rocks vs. dried mud - Page 2

Previous 1 | 2
Author Message
John


Posts: xxx

Reply: 21



PostPosted: February 18, 2013 5:48 AM 

Me thinks I have just lost another 45 minutes here.

hortonheardawho


Posts: 3465

Reply: 22



PostPosted: February 18, 2013 7:12 AM 

John, I just freed up three of your posts. Don't know why the brain-dead comments parser is singling you out for mistreatment.

John Henry Dough


Posts: xxx

Reply: 23



PostPosted: February 18, 2013 1:34 PM 

so where dey at homes?

Just kidding,,,,when shall we expect this data,Gatekeeper?

John Henry Dough


Posts: xxx

Reply: 24



PostPosted: February 19, 2013 6:56 PM 

then you have to ask..where is the gas coming from? there is a guy on the blue forum name xlare,,,this dude is on top of it big time,,
so I feel no shame on in the interest of science advancement would I copy direct one forum too another,,Doug Ellision is in my book Above Description in His Advancement of Science,,,,I am shure before his career is over he will have been recognized as a True Pioneer in Space Exploration.Hello history book.Keep it like it is Doug!!Thank you for yore posts xflare

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 25



PostPosted: February 22, 2013 3:07 PM 

This video/audio link for the Feb, 2013 teleconference on the drilling at John Klein location, discussion of mudstone as calcium sulphate material was suggested as the main component in the gray color drilled powder from the reddish colored flat angular sections selected for a drill test.
[link]

My Google search reply added gives a few of the links presenting early theory of the wet or dry process of basalt decay and reformation of various 'mudstone', greywacky, or sedimentary compressed layered soils from the sources. Just a part of a story.
You must C&P the text or type in a search box entry to your choice of engines, but the result is similar for this topic of mudstone and the current 2013 tests of the drill powder.
We have a real challenge to detail several billion years of geo history of erosion/alteration/reformation of soft to tough rock layers. As some of the materials at each landing site show concentrated material, a rover capable of powdering smaller samples would give a great deal more information than the large sample selection now possible. The current drill is making 0.8 inch diameter holes from less than an inch to more than two inches deep. They seem to be selecting large areas of mixed content where the surface features show the local formation process, and with current content of sedimentation presumed as either wet or periodically wet/humid.
Mars is so small it is a force of imagination to think of long standing water.
Finding water sedimentation alteration or leaching would be an accomplishment, as at Opportunities site traverse.
Will they do a full release of the content of the 'Klein' drill powder from SAM?
Interesting small inclusion/oolites exist in the closeups.

Inverted channels claimed to be ancient river beds do seem to be simple to complex with some extensive switchbacks in meanders which clip themselves in some portions, so the evidence of surface water may exist even at satellite imaging scale. We have just begun to map Mars at Earth type landscape measure.

Inverted simple riverbed evidence.
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_030609_1550
Kasimov crater. ESP_030609_1550
Eventually DTM's and anaglyphs will show how much vertical displacement has occurred over the millions or billions of years. Mars seems to have little capacity to fluctuate locally vertically as the Earth does.
On Earth we see massive 'floating' lithosphere change. While the gravity map of Mars and Earth match in basics, the rocky surface seems to be less eroded or evolved on Mars. Will we see the difference is scarce supply of liquids primarily?
Did the high magnitude earthquakes not become effective on Mars as a result of a lack of broad scale liquids which were long lasting? Did the gravity field remain more static, causing a lack of vertical offsets and therefore a lack of cycling?

If as you suggest John, did the lack of separate water at the surface exist as the product of a lack of a sizable Martian moon over time? Possibly only the colder temp range? Lesser gravity and low air pressure? Lesser sum of material density from all combined preventing separation of water?
There are so many possible items to see in each sample from Mars.
Is the lack of a rock circulation a product of a lack of liquid planetwide oceans? Is it a reversal of cause and effect in the statement?
We take some suppositions as standard currently.
An early test of the questions in this Curiosity sample drilling.
This mission may give many hints or even answers.

Did your entries become visible eventually, John?

John Henry Dough


Posts: xxx

Reply: 26



PostPosted: February 27, 2013 1:26 PM 

Thanks for the Sanity Check there,,Dana...
I have not clicked on the link yet,,I wanted to ask you a question whilst on my mind.
Geing this::By Earth Standard is the rock Hard or is the rock Soft,,,thank you (back to your post,,,these thing take as John (other)
mentioned 45 minuits,,


Dana Said
'''Did your entries become visible,John?''

BLAAAAHHHH

Thats why I clicked onto this subject,,,looking for more mudrock,,,BLAHHHHHHHHH

There are Two of us Johns,,,,the other John posts about i/100the the amount of posts you and I do,,,,Dana,,,,,our Jphn seems very carefull what he says,,,,,I also would like to see the posts,,,after all the Big H,said he put them back up,,,,but where are they,,,hmmmmm((AGAIN!(back to your post))
-------------------

"""If as you suggest John, did the lack of separate water at the surface exist as the product of a lack of a sizable Martian moon over time? Possibly only the colder temp range? Lesser gravity and low air pressure? Lesser sum o"""",,,,,,Dana at this time of my life I find mysely not giving a tinkers damm about how Mars was formed,,,,,,instead I would like to have as close as possible the toosl too allow me to feel/imagine how life on a One Third Gravity (I weigh 180@6'1)
world would be.I think the hypothosis given
for Life in Space to be the Opposite than beleived.In short I beleive that one third gravity and the other life support for ideal human need could lead to eportionall longe lives.
Think about it,look at the lifetime of Oppy.
Truth is hard to deny when it looks you in the face.....The ISS is a piss-poor simulation of a better space station...in the first place they need (at a MINIMUIM)
a quarter mile track...makee it virtual reality or whatever,,,but make it,,,,,Movie Theater,,Library,,Gardens,,,Places for Solitude.
This last one is VERY important.

Space is the Final Frontier....I cant beleive
that we will not have anther Lewis and Clark,,JFK,,,Neil Armstrong,,Heros (God
I wish I could remember the Proud Russian's name)Others all Heroes.
SpaceX will launch to ISS soon now Let all of us hope for total perfect success.
SpaceX is owned by Elon Musk...this will be if successful the second trip to the station. NASA no longer has the money to do hardly anything and for some obscure reason everything cost about 10X more when it is made by NASA,,,I don't think SpaceX employs over 200 people (i don't know),,,,And of all things they designed their own engines and configurations.
So GO SpaceX...(what a goofy-ass name)

Previous 1 | 2


Join the conversation:















Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised
Shocked Confused Cool Laughing
Mad Razz Embarassed Crying or Very Sad
Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
Powered by MTSmileys