Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to re: Impact history of Mars

Partial agreement
Philip Simon — (archived)

I try to base my arguments on P-chem principles, but of course, much of what I said was thinly based speculation. The density of the larger asteroid belt objects, and the nickel iron pieces that reached Earth argue to me that there was a substantial planet there with molten segregation of elements into a core.

The thin, non cross bedded layering, and the abundance of hydrated minerals, known to precititate from water, not liquid CO2, are very strong arguments for past water on Mars. The overall thickness of these layers, and the grouping into larger units or strata visible from satellite, are supportive evidence for extensive and even deep water environments in the past.

One thing, though, is that you do not need any Moon to have tectonism. Isn't that one of Fred Juneman's cracked ideas? He makes interesting reading, but is often far off moon base. What rocky molten planet didn't have a period of tectonism in its early history? That doesn't mean that it will be visible at the surface billions of years later. Tectonism has been noted on Venus by radar studies, it has no moon.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (42 posts)