Geology Of Mars' Gale Crater And Mount Sharp

[DavidPalmer]

I am an amateur scientist with a lifelong interest in Mars, and I recently finished my essay, "An Interpretation of the Geology of Gale Crater and Mount Sharp, with Implications for the History and Habitability of Mars," wherein I present a new hypothesis for the geology of the complex, and (re)introduce a lacustrine model (lake-bed sedimentation) for the strata comprising the Lower Formation of Mt. Sharp, which is something that has recently fallen out of favor (the aeolian or "SWEET" model is in vogue, but I find numerous faults with that model, and believe I have addressed all criticisms of the lacustrine model). I also argue for a near-surface aquifer and geologically-recent groundwater outflow in the complex, and the big test of my model will be when Curiosity reaches the base of Mt. Sharp in late 2014 or early 2015.  In spite of my amateur status I'm hoping to gain some recognition in the scientific community if my hypotheses are confirmed, and my essay can be seen at:

 

http://galecratergeology1.tumblr.com/post/85407991682/an-interpretation-of-the-geology-of-gale-crater-mount

[Eclogite]

Settiing aside, for the moment, your scientific argument, I think you need some vigorous editing to remove some of the pop-science language. In a similar way you need a clear abstract. The opening paragraphs read initially like an abstract, but then deviate seriously from that. This will discourage many potential reader from the outset.

 

I need more time to consider the substance of your argument, before responding to it.

[DavidPalmer]

Settiing aside, for the moment, your scientific argument, I think you need some vigorous editing to remove some of the pop-science language. In a similar way you need a clear abstract. The opening paragraphs read initially like an abstract, but then deviate seriously from that. This will discourage many potential reader from the outset.

 

I need more time to consider the substance of your argument, before responding to it.

 

 

My essay was basically a hobby thing on my part, totally non-commercial, and I never was trying to write a formal article like the ones published in professional scientific journals.  However, I WAS trying to appeal to as wide an audience as I could, both educated lay people and scientists alike, which does involve some compromises.

 

In researching and writing my essay, which took over a year, I had to wade through hundreds of articles, many in scientific journals, and in my own writing I made a point of avoiding things that were particularly irritating to me and which I considered unnecessary, one of which was to have captions for each photo.  Instead I chose to place them at the location of the text where I was discussing them, whereas I found it very awkward the way things are formatted in the journals, where you will often have to go to the other end of the article to find a figure that is being referred to.

 

Also, the reason I mixed metric and English units of measurement, was that I attempted to make my essay more accessible for those who were not familiar with the metric system.  And if that makes it "pop science," so be it.

 

Dave

[Eclogite]

Thank you for your reply. My comments arose from your statement: "In spite of my amateur status I'm hoping to gain some recognition in the scientific community...."

 

That objective can be greatly aided by adopting the standards of the community you are seeking acceptance in. To use an analogy, if you wish to be accepted in a rural French community in the Loire valley, it's best you not go around talking to the locals in Spanish.

 

I think, by trying to aim at as wide an audience as (you) could, that you are at risk of missing on both objectives. I would urge you to decide on one goal and adapt your style to best meet that. Given the care that has gone into your research I would opt for the first one.

 

As far as mixing units is concerned, I think that is a really bad idea. It is perhaps apposite that when NASA tried that in relation to Mars, as you doubtless know, there was a very expensive disaster.

 

My interest in Mars revolves more around tectonic activity, potential evidence for plate tectonics and Martian meteorites. However, I shall attempt to look into your work  in more detail and if I can come up with some challenging questions that will help you refine the idea, I shall do so.

[DavidPalmer]

Reply to Eclogite:

 

 

I would be very interested in hearing what you have to say about my scientific hypotheses and arguments.  And these ARE fully-testable scientific hypotheses in the purest sense of the word....I expect Curiosity to obtain the results that will test them within the next few months.  The first test to be passed will be whether the Lower Formation is aqueous or aeolian in nature, and that may actually come prior to Curiosity reaching the actual base of Mt. Sharp (currently 2 miles away), because they say that an apparent outlier of the Mt. Sharp stratigraphic column is a mere one-quarter-mile from Curiosity! (althouigh I haven't been able to find any more specific information on this exposure).

 

I have been publicizing my essay far and wide in all online science and astronomy forums I can find, and I have generated considerable response, some negative (generally in the vein of constructive criticism) but most positive.  However, I haven't gotten responses from many professional scientists, much less Mars specialists....are you a professional or a fellow amateur?

 

I have been very interested in Mars since I was a kid in the 1960s and encountered "The Exploration of Mars" featuring the artwork of Chesley Bonstell.  And I wanted to become a space artist for a time, but that didn't work out, and now that a lot of good imagery is available, it's possible to showcase the beauty of Mars in photos even if you aren't a space artist, and that's something I tried to do in my essay in addition to presenting factual material.  But I really didn't have anything original to say about Mars until I was looking at the images of Mt. Sharp and trying to understand its geology, and it was like a light coming on when I saw the parallels with features and processes I was familiar with here on the Oregon coast.  And in working out a systematic model for the Gale/Mt. Sharp complex, I have had to do extensive research in tangents that I didn't expect, such as impact cratering and age dating.  And I am particularly proud of my section titled "Gale's Cratering History and Exposure Age," in part 3 of my essay, wherein I argue that traditional dating schemes for the floor of Gale Crater are inadequate, based on new information from Pre-Cambrian Earth impacts and a consideration of the wider geology of the Gale Crater region (I was actually thinking that renowned planetary impact specialist William K. Hartmann might find my arguments interesting).

 

Dave

 

[Eclogite]

I am a rank amateur, although I do have a degree in geology. My interests are eclectic and so lack the excellent focus you have applied to your work here. As you noted, you spent over a year gathering and assimilating your data. When I find the time I would be reluctant to address any portion of your thesis without reading at least a score of related papers, digesting them and then identifying any weaknesses in your argument. Please don't take a lengthy silence as evidence of a lack of interest.

[DavidPalmer]

I am a rank amateur, although I do have a degree in geology. My interests are eclectic and so lack the excellent focus you have applied to your work here. As you noted, you spent over a year gathering and assimilating your data. When I find the time I would be reluctant to address any portion of your thesis without reading at least a score of related papers, digesting them and then identifying any weaknesses in your argument. Please don't take a lengthy silence as evidence of a lack of interest.

 

 

The articles presenting competing model(s), I have listed in the references at the end of my essay.  Mainly, my essay is a critique of the SWEET hypothesis (that Mt. Sharp is a big sand dune).  In addition to the original SWEET paper, there have been many that incorporate it or parts of it, such as those by Millikan and Grotzinger, which I also analyze critically.  And the more I read of the competing model(s), the more problems I saw in them, either empirical or a priori (and which of course I discuss in my essay), whereas everything seemed to come together smoothly and fit together nicely in support of the model I proposed.

 

I don't have a degree, but I took a bunch of geology classes with straight As, and have done a lot of reading and research and even field work on my own, so I consider myself something of a geologist.  Probably should have pursued it as a profession!  That and philosophy were/are my favorite subjects.

 

Have you written any articles/essays and/or plan on writing any?

 

By Martian meteorites, I assume you mean pieces of Mars brought to Earth (not meteorites lying on the surface of Mars).  Definitely a fascinating subject, in terms of revealing the past geology and possible biology of Mars (I touch on this in my essay....my scope is a little broader than just the Gale/Mt. Sharp complex....I even have sections on the sky color of Mars, and the future of humanity on Mars).

 

Dave

[Eclogite]

Dave,

some general, for the most part disconnected, points:

 

1. My knowledge of geology is insufficient for me to write any articles, other than for my own education, to help me get my thoughts in order. I lack the focus necessary to reach an appropriate standard, since in addition to my interest in Mars, I have a similar depth of interest in planet formation mechanisms, pre-Cambiran ice ages, evolutionary mechanisms, the life of Charles Darwin, exobiology, abiogenesis, countering creationists claims, and the military history of WW II. Plus I have a full time job and a 180 year old house in need of repair.

 

2. I did do geological descriptions of drilled cuttings at the well site for a few years, but that is the closest I came to practicing as a geologist, although I do use my geological background daily within the oil and gas drilling industry. My current reading on the topic, however, typically has nothing to do with my work.

 

3. I had already read your piece on the colours of photographs on Mars, a problem I had been aware of since Gilbert Levin raised it. I thought you did a very good job on that part of your work.

 

4. In attempting to read the rest of the work I encountered real difficulty because of the absence of a proper abstract. I really would urge you to prepare one. I appreciate you have given an overview in your last post, but I'm looking for key detail to be added.

 

5. Intersting as the colour photography item is (and the section on Man's future on Mars may be) I would drop them. Put them out on a blog as separate articles by allmeans, but do not confuse the purpose of this essay with extraneous information.

 

Cheers.

E.

[DavidPalmer]

I suppose it's rather late in the game, but I did finally add a sort of abstract or introduction at the beginning of my essay, which will hopefully orient the reader and whet their appetite for what follows (and show that there is aactually a reward to be had by wading through it all), 

 

Dave

[Eclogite]

I new there was something I intended to do! I really do intend to read enough of your thesis to offer a sound critique. It is just finding the time... please wait patiently.