NationStates Jolt Archive

Deleted.

Because of the ****ing moronic U.S. citizens telling their Congressmen to not spend so much money to fund NASA.

"Yeah, finding life out of Earth is good and all, but I'd like it better if we spent the money on a war."


That will (hopefully) look so stupid 20, 30, perhaps 40 years down the road.

although I'm not big on the billions spent on space missions, I admit I am incredibly interested in Europa and Saturns moon Titan (which scientists believe is similar to a very early-stage earth)

I think we should search for intelligent life on this planet before we go looking for it on other planets.

I don't understand why people are for spending money on silly things like space exploration and war and stuff like that when we really need to sort out our society first. I'm a scientist and very much intrigued by all the cool stuff they find out there, but honestly we have much bigger problems that could use the money.

I don't understand why people are for spending money on silly things like space exploration and war and stuff like that when we really need to sort out our society first. I'm a scientist and very much intrigued by all the cool stuff they find out there, but honestly we have much bigger problems that could use the money.
Because imagine how immediate society would come to realize when they discover that there IS life out there.

Of course, you gotta get through religous wackos denying everything, and all those NEW religons...but society will place more money into more funding...

Oh, I just can't wait to see it with my own eyes.

Because imagine how immediate society would come to realize when they discover that there IS life out there.

Of course, you gotta get through religous wackos denying everything, and all those NEW religons...but society will place more money into more funding...

Oh, I just can't wait to see it with my own eyes.


I'm waiting for complex ocean life on Europa :D

The reason why we don't just go to Europa and drill is because it's not just that easy. Europa has a diameter of 3130km and we have no way of knowing how much of its water is locked up as ice and how much if any is liquid beneath the ice. This means that first off you are going to need a very long pipe to drill that far plus the battery power to do, which when coupled with the fact that the larger the object the more it costs to send them into space makes this a very expecsive project. Another major concern is being able to garantee that and microbes found are infact from Europa and didn't hitch a ride because if water exists and is capable of supporting life but for some reason is sterile then any of our Earth bugs will contaminate the water making any future experiments inconclusive so it could also be a one shot only project, of cause if we drill down and find whales the issue of contaminates becomes moot.

The technology probably isn't there yet to land a probe and drill, but it might be to land a probe and conduct sonar and seismic soundings... although considering how tough it was to get something successfully to land on Mars and you see the problem. Maybe in 10 years, especially when private spaceplanes become routine.

I think we should search for intelligent life on this planet before we go looking for it on other planets.Stop making a cynical ass of yourself.

Stop making a cynical ass of yourself.

You're really not the person to tell other people that they're being cynical asses.

The reason why we don't just go to Europa and drill is because it's not just that easy. Europa has a diameter of 3130km and we have no way of knowing how much of its water is locked up as ice and how much if any is liquid beneath the ice. This means that first off you are going to need a very long pipe to drill that far plus the battery power to do, which when coupled with the fact that the larger the object the more it costs to send them into space makes this a very expecsive project. Another major concern is being able to garantee that and microbes found are infact from Europa and didn't hitch a ride because if water exists and is capable of supporting life but for some reason is sterile then any of our Earth bugs will contaminate the water making any future experiments inconclusive so it could also be a one shot only project, of cause if we drill down and find whales the issue of contaminates becomes moot.

We'd be more likely to find sharks than whales. Leaving aside the whole 'sharks are more primative' thing, you've got the whole 'whales need the breathe oxygen' thing.

But, I'm just nit-picking.

And mmmEuropa. So fascinating.

It's a pity we spend more in blowing the living daylights of the life on Earth than finding new life in the universe.

The title was to simply state the fact that Jupiter has a moon called Europa, and how the subject of this post is not going to be about the continent, (Europa is Spanish for Europe).

It's originally greek buddy, and it is called that way because of the greek/roman mythological Europe (a phoenician princess abducted by Zeus -Jupiter for the romans in case you didn't know that ither-), why would there be a moon called by a spanish name for crying out loud? And this comes from someone who's mother language is spanish.

It's originally greek buddy, and it is called that way because of the greek/roman mythological Europe (a phoenician princess abducted by Zeus -Jupiter for the romans in case you didn't know that ither-), why would there be a moon called by a spanish name for crying out loud? And this comes from someone who's mother language is spanish.

he got a point there; Titan, Io, Phoebe, etc. I think they're all called after greek mythological people and stuff. The planets are Roman, and fuck all is Spanish

If we tried to land there, the mermaids would blow up our probes.

If we tried to land there, the mermaids would blow up our probes.

But the pilots would learn what happens when you mate with the triple-breasted whore-mermaids from Europa

The reason we can't send a thing to Europa, drill it, get a sample, and fly the probe back to earth is simple - our space technology is still extremely primitive. It's hard enough just to send something to Europa, let alone get it to drill through ice, and fly back. I don't think any probe sent to another planet has ever been brought back. We need to think smaller for the time being.

If we tried to land there, the mermaids would blow up our probes.
We've dealt with the Martians I think we can handle a few mermaids.

We've dealt with the Martians I think we can handle a few mermaids.
ahh, but triple-breasted whore-mermaids? Different kinda handling method, methinks

they would find a spot where the ice is thin, and use lasers to melt through the ice.


but even so, a "thin" piece of ice on Europa might still be several kilometers thick,

all in all, i'm facinated by Europa, i think that it has the highest chance of life off-earth

We are constantly building and using space technology, why not simply (once and for all) fund and immediately build a machine that can reach Europa, scan (the technology exists) how thick its surface is, drill through it (if it even has something to drill for, that is) and check the liquid water (if any) for life, then bring it back here, and finally show the world that life exists beyond Earth?
They are doing that.

They're testing machines in the antarctic to get through that much ice, but they're worried about the possibility of contaminating Europa with any earth-born life forms.

And also, what the hell is this garbage about Europa being near the sun?

And also, what the hell is this garbage about Europa being near the sun?
Well, relative to, say, Pluto...

Europa? We should have been out past bloody pluto by now, in manned ships that could do light speed. I blame feminism for this slow pace of space exploration, its retarded mans aggressive and adventurous spirit, and replaced it with caution and timidity instead.

One suggestion is to send a probe that will drop a cannonball type object moving at high speed at an interesting spot that looks like a place where water has welled up from an internal sea, and then have the probe fly through the cloud of debris and collect pieces to return to earth. Then the samples can be examined for life or signs of life.

It is expensive to send probes to Jupiter, but it is much cheaper than sending humans into space. Ending the shuttle and space station programs could fund an enormous amout of scientific research in space. And for people who say we need to learn how humans can live in space, we already have the answer to that. Be a Russian on Mir with engineering skills equal to those of Scotty himself.

Europa? We should have been out past bloody pluto by now, in manned ships that could do light speed. I blame feminism for this slow pace of space exploration, its retarded mans aggressive and adventurous spirit, and replaced it with caution and timidity instead.

So you're saying that man's wonderful agressive and adventurous spirit is capable of being limited by equal rights for women? Sounds like man's agressive and adventurous spirit isn't worth diddily squat if that's all it takes to cause it to come acropper. Why do you have such a low opinion of men?

Europa? We should have been out past bloody pluto by now, in manned ships that could do light speed. I blame feminism for this slow pace of space exploration, its retarded mans aggressive and adventurous spirit, and replaced it with caution and timidity instead.
Yeah, you definitely have to be a troll. No one's that stupid.

Uranus (Roman) = I don't know (there's probably no Greek translation)

Ouranos. Father of Chronos/Kronos, god of the sky and counterpart to Gaia.

So you're saying that man's wonderful agressive and adventurous spirit is capable of being limited by equal rights for women? Sounds like man's agressive and adventurous spirit isn't worth diddily squat if that's all it takes to cause it to come acropper. Why do you have such a low opinion of men?

Yes its had an indirect effect I think, men arent what they used to be.
I dont have alow opinion of either sex.

Yeah, you definitely have to be a troll. No one's that stupid.
If you thought long and hard about it, you would realise that Im right on this.
Thanks for the needless insults, showing your maturity there.

According to scientific study, Europa was at one point close enough to the sun to keep Europa under a temperate climate, keeping its liquid "oceans" of water: warm.


What?? No it wasn't ever that close to the sun. You'd have to annihilate the entire inner solar system and halve the distance to the sun for that to be even remotely possible.

Not so long ago, scientists discovered fossils of microscopic life from Mars. Though, it is still not probable that those rocks were in fact "fossils" of microscopic life.

Satellites have been sent much farther than Europa, and rovers have landed on both Venus and Mars.

We are constantly building and using space technology, why not simply (once and for all) fund and immediately build a machine that can reach Europa, scan (the technology exists) how thick its surface is, drill through it (if it even has something to drill for, that is) and check the liquid water (if any) for life, then bring it back here, and finally show the world that life exists beyond Earth?

No, they didn't! It was proven to be geologic coincidence due to re-entry heating and not fossilized microbes. We've sent probes to Venus and they haven’t survived more than minutes. No rovers have gone to Venus. The ice thickness of Europa is over 3k thick, you'd need a drilling rig to get that deep. Not to mention there's no real evidence that there's any liquid water under it at all. The only reason the surface ice is fragmented and moves is because Jupiter's intensive gravitational pull acts as a giant mallet.

Where are you getting this nutty information?? Besides do you have any idea how expensive it would be to construct a lander/rover/driller/return vehicle? Hope you've got a few hundred billion laying around. I think you've seen "2001" a few too many times.

If you thought long and hard about it, you would realise that Im right on this.
Thanks for the needless insults, showing your maturity there.
It wasn't a needless insult, you insulted the entire board with that kind of garbage. I can't believe you expect anyone to take you as anything other than a troll. Why they banned Jesussaves and not you, I don't know.

Not to mention there's no real evidence that there's any liquid water under it at all. The only reason the surface ice is fragmented and moves is because Jupiter's intensive gravitational pull acts as a giant mallet.
This doesn't explain the magnetic field of Europa...

It wasn't a needless insult, you insulted the entire board with that kind of garbage. I can't believe you expect anyone to take you as anything other than a troll. Why they banned Jesussaves and not you, I don't know.

Your the only one, who thinks its that bad to screech over but. :rolleyes:
Truth of my harmless little observation hurt that much does it?

This doesn't explain the magnetic field of Europa...

Of course it doesn't, because Europa doesn't have a magnetic field. Only Ganymede does.

Of course it doesn't, because Europa doesn't have a magnetic field. Only Ganymede does.
Yes it does. It has a weak magnetic field, but it has one.

Edit: On its own Europa would not have a magnetic field, it does have an induced magnetic field from Jupiter though, and that does require a conducting medium... http://www.space.com/searchforlife/seti_phillips_europa_040226.html

Your the only one, who thinks its that bad to screech over but. :rolleyes:
Truth of my harmless little observation hurt that much does it?
lol.

Okay here's something:

Whenever I try looking up recent images or info on our closest stellar neighbours, Alpha, Beta and Proxima Centauri - all I come across is old stuff. Seems a shame no-one ever thought to use Hubble to get a really detailed look at something nearby. If they can use Hubble to look at stuff that's incredibly far away, couldn't it be used to look into a Centauran's linen closet?

Or maybe they have already...?

Okay here's something:

Whenever I try looking up recent images or info on our closest stellar neighbours, Alpha, Beta and Proxima Centauri - all I come across is old stuff. Seems a shame no-one ever thought to use Hubble to get a really detailed look at something nearby. If they can use Hubble to look at stuff that's incredibly far away, couldn't it be used to look into a Centauran's linen closet?

Or maybe they have already...?
Looking at for what?

If it's planets, then it's possible that those are being looked at, but they haven't found anything yet. Most of the extrasolar planets that have been observed have extremely short orbits because we haven't been looking very long, the wobble in the star's gravity is only confirmed when an orbit is completed around a planet, so if there's a planet in the same place as Jupiter, then it will take, what 12 years for all the data to be gathered? They could be looking at those stars periodically (once a month or so) to determine if there is a wobble and slowly plotting it out over the span of years, however, this takes time and until there is something conclusive to say, they don't say anything.

Looking at 'em for...anything, really. Planets. Comets. Asteroids. Space whales. Pirates. You name it.

It's just that with all three of them being so nearby, I'd've thought that with a telescope as powerful as Hubble they could just peel off a good stack of photos and look - I didn't think they'd have to do that wobble-measurement jazz.

They're right next door, after all. It's like using a ouija board to check whether to go look over the fence at the neighbour's back yard. Why bother? It's right there. I just thought it's strange no-one's mentioned they're looking.

The problem is, planets do not emit radiation. ;)

Looking at 'em for...anything, really. Planets. Comets. Asteroids. Space whales. Pirates. You name it.

It's just that with all three of them being so nearby, I'd've thought that with a telescope as powerful as Hubble they could just peel off a good stack of photos and look - I didn't think they'd have to do that wobble-measurement jazz.

They're right next door, after all. It's like using a ouija board to check whether to go look over the fence at the neighbour's back yard. Why bother? It's right there. I just thought it's strange no-one's mentioned they're looking.
They're not that close. Consider that there are lots of things in our own solar system that hubble can't see, Kuiper Belt objects, for instance...

Even Jupiter from that kind of distance would be hard to see.

Also, I don't know what kind of stars they are, if they're blue giants or red giants, then they're not that high a priority for looking at in terms of finding planets capable of humanoid life.

The problem is, planets do not emit radiation. ;)

Well, they either absorb it or reflect it though. Some kinds of radiation. Like light, and heat...

Okay here's something:

Whenever I try looking up recent images or info on our closest stellar neighbours, Alpha, Beta and Proxima Centauri - all I come across is old stuff. Seems a shame no-one ever thought to use Hubble to get a really detailed look at something nearby. If they can use Hubble to look at stuff that's incredibly far away, couldn't it be used to look into a Centauran's linen closet?

Or maybe they have already...?
I've been wondering whether they've done that at all... :hmm:

They're not that close. Consider that there are lots of things in our own solar system that hubble can't see, Kuiper Belt objects, for instance...

Even Jupiter from that kind of distance would be hard to see.

Also, I don't know what kind of stars they are, if they're blue giants or red giants, then they're not that high a priority for looking at in terms of finding planets capable of humanoid life.

Well, that's just it - one of them is a little younger than Sol, but in the same spectral class, one is I believe somewhat stronger than Sol, and Proxima is very old and dim.

Alpha is the one most like Sol.

Well, that's just it - one of them is a little younger than Sol, but in the same spectral class, one is I believe somewhat stronger than Sol, and Proxima is very old and dim.

Alpha is the one most like Sol.
Well, then maybe they're looking at the wobble of it and haven't reached any conclusions yet.

Well, then maybe they're looking at the wobble of it and haven't reached any conclusions yet.

Like you say, maybe...

what do I know?

From what I can tell, the reason we dont, or havent sent a probe to Europa to drill through the ice is becuase of the cost, and simply its location.
The moon, and Mars, are just closer.
Im sure a probe will eventually be sent, but right now, the future of the Space Program may be un question, as most of Nasa's budget was invested in the manned Shuttle flights...

..wich havent been going so well lately.

As for Europa, a probe could indeed be sent, and collect samples, but drillijng through the ice would be impossible becuase its believed to be miles thick.
Its too costly to send a robot drilling machine big enough to do the job.
So basically, all you can get would be surface samples.
This might not be enough to get you the information you would want to look at.

Having read Arthur C. Clark's Space Odyssey series I can't help but have some fascination for Europa. If there's any chance of life in our system outside of Earth, it's most likely there.

If there's any chance of life in our system outside of Earth, it's most likely there.
Methane in the atmosphere of Mars suggests there is life there. It would be easier to send an robotic sample return mission there than drill into Europa, I'd wager.

Already they've sent a probe to Titan... Europa would've been a much better choice, in my opinion.For the same reason they're being a bit cautious (well, more cautious than they might have been, there are astill contamination worries) drilling into Lake Vostok in Antarctica for life, the consensus of opinion is that "until they can guarantee no cross-contamination (Earth to Europa and Europa to Earth-outside-of-sealed-laboratory-conditions) they want to hold off from the attempt". (Plus the fact that the Titan/Europa mission couldn't be a sample-return, so would be more useful on Titan, where they weren't expecting anything needing returning, but they definitely knew there'd be interesting early-Earth-type data, as opposed to Europa which might/might-not find something interesting, if they did they'd need to return to take full advantage and they'd rather not leave a data-only probe on the surface on a hiding to nothing and possibly disrupting the environment. (Titan itself is going essentially steam-clean the probe there, Europa wouldn't do much to anything that survived the depths of inter-planatary space, and if it is as codusive to our extremophile life as we think it might be then we could be giving it anything, but see below...)


Well, instead of a drill, why not use lasers? I saw somewhere that if they land a probe on Europa, they would find a spot where the ice is thin, and use lasers to melt through the ice.The plan I heard was for a heated weight (heated either from within by a small nuclear sub-critical pile* or through the wires connecting it to the surface lander/data-relay) that melted/dorced its way through the kilometres and kilometres of ice that there might be. (The surface of Europe is pretty indicative of ice-over-liquid, but more remote surveying would be necessary to establish exactly how thick it is...) I've no idea how practical this is, engineering-wise, but it sounds one of the more sane methods from the POV of what the initial launch-weight would be...

(* - There are a few people with objections to that idea (not least those who don't like the idea of launching radiological materials up from Earth in the first place, but also those that wonder how we can ensure zero leekage once the probe is abandoned.)

And besides, they do some hard cleaning work on probes before they're sent into space so that they don't contaminate anything. Also, if they contaminate Europa with Earth life, they would know because Europa life shouldn't be exactly the same as Earth life. Even if it is all just bacteria.That depends on various things. What if panspermia is true, then we'd expect Europan life to be essentially the same as ours, and if something that looks a bit like one of our extremophiles gets discovered on a contaminated Europa, can we be sure it isn't one of ours, instead of a Europan-landing (Nth) cousin (many times removed) to our own under parallel evolution? Obviously, if it uses DNA bases other than A, T, C and G (or not even DNA, to be honest, but that'd be a good starting indicator and would mean something about the 'essentiality' of DNA as we know it, which could mean something) then it's probably developed completely independantly.

Developing the same bases but associating them with different building blocks for protein formation,etc, than our own might be tricky to explain (as either a completely independant reliance upon the same chemistry for base-use but chance different way of matching codons (other than three at a time?) to what they represent or a series of significant mutational changes of mechanism in extreme isolation to the ones that gave us our own combinations**) and I think on the whole people are being cautious now so that they don't find themselves wiping out life on another planetary body (yes, a moon, but the best overall description, given its size) with usurping Earth life or toxic discharges from our 'infantile' exploration... There's already a bit of doubt whether Viking was a clean as it could be (these days) and there's always 'cleaner', so caution is the watchword for the planet/body which is often considered the most likely alternative for currently extant life in the solar-system.

(** - Though there are genera, I think, on Earth that have minor encoding differences to others, I forget the details, but it must occasionally happen.)


Well, Europa isn't really a planet, it's a moon. And it doesn't have a tough atmosphere like Venus where the probe can get badly damaged. And actually, probes have in fact returned to Earth. In fact, people have returned to Earth after walking on the moon.Someone's going to correct me, but sample-return has (I think) only ever occured from space itself (most recently the one with the re-entry sensors the wrong way up!) and the moon (from before, but not since, Apollo). You need to launch something with the propulsion to get it to Jupiter (with/without gravitational assists, but there's no such thing as a free launch***), the propulsion and/or other means (Jovian aerobraking?) to be slow down and rendezvous with Europa, a controlled descent method (is the atomosphere too thin for parachutes? then you need more thrusters), all the equipment you need for the operations (including the many kilometers of cable, if that's the tethered-'hot-weight' method is used****), a new launch mechanism for the sample-return capsule which includes further Jovian-escape and Earth-capture capabilities and then whatever you need for Earth-landing. Quite weighty...

You could shortcut some of those things, with something left in Europan orbit that would accept the 'barely to orbit' sample-returner and itself have enough power to then escape Europan/Jovian orbit and head to interception by 'tug' as it approaches Earth, allowing the container to be stored next to the ISS/contemporary equivalent before return to Earth on a 'semi-regular' supply cycler, but it's still complex. One-way is much easier. Not that I don't want to see a sample-return, I just don't think we're anywhere near attempting it (probably a planning stage, though)...


(*** - [DRY LAUGH]Ha ha ha ha[/DRY LAUGH], how droll... How unpredictable that joke was[/SARCASM])
(**** - And that's the lightest method there is, really, short of a disconnected-'hot-weight'*****. The latter I trust more on the 'not getting snagged' issue, but not on reliable communications, etc...)
[***** - Edit: Which would of course not be practical if you want to return the samples... Sorry for not realising that, looks like we're stuck with a tethered method of some kind (which can be at least partially dragged back up to the surface through possibly water-filled (re-frozen) ice-hole)]

but sample-return has (I think) only ever occured from space itself
The Soviets did sample return from the moon. They learnt about as much about the moon with unmanned probes as the U.S. did with Apollo. (Embarrassing isn't it?)

Europen life will sequence different, even if it has similar DNA. Still, best not to contaminate.

If you want to pick something up from Europa, maybe do it with a cable from an orbiter. It might be cheaper than a rocket. But then, you've got all that ice on Europa just sitting there, waiting to be turned into rocket fuel...

Question, why did Galilei Gelileo name that moon "Europa" in the first place? (i think it was him, wasn't it?) :confused:

Bariloche said:

"It's originally greek buddy, and it is called that way because of the greek/roman mythological Europe (a phoenician princess abducted by Zeus -Jupiter for the romans in case you didn't know that ither-), why would there be a moon called by a spanish name for crying out loud? And this comes from someone who's mother language is spanish."

Of course, most modern languages derived from older languages such as Latin and Greek. And yes, all (or most) the planets are named after Roman gods, whose names are different from those of the Greek gods.

Here's the list of Roman god/planet names "translated" into Greek (I don't think there's a Greek "translation" for Earth, or whether Earth is even Roman):

Mercury (Roman) = Hermes (Greek)
Venus (Roman) = Aphrodite (Greek)
Earth (Roman) = Gaia (Greek)
Mars (Roman) = Ares (Greek)
Jupiter (Roman) = Zeus (Greek)
Saturn (Roman) = Kronos (Greek)
Uranus (Roman) = I don't know (there's probably no Greek translation)
Neptune (Roman) = Poseidon (Greek)
Pluto (Roman) = Hades (Greek)

I even know how to say the planet's names in Spanish, since my mother language is also Spanish. I'm not sure how to spell them, though.

"The title was to simply state the fact that Jupiter has a moon called Europa, and how the subject of this post is not going to be about the continent, (Europa is Spanish for Europe)."

I said that because I noticed that everyone I've met here so far is highly political, and if they know Spanish, they would know that Europa is Spanish for Europe. And if I hadn't said that, there would probably be people going, "Europa isn't a moon, it's a continent" or people who simply misread the word "Europa" and immediately saw what they would think was some sort of typo and would think it was meant to be "Europe" and so on.

Also, not all planets and moons are named after Greco-Roman gods. Just recently, "planetoids" were discovered beyond Pluto, and they were named after gods of other cultures, including but not limited to Native American Indian cultures. Not only that, but most objects in space are either not named or given names such as "A2203X" when it comes down to naming asteroids, kuiperoids, meteoroids, comets, brown dwarves, stars, galaxies, etc.

Uranus is Greek, the Roman name is stollen from the Greek. (Note, the Romans didn't have a single original thought in their head, they stole their pantheon and language rules from the Macedonians, and their alphabet from the Phonetians)... So it would be better to say that these are the "Roman" translations of the "Greek" names, as opposed to vice-versa).

but sample-return has (I think) only ever occured from space itselfThe Soviets did sample return from the moon. They learnt about as much about the moon with unmanned probes as the U.S. did with Apollo. (Embarrassing isn't it?)
I wouldn't correct you normally, but I'm replying anyway and my original statement may have been confusing. The full sentence was:Someone's going to correct me, but sample-return has (I think) only ever occured from space itself (most recently the one with the re-entry sensors the wrong way up!) and the moon (from before, but not since, Apollo).(i.e. "sample return only [...] from space itself [...] and the moon [...]", the latter including both Soviet unmanned and US manned efforts)

But no problem. I tend to write complicated sentencial structures, so's probably my fault... ;)


Europen life will sequence different, even if it has similar DNA. Still, best not to contaminate.Especially as how different might tell us what links (if any) it has with Earth life and/or how 'universal' the design of life is. (Though we'd need a few more templates from completely different places, including extra-solar planets, to really work out what is "similar to our own through chance and through origin".) In particular, the assessment may have to be made whether certain common sugars are common because they are a logical (high-chance/sufficient-chance) produce/by-product/pre-cursor to current molecules or because their origins are in the same galactic dust-clouds... (Part of the assessment will be to assess chiral polarisation, though there's a 50-50 chance that they'd be the same without common source... All something scientists with more time on their hands (or immediate involvement) ought to be concerned with, though... ;)

If you want to pick something up from Europa, maybe do it with a cable from an orbiter. It might be cheaper than a rocket. But then, you've got all that ice on Europa just sitting there, waiting to be turned into rocket fuel...The orbital tether isn't something I'd considered. A 'Eurostationary' orbiter, then... Interesting. Might have to wait until at least some of the engineering concerns of an Earthbound space-elevator have been solved (given it's going to be full automated). Is it worth looking up the rotatinal period of Europa and calculating the length of cable required? (Times, of course, unless you can design enough of the mass of the craft as out-flung counterweight to reduce that to more managable levels.) It might well be easier than for Earth, but then again could be harder (even discounting the need for automation) if it's much longer, despite (or because of) the lower forces involved.

As for the ice->fuel, again, interesting idea. Something that they were thinking about (perhaps still are) for a Mars sample-return, though electrolysis sounds simpler than the process for converting Martian fundement. Processing equipment is required (of course) and I doubt pure solar power would suffice out there (at least without a long delay) but then my original hypothetical solution already involved nuclear material for the hot-weight, so..? Perhaps. And if you were patient (and trusted our technology) it could be very small-scale/low-mass/compact...

The orbital tether isn't something I'd considered. A 'Eurostationary' orbiter, then... Interesting.

Actually I was thinking of an orbiter with a cable with a hook on the end and picking up the sample with it as the orbiter flew past. The probe would be orbiting Jupiter but would swoop down perhaps only tens of meters over the surface of airless Europa. A bit of an engineering problem, The cable would need to reel out a bit upon hooking on, I imagine, but there are guys/gals in this world who would love to work out a Jupiter orbit that would give the best combination of pick up speeds, plus orbital escape velocities, etc. I'm afraid Eurostationary orbiter isn't feasible because it would end up in Jupiter.

Uranus is Greek, the Roman name is stollen from the Greek. (Note, the Romans didn't have a single original thought in their head, they stole their pantheon and language rules from the Macedonians, and their alphabet from the Phonetians)... So it would be better to say that these are the "Roman" translations of the "Greek" names, as opposed to vice-versa).

Uranus was Roman. Ouranos was Greek.

They've built more more expensive things. You seem to think that I want them to build a submarine-sized vehicle.

Well.. if you want it to carry a laser with enough power (read: batteries, since the launch of nuclear reactors is no longer allowed) to smelt through an enormous layer of ice, while not sinking in the resulting puddle, I think submarine-sized might be too small...

Because of the ****ing moronic U.S. citizens telling their Congressmen to not spend so much money to fund NASA.

"Yeah, finding life out of Earth is good and all, but I'd like it better if we spent the money on a war."


That will (hopefully) look so stupid 20, 30, perhaps 40 years down the road.

What he/she said!

It pisses me off to no end that all of the money we could have spent not only investigating other planets, but building a REAL space station as the beginnings of housing earth's burgeoning population, is instead, being spent on a bullshit, meaningless war with the sole purpose of providing more money and power to those who are already rich and powerful.

And they say this is the modern age? Hmmmmmm.....

Simply put nothing cool is going to happen in space until a easy and inexpensive way of travelling long distance in a reasonanble amount of time is discovered rockets are simply too expensive.What's really needed is for a truly planetary space exploration program it's obvious nasa don't get enough money and simply aren't arsed the europeans have the brains and the will but again not enough funds the russians don't seem to have the will or the money and china are motivated but still developing their space program.Between them all they'd have the money and off we'd go.

Actually I was thinking of an orbiter with a cable with a hook on the end and picking up the sample with it as the orbiter flew past. The probe would be orbiting Jupiter but would swoop down perhaps only tens of meters over the surface of airless Europa. A bit of an engineering problem, The cable would need to reel out a bit upon hooking on, I imagine, but there are guys/gals in this world who would love to work out a Jupiter orbit that would give the best combination of pick up speeds, plus orbital escape velocities, etc.I dare say this is possible, but I don't like the maths (obviously that'd be someone else's problem... ;))

It would have to be a very low swoop, and with a velocity at that point that allows a little leeway for either catch or miss situation. The unpredictable nature of the 'grab' must still let the orbiter+pickup momentum be enough to have a fairly viable 'continuation' of orbit, and a miss must not leave the orbiter in an 'orbit' that is actually so jam-packed full of momentum that it's automatically escaping Europa's gravitational influence. It must be designed so that it comes round again on a repeat orbit, without too much fuel needs either way*, as I see it.

(* - Best bet is stable nearly ground-grazing stable but highly-elipetical orbit with a period in harmonic with the rotation of Europa so multiple attempts can be made at the same spot without much effort, with a booster burn triggered upon succesful grabbing, and various features to ensure the grabbed load doesn't destablise the satelite (now swooping up but in desperate need of a boost in the right direction, despite the swinging/trailing captured load)... Possible, but count me out from the design team!)


I'm afraid Eurostationary orbiter isn't feasible because it would end up in Jupiter.I never did look up the relevant facts, but I believe you... I was hoping (for feasibilities sake) that Europa had high-enough rotation for a fairly low (fast, despite the low gravity) orbit to be synchronous with the surface.

If the moon was tidally-locked with Jupiter (I don't think Europa is) then there'd be a handy Lagrange-type point in-between the two bodies, and some more (opposing and forward/back in orbit, but the distances involved would be truly prohibitively far for any tether, even if we manage to avoid the problem as you state...

In the immediate future I think a fuel-producing 'scavenger' in the dropped probe to refuel (a sub-part of) the descent stage for re-insertion to orbit (and the Jupiter departure stage) is more likely, but it's a big universe out there and there are likely better versions of all solutions that those I can thinhk up...

Europa? Hmmm...I've been there once or twice. It's a really nice place, you know, but we stopped going after we discovered that it's inhabited. By our sworn enemies. The Thacedyluvian War (cf. 2-5 million years ago) resulted in the extermination of 90% of Europans, and I suspect the rest have become extinct already.

As for the probes, they can send them, but if they explore any farther (for example, the other moons nearby) we'll have to annihilate them.

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

Okay here's something:

Whenever I try looking up recent images or info on our closest stellar neighbours, Alpha, Beta and Proxima Centauri - all I come across is old stuff. Seems a shame no-one ever thought to use Hubble to get a really detailed look at something nearby. If they can use Hubble to look at stuff that's incredibly far away, couldn't it be used to look into a Centauran's linen closet?

Or maybe they have already...?

The Centuri's are a trinary system. No planets.... Tidal Forces from the three stars in formation make it impossible for planets to survive long in the system... Literally, the stars gravity prevents them from cohering. And even if one could have, subsequent forces would literally tear the planet apart.

I say we build a permanent settlement in Callixto or Ganymede first and then explore Europa at leisure.

Lots of energy in Io, too. It would be a nice enterprise.

The Centuri's are a trinary system. No planets.... Tidal Forces from the three stars in formation make it impossible for planets to survive long in the system... Literally, the stars gravity prevents them from cohering. And even if one could have, subsequent forces would literally tear the planet apart.
Well, the two main stars are as far from each other as Saturn is from the Sun, and the third one is very small and extremely far away. Planets might have formed around the two main stars which are very Sun-like.

GO space age Europe

LOL, my region is Europea because of the fact that it has a chance of supporting life! If any of you want to, come on and join me on my happy little ice moon! :D

Well, the two main stars are as far from each other as Saturn is from the Sun, and the third one is very small and extremely far away. Planets might have formed around the two main stars which are very Sun-like.

Do you understand "gravity"? Yes, A and B are about as far the Sun and Saturn, however, "B" is much larger than even Jupiter.... It would be impossible for planets to form "between them"... They would literally get torn apart from tidal forces.... The gravitational abnormality in orbit of both of them is too great for a reliably stable orbit.... And even with Proxima being so far away, it still is much larger than anything in our solar system, and would add even more instability to the equation, because of the abonormal fluncuating gravity well in the system, due to the movement of three massive stellar objects. These are planets, their stars...

Rigel Kentarus A (Alpha Centuri) is the largest, just over the size of our own sun. 1.1 solar masses (15 times the mass of jupiter)

Rigel Kentarus B is just slightly smaller than our sun. 0.9 Solar Masses (12 times the mass of jupiter)

Rigel Kentarus C (Proxima Centuri) is the smallest, at 0.1 solar masses. (Approximately 1.5 times that of Jupiter).

Orbits of planets on the outer edge (of both A and B stars) would be highly eliptical, and pushed more out as they approached C....

Any planets that were in orbit of one or the other, would accellerate in their orbit as they approached the other star (being pulled severly by its gravity... on a continual elongation of its orbit (assuming it didn't get pulled apart at is enters the "lense" between the two)... Resulting the the body to eventually reach orbital proportions where it trades and/or collides, with the other star...

Sorry, but while you're model looks well in theory, it just would never work with actual bodies in orbit of these stars.

...out of concern for thread hijacking, I've put together a new thread more concerned with Centaurus.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420316

Sorry to have intruded.

The Centuri's are a trinary system. No planets.... Tidal Forces from the three stars in formation make it impossible for planets to survive long in the system... Literally, the stars gravity prevents them from cohering. And even if one could have, subsequent forces would literally tear the planet apart.Or chucked it out. (Or perhaps into one of the suns involved if unlucky.)

Actually, as Iztatepopotla says, there may be stable zones.

I'm not an expert, but I could see how perturbation-proof volumes of space could exist (at stable-equilibrea points). Equally well, I could also imagine that any (short-term stable) volumes of space where dustcould accumulate could be rather tenuous and as soon the smaller sun goes as little as 1/4 of the orbit around the main two (if I have the celestial mechanics right) could jolt whatever 'solar disk' material had accumulated in a wildly chaotic way (at least on stellar timescales, might be boringingly dull for a casual visitor... ;)).

Long-period binary systems sound a lot easy to predict. e.g. the one featured in the "Helliconia Winter/Spring/Summer" trilogy, where the planet orbits one star fairly normally and well-balanced (if a little too chilly) but that this dual system of sun and planet are on a highly-eliptical orbit around the other star, whose 'approach' and 'retreat' from the planet on a "long-year" cycle give the planet deep ice-ages and warmer periods.

(Not sure, given its base in fiction and a dodgy memory ofr the details, whether there was any reason why the planet never got purturbed out of orbit of the local star by the action of the other 'closing' and 'departing' as it did... Still, an interesting series, for reasons not restricted to the physics and stellar geometries.)

[Edit: Afterthought - didn't realise the two main stars were as close as Saturn/Sun... That'd be untenable for all but the most fortunately anti-harmonic orbits (ones that are almost precisely the wrong orbit for anything to consistently pull them out of their current position, it all getting lost in the general noise of push and pull) within the vicinity (between or close around the outside) the two main stars... I was of a mind that they were as distant as the Oort cloud from the Sun (or more), in which case there might be stable 'habitable zone' planets... Might. And even then that's optomism for you...

Not that there aren't complex theoretical orbits out there, including 'three-body figure-of eight (and more) loops' and the like, but few of them are stable and hardly any of them would reasonably be expexted to form naturally (though in a near-as-makes-no-difference infinite universe, why not, eh? ;)).]

Or chucked it out. (Or perhaps into one of the suns involved if unlucky.)

Actually, as Iztatepopotla says, there may be stable zones.

I'm not an expert, but I could see how perturbation-proof volumes of space could exist (at stable-equilibrea points). Equally well, I could also imagine that any (short-term stable) volumes of space where dustcould accumulate could be rather tenuous and as soon the smaller sun goes as little as 1/4 of the orbit around the main two (if I have the celestial mechanics right) could jolt whatever 'solar disk' material had accumulated in a wildly chaotic way (at least on stellar timescales, might be boringingly dull for a casual visitor... ;)).

Long-period binary systems sound a lot easy to predict. e.g. the one featured in the "Helliconia Winter/Spring/Summer" trilogy, where the planet orbits one star fairly normally and well-balanced (if a little too chilly) but that this dual system of sun and planet are on a highly-eliptical orbit around the other star, whose 'approach' and 'retreat' from the planet on a "long-year" cycle give the planet deep ice-ages and warmer periods.

(Not sure, given its base in fiction and a dodgy memory ofr the details, whether there was any reason why the planet never got purturbed out of orbit of the local star by the action of the other 'closing' and 'departing' as it did... Still, an interesting series, for reasons not restricted to the physics and stellar geometries.)

[Edit: Afterthought - didn't realise the two main stars were as close as Saturn/Sun... That'd be untenable for all but the most fortunately anti-harmonic orbits (ones that are almost precisely the wrong orbit for anything to consistently pull them out of their current position, it all getting lost in the general noise of push and pull) within the vicinity (between or close around the outside) the two main stars... I was of a mind that they were as distant as the Oort cloud from the Sun (or more), in which case there might be stable 'habitable zone' planets... Might. And even then that's optomism for you...

Not that there aren't complex theoretical orbits out there, including 'three-body figure-of eight (and more) loops' and the like, but few of them are stable and hardly any of them would reasonably be expexted to form naturally (though in a near-as-makes-no-difference infinite universe, why not, eh? ;)).]

Well, there are "safe" zones for liviable levels of radiation from the stars. The main problem is the distance, and speed, in relation to the graviational model (The stars are elipital in orbit, varing between a 11 and 36 AU's distance, and complete one orbit every 77 years or so)... While it's easy to fit the "Earth like" planet in the system, into the "habital zone"; it never stays there... Generally devloping a widely eliptical orbit within 5 stellar rotations (~400 years), and within a short time, either picked up by the other, or smashed into one or the other stars.... As yet, I've only done the modeling with Kentaurus A and B, and a single "Earth-Sized".

Trying the planet around Kentaurus B (0.9x Sol) at 0.7 AU's (in its habitable zone), it will develop a highly eliptical orbit, pushing beteen .01 AU's and 5 AU's from the planet... It will maintain the orbit for about 7 Stellar Rotations, before it is "Grabbed" by Kentaurus A (1.2x Sol), reversing its orbit, and slammed into the Kentaurus A... On the flip side, planets placed between 1.0 and 1.2 AU's from A, are pushed between A and B during their epihelion, and accellerated out of the system.

There really is no "stable gravitational" model, where planets have much hope of survival, or remaining in the system.

Studying the effects of a Jupiter like planet, placed outside 20 AU's becomes horribly erratic, reversing orbit, developing elipses... Though I managed to get it to survive, at least with a "stable" highly elipical and eradic orbit, permanately.... However, given the motion, it is unlikely the such as this could have "formed" in the first place, so would be unlikely, unless the object was captured by the system after its formation.

I think we would have more hope around Tau Ceti, Epsilon Erandi, or Epislon Indi for finding stable planets.

Do you understand "gravity"?


Of course not. No one does.

They would literally get torn apart from tidal forces....

No, they wouldn't. Earth's gravity influences the moon much more than these stars would influence any hypotetical planet and it's not torn apart by tidal forces.


Rigel Kentarus A (Alpha Centuri) is the largest, just over the size of our own sun. 1.1 solar masses (15 times the mass of jupiter)

Rigel Kentarus B is just slightly smaller than our sun. 0.9 Solar Masses (12 times the mass of jupiter)

Rigel Kentarus C (Proxima Centuri) is the smallest, at 0.1 solar masses. (Approximately 1.5 times that of Jupiter).


One solar mass equals 1000 times that of Jupiter. Nevertheless, gravity is a very weak force and obeys the inverse square law. A planet on orbit around the A star at 1 AU would be affected by B's gravity at it's closest as much as Earth is from the moon.


Sorry, but while you're model looks well in theory, it just would never work with actual bodies in orbit of these stars.
Anyway, you don't have to believe me: http://www.solstation.com/stars/alp-cent3.htm There could be planets between boths, the questions is would they be inside the habitable zone? That's more difficult because the further away from the star, the more unstable the orbit.

Google also "Trojan asteroids" and "lagrangian points".

Because of the ****ing moronic U.S. citizens telling their Congressmen to not spend so much money to fund NASA.

"Yeah, finding life out of Earth is good and all, but I'd like it better if we spent the money on a war."


That will (hopefully) look so stupid 20, 30, perhaps 40 years down the road.
It looks stupid now! I think the world outside the US agrees we put a complete dolt in office. Twice!

Because of the ****ing moronic U.S. citizens telling their Congressmen to not spend so much money to fund NASA.

"Yeah, finding life out of Earth is good and all, but I'd like it better if we spent the money on a war."


That will (hopefully) look so stupid 20, 30, perhaps 40 years down the road.

No need to wait. It's looking stupid right now. If we're gonna run up the biggest budget deficit in human history, we may as well spend it on something interesting.

I don't understand why people are for spending money on silly things like space exploration and war and stuff like that when we really need to sort out our society first. I'm a scientist and very much intrigued by all the cool stuff they find out there, but honestly we have much bigger problems that could use the money.

I think it's really cool and stuff that you're a scientist, but I still disagree. We can afford space exploration.

It wasn't a needless insult, you insulted the entire board with that kind of garbage. I can't believe you expect anyone to take you as anything other than a troll. Why they banned Jesussaves and not you, I don't know.

You must be psychic. MSB got deleted just hours ago. I sense a new cult arising around your precog powers. I am going treasure my last reply (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8906055#post8906055) to MSB.

I said that it used to be close to the Sun.
No it didn't. It formed roughly where it is now.

You must be psychic. MSB got deleted just hours ago. I sense a new cult arising around your precog powers. I am going treasure my last reply (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8906055#post8906055) to MSB.
Really? He was kicking around for a couple days since I posted that. What did he say that did him in?

Really? He was kicking around for a couple days since I posted that. What did he say that did him in?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8912091&postcount=92

Nothing huge, but just the typical hate-filled drivel that he spewed non-stop.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8912091&postcount=92

Nothing huge, but just the typical hate-filled drivel that he spewed non-stop.
Yeah, it was really a matter of time before his attitude caught up with him I guess.

It's funny because whenever I put someone as ignore their posts, or try to (I can't find where to do that anymore) they end up banned.

Well, to my knowledge, nothing ever really stays in the same exact spot. Moons and planets are constantly moving in orbit, and the galaxy is also moving... At an extremely rapid pace.
And Europa formed around Jupiter.

Many massive objects in space are actually being "thrown around" by gravity like those planetoids discovered near the Oort Cloud, one of which was named Sedna.
If I recall, Sedna is in the Kuiper Belt, like Pluto... Not the Oort cloud. The Oort cloud is very different... and huge and it would be nearly impossible to spot anything coming from there unless it comes in really close to the sun.
Europa however, was not thrown around.

But anyway, those ancients sources could be wrong, I don't doubt that. That stuff that was quoted about me saying that Europa used to be closer to the sun was posted last year.
Ancient sources? Europa was never close to the sun, it formed from an accretion disk around Jupiter.

Anyway, by reading an old source from a book called "Outer Worlds" - I can see that Jupiter was almost a miniature sun, shedding enough heat that Europa's surface might have been liquid water rather than solid ice.
You're not telling me anything I don't already know here.

I'm just going by what I found long ago when Sedna was first discovered and by what I found a few days ago on the internet, specifically sites like these: http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/sedna/ Other sites told me that Sedna is far beyond the Oort Cloud, or inside the Oort Cloud. Apparently, that's why Sedna is considered a planetoid and not a kuiperoid.
Far beyond the Oort cloud?

You do know what the Oort cloud is, right? It's this giant ball of asteroids that have been shot out of the galaxy and end of in highly eccentric orbits that are off the plane of the solar system by as much as 90 degrees and are usually really way far out there except when they occasionally drop into the solar system. If it was an Oort cloud object, we could only see it if it was on a close approach to the sun, in which case we would have seen it come and go just as we see long term comets come and go in a matter of weeks and then don't see them for another thousand years or so.

Furhtermore, what determines planet status is size mostly and whether it appears to be actually formed as a planet or whether it is just rejected junk that's thrown out there. Hence the debate about the planet status of pluto, which is in an eccentric orbit off the plane of the galaxy, thus making it look like a Kuiper Belt object.

Edit: I stand corrected on the Sedna as an Oort cloud object. It's still not a planet any more than Pluto is a planet.

Yeah - ancient sources. Most of the information I gather about anything - in this case, Europa, go as far back as the early 1990s. I have extremely old books, and I can't afford to go out and look for more recent ones. I even have encyclopedias that date back to the mid-1980s that still go on about the Soviet Union, and East Germany as if they still exist. I tend to use the internet, but the internet is often more unreliable than the books.
That's not ancient. And I highly doubt its veracity... If Europa was at some point close to the sun, that would mean that Jupiter was at one point close to the sun, and if that was the case, then the Earth would not exist right now. Europa formed from an accretion disk around Jupiter, it was not captured, it orbits the same object it originally orbited.

Well, I was just saying that because it seems as if I confused this "miniature sun" with the actual Sun that is in the center of this solar system. Since I read the book long ago, I must've lost my memory and much of what I had read. I guess I just mixed up sources when I posted that stuff back in November 7, 2004. I just wanted to let people know who didn't already know.
Ok. So basically, you're saying that Europa formed how I say and not that it was near the sun then. That was pretty damn comfusing.