5 ms·
The article didn't say, but off-hand I would guess it's for the same reason they crashed Galileo into Jupiter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(spacecraft
by kkylin 10y ago
The article didn't say, but off-hand I would guess it's for the same reason they crashed Galileo into Jupiter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(spacecraft) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(spacecraft)), namely to avoid any possibility of contaminating one of the moons (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_Titan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_Titan) with life (e.g., bacteria) from Earth.
- idlewords 10y agoThis is correct, the probe was too large to sterilize, and they want to avoid any possibility of contaminating Enceladus. http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/space-exploration/extraterrestrial-life/cassini-huygens-preventing-biological-contamination/ http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/space-exploration/extrate...
- Figs 10y agoThat seems like a really poor reason for doing it seeing as Cassini carried Huygens with it -- which already landed on Titan over 10 years ago.
- cgriswald 10y agoFlying a mission to intentionally study a moon is a bit different than accidentally contaminating it while getting no useful data. Titan isn't a likely candidate for contamination anyway and if we ever do find life there it is likely to be distinguishable from Earth life. Enceladus, on the other hand, is one of the likeliest places for Earth-like life in our solar system and much more succeptible to contamination. Since the orbiter is out of fuel and will eventually crash into something, Saturn makes the most sense.
- myowncrapulence 10y agoAre we not actively trying to terraform Mars? Why is "life contamination" seen as a problem for our solar system rather than a goal?
- noelwelsh 10y agoThe days of colonialism, when Europeans showed up on foreign shores, killed the natives, and claimed the land as their own, are over.
- Thane 10y ago*barfs
- myowncrapulence 10y agoare over You mean like in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Israel?
- noelwelsh 10y agoThose are proxy wars and/or puppet governments, which is a different thing to colonisation. There is somewhat more regard for the rights of the native inhabitants than in the past. If we ever find alien life, the Outer Space Treaty prohibits colonisation in the sense we're using here. Of course this is a very easy treaty to sign up to at this point in our development of space travel. If space travel ever becomes cheap enough to enable exploitation of resource on distant planets I imagine those laws will see some amendments.
- myowncrapulence 10y agoSo, why is it a goal to send humans there? Humans breathe out bacteria constantly and will guarantee contamination of Mars.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- raverbashing 10y ago> Are we not actively trying to terraform Mars? No > Why is "life contamination" seen as a problem for our solar system rather than a goal? Because you'll not be sure if eventual life that you found there comes from Earth equipment or was there in the first place
- iampherocity 10y agoI don't understand why we're doing this. They will eventually be contaminated in the next 500 years and that's not long evolutionarily speaking. As tech becomes cheaper and the third world starts breaking into the "modern era", we'll have more failed satellites embedded in the sides of every moon in the solar system. And NASA legitimately struggles to make these devoid of life. An exuberant little nation punching a little above its weight category certainly won't.
- icebraining 10y agoThat still means we have 500 years to find legitimate non-terrestrial life.
- pm90 10y agoExactly. Also, In 500 years, it may be possible/economical to sterilize large bodies before sending them to outer space. I think its a good idea that NASA (and other space agencies) are so careful about this. I wouldn't want any life (or the traces of past life) to be wiped out by organisms from earth.