Talk:Mars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Mars 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 Mars is part of the Solar System 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 May 8, 2007.


The 47-year cycle of Mars was observed by the Ancients[edit]

The 47-year cycle of Mars: after 47 years - 22 synodic periods of 780 days each - Mars returns to the same position among the stars and is in the same relationship to the Earth and Sun. The ancient Mesopotamians discovered this cycle. [1]

Mars water discovery[edit]

Hello, It is commonly known that evidence of seasonal waterflow or active waterflow was found on Mars near the Curiosity[1], but the curiosity is not allowed to look[2]. Please try to edit this in to the article. Thank you.

References

Silica Discovery[edit]

Much higher concentration of silica element at some sites over the past last seven months than anywhere else in the last 40 months after landing and silica makes nine tenths of composition of some of the rocks. The high silica was a surprise, the scientist said. And it supports microbal life.

Read more:

http://phys.org/news/2015-12-mars-rover-higher-silica-considerable.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=splt-item&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter

MansourJE (talk) 06.35, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:47, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Olympus Mons[edit]

Please change the current text about Olympus Mons, as it is THE largest known mountain in the solar system, not the second largest.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaishaku 1986 (talkcontribs)

The thing is, since Dawn has orbited Vesta, it is known that Rheasilvia's central peak is slightly higher, see List of tallest mountains in the Solar System. --JorisvS (talk) 17:52, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

May 12, 2016 New Hubble Mars Image[edit]

For the infobox if interested: http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2016/15/ CuriousMind01 (talk) 12:53, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Nice image, but I think it is still inferior to the image currently in the infobox in terms of overall quality. We had a long discussion about the lead image about a year ago. Huntster (t @ c) 20:22, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Tidal lock?[edit]

The article contains the following assertion:

"7.5 billion years from now. Earth and Mars may become tidally locked with the expanding Sun."

However, I didn't see that mentioned in the attached reference. Part of the problem may be that we don't have full access to the reference work, but the part that was visible didn't seem to mention the possibility. It might help if this statement was backed up by a scholarly study. Praemonitus (talk) 20:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Grand tack hypothesis[edit]

Should the third paragraph of the "Surface geology" section cover the Grand tack hypothesis and its likely impact on the accretion of material that formed Mars? Praemonitus (talk) 19:46, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

IMO, it seems tangential to Mars' geology. The article is long as it is. My 2 cents. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk)
Well it explains why the planet is so small, thereby having its present day geological structure and atmosphere. But otherwise yes, I suppose it is tangential. Praemonitus (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2016[edit]

The images from the following links should be added to the photos in the "Mars" Article: http://imgur.com/vCubgyA http://imgur.com/KVAnI5S Blinndsay (talk) 22:59, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: I don't see any indication that those images are compatibility licensed for use on Wikipedia. Unless they are released by the copyright holder under a compatible license, they cannot be uploaded. — JJMC89(T·C) 02:02, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

The Mars Density Equation[edit]

The Density of Mars can be described as an equation of the Form A R^3 + B R + C where R is the Radius in Kilometers, and C is the Density of the Crust, while A is the tri-axial coefficient of compression, and B is the gravitational uni-axial co-efficient of compression. R is the Radius at the tilt angle of a spinning sphere ( approximately 23 degrees 19 minutes and 39.3 seconds of tilt = 23.327 583 333 degrees of tilt. The tilt angle radius gives a slightly better indication of the Volume of an oblate spheroidal planet like Mars, where the Equitorial Radius is greater than the Polar radius. The Tilt Angle Radius = (( 1 X polar Radius) + ( 2.858 093 602 X Equitorial Radius )) / 3.858 093 602. This gives 3391.0161 Km. The density is then ( 1 + Pi ) X 10^-9 X R^3 + ( 1 + SQRT 2) X 10^-1 X R + 2941.05 kg/m^3. This gives 161.4942016 + 818.663704 + 2941.05 = 3921.207906 kg/m^3. This is slightly lower density than density listed in the article of 3933.5 +/- 0.4 kg/m^3, but the Radius is slightly higher, and Mass will be 6.404 688 781 E23 is slightly lower, and the surface gravity is slightly higher at 3.71743 m/sec^2 versus 3.711 m/sec^2. The advantage of the density equation is that it gives a density for the dominate materials that make up the Crust of Mars. That is 2941.05 Kg/m^3 and other materials mixed together still are dominated by the Unit mass of the tholeiitic basalt. In comparison Venus has a Value of C = 2657.05 ( granite and Diorite ), and the Earth and Moon have a value of C = 2900 Kg/m^3 ( >85 % Basalt, and <15 % Granite by volume in the Crust ). The Density Equation is for Rocky Planets, so it doesn't work well on Mercury, or the Gas Giant Planets. In addition it can be used on the ice Planets, but the value of C can be lower than 1000. In conclusion the Rocky Planet Density Equation can be used to determine the density of the crustal materials as well as the overall average density of the Planet, or Satellite of a Planet.63.225.17.34 (talk) 17:11, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Note that any data used in the article needs to satisfy WP:NOR. I.e. it must be based upon reliable sources. Praemonitus (talk) 17:49, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Move "Moons" section[edit]

I feel Moons comes in such an insignificant part of the page. I'm thinking it is worth moving closer to the top of the page. Would it perhaps belong in the Physical Characteristics? Situphobos (talk) 09:41, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, its position below the in-culture things, some even trivial, was ridiculous. I've moved it. --JorisvS (talk) 12:00, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
I agree. Its position after the history and culture sections was inappropriate - it clearly belongs nearer the scientific sections, and the new location is much better. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:46, 8 July 2016 (UTC)