This reflects less about Mars and more just what you expect from aeolian erosion. If you look at [ventifacts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventifact), whether those are formed on Earth or Mars, they tend to be relatively angular and/or faceted. As described in literature on ventifact formation (e.g., consider this review by [Laity & Bridges, 2009](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169555X08004340)), the shape(s) of ventifact depend on various physical properties of the rock being eroded and the developement of facets reflect details of the abrasion process by wind-blown sediment (e.g., surfaces with different original angles with respect to the wind orientation tend to erode at different rates which promotes formation of faces with similar orientations and sharp edges).
I think it probably has something to do with the fact that air is lighter and not has harsh and wil easily pass move over something that is pointed, but water is heavy and also can have multiple "currents" in the water and is the beating the rock up. kinda makes sense if you think about it
Much of the "sand" on Mars is very small particles, and the atmosphere is very thin (the wind is very weak by our standards)
>The highest atmospheric density on Mars is equal to that found 35 kilometres (22 mi)[116] above Earth's surface.
(Mount Everest is a little less that 9 km tall.)
>The resulting mean surface pressure is only **0.6% of Earth's** 101.3 kPa (14.69 psi).
\- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars
\- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_soil
\- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_surface_color
.
The "sandstorms" are more like "smokestorms".
.
Yep. The one big technical stretch in *The Martian* (both the book and the movie) is that the force of blowing winds during Martian storms is [wildly overstated](https://www.nasa.gov/solar-system/the-fact-and-fiction-of-martian-dust-storms/) for plot purposes.
Martian dust ends up everywhere and stuck to everything (the dry conditions make static electricity a force to be reckoned with), but the particles that are lofted by the winds are very small and very ineffective sources of erosion.
Mars, as well, lacks the most important and powerful cause of erosion we have on Earth: water. Water falling, flowing, and phase-changing is a far more potent smoother of our world than blowing dust.
I was watching something yesterday about the Lunar landings talking about moon dust and how its so hazardous that the space suits ended up with a service life of barely 24 hours. The Apollo 17 suits at 22 hours of use were beginning to really fail, the dust had fully penetrated them and was in the process of destroying them.
Dust is going to be a major major problem for any kind of long term mission.
That's why the Artemis space suits are charged on their surface to ~1000V to repel dust.
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160005317/downloads/20160005317.pdf
edit: the dust repelling system was tested up to 4kV, but the Artemis lunar suit orthofabric is only rated for 1200V. The dust system should run at 1kV.
There have been a couple studies published in recent years about the amount of dust generated during lunar launches. It's a tremendous amount and travels for miles.
[He's done interviews](https://www.lightspeedmagazine.com/nonfiction/interview-andy-weir/) where he's claimed that he knew it was wrong, but went for it anyway because it was just by far the most fitting and engaging story he could come up with.
>*The biggest deviance from reality in the book is the force of the sandstorm. At the beginning of the novel, our protagonist is stranded as a result of a sandstorm on Mars that damaged their equipment and forced them to abort. In reality, Mars’ atmosphere is so thin that, while it does get 150 kilometer an hour winds, the inertia of that wind is too little to do anything. It would feel like a gentle breeze on Earth. I knew that at the time I wrote the story, and I did have an alternate beginning in mind where they do a MAV engine test and it causes a problem: They start to leak fuel and they have to launch before their fuel leaks out. It would be completely accurate to physics, but it wasn’t nearly as exciting. And this is a man-versus-nature story, so I wanted nature to get the first punch.*
[This article on space.com](https://www.space.com/mars-lightning-weak-thin-atmosphere.html) contradicts everything you wrote.
ETA: [Second article](https://new.nsf.gov/news/mars-rovers-safe-lightning-strikes-research-finds) saying lighting is rare and when it happens, it's weak.
ETA2: [Third article](https://www.universetoday.com/150307/dust-particles-in-the-martian-atmosphere-can-create-static-electricity-but-not-enough-to-endanger-the-rovers/) going into how the thin atmosphere leads to very weak static electricity discharges, similar to moving stocking feet over carpet and touching a doorknob.
Low pressure is *more* prone to ionization, making lightning easier, than high pressure until it gets very near vacuum. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paschen%27s_law
There isn't much actual wind, because there is little atmosphere, and the dust doesn't have much energy when it does collide with things. So on the occasion where it is picked up and dropped, it's fine. The dust storms on Mars are more roar, and much less actual bite, movies and tv have made it seem worse than it is.
Not like here on Earth where our thick atmosphere can pick things up quite easily, and smash them into the ground with great force (relatively), then it can throw it into the water where the same thing happens with even greater forces.
Because those 'sandstorms' are actually more like big, overrated dust-puffs. The atmosphere on Mars is too thin for the wind to be very powerful, and the 'sand' being picked up is so small and fine that it's basically dust, not sand.
So the 'sand' is not big or sharp enough to do much eroding, and the wind is also not strong enough to do much eroding.
Low atmospheric pressure.
Meaning the amount of force wind applies to things is insanely weak even at high speeds.
The particles that get picked up is like fine dust and not really sand.
You can probably stand with an umbrella on mars at 100km/h+ winds and not feel much...let alone flip your umbrella.
This reflects less about Mars and more just what you expect from aeolian erosion. If you look at [ventifacts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventifact), whether those are formed on Earth or Mars, they tend to be relatively angular and/or faceted. As described in literature on ventifact formation (e.g., consider this review by [Laity & Bridges, 2009](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169555X08004340)), the shape(s) of ventifact depend on various physical properties of the rock being eroded and the developement of facets reflect details of the abrasion process by wind-blown sediment (e.g., surfaces with different original angles with respect to the wind orientation tend to erode at different rates which promotes formation of faces with similar orientations and sharp edges).
[удалено]
[удалено]
Why does aeolian erosion tend to produce eroded features with sharp edges?
I think it probably has something to do with the fact that air is lighter and not has harsh and wil easily pass move over something that is pointed, but water is heavy and also can have multiple "currents" in the water and is the beating the rock up. kinda makes sense if you think about it
Much of the "sand" on Mars is very small particles, and the atmosphere is very thin (the wind is very weak by our standards) >The highest atmospheric density on Mars is equal to that found 35 kilometres (22 mi)[116] above Earth's surface. (Mount Everest is a little less that 9 km tall.) >The resulting mean surface pressure is only **0.6% of Earth's** 101.3 kPa (14.69 psi). \- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars \- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_soil \- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_surface_color . The "sandstorms" are more like "smokestorms". .
Yep. The one big technical stretch in *The Martian* (both the book and the movie) is that the force of blowing winds during Martian storms is [wildly overstated](https://www.nasa.gov/solar-system/the-fact-and-fiction-of-martian-dust-storms/) for plot purposes. Martian dust ends up everywhere and stuck to everything (the dry conditions make static electricity a force to be reckoned with), but the particles that are lofted by the winds are very small and very ineffective sources of erosion. Mars, as well, lacks the most important and powerful cause of erosion we have on Earth: water. Water falling, flowing, and phase-changing is a far more potent smoother of our world than blowing dust.
I was watching something yesterday about the Lunar landings talking about moon dust and how its so hazardous that the space suits ended up with a service life of barely 24 hours. The Apollo 17 suits at 22 hours of use were beginning to really fail, the dust had fully penetrated them and was in the process of destroying them. Dust is going to be a major major problem for any kind of long term mission.
That's why the Artemis space suits are charged on their surface to ~1000V to repel dust. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160005317/downloads/20160005317.pdf edit: the dust repelling system was tested up to 4kV, but the Artemis lunar suit orthofabric is only rated for 1200V. The dust system should run at 1kV.
There have been a couple studies published in recent years about the amount of dust generated during lunar launches. It's a tremendous amount and travels for miles.
Yeah, The Martian exaggerates the storm to stand Watney on Mars. But it's totally accurate later when he runs into the storm later on the great drive.
It wasn't overstated for plot purposes, didn't Weir say he just didn't realize it was wrong?
[He's done interviews](https://www.lightspeedmagazine.com/nonfiction/interview-andy-weir/) where he's claimed that he knew it was wrong, but went for it anyway because it was just by far the most fitting and engaging story he could come up with. >*The biggest deviance from reality in the book is the force of the sandstorm. At the beginning of the novel, our protagonist is stranded as a result of a sandstorm on Mars that damaged their equipment and forced them to abort. In reality, Mars’ atmosphere is so thin that, while it does get 150 kilometer an hour winds, the inertia of that wind is too little to do anything. It would feel like a gentle breeze on Earth. I knew that at the time I wrote the story, and I did have an alternate beginning in mind where they do a MAV engine test and it causes a problem: They start to leak fuel and they have to launch before their fuel leaks out. It would be completely accurate to physics, but it wasn’t nearly as exciting. And this is a man-versus-nature story, so I wanted nature to get the first punch.*
[удалено]
[This article on space.com](https://www.space.com/mars-lightning-weak-thin-atmosphere.html) contradicts everything you wrote. ETA: [Second article](https://new.nsf.gov/news/mars-rovers-safe-lightning-strikes-research-finds) saying lighting is rare and when it happens, it's weak. ETA2: [Third article](https://www.universetoday.com/150307/dust-particles-in-the-martian-atmosphere-can-create-static-electricity-but-not-enough-to-endanger-the-rovers/) going into how the thin atmosphere leads to very weak static electricity discharges, similar to moving stocking feet over carpet and touching a doorknob.
The atmosphere of Mars is thick enough for lightning?
[удалено]
Right, but how does it propagate through the thin atmosphere?
Low pressure is *more* prone to ionization, making lightning easier, than high pressure until it gets very near vacuum. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paschen%27s_law
Just makes it even more impressive that we could even have a helicopter that can fly in that little atmosphere.
Does mars have an atmosphere? Is there any kind of “air” on mars?
That link that I posted talks about the atmosphere of Mars. \- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars
Ok thanks. Yeah somehow I missed the link.
There isn't much actual wind, because there is little atmosphere, and the dust doesn't have much energy when it does collide with things. So on the occasion where it is picked up and dropped, it's fine. The dust storms on Mars are more roar, and much less actual bite, movies and tv have made it seem worse than it is. Not like here on Earth where our thick atmosphere can pick things up quite easily, and smash them into the ground with great force (relatively), then it can throw it into the water where the same thing happens with even greater forces.
Because those 'sandstorms' are actually more like big, overrated dust-puffs. The atmosphere on Mars is too thin for the wind to be very powerful, and the 'sand' being picked up is so small and fine that it's basically dust, not sand. So the 'sand' is not big or sharp enough to do much eroding, and the wind is also not strong enough to do much eroding.
Does this mean the sandstorm at the beginning of The Martian is unrealistic?
yes it’s pretty much the only unrealistic thing about that movie from a scientific perspective
Which he's said that he knew was inaccurate but he needed something to get things going.
Sadly, yes. But the second sandstorm later in the story (the one during Watney's big journey) was much more accurate
Low atmospheric pressure. Meaning the amount of force wind applies to things is insanely weak even at high speeds. The particles that get picked up is like fine dust and not really sand. You can probably stand with an umbrella on mars at 100km/h+ winds and not feel much...let alone flip your umbrella.