Talk:Europa (moon)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Europa (moon) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Featured topic star Europa (moon) is part of the Jupiter series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 26, 2008.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Astronomy / Astronomical objects  (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon Europa (moon) is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
WikiProject Solar System / Jupiter (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Solar System, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Solar System on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Taskforce Jupiter (marked as Top-importance).
For more information, see the Solar System importance assessment guideline.


"The heating by radioactive decay, which is almost the same as in Earth (per kg of rock), cannot provide necessary heating in Europa because the volume-to-surface ratio is much lower due to the moon's smaller size."

I just think the sentence above should be reworded. Asuming the Earth and Europa to both be nearly spherical the volume-to-surface ratio would be the same regardless of size. Also, Europa's smaller surface area means it radiates less heat than earth if radioactive decay where the only heat source. JTTyler (talk) 00:56, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Life on Europa[edit]

If there is life on Europa it will not be more advanced then the human race. If they were advanced, they'd have radio satellites. No radio satellites = no advanced life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

In order to have radio satellites, you have to have knowledge that there is something to put radio satellites into. There's no reason to assume any advanced life lurking on the ocean floor of Europa would even have a concept of space, let alone spacefaring. Serendipodous 10:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Potential for Extraterrestrial Life[edit]

In this chunk of info, there is/was a bunch of crap about chemosynthesis and discovering tube worms off the Galapagos. This really needs to be truncated down to barely more than a referral to another page. This page is about Europa chiefly, and it jumps a little too far off topic despite how interesting it may be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

The information is very important, because it shows how life could exist on Europa, despite the inhospitable environment. Serendipodous 10:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
However, much of this info doesn't apply distinctly to Europa. In particular, the three middle paragraphs and pictures. It is largely about how life could exist in any extraterrestrial ocean (not even necessarily subsurface, but that's all we're concerned about in the solar system), and could/should be on the pages for several other objects, notably Ganymede. I.e., it is a digression. A reference to a section in a separate exo-life page (the astrobiology page seems the likely candidate), with this section just describing why Europa may be particularly suitable to that type of life: tidal heating, rocky core, O2 from radiation on ice, etc. Tbayboy (talk) 18:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
This historical information is vital context; you can't just say that Europa's subsurface ocean could support life without sunlight and yet not explain why. Serendipodous 20:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
We're not suggesting that. See "referral to another page" above, and my astrobiology suggestion. For example, the page on tigers doesn't have to explain the details of what it means to be a mammal, it just links to it. Similarly, the Europa page doesn't have to explain the details of hydrothermal vent life, just link to it; this page need only explain why Europa might have such life. Tbayboy (talk) 23:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

EAS: Europa Avoidance Syndrome[edit]

There should be a section on how the Mars missions are seen as competitive (for funding) with a series of cancelled Europa missions (Europa, a moon of Jupiter, that has a confirmed saltwater ocean, is considered the most promising location for extraterrestrial life in the solar system). Yet the resulting funding "turf wars" have sidelined Europa surface exploration for years.

Ditto for Saturns' moon Encaladus, which has another confirmed saltwater ocean. Most resources go to Mars, while the ocean moons languish.

The funding politics, and controversies related to this, are certainly worth a section in the article. (talk) 20:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

As I know there is a separate Mars exploration program. So, they do not directly compete. Ruslik_Zero 10:04, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Oh yes they do compete with each other! The space program funding pool is very limited now--
And so there is absolutely competition for limited funding dollars between the existing Mars program and potential life detecting missions to the ocean moons for the small pool of resources that are at play.
Not only that, there is a sense of very keen competition about who gets to claim the first discovery of extraterrestrial life--
The Mars mission, being well established, has a far more powerful "lobby" with which to acquire congressional funding, both within NASA, and directly from congress (congressional NASA funding implicitly earmarked for the Mars mission).
Even though the confirmed ocean moons, Europa and Enceladus are far more likely to harbor life than Mars; scientists who want to make the ocean moons a higher priority are far less organized and have far, far, far less funding than the Mars mission does.
The Mars mission is like an 800 pound gorilla-- and the science interests that want to send life-detecting probes directly to the ocean moons (now, not in 30 years), are like the world's smallest monkey-- the pygmy marmoset, which weighs only 3.5 ounces. Guess which side is winning the battle for funding...
2602:306:BDA0:97A0:466D:57FF:FE90:AC45 (talk) 17:55, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

We're missing something...[edit]

How did Europa form? (talk) 03:25, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Try it now. :) Serendipodous 07:30, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Goddidit!  :-) BatteryIncluded (talk) 12:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

This page scared me[edit]

Did anyone else scroll down this page slowly and then freaked out by the rotating orbit GIF? I thought it was a bug or something at the bottom of my screen! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:46, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Surface Temperature is Incorrect[edit]

The surface temperature is listed as -50 K. Since 0 K corresponds to absolute zero, this cannot be correct. The Johnston Archive suggests ~85 K ( ). If anyone can confirm or improve this with a more vetted source, that would be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:17, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

That's not -50 K that's ~50 K. — Reatlas (talk) 05:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Organic material ?? Or organic compounds[edit]

There is a big difference. I'd be very suprised if there was organic material on the surface ...--EvenGreenerFish (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I understand your concern - however - seems the phrase "organic material" is found "4" times in the original cited NASA reference; "organic compound" (or even the word "compound") is found "0" times (ie, not found at all) - please see => < ref name="NASA-20131211">Cook, Jia-Rui c. (December 11, 2013). "Clay-Like Minerals Found on Icy Crust of Europa". NASA. Retrieved December 11, 2013. </ref> - based on this original cited NASA ref, edited back from "organic compound" to =>

"organic material" (according to NASA)

hope this is ok - please let me know if otherwise of course - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2014[edit]

i know something wrong Hnndcfgn (talk) 18:54, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, well what is it? Serendipodous 19:04, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Not done: You have made no edit request in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ", so it is unclear what you want added or altered.
Furthermore, you have not cited any reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 19:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)