Posted on 07/16/2011 2:31:26 PM PDT by mrjesse
PASADENA , Calif. - NASA's Cassini spacecraft has revealed for the first time surface details of Saturn's moon Hyperion, including cup-like craters filled with hydrocarbons that may indicate more widespread presence in our solar system of basic chemicals necessary for life.
(Excerpt) Read more at nasa.gov ...
Could well be. There's a lot more evidence there's crude oil on Hyperion, based on observations made from space, than there is evidence of crude oil on Earth based on observations made from the same distance. Unless the Cassini spacecraft carried a drilling rig to Hyperion, dropped it on the ground, deployed a bunch of robot roustabouts, and dug themselves a gusher.
What NASA's saying is that there are light fractions on Hyperion. Those dinosaurs must have built cat crackers before they kicked the bucket.
Titan is practically made of methane. What does that mean?
I recall the discovery of hydrocarbon clouds in space via radioastronomy. One was a cloud of ethyl alcohol which ( from recollection ) had enough alcohol to form a ball the size of the earth in liquid form, yet if you dragged a football field sized scoop all the way through it, you would only collect a thimble full.
Exercise: calculate the diameter of the cloud, assuming uniform density.
P.S. It was stated that the cloud was laced with cyanide, to the disappointment of aspiring interstellar dipsomanics.
To me, it is just one more piece of evidence pointing to the possibility that the "abiogenic" petroleum theory of Thomas Gold may be valid.
One thing's for sure. The human race could have non-petroleum based energy based on nuclear -- or thermonuclear -- sources very quickly if the will to develop those sources was there. The "will" is not there because the price of oil is too low, and the price of oil is so low because there's so damn much of it, and the smart money knows it.
Development of an alternative energy source -- such as the low-energy nuclear fusion technologies that are steadily gaining acceptance from the mainstream scientific community -- would knock the price of petroleum for a loop. Energy prices are being held up by political forces, in my opinion, and this is becoming more and more clear.
We have evidence in case after case, both in our own solar system and elsewhere in the galaxy, that hydrocarbons collect on all kinds of planets and planetoids. Good grief, Jupiter and Saturn are mega-balls of hydrocarbons (with other elements such as nitrogen present also, of course).
The idea that only decaying dinosaurs, or diatoms, or algae, could have been the source of all the underground hydrocarbons on Earth strikes me as far-fetched.
I'm not a petroleum engineer, but I am an engineer, and I know what makes sense and what doesn't.
Oil seeps on Earth are visible from space. No oil is visible on Hyperion from any distance.
What NASA's saying is that there are light fractions on Hyperion.
No they aren't.
I would think geological activity has a lot to do with Earth’s “seeps”. Not sure you’ll find much of that going on with Hyperion.
Thanks for that information.
And for proving my point.
Thanks for the ping. Hydrocarbons are among the basic building blocks of the universe. We’re going to find them everywhere.
I think you will. I believe that a moon or planet undergoes a tremendous amount of flexing as it orbits.
You're welcome.
And for proving my point.
Yeah, you're a crackpot.
Oil of biological origin finds its way through fissures in cap rock.
Not sure you’ll find much of that going on with Hyperion.
I'm 100% sure you won't find anything similar on Hyperion.
Oh wow. You called me a name. A powerful demonstration of your great confidence in the validity of your position. Whatever it is. And I mean that in the best possible way.
You're a crackpot for asking me if there was algae on Hyperion, and then making the following statement without backing it up, even though I countered it.
There's a lot more evidence there's crude oil on Hyperion, based on observations made from space, than there is evidence of crude oil on Earth based on observations made from the same distance.
Turns out water (ice) is abundant even in space.
Just like Hydrocarbons, it would have to be, as that is where everything on every planet came from.
It sure does. The source is the Earth.
Sure, you can assume that algae or plants are the only source of oil, but you discredit the ability of the Earth to create in more than one way.
If oil is made by algae, what makes diamonds?
They both start out in roughly the same form and composition.
SteelyTom. You could have found a better (more courteous) way to debate the source of oil. Personal attacks never help and just make the other person unwilling to listen to anything else you say.
Moonman62. If you have an explanation for why oil can ONLY come from a biological source (algae), then why don’t you lay it out?
Your position is locked into OIL ONLY COMES FROM ALGAE.
Remember, our best scientists also insisted, not to long ago in our history, that our Galaxy was the total extent of the Universe.
These were some of our best educated scientists. And they were not just a little wrong, they were way, way wrong.
‘Oil’ have to agree with ya there. :’)
Recharging of oil and gas fields
Thomas Gold
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/tg21/recharging/
[snip] ...hydrocarbons are a common constituent of the cosmos and the planetary condensations that formed in it... Hydrocarbons are stable down to great depths and the high temperatures there, contrary to many statements that have been made that the temperature reached at depths between 30,000 and 40,000 ft would dissociate most of the hydrocarbons... The existence of diamonds, crystals of pure carbon that form at pressures which are not reached on earth at depths of less than 140 kilometers, proves that unoxidized carbon exists at such depths, and also carbon-bearing liquids must flow there that can deposit carbon at high purity. High pressure fluid inclusions in diamonds prove that liquid or gaseous hydrocarbons were present at their formation. Present day meteorites give us examples of the solids responsible for the building up of the Earth; among those only one class, the carbonaceous chondrites, contain much carbon, mostly in unoxidized form. That this material is present in the Earth’s interior in large abundance is shown by the distribution of noble gases and their isotopes that have emerged into our atmosphere and show distributions that are strikingly similar to those in carbonaceous chondrites, but dissimilar to those of any other class of meteorites. [/snip]
***
The Origin of Methane (and Oil) in the Crust of the Earth
Thomas Gold
U.S.G.S. Professional Paper 1570, The Future of Energy Gases, 1993
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/tg21/usgs.html
[snip] Origin of the Carbon on the Earth
The surface and surface sediment on the Earth contain approximately one hundred times as much carbon as would have been derived from the grinding up of the basement rocks that contributed to the sediment. The surface is enormously enriched in carbon, and this needs an explanation.
The carbon we have on the surface or in the sediment of the Earth is estimated to be 4/5 in the form of carbonate rocks, and 1/5 in unoxidized form, frequently referred to as “organic.” (The word “organic” given then to all unoxidized carbon, is of course now a misleading misnomer.) The quantities are large: if expressed as the mass of the element carbon per square centimeter of total Earth surface area, the estimate is about 20 kilograms. (I will be referring to this quantity again later.)
...
[snip] Perhaps one might consider the possibility that the Earth once had a massive atmosphere of carbon dioxide that evolved early on, from materials that could have survived the formation process, and that these then became converted in into the carbon deposits we now have; but that also does not seem an acceptable explanation, for in that case we should see incomparably more very early carbonate rocks than the amounts laid down later. This is not what the geologic record shows. What it does show is a reasonably continuous process of laying down carbonate rocks; no epoch having enormously more per unit time, nor enormously less. If outgassing from depth is responsible, then one has to discuss what the source material in the Earth might have been, what liquids or gases might have come from them, and what their fate would have been as they made their way up through the crust. [/snip]
And that doesn’t even begin to explain the calcium and magnesium bound to the carbon in the rocks.
There was no calcium in the atmosphere.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
