PDA

View Full Version : If mars had a large moon and large core could it support life?



willstaruss22
2012-Jun-23, 10:38 AM
Im no scientist or math wizard so i'll keep it simple. If mars originally had a large moon and a larger core could life thrive. Would it also sustain a magnetic field then atmosphere because of the larger core. Also could there be the possibility of plate tectonics because of a larger moon for tidal friction?

Im researching if mars developed differently with these differentials

LoneTree1941
2012-Jun-25, 01:39 PM
If Mars had a density equal to Earth, instead of it having .38 Earth gravity, it would have .53 earth gravity - Earth, on average is 40% more dense than Mars. In that situation we could have Mars be identical in make up to Earth, just a scaled down version. Earth is the most dense planet in the solar system and Mercury second most dense.

This suggests to me that a smaller planet, say a Mars sized planet could be even more dense than Earth is. Earth may have lost some less dense material make-up in the creation of the moon; one scenario for the refinement of a denser than average planet of the four terrestrial planets. Without that adjustment of Earth density Mercury would rank 1st, Venus (might then) rank 2nd, Earth (without the moon creating collision) 3rd, and Mars 4th.

So the potential existed for a mars sized planet to be even more dense than Earth, have a large moon, a molten core, plate tectonics, a magnetic field, a thicker atmosphere, more out-gassing to generate a thicker atmosphere, and greater internal heat released to provide some ambient heat to make Mars' present day climactic conditions substantially more friendly for life than would be the case experienced without all those refinements.

Blackhole
2012-Jun-28, 03:21 PM
I speculate that Mars can support live even without a thicker core and a bigger moon. But from what we know of Earth, those two features certainly help life evolve and persist for billions of years.

ASTRO BOY
2013-Jan-02, 08:32 AM
Im no scientist or math wizard so i'll keep it simple. If mars originally had a large moon and a larger core could life thrive. Would it also sustain a magnetic field then atmosphere because of the larger core. Also could there be the possibility of plate tectonics because of a larger moon for tidal friction?

Im researching if mars developed differently with these differentials



EARTH MAY NOT HAVE NEEDED MOON FOR LIFE

Scientists have long believed that without the moon's stabilizing gravitational influence, variations in Earth's tilt would have caused climate change too dynamic for complex life to evolve. Not so, concludes a new study that has implications for understanding conditions for life elsewhere in the solar system.

full story at...

http://news.discovery.com/space/earth-moon-life-tilt-110808.html

neilzero
2013-Jan-02, 02:18 PM
Mars possibly has microscopic life far below the surface. A larger, denser, core, would increase the surface gravity, the surface air pressure and the average surface temperature, but likely not enough to allow multicellular life on the surface of Mars. A large Moon would also help slightly. Neil

Rhaedas
2013-Jan-02, 02:32 PM
Mars might need a thinner crust to have tectonics though. One thing that might have made life as we know it more possible on Earth was the Moon creation impact, in that it removed a lot of the crustal material, giving the Earth a thinner crust that can move and thereby create the carbon cycle, something that is important to life on Earth and maybe very crucial to its beginnings and persistence.

ASTRO BOY
2013-Jan-02, 08:19 PM
Mars might need a thinner crust to have tectonics though. One thing that might have made life as we know it more possible on Earth was the Moon creation impact, in that it removed a lot of the crustal material, giving the Earth a thinner crust that can move and thereby create the carbon cycle, something that is important to life on Earth and maybe very crucial to its beginnings and persistence.


Hmmmmm, Interesting hypothesis.......
Again though latest thoughts are that we probably did not really need the Moon for life to arise.....

On another matter, and don't ask me why as I don't fully know, but I still am having trouble accepting the "Moon creation Impact" theory despite the gathering evidence to support it.
Might be a while before I come around to accept it. :-)

Rhaedas
2013-Jan-02, 09:05 PM
I agree that having the Moon itself may not be a big factor. It's hard to weigh in its importance when we only have one example so far of a world with life. The biggest contribution the Moon gives since its birth is the tides, but how relevant to abiogenesis that was is possibly debatable, as I think we have hypotheses that both need regular water movement and those that don't. Again, a work in progress.

The Rare Earth hypothesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis) covers many of these parameters, as it's basically a collection of topics that may or may not be important to higher forms of life development. As the criticisms on the wiki point out, some information we've learned since its introduction might lessen the rareness, but there could be other factors not even known yet that make our situation unusual. Jury is still out until we get more samples, and that might be a while.