From the surface, Chetumal Bay looks almost placid – just a wide sheet of water with no hint of drama underneath. But below that calm is Taam ja’, a massive underwater sinkhole, or “blue hole,” that’s turned into an unexpected mystery for scientists.

At first, the plan seemed straightforward: map it with sonar, get a depth, move on. Instead, the early readings created a bigger problem – what if Taam ja’ isn’t anywhere near as shallow as those first numbers suggested?

The most recent measurements point to a hole that drops far deeper than expected, and the true bottom may still be out of reach…

  • someguy3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    27 minutes ago

    Below about 1,300 feet (400 meters), the trend shifted. Temperature began to creep upward slightly while salinity climbed even higher. That combination suggests the deeper water has a different origin – its own distinct “signature.”

    When the team compared the measurements to nearby regional waters, the upper layers lined up with the bay’s mixed, lower-salinity water. The deepest measured layers, though, moved toward values more typical of Caribbean marine water.

    That doesn’t prove there’s one big open tunnel connecting Taam ja’ directly to the Caribbean, but it does support the idea that the deepest water isn’t coming only from the bay above.

  • ravenaspiring@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 hours ago

    So the line they brought for the CTD was only 500m, and they only made it to 423 before the reading didn’t line up with the wire out.

    So it’s deep, but sometimes you can’t bring the CTD & winch you want, you bring the one you can get.

    They’ll figure it out sooner than later, but for anyone who works with these thing it’s clickbait title.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if someone gets funding or a billionaire to want to film this hole so they’ll stick an ROV in it and make a documentary about it. That would probably be more reliable than a standalone CTD or rosette.

    • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      It’s still astounding that really happened and wasn’t just the plot of a “Down Periscope” type movie.

        • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Haha.

          If only they’d done a 30 second search on why this is a bad idea… Or the lack of testing.

          • CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            4 hours ago

            The thing is they DID test it! And they even had a working failure detection mechanism with the microphones. They had seen the signs of failure from previous dives. And then just ignored all of that.

            • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Wow.

              Guess their definition of test and mine are different. I’d want a whole slew of testing regimen, including test to failure over a long time - essentially years of running it unmanned.

  • melfie@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    The only thing we can know for sure about a hole that deep is that there are bodies at the bottom.

  • CerebralHawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    We should know about how deep it is if we know the dimensions of the Earth’s core. There has to be a good amount of rock between that and the bottom of this trench.

    We may not be able to send a human (or other biological being) down there, but we can certainly run a pipe down there. The question is, can we get lights and a camera that can withstand the pressure and show us what’s down there? I wanna say yes, we have solid state lighting that would not be subject to pressure, same for recording materials, but I’m not 100% sure. I would say for a camera you need space between the lens and the glass, and the lens and the image sensor, but I’m not sure you can’t just use glass instead of air, if it’s clear enough.

    I am almost certain it can be reached, but I’m almost certain a human can’t go there.

    • degenerate_neutron_matter@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      7 hours ago

      We have submersibles that can explore and even carry a human to the bottom of the Mariana Trench, which is over 10km deep, far deeper than this hole could possibly be. But they are very expensive and I’d guess it’s not worth the cost to map out an obscure feature of a bay.

      • justsomeguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        6 hours ago

        We should assemble a team of billionaires and send them down there in a plastic submarine. For…science.

      • homes@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        If they get the writer of this article to help write their grant proposal, they may just get the money.

    • teft@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      They only got to 1300 feet which is well above crushing depth for remotely operated vehicles and cameras. Challenger deep is 35,000 feet and 27 people have been down there.

      I would assume the bigger problems will be visibility (cave systems tend to have murky water and it sounds like the bay also has murky water) and being able to maneuver an rov or submersible in the passages. Some caves are so narrow that cave divers have to take off their gear and squeeze themselves through a passage so getting an rov in would be impossible.

      • MetalSlugX@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Not to immediately gainsay what you’re talking about but I think visible light isn’t necessary for “vision”. Think radar, etc

      • d15d@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Caves, especially sink holes and cenotes in mexico actually tend to have pretty clear water. The murkyness in water comes either from organic matter or silt. If there’s no light there is no algae to limit visibility. If the cave has flow the silt is often carried away quickly. If there is no flow the silt will sink to the bottom, clearing up the visibility. Once the silt is disturbed (e.g. by a diver kicking their fin in the wrong direction) it can take a long time to settle again.

      • CerebralHawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Right, I just mean the pole would be able to poke the bottom of whatever hole. As far as exploring, yeah, I mean of course a cave system beats a straight pole lowered from the surface.

        I’m thinking some kind of automated submersible, like a drone but in the water.

        The murky water is something I don’t have an answer for. Then you’re just falling back on sonar.

        I don’t think they’ll find Godzilla down there, or any kind of “monster” or anything that would wow the average doom scroller. But we might find new life down there, something that is suited to the higher pressure. And that could be interesting. Though, just like we’d die down there, it would likely die “up here”.