I agree with your entire post, except this:<br /><br />"Any biochemistry which evolves on Europa, Enceladus, or Titan would have completely different chemical pathways suitable for the conditions found there." <br /><br />While that statement would definitely be true for Titan, it would not have to be true for Enceladus and maybe Europa. It is very possible that the temperatures under the surface at Enceladus are over 0c which would allow Earth-like life to evolve. (As any ocean of Europa is salty, it is unclear if Earth-like live could evolve in an ocean substantially below 0c.)
- Status
Here again is the info regarding internal temperatures:<br /><br />http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4895358.stm<br /><br /><i>"Other research presented at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) annual meeting suggests that Enceladus may have a core of molten rock reaching temperatures of 1,400K (above 1,100C)."<br /><br />Most of its surface has a temperature of about 80 Kelvin (minus 193C). But in the "tiger stripes" it soars to 140 Kelvin (minus 133C), and the interior must be considerably hotter.<br /><br />Computer models have been produced which try to explain just how hot the interior needs to be, and examine the processes which could produce and maintain the temperatures observed today.<br /><br />Dr Dennis Matson from Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) took EGU delegates through a model which envisages energy coming from two sources, radioactive decay and tidal heating, where differences in the gravitational forces exerted by a nearby body (in this case the giant planet Saturn) cause churning inside the moon, producing heat through friction.<br /><br />"Down here [in the centre] we have molten magma," he said. "In this model, in the present day, it's entering a cooling phase which may go on for another billion years or so; but at depth you still have high temperatures."<br /><br />Temperatures at the centre could reach 1,400 Kelvin, he said."</i>
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>The evidence of a global ocean is also very good at Europa. According to our best understanding of planetary magnetism, a fluid is required. Europa has a magnetic field. The best explanation is moving salty water. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Not to diverge too much from Enceladus, but no, a liquid is not neccesarily required. However, a moving conductive liquid can generate a magnetic field, so it's a very plausible explanation -- arguably the most plausible available for Europa. (The moon is too lightweight for ferromagnetism or motion of semiliquid metal to explain it, and it seems absurd to even consider a mechanism such as the Sun's, where it's moving plasma doing the job.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em> -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Not to diverge too much from Enceladus,<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>Sorry about that...but, speaking of Enceladus, where's the salt? I was expecting that to show up in the plume, somewhere.<br /><br />Is there any data on Enceladus' magnetic field? Or will this have to wait until the close flyby in 2008?<br /><br />The chance for life, particularly life-as-we-know-it, is best if the ocean reaches all the way to the surface and is exposed to sunlight or charged particles. It's kind of hard to imagine chemically powered life like deep-sea vent colonies here on Earth. It seems like eventually you'd run out of materials.
<font color="yellow">The beleiefs in 'oceans' beneath the surfaces of some JOvian moons is similarly an hypothesis which is not supported by the evidence, beyond any reasonable doubt or even some doubt. </font><br /><br />Your belief is delusional. Show us this so called evidence. It will get trumped because all signs point to just that. <br /> <br />Doctor, heal thyself!
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><br />I'll take that bet. No life will be found on Enceladus or ANY moon of ANY Jovian planet (Unless humans take life there.). The temps & conditions are WAY too hostile.<br /><br />Minus 180-200 C. is a virtual cryonic ice box. Ice particles do NOT constitute liquid water in any case warm enough for life to evolve. As usual, such beliefs are long on guessing and nil regarding good scientific, biological bases. It's highly unlikely to be there.<br /><br />Promoting this life fantasy is viewed probably in the press as a way of keeping people interested in the space program. Sadly, such tactics, while in the short range might work, in the long run simply undermine credibility and are contrary to the laws of reason and biology.<br /><br />Believing that there's life on ANY Jovian moon is simply bad science and wild speculation<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br /><br />Basic article on earth extremophiles should get you up to speed:<br /><br />http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/050207_extremophiles.html<br /><br />Keep making overly confident speculations re: the limitations of whats possible: <br /><br />I can hardly count all the implicit assumptions and bias in just about every statement you're making here <br /><br />.. it stands as a singular testement one aspect of humanity that never seems to change<br /><br />Stars were gods - earth was flat - everything revolved around us - venus was a paradise - man could never fly - artic was dead - no life around volcanic vents - pluto was the last 'planet' - all creatures from the (jurassic, cenozoic, whatever) are extinct - blah blah blah<br /><br />I love it<br /><br />.,
All right, stevehw33 and chew_on_this, let's give that poor dead horse a rest, okay? We don't need any more insinuations about the other party's mental stability just because you don't happen to agree with one another. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em> -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
The good debates are the ones where evidence is presented. You might remember a PM fight I had with another poster over the VVAW?<br /><br />The same guy said he believed in the "Nemesis" hypothesis. When that first came out years ago, I said, "nah...those patterns don't work. Could be random, not worth looking into." But when simulation work on Xena showed me that it had to have been perturbed by something to get into it's inclined orbit, I began to suspect there may be such an object. The other poster provided the crucial piece of evidence; lunar soil analysis indicating a renewal of bombardments about 600 million years ago, possibly meaning "Nemesis" was perturbed into it's present orbit at that time. I had rejected the idea because such an orbit could not possibly have lasted the age of the solar system in the face of perturbations by passing stars. The geological evidence cannot stand alone, but there is a growing mass of other evidence.<br /><br />(Closer to this topic) -The same poster, over in M & L, wanted to use psychlopropane (<img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" />) as a jet fuel. I'm afraid he might get some amateur rocketeer blown up. I searched other similar fuels and discovered that acetylene is a hazardous explosive in solid form. The stuff freezes at -84 degrees C.<br /><br />Some posters would like to find green plants. But as best we can tell right now, the ones on Enceladus are blue. But some of the best enchiladas I have ever had were made out of blue corn tortillas by Sandia Indians in Ysletta, New Mexico.<br /><br />I wonder - ... did chlorophyll take over as the chief biochemical by sheer luck? Could there have been competitors in the early Earth environment which lost out because of simple misfortune? Could it be that there are purple aliens?<br /><br />What life chiefly needs is energy. Since it appears there is a hole in the ice at Enceladus that might let energy through, I would say it would make better sense to check there first,
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Meanwhile I am hundreds of miles from the delicious green chile burritos<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />did you mean to say ... enceladus? 
<br /><br />.
<br /><br />.That's an interesting idea. I don't know; magnetic fields don't usually seem to have that much influence, but perhaps given enough time it does. I don't know. Does anybody more knowledeable care to take a stab? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em> -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
<font color="yellow">"Show us this 'so-called' evidence..(for oceans on the jovian moons)." </font><br /><br />You purported the lack of evidence supporting oceans, let's see it. It's not there because the evidence points to them. Pull your head out.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">there is not the slightest confirmation of ocean in/on ANY jovian type moons. this is an hypothesis. and there's a huge difference between a speculation about something, versus a scientific, well confirmed fact. </font><br /><br />Who said anything about confirmation? Although the evidence confirms the near certainty of it.<br /><br />As I said before, Doctor, heal thyself!<br /><br />
Go back and read your posts dingus. You made the claim of there being evidence against the oceans. The [sic] is not necessary as the usage is correct.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">the burden of proof, as you well know, depends upon those stating a claim. not on those who do not believe it. It's called the scientific method. </font><br /><br />That's just it with you, belief. You have nothing to back your claims.<br />
The possibility for magnetic heating of the core would make sense for Enceladus but what about Xena? <br /> Have there bean any studies of how these ices react to great pressure? <br /> I'm not completely convinced of a liquid core in these bodies but maybe something like a semisolid icey molten plastic like core in motion due to temperature variations. Something like the earths inner core but with different types of ice instead of magma. <br /> In this way you would have hotter pockets of water between opposing internal structures. As the internal slush moves around occasional geisers or vents could spew material onto the surface.<br /> I think it might take far longer for these icey planets cores to cool if there surface was reflecting heat and supplying insulation to the interior.<br /> The whole thing may not really be as hot as the geysers would seem to imply,.<br /> <br /> Enceladus may be a small moon but it still has a fairly large amount of mass that should be able to generate a lot of pressure
You're obviously just trolling this thread. Have you not read any of it? Of course not, what was I thinking. There's enough evidence in this thread alone. Begone if you have nothing to contribute but trollish behaviour.
Reikel and Borman,<br /><br />I think your concept of a binary core is very interesting. In some ways, it is more probable than a single non-spherically symmetric "lumpy" core, as suggested earlier. I think the tidal interactions with a binary core would generate a lot more heat than a single spherical core, and perhaps even a hotspot.<br /><br />I eagerly await a planetary geologist to simulate tidal interactions with various geometries of mis-shapen cores. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
i think you're hitting on something very good. i do believe Enceladus' centre of mass is off-centre. i feel very strongly this is the case. however, i do not feel the hotspot is of impact origin.
Enceladus I beleive is active due to orbital resonances with Dione. Also it is interesting to see that the geysers are concentrated south of the Enceladus Antarctic Circle (where on Enceladus the sun does not set during the long 'Summer'. It had been sugested elsewhere, that is why there is activity there & that the geysers will shut down during the long Winter. However, I do not think that the sunlight at this distance is strong enough, the heat is internal. It is still strange though why Enceladus is ative around the south pole, but appears inactive at the north. <br /><br />I think that a future close encounter with Enceladus should pass over the older terrain in the northern hemisphere & then compare & see if there are clues to be had as to why both hemispheres are so different. <br /><br />It is also interesting that Mimas which is of a similar size to Enceladus is just a cratered ice ball. Enceladus I believe contains a rocky core whereas Mimas does not. I do not beleive that Enceladus has enough radiactive materials in the core to keep the interior warm. I also do not think that Enceladus has a global subsurface ocean like that suspected of Jupiter's Europa, but there may be lakes & springs.<br /><br />It has been suggested also that Dione's tectonic features may had at one time been similar to the Tiger Stripes on Enceladus.<br /><br />Jupiter's Io has most of its active volcanoes around the equator. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>
Thank you, borman. I will also send a link to this post to vogon13, he has mentioned ring collapse. I couldn't access the paper, I'll try again later. L4 and L5 are pretty much mirror images of each other, so I'm curious as to why L4 was specified.
There is also another new article in <i>Icarus</i> however (December 18), which supports the hot interior model. Abstract:<br /><br />http://tinyurl.com/y3vclw
Paul, do you know if the Icarus article supports the idea of radiogenic heating for the source of the heating?<br /><br /><br /> Bob Clark <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
I would have thought that Clathrate volcanism is more likely, as it can occur at far lower temps. <br /><br />An elongated core, could probably explain why the volcanism is centred aroung the south pole. However I am not sure, as an elongated core would point directly as Saturn & most, if not all cryovolcanic activity would occur on the Saturn facing hemisphere, not surrounding the south pole!!<br /><br />However the Saturn system is approaching an equinox in December 2009 (Northern Spring / Southern Autumn), so if Cassini is still operating after January 2010, we would have to see, if the area is still active then. If it is, then clearly the warmth generated is DEFINATELY deep seated, a warm ice mantle, perhaps caused by tidal interactions with Dione. I would doubt very much if there is enough Radioactivity involved.<br /><br />If it shuts down, than we can say that it is driven by sunlight, in esence Enceladus, would then behave more like a giant Comet Nucleus.<br /><br />Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>
Since they appear to be in related orbits, prehaps a moderate impact shattered an object, imparting enough energy to melt water but not vaporize in. Since 2003 EL61 is part of the group, that might also explain it's unusual shape, if it spunup during the impact then froze in place.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
Good point MeteorWayne. The super fast rotation of 2003 EL61 would be difficult to explain otherwise.<br /><br />On a BCC programme The Sky at Night with Sir Patrick Moore on Sunday (I have been fortunate enough to have met him on several occassions), it was mentioned that the Saturn moon Dione may also have a thin 'atmosphere' & crystaline 'frosting' & that there may be evidence of fairly recent activity there, this time around the North Pole, not the South Pole as with Enceladus. This is just getting weirder & weirder!! If Cassini is still operating in December 2009, we will know more. <br /><br />Apparently four very close encounters with Enceladus along with one each of Dione & Iapetus as well as several with Titan are being planned for the two year extended mission of Cassini.<br /><br />I will research this fascinating development & post back on this tread what I find.<br /><br />Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 188
-
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 36
-
-
Just a couple of questions please about just how far back we can model.- Started by Starstruck
- Replies: 12
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram