Martianite! Call it martianite, me'lord!
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
55 points (96.6% liked)
Space
1997 readers
61 users here now
A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics
Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.
Related Communities
🔭 Science
- !curiosityrover@lemmy.world
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !esa@feddit.nl
- !nasa@lemmy.world
- !perseverancerover@lemmy.world
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !space@beehaw.org
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
“However, scientists must also find it on Earth to officially recognize it as a new mineral.”
Can someone smarter explain this to me?
Without having a physical sample, they can't know for an absolute fact that there wasn't some unknown variable, or error, leading to that special analysis. That's my interpretation, glad to be corrected if wrong.
I think “spectral analysis” means they’re going by imagery. They don’t have actual samples. But yeah, it doesn’t fully explain it.
I assumed they were using some form of spectroscopy, but dunno how that would work in this context
Doesn't that probe have an onboard gas spectrometer?
Ok. I’m out of my depth.
It's based on the definition of mineral, it must be naturally occurring. New lab made substances that aren't naturally occurring are just compounds.
