Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
Yesterday at 09:40 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
February 22, 2025, 09:50 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
February 22, 2025, 02:56 PM

German nationalist party ...
February 21, 2025, 10:31 AM

New Britain
February 17, 2025, 11:51 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
February 14, 2025, 08:00 AM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
February 13, 2025, 10:07 PM

Muslim grooming gangs sti...
February 13, 2025, 08:20 PM

Russia invades Ukraine
February 13, 2025, 11:01 AM

Islam and Science Fiction
February 11, 2025, 11:57 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
February 06, 2025, 03:13 PM

Gaza assault
February 05, 2025, 10:04 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Random Science Posts

 (Read 113887 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 7 8 910 11 ... 19 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #240 - April 26, 2014, 10:52 PM

    Old news. Tongue

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #241 - April 26, 2014, 10:54 PM

    Qtian, I reckon you haven't seen this then, for all those of us who hate it when we accidentally 3D print a gun.

    http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/06/worried-about-accidentally-3d-printing-a-gun-new-software-will-prevent-it/
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #242 - April 27, 2014, 04:11 AM

    I believe NASA were currently working on launching a 3D printer to space to make spare parts.

    3D printing is a revolutionary piece of technology. With only improvements to come, it could very well change society forever, like the internet.
  • Astronauts call for more asteroid awareness
     Reply #243 - April 27, 2014, 05:54 AM

    This is fun. dance

    Astronauts call for more asteroid awareness

    Quote from: Program transcript
    SIMON LAUDER: More than 1,000 people were injured in the Russian city of Chelyabinsk last year when an asteroid exploded in the sky.

    Glen Nagle is from the NASA tracking station in Canberra.

    GLEN NAGLE: If that object had come straight down, as opposed to grazing through the atmosphere, some estimates suggest that there may not have been a Chelyabinsk after that, and you could have had a loss of up to 1 million people.

    SIMON LAUDER: Was there any forewarning of the Chelyabinsk asteroid?

    GLEN NAGLE: None at all.

    SIMON LAUDER: Former space shuttle astronaut, Ed Lu, says there's no way of knowing where or when the next impact will be and the current strategy for avoiding disaster is blind luck.

    ED LU: We want to dispel the notion that asteroid impacts are rare, because they're not. These asteroid impacts in the last decade have been ones that we haven't had much data on until recently, and it tells us that in fact asteroid impacts are more common than we thought.

    SIMON LAUDER: Dr Lu is the head of a group made up of former astronauts and astronomers, called the B612 Foundation. It's using data from the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization to make the case for greater monitoring of asteroids.

    ED LU: The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Organization runs off an infrasound warning network to listen for very large explosions. We're looking for evidence that somebody has set off a nuclear weapon.

    And, in the last 12 years, it has recorded 26 large explosions, but all of those were asteroids. It turns out that these smaller asteroid impacts happen all the time and these are ones that are loud enough to be heard on the other side of the Earth, but not necessarily dangerous. But what they do is they tell us that asteroid impacts do happen fairly regularly.

    <snip>

    SIMON LAUDER: The foundation's mission director, Harold Reitsema, says the 26 asteroids impacts recorded on Earth in the last 12 years ranged in energy from 100 to 600 kilotons.

    For comparison, the bomb dropped on Nagasaki (the bigger of the WWII bombs) had a 21 kiloton yield. So, roughly every six months, Earth gets hit by an asteroid strike with a yield between 5 and and 30 times as high as the bomb that wiped out Nagasaki.

    Naturally, these are random strikes that can hit anywhere, anytime.

    Just thought people might like to know this, so they have something else to worry about apart from itsy bitsy spiders n stuff. Smiley

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #244 - April 27, 2014, 10:47 AM

    ^I think this article is wrong. Though asteroid impacts are definitely dangerous for humanity, the statistics of this article are off.

    I believe Chelyabinsk, 500kt, was the largest since Tunguska (1908; 15mt). As you can see it's quite rare, and even then it only resulted in 1000+ injuries (not catastrophic). As far as I know and from what I've read, 100kt impact events are not common occurrence.


    Edit: I think the article made a type and its supposed to be 1-600 not 100-600.

    Here are the 26:

    Chelyabinsk being the highest at 500kt (a maximum estimate at 600kt).

    8/25/2000 (1-9 kilotons) North Pacific Ocean
    4/23/2001 (1-9 kilotons) North Pacific Ocean
    3/9/2002 (1-9 kilotons) North Pacific Ocean
    6/6/2002 (20+ kilotons) Mediterranean Sea
    11/10/2002 (1-9 kilotons) North Pacific Ocean
    9/3/2004 (20+ kilotons) Southern Ocean
    10/7/2004 (10-20 kilotons) Indian Ocean
    10/26/2005 (1-9 kilotons) South Pacific Ocean
    11/9/2005 (1-9 kilotons) New South Wales, Australia
    2/6/2006 (1-9 kilotons) South Atlantic Ocean
    5/21/2006 (1-9 kilotons) South Atlantic Ocean
    8/9/2006 (1-9 kilotons) Indian Ocean
    9/2/2006 (1-9 kilotons) Indian Ocean
    10/2/2006 (1-9 kilotons) Arabian Sea
    12/9/2006 (10-20 kilotons) Egypt
    9/22/2007 (1-9 kilotons) Indian Ocean
    12/26/2007 (1-9 kilotons) South Pacific Ocean
    10/7/2008 (1-9 kilotons) Sudan
    10/8/2009 (20+ kilotons) South Sulawesi, Indonesia
    9/3/2010 (10-20 kilotons) South Pacific Ocean
    12/25/2010 (1-9 kilotons) Tasman Sea
    4/22/2012 (1-9 kilotons) California, USA
    2/15/2013, (20+ kilotons) Chelyabinsk Oblast, Russia
    4/21/2013 (1-9 kilotons) Santiago del Estero, Argentina
    4/30/2013 (10-20 kilotons) North Atlantic Ocean
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #245 - April 27, 2014, 10:53 AM

    Well you write to NASA and argue with them. Afro

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #246 - April 28, 2014, 07:38 AM

    ^ It's definitely something to be afraid of.

    99942 Apophis

    Quote
    initial observations indicated a probability of up to 2.7% that it would hit Earth in 2029.

    Quote
    On average, an asteroid the size of Apophis (325 meters) can be expected to impact Earth about every 80,000 years

    Quote
    The Sentry Risk Table estimates that Apophis would make atmospheric entry with 750 megatons of kinetic energy. The impacts that created Meteor Crater or the Tunguska event are estimated to be in the 3–10 megaton range


    Yep, many will be screwed if this hits Earth. Fortunately, the probability has decreased after more observations.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #247 - April 29, 2014, 08:10 PM

    Wouldn't have expected this.

    Male sweat stresses out lab mice

    Quote
    More than a decade ago, researchers found that identical strains of mice behaved differently in one lab than in another, and several researchers have since suspected that mice react differently to different experimenters. Among them was Jeffrey Mogil, a neuroscientist at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, who noticed that mice seemed to respond to pain differently in his experiments than in those by a female colleague.

    Mogil decided to look more closely. He and his team gave pain-inducing injections to anaesthetised mice and rats. When the animals awoke, the team recorded their facial grimaces, a measure of pain intensity.

    When a male investigator sat in the room with the rodents, they grimaced 35 per cent less, on average, than when no one was in the room. There was no significant grimace difference when a female investigator sat in the room than when it was empty. The reduced sensitivity to pain shown when the men were present is a common side effect of stress, as it allows for the preparation of the fight or flight response.

    <snip>

    The additional stress caused by a male researcher is likely to affect any experiment where stress plays a role. "The problem is that almost every phenomenon is affected by stress," says Mogil. These experimenter effects could be one reason researchers often find it difficult to replicate biomedical studies, he says.

    If so, researchers should pay much closer attention to how they carry out their experiments, says Elissa Chesler, a behavioural geneticist at the Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine. "It's already caused me to ensure that one, and only one, person is doing each test," she says. However, "this will come as news to many people", she adds.


    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #248 - April 30, 2014, 04:47 AM

    ^These are some serious implications considering we've been testing on mice for quite a while.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #249 - April 30, 2014, 10:20 AM

    Men, what are you doing!?  finmad ... The Women are taking over!

    Girls make higher grades than boys in all school subjects, analysis finds

    Quote
    Despite the stereotype that boys do better in math and science, girls have made higher grades than boys throughout their school years for nearly a century, according to a new analysis published by the American Psychological Association.

    "Although gender differences follow essentially stereotypical patterns on achievement tests in which boys typically score higher on math and science, females have the advantage on school grades regardless of the material," said lead study author Daniel Voyer, PhD, of the University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, Canada.
    "School marks reflect learning in the larger social context of the classroom and require effort and persistence over long periods of time, whereas standardized tests assess basic or specialized academic abilities and aptitudes at one point in time without social influences."

    Based on research from 1914 through 2011 that spanned more than 30 countries, the study found the differences in grades between girls and boys were largest for language courses and smallest for math and science. The female advantage in school performance in math and science did not become apparent until junior or middle school, according to the study, published in the APA journal Psychological Bulletin. The degree of gender difference in grades increased from elementary to middle school, but decreased between high school and college.

    The researchers examined 369 samples from 308 studies, reflecting grades of 538,710 boys and 595,332 girls. Seventy percent of the samples consisted of students from the United States. Other countries or regions represented by more than one sample included Norway, Canada, Turkey, Germany, Taiwan, Malaysia, Israel, New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, Slovakia, United Kingdom Africa and Finland. Countries represented by one sample included Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Mexico, Hong Kong, India, Iran, Jordan, the Netherlands, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Serbia and Slovenia.

    All studies included an evaluation of gender differences in teacher-assigned grades or official grade point averages in elementary, junior/middle or high school, or undergraduate and graduate university. Studies that relied on self-report and those about special populations, such as high-risk or mentored students, were excluded. The studies also looked at variables that might affect the students' grades, such as the country where students attended school, course material, students' ages at the time the grades were obtained, the study date and racial composition of the samples.
    The study reveals that recent claims of a "boy crisis," with boys lagging behind girls in school achievement, are not accurate because girls' grades have been consistently higher than boys' across several decades with no significant changes in recent years, the authors wrote.

    "The fact that females generally perform better than their male counterparts throughout what is essentially mandatory schooling in most countries seems to be a well-kept secret, considering how little attention it has received as a global phenomenon," said co-author Susan Voyer, MASc, also of the University of New Brunswick.

    As for why girls perform better in school than boys, the authors speculated that social and cultural factors could be among several possible explanations. Parents may assume boys are better at math and science so they might encourage girls to put more effort into their studies, which could lead to the slight advantage girls have in all courses, they wrote. Gender differences in learning styles is another possibility. Previous research has shown girls tend to study in order to understand the materials, whereas boys emphasize performance, which indicates a focus on the final grades. "Mastery of the subject matter generally produces better marks than performance emphasis, so this could account in part for males' lower marks than females," the authors wrote.......

  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #250 - April 30, 2014, 11:42 AM

    But I thought women were deficient in intelligence? These girls are obviously trying to discredit islam by getting better grades.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #251 - April 30, 2014, 01:27 PM

    ^How dare they get better grades than us! It's a violation of sharia and they should be punished for being too smart. Cheesy
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #252 - April 30, 2014, 06:23 PM

    Space-port planned to be built in the UK, backed by the government dance

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27222077

    I am very happy about this, I hope that the government don't back out of it. I think spending £40 billion on this is much better than spending £40 billion on a train set that the government also plan to build. Space tourism in the UK will be great, however it would be a long wait as it would be complete by 2030. I will most likely never afford to be a space tourist, but hopefully I will live to see the beginnings of space tourism becoming more popular and common.

    "So what do we do?", "You know what we do."
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #253 - April 30, 2014, 06:50 PM

    The better news is that they're going ease regulations on private enterprise in space.

    But honestly, when it comes to scientific research, as much as I love the space program, I think they should be funding more research into Nuclear Fusion. It's the solution to so many problems, and it will indirectly create more interest in the space program (like mining Helium-3 on the Moon).
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #254 - April 30, 2014, 06:53 PM

    Should be catching asteroids and meteorites and mining them.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #255 - April 30, 2014, 07:02 PM

    That's why let private enterprise worry about space and let the government support nuclear fusion research. It's a win-win situation.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #256 - April 30, 2014, 11:30 PM

    We live in interesting times.

    Antibiotic-resistant superbugs now a global epidemic

    Quote
    Bacteria that resist antibiotics are widespread around the planet, concludes the first global review of antibiotic resistance

    To make matters worse, the World Health Organization, which produced the report, has revealed that there is no globally standardised way to assess and share information on drug-resistant infections – something the WHO will now make a priority.

    "Unless we take significant actions to improve efforts to prevent infections and also change how we produce, prescribe and use antibiotics, the world will lose more and more of these global public health goods and the implications will be devastating," says Keiji Fukuda, head of health security at the WHO.

    The WHO also points out that without incentives for pharmaceutical companies to develop new antibiotics, we will run out of ways to fight resistant infections. The data in the WHO report raise the spectre that most antibiotics could become largely useless while we are still trying to measure the extent of the problem.

    <snip>

    Countries in all regions reported that more than half of Klebsiella infections resist antibiotics called third-generation cephalosporins. If those drugs fail, the only ones left are a class called carbapenems – and some countries in the European and eastern Mediterranean regions reported more than 50 per cent of Klebsiella infections resisted those as well, making them almost untreatable.

    Most regions had countries where at least half of E. coli infections resisted both classes of drug, making many urinary tract infections, usually regarded as merely a nuisance, effectively untreatable. Countries worldwide reported that half or more of Staphylococcus infections were MRSA, which carries a 64 per cent greater risk of death than non-resistant Staphylococcus.

    All regions had countries reporting that at least a quarter of Streptococcus infections, which include pneumonia, meningitis and ear infections, resisted penicillin. Meanwhile, gonorrhoea that resisted third-generation cephalosporins, making it virtually untreatable, was reported in 10 developed countries including the UK.

    National authorities and researchers may see different bacterial worlds. Countries in the European and western Pacific regions reported that a quarter or more of all Shigella dysentery cases resisted fluoroquinolone antibiotics. Research reports found up to 82 per cent of such infections were also resistant in South-East Asia – yet no national medical authorities in that region made any such report.


    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #257 - May 01, 2014, 03:56 AM

    ^ I always thought this was going to wind up being a huge issue we'd have to tackle eventually.

    When I was in my early teens, I was sick for a year or so and in and out of the hospital, and I actually wound up getting a somewhat severe MRSA infection, probably from the hospital itself, since that's where some pretty bad bugs like to hang out. It was a huge pain to treat and they had to put me on some pretty powerful stuff, and I had delayed treatment for so long thinking that I was just sore or something that my doctors told me another day without treatment probably would have seen it progressed past the point where they'd be able to save me. Oops.  wacko

    We had a good run with our current antibiotics, but the bacteria are always going to be evolving, and much faster when we keep misusing antibiotics. I reckon we're going to have to sit down and catch up at some point.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #258 - May 01, 2014, 04:44 AM

    The problem is that humans don't take anything seriously until it's at a critical stage. Bacteria will always evolve but over-prescription by medical practitioners, patients not completing their antibiotic course, and mass use of antibiotics in agriculture certainly doesn't help.

    I once had the common cold and was proscribed a course of antibiotics. It's like these people didn't even pay attention in class.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #259 - May 01, 2014, 04:49 AM

    I consider the patient misuse a failure in education; I think it is unnecessarily high. Doctors should be willing to spend the extra two minutes explaining to the patient what can happen and why it happens when you don't take it as prescribed.

    The patients are always warned that they have to finish the course, even if they feel better, but almost no one seems to understand why.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #260 - May 01, 2014, 04:51 AM

    The problem is that humans don't take anything seriously until it's at a critical stage.


    Also, truer words are rarely spoken.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #261 - May 01, 2014, 05:39 AM

    ^Yeah, it would really help if doctors could just take a couple moments since it is very crucial to fighting Anti-biotic resistance.

    Were Neanderthals cognitively inferior?

    Here is the journal:http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0096424

    Quote
    If you think Neanderthals were stupid and primitive, it's time to think again.

    The widely held notion that Neanderthals were dimwitted and that their inferior intelligence allowed them to be driven to extinction by the much brighter ancestors of modern humans is not supported by scientific evidence, according to a researcher at the University of Colorado Boulder.

    Neanderthals thrived in a large swath of Europe and Asia between about 350,000 and 40,000 years ago. They disappeared after our ancestors, a group referred to as "anatomically modern humans," crossed into Europe from Africa.
    In the past, some researchers have tried to explain the demise of the Neanderthals by suggesting that the newcomers were superior to Neanderthals in key ways, including their ability to hunt, communicate, innovate and adapt to different environments.

    But in an extensive review of recent Neanderthal research, CU-Boulder researcher Paola Villa and co-author Wil Roebroeks, an archaeologist at Leiden University in the Netherlands, make the case that the available evidence does not support the opinion that Neanderthals were less advanced than anatomically modern humans. Their paper was published today in the journal PLOS ONE.

    "The evidence for cognitive inferiority is simply not there," said Villa, a curator at the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History. "What we are saying is that the conventional view of Neanderthals is not true."
    Villa and Roebroeks scrutinized nearly a dozen common explanations for Neanderthal extinction that rely largely on the notion that the Neanderthals were inferior to anatomically modern humans. These include the hypotheses that Neanderthals did not use complex, symbolic communication; that they were less efficient hunters who had inferior weapons; and that they had a narrow diet that put them at a competitive disadvantage to anatomically modern humans, who ate a broad range of things.

    The researchers found that none of the hypotheses were supported by the available research. For example, evidence from multiple archaeological sites in Europe suggests that Neanderthals hunted as a group, using the landscape to aid them.
    Researchers have shown that Neanderthals likely herded hundreds of bison to their death by steering them into a sinkhole in southwestern France. At another site used by Neanderthals, this one in the Channel Islands, fossilized remains of 18 mammoths and five woolly rhinoceroses were discovered at the base of a deep ravine. These findings imply that Neanderthals could plan ahead, communicate as a group and make efficient use of their surroundings, the authors said.
    Other archaeological evidence unearthed at Neanderthal sites provides reason to believe that Neanderthals did in fact have a diverse diet. Microfossils found in Neanderthal teeth and food remains left behind at cooking sites indicate that they may have eaten wild peas, acorns, pistachios, grass seeds, wild olives, pine nuts and date palms depending on what was locally available.

    Additionally, researchers have found ochre, a kind of earth pigment, at sites inhabited by Neanderthals, which may have been used for body painting. Ornaments have also been collected at Neanderthal sites. Taken together, these findings suggest that Neanderthals had cultural rituals and symbolic communication.

    Villa and Roebroeks say that the past misrepresentation of Neanderthals' cognitive ability may be linked to the tendency of researchers to compare Neanderthals, who lived in the Middle Paleolithic, to modern humans living during the more recent Upper Paleolithic period, when leaps in technology were being made.

    "Researchers were comparing Neanderthals not to their contemporaries on other continents but to their successors," Villa said. "It would be like comparing the performance of Model T Fords, widely used in America and Europe in the early part of the last century, to the performance of a modern-day Ferrari and conclude that Henry Ford was cognitively inferior to Enzo Ferrari."

    Although many still search for a simple explanation and like to attribute the Neanderthal demise to a single factor, such as cognitive or technological inferiority, archaeology shows that there is no support for such interpretations, the authors said.

    But if Neanderthals were not technologically and cognitively disadvantaged, why didn't they survive?
    The researchers argue that the real reason for Neanderthal extinction is likely complex, but they say some clues may be found in recent analyses of the Neanderthal genome over the last several years. These genomic studies suggest that anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals likely interbred and that the resulting male children may have had reduced fertility. Recent genomic studies also suggest that Neanderthals lived in small groups. All of these factors could have contributed to the decline of the Neanderthals, who were eventually swamped and assimilated by the increasing numbers of modern immigrants.


    There was a plan to birth a Neanderthals using a a modern human female as a surrogate. That would be very neat and we can learn a lot of Neanderthals.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #262 - May 01, 2014, 11:58 AM

    The problem is that humans don't take anything seriously until it's at a critical stage.

    This.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #263 - May 03, 2014, 05:04 AM

    Ganymede May Harbour Oceans

    Quote
    The largest moon in our solar system, a companion to Jupiter named Ganymede, might have ice and oceans stacked up in several layers like a club sandwich, according to new NASA-funded research that models the moon's makeup.

    Previously, the moon was thought to harbor a thick ocean sandwiched between just two layers of ice, one on top and one on bottom.

    "Ganymede's ocean might be organized like a Dagwood sandwich," said Steve Vance of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., explaining the moon's resemblance to the "Blondie" cartoon character's multi-tiered sandwiches. The study, led by Vance, provides new theoretical evidence for the team's "club sandwich" model, first proposed last year. The research appears in the journal Planetary and Space Science.

    The results support the idea that primitive life might have possibly arisen on the icy moon. Scientists say that places where water and rock interact are important for the development of life; for example, it's possible life began on Earth in bubbling vents on our sea floor. Prior to the new study, Ganymede's rocky sea bottom was thought to be coated with ice, not liquid -- a problem for the emergence of life. The "club sandwich" findings suggest otherwise: the first layer on top of the rocky core might be salty water.

    "This is good news for Ganymede," said Vance. "Its ocean is huge, with enormous pressures, so it was thought that dense ice had to form at the bottom of the ocean. When we added salts to our models, we came up with liquids dense enough to sink to the sea floor."

    NASA scientists first suspected an ocean in Ganymede in the 1970s, based on models of the large moon, which is bigger than Mercury. In the 1990s, NASA's Galileo mission flew by Ganymede, confirming the moon's ocean, and showing it extends to depths of hundreds of miles. The spacecraft also found evidence for salty seas, likely containing the salt magnesium sulfate.

    Previous models of Ganymede's oceans assumed that salt didn't change the properties of liquid very much with pressure. Vance and his team showed, through laboratory experiments, how much salt really increases the density of liquids under the extreme conditions inside Ganymede and similar moons. It may seem strange that salt can make the ocean denser, but you can see for yourself how this works by adding plain old table salt to a glass of water. Rather than increasing in volume, the liquid shrinks and becomes denser. This is because the salt ions attract water molecules.

    The models get more complicated when the different forms of ice are taken into account. The ice that floats in your drinks is called "Ice I." It's the least dense form of ice and lighter than water. But at high pressures, like those in crushingly deep oceans like Ganymede's, the ice crystal structures become more compact. "It's like finding a better arrangement of shoes in your luggage -- the ice molecules become packed together more tightly," said Vance. The ice can become so dense that it is heavier than water and falls to the bottom of the sea. The densest and heaviest ice thought to persist in Ganymede is called "Ice VI."

    By modeling these processes using computers, the team came up with an ocean sandwiched between up to three ice layers, in addition to the rocky seafloor. The lightest ice is on top, and the saltiest liquid is heavy enough to sink to the bottom. What's more, the results demonstrate a possible bizarre phenomenon that causes the oceans to "snow upwards." As the oceans churn and cold plumes snake around, ice in the uppermost ocean layer, called "Ice III," could form in the seawater. When ice forms, salts precipitate out. The heavier salts would thus fall downward, and the lighter ice, or "snow," would float upward. This "snow" melts again before reaching the top of the ocean, possibly leaving slush in the middle of the moon sandwich.

    "We don't know how long the Dagwood-sandwich structure would exist," said Christophe Sotin of JPL. "This structure represents a stable state, but various factors could mean the moon doesn't reach this stable state.

    Sotin and Vance are both members of the Icy Worlds team at JPL, part of the multi-institutional NASA Astrobiology Institute based at the Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif.

    The results can be applied to exoplanets too, planets that circle stars beyond our sun. Some super-Earths, rocky planets more massive than Earth, have been proposed as "water worlds" covered in oceans. Could they have life? Vance and his team think laboratory experiments and more detailed modeling of exotic oceans might help find answers.

    Ganymede is one of five moons in our solar system thought to support vast oceans beneath icy crusts. The other moons are Jupiter's Europa and Callisto and Saturn's Titan and Enceladus. The European Space Agency is developing a space mission, called JUpiter ICy moons Explorer or JUICE, to visit Europa, Callisto and Ganymede in the 2030s. NASA and JPL are contributing to three instruments on the mission, which is scheduled to launch in 2022 (see http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2013-069).

    Other authors of the study are Mathieu Bouffard of Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, France, and Mathieu Choukroun, also of JPL and the Icy World team of the NASA Astrobiology Institute. JPL is managed by the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena for NASA.


    All of Jupiter's Moons seem to be very exciting places with potential of a great quantity of liquid water.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #264 - May 03, 2014, 04:03 PM

    What is the origin of water? I understand what it's made of but not how it first came to be.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #265 - May 03, 2014, 04:11 PM

    ^ Chemistry! And atmospheric conditions. Liquid water is a state, the molecules bind because it is energetically (oops Grin) favorable. Both the actual molecules and the proper atmospheric conditions had to come together to create the liquid water, which, to our knowledge, isn't something that happens all too often 'round these parts...
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #266 - May 03, 2014, 04:20 PM

    So you're talking about the cooling down of the primordial world to the point where the outgassed volatile components were held in an atmosphere of sufficient pressure for the stabilization and retention of liquid water?

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #267 - May 03, 2014, 04:21 PM

    My knowledge on this is rather limited.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #268 - May 03, 2014, 04:29 PM

    Cheesy Very basically, I'd reckon.

    I can't say I've studied so deeply on the proposed conditions of the early Earth, but it is still what had to happen. The compounds that come together quite easily (and I do consider the water molecule to be one of the easier compounds to throw together; hydrogens are basically just ions for all intents and purposes and attach fairly easily as needed to the outside of other molecules) do because of simple chemistry and it being more energetically favorable in that relationship than as two separate species.

    However, where ever hydrogen and oxygen live in close quarters doesn't necessarily mean that the molecules are going to all come together to give us some liquid water; atmospheric conditions also play a huge role. I read once that they think there is an interesting kind of water that may or may not exist in space where the conditions can make it simultaneously a liquid and a solid. Google says it's called superionic water. That'd be interesting to see, if such a thing exists.
  • Random Science Posts
     Reply #269 - May 03, 2014, 04:33 PM

    So where exactly does hydrogen and oxygen come from? You need plants for oxygen but I can't see vegetating existing without oxygen.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Previous page 1 ... 7 8 910 11 ... 19 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »