<"Today, at this space and time, all the life we know, or have ever known, found its origins here, on this lonely, fertile growing-field called Earth."

There are theories that claim ‘space’ or other planets as the origination of life on Earth.





These theories have no basis, other than the possibility. Even then, the life remnants that may one day be found on other worlds could still very well be from Earth. Nanodes (much smaller than microbes) live within our atmosphere, and have for many billions of years. They have been discovered in the upper reaches of the stratosphere, and theory holds that they are buoyant enough to escape Earth’s gravity, along with our bits of hydrogen. That other fossils may be found in the Solar system is possible, but they would still be a Solar species, one related to us.

For such nanodes, or even microbes, to journey as such across the vastness of interstellar space would require many billions of years -- and the Universe is theorized to be only about 14 billion years old.

"We shall have to wait for what the future may tell."



True, but would you be surprised if it turns out that ‘life’ is very common in the universe?





Not at all. In fact, I very much hope it is.

"The numbers you seek, regarding lost quantities of atmospheric particles, are not with me. I find the sum of “miniscule” to be sufficient data. The Solar wind pounds at a regular speed of between 200 km/s and 900 km/s, but with a density of very near zero (1 to 10 protons per cubic centimeter). Our astronauts bounced through it with relative ease on the Moon, and the posted flags never rippled."



I agree with you on the subject matter of solar wind and its density. But without numbers on the amount of radiation being added to the upper atmosphere by nuclear ‘leaks’ from reactors all over the world, it is difficult to know if the ‘polar fountain’ has increased in magnitude since the invention of nuclear power.





I doubt it. As we have nothing that monitors this outflow on a 24/7 basis, the levels are far to low for any precise measurement to have been archived for such a study.

"As for the environment of Mars, there is no magnetosphere to protect what little atmosphere she holds, and there is no shield against the Solar wind, meteor storms, or coronal mass ejections. It’s a radio-hot planet, one we will need to be very prepared for when we eventually go."



At least there is 'water' or ice on the planet, should make it easier to quench our thirst. ;-)





Oh, that water exists is not the question. The question remains one of quantity. No probe that has ever been sent to Mars was ever designed for serious geo-study. There is not even an example of a vessel scraping the surface to reveal what might be underneath. All our knowledge of Mars is from surface imaging, and mostly in still frames.

Mars is such a fascinating place, I’m amazed we’re not already there. Geology in all its naked glory. An entire planet, exposed to the raw elements of space, an atmosphere less than 1% Earth’s density, torn by impact events that mirrored our own, but with a planet exposing the events of history to us from afar -- and here we still sit, comfortably wondering.

Dan