Astronomy
Astronomy
Curiosity finds old streambed on Mars. NASA Science News. September 27, 2012. http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/27sep_streambed/
A breakthrough was reached by NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration after its Curiosity rover mission discovered substantiation of a streambed on the surface of planet Mars. Curiosity rover mission had been intended to discover whether or not there was life in mass planet. Since no man could be sent to mass to carry out the research, a robotic nomad, the size of a car, was sent to Mars on a crater known as Gale Crater. While driving along the crater, the curiosity Rover discovered images of antique streambed gravels that were contained in rocks. The size of the streambed rocks was relevant in determining the rate of flow of water on the river. The method used to make this discovery is imaging through Curiosity’s mast camera. Images were sent to the NASA science laboratory for interpretation.
The images from Curiosity Rover revealed to the NASA scientists that there was a river on the streambed. That river contained water level between the ankle and the hip deep. In addition, the findings revealed that the water flow was about 3 feet every second. From the position of the discovered streambed and previous imaging findings, the discovered stream lay between the foot of mount Sharp and the Northern edge of Gale Crater. From the shape of the streambed gravel, it was evident they were transported. In addition, their large sized rule out transportation of the gravel through wind. This brought the conclusion that only water was responsible for their transport. The findings paved way for future research on the elemental composition of responsible for holding gravel together by NASA. Such revelation would reaffirm characteristics of wet environment that was found in the discovered deposits. On the surface of Mount Sharp on the floor of Gale Crater, clay and sulfate minerals have been detected. As a result, carbon-based chemicals’ preservation has been confirmed. These chemicals are probable constituents of life.
Although much relevance of the research is experienced by the astronomers, these findings of potential life on Planet earth are relevant to scientists universally. The issue of life on planet mars has remained a topic of serious debate by scientist and the universe in general. Scientists have always believed that, with the potential of life in Mars, it would be easy to decongest the earth. Increasing world population has raised alarm on the security of food and other resources. This means that their presence on planet Mars will result to the transfer of willing persons to Mars to live the rest of their lives there. This is with the aim of establishing permanent life in Mars by 2023. I believe this sought of research is not relevant. Although people will be excited to go and live in mass, there is no technology there to support their lives, and this means they will have to struggle to live. For instance, since no one is found there, this means nothing exists except for the fact that life can be supported. For the sent people, living there will be indefinite and they will have to separate from their families or friends.
I chose this article in order to clarify to myself and others that the mystery of whether or not there was life on earth has been found to be true. Life existed in Planet mars, but this does not mean that there can be life now. Too much research is needed to proof that rivers exist and not just dried stream beds. Again, on mountains, snow is likely to form which means that the stream could have been as a result of temporary melting snow. I feel that the question on whether the water was fresh for consumption is more valuable than just the discovery of its existence. Before reading the article, I had the preconception that mars can not support life. The reason being that only old streambed was found which does not mean there are streams to support lives now. My preconception was supported because so the old streams were not deep. Again, this is proof for probable support for life not that the habitat is potential to live n.
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
