4 ms·
Thankfully the smart people of NASA listened https://mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/instruments/mi/ https://mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/instruments/mi/
by ArnoVW 5y ago
Thankfully the smart people of NASA listened
https://mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/instruments/mi/ https://mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/instruments/mi/
- ncmncm 5y agoA microscope that cannot resolve smaller than 0.1 mm will not be very useful for seeing bacteria. As it says in the blurb, "magnifying glass views".
- ArnoVW 5y agoSorry, I willfully risked Poe's law, and the results were to be expected. Have you considered that the people that design, develop, transport and operate autonomous robots on other planets in order to perform science have not "forgotten" to include a microscope? Whenever you think you've got a great idea, try asking your question to Google. For example, when you type "microscope mars rover", the first link is what I sent. The third link is a StackOverflow thread explaining why there is not a better resolution: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/39525/why-is-there-no-microscope-on-the-mars-2020-rover The reason suggested? For high magnification you get shallow depth-of-field. Hence, samples must be prepared, and that's not easy. Like any engineering issue it could be done in theory. But there are constraints and budgets, and choices have to be made, based on science priorities and the likelyhood of mission success. I'm not a rocket scientist, but that's the likely reason that there is not a high-power microscope on rovers. I've got good news for you though. The second result on Google says that the current Mars mission will test for microbial life by using chemical analysis. Not in-situ, but using a sample return.
- ncmncm 5y agoViking 1 also did chemical analysis. Canonically inconclusively.