Author Topic: Astrobiological Implications of Liquid Water IN The Moon!  (Read 64757 times)

Offline Warren Platts

Quote from: Fornaro
Quote from: Platts
Water concentrations at the ppt level within the Moon provides strong evidence that the Moon is still outgassing water, and that such outgassed water is at least a partial source of the ice detected in polar craters. Indeed, it's likely that there is liquid water (and therefore life) within sublunarian aquifers! :)

It is mildly amusing, at best, to read that in the not known to exist "sublunarian aquifers", we are "therefore" "likely" to find life.

I can't say as I blame John for his incredulity--the idea that the Moon might harbor liquid water within it must seem counterintuitive to many. However, with the recent discovery by an undergraduate student at Brown University of unusual, Lunar volcanic glass beads containing water at the ppt level within pristine, pre-eruptive mantle sampled from the Lunar orange soil recovered by Apollo geologist Harrison Schmitt--a level about the same found in Earth mantle emerging from mid-oceanic spreading zones on Earth--it is now clear that there are large amounts of endogenous water deep within the Lunar interior. Some of this water--being less dense than rock--will try to escape to the surface through cracks and fissures.

The question is whether there are zones within the Moon where the temperature and pressure regimes favor liquid water according to water's phase diagram. A simple BOTE shows that this must be the case: Assuming an average surface temperature of 250 K, and a thermal gradient of ~1 K/m, then 250 K + 24 m = 274 K. This is quite shallow, and within reach of a most rudimentary drilling system that could be landed in a single launch quite "easily" I'm sure.

The Moon's interior temperature profile is not uniform: there are probably places where it gets hotter faster the deeper you go. There is some evidence for this in the few Lunar volcanos that have been identified, and possible sink holes caused by catstrophic gas explosions. In such areas, liquid water could be expected to be found at much shallower depths.

Such "sublunarian" aquifers would exist within naturally fractured basalt formations. Such formations exist on Earth, and actually have a decent porosity and permeability: enough at least to serve as economically practicable natural gas storage in places like eastern Washington State.

The reason I bring this up is because the fundamental mantra of exobiology is "Follow the water". The idea is that life is tenacious and will exist practically anywhere where liquid water can be found. This principle has thus been used as a scientific cudgel for Mars boosters to justify not funding ambitious Moon programs. However, as I aim to show, the idea that there is no liquid water to be found on the Moon is a mere assumption with no scientific basis to it. If finding extraterrestrial life really is a main goal in space exploration, IMHO finding it on the Moon would be more cost-effective than attempting to go to Mars for the same purpose.
« Last Edit: 07/30/2012 11:20 pm by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Bob Shaw

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1427
  • Liked: 727
  • Likes Given: 676
Re: Liquid Water In The Moon
« Reply #1 on: 07/26/2012 07:56 pm »
Considering the amount of material now known to have been exchanged between the inner planets during the LHB (when life was getting going on this planet) it's not a great stretch to ask whether viable living matter made it to the Moon. Hunting for (primarily chemical) fossils should be a major research goal when humans return to the moon in a serious fashion.

Offline Warren Platts

Re: Liquid Water In The Moon
« Reply #2 on: 07/27/2012 02:38 am »
Considering the amount of material now known to have been exchanged between the inner planets during the LHB (when life was getting going on this planet) it's not a great stretch to ask whether viable living matter made it to the Moon. Hunting for (primarily chemical) fossils should be a major research goal when humans return to the moon in a serious fashion.

Hi Bob, I agree it's quite likely that spores of life may have been exchanged between the primoridial Earth and the proto-Moon. And that hunting for Lunar fossils ought to be a serious major goal as well. It very well could be the case that signs of life could be found at the surface if one were to look in the right place. Plausible sites where outgassing has occured in the past and may still be occuring have been identified, such as the feature named "Ina" pictured in the attachment.

See also "It's a gas Man!" by Paul Spudis.

« Last Edit: 07/28/2012 12:53 pm by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4286
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 201
Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #3 on: 07/27/2012 03:06 am »
What sort of techniques would be used to detect such things?


Offline Warren Platts

Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #4 on: 07/27/2012 03:33 am »
Are you referring to microbes or fumaroles??
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4286
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 201
Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #5 on: 07/27/2012 07:19 am »
Are you referring to microbes or fumaroles??
Ah sorry, I meant underground pockets of water or rock with unusual water content. Actually, any interesting resources deep under the surface.

Offline Warren Platts

Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #6 on: 07/27/2012 08:31 pm »
Well, just look for the sort of irregularly shaped rimless pits described in the Spudis article.

But Kelvin, you've given me an idea: here's how Dr. Spudis describes the pit forming process:

Quote from: spudis
How are these features created?  Significant volcanism on the Moon largely stopped at least a couple of billion years ago.  The Brown team thought that the combination of young age, low maturity and unusual morphology suggested a relatively uncommon pit-forming process.  They proposed that the explosive release of volatile substances from the lunar interior would have disrupted the surface, created a chaotic mixture of rock and soil, exposed fresh surfaces (creating the immature spectral signature), and formed a collapse depression caused by the instantaneous removal of mass from below.

Now we can see that the new Mercurian hollows have morphologies displaying spectral anomalies similar to the lunar collapse pits such as Ina.  The new data suggest that Mercury contains significant volatile substances.  These volatiles must be present at some depth, accumulated under high pressure until crustal failure ensues and a massive gas release results in an “eruption.”  This explosive event leaves behind a chaotic, disrupted surface (“immature,” with fresh bedrock and deep regolith “newly” exposed to space).

But the strange thing is we don't see these sorts of features on Planet Earth. Yes, there are explosions caused by build up of volatiles, but these Mt. St. Helen type of explosions are high-temperature affairs and are associated with pyroclastic flows and volcanos. But the features on the Moon and Mercury are not really associated with volcanos, and that suggests a different mechanism by which the gas gets emplaced, builds up pressure and then violently explodes.

This is where the liquid water potentially comes in: imagine if a pool of water were to form between the interface of the regolith and the bedrock (perhaps in a rubble layer with good porosity). Imagine further that this water is under a little bit of pressure, and so the water would want to percolate to the surface and form an artesian spring. But ordinarily, any water moving up like that would freeze, forming a rime that would further entrap the liquid water underneath. But what if some sort of event were to occur where instead of freezing, the water went the other way on the phase diagram diagram and became stable as a gas, rather than a solid, perhaps either through some sort of local temperature increase or local decrease in the hydrostatic pressure? The water would start boiling and that could potentially cause an extremely rapid build up in pressure and thus cause a catastrophic explosion capable of excavating these sorts of rimless pits we observe.

Pure speculation, I admit: but you heard it first here at nasaspaceflight.com! :D
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Warren Platts

depth          0.79        1.7         2.52               Pressure
  1             250.00   250.00   250.00             3.60E+03
  2             250.79   251.70   252.52             7.19E+03
  3             251.58   253.40   255.04             1.08E+04
  4             252.37   255.10   257.56             1.44E+04
  5             253.16   256.80   260.08             1.80E+04
  6             253.95   258.50   262.60             2.16E+04
  7             254.74   260.20   265.12             2.52E+04
  8             255.53   261.90   267.64             2.88E+04
  9             256.32   263.60   270.16             3.24E+04
10             257.11   265.30   272.68             3.60E+04
11             257.90   267.00   275.20             3.96E+04
12             258.69   268.70   277.72             4.31E+04
13             259.48   270.40   280.24             4.67E+04
14             260.27   272.10   282.76             5.03E+04
15             261.06   273.80   285.28             5.39E+04
16             261.85   275.50   287.80             5.75E+04
17             262.64   277.20   290.32             6.11E+04
18             263.43   278.90   292.84             6.47E+04
19             264.22   280.60   295.36             6.83E+04
20             265.01   282.30   297.88             7.19E+04
21             265.80   284.00   300.40             7.55E+04
22             266.59   285.70   302.92             7.91E+04
23             267.38   287.40   305.44             8.27E+04
24             268.17   289.10   307.96             8.63E+04
25             268.96   290.80   310.48             8.99E+04
26             269.75   292.50   313.00             9.35E+04
27             270.54   294.20   315.52             9.71E+04
28             271.33   295.90   318.04             1.01E+05
29             272.12   297.60   320.56             1.04E+05
30             272.91   299.30   323.08             1.08E+05


Consider the above table. The depth is in meters. The three middle columns are the temperature at depth depending on the value of the thermal gradient, based on the three values I've found in the literature: 0.79, 1.7, and 2.52 K/m. (The lower one is based on LRO Diviner measurements of Hermite Crater--temp = 20K!--and Apollo values, if I'm not mistaken.) The right-most column is the pressure in pascals, if I've done my math correctly (assumes a density of 2200 kg/m3).

Note that the pressure gets to about 1 atmosphere at about 30 meters down. At that depth, all three thermal gradients are above the freezing point of water. Note further that the average depth of regolith on the Moon is on the order of ~10 meters. Thus, at a thermal gradient of 2.52 K/m, the temperature at the bedrock/regolith interface would be at about the freezing point of water.
« Last Edit: 07/30/2012 11:23 pm by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Warren Platts

Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #8 on: 07/29/2012 12:07 pm »
Who among you kind and gentle readers believe that the Martian meteorite contains compelling evidence of Martian life? Then why do you discount similar evidence of Lunar life?

Quote from: Zhmur and Gerasimenko (1999)
[We present] the results of the analyses of microphotos of lunar regolith particles published earlier, which confirmed that lunar rock contains fossilized remnants of microbial organisms, that most probably had been functioning in hydrothermal springs.

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline DGH

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #9 on: 07/29/2012 02:38 pm »
Temperature vs depth is very tricky because temperature change slows with depth.
You went from one extreme to the other.
First you posted 2.7 degrees per km which is probably accurate over 1000 km.
Then you went to 2.52 degrees per meter which may be accurate over a meter or two.

On the Earth it is 20- 30 degrees Celsius per Km for the first few kilometers but by 200 km it is estimated to be 0.3 degrees. Geological hot spots rise faster.

Although it was not your purpose you are making a great case for ice at depth in lunar cold traps. Even at 2.52 degrees per meter cold traps could be below 273 degrees Kelvin at almost 100 meters.

The simple fact is we need more data.

Offline HappyMartian

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2713
  • Tap the Moon's water!
  • Asia
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #10 on: 07/29/2012 04:35 pm »
....

Warren asks, "Who among you kind and gentle readers believe that the Martian meteorite contains compelling evidence of Martian life?"

I answer, "Me!"


Warren asks, "Then why do you discount similar evidence of Lunar life?

I answer, "I don't discount evidence that Earth microbes might have survived on the Moon!"


Earth microbes on the moon
At: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/1998/ast01sep98_1/
"The Surveyor probes were the first U.S. spacecraft to land safely on the Moon. In November, 1969, the Surveyor 3 spacecraft's microorganisms were recovered from inside its camera that was brought back to Earth under sterile conditions by the Apollo 12 crew."

And, "The 50-100 organisms survived launch, space vacuum, 3 years of radiation exposure, deep-freeze at an average temperature of only 20 degrees above absolute zero, and no nutrient, water or energy source."

And, "How this remarkable feat was accomplished only by Strep. bacteria remains speculative, but it does recall that even our present Earth does not always look as environmentally friendly as it might have 4 billion years ago when bacteria first appeared on this planet."



Note also:

"The Late Heavy Bombardment (commonly referred to as the lunar cataclysm, or LHB) is a period of time approximately 4.1 to 3.8 billion years ago (Ga) during which a large number of impact craters are believed to have formed on the Moon, and by inference on Earth, Mercury, Venus, and Mars as well."

And, "Extrapolating lunar cratering rates to Earth at this time suggest that the following number of craters would have formed:[citation needed]
22,000 or more impact craters with diameters >20 km (12 mi),
about 40 impact basins with diameters about 1,000 km (620 mi),
several impact basins with diameter about 5,000 km (3,100 mi)"
From: Late Heavy Bombardment
At: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Heavy_Bombardment



"The newly formed moon orbited at about one-tenth the distance that it does today, and became tidally-locked with the Earth, where one side continually faces toward the Earth."
Geology of the Moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Moon



If 385,000 km is the current mean distance to the Moon, then about 4.5 billion years ago the Moon was orbiting about 38,500 km away from the Earth.

The early Moon should have been in a useful orbit to 'catch' some of the many large fragments of the Earth that were thrown into space from the impacts of the large NEOs that smashed into our planet during the Late Heavy Bombardment of about 4.1 to 3.8 billion years ago. Early life on Earth may have existed at that time and could have caught rides to the Moon on some of those large impact fragments.

Let's go back to the Moon and look deep into the regolith and fractured bedrock for those interesting fragments from the early Earth. What else might we find while doing that Lunar research task? Might we somehow also discover lots of ice and Liquid Water IN The Moon?

:)


Edited.
« Last Edit: 07/30/2012 12:43 am by HappyMartian »
"The Moon is the most accessible destination for realizing commercial, exploration and scientific objectives beyond low Earth orbit." - LEAG

Offline Warren Platts

Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #11 on: 07/29/2012 09:59 pm »
....

Warren asks, "Who among you kind and gentle readers believe that the Martian meteorite contains compelling evidence of Martian life?"

I answer, "Me!"


Warren asks, "Then why do you discount similar evidence of Lunar life?

I answer, "I don't discount evidence that Earth microbes might have survived on the Moon!"

{snip}

So, you're saying they probably are microbes, but that the Luna sample return mission just happened to grab a meteorite thrown up from the Earth 4 billion years ago.... Those are long odds. More importantly, if the rock came from Earth, they would be able to tell, just as we can distinguish meteorites that came from regular asteroids and meteors versus those that came from Mars or the Moon. Even if they didn't test for Earth isotopes, the idea that a single random grab from the Moon would actually grab an Earth rock stretches the imagination. Yes, people win the Powerball lottery every other day; yet I never seem to. Have you?

More importantly, to deny that it is possible that life could be/have been on the Moon is to deny the presences of liquid water on the Moon. We can quibble about the exact nature of the thermal gradient, but that there are zones where the temperature and pressure regimes favor water in its liquid phase cannot be doubted. Therefore, you must be doubting the claim that there IS enough water within the Moon to fill in cracks in the rocks within the liquid favorable zone. Yet, you, Happy Martian, are the one who keeps repeating and reposting the same links as to how much water there is in the Moon! E.g., the orange soil has recently shown that Moon mantle and Earth mantle have comparable water concentrations. Something has to give. You must give up something. Which is it?

EDIT: And what about the organic molecules detected by Chandrayaan? These are also consistent with the Lunar Life hypothesis:

Universe Today: "Signs of Life of Life Detected on the Moon?" by Nancy Atkinson
« Last Edit: 07/29/2012 11:43 pm by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Warren Platts

Astrobiological Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #12 on: 07/30/2012 12:07 am »
As for the Surveyor 3 camera microbes, I'm sure you're aware of the recent skepticism of that result based on the unsurprising fact that sterile, clean room standards back in 1971 were less stringent than they are in 2012. Personally, I do not find the recent "debunking" to be at all compelling: the mere fact that the investigators wore short sleeve shirts and set one of their scrapers on the table for a few seconds does not entail that they contaminated the camera. I'm sure they scrubbed their arms before they went in there, and that they sterilized their working surface.

The main problem, however, is that the type of contamination is consistent with the primary contamination occurring before Surveyor 3 was launched, but not if the contamination occurred after return to Planet Earth. If the contamination was secondary:

1. there should have been more contamination than was observed--in the event, only ~100 microbes were found within an obscure part deeply buried within the camera--about the most protected place within the camera and where, if anywhere, spores would be likely to survive;

2. fresh microbes should have quickly grown within the culture--in the event, it took substantially longer than normal, which is consistent with the life coming from dessicated spores, rather than fresh, active bacteria;

3. the microbes that inhabit the skin of humans are a veritable zoo: the entire ecological suite should have been observed if the contamination was secondary; but in fact, only a few microbes of a single species was found.

That said, if you accept the Surveyor 3 microbes at face value (i.e., that they did in fact spend 2 1/2 years on the Moon and survived), then this is evidence that life can in fact survive on the Moon, and that the purported Lunar microfossils are potentially real--not that the fossils must have necessarily come from Earth!
« Last Edit: 07/30/2012 11:21 pm by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline HappyMartian

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2713
  • Tap the Moon's water!
  • Asia
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #13 on: 07/30/2012 01:18 am »
....

So, you're saying they probably are microbes, but that the Luna sample return mission just happened to grab a meteorite thrown up from the Earth 4 billion years ago.... Those are long odds. More importantly, if the rock came from Earth, they would be able to tell, just as we can distinguish meteorites that came from regular asteroids and meteors versus those that came from Mars or the Moon. Even if they didn't test for Earth isotopes, the idea that a single random grab from the Moon would actually grab an Earth rock stretches the imagination. Yes, people win the Powerball lottery every other day; yet I never seem to. Have you?

More importantly, to deny that it is possible that life could be/have been on the Moon is to deny the presences of liquid water on the Moon. We can quibble about the exact nature of the thermal gradient, but that there are zones where the temperature and pressure regimes favor water in its liquid phase cannot be doubted. Therefore, you must be doubting the claim that there IS enough water within the Moon to fill in cracks in the rocks within the liquid favorable zone. Yet, you, Happy Martian, are the one who keeps repeating and reposting the same links as to how much water there is in the Moon! E.g., the orange soil has recently shown that Moon mantle and Earth mantle have comparable water concentrations. Something has to give. You must give up something. Which is it?

EDIT: And what about the organic molecules detected by Chandrayaan? These are also consistent with the Lunar Life hypothesis:

Universe Today: "Signs of Life of Life Detected on the Moon?" by Nancy Atkinson

Follow the water is supposed to be the rule in looking for life. I think it is a very good rule. If some forms of life managed to get to the Moon from Ceres, Mars, Earth, or somewhere else, then there is a good chance that if that life was buried deep enough in the Lunar environment where water in some form tends to be available, some of those immigrant forms of life would still be active today. Could life have evolved on the Moon and then caught a ride to Earth? Good question.

But you know Warren, not too many people share such beliefs. However, the best way to guarantee that there is lots of life on the Moon is to invite a dozen, then a few dozen, and then thousands, and eventually millions of humans to visit Luna. Some of those humans will stay on the Moon and some of those folks will eventually head off to Mars and Ceres and other destinations in the Solar System. And wherever humans go they are pretty good at finding fun ways to create lots of new humans...

Oh and sorry about "repeating and reposting the same links as to how much water there is in the Moon". I've noticed that some powerful folks, including the President, are in deep denial about Lunar water and volatiles, and thus I tend to repeat the obvious. Such is life on the Blue Planet.

 
 :)
 
"The Moon is the most accessible destination for realizing commercial, exploration and scientific objectives beyond low Earth orbit." - LEAG

Offline Warren Platts

Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #14 on: 07/30/2012 03:37 am »
Follow the water is supposed to be the rule in looking for life. I think it is a very good rule. If some forms of life managed to get to the Moon from Ceres, Mars, Earth, or somewhere else, then there is a good chance that if that life was buried deep enough in the Lunar environment where water in some form tends to be available, some of those immigrant forms of life would still be active today. Could life have evolved on the Moon and then caught a ride to Earth? Good question.

But you know Warren, not too many people share such beliefs.

Yeah. I know. And your point is? That people presented with evidence won't change their minds? The purpose of this thread is to get people to re-examine their long-held prejudices with respect to life on the Moon. The idea that there might be extraterrestrial life has always been THE trump card played by the Mars folks and has been a major justification for the plan to husband every dollar in the HSF program and channel it into one great shoestring leap to Mars in an effort to find Martian microbes, since billions of dollars worth of robots so far have proven inept at that task. The idea being that once life is found, a profound philosophical transformation will sweep Planet Earth, and all of a sudden, many more billions will become available for space exploration with plenty of ponies and unicorns for all.

I say, OK, fair enough, but what's good for the goose is good for the gander! If we really think that finding extraterrestrial life is a major justification for space exploration, then if it is the case that there is likely liquid water within a few 10's of meters of the Moon's surface, then we should look for life on the Moon First!

Or to put it another way, I guess a side purpose of this thread is to expose the hypocrisy of many Mars First!ers: their proclaimed desire to find extraterrestrial life is a mere disingenuous ploy to direct funding their way and away from other, more useful projects. Thus, when presented with the case that life is just as likely to be found on the Moon as it is on Mars, watch them: they will not retract their position that an aggressive Moon program is a wasteful distraction from the main goal of Mars. But at least for now, the fence sitters will be able to see that the emperor wears no clothes.
« Last Edit: 07/30/2012 03:47 am by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline HappyMartian

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2713
  • Tap the Moon's water!
  • Asia
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #15 on: 07/30/2012 08:13 am »
Yes Warren, I too appreciate "The Emperor's New Clothes" and since 1837 that simple story by Hans Christian Andersen has taught the lesson of how some folks in various leadership positions don't want to appear foolish or think too deeply or ask any questions at all about the obviously nonsensical behavior and illogical proclamations of their Grand Pooh-bah.

From such grandiose and easily duped Grand Pooh-bahs we get tragic wars, bankrupt nations, misdirected space programs, and various other types of goofy zig zagging national policies.

Now, some pretty serious scientists have repeatedly tried to make the point that the Moon appears to have more than enough water and volatiles to meet our space exploration and in-situ resource utilization needs.

Further human field work research to prioritize the tapping of the strategically located Lunar water, volatiles, and other resources would be the logical and commercially smart thing to do, if logic and commerce had anything to do with the vague blind alley asteroid and Mars space policy formulated and articulated by our Grand Pooh-bah.

Unfortunately, we space cadets are faced with the little child's task of crying out loudly and repeatedly that the Grand Pooh-bah's space policy's nonexistent clothes are revealing too much of the embarrassing nakedness of a vacuous Solar System exploration architecture which is not based on space commerce, Lunar geology, and the many joys of water where you need it.

The water and volatiles that exist both in the Moon and in its polar surface areas will be used by some nation, or group of nations, to make the Moon into the prettiest rocket propellant station imaginable and to make that generous gift even commercially sweeter, Luna has just about the best possible location to efficiently service many local and far voyaging spacecraft. Unfortunately, our current Grand Pooh-bah continues to display his disdain about the commercial prospects of our lovely and resource rich Moon.

We Americans routinely install a new Grand Pooh-bah every four or eight years, so hopefully we will eventually get a Grand Pooh-bah that is actually interested in science instead of displaying an ongoing dismal ignorance about what is needed for a functional and commercially robust space exploration architecture.   


:)
"The Moon is the most accessible destination for realizing commercial, exploration and scientific objectives beyond low Earth orbit." - LEAG

Offline Warren Platts

Temperature vs depth is very tricky because temperature change slows with depth. You went from one extreme to the other. First you posted 2.7 degrees per km which is probably accurate over 1000 km. Then you went to 2.52 degrees per meter which may be accurate over a meter or two.

On the Earth it is 20- 30 degrees Celsius per Km for the first few kilometers but by 200 km it is estimated to be 0.3 degrees.

True, but for the practical purposes of this thread, we are only interested in the top 10 to 100 meters of the surface. It's not clear to me that there is a sharp dogleg in the thermal gradient where it drops down to 20 K/km immediately after the first 2 meters. I'm still researching this issue. Main point remains that it's possible, indeed likely, that liquid water in certain circumstances may reach as high as the base of the regolith is some locations. My guess is that liquid water somehow plays a role in the formation of the irregularly shaped rimless pit features like Ina. Evidence for this is that the rimless pits are not found in the polar regions. There, because of the extra cold surface temperatures, the "water table" is too low, and so the overburden is too heavy to be blown away by overpressured pockets of water vapor. 

Quote
Although it was not your purpose you are making a great case for ice at depth in lunar cold traps. Even at 2.52 degrees per meter cold traps could be below 273 degrees Kelvin at almost 100 meters.

Interesting point that I hadn't thought of. If the ice lid was thick enough, there might even be a pool of liquid water at the base of the ice.

Quote
The simple fact is we need more data.

Not so simple. The platitudinous truism that "we need more data" hides a multitude of sin. It sounds reasonable, but it is at once a claim that speculation on the possibilities must be rejected as useless, that commitments to major projects must be postponed, that nothing can be done because there isn't enough money, that money earmarked for HSF must be redirected toward robotic spacecraft, that exploration must be confined to power point presentations. Above all that we must not step off of the "Flexible Path". Something a little more specific than "we need more data" would provide a better point of departure for more conversation. The statement "we need more data" ends the discussion.
« Last Edit: 07/30/2012 11:16 pm by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Warren Platts

Yes Warren, I too appreciate "The Emperor's New Clothes" and since 1837 that simple story by Hans Christian Andersen has taught the lesson of how some folks in various leadership positions don't want to appear foolish or think too deeply or ask any questions at all about the obviously nonsensical behavior and illogical proclamations of their Grand Pooh-bah.

From such grandiose and easily duped Grand Pooh-bahs we get tragic wars, bankrupt nations, misdirected space programs, and various other types of goofy zig zagging national policies.

Now, some pretty serious scientists have repeatedly tried to make the point that the Moon appears to have more than enough water and volatiles to meet our space exploration and in-situ resource utilization needs.

Further human field work research to prioritize the tapping of the strategically located Lunar water, volatiles, and other resources would be the logical and commercially smart thing to do, if logic and commerce had anything to do with the vague blind alley asteroid and Mars space policy formulated and articulated by our Grand Pooh-bah.

Unfortunately, we space cadets are faced with the little child's task of crying out loudly and repeatedly that the Grand Pooh-bah's space policy's nonexistent clothes are revealing too much of the embarrassing nakedness of a vacuous Solar System exploration architecture which is not based on space commerce, Lunar geology, and the many joys of water where you need it.

The water and volatiles that exist both in the Moon and in its polar surface areas will be used by some nation, or group of nations, to make the Moon into the prettiest rocket propellant station imaginable and to make that generous gift even commercially sweeter, Luna has just about the best possible location to efficiently service many local and far voyaging spacecraft. Unfortunately, our current Grand Pooh-bah continues to display his disdain about the commercial prospects of our lovely and resource rich Moon.

We Americans routinely install a new Grand Pooh-bah every four or eight years, so hopefully we will eventually get a Grand Pooh-bah that is actually interested in science instead of displaying an ongoing dismal ignorance about what is needed for a functional and commercially robust space exploration architecture.   


:)

This is all fine and dandy, but it's a bit off topic, sir. What we're really talking about in this thread is why the Moon always gets the short shrift when it comes to astrobiology. The traditional answer has always been that the Moon is dryer than a bone. But now, evidently, it's become clear that there are substantive amounts of water on the Moon. Since there is a baseline of water that is not entirely allochthonous, we must ask why couldn't there be liquid water in the Moon? And the only answer to that question is that there is no water on the Moon to begin with--which we now know to be false. Therefore, if we are to take the principle of "follow the water" seriously, then we should follow it wherever it leads, even if it leads to that humble silver orb in the sky. Not as sexy as Enceladus ejaculations, I'll admit, but so what? Are we looking for life or not? Or is it all about pork driven "cool" stunts?
« Last Edit: 07/31/2012 12:18 am by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3628
  • 92129
  • Liked: 1145
  • Likes Given: 360
Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #18 on: 07/30/2012 01:33 pm »
Quote
... so what? Are we looking for life or not? Or is it all about pork ...

I thought we were looking for a place to live so to spread the risk of living in one place, and for resources with which to generate wealth in order to live comfortably. But we need more data. But as was implied, that statement results in an endless drain on resources, with no end in sight. There will always be more data to collect. We are still collecting data about the Earth after all. We need to identify the data that we really need in order to evaluate whether or not mankind can live there.

What would be the keystone piece of data about the Moon? Do we need to know whether or not liquid water exists at some depth, or is it enough to know whether or not near surface ice exists in the polar craters? Do we need to know whether or not mankind on the moon will spread across the surface living in surface habs, like houses, or will bore down under the protection of the surface living in underground (?) cities. If the latter, then subsurface water might cause problems similar to what it causes here on Earth when constructing deep underground structures (mines, for example). It could also provide inestimable benefits.

But do we need to know this next? If so, then how do we find out? Can it be done remotely or do we need to dig, drill or blast? Where should we look, and how deep should we look irrespective of the required technology and equipment? If this is not next on the agenda, what is?
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline muomega0

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 862
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Liquid Water IN The Moon!
« Reply #19 on: 07/30/2012 01:50 pm »
Yes Warren, I too appreciate "The Emperor's New Clothes" and since 1837 that simple story by Hans Christian Andersen has taught the lesson of how some folks in various leadership positions don't want to appear foolish or think too deeply or ask any questions at all about the obviously nonsensical behavior and illogical proclamations of their Grand Pooh-bah.

From such grandiose and easily duped Grand Pooh-bahs we get tragic wars, bankrupt nations, misdirected space programs, and various other types of goofy zig zagging national policies.

Further human field work research to prioritize the tapping of the strategically located Lunar water, volatiles, and other resources would be the logical and commercially smart thing to do, if logic and commerce had anything to do with the vague blind alley asteroid and Mars space policy formulated and articulated by our Grand Pooh-bah.

Unfortunately, our current Grand Pooh-bah continues to display his disdain about the commercial prospects of our lovely and resource rich Moon.

We Americans routinely install a new Grand Pooh-bah every four or eight years, so hopefully we will eventually get a Grand Pooh-bah that is actually interested in science instead of displaying an ongoing dismal ignorance about what is needed for a functional and commercially robust space exploration architecture.   

:)
Oh really?

Quote above leaves in sentences with GPB:  Grand Pooh-bah

GPB circa 2001-2009 along with the same Congress and forced NASA to build a HLV (Constellation)--throwing out the depot centric architecture.  The budget impact of this choice was ~$3B/year.   Robotic missions?!

The links to the data and leaked studies show

Why a decade of HLVs (Constellation and SLS) did not solve NASA $$$ problems, but depot centric with a LEO ZBO Depot and Smaller LVs Will free up cash for Flexible Exploration


GPB circa 2009-   threw out Constellation, but *Congress* mandated the 70 to 130 metric tonne LV SLS as part of a compromse--no cash savings.  SLS =>   something << envisioned HSF

The great news for those at NASA who want to start addressing the key Challenges and developing Exploration Hardware is that SLS now has a half life of 4 months. ;)  This will free LV dollars for hardware to explore for water and to start working on technologies for other BEO missions.

Visiting an asteroid is only a step in the process and has nothing in common with the Constellation flags and footprints 2X/year 6 day lunar sorties.  A asteroid mission requires most of the technologies needed for Mars, but with substantially less energy required.  Think of the asteroid mission as a lunar flyby--a step in the overall process.

But its flexible, if one does find a economically retrievable resource.....asteroid or lunar or ....

One remaining key to the puzzle is a reasonable, cheap yearly IMLEO required by NASA to aid the so called 'commercial' lv sector, because as we all know, increasing the flight rate reduces costs.   Again, this is accomplished by removing unneeded product lines, and using the cash for BEO hardware.

Most people at NASA want to move *forward* to the proper, flexible architecture.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0