ONTD Political

NASA's rover Curiosity lands on Mars

2:11 am - 08/06/2012


(CNN) -- NASA's $2.6 billion rover, Curiosity, carried out a challenging landing on Mars early Monday after traveling hundreds of millions of miles through space in order to explore the Red Planet.

The SUV-sized Curiosity made its dramatic arrival on Martian terrain in a spectacle popularly known as the "seven minutes of terror."

This jaw-dropping landing process, involving a sky crane and the world's largest supersonic parachute, allowed the spacecraft carrying Curiosity to target the landing area that scientists had meticulously chosen.

The mission control in NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California burst into cheers as the rover touched down. Team members hugged and high-fived one another as Curiosity beamed back the first pictures from the planet, some shed tears.


"Rationally I know it was supposed to work all along, but emotionally it always seemed completely crazy," said James Wray, assistant professor at Georgia Institute of Technology, who is affiliated with the Curiosity science team of Curiosity. "So to see all those steps being ticked off and actually working, it's a huge relief."

The spacecraft had been traveling away from Earth since November 26 on a journey of approximately 352 million miles (567 million kilometers), according to NASA.

The vehicle, which will be controlled from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, has a full suite of sophisticated tools for exploring Mars. They include 17 cameras, a laser that can survey the composition of rocks from a distance and instruments that can analyze samples from soil or rocks.

The aim of its work is "to assess whether Mars ever had an environment able to support small life forms," NASA says.

If all goes according to plan, Curiosity's first stop will be Gale Crater, which may have once contained a lake. After at least a year, the rover will arrive at Mount Sharp, in the center of the crater. The rover will drive up the mountain examining layers of sediment. This process is like looking at a historical record because each layer represents an era of the planet's history, scientists say.


The phenomenon of sedimentary layers is remarkably similar to what is seen on Earth, in California's Death Valley or in Montana's Glacier National Park, says John Grotzinger, chief scientist of the Mars Science Laboratory mission.

Rocks and minerals found on Earth are different than on Mars, but the idea of a mountain made of layers is familiar to scientists. Unlike on Earth, however, Mars has no plate tectonics, so the Martian layers are flat and not disrupted as they would be on Earth. That also means that Mount Sharp was formed in a different way than how mountains are created on Earth -- no one knows how.

In these layers, scientists are looking for organic molecules, which are necessary to create life. But even if Curiosity finds them, that's not proof that life existed -- after all, these molecules are found in bus exhaust and meteorites, too, says Steve Squyres, part of the Mars Science Laboratory science team.

If there aren't any organics, that may suggest there's something on the planet destroying these molecules, said Wray, of Georgia Tech. But if Curiosity detects them, Wray said, that might help scientists move from asking, "Was Mars ever habitable?" to "Did Mars actually host life?"

Curiosity's mission is also significant in an era when NASA's budgets are shrinking and China is becoming more ambitious in its space exploration program.

"I feel like it's a signal that we have the capability to do big and exciting things in the future." said Carol Paty, assistant professor at Georgia Tech's School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences. "You can't not be excited."

Liquid water is not something scientists expect to be apparent on Mars because the planet is so cold and dry, Squyres said. If the planet does harbor liquid water today, it would have to be deep below the surface, perhaps peeking out in a few special places, but not likely to be seen by Curiosity, Squyres said.

Rover to search for clues to life on Mars

It's hard to know how long ago liquid water would have been there because there's no mechanism to date the rocks that rovers find on Mars, Squyres said.

Evidence from the spacecraft NASA has sent to Mars so far suggests that the "warm and wet" period on Mars lasted for the first billion years of the planet's history.

"In order to create life, you need both the right environmental conditions -- which includes liquid water -- and you need the building blocks from which life is built, which includes organics," Squyres said. The Mars Science Laboratory is a precursor mission to sharper technology that could do life detection, Grotzinger said.

There aren't specific molecules that scientists are looking for with Curiosity. The attitude is: "Let's go to an interesting place with good tools and find out what's there," Squyres said.

Curiosity is supposed to last for two years on Mars, but it may operate longer -- after all, Spirit and Opportunity, which arrived on Mars in 2004, were each only supposed to last 90 Martian days. Spirit stopped communicating with NASA in 2010 after getting stuck in sand, and Opportunity is still going.

"You take what Mars gives you," said Squyres, also the lead scientist on the Mars Exploration Rover Mission, which includes Spirit and Opportunity. "If we knew what we were going to find, it wouldn't be this much fun."

Image from the Rover:




SOURCE
Live Feed

rex_dart 6th-Aug-2012 03:20 pm (UTC)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/06/us-usa-mars-idUSBRE8721A920120806

It's not really that hard to find out why this was special:

Mission controllers burst into applause and cheers as they received signals confirming that the car-sized rover had survived a perilous seven-minute descent NASA called the most elaborate and difficult feat in the annals of robotic spaceflight.

Engineers said the tricky landing sequence, combining a giant parachute with a rocket-pack that lowered the rover to the Martian surface on a tether, allowed for zero margin for error.



NASA put the official landing time of Curiosity, touted as the first full-fledged mobile science laboratory sent to a distant world, at 10:32 p.m. Pacific time (1:32 a.m. EDT/0532 GMT).


The $2.5 billion Curiosity project, formally called the Mars Science Laboratory, is NASA's first astrobiology mission since the 1970s-era Viking probes.


The sequence also involved 79 pyrotechnic detonations to release exterior ballast weights, open the parachute, separate the heat shield, detach the craft's back shell, jettison the parachute and other functions. The failure of any one of those would have doomed the landing, JPL engineers said.


Over twice as large and five times heavier than either of the twin rovers Spirit and Opportunity that landed on Mars in 2004, Curiosity weighed too much to be bounced to the surface in airbags or fly itself all the way down with rocket thrusters -- systems successfully used by six previous NASA landers, engineers said.


The rover comes equipped with an array of sophisticated instruments capable of analyzing samples of soil, rocks and atmosphere on the spot and beaming results back to Earth.

One is a laser gun that can zap a rock from 23 feet away to create a spark whose spectral image is analyzed by a special telescope to discern the mineral's chemical composition.</i
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 03:30 pm (UTC)
If it gives some sort of groundbreaking information I'll eat my words, but I am just unconvinced it will.
dark_puck 6th-Aug-2012 03:44 pm (UTC)
Well, that's kind of the entire point of the thing.

To find out.
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 03:48 pm (UTC)
It's true. If I were in charge, though, given the previous discoveries we've had off-planet (that is: very limited), I'd put that money into new technologies rather than poking at dead rocks again.
rex_dart 6th-Aug-2012 03:51 pm (UTC)
This IS a new technology. It's never been done before and is an incredible feat of engineering. How are you missing that?
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 03:55 pm (UTC)
new technology being tested on MARS, which has most arrows pointing at "big ball of nothing".
layweed 6th-Aug-2012 03:56 pm (UTC)
How could you say Mars is a "big ball of nothing" if you've never had the technology on Mars to begin with?
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 04:01 pm (UTC)
because we've been to mars and had a series of extremely uninteresting finds. I'm Mars-ed out.
rex_dart 6th-Aug-2012 03:58 pm (UTC)
I feel like I'm talking to someone who shit on every previous particle accelerator ever built at CERN because none of them were advanced or big enough to find the Higgs boson when the LHC wouldn't be able to run without the old accelerators to literally feed it particles.

You do realize that Mars is closer to us than Jupiter, right? And that you usually learn to drive in a parking lot before you try your hand in the Indy 500?
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 04:06 pm (UTC)
I do realize that. I just am not convinced this is really a step in that direction rather than a step in dawdling on mars. We've been to mars. We've been to the moon and took way too long to realize it was time to stop going. Soon enough they will realize that Mars is the same (unless there is some sort of SHOCKER, but really, that's unlikely).

The only upside to this in my opinion is that it'll keep scientists & other people employed for a few more years.
meran_flash 7th-Aug-2012 09:18 am (UTC)
This one misses a lot of things.
dark_puck 6th-Aug-2012 03:51 pm (UTC)
But the money DID go into new technologies?

At least one of the objectives is to find out if Mars previously supported life. I mean, we need to know more about our own backyard before we go check out, say, Charon.
layweed 6th-Aug-2012 03:55 pm (UTC)
Naw, Europa or Titan would totally be the next target.
starzangelus 6th-Aug-2012 05:20 pm (UTC)
I'm jizzing just thinking about going to TITAN.

<3
girly123 6th-Aug-2012 05:57 pm (UTC)
Holy god meeee toooo.

It's raining METHANE there! Like, what the hell! It's just like Earth only with Methane instead of water and way the fuck colder and like, in a few million years there may be LIFE there and aaaaa Titan excites me I can't shut up someone send help
wathsalive 7th-Aug-2012 12:34 pm (UTC)
oh god me too. And Enceladus.
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 03:58 pm (UTC)
Right. It's just that we've already been to mars and tested for that.

If they FIND life, that's one thing, but it's double checking at this point.
rex_dart 6th-Aug-2012 03:45 pm (UTC)
tbqh unless you provide some truly stunning credentials I am going to have to go with the scientific community's opinion and historical precedent and the fact that this is already a groundbreaking and hugely important step forward for the space program over your thoughts on the matter.

I am also unsure of how in the world you expect NASA to secure funding to go on your outer solar system moon mission if they can't even prove they can perform a controlled landing on Mars.
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 03:54 pm (UTC)
My only credentials are years worth of following space exploration and again and again coming up against the fact that the moon & mars are essentially just dead planets whose exploration, while good in and of itself, isn't exactly giving us the sort of ground breaking knowledge people keep expecting.

I don't expect NASA to do that because I don't think we have the technology to do it. I'd rather they focus on getting us able to actually go places like the outter solar system with the DREAM of maybe finding technology that would make other solar systems tenable. Our rocket technology is pretty much a joke, it's an area that actually has room for real breakthroughs.

Exploration for exploration's sake is fine, but the money could absolutely be going to things that will give us better long-term results.

I'll be hearing about most studies they find from Mars, the same way I've always done, so I could be wrong! I just really, really don't think I am.
rex_dart 6th-Aug-2012 04:05 pm (UTC)
I kind of can't believe you ~follow space exploration and still have this absurd viewpoint that

a) this is not an advance in science or engineering.
b) the old Mars rovers are comparable to Curiosity.
c) the farther away something is, the more important it is.
d) the difference in distance between Mars and the outer solar system represents a major step in reaching other solar systems, a feat that would require entirely new technology backed by entirely new breakthroughs in physics that are not actually going to be attained by dicking around in our backyard.

You obviously feel that science is just a pissing contest whose major purpose is to do the most superficially impressive thing.
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 04:07 pm (UTC)
Those aren't what I believe at all.


We've been to Mars. I don't think we'll find anything exciting there. You might have some faith in the ~secrets of the red planet, but I don't.
rex_dart 6th-Aug-2012 04:11 pm (UTC)
Nobody's talking about ~secrets. Most important discoveries are, in fact, not heart-clutchingly exciting.

And tbh I really don't think you understand that one of the most important things we're likely to get out of this has already been accomplished just by putting this rover there at all. Your thoughts speak to a very Tony Stark 50s B movie History Channel special way of looking at research.
vanishingbee 6th-Aug-2012 04:18 pm (UTC)
Every space-event that isn't a disaster is absolutely important to overall space exploration, since disasters sell so well to the media.

I mean, if you think going to Mars is a great way to spend our time, more to you. Be excited!

I am just incredibly non-excited. Landing = good, as always. But I think most of the importance in this comes from the fact that, unless it finds something significant, we won't be going back to mars for a good long time.
officer_down 6th-Aug-2012 04:44 pm (UTC)
Hahaha.....I never post here, but I have been reading your comments & just want to say THANK YOU!!! You have been totally on point. It's pretty hard to convince naysayers when they are so stubborn in their opinions due to their lack of understanding & self education.
fishphile 7th-Aug-2012 10:26 pm (UTC)
I kind of can't believe you ~follow space exploration and still have this absurd viewpoint that

Seriously.
This page was loaded May 24th 2013, 8:16 am GMT.