To add comments or start new threads please go to the full version of: Space Water
PhysForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums > Space > Space
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4

Zarkov
Yes, Earth has quite a large drop of water... rather minute when compared with the size of the Earth, but at least it is somewhat stable.

There are a lot of reports that space is full of water
The Bible specifically states that water is everywhere

But is it ?

Can water exist in space ?..... and for that matter

Is water a natural compound ?
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 19 2008, 09:32 AM)
Yes, Earth has quite a large drop of water... rather minute when compared with the size of the Earth, but at least it is somewhat stable.

There are a lot of reports that space is full of water
The Bible specifically states that water is everywhere

But is it ?

Can water exist in space ?..... and for that matter

Is water a natural compound ?


Water is everywhere. Water vapor is a component of most planetary atmospheres, at least to some degree. Water molecules have also been detected in stellar atmospheres and interstellar clouds; comets are largely water ice and there are a lot of icy meteoroids and asteroids. Europa, at least, is likely to have a huge ocean underneath its (water) icy surface. It is everywhere.

And what do you mean by "natural"?
MjolnirPants
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 19 2008, 09:32 AM)
Can water exist in space ?..... and for that matter

Is water a natural compound ?

Wikipedia - Water - Water in the Universe
QUOTE
Much of the universe's water may be produced as a byproduct of star formation. When stars are born, their birth is accompanied by a strong outward wind of gas and dust. When this outflow of material eventually impacts the surrounding gas, the shock waves that are created compress and heat the gas. The water observed is quickly produced in this warm dense gas.[5]

Water has been detected in interstellar clouds within our galaxy, the Milky Way. It is believed that water exists in abundance in other galaxies too, because its components, hydrogen and oxygen, are among the most abundant elements in the universe. Interstellar clouds eventually condense into solar nebulae and solar systems, such as ours.

Water vapor is on:

Mercury - 3.4% in the atmosphere
Venus - 0.002% in the atmosphere
Earth - trace in the atmosphere (varies with climate)
Mars - 0.03% in the atmosphere
Jupiter - 0.0004% in the atmosphere
Saturn - in ices only
Enceladus (moon of Saturn) - 91% in the atmosphere
exoplanets known as HD 189733 b[6] and HD 209458 b.[7]
Liquid water is on:

Earth - 71% of surface
Strong evidence suggests that liquid water is present just under the surface of Saturn's moon Enceladus. Probably some liquid water is on Europa.

Water ice is on:

Earth - mainly on ice sheets
polar ice caps on Mars
Titan
Europa
Enceladus
Probability or possibility of distribution of water ice is at: lunar ice on the Moon, Ceres (dwarf planet), Tethys (moon). Ice is probably in internal structure of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto and on comets.

Why would you even ask, instead of doing the 10 seconds of research it takes to find out for yourself??
Zarkov
QUOTE
Why would you even ask


because all those reports are not specific for H2O but the hydroxyl radical -OH

IMO water can not exist in a cosmic environment.
MjolnirPants
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 19 2008, 09:31 PM)

because all those reports are not specific for H2O but the hydroxyl radical -OH

IMO water can not exist in a cosmic environment.

Umm.... From that very same article:
QUOTE
Common name: water
IUPAC name: oxidane
Alternative names: aqua, dihydrogen monoxide,
hydrogen hydroxide, (more)
Molecular formula: H2O

So they're obviously talking about H2O. Pay attention, son!

And then there's this:
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
Common name: water
IUPAC name: oxidane
Alternative names: aqua, dihydrogen monoxide,
hydrogen hydroxide, (more)
Molecular formula: H2O

So they're obviously talking about H2O. Pay attention, son!

And then there's this:
The hydroxyl radical, ·OH, is the neutral form of the hydroxide ion. Hydroxyl radicals are highly reactive and consequently short lived; however, they form an important part of radical chemistry.

From Wikipedia - Hydroxyl Radical
You see, short lived chemicals don't stick around for very long, hence there aint too much of em in the universe. Good god, when you gonna stop deluding yourself and get in touch with reality? If you wanna talk about science, it helps to actually know a thing or two about it...
Sapo
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+May 19 2008, 04:47 PM)
Pay attention, son!

Ol' Thunder-Britches, and Foghorn Leghorn, too? Godalmighty, boy. Are you trying to take on too much? laugh.gif
MjolnirPants
QUOTE (Sapo+May 19 2008, 09:51 PM)
Ol' Thunder-Britches, and Foghorn Leghorn, too? Godalmighty, boy. Are you trying to take on too much? laugh.gif

Ain't no such thing as too much for Ol' Thunder Britches! laugh.gif
Sapo
How about those goats that draw your daddy's cart? Bet they'll give y' watfive! sad.gif
MjolnirPants
QUOTE (Sapo+May 19 2008, 10:04 PM)
How about those goats that draw your daddy's cart? Bet they'll give y' watfive! sad.gif

Whatta ya mean, my daddy's cart? Them's MY goats and MY cart! biggrin.gif
Don't make me cloud up n rain on ya!
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 19 2008, 09:31 PM)

because all those reports are not specific for H2O but the hydroxyl radical -OH

IMO water can not exist in a cosmic environment.

What? Where do you get these bizarre ideas? No, they are direct detection of H2O.

Are you saying that cometary ices, Galilean satellites surfaces and Martian icecaps do not contain any water? Or the interstellar clouds? Look at arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0801/0801.1167v1.pdf , for example. You are on my turf now...wink.gif
Sapo
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+May 19 2008, 05:34 PM)
Whatta ya mean, my daddy's cart? Them's MY goats and MY cart! biggrin.gif
Don't make me cloud up n rain on ya!

Flood control is enabled on this board.
barakn
QUOTE (ofelas+May 19 2008, 11:32 PM)
What? Where do you get these bizarre ideas? No, they are direct detection of H2O.

Are you saying that cometary ices, Galilean satellites surfaces and Martian icecaps do not contain any water? Or the interstellar clouds? Look at arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0801/0801.1167v1.pdf , for example. You are on my turf now...wink.gif

That's going to be way over his head. Let's start him off with baby food.
http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/vibrat.html
Zarkov
LOL, well hit a chord.... way off key guys

QUOTE
short lived chemicals don't stick around for very long, hence there aint too much of em in the universe.


mmmh, interesting that there are massive STABLE clouds of -OH in the Universe

unstable.... only on Earth (or similar) lads.....

The condensation product of OH +OH is

Hydrogen peroxide
unstable on Earth, very stable in space.....


Your anthropogenic chemistry is not useful in the cosmos.... y'all need an upgrade
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 12:14 AM)
LOL, well hit a chord.... way off key guys



mmmh, interesting that there are massive STABLE clouds of -OH in the Universe

unstable.... only on Earth (or similar) lads.....

The condensation product of OH +OH is

Hydrogen peroxide
unstable on Earth, very stable in space.....


Your anthropogenic chemistry is not useful in the cosmos.... y'all need an upgrade

Peroxide is unstable in space also; exposed to H it becomes...guess what? And is detected directly, as well as in stellar atmospheres.

Teach yr gramma to suck eggs.
N O M
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 09:31 AM)
IMO water can not exist in a cosmic environment.

As if we care about your opinion.

You have been defeated on this subject before on physorg Zerkoff. What did you fail to learn then?
MjolnirPants
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 12:14 AM)
mmmh, interesting that there are massive STABLE clouds of -OH in the Universe

Boy yer just full of bullcrap, ain'tcha?

QUOTE
unstable.... only on Earth (or similar) lads.....

Apparently so, it just keeps spillin out!

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
unstable.... only on Earth (or similar) lads.....

Apparently so, it just keeps spillin out!

The condensation product of OH +OH is

Hydrogen peroxide
unstable on Earth, very stable in space.....

I think I need a mop and a bucket...

QUOTE
Your anthropogenic chemistry is not useful in the cosmos.... y'all need an upgrade

DEAR GOD START BAILING!!!
Zarkov
QUOTE
exposed to H it becomes...guess what?


err.... what H is that ????

and what happens to H2O when it is exposed to UV ?

NASA has been backpeddling... every since I alerted them to their classic anthropogenic mistake.......and yes the "comet freaks" are all confused when it comes to cosmic chemistry

Sunday, NASA is landing a probe on Mars to look for water... LOL
but a recent report from NASA claims that water is now far to deep for the probe to find any... LOL

So what is all that "ICE" on Mars..... H2O2 ice, just as it is on Saturn's moons.....

EGG all over their earthling faces... but never admit anything !!!!!!

LOL

The Truth is Out There.... I know !


on Edit

Before you show your total stupidity... google is your friend!
Zarkov
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/0805...-mysteries.html

QUOTE
In the long list of questions that make up this puzzle, two related queries have long stood out in the minds of scientists and the public alike: Is there liquid water on Mars? And does this seemingly barren planet harbor some kind of life?

NASA's Mars Phoenix Lander, slated to touch down in the northern polar region of Mars on Sunday, will aim to help answer these two key questions as it surveys a tiny piece of the planet.

Scientists have been keen to find evidence of water on Mars because it is essential to life as we know it, and having an "onsite" source of H2O would be crucial to any future manned missions to the planet.

"Liquid water is the holy grail on Mars. Where is it? Does it exist at all?" said Phoenix principal investigator Peter Smith of the University of Arizona.

For the first half of the 20th century, it was thought that liquid water sloshed around all over the surface of Mars, in dark patches assumed to be seas covering portions of the planet's surface (not to mention astronomer Percival Lowell's infamous canals, later shown to be optical illusions). Mariner 4's 1965 flyby, which returned the first images of the planet's surface, dashed hopes of finding any Martian seas: The surface looked as inactive and pockmarked with craters as the moon.

Mariner 9, however, found signs that liquid water had once flowed across the Martian landscape through ancient river beds, as well as evidence of water erosion. Other missions, including two current rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, have found ample evidence that water once flowed through rivers, pooled in lakes and spewed from hydrothermal vents.

But this liquid water flowed mostly in very ancient times, when conditions on Mars were much different than they are today. Now, the planet's atmospheric pressure is too low (about 1/100th of Earth's) for liquid water to last on the surface. The only place on the surface where water exists is at the poles, and there it is found only in its frozen form.

In February 2002, NASA's Mars Odyssey orbiter extended the known regions of water on Mars when it detected the signature of water ice just under the surface of the Martian arctic regions, and lots of it.

"It's not just a little bit that you might expect to get frozen into the ground from the atmosphere, but it's like 70 to 80 percent of the upper meter of the surface is ice," Smith said. "The amount of ice was a huge surprise."

Because the arctic regions of the planet haven't been explored from the surface and the underground ice has so far only been detected indirectly, this subsurface arena is "all of a sudden this mystery zone in my opinion," Smith said.

Exactly how these substantial subsurface layers of water ice formed is unknown. Some scientists say it could be a remnant of an ancient northern sea that has been theorized to have existed when Mars was much warmer. It may also have formed as water vapor froze out of the atmosphere, which is partly how the polar caps on Mars form today. But this deposition typically only creates a small amount of soil-trapped ice.

"So you wonder how you can get 70 percent water in just the pore spaces [between soil grains], it doesn't make any sense!" Smith said. "So there must be some other way that you're getting this large amount of water in that area."

Phoenix will aim to shed some light on the origin of this ice, which is expected to be so cold that it will be as hard as concrete, and to characterize it by chipping away pieces for analysis. Smith and the other Phoenix investigators also hope the lander will help determine whether or not the ice periodically melted and wet the Martian soil to create a habitable zone that could have possibly supported some form of Martian life.

"You know there's ice there now, it's probably too cold to melt — the question is, in the last million or couple million years has there been a 'wet zone' up there, if you like, where you really did get liquid water, you wet the soil, and would that be a habitable zone on Mars?" Smith told SPACE.com. 



There is going to be a huge surprise for NASA

for the uninitiated:- ice is frozen something.... and does not imply water....
This ice on Mars has been picked up by radar, where the reflection is "characteristic" of a smooth surface... presumed to be, you guess it, "water ice", LOL

but reality seems to be slowly sinking in

Strange how NASA took the words in the Bible to be absolutely true !!!! LOL



On Edit

They still have no idea about the cosmic chemistry of Hydrogen and Oxygen

Under low pressure, liquid water evaporates, thus it freezes, then that ice sublimes...... thus if there is no liquid water there, really there can not be any frozen water..

On Mars any water vapour in the atmosphere is quickly dissociated by UV to H2 and -OH ----> H2O2 ......... lost to space.... ( H2O2 will decompose on occasion to water but that is transient.

However frozen H2O2, CO2 exists at the poles on Mars, just as it does on various gas giant moons... and as comets.....

H2O2 is the Universe's free fuel.... thank you GOD !

Water may once have been on Mars... but that was when the atmosphere of Mars was similar to Earth and life forms roamed the hills.... but that was when Mars was at the distance from the Sun that Earth is now...

Mars is about to fragment as it is pushed up against Jupiter's magnetic Bloch Wall, its core is frozen and there is nothing to hold it together anymore..... sob, goodbye Mars, bye Mum !
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 01:56 AM)

err.... what H is that ????

Before you show your total stupidity... google is your friend!

No, before you show your total stupidity, some knowledge of astrophysics, cosmochemistry and cosmology is invaluable and can not be replaced by google.

And H is what all space is full of, both atomic, ionized, molecular...
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 05:47 AM)

but reality seems to be slowly sinking in

I am sure that all direct observations of 940 nm water absorption line in multiple stellar spectra are a particular hallucination I share with most astronomers.

It is rather obvious that reality has no effect on you; the rest of your post was beyond gibberish and even more entertaining than the ones I have seen before.
Zarkov
QUOTE
And H is what all space is full of, both atomic, ionized, molecular...


OK, ionised, atomic hydrogen..... certainly is in some places in the cosmos, usually in association with other atomic/ionised particles... ie O etc

H2, molecular is usually very cold and completely unreactive..... and in fact any reaction between H and O only yields -OH

In places where -OH is produced, the oxygen is almost completely exhausted.

Great clouds of -OH are testimony to this.

Certainly space offers many chemical environments, but nothing out there produces water as such.

I call you out on this.

ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 09:03 AM)

OK, ionised, atomic  hydrogen..... certainly is in some places in the cosmos, usually in association with other atomic/ionised particles... ie O etc

Certainly space offers many chemical environments, but nothing out there produces water as such.

I call you out on this.

You fail to notice that we observe water absorption lines DIRECTLY in stellar spectra, as a search of arxiv will clearly show, and as elementary experience with stellar spectroscopy will decisively confirm.

Planets? There is an amazing amount of information out there, for example, on Chiron: www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WGF-45GWGRP-M&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=17cb34236ae03ce57e4eb717ef6f0f3a

Your ignorance of basic science is astounding, considering that you feel yourself to be qualified to challenge it.

There are also massive amounts of atomic hydrogen in interstellar clouds not "in association" with anything in particular, despite your claims to the contrary, a fact learned in the first semester astrophysics course on Galactic Astronomy.
Zarkov
QUOTE
massive amounts of atomic hydrogen in interstellar clouds not "in association" with anything in particular


oh definitely

where are the massive clouds of atomic oxygen ????

Sorry I don't buy any of your story
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 09:38 AM)

oh definitely

where are the massive clouds of atomic oxygen ????

Sorry I don't buy any of your story

You are dim. This is not a story, but rather direct observations. You should polish up your spectroscopic knowledge and check it out for yourself. By the way, stellar spectra libraries are available for download, if you do not have access to a spectroscope (as I suspect you don't), and you can see for yourself.
Sapo
I believe his best use for a spectroscope would be to arrange his comb-over... laugh.gif
theory_of_nj
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 01:56 AM)

NASA has been backpeddling... every since I alerted them to their classic anthropogenic mistake......

haha, can you imagine being the guy who answered this phone call, haha
MjolnirPants
QUOTE (theory_of_nj+May 20 2008, 04:53 PM)
haha, can you imagine being the guy who answered this phone call, haha

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
Oh man, I think I just peed myself...
laugh.gif
Zarkov
QUOTE
check it out for yourself.


Thanks ofelas

You may find all manner of absorption/emission lines in spectra, and yes it may indicate a transition of some sort in energetic places

But when it comes down to what is stable..... now that is the purpose of this post

Water is just not stable under cosmic conditions.... anything that is broken down, even slowly can not accumulate given "time without end"


I appreciate your passion, and your knowledge... we are coming from different places

I am stating water is not stable, proof drawn from chemistry.. yes an age old study of elements and their "allowed" compounds.... allowed depends upon conditions.

Reading sprectra at a distance with really no factual evidence as to what may be happening does not count as proof for someone like me.
barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 06:51 PM)
Reading sprectra at a distance with really no factual evidence as to what may be happening does not count as proof for someone like me.

If you don't believe in the utility of spectra, then there must be no evidence for the vast clouds of -OH that you claim.
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 06:51 PM)
Reading sprectra at a distance with really no factual evidence as to what may be happening does not count as proof for someone like me.

What you don't get is that it is not only broken down but is also created constantly. And if you have a problem with spectra, why do you keep on mentioning that -OH?

barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 10:56 PM)
This means, where H2 and O2 in whatever form are, they combine to either -OH or condense as H2O2.

These products are stable in space, so why would water ever form ???

What evidence do you have to support this?
Zarkov
QUOTE
What evidence do you have to support this?


Read about upper atmosphere chemistry of water escaping to space.
barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 11:26 PM)

Read about upper atmosphere chemistry of water escaping to space.

That's not what I asked for. I asked "what evidence do you have..."
Zarkov
QUOTE
"what evidence do you have..."


qualifications to understand a library of chemistry books
and extensive study

I ask you ""what evidence do you have..." against this body of well accepted evidence backed up by experiment.. hands on experiment!
barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 11:33 PM)

qualifications to understand a library of chemistry books
and extensive study

I ask you ""what evidence do you have..." against this body of well accepted evidence backed up by experiment.. hands on experiment!

Since you can't even point out one concrete example of these "hands on experiment," I have to assume you're making everything up.
Zarkov
Read the elemental chemists bible
Sidgwick.. Chemical Elements and their Compounds

and many others

but first you must understand what the words mean..... good luck

This is no surface skimming exercise... you must have the deep knowledge of chemistry... afterall it is Che-Mystery......

errr..... that is why people like me have spent a lifetime studying and practicing the science of chemistry and its byproducts...

look lad you put up or butt out

I don't mind explaining and discussion but harassment and innuendo just don't make you look good at all....
N O M
QUOTE (Zerkoff+)
that is why people like me have spent a lifetime studying and practicing the science of chemistry and its byproducts...
There's only one byproduct you've ever shown any expertise in Zerky.

Your demonstrated knowledge of chemistry is as absent as your knowledge of physics, maths, and ... everything.



so in you own words:
QUOTE (Zerkoff+)
put up or butt out
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 11:46 PM)
Read the elemental chemists bible
Sidgwick.. Chemical Elements and their Compounds

and many others

but first you must understand what the words mean..... good luck

This is no surface skimming exercise... you must have the deep knowledge of chemistry... afterall it is Che-Mystery......

You seem to operate under the time-honoured paradigm that when the theory does not fit observations, one must adjust observations. Simply, the 940nm absorption line of water is present in many stellar spectra; your speculations on instability of water (in fact, water ice is very stable under a huge range of temperatures and pressures, and so is water vapour) are irrelevant. Not all environments in space are saturated with UV; red and brown dwarf atmospheres (where most of the water is observed, in agreement with theory), as well as planetary atmospheres and interiors of comets are quite safe from it. So is deep space, really. The energy density in interstellar clouds far from stars is quite low--which is why they are cold. Water is much less common in hot, ionized clouds, again, in agreement with theory.

Meanwhile, while the presence of free oxygen in planetary atmospheres would indeed strongly indicate the presence of carbon-based lifeforms, the presence of water does no such thing. Water was present on Earth in huge quantities before any life-forms arose, as is evidenced by the oldest rocks.

Finally, your insistence on the "proper" meaning of words is silly in this context. It may belong in a philosophy of science thread, but not in a discussion of empirical observations. Whatever "gravity" is, I do have equations enabling me to describe and predict its effects. Since I consider it to be a result of broken symmetries, I also have a pretty good idea what I mean by the word. You, however, constantly resort to the argument from incredulity: "I cannot imagine what it means, and therefore it is wrong." (You share that endearing trait with every creationist I've ever debated). That is also known as hubris, and looks rather ridiculous.
N O M
QUOTE (ofelas+May 21 2008, 01:21 PM)
and looks rather ridiculous.

Zarky does that rather well laugh.gif
ofelas
QUOTE (N O M+May 21 2008, 01:46 AM)
Zarky does that rather well laugh.gif

Yes, he is indeed amusing in small doses. Annoying overall, however.
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 10:56 PM)
There have been numerous reports via spectroscopic "evidence" that such and such... and here add "water"

has been found... but it is never there... until you can get some and analyse it, you just have light.... and what does this light mean ??????????

There are many combinations but the END PRODUCT>.. stable end product is hydrogen peroxide or -OH

1.What does light not mean? Your insistence on meaning as somehow different from observation is irrelevant and silly. I look at the ocean; I see water, what does this mean? I look at the spectrum, I see water, in the same sense.

2. Just in case, hydrogen peroxide is H2O2.

-OH is a hydroxyl ion, last time I checked.
Zarkov
QUOTE
Not all environments in space are saturated with UV;


Indeed that is the point.

Just where would H2O be made ?

if whatever is first made is stable in all states then there would be no reason why that substance would change

Please show me where this, to me, "unnatural water" is made in a cosmically stable sense ?
KKris
QUOTE
And H is what all space is full of, both atomic, ionized, molecular...


ofelas, are you so stu--- to say this man?! If H is everywhere then a small solar flare can blow up the entire universe. BOOOOOM!!!


ofelas
QUOTE (KKris+May 21 2008, 02:55 AM)

ofelas, are you so stu--- to say this man?! If H is everywhere then a small solar flare can blow up the entire universe. BOOOOOM!!!

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the Universe; it is everywhere, and certainly is the major component of the interstellar clouds in which water is observed. And, of course, nothing would blow up in the absence of oxygen, so I can only assume that you were joking.
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 21 2008, 02:33 AM)

Indeed that is the point.

Just where would H2O be made ?

if whatever is first made is stable in all states then there would be no reason why that substance would change

Please show me where this, to me, "unnatural water" is made in a cosmically stable sense ?

Of course, H2O2 + 2H = 2H2O

And the possible details for this are here: arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0805/0805.0055v1.pdf

-OH is not stable in all states, charged ions usually aren't.
barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 20 2008, 11:46 PM)
Read the elemental chemists bible
Sidgwick.. Chemical Elements and their Compounds

and many others

but first you must understand what the words mean..... good luck

This is no surface skimming exercise... you must have the deep knowledge of chemistry... afterall it is Che-Mystery......

errr..... that is why people like me have spent a lifetime studying and practicing the science of chemistry and its byproducts...

look lad you put up or butt out

I don't mind explaining and discussion but harassment and innuendo just don't make you look good at all....

So in other words you made it all up and aren't willing to even try to come up with a relevant link that backs up your insane assertions. Thanks for nothing ... again...
barakn
Posting a link to your own website doesn't count. I looked at it and it is similarly devoid of corroborating evidence.
Zarkov
QUOTE
Such reports were filed under "L" ... for lunatic.




Fires on the Moon

http://physorg.com/news130594576.html

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
Such reports were filed under "L" ... for lunatic.




Fires on the Moon

http://physorg.com/news130594576.html

  Not so long ago, anyone claiming to see flashes of light on the Moon would be viewed with deep suspicion by professional astronomers. Such reports were filed under "L" ... for lunatic.

Not anymore. Over the past two and a half years, NASA astronomers have observed the Moon flashing at them not just once but one hundred times.

"They're explosions caused by meteoroids hitting the Moon," explains Bill Cooke, head of NASA's Meteoroid Environment Office at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). "A typical blast is about as powerful as a few hundred pounds of TNT and can be photographed easily using a backyard telescope."

As an example, he offers this video of an impact near crater Gauss on January 4, 2008.

The impactor was a tiny fragment of extinct comet 2003 EH1. Every year in early January, the Earth-Moon system passes through a stream of debris from that comet, producing the well-known Quadrantid meteor shower. Here on Earth, Quadrantids disintegrate as flashes of light in the atmosphere; on the airless Moon they hit the ground and explode.

"We started our monitoring program in late 2005 after NASA announced plans to return astronauts to the Moon," says team leader Rob Suggs of the MSFC. If people were going to be walking around up there, "it seemed like a good idea to measure how often the Moon was getting hit."

"Almost immediately, we detected a flash."

That first detection—"I'll never forget it," he says--came on Nov. 7, 2005, when a piece of Comet Encke about the size of a baseball hit Mare Imbrium. The resulting explosion produced a 7th magnitude flash, too dim for the naked eye but an easy target for the team's 10-inch telescope.

A common question, says Cooke, is "how can something explode on the Moon? There's no oxygen up there."


H2O2 patches being forcefully decomposed... meteors hitting dust and rock do not flash.


Now the erroneorus theories... the BS that is propergated as fact to show they KNOW everything

QUOTE
These explosions don't require oxygen or combustion. Meteoroids hit the moon with tremendous kinetic energy, traveling 30,000 mph or faster. "At that speed, even a pebble can blast a crater several feet wide. The impact heats up rocks and soil on the lunar surface hot enough to glow like molten lava--hence the flash."

During meteor showers such as the Quadrantids or Perseids, when the Moon passes through dense streams of cometary debris, the rate of lunar flashes can go as high as one per hour. Impacts subside when the Moon exits the stream, but curiously the rate never goes to zero.

"Even when no meteor shower is active, we still see flashes," says Cooke.



more at link


H2O2 being detonated
Sapo
I missed the link, but aren't you referring to the early Mars lander data, that suggested the soils were full of peroxides?

Man, you should give up drinking water if affects you this way. smile.gif

laugh.gif
Sandra doliak
Ita amazing what one singular atom can do.

Observe.

Water, the most essential element, vital for life, is a chemical connection of three atoms, H2O.

Hydrogen peroxide, H2O2. It is sometimes used as a cleaning agent. It is HIGHLY blistering to the skin, but amazingly, when diluted in water to 3 %, it can treat wounds. When diluted with water, it can oxidize or reduce a variety of inorganic ions.

hydrogen trioxide, H203. An unstable compound. Very weird. It retro-decomposes in water to form two water molecules and singlet oxygen.

Can you guess the others?

Sandra rolleyes.gif
Sapo
Is plagiarism so rampant here? Just look at all the tags I have instituted here, and Sweet Sandra has eaten up at least two!

CODE
Who ya Gonna Call? ©

Currently intoxicated.

MoFM


I hadn't thought to copyright drunkenness, though. Good hit! laugh.gif
Zarkov
QUOTE
Of course, H2O2 + 2H = 2H2O


LOL

amazing lack of chemical understanding

If for instance this was (true)

then where would this occur

it must occur where there is H..ionised or atomic

now where does that occur

where there is high UV

and what does UV do to H2O -----> H2O2

???

please put your brain into gear before you call what I say crap....thanks
Sapo
QUOTE (Sapo+May 21 2008, 05:40 PM)
Is plagiarism so rampant here? Just look at all the tags I have instituted here, and Sweet Sandra has eaten up at least two!

CODE
Who ya Gonna Call? ©

Currently intoxicated.

MoFM


I hadn't thought to copyright drunkenness, though. Good hit!  laugh.gif

Since we can ignore Zarkov, I turn to my last post. Sandra took me to mean I accused her of plagiarism. Nothing was further from my mind! Simply the use of tags that we all see, but aren't temporally fixed in our posting history.

O Babylon! laugh.gif

Edit: I don't think my obscurity helps, but that is the way it is tonight. Sorry. tongue.gif Love to all!
N O M
QUOTE (Sapo+May 22 2008, 11:54 AM)
Since we can ignore Zarkov

Agreed. Pointing out obvious flaws in his posts doesn't work. Rational argument doesn't work. Facts don't work. So we might as well just completely ignore him. Hopefully he will go away.
barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 21 2008, 10:06 PM)
H2O2 patches being forcefully decomposed... meteors hitting dust and rock do not flash....
H2O2 being detonated

And so the tremendous kinetic energy of an impact somehow magically disappears without being at all visible? Four months ago I showed you how the kinetic energy of an impactor was far greater than its chemical energy even if composed entirely of hydrogen peroxide.

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=305713

Dimwit.
Zarkov
Whatever

The Moon does not have an atmosphere.... so no heating, no oxygen.... so no combustion... only impact at rather a low speed.... remember "falling" to earth is an acceleration.

Even the "experts" are at a loss to explain this "madness".

Sorry you are talking out of....Uranus

No point me talking, y'all just haven't got the necessary background..

You will just have to wait until what I have stated is proven..,. by actual analysis, straight out of the asses mouth.


Remember not so long ago (100 years or so)

Meteorites were thought to be impossible...rocks falling out of the sky ??????????

now its frogs, fish.... etc....

LOL

just stuck in the muck of the past..... update
barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 21 2008, 10:52 PM)
where there is high UV

and what does UV do to H2O -----> H2O2

???

please put your brain into gear before you call what I say crap....thanks

You're full of crap. You are ignorant of the fact that UV light also degrades H₂O₂. You are also apparently under the impression that the entire universe is filled with UV light of constant intensity. In previous discussions I've pointed out that stars are the main source of light and thus UV light thins out quickly the further you get from a star, following the 1/r2 law. At a certain distance there isn't enough UV to damage H₂O or H₂O₂. Very thin layers of dust are also sufficient to protect ices that are closer to a UV source.

Mixtures of water and hydrogen are sold in drug stores. They go bad after a while - the water is still there but the hydrogen peroxide has decomposed. Hydrogen peroxide has a lower melting point than water, so while water is safely locked away as ice, hydrogen peroxide at the same temperature can still be in a liquid form and thus more likely to react and decompose. Hydrogen peroxide is a high energy molecule that is used as rocket fuel. Water can't be used as rocket fuel because it is a low energy molecule. And none of this B.S. where you claim that hydrogen peroxide in space doesn't behave the same way as down here - they use those H₂O₂ rocket motors in space. Iron oxides (amongst many other substances) catalyze the destruction of H₂O₂, and we know iron oxides exist in space because they are found in meteorites. Water is one of the by-products of this destructive process.

Your "knowledge" of H₂O₂ is so backwards from the way it actually behaves that I can't help but think there's some sort of psychological underpinning to your beliefs, some sort of trauma like your mother washing your mouth out with hydrogen peroxide after you said a naughty word.
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 22 2008, 05:40 AM)
The Moon does not have an atmosphere.... so no heating, no oxygen.... so no combustion... only impact at rather a low speed.... remember "falling" to earth is an acceleration.

What??? Are you smoking crack? Heating happens upon impact, as kinetic energy is converted to thermal; the speed of impact itself is quite variable but an object from Oort cloud would be going up to 100 km/s, which is pretty damn good. And even an inner system object may be traveling up to 60 km/s if it comes at us head on.

So you sort of fail again. What am I saying? Sort of? Bah, you bore me now.
Zarkov
QUOTE
Heating happens upon impact, as kinetic energy is converted to thermal; the speed of impact itself is quite variable but an object from Oort cloud would be going up to 100 km/s, which is pretty damn good. And even an inner system object may be traveling up to 60 km/s if it comes at us head on.


der, that's correct...... the speeds are not particularly fast

and such an impact of quite small particles would not be energetic enough to cause a light flash of the proportions needed to be viewed from Earth.

No, as I said, even the researchers are truly perplexed..

yes, your propaganda suits... but those who know, they know something is wrong with their theories

One would expect that all meteorite impacts should yield light.... this is just not the case

Many/even most impacts occur without light being emitted, even here on Earth

The impacts that are massive and emit light have frozen solid H2O2 involved either in the meteorite of at the impact site.....
Many meteors or meteorites have frozen H2O2 on their surface... this causes high level explosions in Earth's atmosphere

On the Moon such an premature explosion would not occur... however the Moon has quite a lot of pockets of frozen H2O2 on the surface, just waiting to be detonated.

But this aspect of this topic is now closed... there is nothing I can say and nothing you can say ..............
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 22 2008, 07:56 AM)
But this aspect of this topic is now closed... there is nothing I can say and nothing you can say ..............

Funny. You haven't said anything at all.;D
Zarkov
Oh, so sorry, all the evidence from chemistry just went over your head....

You do not impress me at all.... just another parrot with no understanding of the meaning

just another one... move on nothing to see here....



Cya
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 22 2008, 09:07 AM)
move on nothing to see here....



Cya

You've got that right.. laugh.gif
MjolnirPants
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 22 2008, 09:07 AM)
Oh, so sorry, all the evidence from chemistry just went over your head....

Weren't no evidence.
You claimed the crap you said was supported by evidence. You were asked to provide it an you linked to your own web site. You had it pointed out that your dumb claims aren't evidence supporting your dumb claims, so you claimed (yet again) that you're some kinda master of chemistry, despite not knowing the 'proper' usage of the word "unstable" in chemistry. (Hint, it ain't what you think it is wink.gif ) Then you claimed that the evidence went over ofelas' head, even though he knew enough to recognize that you didn't provide any evidence.

Hey ofelas, tell us all what the 'proper' usage of the word "unstable" is in chemistry.
Yeah, I know how dumb a question it is, but it's one I know for a fact Zarkov here can't answer. (not something you can look up on wikipedia, yanno wink.gif )
I just wanna clear cut demonstration o' how much smarter than Zarky you are.
N O M
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 22 2008, 09:07 PM)
Oh, so sorry, all the evidence from chemistry just went over your head....

It's certainly gone over yours. You have yet to provide evidence for any of your claims lies.
barakn
Oh, yeah, forgot one more thing. Hydrogen peroxide is so unstable that its not just sensitive to UV light, it's sensitive to visible light and thus must be sold in opaque containers (usually dark brown). I can't recall the last time I bought water in a brown bottle, nor the last time I bought ice in a brown bag. I don't know what kind of clown universe Zarkov lives in, but it bears no resemblance to reality.
Zarkov
OH my, all chemistry drop-outs

H2O2 can be made using UV water and oxygen...
H2O freezes at a higher temperature than H2O2

No point my talking to idiots.
ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 24 2008, 08:50 AM)
OH my, all chemistry drop-outs

H2O2 can be made using UV water and oxygen...
H2O freezes at a higher temperature than H2O2

No point my talking to idiots.

So? In the interstellar environments neither would be found in liquid phase. And water, despite what you may think is actually quite stable.

It doesn't matter; we have observed water directly in interstellar clouds and planetary and stellar atmospheres. If your theory (I hesitate to apply such a term to it) predicts that water will not exist there, it has been falsified, repeatedly.
Trippy
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 21 2008, 11:33 AM)
qualifications to understand a library of chemistry books
and extensive study

Good god man, I peed my oants I was laughing so hard when I read this.
Trippy
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 21 2008, 11:46 AM)
Read the elemental chemists bible
Sidgwick.. Chemical Elements and their Compounds

and many others

but first you must understand what the words mean..... good luck

This is no surface skimming exercise... you must have the deep knowledge of chemistry... afterall it is Che-Mystery......

errr..... that is why people like me have spent a lifetime studying and practicing the science of chemistry and its byproducts...

look lad you put up or butt out

I don't mind explaining and discussion but harassment and innuendo just don't make you look good at all....

My god man - two pairs of pants in one night.
Trippy
Oh yeah.

Here's a good article, which pretty much puts Zarkovs stupidity in its place.

http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?o...article&sid=142
Trippy
What's even more stupid is that (AFAIK) Hydrogen Peroxide HASN'T been found in space, because it's so readily transformed into water.

Get that Hansy old bean?

They've directly detected water in GMC's, but NOT Hydrogen Peroxide.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003asdu.confE.156S
Trippy
And not that I expect Dr Hans Zarkov to understand the significance of this article in relation to his proposal, but.

https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/dspace/bit...331_749_759.pdf

Which manages to completely contradict everything that Zarkov has said (but we're not really surprised by that now are we?)

As does this one:

http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=arti...130/aa0130.html
Zarkov
Thanks for that trippy...

2nd link states

QUOTE
Water is the dominant ice present in the Universe.

CONJECTURE

and yet

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
Water is the dominant ice present in the Universe.

CONJECTURE

and yet

ion irradiation of water ice performed on thin films to study the synthesis of the hydrogen peroxide molecule

FACT...UV does this as well... but you have totally missed the point, H2O2 is a condensation product of -OH.... what is formed is -OH

H2O2 only exists as cold ice... so all these water ices in space are not water but frozen H2O2

H2O2 is the primary product of H and O reaction..... and there is nothing in a cosmic environment to break it up... and if it is detonated, then any water produced is quickly re energised back to H2O2


well that attack was quickly sunk


the rest are all incorrect... propaganda at its finest

Yes spectral analysis at a distance still has a long way to go...

Thanks again trippy, all BS.

I was going to post more... but it is a total waste of time......

Trippy
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 25 2008, 01:59 PM)
Thanks for that trippy...

2nd link states

CONJECTURE

and yet

FACT...UV does this as well... but you have totally missed the point, H2O2 is a condensation product of -OH.... what is formed is -OH

H2O2 only exists as cold ice... so all these water ices in space are not water but frozen H2O2

H2O2 is the primary product of H and O reaction..... and there is nothing in a cosmic environment to break it up... and if it is detonated, then any water produced is quickly re energised back to H2O2

well that attack was quickly sunk

the rest are all incorrect... propaganda at its finest

Yes spectral analysis at a distance still has a long way to go...

Thanks again trippy, all BS.

I was going to post more... but it is a total waste of time......

As I suspected. All articles went completely over your head.

You still have not grasped the basic facts.

Water (ice) has been observed in the interstellar medium.

Hydrogen Peroxide has not.

You.
Are.
WRONG.

As for the attack being quickly sunk?

In your dreams boy-oh.
Zarkov
Thanks for that....

we part as we met....

I understand all of it... I am well versed in chemistry... and I understand I am standing against the crowd... you don't seem to understand that,... all that you can dredge up is know by me

and I discount it all... the real evidence, the facts just do not stand up to water being stable in space.... the only stable H-O compound in a cosmic environment is -OH or frozen as H2O2.

Even Tempel 1 and further on..... no water... no water.... no water..... and THEY can't understand that there is no water in space.

That is the state of your earthling metal poisoned anthropogenic chemists

Now the chemists of old knew there was no water in space.... but it was heresy.. the church knows everything .. and the Bible says there is water in space (even 2000 years ago they knew ???? LOL). totallty ludicrous


How stupid are you earthlings ???????

This topic is closed from my end.


ofelas
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 25 2008, 01:59 AM)
Yes spectral analysis at a distance still has a long way to go...

Obviously clueless. One more time: the absorption line of water is at 940nm. It has been observed repeatedly. What's your problem with it? WE SEE THE GODDAMN WATER DIRECTLY. Go away.
Sapo
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 25 2008, 04:09 AM)
Thanks for that....


Thanks for nothing, but thanks! smile.gif

QUOTE (Dhzerkov+May 25 2008, 04:09 AM)

How stupid are you earthlings ???????

This topic is closed from my end.

-------------------------------------------

http://www.omegafour.com/forum2/

All bets are off
Ignore List:- Everyone



How long are you going to last, without your meds, living on Cheetos and potted meat? ohmy.gif

Oh, well, ignore away, chief!

N O M
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 25 2008, 09:09 PM)
I understand all of it... I am well versed in chemistry...

Add this to your long list of lies. You have demonstrated very little knowledge of chemistry.

You aren't just "standing against the crowd". You are standing against the facts. You are wrong. You are an idiot.
Zarkov
MOM you take the cake... got anything to say ? FOOL
Trippy
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 25 2008, 09:09 PM)
Thanks for that....

we part as we met....

I understand all of it... I am well versed in chemistry... and I understand I am standing against the crowd... you don't seem to understand that,... all that you can dredge up is know by me

and I discount it all... the real evidence, the facts just do not stand up to water being stable in space.... the only stable H-O compound in a cosmic environment is -OH or frozen as H2O2.

Even Tempel 1 and further on..... no water... no water.... no water..... and THEY can't understand that there is no water in space.

That is the state of your earthling metal poisoned anthropogenic chemists

Now the chemists of old knew there was no water in space.... but it was heresy.. the church knows everything .. and the Bible says there is water in space (even 2000 years ago they knew ???? LOL). totallty ludicrous


How stupid are you earthlings ???????

This topic is closed from my end.

you're ludicrous.

We can tell the difference between frozen water, and frozen hydroogen peroxide.

One of the papers I linked to even discusses the differences.

You know nothing about chemistry.

Now avaunt my sight foul heathen.
Zarkov
well NASA has a lander on Mars, trying to detect water... seems like a very very difficult task..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7442233.stm

>> Scientists working on Nasa's Phoenix lander are trying to work out why a soil sample dropped on to an instrument bay was not registered.

Images sent back from Mars clearly show the sample lying across a screen protecting the opening to a tiny oven.

But it seems the soil may have been too lumpy to pass through into the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer.

The oven would have baked the soil to gain some insights into its possible water content and mineral make-up. >>>


The UV level at the surface of Mars is sufficient to kill micro-organisms...

therefore it is sufficient to convert water to H2O2....

I expect LIFE was once on Mars... a long long time ago... and Mars had water way back then.... now ?

I am sure we are all waiting for some "news" one way or the other.

Trippy
QUOTE (Zarkov+Jun 8 2008, 12:52 PM)
well NASA has a lander on Mars, trying to detect water... seems like a very very difficult task..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7442233.stm

>> Scientists working on Nasa's Phoenix lander are trying to work out why a soil sample dropped on to an instrument bay was not registered.

Images sent back from Mars clearly show the sample lying across a screen protecting the opening to a tiny oven.

But it seems the soil may have been too lumpy to pass through into the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer.

The oven would have baked the soil to gain some insights into its possible water content and mineral make-up. >>>


The UV level at the surface of Mars is sufficient to kill micro-organisms...

therefore it is sufficient to convert water to H2O2....

I expect LIFE was once on Mars... a long long time ago... and Mars had water way back then.... now ?

I am sure we are all waiting for some "news" one way or the other.

Again, you miss the point.
Zarkov
QUOTE
Again, you miss the point.


wow so instructive creep.

what is your point ?
Trippy
QUOTE (Zarkov+Jun 8 2008, 08:42 PM)

wow so instructive creep.

what is your point ?

Yay more abuse.

Creep.

Besides, why would you automatically ASSume it's my point that you've missed.
Zarkov
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/...x-20080608.html

>>> On Sunday, Sol 14 of NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander mission, mechanical shakers inside the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer will attempt to loosen clumped soils on the device's screens to allow material to fall into the oven for analysis later in the week.

The commands for this shaking action were to be sent to the spacecraft late morning Sunday, Pacific Daylight Time, and results will be reported Monday, June 9. Also on Sol 14, the robotic arm will acquire a sample from the "Baby Bear" site intended for the MECA microscopy station. Delivery of that sample will occur no earlier than Sol 16, after testing is done to sprinkle the sample.

A camera on Phoenix continues to image the area close to the spacecraft to extend scientists' knowledge of the landing area and work sites.

Phoenix's Robotic Arm Camera on Saturday took additional images of areas close to and under the lander unreachable by the larger Surface Stereo Imager (SSI), said Ray Arvidson of Washington University in St. Louis, Phoenix co-investigator for the Robotic Arm.

"We are mapping with the Robotic Arm Camera where the SSI can't see to extend our knowledge of the site and to see details of the polygon structures of the near field, close to the lander," Arvidson said.

An image from the Robotic Arm Camera taken Saturday and other raw images are at:

http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=3402&cID=51

On May 30, images taken under the lander showed the descent thrusters had cleared dirt from a smooth patch of either ice or rock. That area has been informally named "Snow Queen." Mission scientists continue to examine that feature. >>>



Snow Queen.... salt, ice( type unknown) or rock ?????


Zarkov
curious material at the North Pole of Mars...

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/...x-20080609.html

>> Engineers operating the Robotic Arm on NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander are testing a revised method for delivering soil samples to laboratory instruments on Phoenix's deck now that researchers appreciate how clumpy the soil is at the landing site.

"We're a little surprised at how much this material is clumping together when we dig into it," said Doug Ming a Phoenix science team member from NASA's Johnson Space Center, Houston.

The soil's physical properties are proving to be a challenge for getting a sample intended for one instrument to pass through a screen over a delivery opening. The instrument is the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Anaylzer, or TEGA, designed to bake and sniff samples to identify some key ingredients. The analyzer vibrated the screen for 20 minutes on Sunday but detected only a few particles getting through the screen, not enough to fill the tiny oven below.

"We are going to try vibrating it one more time, and if that doesn't work, it is likely we will use our new, revised delivery method on another thermal analyzer cell," said William Boynton of the University of Arizona, lead scientist for the instrument.

The arm delivered the first sample to TEGA on Friday by turning the scoop over to release its contents. The revised delivery method, which Phoenix is testing for the first time today, will hold the scoop at an angle above the delivery target and sprinkle out a small amount of the sample by vibrating the scoop. The vibration comes from running a motorized rasp on the bottom of the scoop.

Phoenix used the arm Sunday to collect a soil sample for the spacecraft's Optical Microscope. Today's plans include a practice of the sprinkle technique, using a small amount of soil from the sample collected Sunday. If that goes well, the Phoenix team assembled at the University of Arizona plans to sprinkle material from the same scoopful onto the microscope later this week. >>>


just have to wait another week....
Zarkov
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/main/

>> June 10 Update: Phoenix Will Sprinkle Martian Soil for Microscope to View

Next media telecon: Wednesday, June 11, 2 p.m. Eastern

NASA and the University of Arizona, Tucson, will hold a media teleconference at 11 a.m. PDT (2 p.m. EDT) on Wednesday, June 11, to present the latest news from NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander mission. >>>


Hold your breath !!
Capracus
QUOTE (Zarkov+Jun 11 2008, 07:51 AM)
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/main/

>>  June 10 Update: Phoenix Will Sprinkle Martian Soil for Microscope to View

Next media telecon: Wednesday, June 11, 2 p.m. Eastern

NASA and the University of Arizona, Tucson, will hold a media teleconference at 11 a.m. PDT (2 p.m. EDT) on Wednesday, June 11, to present the latest news from NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander mission.  >>>


Hold your breath !!

Dr. Zarkov, you sound as if you actually believe that NASA put a lander on Mars and is trying to do real scientific analysis.
Zarkov
http://physorg.com/news132419371.html

QUOTE
NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander has filled its first oven with Martian soil. "We have an oven full," Phoenix co-investigator Bill Boynton of the University of Arizona, Tucson, said today. "It took 10 seconds to fill the oven. The ground moved."

"There's something very unusual about this soil, from a place on Mars we've never been before," said Phoenix Principal Investigator Peter Smith of the University of Arizona. "We're interested in learning what sort of chemical and mineral activity has caused the particles to clump and stick together."


LOL

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander has filled its first oven with Martian soil. "We have an oven full," Phoenix co-investigator Bill Boynton of the University of Arizona, Tucson, said today. "It took 10 seconds to fill the oven. The ground moved."

"There's something very unusual about this soil, from a place on Mars we've never been before," said Phoenix Principal Investigator Peter Smith of the University of Arizona. "We're interested in learning what sort of chemical and mineral activity has caused the particles to clump and stick together."


LOL

Boynton said that the oven might have filled because of the cumulative effects of all the vibrating, or because of changes in the soil's cohesiveness as
it sat for days on the top of the screen.


LOL... so now its "old soil" that is being tested !!!!

Might as well declare this effort a complete failure.

always expect the unexpected
barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+Jun 11 2008, 02:30 PM)
http://physorg.com/news132419371.html



LOL



LOL... so now its "old soil" that is being tested !!!!

Might as well declare this effort a complete failure.

always expect the unexpected

The soil broke apart mechanically so there's no reason to expect that it ha changed chemically unless you're an idiot like Zarkov.
MDT
QUOTE
Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the known Universe; helium is second. However, after this, the rank of abundance does not continue to correspond to the atomic number; oxygen has abundance rank 3, but atomic number 8. All others are substantially less common.
Wikipedia

This makes water very common in the universe since in the cold of space, water is the most stable thing to form from O and H. Water, although simple and common, is the most complex molecule, with at least 63 anomalies. One of the most interesting is warm water will freeze faster than cold water. Mpember affect.

Another interesting anomaly is liquid water can exist at very low temperature and will freeze upon heating. Water is messed up.

Here in Florida, this time of year, it is common for dark gray clouds to float with white clouds on nice days. These are absorbing energy instead of reflecting. They are gray but not due to a shadow coming from other clouds. Water forms its own dark matter affect.
Zarkov
QUOTE
changed chemically


ah yes, smashed and decomposed.... yes no reason to think differently

actually it said

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
changed chemically


ah yes, smashed and decomposed.... yes no reason to think differently

actually it said

it sat for days on the top of the screen.


in contact with metal and ??/what else....

even if "smashed"... LOL... this is getting so ridiculous

A completely ill considered experiment... a complete failure...and any "results" they do get will always be open to severe doubt.

If you can not understand the above... then U better head back to your chemistry classes

This should alert U to the "strange" environment...

QUOTE
There's something very unusual about this soil, from a place on Mars we've never been before,


now an environment with "real water" is well understood..... one with CO2 and H2O2 is not.....

I am sad about these results..... but you know THEY must find water !!!!!

LOL

idiots the lot of them !
barakn
QUOTE (Zarkov+Jun 11 2008, 05:23 PM)
any "results" they do get will always be open to severe doubt.

Yes, but no one cares if you doubt them because you're an idiot.
Zarkov
bark'n mad

please refrain from snide comments

I take science very seriously... and this thread...

Space water or not is a VERY important topic.....
barakn
Seriously, Zarkov. The warmest it has gotten at the Phoenix site since Sol 12 when the sample was taken is -30 ºC, which is 19 degrees colder than the melting temperature of hydrogen peroxide. The average temperature (using only max and min) has been -56 ºC. Anyone with a background in chemistry knows that reaction rates are very temperature dependent and slow way down in the cold. And since the temperatures are well below the freezing point of either water or hydrogen peroxide (a simple visual inspection of the dirt would also confirm that it is dry), you're trying to argue that there is a significant amount of solid-state chemistry going on, which is downright laughable.
Furthermore the dirt sample has been held at ambient temperatures, so whatever has been happening to it the last 4 days has been happening to all it and all the surrounding dirt for thousands of years. I know you don't have nearly as much chemistry knowledge as you claim, but next time try to use at least a little common sense.
Zarkov
seriously I take your argument

but contact reaction (metal-sample) generates HEAT... and a chain reaction can occur..slowly....

IMO, this experiment is fatally compromised.
Grumpy
Zarkov

QUOTE
IMO, this experiment is fatally compromised.


It is you OPINION that is fatally compromised. While H2O2 does exist in places, without constant inputs of energy it is not the stable configuration of H and O, H2O is.

Grumpy cool.gif
Trippy
QUOTE (Zarkov+Jun 12 2008, 08:27 PM)
seriously I take your argument

but contact reaction (metal-sample) generates HEAT... and a chain reaction can occur..slowly....

IMO, this experiment is fatally compromised.

Just how did I know that you were going to make up some BS excuse not to accept the results of the Phoenix lander?
Zarkov
QUOTE
without constant inputs of energy


yes you are 100% correct

no UV, high IR (as inside lander), and compromised by foreign reactants, H2O2 is completely unstable......


In a cosmic environment there is low IR, high UV and ultra cold....H2O2 is completely stable

Water can be too in low UV and ultra cold... unfortunately there is nowhere for it to form (except where LIFE forms it) in the cosmos

If it is not in high UV and Low IR, it is as a gas OH or in ultra cold as solid H2O2

thats chemistry!!

And no, I would love to see a good result from a good experimental set up---- but unfortunately, the planners never banked upon the "clumpyness" of frozen -OH bonding
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.