LONG-DISTANCE DATING: IN SITU GEOCHRONOLOGY FOR PLANETARY BODIES

Isotopic dating is an essential tool to establish an absolute chronology for geological events. It enables a planet’s crystallization history, magmatic evolution, and alteration to be placed into the framework of solar system history. The capability for in situ geochronology will open up the ability for this crucial measurement to be accomplished as part of lander or rover complement. An in situ geochronology package can also complement sample return missions by identifying the most interesting rocks to cache or return to Earth. Appropriate application of in situ dating will enable geochronology on more terrains than can be reached with sample-return missions to the Moon, Mars, asteroids, outer planetary satellites, and other bodies that contain rocky components. The capability of flight instruments to conduct in situ geochronology is called out in the NASA Planetary Science Decadal Survey and the NASA Technology Roadmap as needing development to serve the community’s needs. Beagle 2 is the only mission launched to date with the explicit aim to perform in situ K-Ar isotopic dating [1], but it failed to communicate and was lost. The first in situ K-Ar date on Mars, using SAM and APXS measurements on the Cumberland mudstone [2], yielded an age of 4.21 ± 0.35 Ga and validated the idea of K-Ar dating on other planets, though the Curiosity method is not purpose-built for dating and requires many assumptions that degrade its precision. To get more precise and meaningful ages, multiple groups are developing dedicated in situ dating instruments [3-7]. Four in situ dating instruments using K-Ar and Rb-Sr radioactive dating schemes were proposed to the Mars 2020 rover opportunity. Though none were selected, in situ dating may soon become a reality. [1] Talboys, et al. (2009) Planetary and Space Science 57, 1237-1245, doi:10.1016/j.pss.2009.02.012. [2] Farley, et al. (2014) Science 343, doi:10.1126/science.1247166. [3] Anderson, et al. (2015) Rapid Comm. Mass Spec. 29, 191-204, doi:10.1002/rcm.7095. [4] Solé (2014) Chem. Geo. doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2014.08.027. [5] Cohen, et al. (2014) Geostand. Geoanaly. Res. 38, 421-439, doi:10.1111/j.1751-908X.2014.00319.x. [6] Farley, et al. (2013) Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 110, 1-12, doi:10.1016/j.gca.2013.02.010. [7] Cho, et al. (2016) Planet. Space Sci. 128, 14-29.