Enceladus, the Europa of Saturn

[bonzelite]

anvel, good points. <br /><br />what differs, perhaps, in the case of Enceladus from, say, Io at Jupiter (besides it's composition), is it's farther distance from the planet. Io is tidally tortured to death by Jupiter in it's extremely close proximity, embedded in the plasma torus. and activity appears throughout Io's surface. <br /><br />a question arises, then: at what distance is tidal heating no longer a dynamic or relevant force acting upon a body? i would assume tidal forces can act over vast distances. for example, look at how far out the sun's influence extends, gravitationally speaking, reaching far beyond Pluto. <br /><br />it is said that tidal forces acting upon Enceladus are "not enough" to create such a radical event as internal heating with water plumes, notably a hot spot at the south pole. it appears, then, that the heating is localized and not happeing throughout the surface as is seen on Io. <br /><br />why? and why is it dead-on at the south pole? <br /><br />in it's asymmetry of heat signature and erosional distribution, ie, skewed to the southern hemispehre of Enceladus, perhaps, too, there is an asymmetrical distribution of mass and density: maybe the southern hemisphere has a greater porosity than the northern, is thinner and acts a funnel or outlet for the entire moon's inner heat source. <br /><br />i'm only brainstorming of course.

 

[thalion]

A while back...I mean, a LONG while back...I remember reading something about how some planetologists theorized that Io may gos through 10 million-year cycles in which it varies between volcanically active and inactive, due to some orbital fluctuation. Perhaps the situation is similar with Enceladus. Maybe it goes through activity cycles, and was more active in the recent past; we might just have the luck of catching it on the downside of its last peak, when it would seem that tidal factors (etc.) are too slight to heat its interior.

 

[bonzelite]

good point. <br /><br />i said in an earlier post that the plume activity may have been throughout the history of the surface, and this recent activity happens to be what we are "dropping in on" only just now. <br />

 

[chew_on_this]

What's this "lies" crap? Get over it. Enceladus has geothermal activity and you just can't stand it. Ha! Your world must be crashing down around you. I can't wait till incontrovertible life is found outside of earth. You're head will probably explode.

 

[exoscientist]

Some great posts in this thread.<br /><br /> Borman quoted this release:<br /><br />NASA's Cassini images reveal spectacular evidence of an active moon <br />http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-12/nsfc-nci120605.php <br />"In some ways, Enceladus resembles a huge comet," said Dr. Torrence Johnson, imaging team member from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena. "Only, in the case of Enceladus, the energy source for the geyser-like activity is believed to be due to internal heating by perhaps radioactivity and tides rather than the sunlight which causes cometary jets." <br /><br /> However, the evidence from Deep Impact showing clays and carbonates suggest comets as well undergo radiogenic heating, which could possibly be as well the source of jets on the non-sunlit side of the comets:<br /><br />Newsgroups: sci.astro, alt.sci.planetary, sci.physics, sci.geo.geology, sci.bio.misc <br />From: "Robert Clark" <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com /> <br />Date: 8 Sep 2005 14:32:07 -0700 <br />Local: Thurs, Sep 8 2005 4:32 pm <br />Subject: Carbonate and clay in comet Tempel I raise the possibility of life.<br />http://groups.google.com/group/sci.astro/msg/378647c737beb164<br /><br /> Some ref's for the theory of radiogenic heating in comets:<br /><br />The Net Advance of Physics: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHIES, No. 1 <br />Panspermia Theories: Annotated Bibliography, Section V <br />ORGANIC GRAINS, PREBIOTIC CHEMISTRY, AND LIFE ON COMETS.<br />http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/user/r/e/redingtn/www/netadv/bioast/clash/comets.html <br /><br /> Borman also cited the observation of higher temperatures and inferred radiogenic heating on the Kuiper belt object Quaoar due to the observati <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[bonzelite]

for anyone: what other elements or compounds are present in the water plumes? any inorganic acids, bases, and salts present in the vapor/atmosphere? <br /><br />any conclusive data yet on a planetwide mag field? Enceladus is embedded in a plasma torus, like Io, yes?

 

[telfrow]

The only thing I've seen so far is frozen water ice averaging about 10 microns in diameter.<br /><br /> Link <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[bonzelite]

ok. someone mentioned, asked, about the insulation/conduction quality of water ice ---->water ice is a proton conductor whereby hydrogen ions can carry charge. you run a current through this, eg, a plasma torus, and you have Enceladus as a giant electrolyte, like in a car battery. <br /><br />all is fun conjecture, of course, but i'd like to know what other compounds are present in the vapor ejections, ie, acids, bases, or salts. NH3 (Ammonia) is a weak base, for example. <br /><br />i'll wait for more atmo data, then.

 

[silylene old]

<font color="yellow">ok. someone mentioned, asked, about the insulation/conduction quality of water ice ---->water ice is a proton conductor whereby hydrogen ions can carry charge. you run a current through this, eg, a plasma torus, and you have Enceladus as a giant electrolyte, like in a car battery. <br /></font><br /><br />Umm....no.<br /><br />Actually pure water and pure ice are excellent insulators, with a resistance of 18.2 megaOhms. <b>Pure water is not a conductor.</b> Nor is pure water or ice a plasma torus.<br /><br />Water with salts dissolved into it will conduct charge, with the resistivity decreasing as the salt molality increases. However, so far, we have zero evidence that the water droplets released by Enceladus are salty. <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>

 

[bonzelite]

it's not umm no. it is an unfolding dialogue. and it is an opinion and hypothesis: <br /><br />you maybe misunderstand my premise --i know all about vapor as insulator from cyclonic and lightning events --arid conditions allow for greater electrical discharge, ie, mars. thunderstorms on earth: water vapor insulates in that context --inhibits a good many lightning strikes from hitting ground. but we're moving past that context... put on another hat..... <br /><br />i'm talking about electrolytes --water ice can be such a thing-- it's varying crystalline structure, which is poorly understood, allows for things not possible as a vapor. <br /><br />as well, i never said "water or ice is a plasma torus." let me clarify. i said/asked if Enceladus is embedded WITHIN a plasma torus, ie, of it's parent Saturn (as is Io at Jupiter). if so, this is ample electrical field to run through Enceladus, as if you were to stick your finger into an electrical socket, coursing charge through your body --painfully! Enceladus is your finger. the torus is the socket.<br /><br />the entire reason why i based this premise of electrolytes, with questions about atmo data --with any possible acids, bases, or salts-- is exactly because their presence would build a case for electrolytes. but their existence is not necessarily required for electrolysis of H20:<br />http://www.synapses.co.uk/science/moonwat.html<br /><br />"Electrolysis uses electricity to break up molecules. The electrolysis of water is a well-known process and it's easy to perform.<br />When an electric current is passed through water the molecules break into ions of oxygen (O=) and hydrogen (H+). <br />The hydrogen cation (H+) migrates to the negative electrode (called the cathode) where there's an abundance of electrons produced by the electricity. At the cathode each hydrogen cation picks up an electron and shares it with another hydrogen cation which does the same.

 

[silylene old]

Let's discuss, as you made many factual errors.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">water ice can be such a thing-- it's varying crystalline structure, which is poorly understood</font><br />Actually it is well understood, except at extreme high pressures. Here is a reference: http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Electrolysis uses electricity to break up molecules. The electrolysis of water is a well-known process and it's easy to perform. <br />When an electric current is passed through water the molecules break into ions of oxygen (O=) and hydrogen (H+). <br />The hydrogen cation (H+) migrates to the negative electrode (called the cathode) where there's an abundance of electrons produced by the electricity. At the cathode each hydrogen cation picks up an electron and shares it with another hydrogen cation which does the same. This creates a molecule of hydrogen gas (H2), held together by the sharing of two electrons. (That's called a covalent bond.) <br />Oxygen anions (O=) migrate to the opposite electrode (called the anode) which has a positive charge because the electrical circuit has been set up to make that electrode deficient in electrons. At this electrode the oxygen anions give up their extra electrons and create molecules of oxygen gas (O2) held together by sharing the electrons they haven't given away. </font><br /><br />This is incorrect. During electrolysis of water, free oxygen dianions are never formed. Your "moonwater reference" is simply wrong.<br />The facts:<br />At the cathode:<br />4H2O + 4e- -- /> 4OH- + 2H2 <br />At the anode:<br />2H2O -- /> O2 + 4H+ + 4e-<br />Net reaction:<br />6H2O -- /> 4OH- + 4H+ + 2H2 + O2<br />which simplifies to:<br />2H2O -- /> 2H2 + O2<br /><br />Next, <font color="yellow">but their <electrolytes> existence is not necessarily required for electrolysis of H20</font><br /><</safety_wrapper> <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>

 

[bonzelite]

thank you for that clarification. but electrolysis does occur in pure water --to a negligible extent, producing hydrogen and oxygen bubbles:<br /><font color="yellow">"Pure water consists almost entirely of H2O molecules loosely bound in a network-like structure in which individual molecules are constantly changing partners. Water molecules exhibit a very slight tendency to dissociate ("ionize") into hydrogen ions and hydroxide ions:<br /><br />H2O -- /> H+ plus OH–<br /><br />but the extent of this reaction is severely limited by the fact that the reverse of this reaction is much more rapid, so that on the average, only about one out of ten million H2O molecules is dissociated. No electrical device or chemical additive is capable of increasing these ion concentrations in pure water above this very minute level which is so small that for most practical purposes pure water can be considered to be ion-free, as evidenced by the fact that it will not conduct an electric current."</font><br />http://www.chem1.com/CQ/ionbunk.html<br /><br />you are correct that it is a poor conductor. PURE H20 is a natural insulator; a perfect example being water vapor in the air in context of a thunderstorm, as i previously said. <br /><br />**for my original point** we can drop "pure water" and go back to acid, base or salt presences in the water, as i originally asked about --most certainly common electrolysis is feasible under this dilution <font color="yellow">--at the outset, i doubt Enceladus is pure water.</font>more atmospheric data will come out in the near future. <font color="orange">if the water has any pH factor tipping to acidic or alkaline, we can continue this story.</font><br /><br />

 

[bonzelite]

here's what i am looking for on Enceladus --stuff resembling this to enable electrolysis:<br /><br /><font color="yellow">HCl hydrochloric acid<br />HNO3 nitric acid<br />H2SO4 sulfuric acid<br />HBr hydrobromic acid<br />HI hydroiodic acid<br />HClO4 perchloric acid<br />----------------------------</font><br /><br /><font color="orange">LiOH lithium hydroxide<br />NaOH sodium hydroxide<br />KOH potassium hydroxide<br />RbOH rubidium hydroxide<br />CsOH cesium hydroxide<br />*Ca(OH)2 calcium hydroxide<br />*Sr(OH)2 strontium hydroxide<br />*Ba(OH)2 barium hydroxide<br />* Completely dissociated in solutions of 0.01 M or less. These are insoluble bases which ionize 100%. The other five in the list can easily make solutions of 1.0 M and are 100% dissociated at that concentration.<br />--------------------------</font><br /><br /><font color="yellow">ammonia (NH3)<br />NH3 + H2O <=== /> NH4+ + OH¯ </font>/safety_wrapper>

 

[silylene old]

<font color="yellow">--at the outset, i doubt Enceladus is pure water. more atmospheric data will come out in the near future. if the water has any pH factor tipping to acidic or alkaline, we can continue this story.</font><br /><br />Thanks, to this extent, now we are in agreement. For your speculations to be correct, the water must be contaminated with an electrolyte of some sorts and/or be acidic or basic. This is the clarity I was hoping to we could arrive at.<br /><br />Let me now argue both for and against the 'pure water' issue:<br /><br />Personally, like you, I think it is likely that the water isn't pure. This opinion is based upon the slight color changes observed along the edges of the southern hemisphere fissures, which I think are caused by impurities in the ice. I think it is possible that the ices and water near the vents may be acidic, because sulphur compounds have been detected in the Saturnian the moon systems. If we can detect sulphur compunds in the Enceladus jets, then I think it becomes probable that the water is acidic.<br /><br />Arguing for the 'pure water' scenario is the observation that ices are almost always more pure than the liquid they crystallize from (this is why polar pack ice is much less saltier than the oceans). Repeated meltings and refreezing of ice will purify it more and more (this is why pools of water on polar pack ice are almost perfectly pure). So it is possible that if the heat source is shallow, and it is melting purified pack ice to form a pocket of pure water which is ejected into the jets, that this water may be quite pure, and thus it would be an electrical insulator....and thus your speculation of electrolyzed water becomes much more unlikely.<br /><br />...Or it is possible that the heat source, and thus the water source, is deep below the thick ice layer, and this deep water has even a higher electrolyte content because the freezing process above has rejected the eletrolytes causing them to become conc <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>

 

[bonzelite]

right. now we are getting somewhere; i never thought Enceladus to be pure water, which led to my initial question to anyone if they knew of further conclusive atmo data, ie, presence of any other elements or compounds that are acidic or basic. if so, this would lend further credibility to at least an educated guess for electrolytic processes at Enceladus, if any.<br /><br />insofar as water ice, i should have used clearer phraseology when i was making a statement about the freezing process and crystals --i should have been clearer and said that in any change of state event of water, the electrical potential increases if there is any electrostatic friction and/or convection associated with these particles --namely ice particles in high atmospheric clouds-- not frozen solid pack ice. <br /><br />vapor in high clouds that remains unfrozen takes on a (+) charge, the frozen droplets taking on a (-) charge. the cloud in this context acts as an aerial capacitor.<br /><br />that was sort of a tangential issue, perhaps, to my point, and i should have probably not have clouded the focus with it. <br /><br />

 

[centsworth_II]

This may be premature, but if the Drudge "exclusive" here is to be believed, <br />Enceladus may even best Europa in terms of near surface liquid water. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[chew_on_this]

Steves' head is gonna 'splode on this one!

 

[paulanderson]

It's on NASA Watch also:<br /><br />http://www.nasawatch.com

 

[telfrow]

NASA's Cassini Discovers Potential Liquid Water on Enceladus from NASA's Cassini site. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

NASA discovers potential liquid water on Enceladus<br /><br />Here's an interview where Cassini scientist Carolyn Porco says <b>"...our best models, right now, are those that suggest that there's pockets of liquid water under the surface, and what we're seeing in these jets are like the equivalent of Old Faithful, in Yellowstone, they're geysers that are erupting out of pockets of water. It doesn't seem to make sense that they are anything else, so we've, in some sense, almost reluctantly been driven to this conclusion because any other possibility just doesn't make as much sense as a geyser."</b> And, <b>"Enceladus is being flexed, like one might flex a rubber band or a paper clip to make it warm, it seems to be flexed. And together with the rock and radioactivity heating the interior, that seems to be enough to give us warm temperatures, surprisingly warm temperatures and liquid water."</b><br /><br />Yes liquid water -- and thus above freezing temperatures on Enceladus -- are not yet proven. They are theories. But they are the best, most logical theories to explain the observations. This is Cassini project scientists speaking, not reporters or armchair scientists. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[robnissen]

How very cool. I wonder how many years it would be before we could have a rover on Enceladus. That would be awesome.

 

[qso1]

As NASA is able to glean more detail from Cassini flybys of Saturns moons, one things for sure. They are going to have some surprises. It may still be a bit too early to say for sure its water but its very promising.<br /><br />If they are able to confirm that the same process is at work at Enceledus as that at Europa, I'd say the chances of some type of landing mission are very good.<br /><br />Problem is, figure on at least fifteen years. 7 or 8 years development if they started tomorrow and the lengthy transit time to Saturn. Considering the distance and transit times of comm signals, and the much colder environment, a sitting surface lander is probably going to be sent rather than a rover. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

It ain't just Drudge:<br /><br />Cassini website: NASA's Cassini Discovers Potential Liquid Water on Enceladus<br /> <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>

 

[bonzelite]

Carolyn speaks to possible life as well:<br />excerpt<br />http://ciclops.org/index.php<br /><font color="yellow"><br />Our detailed analyses of these images have led us to a remarkable conclusion, documented in a paper to be published in the journal SCIENCE tomorrow, that the jets are erupting from pockets of liquid water, possibly as close to the surface as ten meters ... a surprising circumstance for a body so small and cold. Other Cassini instruments have found that the fractures on the surface and the plume itself contain simple organic materials, and that there is more heat on average emerging from the south polar terrain, per square meter, than from the Earth.<br /></font>/safety_wrapper>

 

[mikeemmert]

There are 224 entries on this thread, dating back to February 15. And it's news. BIG news. A gauge of this is the 6500 reads on this thread.<br /><br />But how did this get into the mainstream news, and why now and not Feb. 15?<br /><br />Could it be this?<br /><br />That's big news, too, especially here, and shoud be bigger news in Free Space, where it's flopped.<br /><br />There's been so much hype over the last couple of hours that I thought at one point that they had discovered bugs on Titan.<br /><br />I hate to say this here, and yes I'm going to take it to Free Space, but this sounds like a typical George W. Bush prank to cover over bad news (for him) by creating screaming headlines somewhere else. He's pretty desparate if he's going to drudge up a nearly month-old space science report.<br /><br />What is he masking?<br /><br />"IAEA Reports Iran Has No Nuclear Weapons".