Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Did Chandrayaan Find Organic Matter On the Moon?

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the regolith-wasn't-in-my-spellchecker dept.

Moon 141

Matt_dk writes "Surendra Pal, associate director of the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) Satellite Centre says that Chandrayaan-1 picked up signatures of organic matter on parts of the Moon's surface. 'The findings are being analyzed and scrutinized for validation by ISRO scientists and peer reviewers,' Pal said. At a press conference Tuesday at the American Geophysical Union fall conference, scientists from NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter also hinted at possible organics locked away in the lunar regolith. When asked directly about the Chandrayaan-1 claim of finding life on the Moon, NASA's chief lunar scientist, Mike Wargo, certainly did not dismiss the idea."

cancel ×

141 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The year (2, Funny)

suso (153703) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474232)

Cool, just in time for 2010

Hey look what we found! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30474496)

Some strange evidence that primates have actually been ON the moon. I wonder who or what they were?

Re:Hey look what we found! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30474558)

Only the Americans have been on the Moon... What does this tell us?

Re:Hey look what we found! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475018)

Americans waste money?

Re:Hey look what we found! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475222)

No, just better than the Soviets.

Re:Hey look what we found! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30476248)

Americans don't waste money, but Americans waste money better than the Soviets?

Re:Hey look what we found! (1)

Evil Shabazz (937088) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475414)

That we litter, and don't care where?

Re:Hey look what we found! (3, Interesting)

Rei (128717) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476064)

Actually, it's really interesting news, if confirmed and if the organics are in quantity. Many people know that the moon has historically been viewed as having a shortage of hydrogen (the amount of water found recently was still pretty sparse). Most people don't know that there are also shortages of other elements critical to life, including carbon and nitrogen. Finding places on the moon where they could be found in greater concentration would be critical to long-term, sustainable human habitation.

"Life" or "organics"? (5, Insightful)

thirty-seven (568076) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474288)

The summary seems to make a jump from talking about "organics" and "organic matter" to "the Chandrayaan-1 claim of finding life on the Moon". Is the ISRO actually claiming to have found life on the moon? And aren't there lots of sources of organic molecules that don't involve life?

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (5, Funny)

InsertWittyNameHere (1438813) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474370)

I didn't RTFA but I assume that they're whalers on the moon and they carry a harpoon.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474468)

But there ain't no whales! So what do the whalers do, then? Tell tall tales? Sing their whaling tune? Tell me that, smart guy.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

wisdom_brewing (557753) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474842)

What about Willzyx?

http://www.southparkstuff.com/season_9/episode_913/

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (4, Funny)

Again (1351325) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475662)

But there ain't no whales! So what do the whalers do, then? Tell tall tales? Sing their whaling tune? Tell me that, smart guy.

Actually, the lack of whales in space is a piece of evidence supporting the theory that there are whalers in space.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

Abreu (173023) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474996)

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

Zordak (123132) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476432)

No, you moron. The species isn't found on any other planet. Whales were indigenous to earth. If we were to assume that they were ours just to do with as we pleased, we would be as responsible as those who caused their extinction.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474492)

And aren't there lots of sources of organic molecules that don't involve life?

Don't be silly. Vitalism is alive and well. [space.com]

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (5, Funny)

boef (452862) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474500)

Humans have been there. Humans carry organic matter with them (water, waste etc). So no surprise here in my opinion...

For those wondering about the toilets - From the book called A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts:

But one aspect of weightlessness was so unpleasant was so unpleasant that even the thrill of exploration didn't make up for it. If this marvel of engineering called Apollo had one major design flaw, it was the 'Waste Management System,' perhaps the most euphemistic use of English ever recorded. For urine collection there was a hose with a condom-like fitting at one end which led, by way of a valve, to a vent on the side of the spacecraft. On paper at least, it seemed like a reasonable, if low-tech, way to handle urinating in zero g, assuming you got over your anxiety about connecting yor private parts to the vacuum of space. You roll on the condom, open the valve, and it all goes into the void where it freezes into droplets of ice that are iridescent in the sunlight. One astronaut answered the question "What's the most beautiful sight you ever saw in space?" with "Urine dump at sunset."

In reality, using the urine collector didn't work so well. For one thing, it could be painful. If you opened the valve too soon, some part of the mechanism was liable to poke into the end of your penis, which prevented you from urinating. And at that point, as if to confirm your worst fears, the suction began to pull you in. Now you were being jabbed and pulled at the same time, so you shut the valve, and as the mechanism resealed itself it caught a little piece of you in it. It took only one episode like that to convince you to never let it happen again. Next time you had a strategy: start flowing a split-second before you turn on the valve. But once you began to urinate the condom popped off and out came a flurry of little golden droplets at play in the wonderland, floating around and making your misfortune everybody's misfortune! And in no time at all the whole device reeked; it was an affront to the senses just sitting there.

The astronauts got used to the urine collector, though, and they got used to mopping up afterwards. But there was no getting used to the other part of the Waste Management System. Tucked away in a strange locker was a supply of special plastic bags, each of which resembled a top hat with an adhesive coating on the brim. Each bag had a finger-shaped pocket built into the side of it. When the call came you had to flypaper this thing to your rear end, and then you were supposed to reach in there through the pocket with your finger---after all, nothing falls in zero gravity---and suddenly you were wishing you had never left home. And after you had it in the bag, so to speak, you had one last delightful task: break open a capsule of blue germicide, seal it up in the bag, and knead the contents to make sure they were fully mixed! At best, the operation was an ordeal. In the confined space of the Apollo command module, your crewmates suffered, too. One of the Apollo 7 astronauts said the smell was so bad it woke him out of a deep sleep. When the crew came back they wrote a memo about it: "Get naked, allow an hour, have plenty of tissues handy."

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30474932)

I did not need that information. Nor do need to know how you believe the waste migrated from the equatorial region to the south pole.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475070)

Water isn't an organic molecule.

I would think carbon monoxide would be more likely a find than human waste...

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476716)

Unless you anticipate some kind of chemical reaction, humans don't expel carbon monoxide as waste. Carbon dioxide, sure. But if you try exhaling into the vacuum of the lunar surface, the organic material you're likely to leave behind is lung tissue and blood.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475582)

break open a capsule of blue germicide, seal it up in the bag, and knead the contents to make sure they were fully mixed!

Aww, come on man. Some of us read Slashdot during our lunch break.

That's just nasty! :-P

Cheers

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30476426)

NOT ANY MORE WE DON"T!

- Socz

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1, Funny)

CorporateSuit (1319461) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475878)

But one aspect of weightlessness was so unpleasant was so unpleasant that even the thrill of exploration didn't make up for it. For one thing, it could be painful.... If you opened the valve too soon, some part of the mechanism was liable to poke into the end of your penis, which prevented you from urinating. And at that point, as if to confirm your worst fears, the suction began to pull you in. Now you were being jabbed and pulled at the same time, so you shut the valve, and as the mechanism resealed itself it caught a little piece of you in it. It took only one episode like that to convince you to never let it happen again. Next time you had a strategy: start flowing a split-second before you turn on the valve. But once you began to urinate the condom popped off and out came a flurry of little golden droplets at play in the wonderland, floating around and making your misfortune everybody's misfortune! And in no time at all the whole device reeked; it was an affront to the senses just sitting there.

You're speaking to the wrong audience. For most of these guys, that sounds like the closest thing to a blowjob they'll ever get.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

mpdolan37 (675902) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476782)

I wonder if the image of this organic matter looks like footprints...

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

godless dave (844089) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474660)

The article just says organic matter, but the headline says life. I'm guessing the former is what they found.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474726)

Everything you're saying is correct, but you're missing the point of the media. The media asked NASA about the "Life on the moon" - ISRO never makes that claim.

The media is there to find the BOLDEST statement you can make. Then when it's wrong they work their way backwards until the news is no longer interesting.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

wisdom_brewing (557753) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474808)

what they found was the expected - live bacteria that causes the mould in cheese

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474886)

Carbon is the 4th most common element in our galaxy. It would be surprising if there weren't organic molecules on any rock of appreciable size. There's methane in all of the gas giants, and moons like Titan. No one claims that came from life.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (5, Funny)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474912)

I'd say the timeline was something like this:

JFK: We will put a man on the moon by the end of the decade
NASA 3 months later: ok we put a man on the moon!
After small coverup
JFK: We will put a man on the moon by the end of the decade, and bring him back.

40 years later,
Chandrayyaan: What's this spot of organic matter on the moon?

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (2, Interesting)

rworne (538610) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475428)

One of the Minervans?

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30476464)

One of the Minervans?

Mod parent up. A reference to an excellent SF book won't pass unnoticed in /.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30476610)

Jimmy Hoffa?

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475228)

Yes

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1, Informative)

Gulthek (12570) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475340)

Re: your sig

Religion = a belief without proof

Atheism = a belief that there is no God, afterlife, and all that

Not even caring enough to have a label is a religion to the same extent that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

Evil Shabazz (937088) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475432)

It's not just the summary making the leap from carbon to life. The entire article makes the same leap, though to be fair - it does indicate that the leap is a very large one.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475820)

It's even worse. The discovery seems to be a mass spec observation of carbon. Either the article or the ISRO suggests that it's possible some actual organic compounds of some sort might have been deposited by meteors. The summary then mentions life.

Re:"Life" or "organics"? (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476772)

actual organic compounds of some sort might have been deposited by meteors

One of these? [wikipedia.org]

Impact (1, Interesting)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474304)

I wonder if there was life on Earth before it was struck by the object that "splashed" to become the moon? If so, could it mean that life has developed here twice?

Re:Impact (2, Insightful)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474434)

I was under the impression that the Earth was still in the early stages of cooling when struck by that other planet, and was still a highly "magmatic" planet at that point, and thus incapable of sustaining life yet.

Re:Impact (2, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474524)

How could they know anything at all about the planet before it was struck?

Re:Impact (2, Insightful)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474596)

Science theory. Based on observable evidence of other bodies, physical properties and elapsed time they can theorize with a fair bit of confidence, what the conditions were given the age of the earth at the time.

That said, theories are only theories. I just saw an TV show that suggested the earth didn't become completely molten 'until' the impact by the other planet. This is what gave us the iron dense core we have as it settled out into the center while the earth was molten.

Re:Impact (2, Insightful)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474638)

Well, IANAS, but my understanding is that the Earth was simply too young at that point to be anything other than a mostly molten ball of semi-liquid rock with a thin crust, as was the other planet. This is why Earth was able to re-form into a nice sphere again rather than a lopsided, cracked mess like Mimas did.

But, in the strict sense you are correct in that they can't KNOW in that we weren't around then and we haven't yet invented Time Travel. But as a theory it certainly makes sense.

Re:Impact (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475632)

There was at least one ocean shortly after the Earth formed, so it probably never was a ball of molten rock. The rock atmosphere after the Moon-forming impact was a bit irritating, though.

Re:Impact (1)

spitzak (4019) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476074)

This is why Earth was able to re-form into a nice sphere again rather than a lopsided, cracked mess like Mimas did.

The earth is large enough that it would have collapsed to a perfect sphere even if it was completely solid and cold. Mimas is a lot lot lot smaller with 1/1000 the gravity. You might want to check obvious things like that, especially if you are attempting to deny AGW. When you say stupid science fallacies in your post it does not help your cause in any way!

Re:Impact (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475626)

Geochemistry [springerlink.com] of the Earth and the Moon [wikipedia.org] . Isotope geochemistry is particularly useful. And it can be compared to meteorites (i.e. undifferentiated/less differentiated material left over from the solar system formation).

organic buzzword (1)

hort_wort (1401963) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474310)

So from reading the article, it sounds like they just found some carbon dust in the cloud they stirred up. Am I the only one not excited at all by finding carbon? Isn't it a common mineral?

Re:organic buzzword (4, Funny)

yincrash (854885) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474350)

they just meant it's pesticide free

Re:organic buzzword (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475698)

Yeah, they're only certain that they saw carbon. That could mean hydrocarbons/organics, or it could essentially be graphite. They admit it's a leap yet to get to organics from what they've discovered. Of course it was an interviewer who then made the additional leap to life. Which of course the researcher wouldn't rule out, because that would be silly when you still don't know what you're looking at.

Though as TFA mentions it's not like organic compounds are all that rare in space.

curry (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30474318)

it was curry he found. and he was happy.

Organic matter is the basis of life (4, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474324)

Though organic matter is the basis of life, it does not guarantee that life would exist. It is just a type of matter composed of carbon-based molecules. Is there carbon out there? You bet. That means that organic matter will also exist out there in space.

Colin Powell was crucified for claiming the existence of WMDs in Iraq. It took a couple years, but we never found the smoking gun. Don't be too quick to jump on the first piece of evidence you find.

Why is this surprising? (3, Interesting)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474338)

Assuming the theory of "panspermia" is a reasonably close to accurate description of how life arrived on earth (Amino acids and water carried inside asteroids brought life to Earth) and knowing that the Moon has acted as an Asteroid barrier for BILLIONS of years, is it all that surprising that we would ALSO find "organic signatures" on the moon?

Indeed, one would almost EXPECT to find them there.

Re:Why is this surprising? (4, Insightful)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474404)

Assuming panspermia is pretty big leap.

Re:Why is this surprising? (1)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474482)

Is not the theory that "life arrived here via Amino acids carried aboard asteroids" the current leader among the scientific community? Is that not "panspermia"? Or am I getting my terminology confused?

Re:Why is this surprising? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30474690)

No, yes, no.

boooo panspermia! (1)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475442)

panspermia is a terrible theory. it doesn't fully address where the componets of life came from, it's just sticking your fingers in your ears shouting IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE.

One of the many problems I have with the theory is that no where have I seen evidence that these organic molecules are more likely to appear when exposed to the hard radiation of space. And only thing it has going for it, in my opinion, is that you can have much larger time scales for life to appear if you take the Earth out of the picture.

Re:boooo panspermia! (0, Redundant)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476044)

...it's just sticking your fingers in your ears shouting IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE.

Um, where do you think the solar system and everything in it came from?

Re:Why is this surprising? (1)

catchblue22 (1004569) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476174)

Could some of these chemicals have originated on Earth and were blasted onto the moon by an asteroid impact?

Oblig. Futurama quote (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30474354)

So THAT'S where I left those skin flakes!

Neil Armstrong's Pee (2, Funny)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474400)

I bet what they found was some of our astronaut's pee pee on the moon.

Or maybe a discarded moon pie wrapper.

Or maybe a bottle of scotch.

Re:Neil Armstrong's Pee (3, Funny)

seven of five (578993) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474464)

Dude, I think the vaccum woulda done a number on his unit.

Re:Neil Armstrong's Pee (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474478)

Dude, no scotch drinking person I know would ever waste a bottle lying around, especially not when you could never get to it (say, the moon). Heck, what better place to get trashed than on the moon itself? Screw the mission.

Re:Neil Armstrong's Pee (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475538)

Scotch was just standard rations along with a carton of cigarettes. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, everyone drank scotch and smoked cigarettes. If you don't believe me, just watch the movie "Colossus: The Forbin Project".

Re:Neil Armstrong's Pee (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475868)

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, everyone drank scotch and smoked cigarettes.

*laugh* Wow, sounds like a hell of a time. Throw in the LSD and free love, and you've got a party!

Cheers

No, it was Alan Shepard's balls . . . (2, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474758)

Um, golf balls, that is: http://www.pasturegolf.com/archive/shepard.htm [pasturegolf.com]

Being the joker that he was, I wouldn't be surprised if he took the time to take a dump and have a wank, as well.

"Hello Moon! Welcome to what humanity is going to do to you!"

mmmm.... (4, Funny)

seven of five (578993) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474452)

Green cheese....

just a thought... (1)

Dilbert Knows (1700878) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474480)

With the Apollo missions and various probes sent to the moon since the 60's... Wouldn't you expect to find some organic material on the moon?

Re:just a thought... (2, Informative)

FTWinston (1332785) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474736)

Not on the far side, or at the poles. And frankly, even if they crashed right into an old probe or LM lower stage, the quanties would be miniscule.

ZOMG! (3, Funny)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474678)

It *is* cheese!

Re:ZOMG! (1)

G-Man (79561) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475918)

Paneer, to be specific...

New proof! (1)

sajuuk (1371145) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474682)

New proof that the cartoonists were right! Possible cheese discovered on moon! Story at 11!

welcome (1)

OMFG it's Rici (1564141) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474698)

I for one welcome our new lunar overlords.

Remember that in Chemistry has a precise meaning (5, Insightful)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474708)

It means hydrocarbons. So before any one asks to a chemist gasoline is organic.

Re:Remember that in Chemistry has a precise meanin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475296)

Not such a good example, since by definition gasoline was living organisms.

Re:Remember that in Chemistry has a precise meanin (1)

xupere (1680472) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475646)

Gasoline used to be life [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Remember that in Chemistry has a precise meanin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475782)

So even better than life on the moon, there's oil on the moon!

Re:Remember that in Chemistry has a precise meanin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475898)

No surprise, as gasoline is made out of crushed dinosaurs. Or so I'm told.

wow (3, Funny)

fulldecent (598482) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474928)

Wow... peer review, remember that?

Re:wow (1)

petaflop (682818) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475566)

No, I don't. But I've read about it.

I understand that peer-review used to be the response of the scientific community to a piece of work over a period of years, sometimes decades.

However, since the rise of the scientific journal as the major means of scientific publication and the implementation of "peer review" as part of the publication process, it has come to mean (among most members of the public and also many members of the scientific community) the review of a paper by 2 or 3 scientists who may be qualified to comment on some portion of the work, but certainly don't have time to do their own experiments, re-analyze the data, do further work to test the results of the paper in new ways, or do new original work depending on the paper.

I think this is a major problem for the public perception of science, because it gives the public an unrealistic impression of how scientific results are validated. The fact that many scientists have also adopted this mistaken usage may also be harmful because it perpetuates the misleading usage.

Obligatory... (2, Funny)

Zalbik (308903) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474934)

But it might just be a particle of preanimate matter caught in the matrix...

Organic? (3, Insightful)

VincenzoRomano (881055) | more than 4 years ago | (#30474942)

It depends on what do they mean with "organic [wikipedia.org] "!
At the bare minimum it's "anything that contains carbon". Which is not that hard to find when you stroll close to a star.

Re:Organic? (1)

mishu1985 (1146799) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475466)

Exactly. The interstellar medium, all the dust and gases between celestial bodies, is mostly inorganic, but there are a number of surprising organic compounds as well, like ethyl alcohol. So either the Russians have been producing vodka for the last few billion years and distributing it all over the galaxy or it can be produced in nature with no involvement with life whatsoever...I'm guessing the second option is more likely.

In other news, moons only indigenous life... (3, Funny)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475002)

In other news, moons only indigenous life destroyed by rocket. Film at 11!

Re:In other news, moons only indigenous life... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475386)

The mooninites are not going to be happy about this.
That is, unless they were all destroyed.
Which means we just committed extra-terrestrial eugenics.
And now we can colonize the moon and reap its vast resources for our own wealth and advance.

Why yes, I am American. Why do you ask?

Moontrap? (1)

mdm-adph (1030332) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475242)

Quick, get Chekov and Brisco County Jr. up there to take a look at it.

Rabbit (1)

Issarlk (1429361) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475264)

They found the rabbit on the moon, that's all. And this makes the news? I cite, directly from wikipedia: "The Moon rabbit, also called the Jade Rabbit, is a rabbit that lives on the moon"

What do they mean by "organics"? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475292)

Organic chemistry just refers to any chemical containing carbon... I've no doubt there are organic chemicals on the moon. I seriously doubt they mean "could only have been created as a by-product of living creatures" when they say "organics".

Organic matter?? ... Armstrong!! (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475350)

You DID take a shit on the moon!

And as usual, an Indian is the lucky one, who finds it!

Mars, Europa, now our moon (1)

frog_strat (852055) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475370)

Richard Hoagland says it will go like this:
-we discover microbes
-we discover artifacts
-we discover other intelligent life

Maybe all the retired military and intelligence guys, with their "I want to say this before I die" stories, weren't lying after all.

Organic Compounds != Life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30475384)

There is methane in Jupiter. Cows fart and burp methane. Therefore, there must be cows on Jupiter.

It is more likely to be a carbon based compound (like methane or even carbon dioxide). These organic reactions occur very commonly outside of life.

Contamination Concerns (1)

Drache Kubisuro (469932) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475462)

Well, even U.S. scientists are very careful about the potential for organic contamination. Hopefully the satellite isn't simply detecting something deposited onto the detectors or nearby areas on the spacecraft. Carbon and oxygen are all over the universe, so even if contamination isn't a problem, detection of organics on the moon is not a surprise. To give an idea about the abundance of carbon, very large stars may end up in a carbon-nitrogen-oxygen (CNO) burning phase once they're used up all their heavier elements. What is really of interest is what organic molecules have been found. Amines would be exciting; particularly if they are amino acids.

Debris from Earth? (1)

jolyonr (560227) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475488)

Lunar meteorites are not that uncommon here (chunks of the moon blasted out of the moon after asteroid/meteorite impacts onto the moon which then fall on earth).

The reverse has no doubt happened too, over geological time, chunks of Earth rock have been blasted into space during particularly nasty collisions (think of the one that ended the dinosaurs), and while most of it would rain back down on Earth, a small percentage could eventually end up caught by the moon.

Now, this doesn't necessarily mean the traces of organic chemicals found on the moon are from the Earth, there are far more likely sources (such as comets) where organic chemicals are found.

But it opens up an interesting possiblity - because much of the Earth's surface is constantly subducted and renewed at plate boundaries, much of the fossil record of very early times is lost - and there has been speculation that the best place to find fossils of very early life on earth is on meteorite fragments on the surface of the moon.

I'm quite happy to go up there and do some collecting for anyone, if they'll pay my fare.

Jolyon

On the topic of Organic matter on the moon... (2, Insightful)

joocemann (1273720) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475674)

A recent anonymous hacker hacked the hackings of hackery into the datas of the database datastores of the NASA research on the topic that is subject at hand.

Several NASA e-mails indicate that there was an argument at the coffee machine that did not go well and that one of the arguers, Bob Shandley, said something to the tune of 'booshit there ain't not organic matter on the moon!'.

While most would consider a discussion at the coffee machine unofficial and casual, many are fueled in their skepticism of NASA as a whole; they reason that if Bob could be so bold and deny the recent data, that there must be a serious level of corruption within NASA that may even bring into question the validity of the moon landing.

Mary Jenkins, a Washington Elementary fourth Grader is quoted saying "Well. If the guy says something isn't true but it is true. Well then he's lying. And my mom says liars hang out with liars, and so.. well... NASA is full of liars. We never landed on the moon."

Attempts to contact the Obama administration for comment on the topic have yielded no results. We assume the silence is likely due to cooperation between the administration and NASA to coverup the extreme level of non-science going on at NASA, regarding Bob Shandley's coverup.

Thousands rallied against corruption and conspiracy outside the Austin, TX NASA launchpad on Friday; a day of high expectations set for the launch of NASA's new the Eagle II rocket. People from all walks of life stood through the cold and dry afternoon in protest with signs like "IF BOB WON'T, I WON'T" and "WHAT IS BOB HIDING".

One protester standing a mere 400 feet from the Eagle II, who wishes to remain anonymous is quoted with the observation "That rocket doesn't even have a red tip. Chances are it's not even a real rocket, this is probably some 3d projection or something. Those damn NASA scientists are so full of lies and tricks we cannot trust them!"

After the recent uncovering of Bob's coffee-machine side argument, the world is clearly up in arms and now standing in disbelief of everything NASA.

Next at 5: Are America's youth getting dumber? New research indicates widespread failure in critical thinking, mathematics, and basic sciences among public school students. Check back for more in a half hour for more details.

Re:On the topic of Organic matter on the moon... (1)

spitzak (4019) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476140)

Brilliant. Thank you.

Detected by mass spectrometer? (1)

AmonRa1979 (797618) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475676)

From the article "An anonymous Chandrayaan-1 scientist said MIP's mass spectrometer detected chemical signatures of organic matter in the soil kicked up by the impact". From the information I could find it sounded like the mass spectrometer was directly on the impactor and was only to be used for atmospheric analysis as the MIP descended. If the mass spectrometer detected the debris kicked up by the impactor either it separated and passed through a cloud of debris or it survived the impact. I can't find the details on whether or not the MIP had two stages, the impactor and sensors or if another probe went through the debris cloud. I thought analysis of the debris kicked up by the impactor was only through photon spectroscopy, in which case I would have to wonder if earthshine played a part in this organic signature. However, it has been said that organic doesn't necessarily mean life and that it wouldn't be implausible to find it on the moon.

Re:Detected by mass spectrometer? (1)

AmonRa1979 (797618) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475818)

... the photon spectroscopy being performed by the Chandrayaan-1 satellite still in orbit.

Cheese is organic, just sayin' (eom) (1)

Punk CPA (1075871) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475738)

I said "eom," dammit!

*Now* I remember... (1)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475780)

It's that bag of dope I was hiding from my Mom in 1973!

Man, was I high!

With him being on the moon (1)

trickyrickb (910871) | more than 4 years ago | (#30475874)

I suppose theres no chance of Sixth Sense II being released any time soon?

Blowback from Earth? (1)

geoffrobinson (109879) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476126)

Some people have guessed that there may be or may have been life on Mars due to a meteor striking Earth and putting Earth material into space. I would assume the Moon, being so much closer, would have caught a lot of organic material over the years from numerous meteor impacts.

Eeewww, gross!! (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 4 years ago | (#30476872)

Don't touch that slimy thing. You don't know where its been!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>