Mars Meteorite Breaks Auction Record With $5.3 Million Sale
The Planet Mars. NASA via Getty Images
Called NWA 16788, the specimen was found in November of 2023 in Niger's remote Agadez region, part of the Sahara Desert.
The 'once-in-a-generation find' has a red hue and a glassy fusion crust that Sotheby's said suggests it was blasted from the surface of Mars by an asteroid impact so powerful it turned some of the meteorite's minerals into glass.
There are roughly 77,000 officially recognized meteorites on Earth and, of those, only 400 are Martian, according to Sotheby's.
The hunk of rock was expected to fetch between $2 million and $4 million when it sold.
NWA 16788, a Martian meteorite, is going up for auction July 16, 2025. Sotheby's
Get Forbes Breaking News Text Alerts: We're launching text message alerts so you'll always know the biggest stories shaping the day's headlines. Text 'Alerts' to (201) 335-0739 or sign up here : joinsubtext.com/forbes.
6.59%. That's the percentage of Martian material on Earth that this meteorite accounts for. The 400 recognized Martian meteorites have a combined total weight of roughly 825 pounds, meaning NWA 16788 makes up almost 7% of all Martian material ever found on our planet. Surprising Fact
Only about 15 meteorites are discovered in North America per year, according to Sotheby's. Tangent
Before the NWA 16788 went up for sale, the Fukang meteorite held the title for the most expensive ever offered at auction. The specimen was found in 2000 in China and is classified as a pallasite—a type of stony–iron meteorite with olivine crystals. It's thought to be over 4.5 million years old, possibly older than Earth, and weighs more than 2,200 pounds. In 2008, a 925-pound slice of the Fukang meteorite was valued at around $2 million and put up for auction by Bonhams in New York. It didn't sell. Further Reading Forbes White House Could Jeopardize Mars Missions By Slashing NASA's Funding By Kevin Holden Platt Forbes Updated Mars Vision From Elon Musk, SpaceX Hits Different Now, Matters More By Eric Mack Forbes We Finally Know Why Mars Is Red, Scientists Say By Jamie Carter Forbes Mars' Small Mass Still Puzzles Planetary Scientists By Bruce Dorminey
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
25 minutes ago
- Forbes
Audacious Idea That America Is Going To Have An Unnerving Sputnik Moment When It Comes To Attaining AGI And AI Superintelligence
Will the United States attain AGI and ASI first, before any other country, and does it really matter ... More which country is first? In today's column, I examine the provocative chatter that the United States might experience a said-to-be Sputnik moment when it comes to attaining artificial general intelligence (AGI) and artificial superintelligence (ASI). How so? The audacious idea postulates that rather than America being the first to achieve AGI and ASI, some other country manages to beat us to the punch. It is a seemingly unimaginable proposition. You see, the United States is indisputably a world leader in AI and known for the development of leading-edge advances in AI. It is nearly inconceivable that the U.S. won't arrive at AGI and ASI first. But is that wishful thinking rather than real-world thinking? Let's talk about it. This analysis of an innovative AI breakthrough is part of my ongoing Forbes column coverage on the latest in AI, including identifying and explaining various impactful AI complexities (see the link here). Heading Toward AGI And ASI First, some fundamentals are required to set the stage for this weighty discussion. There is a great deal of research going on to further advance AI. The general goal is to either reach artificial general intelligence (AGI) or maybe even the outstretched possibility of achieving artificial superintelligence (ASI). AGI is AI that is considered on par with human intellect and can seemingly match our intelligence. ASI is AI that has gone beyond human intellect and would be superior in many, if not all, feasible ways. The idea is that ASI would be able to run circles around humans by outthinking us at every turn. For more details on the nature of conventional AI versus AGI and ASI, see my analysis at the link here. We have not yet attained AGI. In fact, it is unknown whether we will reach AGI, or that maybe AGI will be achievable in decades or perhaps centuries from now. The AGI attainment dates that are floating around are wildly varying and wildly unsubstantiated by any credible evidence or ironclad logic. ASI is even more beyond the pale when it comes to where we are currently with conventional AI. The Saga Of Sputnik 1 There is immense speculation going on about AGI and ASI regarding which country will be the first to achieve the vaunted pinnacle of AI. One fiery comment that's floating around is that this could turn out to be another semblance of the infamous Sputnik crisis. You might be somewhat familiar with the unnerving exploits of Sputnik that occurred in the 1950s and 1960s, and beyond. I'll provide a quick recap for ease of recollection and then tie the historical reference to our modern times. In October 1957, the Soviet Union launched a small spacecraft known as Sputnik 1 that traveled in a low Earth orbit. A radio signal was then beamed from this orbiting spacecraft. People across the globe could hear the beeping sounds on their radios as retransmitted by amateur radio operators. This made enormous history as it was the first-ever artificial Earth satellite. At the time, this frightening action triggered the American Sputnik crisis. Worries were that the Soviet Union could end up controlling outer space. The Russians could potentially launch military weapons that orbited the planet and would readily threaten the United States and other countries of the world. The action also suggested that the scientific prowess showcased by the Soviet Union was superior to that of America. How much farther behind might the U.S. really be? The sky was the limit, or maybe not, and extended to the heavens far above. This served as a mighty impetus to spur the Space Race. Indeed, a few years later, President John F. Kennedy made his famous speech in 1962 that called for the United States to land on the Moon before the end of the decade. The oft quoted line was this: 'We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win, and the others, too.' Will AI Be The Sputnik 2 Let's tie the Sputnik saga with the ongoing efforts to attain pinnacle AI. There is heated debate in dark backrooms that maybe the United States won't be the first to arrive at AGI and ASI. Some other country might get there first. Lots of big-name countries are vying for that prized position. Smaller countries are doing so too. An eclectic race is avidly underway. Suppose the U.S. isn't first? It would be reminiscent of the Sputnik 1 circumstance. Perhaps such an instance would cheekily be labeled as a kind of Sputnik 2 phenomenon (as an aside, there really was a Sputnik 2 in terms of a second spacecraft launched in November 1957 by the Soviet Union and was the first to put an animal in space, the dog named Laika). America could end up as a second fiddle in the AI race. The idea seems absurd at face value. The United States undeniably has many of the top AI makers, along with amazing academic institutions that are globally recognized as AI leaders, and gobs of first-class AI researchers. Billions upon billions of dollars are flowing into the AI race by American companies and via U.S. federal, state, and local governmental agencies. Any notion of the United States not landing on AGI and ASI before any other country would seem utterly ludicrous and summarily rejected. The Logical Suppositions Whoa, comes the retort, you can't blindly assume that the United States will necessarily be the first to attain AGI and ASI. That is a haughty assumption. It belies the intense efforts taking place beyond the United States. This begs the question as to why America would not be the first to reach that desired goal. I will go ahead and give you a rundown on some of the most compelling reasons that have been expressed on this dicey matter. They consist of these five primary contentions: Let's briefly unpack each of those. Unknown Path To AGI And ASI First, no one anywhere can say for sure how AGI and ASI can be achieved. The whole endeavor is pretty much a shot in the dark. There isn't a pristine map that lays out the steps involved. Furthermore, it is conceivable that AGI and ASI will not be attained at all, i.e., no one will achieve the pinnacle AI. The United States is in the same boat as everyone else, namely, trying all sorts of clever ways to move toward AGI and ASI. No guarantees are to be had. All countries might come up blank on the AGI and ASI pursuit. Thus, no matter how much money or brainpower is employed, the end result might consist nicely of more advanced AI, but not the total package of true pinnacle AI. Marching To The Same Tune A second point is that perhaps a birds of a feather mindset could undermine the United States. Here's what that entails. Some have criticized that, by-and-large, we are using the same methods and similar AI internal structures across the board to reach AGI and ASI, see my analysis at the link here and the link here. If that's the case, our all-alike AI approach could be akin to putting all our eggs into one basket. The true path to pinnacle AI might be something outside of that presumed avenue. Unwilling To Take Risky Chances Another somewhat related consideration is that with the vast investments going into AI efforts, this might be making us more risk-averse. The logic is this. You would find it difficult to take in bucko bucks and not be pursuing AGI and ASI like others are. The investors won't be happy that you are trying some oddball angle. If you don't succeed but have followed the same approach as others, you can hold your head high and proclaim that everyone was caught off guard. On the other hand, if you opt for a risky path that no one else chooses to pursue, you'll have little headspace cover when it comes to explaining why your zany method didn't arrive at AGI and ASI. You will be fully exposed and readily vulnerable to reputational attack. Stealing AI To Reach The Pinnacle Here's a twist for you. Theft might come into play. It is suggested that maybe another country will steal our budding AI and manage to undertake the final steps to AGI and ASI before we do. In other words, suppose we have gotten down to the 90% mark and are struggling to get the final 10% done. Some other country that isn't anywhere near AGI and ASI decides to take a shortcut by stealing the AI that we have. Next, they manage to get the remaining 10% undertaken under their own auspices. Of course, they tout to the world that they did the pinnacle AI by themselves, entirely from A to Z. For more details on the chances of stealing AI, see my coverage at the link here. Discovery By Luck Or Chance One of the most intriguing reasons for the U.S. not being the first to achieve pinnacle AI is that perhaps there is some out-of-the-blue discovery that needs to be made. The ardent belief is that there is a missing piece that nobody has identified yet. No one knows what that piece is. There isn't any definition of it. It is the classical dilemma of not knowing what we don't know. The kicker is this. Suppose that discovering the missing piece is going to be based mainly on luck rather than skill. Assume that there is no inherent advantage in having the biggest AI labs and the biggest AI budgets. AGI and ASI might hinge on a completely left-field discovery that could happen anywhere and at any time. I've pointed out that this particular theory or conjecture has given rise to the credence that AGI and ASI might be achieved on a solo basis, see my discussion at the link here. Yes, instead of vast teams arriving at pinnacle AI, some enterprising individual in their pajamas and in their basement arrives there first. If you believe in this fanciful missing piece concept, it seems plausible that a solo developer with incredible luck might discover it. The solo developer might be in the tiniest of countries, and ergo, bring AGI and ASI to that country before any other country figures it out. Presumably, unbelievable fame and fortune await that solo developer. Being First Does Matter Those above-described handful of mainstay reasons are on the minds of many. Please know that additional reasons are being bandied around. It's a hot topic and raises the heat when emphatically discussed. A smarmy viewpoint about this dire handwringing conundrum is that being first is perhaps overrated. If the U.S. doesn't get to AGI and ASI before some other country, maybe it's not such a big deal, and we are making an undue fuss. A preoccupation with being first can be a bad thing. Go with the flow. However things perchance go, they go. The counterargument to this offhandness is that we all pretty much acknowledge that AGI and ASI have supremely dual-use consequences, doing grand good for the world but also potentially grand bad for the world. The first to get to pinnacle AI might unleash quite a vicious storm upon the globe and muscle themselves into a geo-economic position of a disconcerting nature (see my analysis at the link here, along with why the United Nations also is trying to have a role in the AGI/ASI arrival, see the link here). The planetary and humankind existential stakes underlying AGI and ASI are huge. Whichever country gets there first is, in fact, an important consideration. Humanity And The Future A final thought to ruminate on. Some have likened the attainment of AGI and ASI to the likes of achieving atomic energy and the atomic bomb. Historically, the case can be made that getting there first did make a difference. We now know that being first was significant, and we also know that what happens after the first attainment is an ongoing struggle and vitally crucial too. Thinking further ahead in terms of pinnacle AI, the question arises whether some or all other countries of the world will eventually possess and/or control AGI and ASI. That's another substantive topic worthy of keen chatter. Per the wise words of Albert Einstein, we earnestly need to keep this pointed remark in mind: 'The solution to this problem lies in the heart of mankind.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
When did our solar system's planets form? Discovery of tiny meteorite may challenge the timeline
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. A tiny meteorite is rewriting what scientists thought they knew about the origins of our solar system. New evidence found in shavings from a meteorite known as Northwest Africa 12264 — a 50-gram (1.8 ounces) piece of space rock that is believed to have formed in the outer solar system — suggests that rocky planets like Earth and distant icy bodies may have formed at the same time. This challenges the long-standing belief that planets closer to the sun formed before those in the outer solar system, the ones that lie beyond the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. Planets form within the rotating disks of gas and dust that surround young stars, where particles collide and stick together through a process known as accretion. As developing rocky planets heat up, they begin to differentiate, forming separate internal layers known as the core, mantle and crust. Scientists have thought that our solar system's inner rocky planets — Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars —formed first (around 4.566 billion years ago), while gas giants and icy bodies in the outer solar system came together slightly later (4.563 billion years ago), due to the colder temperatures at a greater distance from the sun. Rocky planets farther out were also thought to form more slowly because their higher water and ice content would have delayed internal heating and core development. Analyzing the composition of the meteorite (which was purchased from a dealer in Morocco in 2018) revealed a ratio of chromium and oxygen that indicates it came from the outer part of the solar system. Using precise isotopic dating methods, the researchers found that the rock formed 4.564 billion years ago — just two to three million years after the solar system's earliest solid materials. Until now, such early formation was thought to be limited to bodies from the inner solar system, according to a statement announcing the new study. RELATED STORIES — How did the solar system form? — Solar system guide: Discover the order of planets and other amazing facts — What are meteorites? Evidence that rocky planets beyond Jupiter formed as rapidly, and at the same time, as the inner planets could transform our understanding of how planets take shape — not only in our solar system, but in planetary systems throughout the universe, the researchers said. Their findings were published on July 4 in the journal Communications Earth & Environment.
Business Insider
3 hours ago
- Business Insider
NASA veterans say political pressure and slashed funding are destroying mankind's ability to go on future missions
A group of 287 current and former NASA employees said federal funding cuts will have dire consequences for NASA and the country as a whole. In a Monday letter titled the "Voyager Declaration," addressed to NASA's interim administrator and US transportation secretary Sean Duffy, the group slammed the Trump administration's recent actions against the space agency. "The last six months have seen rapid and wasteful changes which have undermined our mission and caused catastrophic impacts on NASA's workforce," the letter said. The group said recent policies proposed by the administration threaten to waste public resources, compromise human safety, and weaken national security. The letter to Duffy comes after the Trump administration axed three NASA departments as part of larger cuts carried out by the Department of Government Efficiency. Several NASA employees were also fired as a result of the DOGE cuts. "Interim Administrator Duffy, we urge you not to implement the harmful cuts proposed by this administration, as they are not in the best interest of NASA," the letter read. The group said that the funding cuts could compromise safety for future missions, which was "a dangerous turn away from the lessons learned following the Columbia disaster." In 2003, the Space Shuttle Columbia disintegrated as it reentered Earth's atmosphere, killing all seven astronauts on board. The declaration added that cutting funding for missions and shutting them down was not reversible. "Once operational spacecraft are decommissioned, they cannot be turned back on. Additionally, cancelling missions in development threatens to end the next generation of crucial observations," the group said in the document. A total of 287 current and former NASA employees who signed the declaration, per its website. In response to the letter, NASA's press secretary, Bethany Stevens, said to CNN that the agency would never compromise on safety. "Any reduction — including our current voluntary reduction — will be designed to protect safety-critical roles," she said to CNN. Employees of the National Institutes of Health and the Environmental Protection Agency released similar declarations slamming DOGE cuts. The cuts resulted in more than 200,000 workers across all federal agencies losing their jobs in March.
