7 ms·

Titan, one of Saturn's moons, has an underground ocean

178 points by rblion 14y ago

bfe 14y ago
Link to abstract of the original research paper in the journal Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6093/457.abstract http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6093/457.abstract ...and for accompanying news article in Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6089/1629 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6089/1629
startupfounder 14y ago
... and here is how we get there, similar to how Bill Stone proposes we get to Jupiter's moon Europa: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bn6Gel7yEs#t=6m9s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bn6Gel7yEs#t=6m9s
- AlexanderZ 14y ago
  Thanks for the link. And just in case you didn't know, you can add #t=6m9s to youtube links to make videos start from that point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bn6Gel7yEs&feature=player_detailpage#t=6m9s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bn6Gel7yEs&feature=playe...
InclinedPlane 14y ago
In case anyone's counting, this makes it the 5th planetary body in the solar system with a high likelihood of having an ocean (Earth, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto, and now Titan). Add to that a parcel of additional moons and other other bodies that show indications of having sub-surface oceans (Triton, Enceladus, Pluto, Rhea, Titania, Eris, Sedna, Orcus, and Oberon).
quotemstr 14y ago
It's not really an "ocean" in the way we think of such things. In the outer solar system, ice is a rock in the same way granite is a rock. What Titan has isn't so much an ocean as an interior layer of molten ice --- just as our planet has an interior layer of molten rock.
- bcbrown 14y ago
  What's the difference between "molten ice" and water? Is it still crystalline? Is it just the pressure is different, or is there actual physical differences?
  - awolf 14y ago
    Perhaps by "molten ice" he means that the H20 is in its liquid state not because of the surrounding temperature but because of the pressure exerted upon it by the upper layers. Just a guess.
  - icegreentea 14y ago
    I don't think it's so much a physics/chemical difference, but more to the effect that here on Earth, the ocean is a large body of water that sits on top of the stuff the Earth is actually made of (which is a solidified crust on top of the semi-liquid rock of the mantle) On Titan, the role of the semi-liquid rock is played by the "ocean" (and the crust is played by the solid water ice layer ontop).
- recampbell 14y ago
  Can you expand? Why does the article call it "liquid water?"
  - awj 14y ago
    It's "liquid water" in the same sense that the molton rock inside the earth is "liquid rock". Here when we see water outside of it's natural state (liquid) it's frozen or evaporated. Out there ice (solid) is the natural state, so it's molten or (vaporized ???).
    - sliverstorm 14y ago
      If it's subterranean, it's probably not vaporized. Thank the pressure.
      - 14y ago
rbanffy 14y ago
Please, can we now put a reasonable nuclear reactor in space, power a VASIMIR engine (or something equally adequate), and do it with humans instead of robots? We already proved we can do it with machines and who will make first contact with alien life in becoming a really important question. We are not a race of robots. People wonder why the general public lost interest with space exploration, but we need to look no further than all the excitement every six-wheeler is experiencing right now, as they watch their six-wheeled brothers, the daring explorers of Mars. I am an engineer. I can comprehend and I do have the ultimate respect for the genius that allows us to land and operate robots on Mars, but that's the same genius that allowed us to land people on the Moon and, sadly, this is something we don't do anymore because it's too expensive. And we refuse to spend money on that while, at the same time, we fight unnecessary wars against the dictators we financed in the past. There is water ice on the Moon, probably a lot of it. There are minerals, abundant energy, just enough gravity to make industrial processes easy and a high grade vacuum that's the dream of every metallurgist. With these resources, we can become a true spacefaring civilization fit to meet our neighbors from the other islands floating around our sun. We shouldn't do with robots the work of humans.
- sktrdie 14y ago
  I couldn't agree more, however, if humans are too expensive, I still don't mind the robots getting there first. The moon landing was an outcome of the cold war. I find it hard happening again. Sending humans all the way to Saturn - it is very far away - is a dangerous task with too much at stake. I would love for all wars to end, for all the military budget to go to NASA instead, and for us to become a truly inter-planetary civilization, but that's just not a realistic wish, at least not for the next decades. But robots. Robots we can do now. Curiosity landing on Mars next week. It can do truly amazing things, scientifically more than a team of humans could.
- mikepurvis 14y ago
  A lot of the Rocket to Nowhere arguments address your points: http://idlewords.com/2005/08/a_rocket_to_nowhere.htm http://idlewords.com/2005/08/a_rocket_to_nowhere.htm In short, as soon as large hairless mammals are involved in the mission, 99% of the mission's resources are suddenly consumed with keeping said large hairless mammals fed, watered, breathing, amused, etc. So basically, there's nothing left to do anything of much value, especially on any kind of reasonable budget. Cost is the main reason robots have gone all over the Solar System and beyond, and the farthest any humans go these days is to LEO to hang out at the ISS.
akkartik 14y ago
Reading this article gave me a glimpse into the richness of extra-terrestrial biosphere processes. Even if Fermi's right and we never find life, there's a lot of stuff left to observe, study, and learn about, like the methane cycle on Titan.
Zenst 14y ago
I do wonder, if NASA said they found oil on another planet or moon what the reaction would be. After all it would be a sign of past life on that planet, though I feel that alot would see it as a opertunity to claim more oil. I just hope the first aliens we encounter are not plant based or they will take one look at us and our use of there dead relatives and it will not go well. Food for thought.
- brc 14y ago
  Unless it was economic to extract the oil and return it to earth (which it would not be) the discovery would be mostly of a scientific nature. However, finding hydrocarbons on the moon would be a good thing insofar it would provide a ready energy source for any future moon-based operations. The reason oil is so popular is because it is so useful. Anything useful is in high demand. There's no need to get hysterical about it.

178 points by rblion 14y ago

bfe 14y ago

Link to abstract of the original research paper in the journal Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6093/457.abstract http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6093/457.abstract ...and for accompanying news article in Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6089/1629 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6089/1629

startupfounder 14y ago

... and here is how we get there, similar to how Bill Stone proposes we get to Jupiter's moon Europa: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bn6Gel7yEs#t=6m9s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bn6Gel7yEs#t=6m9s

AlexanderZ 14y ago
Thanks for the link. And just in case you didn't know, you can add #t=6m9s to youtube links to make videos start from that point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bn6Gel7yEs&feature=player_detailpage#t=6m9s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bn6Gel7yEs&feature=playe...

InclinedPlane 14y ago

In case anyone's counting, this makes it the 5th planetary body in the solar system with a high likelihood of having an ocean (Earth, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto, and now Titan). Add to that a parcel of additional moons and other other bodies that show indications of having sub-surface oceans (Triton, Enceladus, Pluto, Rhea, Titania, Eris, Sedna, Orcus, and Oberon).

quotemstr 14y ago

It's not really an "ocean" in the way we think of such things. In the outer solar system, ice is a rock in the same way granite is a rock. What Titan has isn't so much an ocean as an interior layer of molten ice --- just as our planet has an interior layer of molten rock.

bcbrown 14y ago
What's the difference between "molten ice" and water? Is it still crystalline? Is it just the pressure is different, or is there actual physical differences?
- awolf 14y ago
  Perhaps by "molten ice" he means that the H20 is in its liquid state not because of the surrounding temperature but because of the pressure exerted upon it by the upper layers. Just a guess.
- icegreentea 14y ago
  I don't think it's so much a physics/chemical difference, but more to the effect that here on Earth, the ocean is a large body of water that sits on top of the stuff the Earth is actually made of (which is a solidified crust on top of the semi-liquid rock of the mantle) On Titan, the role of the semi-liquid rock is played by the "ocean" (and the crust is played by the solid water ice layer ontop).
recampbell 14y ago
Can you expand? Why does the article call it "liquid water?"
- awj 14y ago
  It's "liquid water" in the same sense that the molton rock inside the earth is "liquid rock". Here when we see water outside of it's natural state (liquid) it's frozen or evaporated. Out there ice (solid) is the natural state, so it's molten or (vaporized ???).
  - sliverstorm 14y ago
    If it's subterranean, it's probably not vaporized. Thank the pressure.
    - 14y ago

rbanffy 14y ago

Please, can we now put a reasonable nuclear reactor in space, power a VASIMIR engine (or something equally adequate), and do it with humans instead of robots? We already proved we can do it with machines and who will make first contact with alien life in becoming a really important question. We are not a race of robots. People wonder why the general public lost interest with space exploration, but we need to look no further than all the excitement every six-wheeler is experiencing right now, as they watch their six-wheeled brothers, the daring explorers of Mars. I am an engineer. I can comprehend and I do have the ultimate respect for the genius that allows us to land and operate robots on Mars, but that's the same genius that allowed us to land people on the Moon and, sadly, this is something we don't do anymore because it's too expensive. And we refuse to spend money on that while, at the same time, we fight unnecessary wars against the dictators we financed in the past. There is water ice on the Moon, probably a lot of it. There are minerals, abundant energy, just enough gravity to make industrial processes easy and a high grade vacuum that's the dream of every metallurgist. With these resources, we can become a true spacefaring civilization fit to meet our neighbors from the other islands floating around our sun. We shouldn't do with robots the work of humans.

sktrdie 14y ago
I couldn't agree more, however, if humans are too expensive, I still don't mind the robots getting there first. The moon landing was an outcome of the cold war. I find it hard happening again. Sending humans all the way to Saturn - it is very far away - is a dangerous task with too much at stake. I would love for all wars to end, for all the military budget to go to NASA instead, and for us to become a truly inter-planetary civilization, but that's just not a realistic wish, at least not for the next decades. But robots. Robots we can do now. Curiosity landing on Mars next week. It can do truly amazing things, scientifically more than a team of humans could.
mikepurvis 14y ago
A lot of the Rocket to Nowhere arguments address your points: http://idlewords.com/2005/08/a_rocket_to_nowhere.htm http://idlewords.com/2005/08/a_rocket_to_nowhere.htm In short, as soon as large hairless mammals are involved in the mission, 99% of the mission's resources are suddenly consumed with keeping said large hairless mammals fed, watered, breathing, amused, etc. So basically, there's nothing left to do anything of much value, especially on any kind of reasonable budget. Cost is the main reason robots have gone all over the Solar System and beyond, and the farthest any humans go these days is to LEO to hang out at the ISS.

akkartik 14y ago

Reading this article gave me a glimpse into the richness of extra-terrestrial biosphere processes. Even if Fermi's right and we never find life, there's a lot of stuff left to observe, study, and learn about, like the methane cycle on Titan.

Zenst 14y ago

I do wonder, if NASA said they found oil on another planet or moon what the reaction would be. After all it would be a sign of past life on that planet, though I feel that alot would see it as a opertunity to claim more oil. I just hope the first aliens we encounter are not plant based or they will take one look at us and our use of there dead relatives and it will not go well. Food for thought.

brc 14y ago
Unless it was economic to extract the oil and return it to earth (which it would not be) the discovery would be mostly of a scientific nature. However, finding hydrocarbons on the moon would be a good thing insofar it would provide a ready energy source for any future moon-based operations. The reason oil is so popular is because it is so useful. Anything useful is in high demand. There's no need to get hysterical about it.