Curiosity chief scientist responds to Noffke paper.http://www.space.com/28218-mars-rover-curiosity-signs-life.htmlHe could not really say anything else.
England has a good paper on why RNA is uniquely suited as the first catalytic self-replicator.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 01/09/2015 11:14 pmCuriosity chief scientist responds to Noffke paper.http://www.space.com/28218-mars-rover-curiosity-signs-life.htmlHe could not really say anything else.Do you mean in the sense that he had to say that because they decided not too investigate the feature?
Quote from: Star One on 01/10/2015 08:43 amQuote from: Dalhousie on 01/09/2015 11:14 pmCuriosity chief scientist responds to Noffke paper.http://www.space.com/28218-mars-rover-curiosity-signs-life.htmlHe could not really say anything else.Do you mean in the sense that he had to say that because they decided not too investigate the feature?Yes.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 01/10/2015 09:11 pmQuote from: Star One on 01/10/2015 08:43 amQuote from: Dalhousie on 01/09/2015 11:14 pmCuriosity chief scientist responds to Noffke paper.http://www.space.com/28218-mars-rover-curiosity-signs-life.htmlHe could not really say anything else.Do you mean in the sense that he had to say that because they decided not too investigate the feature?Yes.I've seen some criticism online in relation to things like this that the Curiosity science team are too conservative in the targets they choose to investigate. I'm not sure myself whether that's fair or not as looking for life directly isn't its primary mission.
I don't think it is entirely fair either, given the huge issues associated with using the drill.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 01/11/2015 09:31 pmI don't think it is entirely fair either, given the huge issues associated with using the drill.What is the current story with that anyway? I can't remember what specifically the issue was - something about a short circuit risk?Do we know of any plan for dealing with it beyond using it only for very valuable targets?
I think the problem is built in, AFAIK the only solutions are to use it very sparely for the highest value targets and avoid using it in the purcussive mode. Which is a shame really, because the onboad labs have got the capacity to do scores of samples.The announced plan is to collect somewhere between four and eight more samples in the next 19 months (compared to five in the last 29. At current rate of progress I suspect four is the best that can be hoped.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 01/12/2015 09:21 pmI think the problem is built in, AFAIK the only solutions are to use it very sparely for the highest value targets and avoid using it in the purcussive mode. Which is a shame really, because the onboad labs have got the capacity to do scores of samples.The announced plan is to collect somewhere between four and eight more samples in the next 19 months (compared to five in the last 29. At current rate of progress I suspect four is the best that can be hoped.So... what happens when the fault does strike? Is it just the drill that's busted, or the whole vehicle?
Spiegel & al. 2012 is a very interesting paper indeed. I was thinking to try something like that but had not enough understanding of the issue (and time) for that. Still reading...
Those above are unique properties of life on Earth. But what let you assume this are also necessary to alien life? You write that RNA is "most likely" in particular. On what you base that? Any reference?
Good question what is it says that RNA is always the preferred option.
Quote from: Torbjorn Larsson, OM on 01/08/2015 11:16 amEngland has a good paper on why RNA is uniquely suited as the first catalytic self-replicator.I cannot locate this. Link please?
I would add to Anderson's writ that Vasavada rejects Noffke's claim that there are no potential confusions (false positives) at her state of checking off on her MISS tests list, on Earth. (She do want to make a complementary microanalysis and a search for potential false positives, to make sure.) Either Vasavada makes a blanket claim that Noffke is wrong, or he has observations that would teach MISS experts something new.In either case it would be useful, not least for strategies on rover science, if Vasavada wrote a counter-article that lays out his evidence for errors or Mars's unique MISS-like geological processes.Can Curiosity's team really leave this behind as "a causal dismissal", especially since the 2020 rover isn't finalized? Any thoughts?
This paper now seems to be slowly picking up some more widespread coverage.http://www.theage.com.au/technology/sci-tech/astronomy/photos-show-possible-signs-of-ancient-microbial-life-on-mars-20150112-12mt27.htmlhttp://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6425392http://io9.com/this-curiosity-image-suggests-microbial-life-once-exist-1677739858
Quote from: Star One on 01/13/2015 10:07 pmThis paper now seems to be slowly picking up some more widespread coverage.http://www.theage.com.au/technology/sci-tech/astronomy/photos-show-possible-signs-of-ancient-microbial-life-on-mars-20150112-12mt27.htmlhttp://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6425392http://io9.com/this-curiosity-image-suggests-microbial-life-once-exist-1677739858Uh oh... almost time for misinformed reporters to take it as an absolute fact that these structures were formed by life.
Yeah... good point.I do hope they find similar features in the future, and take the time to investigate them closely as a result of this paper. Maybe media attention will make investigation more likely.