E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
NASA / JPL-Caltech
NASA's Curiosity rover, shown in this artist's conception, is equipped to analyze chemicals on Mars.
Although NASA's Curiosity rover hasn't yet confirmed the detection of organic compounds on Mars, it's already seeing that the Red Planet's soil contains water and more complex chemicals — including signs of an intriguing compound called perchlorate.
The first soil sample analysis from Curiosity's Sample Analysis at Mars lab, or SAM, was the leadoff topic today at the American Geophysical Union's fall meeting in San Francisco. The findings were eagerly awaited because of rumors that the Curiosity team was on the verge of announcing major findings — and although NASA tamped down expectations, the scientists said they were overjoyed with the first round of analysis.
"We really consider this a terrific milestone," Paul Mahaffy, a NASA researcher who is SAM's lead scientist, said at the AGU briefing.
Mahaffy said in a statement issued by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory that "we have no definitive detection of Martian organics at this point, but we will keep looking in the diverse environments of Gale Crater."
Curiosity landed in Gale Crater on Aug. 5, and since then it's been studying Martian rocks, soil and atmosphere with a suite of 10 scientific instruments. Its two-year, $2.5 billion primary mission is aimed at determining whether conditions in the crater were ever conducive for microbial life.
SAM is a key tool for that mission, because it can cook Martian samples in a mini-oven and then analyze the gases that are given off to identify the compounds contained in the sample. Other instruments — including the Chemistry and Mineralogy instrument, or CheMin — were used as well to study the initial soil samples, collected over the past several weeks from a drift of windblown sand and dust called Rocknest.
NBC's Brian Williams reports on Curiosity's latest findings.
NASA / JPL-Caltech / MSSS
This Oct. 31 view from Curiosity's Mars Hand Lens Imager, or MAHLI, shows two of the trenches made by the rover's 1.6-inch-wide (4-centimeter-wide) sampling scoop. The dust and sand from a dune known as Rocknest were fed into Curiosity's onboard labs for analysis.
NASA said CheMin found that the composition of the Rocknest samples was similar to that of soil analyzed by other Mars rovers such as Pathfinder, Spirit and Opportunity — about half common volcanic minerals, and half non-crystalline minerals such as glass. SAM identified other ingredients in much lower concentrations, including water molecules that were apparently bound to the grains of sand and dust. Although the water wouldn't be enough to support any sort of life, the concentration was higher than expected.
SAM also identified a type of perchlorate, a compound that includes oxygen and chlorine. Perchlorate, which was also found by NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander in 2008, is considered a toxic substance and used as an ingredient in rocket fuel on Earth. But scientists say the compound could conceivably serve as an energy source for hardy microbes on Mars. Mahaffy said the particular type of compound detected by Curiosity appeared to be calcium perchlorate, but "we have to study that further."
Reactions with other chemicals in SAM's oven formed chlorinated methane compounds, which geologists consider organic chemicals because they contain carbon and hydrogen. Mahaffy said it was most likely that the chlorine came from a perchlorate-like compound in the soil. However, he said it wasn't yet clear whether the tiny amount of carbon in the compounds came from the Martian soil or was actually brought to Mars from Earth by Curiosity itself.
"We have to be very careful to make sure both the carbon and the chlorine are coming from Mars," he told reporters.
Caltech's John Grotzinger, the project scientist for Curiosity's mission, seconded that view. "We just simply don't know if they're indigenous to Mars or not," he said.
Grotzinger said the team would first have to confirm that the constituents of the organic compounds seen by SAM truly came from Mars. If the presence of organics is confirmed, then the scientists would have to look into whether they are merely part of the "background fall of cosmic material" onto the planet, or arose through chemical processes on Mars itself, he said.
It would take a step-by-step process to confirm the presence of truly Martian organic compounds, and reconstruct how those compounds were formed. "Then you have ... to decide whether or not those formation pathways are abiotic, or maybe in the end biologic," Grotzinger said. "So you see there's a complicated decision pathway there, and we have to explore each one systematically."
Grotzinger cautioned that there would be no "hallelujah moment" in the search for organic chemicals on Mars.
A couple of weeks ago, he was quoted as saying that the data set from Curiosity would be "one for the history books." That led to speculation that an earth-shaking discovery could be revealed at the AGU meeting. NASA later said Grotzinger was referring to the two-year mission as a whole, rather than any specific findings to be announced in the near term.
Today, Grotzinger said his original comments were misunderstood.
"What I've learned from this is that you have to be careful about what you say, and even more careful about how you say it." he told reporters. "We're doing science at the speed of science [but] we live in a world that's sort of at the pace of Instagrams. The enthusiasm that we had, that I had, that our whole team has about what's going on here ... I think it was just misunderstood."
Update for 3:05 p.m. ET: After discussing this report with my friends in the newsroom as well as on Twitter, I've turned the headline around to emphasize the detection of chlorinated methane compounds, even though the origin of those compounds has not yet been confirmed. Is that going too far the other way?
More about Mars Curiosity:
- Mars hype teaches science lessons
- Plastic beads on Mars: Rise and fall of a NASA spoof site
- Curiosity captures spooky self-portraits
- Mars rover driving through dried-up riverbed
- More news about Curiosity's mission
Alan Boyle is NBCNews.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. To keep up with Cosmic Log as well as NBCNews.com's other stories about science and space, sign up for the Tech & Science newsletter, delivered to your email in-box every weekday. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.
Leave a Comment:
a TERRIFIC waste of taxpayer money. NASA just blows money out the a**.
Thankfully, that is only your opinion, and not shared by everyone
NASA gets less than 1% of the US budget each year. Last year, it was 0.52%, and it's expected to be less in the coming years. There are a lot bigger "wastes" of money in US spending. I'd rather the money be used on exploration of our solar system and our galaxy. Earth will not support human life indefinitely. We need to look beyond our planet, and eventually our solar system, if our species is going to survive.
MagnoliaSimms, not be be a party pooper or anything however, what we need to be looking to is our God in heaven for our help. As a scientist myself, I am all for exploring the universe. It just goes to show how complex and infinite our God is. Now with that said, I am all for exploration of the planets and the system. I think Gene Rodenberry had it correct when he does an episode showing that MONETARY gain is no longer the goal of mankind but the betterment of all peoples. Oh my, I sound like a fanatic. I'll stop now...
Hey, chemicals make our lives much better and easier. Without chemicals, you wouldn't be able to connect neural pathways to form the thoughts you're typing on your computer. So if the space program leads to finding chemicals, I'm all for it!
@ Steve. With all do respect, we've already left God out of the equation by treating this Earth like a garbage can. Perhaps it is the will of God, that we explore other options for future generations who will be affected by our arrogance and lack of proactivisms in preserving this Earth. Also, what makes you think that God is so narrow as to only exist in the realm of this lowly planet. I think the scriptures tell us that God made the Heavens and the Earth.
We look up at the sky, yet we know that is not Heaven. When the ancients wrote the bible, they spoke in terms that they could understand with their limited knowledge of the Universe. They looked up at the sky and they saw the Heavens. But, our science has taught us that the "blue" sky that we see is an illusion, and what we are really looking into is the beginnings of a vast Universe.
IMHO God exists in the space of the Universe and looking to our Star the Sun and beyond for answers, or possibly future habitation is the smartest thing we've ever done. I would equate it to Noah preparing the people for the great flood, no one listened yet the flood came and destroyed the Earth. Our great flood is upon us of our own making, and its time to seek answers in science, and Yes God the Omniscient, the Omnipresent is also Science.
Steve:
I'm an atheist, but what I believe is not important. Whether you believe in God or not, sometimes we need to help ourselves. Based on scientific evidence, our sun will eventually turn into a red giant. Maybe not for a long, long time, but it will happen. So why should we wait for God to give us a path, when we can find one for ourselves? How do you know that's not God's will?
Maybe I'm not understanding here... so you're all for exploring the universe, but we should look to God for what to do about it? I would love it if we could follow what Gene Roddenberry thought our future could be like. No poverty, all of humanity working together, etc. But right now, it's not possible. Money is involved. Not that NASA uses all that much of the entire US budget, but it's money well spent in my opinion.
Said it before and I'll say it again.
For the cost of several years of work and exploration (2.5 billion dollars) we could buy 2 B-2 Stealth bombers. We have 22 stealth bombers, a cold war era weapon built and delivered AFTER the cold war ended. Do we really need stealth bombers when we have ICBM's? Do we really need stealth bombers to drop a couple bombs on guys with RPG's in the hills of Afghan?
NASA's budget this year is 0.48% of our federal budget, the lowest it has EVER been.
I'll also add this time around that NASA's ENTIRE budget from 1958 till now is 526 billion dollars. That's almost 55 years of exploration and discoveries for all of mankind, not just our country. This years defense budget, JUST THIS YEAR is well over 700 BILLION dollars. For this one single year, 2012.
So, we could get over 50 years of science and learning or one single year of killing other human beings...
Where are your priorities?
If it wasn't for NASA, you could not have posted that ridiculous statement.
I agree. Nasa is and will always be an inportant asset to America! For sure!! It's the stupid Bush war that destroyed our country, and now we Americans are being forced to pay for it. I definitely see a revolution on the way!
Mike
Since the Phoenix lander previously found Perchlorate, I fail to see ANY justification for saying "this is one for the history books".
I was hoping they found a QB for the Minnesota Vikings.. Ponder is dreadful... keep digging.
#Discovery_of_perchlorate_on_Mars
#Discovery_of_perchlorate_on_Mars
Complex chemicals? I thought it was on Mars, not looking up LiLo's nose.
Good one!
they can't even find Jimmy Hoffa on Earth, how are they going to find anything on Mars? Maybe Hoffa's up there, keep digging!
You know, I love stuff like this. I always dreamed of sitting my grand children on my knee and looking up into the sky and telling them stories about what life on earth was like. Then pointing up and showing them the little blue point of light. Maybe someday. My question is. If the samples do not yield organic compounds in this site. Is it possible other sites might? Do they plan on checking other places?
Much more interesting than another royal brat is going to be born. THIS is much better breaking news.
yeah,right.what news!!!! that there are complex molecules on Mars!!!! big whooop!!!!
drip...
drip....
drip.....
Nasa needs a better Artist..There no clouds on mars...
Actually, there are:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26514708/ns/technology_and_science-space/
Someone's not up on their planetary information.
Who told you there were no clouds on Mars. Wrong.
They found an ingredient used in rocket fuel on Earth. Let the mining and destruction of Mars begin. Save Mars, no drilling!!!
oh,joy,oh joy!!!! they have found complex molecules on Mars,yippeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!! what else is new!!!!!!!!
They have data. It is what science is made of.
What is NASA telling the truth about? To try to figure it out, the Jet Propulsion Laboratories in La Canada, CA offers free public tours and has an open house weekend every spring. Entertaining. And also informative.
.
I was a little suspiscious of the first announcement, since it is budget time, and thought that maybe a big breakthrough was being hinted at in order to bolster the cause for a bigger budget. It is a shame that politics is so critical to the survival of what may be the most important endeavour in the history of us lowly animals we call "mankind".
Newt Gringrich got so excited after seeing this article he didn't even need a little blue Vigra pill to become aroused.
23million people in this country of of work, sick and with no sign of things getting better our stupid goverment spends 2.5 billion sending some toy to mars for nothing but some stupid reason we could live there. This should be put on the back burner for a hundred years or until we know more.
How will we know more if we cut off funding for the exploration of Mars? How would we "know" anything?
I've said it above, but I'll say it again. NASA gets less than 1% of the US budget each year. Last year, it was .52%. It will be even less in future years. And they don't even use it all for space exploration. They have satellites that orbit Earth monitoring the soil and oceans to study the effects of climate change. They create things that we use here on Earth because of space exploration. Do you like scratch resistant lenses? Safety grooves on the highway? Memory foam mattresses? All of those are thanks to NASA, and there are plenty more inventions that come out of the space program.
What happens if this planet is no longer habitable? What if an asteroid hits it? Or our population becomes too large for the planet to support? Or if there is a supervolcano eruption that changes our climate dramatically? We need to look beyond this planet if our species as a whole is going to survive.
We don't need any of that on earth. With all the mining, fracking, Superfund sites and endless wars and bad water, air and land and GMO's, KEEP it on Mars.
Technically, this is for the history books. Proving what is actually on Mars instead of just speculation. Every sci-fi geek DREAMED of the surface, and now photos for reality. Manned missions would be legendary, but we need a more viable vehicle than what NASA has looked at. Manned missions cost more and have a very large risk factor, thus why it's still robots. Analyzing Mars for resources is truely a thought that warrants investigation. The main thought is realizing the realities from the pipe dreams. Funding, Research, and Development does not come without a price tag. With bankers already manipulating the federal reserve; countries taking hostile actions; no agreements allowed in Washington, a trip to MARS has detonated before it even launched.
Perchlorate is rocket fuel so it could be processed and used to fly back to Earth. Water on the other hand can sustain life and can be used to make Hydrogen for rocket fuel if their is enough of it.
Those are Bigfoot tracks.
OMG...it's...it's...BIGFOOT!..I knew it...
Exactly as I predicted. The announcement, while important, is a major disappointment to the public and is still being debated. I was hoping to be wrong on this one...
All life on Earth is based on DNA. All DNA is at least 60% identical. So we don't know anything about life, just us. In practical terms, this mean we have more in common with slime molds & oak trees that with ET. The discovery of extraterrestrial life will advance the biological sciences beyond all imaginaton.
This is the principal argument against UFOs being ETs. If there were the slightest chance, every nation & company on Earth would be offering huge rewards for the smallest fragment of ET carcass. Huge? They'll give you billons of dollar, your own country, & name a religion after you.
If there's no life there, then Mars is ours to terraform. The surface of Mars is the same size as the land surface of Earth. Get out your calculator & figure the total value of all the real estate on Earth. Is that number big enough for you? Seriously, wouldn't you want a piece of that?
Ps We are not really looking for life on Mars we are looking for a way to live on Mars and a way to travel their and back.
Why would you want to come back? To pay your taxes?
hijack alert!
The fact that we have a rover on Mars collecting and studying samples is truly amazing and a fantastic step towards the future in space exploration. But letting them just conduct their scientific experiments isn't good enough....it's not FUN enough. I mean, after all, people need something to twitter about, don't they?? What else are they going to update their facebook status about? The sad truth is NASA could announce finding an alien creature hidden under the sand on Mars and people would be bored with it within a week. "Oh yea, space alien? That's old news, let's get back to the important stuff...like what did Rihanna wear last night?!?!"
Better yet who's screwing who. Or is their intelligent life on Earth.
I just hope I live to see the first Martian President!
USA! USA!
Doug,
Are you sure you haven't? (It would explain at lot.)