[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Martian Life: A further look.



	A recent article was published on the formation temperature of 
carbonates in the ALH84001 Martian meteorite. Since the initial news 
broke about the possibilty of life in a Martian meteorite found in these 
carbonates, the temperature in which they formed became the center of 
attention. If it was high(>500 degrees), than life most definatly was not 
found, but if it were low(40-250 dgrees) than life may have had a foot 
hold in the carbonate.
	Scientists have used oxygen isotopes to determine the temperature 
in which the carbonates formed. Certain oxygen isotopes are more abundant 
at higher temps, than others. It is by counting the abundance of these 
isotopes that a temperature can be constrained.
	It was argued, at the end of last year, that, based on the oxygen 
isotope data the carbonates formed at a high temperature. This then 
negates the conclusion life may have existed in these carbonates. This 
then leads to the conclusion that the biogenic structures are really 
inorganic.
	New data indicate that this may not be right. The reason for the 
high temperature conclusion, is due to a trick played by mother nature. 
Ground water here on Earth can penetrate a rock, and alter the minerals 
of that rock. If the water is incorporated with the original minerals, it 
would indicate a higher temperature of formation of the minerals. This is 
due to the salinity, which has certain oxygen isotopes associated with it.
	Perhaps the same thing happened on Mars. Groundwater may be 
obscurring the true temperature of formation, thereby inhibiting the true 
temperature of formation. When a method that is applied to Earth rocks to 
remove the effects of ground water, is applied to the carbonates of 
ALH84001, then the temperate is reduced to a temperature that does not 
preclude the concurrent existence of life in the Martian meteorite.
	It should be noted that, ground water dynamics are not well known 
on Mars. This is due to lack of samples, and actual observations by 
humans. Perhaps the method used can not be accurate do to some possible 
anomalous charactor of the soil, water, or rock. The data do indicate 
though, that, other factors do control what we see, and that we should 
not jump to conclusions.

Frank Stroik


References: