←back to thread

277 points Gaishan | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.203s | source
Show context
dash2 ◴[] No.45194159[source]
This feels very cynical, but what incentive does NASA have to do research showing alien life is not very likely in our solar system?
replies(3): >>45194306 #>>45194669 #>>45202418 #
jiggawatts ◴[] No.45194306[source]
This is a point I keep making: every one of NASA’s Mars missions has very carefully excluded any scientific instrument that could conclusively eliminate the presence of life... and hence future missions to find life.

I.e.: they don’t carry high power microscopes because apparently there’s no room for one on a 900kg rover the size of a car.

replies(3): >>45194468 #>>45194494 #>>45194656 #
Scarblac ◴[] No.45194468[source]
What kind of instrument could conclusively eliminate presence of life?
replies(2): >>45194486 #>>45195017 #
jiggawatts ◴[] No.45195017[source]
Anything that can return a sample. Notice that Curiosity collects samples, but omits the sample return rocket.

A good enough microscope can easily tell the difference between life and non-life, especially in the presence of water. If it moves on its own, it is almost certainly alive!

Certain kinds of chromatographs can conclusively determine that no complex chemicals are present, the kind essential to life. I.e.: if only simple metal oxides and the like are present, then you have only a rock.

replies(4): >>45195576 #>>45195706 #>>45199412 #>>45199956 #
1. IAmBroom ◴[] No.45199412[source]
You're suggesting we can state "Mars has no life" based on a single sample?

If that's so, I can produce a sample of material from the center of the Amazon rain forest that will conclusively prove to you that Earth is also lifeless.