/sci/ - Science & Math

sure its amazing, but we will never travel there/know whats under it

the deepest mine on earth is like 4 km deep, just imagine how much time it would take for a remote controlled robot to dig 15km

then find gazillions of water and possibly life

>>6473656
why dont we just build a giant pipe from europa to earth so we never run out of water then sample it on earth. problem solved

>>6473659
why dont you do it

>>6473659
we wont run out of water

>>6473619
What makes anyone think it could hold life?
There's no source of energy, is there?

>>6473659
Better yet, bring it over as ice and we solve global warming.

In your face Al Gore

>>6473664
There is a source of energy, the same energy that makes high tide and low tide on earth
But for Europa, it would obtain it from Jupiter

>>6473666
Actually, Al Gore has thought of this already. Didn't you see his movie?

>>6473674
Fuck Al Gore figures everything out before everyone else.

>>6473672
but muh photosynthesis

>>6473666
Yeah.
Tow Europa to Earth and crash it into Earth.
Bonuses:
1. Lots of free water
2. Global warming ended
3. Don't have to deal with Florida anymore

>>6473619
You suck!

I'm the one with the proof of life! I'm the one with surface methan AND a subsurface Ocean. I'm the one with the thick atmosphere and protected by my dad's Magnetosphere! I'm the one that Earthlings could actually find life on without a gigantic drill.


But nooooooooooo, you get all the attention. I hate you. And that faggot Mars too

>>6473680
Photosynthesis is basically impossible on Europa, as it receives little light from the Sun
and life isn't entirely dependent on energy from the sun

>>6473619
>>6473683
Why you guys have all the attention ??
IM THE BIGGEST

>>6473681
Each of those problems have much easier solutions:
1. Drag icebergs from the Arctic or Antarctic
2. Drastic reductions in greenhouse gas pollution and dump aerosols into stratosphere simultaneously
3. Engineer some sort of superbug that thrives in Florida's swampy ecosystem, then immediately quarantine the state, cutting off all food and water supplies and simply waiting until everyone is dead

>>6473690
Oops, I meant to be Ganymede

>>6473690
>>6473703

I think we can all agree your claims are at least as credible as Europa's and that none of you are anywhere near as cool as me. I mean look at this picture of me. You guys look like the Earth's lifeless moon and I look like a miniature version of Earth hiself!

>>6473683
Wouldn't it be great to go out and take a big puff of an inert gas

>>6473711
cool? I used to orbit a planet too..

>>6473725
forgot pic

>15km thick ice layer
How would a probe send back information through that?

>>6473656
not too long if it's only ice

>>6473695
But none of those are as cool as dragging a fucking moon to us.

>>6473619
It could even hold life bellow it's 15km thick ice layer
What could handle its pressure?
Where would it get nutrients?
What is stopping high entropy in this system enclosed in 15km of ice?

>What could handle its pressure?
The pressure at the bottom is only slightly higher than the pressure at the mariana trench.

>>6473681
Downsides:
1. The extinction of all life on Earth

>>6474156
>>6474153

And pressure's only a danger when there's a differential.

>>6474153
> What could handle its pressure?
have a pressure inside as well
> Where would it get nutrients?
that's the cool thing. It's an ocean with rock under
> What is stopping high entropy in this system enclosed in 15km of ice?
there's supposedly a lot of heat inside the rock

not that amazing. so far removed from us that it really has no impact on us. its basically like it doesnt exist.


Its like saying there's a dragon very, very far away, so far away we will never see it or anything.


Seriously, I hate you guys. You all talk about how amazing the universe is and how big it is, but you or I cant really even comprehend how big it is. whether it is 10^12 or 10^24, those numbers dont mean anything different for us.


quit trying to act amazed by things that cant affect you

>>6473680
ever heard of chemosynthesis? There are hydrothermal vents and cold seeps at the bottom of the ocean that expel hydrogen sulfide and methane. Bacteria that can utilize those energy sources form the base of the food chain in a fairly large ecosystem.

Its not far fetched to imagine something similar on europa.

Also I read a cool paper about a bacteria that uses photosynthesis near hydrothermal vents supposedly from light in infrared range and the visible light emitted from the magma.

>>6473619
>It could even hold life bellow it is 15km thick ice layer

>>6474420
The point of searching for life on Europa (and I think Titan is far better for exploration) is to plug values into the Drake equation.

Just a few years ago we didn't know exoplanets were common. Now we do. If we further know that in our own solar system that life arose 5 times (let's just say Mars, Europa, Titan, Earth, and another moon) all had life arising independently that would be huge.

How does this affect you? Well it doesn't necessarily imply intelligent life should be common, but it does increase the likelihood greatly. And if it is, well that means there could be aliens more advanced than ourselves which means they have cool tech for us to copy.

Copying cool tech is what humans do.

>>6474531
This is why Titan is better. A Titan expedition will cost about a billion dollars (read: less than some individual's net worth) while a Europa expedition will probably be in the Trillions if it's even possible with today's technology.

>>6474538
>Copying cool tech is what humans do.
But what if they patented the tech?!

>>6474538
>How does this affect you? Well it doesn't necessarily imply intelligent life should be common, but it does increase the likelihood greatly.
And makes the fermi paradox even more offensive

Si, me sorprendi.

>>6474545
We have very good lawyers

>>6474633
How do you mean "offensive"?

All the water on Earth balled together like this would have a radius of about 750km.

>>6474687
All the water on Europa would have a radius of about 900km.

>>6474690
I'm on board the Titan bandwagon but I'll try real hard to think about Europa.

Now, if you believe in abiogenesis (that is that life on Earth arose on Earth) it seems a big component of it was waves crashing on the shore, creating "bubbles" and trapping organic material.

Now, from what I remember this life was originally a chemotroph and phototrophs didn't develop til later, is this true?

And water is one ingredient for life sure, but does Europa have many hydrocarbons?

>>6474660
Paradoxes demand to be resolved, or at least justifiably dismissed. Maybe "embarrassing" is a better word.

>>6473666
futurama pls go

>>6473619
You guys are forgetting about Enceladus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enceladus

It has liquid water under a thin layer of ice.

>>6474737
Okay, this brings up an interesting question:
Is there any reason to suspect that the size of the planet/moon matters for life? Enceladus is significantly smaller than Titan which is significantly smaller than Earth?

If it does matter, does this mean that a superearth (say 2x the size of earth) would be even more conducive to life?

>>6474789
I think the only advantage of size for life is that an asteroid carrying materials necessary to form life would have more chances to be catched by the gravity

I think Europa is "the new Mars". There's free oxygen in the water (supposedly) from incoming radiation liberating it from the ice above, and there's energy in the form of sunlight in any cracks in the ice filled with water close enough to the surface, and from geological activity from the seafloor (the tidal flexing that keeps the ocean liquid is sure to keep the seafloor active). Life there, if it exists, may be multicellular (because of the free oxygen in the water).

>>6474817
And what materials would that be? I can see panspermia but are you referrign to some sort of minerals?

>>6474825
Okay, so why is it superior to Titan?

Titan has all of those things as well as evidence for life (dissapearance of acetylene) and surface hydrocarbon lakes.

I really think it's just because of that stupid movie and the space agencies being run by physicists who are interested in how to transport a trillion dollar drill instead of a billion dollar rover and not interested in discovering life in the more obvious and easy place.

>>6474833
What movie?

Also, I didn't know that about Titan. I knew it had the hydrocarbon lakes and landscape on top of a water/ice layer, but that's new to me.

>>6474737
They're pretty sure there's an ocean there now.

It'd be awesome if it turns out the Solar System is teeming with life in underground oceans. And if that's the case in just the Solar System, life may be far more common than we thought.

>>6474828
I was talking about organic compounds so yeah panspermia.

>>6474834
Here's the info on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_titan#Findings_suggesting_surface_life

In 2005, astrobiologists Chris McKay and Heather Smith predicted that if methanogenic life is consuming atmospheric hydrogen in sufficient volume, it will have a measurable effect on the mixing ratio in the troposphere of Titan. The effects predicted included a level of acetylene much lower than otherwise expected, as well as a reduction in the concentration of hydrogen itself.[22]
Evidence consistent with these predictions was reported in June 2010 by Darrell Strobel of Johns Hopkins University, who analysed measurements of hydrogen concentration in the upper and lower atmosphere. Strobel found that the hydrogen concentration in the upper atmosphere is so much larger than near the surface that the physics of diffusion leads to hydrogen flowing downwards at a rate of roughly 1025 molecules per second. Near the surface the downward-flowing hydrogen apparently disappears.[22][24][25] Another paper released the same month showed very low levels of acetylene on Titan's surface.[24]
Chris McKay agreed with Strobel that presence of life, as suggested in McKay's 2005 article, is a possible explanation for the findings about hydrogen and acetylene, but also cautioned that other explanations are currently more likely: namely the possibility that the results are due to human error, to a meteorological process, or to the presence of some mineral catalyst enabling hydrogen and acetylene to react chemically.[6][26] He noted that such a catalyst, one effective at −178 °C (95 K), is presently unknown and would in itself be a startling discovery, though less startling than discovery of an extraterrestrial life form.[6]

As for the Europa movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Report
It may not have been that big of a movie but it was all over the space websites last year.

>>6474842
Okay, I can see that arguement. Personally I don't think Panspermia happened on Earth but there's no reason it couldn't happen elsewhere.

But on Earth I do think the size of the Earth has had affects. Not for developing life I don't think, but it increases biodiversity which may allow for more niches to be fullfilled and may in turn lead to the development of more complex life.

>>6474851
Size could have an effect on biodiversity I agree but in term of if there could or couldn't be life, I think size doesnt matter

I think Titan is the best target for a search for life simply because it would be the easiest to get a probe onto. Europa and Enceladus both have next to no atmosphere so any landing is going to have carry Apollo levels of fuel out to the gas giants. It would also have to be completely automated, which could be a bit risky as we only have one use of the sky crane under our belts currently. Plus we have no idea what their surface looks like from up close. It could be covered in endless fields of huge ice shards for all we know, making a safe landing difficult.

Titan, however, has a nice thick atmosphere to parachute through and we've got an image from it's surface, so we have a bit of an idea of what to expect.

>>6474843
Cool, thanks for the info. I wasn't really keeping up with news on Titan. It also seems like I live in the Europan oceans when it comes to keeping up with movies.

It'd be very dreary on Titan's surface though. It's like a brownish/orange light that's comparable to moonlight on Earth (if even that).

This guy does good space art:
http://arcadiastreet.com/cgvistas/ab_menu_saturn.htm

And then of course, there's that famous photo:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Huygens_surface_color.jpg

Although Europa and Enceladus' oceans would be like the abyss regions of Earth's oceans - pitch black. (Unless there's bioluminescent life)

>>6474859
Unfortunately, and I thank you for making it, this is the type of arguement that will be best for Titan in these kinds of debates, at least where it matters.

NASA, ESA, and the like are dominated by physicists and engineers, not biologists. I honestly don't think they understand astrobiology all that much, so even if it was known absolutely (and not just likely) that Titan had life on it they wouldn't care.

So logically, the best arguement to make in NASA/ESA circles is not one based on the likelihood for life, but one based on the engineering challenges.

>>6474865
>It's like a brownish/orange light that's comparable to moonlight on Earth (if even that).

Any plant biologists experts on moonlight and photosynthesis?

>>6474789
the main issue with super earths is that the hydrogen/helium that would have been present in the atmosphere of the protoplanet may have not been blown away. That would hinder DNA based life. Other life might arise, which would be cool as well.

>>6474897
Care to explain more? Why exactly is this an issue? At what point (vs. the size of Earth) does it become an issue?

europa sucks. enceladus is better

The radiation from Saturn's rings would have potentially killed all life on Titan. Stop wasting money on this bullshit and try to find life somewhere else.

>>6474925
Oh? I haven't heard this arguement, care to elaborate?

>>6474925
You mean Saturn's radiation belt, right? Saturn's radiation belt is nowhere near as lethal as Jupiter's, from what I understand, and even if it were, Titan is too far out.

>>6474922
It certainly has the more interesting landscape. And gravity is so slight there that if you were to drop something, it'd still be only about forearm's length from where you dropped it a second later, and it would be accelerating at a mere .08ish m/s^2.

>>6474870

Well NASA might become a much smaller player if spacex can really cheapen spaceflight like they claim; wiki says their reusable rockets could bring it as low as $5M per launch. If it became that cheap maybe companies like IBM or whoever might take up an interest in sending probes out to explore what nasa won't/can't.

>>6474958
For comparison, what's the cost of a flight of a typical passenger jet (like a Boeing 747)?

>>6474958
SpaceX will definitely make a Titan mission cheaper (and that means that if currently it costs 1 billion, it might cost 100 million which is cheaper than a documentary about life on Titan would make).

However, SpaceX is also owned by Elon Musk who is firmly in the Physicist/Engineer camp.

>>6474967
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747-8
$350 million

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_(moon)#Proposed_or_conceptual_missions
the last proposed Titan mission cost $715 million

>>6474870
>I honestly don't think they understand astrobiology all that much, so even if it was known absolutely (and not just likely) that Titan had life on it they wouldn't care.
This is nonsense. NASA and ESA draw on the knowledge of experts in their respective fields.

Titan isn't likely to have life because we have no idea how it could come to evolve there or how to detect it. Life may be more varied than we know but we would have no idea how to go about finding it. Europa and Enceladus on the other hand are better. We know more about water based life. It's also polar and freezes top down which some believe is important.

If people knew there was life on Titan they would certainly be going there. If it was about technical challenge they would simply go to Titan because it's easier.

>>6474859
>It would also have to be completely automated, which could be a bit risky as we only have one use of the sky crane under our belts currently.
Nope. There have been many other powered landings.

>>6474981
SpaceX don't build spacecraft, the bulk of mission costs lies in the payload and operation not the launcher.

Mission support is another huge chunk of money. Currently it costs about 60 million a year just to keep a mission like Cassini going.

>>6474993

Wow, NASAIDF

Why would a biologist be hired by NASA? Maybe some minor theoretical research? Okay, so there might be a few.

Why would an engineer or physicist be hired by NASA? So that they can build rockets/ mars rovers/ etc. I.e. most of NASA

Now who is more likely to rise to the top of NASA? The much larger and more powerful group or the smaller group?

Further, Titan has a liquid water surface just like Europa. So if you want to drill Titan is just as good. As for detecting life on Titan?

Well the obvious one is to just send a rover. Test for the coolest stuff first. If you see roaming organic compounds eating eachother, there you go. Only costs a few hundred million and you find something really cool as opposed to a few trillion for a giant drill.

As for microbial life, that's touget. But I don't think the hypothetical methenogens on Titan would be any harder to discover if you were looking right at them under a microscope than the hypothetical life in Europa's undersea vents.

>>6474651
What if aliens are using our companies on earth to manufacture cheap devices or some other service that's good for them?

>>6475012
>Why would a biologist be hired by NASA
Why would a geologist or a solar physicist be hired at NASA? To do research, to plan future missions and to support current missions.

It's not just a few. Scientists propose missions. They drive the themes of study. They drive the instruments. It's the engineers who say "no, not in on this opportunity budget".

>Why would an engineer or physicist be hired by NASA? So that they can build rockets/ mars rovers/ etc. I.e. most of NASA
If that's what they're hired to do then that's what they do. They do not start dictating the direction of research. That's not how things work.

>Now who is more likely to rise to the top of NASA?
That's not how missions are selected.

>Titan has a liquid water surface just like Europa.
Neither do. Titan has surface liquid methane and Europa has no liquid surface. Europa is a better candidate because it's close to Jupiter and so almost certainly has enough heating to sustain an ocean and for life. Also has a rocky core which is good for salts. The surface cracks support this view and the idea it may be thinner.

>So if you want to drill Titan is just as good.
Doesn't take into account depth or the possibility of pockets of water and faults.

>Well the obvious one is to just send a rover.
Can't do that without surface imagery as you have no idea where you're sensing it. That is very hard on titan because of the haze. The cheapest solution to this is an aircraft which is risky and will take time. Europa is easier because you can use an orbiter.

> If you see roaming organic compounds eating eachother, there you go.
And what if it's microscopic. You can't send a mission on the assumption life will be easy find.

> Only costs a few hundred million
Ha. The imagery and preparatory work will cost you 800-1000 million if it's cheap. A rover will be 2-3 billion.

>>6474883
This is a good conceptual question.

>>6475035
>implying NASA is immune from human social behaviors

>>6475035
>Well the obvious one is to just send a rover.
Can't do that without surface imagery as you have no idea where you're sensing it. That is very hard on titan because of the haze. The cheapest solution to this is an aircraft which is risky and will take time. Europa is easier because you can use an orbiter.

> If you see roaming organic compounds eating eachother, there you go.
And what if it's microscopic. You can't send a mission on the assumption life will be easy find.

What is it you intend to find with this Europa orbiter? Sounds like answers to physical/engineering questions, not biological ones.

>>6475042
>>6474883
Found this
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16916290

Starlight alone is not enough to support photosynthesis, but the light from a Full Moon is enough to support very low levels of photosynthesis. And finally...
>Photosynthesis on an ELP(Earth-like Planet)-like satellite of a Jupiter-sized planet using light reflected from the planet could be almost 1% of the rate in full sunlight on Earth when the planet was full.

>>6475054
That's not how it's structured. Science themes are selected by a panel of scientists not by the NASA hierarchy.

>>6475057
>What is it you intend to find with this Europa orbiter? Sounds like answers to physical/engineering questions, not biological ones.

You can't do the biology without doing the preparatory work and it isn't all about biology. A Europa Orbiter will answer planetary science questions about Europa and will provide the data necessary for possible future surface missions. You can't send a big lander without surface information or you waste a big opportunity. You can't drill if you don't know how thick the ice is, it may not even be practical.

>>6475069
Oh, how is this panel selected? And doesn't NASA have to go to congress for funding which might be more susceptible to say movies(like the Europa one) or fascinations from their youth (which would lead to Mars funding)?

> it isn't all about biology.

There you go people! Straight from the horse's mouth! The NASA bureaucrats care about funding their own pet projects and experiments, they care nothing about the search for life and are just using it as an excuse to get more fuding.

Thankfully, thanks to Obama (he deserves credit for this one), government space agencies are going the way of the dinosaur and will be replaced by private space initiatives.

>>6473656
The idea is to have a robot land on the surface and have a giant hot plate under it. When it reaches the ocean it would deploy a sub of some sort to explore the ocean.

>>6475064
>the light from a Full Moon is enough to support very low levels of photosynthesis.
It's not just a full Moon it's a much, much closer moon, hence brighter.
>Photosynthesis on an ELP(Earth-like Planet)-like satellite of a Jupiter-sized planet using light reflected from the planet could be almost 1% of the rate in full sunlight on Earth when the planet was full.
Three extra considerations for Titan are Saturn's considerable distance from the Sun, Titan's distance from Saturn and the extreme haze.

>>6475080
Okay, what % of sunlight is moonlight?

Also Titan would be recieving light from both Saturn and the Sun so it would probably be around 1% (pure guess) even though it's considerably farther than Jupiter.

>>6475081
Where are you going to get the energy to power that sort of hot plate?

And again, that's why biologists like Titan and Physicists like Europa. Europa poses all sorts of engineering challenges. The simplest Titan expeditions are basically already solved, thus no funding(or not as much) for the physicists to research them.

>>6475091
I found
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonlight
>The full moon is about 500,000 times fainter than the Sun.

Meaning that 1% of Earth's sunlight would be 500 times as much light as moonlight. If moonlight is good for low levels of photosynthesis Titan's good (not as good as earth of course)

>>6475079
>how is this panel selected?
Not by NASA but by the science academies. Conferences, white papers and subcommittees allow people to have direct contact.

>And doesn't NASA have to go to congress for funding which might be more susceptible to say movies
Congress can refuse funding but they do not dictate the science themes.

>There you go people! Straight from the horse's mouth!
Listen carefully this time. Does the charter of NASA state "science but only biology"? No. There are other fields of science, missions do not exist to satisfy you and you alone. Should planetary science stop because it isn't what you are interested in? No. As I said it addresses more than one field. A Europa orbiter will FACILITATE BIOLOGY. You need surface data for a lander, it will get that. At the same time people want to know about planetary formation, moon dynamics.... You don't make a mission to do one thing.

>The NASA bureaucrats care about funding their own pet projects and experiments
No, you didn't read what I wrote.

>>6475099
>that's why biologists like Titan and Physicists like Europa.
Complete bollocks.

You've now successfully entered the conspiracy stage of nonsense.

>>6475113
Please explain the process for NASA mission selection in more depth.

>>6475113
So this Europa orbiter goes and finds evidence that Europa is emitting some gas that can only likely be explained by biological phenomenon, now what?

>>6475147
The science academy and NRC put together the decadal survey every 10 years for a number of different topics. Which though subcommittees, conferences and white papers. Scientists submit white papers which are outline missions with science cases. Subcommittees and conferences allow for debate between similar proposals. The editing comity attempts to take all things into account and ranks priority science themes for NASA. Science priorities in the last decadal survey were a Europa orbiter and a Mars rover cacher.
NASA has opportunities for different missions of different budgets. Opportunities include a certain budget, approx launch date and field (astrophysics does not complete with planetary science or solar and so on) It attempts do take the advice of the decade survey on science whist adding in practical considerations such as budget and risk. A large mission has never gone forward which was not highly ranked on the decadal survey, some have been passed over for a number of reasons but big missions are always priorities.
At the end of the day white papers are selected for opportunities. There are often down selections where multiple missions are shortlisted and debate takes place, this usually occurs for smaller missions rather than large ones although ESA does it on all scales.

From selection a mission can be cancelled at review or by government.

>>6475150
Then you investigate that by whatever means deemed necessary. Things like that shift the scientific landscape and interest snowballs in all fields. Just like Titan's lakes have become a great interest. If biology is possible then it is done. The point is that a mission doesn't have to be centered around biology. Big questions in planetary science exist and missions like this are an opportunity for that.

>>6475188
So why ignore the dissapearance of acetylene and hydrogen near Titan's surface which has a likely biological explanation? Or rather, why is it being ignored?

>>6475179
And in all that buereaucratic mess there's no room for corruption/nepotism/friendships/bribery/sexual favors/ coalitions/etc. etc.?

I also noticed you mentioned 3 physics commitees but 0 biological ones, still suggesting NASA is mostly ruled by physicists. What would these physicists do if Congress was persuaded by the astrobiologists to scrap a Europa mission and persue Titan? I figure they'd be pretty pissed off.

>>6475197
Nobody is ignoring it but claiming it is most likely biological is nonsense. The chemical cycle on titan is not understood.
On Mars one of the Viking life science experiments came back positive, that was a similar chemical mystery. It was not enough to drop everything to research.
A Titan mission would cost most of a billion dollars minimum. Interesting chemistry doesn't cut it. You need more than one science question.

You need to wait for lab tests to be done and people to understand the result. Otherwise you risk wasting two decades and a large mission.

>>6475207
>And in all that buereaucratic mess there's no room for corruption/nepotism/friendships/bribery/sexual favors/ coalitions/etc.
Where? It is a huge process. One person cannot control the result.

>I also noticed you mentioned 3 physics commitees but 0 biological ones
No. Planetary science is branch of NASA science which contains all planetary research including biology.

>What would these physicists do if Congress was persuaded by the astrobiologists to scrap a Europa mission and persue Titan?
Anyone who likes science should be pissed. What would you do if a small group of scientists used the overarching powers of congress to ignore the democratic internal process and risk it all on a mission congress may very well get bored of anyway. I would be pissed, so should you. The point of the decadal survey is to bring together scientists and represent the field, not one group or another.

In any case astrobiologists aren't quite as gung-ho about Titan as you claim. NASA is not ruled by physicists.

>>6474704
>And water is one ingredient for life sure, but does Europa have many hydrocarbons?
Massive quantities

>>6475498
What type of activation energies would Europa have to spark (Earth pun) the combination of hydrocarbons? And is there any Nitrogen or Phosphorus? Or even Arsenic if one is willing to think of exotic types of genetic information storage?

>>6475510
>What type of activation energies
Energy from tidal forces (from Jupiter) that causes heat by friction (it's why the water bellow the surface is liquid).

>>6475064
>>6475080

There's the perpetual thick haze mentioned, and also, Saturn isn't as close to Titan as Jupiter is to Europa. Pic related, Saturn from Titan a few minutes ago.

(my toaster won't display ring shadows or the upper atmosphere of Titan as blue)

(image from Celestia (http://www.shatters.net/celestia/)) - site down)

>>6475568
For comparison, here's Enceladus from Saturn

(Screencap of Celestia again, the Enceladus surface texture is modified from a map of the surface of Enceladus by NASA and ESA, et al. My toaster doesn't display the ring shadows on Saturn)

>>6475572
Damn typos. I meant, here's Saturn from Enceladus.

>>6475572
Finally, for the hell of it, here's Jupiter from Europa tommowrow morning. Right now, Europa's in Jupiter's shadow.

(pic of Celestia yet again)

>>6475572
The closeness won't help Enceladus though. I don't think anyone is proposing there would be photosynthetic life on Enceladus.

So what's the current estimate for light and thus photosynthesis on Titan then? Something like 2 or 3x moonlight?

>>6475572
Imagine being there and see a ''Saturn rise"

>>6475586
Saturn doesn't really move in Enceladus' sky due to "tidal lock".

I'd like to see the sun rising from behind Saturn though, and a full Saturn. A full Saturn on the night side of Enceladus would make all the ice on the surface glow with a tan-ish colored light.

>>6474922
>>6474737
Found this on Wikimedia Commons:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PIA18071-SaturnMoonEnceladus-WaterOcean-20140403.jpg

>>6475582
Is useful radiation for photosynthesis even reflected by a planet (assuming it were bright enough)?

For example, if we have a space station orbiting the Moon at a distance where it takes up half the "sky" from the space station, could plants inside a transparent dome on the space station (assuming no sunlight is reaching the dome) receive enough radiation useful for photosynthesis?

I'm guessing any radiation (UV, IR, etc) reflected from a planet or moon , like visible light, is greatly reduced, if any.

>>6474165
i have yet to see a downside

>>6475899
>pic

What the hell is that?

>>6475994
it's in the filename.

>>6475994
if I had to Gauss i would say its putty with iron in it next to a magnet.

>>6475899
OM NOM NOM

>>6475994
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bx3PYFwnnA

Thanks for the link and info.

>>6476018
>iseewhatyoudidthere.pcx

>>6473683
>>6473690
>>6473703
>>6473711
>>6473725
>>6473729
I can't believe /sci/ is actually RPing as moons.

>>6473680

>>6473683
true but what life is able to withstand that amount of radiation
>>6473619
I really want to drink a big fucking glass of ice water now , what would the health effects be if you just drank water from another planet? would you like instantly die?
>>6474737
either Enceladus or Europa is my bet for life

anyone else cringe or laugh there asses off when a giant space squid totally wrecked the spacecraft/Manned lander in that one movie "The Europa report"?

>>6476515
Muh science, muthafucka.

>>6476602
>drank water from another planet
>would you like instantly die?

>>6476610
killer space microbes from space,
niggers drink water in Africa and they get really fucking sick, is it because they're niggers?

>>6476615
>instantly

>>6476615
>die

>>6476602
>?

>>6475568
>>6475572
>>6475577
Aesthetically, I like Enceladus the best. Europa looks like dirty marble (although I still like how it looks), and Titan is just a bland fuzzy ball.

Also, what's known about the water composition on Europa, Enceladus, and Titan now? (saltwater/freshwater, acid content, etc)

>>6473659

>>6473711
Titan is actually much smaller than that if you are going by the surface, as the atmosphere is several times 'deeper' than the Earths.

>>6476708
Europa is also the roundest/smoothest natural object in our own solar system

It's almost a perfect sphere and it's due to the water composition

>>6476162

>>6476761
if the pipe was long enough, that would actually work.

>>6476819
When you stick a straw in milk does the milk pour out the top?

best book on europa. find it on avax or libgen

also has some intereting insights on how the cassini hyugens operated and why it is what it is now.

>>6476822
yes, if the straw is long enough and rotating fast enough

>>6475064
Makes you wonder if we'll find chemotrophic/phototrophic hybrid life on some of these darker bodies. I've even wondered if there were organisms that persisted based on heat transfer alone, they'd do well in a dark ocean warmed by tidal heating.

>>6476876
cont. Can life theoretically persist utilizing only an energy gradient of some type? How big does the energy gradient need to be?

>>6476761
why Austria?

>>6476899

You'll need a mix of interesting chemicals as well, but there's plenty of life around hydrothermal vents on Earth where the only readily available energy source is the heat difference between the vent and the ocean.

Of course, part of the reason we are so interested in the oceans on these moons is that they would help answer this kind of question better.

>>6476786
If Europa was warmer and could somehow sustain an atmosphere, it'd be Earthlike, except with 120ish km deep ocean and no dry land anywhere. I've seen an illustration in an astronomy book ("The Universe ... And Beyond" by Terrence Dickinson, 1992 edition) that claimed that Europa actually once was like that, when Jupiter was radiating far more heat in the early Solar System than it is today (in the painting, Jupiter glowed a dull red color)

The water pressure on the seafloor there must be enormous.

>>6475577
Here's what the view at Europa should be like a few minutes ago. Jupiter pretty much stays in the same part of Europa's sky, but you'll notice how much Jupiter's phase has changed in the past few hours.

(screencap of Celestia)

Hey there!!

Want a free cab ride?? and FREE $20??

Signup right now for Uber with promo code: 13n1f

Open Link Below:

https://uber.com/invite/13n1f

SPREAD THE LOVE…SHARE THE LINK WITH ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY!!

>>6475577
>>6477474
/mlp/ pls go

>>6477772
lel

Also, I think I may be one of the few left who doesn't readily associate "Celestia" with that pony shit.

>>6473996
A very, very, very long cable to a surface transmitter.