What do you think curiosity has found on mars?

Question

NASA released that curiosity has found something 'earth shaking that will be in the history books'
Is this by the means every day people will find mind blowing? Or just scientific jargon such as a trace of some sort of gas, or something that's just not interesting to a non-science type person.

Could it be traces of life ? What do you think?

Answer 1

In my opinion, in order of probability



1. Ice



2. Liquid water



3. Ambiguous indications of life- maybe hydrocarbons, amino acids etc which could be there without life.



4. Remains of something that actually lived.



5. Something actually alive



6. An artifact.



4, 5 and 6 are unlikely, but 6 has just about zero probability.



The two weeks delay are because they want to make sure they get it right

Answer 2

If it had been sign of actual life, the news would already be out.



It is more likely some hydrocarbon (ethane? methane?) or even carbohydrate (carbon, hydrogen AND oxygen) that is difficult to explain without some living process at work at some point in time.



Remember when they found methane on Mars? On Earth, most of our methane comes from life (past or present) so that our first thought was "methane shows there might have been life on Mars". Then astrochemists showed that there are non-living explanations for methane.



If they have found more complex molecules that include chains of carbon, that is a lot more difficult to explain away with a non-organic explanation... but not impossible. I suspect they need the extra time to test (and refute) some ways that these molecules could have been formed without life. Once they do that (if they can) then they will announce that these molecules show a high probability of past life on Mars.



At least, that is my guess.



Problem is that, over the last few years, NASA has made it a habit of "pre-announcing" major discoveries, that turn out to be mundane stuff. For example, the discovery of a bacteria (on Earth) that uses arsenic in its DNA structure (I had read about such possibility three years BEFORE, during my astrobiology course).

Answer 3

Think about how quiet the folks who found the Higgs-Boson -- the thing which confirmed a huge amount of what we know to be true -- were. These guys are being even quieter.



And remember, we accidentally found an ancient river bed just by landing Curiosity. Considering that we've already found mind-blowing stuff on mars, they would have to have something special to be acting like this.



My guess? Microbial life. Keep in mind, I'm a microbiology student so that's the first place my mind went... and I'm sure everyone else in class is thinking the same thing. We wont get much done today.



Fossilized microbes are more likely. But I am going for the full living microbes because, well, I want to. But I really do think its a decent chance of some form of proof of microbial life.

Answer 4

Well, ..., NASA is being cautious. If it was an exoskeleton or fossilized remains that would be cool. Here's the deal, if they're finding methane on the planet something has to be generating it. For us here on earth that's general rotting plant matter which indicates the activity of micro-organisms. However, that's not always the case so I'm sure NASA want's to be sure before releasing information.



It could also be something like a mineral find like Uranium, Gold or diamonds who knows? However, I don't think that would be as big a deal and certainly not need for a lot of secrecy. IMHO, it has something to do with life. In this case, though, I think we're just going to have to wait to find out.

Answer 5

I'm going to guess, and that's all it is, a guess, that it is closely related to number three on Brigalow Bloke's list. Thinking back to the Allen Hills meteorite, when it was announced prematurely that fossilized life from Mars was discovered, and given the delay in the announcement, it is something that is probably pretty big, but nobody wants to be the first to jump to an inaccurate conclusion. To me, that means signs of complex proteins or amino acids. Of course, since Earth and Mars have 'shared' some rocks through collsions with asteroids over the course of billions of years, ruling out an Earthly origin must be the first condition addressed. Confirming what it is, would be a close second.



I don't think water or ice would be this 'hush hush,' nor would it warrant the hype that seems to be stirring about it.



Of course, I tend to be way off base on guessing these sorts of things. Perhaps it is a tremendous find in the geology of the red planet. We always think of 'life' as exciting finds in astronomy, but really, findings that might twist around our understanding of the geology oft he planet might be just as exciting, just not to the general public.

Answer 6

I believe in panspermia so I want to think they found fossilized or active bacteria on Mars, but i'm a bit of a conservative so my bet is "They probably found liquid water or water ice in some significantly abundance."

Answer 7

Organic molecules would be nice. But I am hoping for the announcement to be Martian life, Martian fossils, or maybe even Martian artifacts.

Answer 8

Here's some good advice on the subject: http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/11/21/mars_rover_curiosity_makes_earthshaking_find_no_one_is_talking_but_everyone.html





What do you think?



I expect the same reactions that happened on other announcements: scientists get excited, the public makes a weird face and goes "why are you excited about THAT? I thought it was something about aliens! science is BORING! boo-hoo!"