substain life and have it evolve to our point.

Space exploration is important for the future development of humanity, and there may well be life on other planets, however, the chances of it being on the planet next to us is pretty low.

Actually, the chances are no different than they are anywhere else. In fact they're higher, since we know that Earth and Mars exchange material occasionally, and it's possible life could hitch a ride on that. Though, in that case it would be somewhat disappointing. But we know Mars' environment was capable of sustaining life in the distant past. Whether it actually did or not is the question.

If there is life anywhere else in the solar system (Mars, Europa, Titan and Encleadus seem to be the top candidates) it would pretty well prove the universe is teeming with it. The likelihood of life arising twice in the same unremarkable star system if life is rare? Psh.

Oh, and there's a very good chance that we're the only beings currently capable of space exploration. Unless you believe all that about God creating us and a few other planets at the same time 4000 years ago.

Think about how much we have advanced in the last 100 years. Now think how much further we will have advanced in 1,000,000 years time. Considering the challanges life has to overcome to exist in the first place, the chances of life existing in other places is extremely low. The chances of that life evolving at least human level intelligence around about the same time (i.e., within several million years) is significantly lower. Therefore, if any human level+ intelligence aliens would have developed space travel millions of years ago, and evidence of their existance would be somewhat more ... evident, even if we are so stupid to them that they place as much value in visiting us as we would in going to a petting zoo full of hedgehogs. Or they would have died out a long time ago.

NickD wrote:Oh, and there's a very good chance that we're the only beings currently capable of space exploration. Unless you believe all that about God creating us and a few other planets at the same time 4000 years ago.

Think about how much we have advanced in the last 100 years. Now think how much further we will have advanced in 1,000,000 years time. Considering the challanges life has to overcome to exist in the first place, the chances of life existing in other places is extremely low. The chances of that life evolving at least human level intelligence around about the same time (i.e., within several million years) is significantly lower. Therefore, if any human level+ intelligence aliens would have developed space travel millions of years ago, and evidence of their existance would be somewhat more ... evident, even if we are so stupid to them that they place as much value in visiting us as we would in going to a petting zoo full of hedgehogs. Or they would have died out a long time ago.

Unless faster than light travel just isn't possible. Then we'd likely never know.

Grand Fromage wrote:Actually, the chances are no different than they are anywhere else. In fact they're higher, since we know that Earth and Mars exchange material occasionally, and it's possible life could hitch a ride on that. Though, in that case it would be somewhat disappointing. But we know Mars' environment was capable of sustaining life in the distant past. Whether it actually did or not is the question.

Point taken. However, avoiding the point about life on Mars and life on Earth having the same origin point, while the chances may be the same as anywhere else, the randomness of it would make it unlikely, like a person winning a lottery - in which every single person on the planet gets a unique ticket - one week and then their neighbour winning it the next week.

Burt wrote:Unless faster than light travel just isn't possible. Then we'd likely never know.

Pft. Robot pilots and cryogenic chambers ftw.

NickD wrote:while the chances may be the same as anywhere else, the randomness of it would make it unlikely, like a person winning a lottery - in which every single person on the planet gets a unique ticket - one week and then their neighbour winning it the next week.

Read up on probability. The chances of your neighbor winning or someone on the other side of the planet winning are exactly the same. As are the chances of you winning a second time, actually.

Not quite what I think Nick is trying to say.

Let's say you've got a lottery consisting of 11 people, each with an equal chance of winning. Assuming person A wins the first time, the chance of person B (A's neighbour) winning next is 0.1 (removing A, as he already has life). The chance of it not being A's neighbour is 0.9.

The same thing with life on Mars. There's a [very small number] chance of there been life there, but there's a 1-[very small number] chance of life living somewhere that's not Mars.

Yes - I'm no mathematician, so most of that probably doesn't make sense to anyone

NickD wrote: Point taken. However, avoiding the point about life on Mars and life on Earth having the same origin point, while the chances may be the same as anywhere else, the randomness of it would make it unlikely, like a person winning a lottery - in which every single person on the planet gets a unique ticket - one week and then their neighbour winning it the next week.

Yes, except no. As we honestly don't know how many 'viable' entries there are into this lottery as well as the number of 'winners.' You're assuming there's only one which most likely is quite incorrect

Yeah, it doesn't make sense. If everyone in a group has a single ticket, everyone's chance of winning are precisely equal, no matter how many times you draw.

The chance of life being in any particular environment is not equal so it doesn't directly relate though. Tangent. :F As we define life, there has to be liquid water available. Water's very abundant, but liquid water isn't so much. Fortunately there are assloads of planets, so even with the rarity of liquid water there are almost certainly billions, if not trillions of planets that do have it.

The big question is how easily life arises. We know that organic molecules spontaneously form from inorganics very easily, and simple cell-like structures also come together pretty readily. Until we put together simple life from scratch in an experiment or find it elsewhere, though, we don't know how difficult it is.

The best possible discovery would be finding evidence of life, current or extinct, on all four likely spots in the solar system. That'd almost certainly mean life is just an inevitable result of emergent complexity, and it's everywhere. And we really haven't thought about life that's totally alien, stuff that doesn't even involve water or carbon or proteins or anything we know. All we know for sure is carbon-based life is very hardy and on Earth, we find it anywhere there's water, no matter what other conditions exist.

Man that is one expensive backhoe! I need some trees planted this fall...perhaps they'll loan me one.

So what if we find bacteria on Mars? We should be looking for intelligent life in outer space, if there is any...that would cool...Live talking aliens = cool...frozen extraterrestrial bacteria = meh.

You wouldn't care about the confirmation of existence of alien life?

And, http://www.seti.org/ You can do two things at once. Maybe even three!

There are at least 35,000 to 40,000 habitable earthlike-planets that contain sentient life; according to the statistics; within our galaxy.

Faster than light travel is distinctly possible; I believe I posted some obscure comments on one method I'd thought of earlier this year.

Sentient life will likely try to kill us, or us them. Xenophobia is a survival instinct, unless said lifeforms are giant fungi, or space-borne creatures like whales who are too dumb to get out of the way.